[paul.fr]

Walking, cycling or running for a mile?

[another_someone]

Cycling is considered one of the most efficient forms of transport, but the other factor how fast you are travelling.  One tends to travel faster on a cycle than by walking, so the slow speed of walking will save on energy; but run of cycle at the same speed, and I would imagine that cycling would be the more efficient.

[chris]

Sitting in the armchair burns an average of 60 calories per hour. Walking at average speed uses about 300 calories per hour, and a vigorous jog consumes 500. A fast swim or a bout of mountaineering uses about 700 calories per hour.

Cycling depends upon how fast you cycle. A cylist competing in the Tour de France can expect to burn calories at the same rate as a swimmer or mountaineer.

Chris

[DrDick]

I think the question is to compare:
  walking for a mile
  cycling for a mile
  running for a mile

And I believe that running would use the most calories.
  cycling is the most efficient (uses the least calories)
  walking is less efficient, so uses more calories than cycling
  running is even less efficient, because it involves more vertical motion, so uses the most calories

Dick

[Carolyn]

In any of these activities, do you burn the same amount of calories if you're not sweating versus sweating?