## 5 Conclusions and Way Forward  
The different transport scenarios discussed in Sections 3 and 4 have shown that the physical entity of action is a useful measure for quantifying the amount of transport value that had been generated in an automotive ride. Additionally, the above considerations have paved the way towards two figures of merit (FOM) that measure (a) the economically relevant value of transport of the automotive ride, and which (b) provide an additional measure of the ecological footprint that had been generated alongside. While the first quantity of transport value had so far been measured in units of physical action, the second FOM of energy efficiency of transport value generation, or the equivalent energy relaxation time \(\tau_{E\_AB}\), had so far been measured in units of time. Discussing both FOMs regarding their relative importance and mutual trade-offs, it is advisable to turn both FOMs into dimensionless quantities and to give them suggestive names. Considering that automotive engine power is measured in kilowatts (\(kW\)) and travel durations in fractions of hours up to hours (\(hr\)), it is suggested to measure the physical action \(W_{AB}\) generated in the transport in units of \(kWhr^{2}\) and to name the respective FOM of transport value as:  
\[TV_{AB}=\frac{W_{AB}}{kWhr^{2}}. \tag{27}\]  
In this latter equation, the time unit of hours had been written as \(hr\) to avoid confusion with the Planck constant \(h\), which is the extremely small quantum of physical action. Being measurable in units of time, the second FOM of energy efficiency of transport value generation \(\eta_{E\_AB}\), or energy relaxation time \(\tau_{E\_AB}\), can be re-defined as ecologically rated transport value as:  
\[ETV_{AB}=\frac{\eta_{E\_AB}}{hr}=\frac{\tau_{E\_AB}}{hr} \tag{28}\]  
The second definition of \(ETV_{AB}\) in Equation (28) reminds us of the fact that the efficiency of transport value generation is related to the physical processes of energy  
Figure 11: (**a**) Elongation of transport paths on upward-sloping roads; (**b**) equilibrium of engine, gravitational, and friction forces on the moving vehicle; (**c**) impact of geographical height differences on the energy efficiency of upward (full lines) and downward (broken lines) travels along sloping roads. dissipation and energy relaxation through which mechanical energy is degraded into heat, smog, greenhouse and poisonous exhaust gases. Starting with the discussion of both FOMs, we recall that there is a clear trade-off between the economic interest inherent in high values of \(TV_{AB}\), on the one hand, and the ecological concern signaled by \(ETV_{AB}\), on the other hand. While the first FOM measures the economic value of making goods and services, initially present at a point \(A\), also available at a second point \(B\), which is separated from \(A\) by a distance \(L_{AB}\) and with a time delay of \(\tau_{AB}\), \(ETV_{AB}\) represents a pure number that qualitatively enumerates the magnitude of the concomitantly generated ecological footprint. To show how \(TV_{AB}\) and \(ETV_{AB}\) scale with the distance \(L_{AB}\) covered and the speed of transport \(v_{AB}\) between start and endpoints, we have drawn up Figure 12.  
More realistic than long-term transports at constant speed are frequent changes in momentary speed deriving from driver actions, such as adaptations to changing traffic situations, narrowly winding roads, or compensating for gravitational profile forces. Quantitative determinations of \(TV\) and \(ETV\) in such situations require measurements of the temporal changes in \(TV_{AB}(t)\) and \(ETV_{AB}(t)\) to obtain via subsequent integration values \(TV_{AB}(\tau_{AB})\) and \(ETV_{AB}(\tau_{AB})\) that are representative of the overall travel from \(A\) to \(B\).