I remember reading somewhere that a canoe is the most efficient boat design

assuming propelled boat, yes, it is. . . the raft is not more efficient unless it's being propelled by a river. For example, it's easier to take a canoe upstream than to take a raft upstream.



, the bicycle is the most efficient land transportation

depends. if you're talking energy per unit of distance, some bikes are. other bikes are not (for example, my 10-speed racing bike is a very efficient machine. The Schwinn I had when I was 6 was not)

and the jet airliner is the most efficient means of air travel.

the Gossamer Albatross and the Gossamer Condor are more efficient than that. . they were human powered. a typical jetliner's fuel use is measured not in miles/gallon, but in gallons/mile.

there's a new plane that's solar powered which is incredibly efficient.



All are based on people/miles for the least expenditure of energy, or something like that. Could this be true?
>
> Firstly, I'd have to argue with that definition of the word "efficient." Compare a bicycle and a car, and set the distance at four hundred miles (roughly the commute from here to where I live in New York, for those who care). A bicycle may use less energy to cover the distance than a car does, but there is less of that energy available. I can't think of anyone who could bike the distance from here to there without replenishing his energy several times along the way (and that's even allowing that he could bike on the highway, which he cannot), but I can drive it on about two-thirds of a tank or gas.
>
> Secondly, using the definition of "efficient" given in the example, I doubt that the canoe is really more efficient than the raft.
>
> Thirdly, I doubt that the jet airliner is more efficient than the blimp.
>
> Dar "And I don't mean the Goodyear blimp" ien