Using Gym Rats' Body Power to Generate Electricity

Carl Bialik from WSJ writes "A Hong Kong health club is hoping that a car battery, some StairMasters and dozens of gym rats can help ease the world's energy problems. It is just one of a wave of projects that are trying to tap the power of the human body, the Wall Street Journal reports. The article explains the impetus behind the project: 'The human power project at California Fitness was set in motion by Doug Woodring, a 41-year-old extreme-sports fanatic and renewable-energy entrepreneur, who pitched the experiment to the gym's management last May. "I've trained my whole life, and many megawatts have been wasted," says Mr. Woodring, who has worked out at the Hong Kong gym for years. "I wanted to do something with all that sweat."'"

Comments

can they also make a contraption...

[tuxette]

...that will collect the energy generated by all the jiggling rings of fat you see on most people these days?

Re:can they also make a contraption...

[Anonymous Coward]

Fat is stored energy. What you need to do is pay them for liposuction, like buying oil drilling rights.
it would give a whole new meaning to the phrase "fat farm".

Re:can they also make a contraption...

[daveinthesky]

been there, done that:
http://www.boingboing.net/2007/02/27/biodiesel_fro m_lipos.html

Re:can they also make a contraption...

[mappemonde]

mmm...does this sound kind of like a Matrix (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0133093/) type beginning to power generation? First we go with treadmills and cycle bikes and then move on to people who are undesirable (prisons, homeless, etc) and then further the trend... Don't like it.

Re:can they also make a contraption...

[jambox]

Just wait for them to have a heart attack, then attach a turbine to the crematorium... Come on, it's better than coal!

Re:can they also make a contraption...

[ShieldW0lf]

This reminds me of a recent blog post I made...

A lot of people are driven by an inner need to do physical exertion on a regular basis. Gym memberships are full of such people. It's a rewarding pursuit to get up and do something physically active.

So there are all these people, engaging in utterly useless labour. They're picking up heavy things and putting them down over and over, running on treadmills, that sort of thing.

And I get to thinking... that we have all this stuff that could be done around here. Roads, housing, bridges, new infrastructure that could be built, that sort of thing. Stuff that benefits the community.

There are all these workplace safety people out there, specialized in making work safe, ergonomics, best practices, that sort of thing.

And there are all these physical therapists out there, designing exercise programs for people that are focused on being rewarding for the individual to participate in, where they're happily doing this labour out of a sense of enlightened self-interest.

It gets me to thinking...

If you organized community projects in a way where as many aspects of the tasks involved as possible were designed by a physical trainer to be purely beneficial to the individuals involved...

If one of the organizational mandates was that these tasks would not require specialized knowledge of workers who just showed up to get a workout...

If you made it so it would be brain dead easy for them to use the knowledge they have of their workout needs to find which tasks to do...

Could you create community projects that would be just as good for you as going to the gym?

Maybe managed by a core group of paid workers with expert knowledge?

If you had flexible time frames, if you had a complete lack of privately vested interest in the project and drove it purely at a community level so no one felt suckered when they participated but rather like they were getting an enjoyable workout first and making their neighborhood better as a nice side benefit...

Would people participate?

It would be interesting to see some people with more expert knowledge in those areas than I have give it a try...

I can't wait...

[FredDC]

... to see the guy on the threadmill yelling at the guy on the stairmaster to "go faster!"

Schwarzenegger beat them to it

[giminy]

Ahnald was already doing this in the 1970s. In his excellent movie _Hercules in New York_, he threw a lightning bolt in one scene. I believe he wasn't wearing a shirt. I also believe the lightning bolt was actually a grounding rod, bent into a jagged, vaguely lightning bolt shape. See, you have shirtless bodybuilder, lightning bolts, and grounding rods. Truly Ahnald was a man ahead of his time.

Ahnald, you've come a long way...baby.

Inefficient use of human body

[Reverse Gear]

The article doesn't hide this either, but there is really very little real energy to be won in this way, I don't really get what Mr. Woodring says about megawatts being wasted though, no human is able to generate that much electrical power, maybe he refers to megawatthours which he might be right about, but it would have been generated over the span of many years.

I think it would be more efficient if the people who go to the gym instead would just put on a pair of running shoes and would not have to exercise in a room that had not to be lit and heated for the purpose of them having a place to exercise.

I guess the best thing about this is that it might raise some people's awareness of how much energy different electrical devices use during the day and might help them remember to shut them off and think of energy efficiency when they buy new equipment.

The good thing about the way the human body works is not how much energy we use or generate, our biggest strength in this is the precise and versatile we can use our bodies and the energy we generate from the our food intake.
For example I bet you can save a lot more energy and pollution from exercising by getting wood for heating than you would ever be able to make by exercising a stair machine or spinning device.

Re:Inefficient use of human body

[Ihlosi]

I guess the best thing about this is that it might raise some people's awareness of how much energy different electrical devices use during the day and might help them remember to shut them off and think of energy efficiency when they buy new equipment.

Yes. Try generating 200W of electrical power with your body, and see how long you can keep it up.

Re:Inefficient use of human body

[eugene ts wong]

I see what you and the other fellow are saying. I remember that in Expo 86, there was a claptraption, where people would sit on stationary bikes, and pedal away, to light up some light bulbs. It took much effort. I'm sure that the system could have been made more efficient with flourescent lamps, and better gearing.

I do have to wonder, though, wouldn't the electrical savings eventually pay for the generators? Or maybe they could come up with some kind of system to turn a fan, so that there won't be a need for air conditioners.

Re:Inefficient use of human body

[Anonymous Coward]

Why are americans so ignorant and uneducated when it comes to CO2. It is as if you dont learn this stuff in compulsory highschool. What is it americans actually DO in high school? Bible studies or some shit like that? :)

When our bodies burn sugar we exhaust CO2, yes. But since this CO2 was originally taken from the air during the growth of the plant, there is no net addition of CO2 to the atmosphere. The food we eat is grown in our atmosphere; thus we have a CO2-circle. If this natural CO2-circle somehow was unstable and more CO2 was released than what was consumed we would not be living today. Think before you write.

This would be an environmetal benefit if we compare to generating the same energy by burning fossil fuel. Say coal. Burning coal is not part of the CO2 cycle - thus it adds CO2 to the atmosphere. The danger is NOT CO2; but from where the C in CO2 come frome. Why do you always get this wrong, its quite irritating.

Also I guessed the first reply to this post would correct you, but noo.

Re:Inefficient use of human body

[Eivind]

Possibly, but doubtful. As stated, if the exersize-bikes where in use for 10 hours/day, they'd pay back the investment in 82 years, but since they probably get replaced within 5 years anyway, that's never going to happen.

It's much easier to *save* energy than to *create* it.

Replacing 10 of the ligth-bulbs in the gym with modern low-energy ones would've had a larger effect on energy-savings, and would've costed less than the $15.000 this cost.

It's a gimmick, nothing more.

Re:Inefficient use of human body

[MightyYar]

A lot of petroleum is used in the food production chain, so you aren't quite carbon-neutral unless a bio-fuel is being used with all of the farm equipment, food processing equipment, and transportation infrastructure which brings the food by train or truck to your store.

Re:Inefficient use of human body

[LarsWestergren]

maybe he refers to megawatthours which he might be right about, but it would have been generated over the span of many years.

For one person yes, but if you have hundred or thousands of customers per day pedalling/rowing/stairstepping, it adds upp quickly

I think it would be more efficient if the people who go to the gym instead would just put on a pair of running shoes and would not have to exercise in a room that had not to be lit and heated for the purpose of them having a place to exercise.

a) People in big cities rarely have good places outdoors to run. b) If it is winter and snowy, it can be difficult to excercise outside too. c) Some people prefer to build muscles over doing cardiovascular excercise. d) Heating and lighting a gym isn't more wasteful than heating and lightning any other room.

I guess the best thing about this is that it might raise some people's awareness of how much energy different electrical devices use during the day and might help them remember to shut them off and think of energy efficiency when they buy new equipment. The good thing about the way the human body works is not how much energy we use or generate, our biggest strength in this is the precise and versatile we can use our bodies and the energy we generate from the our food intake. For example I bet you can save a lot more energy and pollution from exercising by getting wood for heating than you would ever be able to make by exercising a stair machine or spinning device.

Now these points I agree with 100%. :)

Re:Inefficient use of human body

[CagedBear]

I bet you can save a lot more energy and pollution from exercising by getting wood

I grew up in a house that had no heat except for wood. We cut up tree tops left behind by loggers and dropped any trees that didn't look healthy or were in a cluster.

It was good excercise, but also incredibly dangerous and we created pollution in the process. Chainsaws, tractor, log splitter, etc. I can't imagine cutting wood without these machines. At least not for the big farm house we lived in. I guess that's why the little house on the prarie was so damn small.

Re:Inefficient use of human body

[Tim C]

I think it would be more efficient if the people who go to the gym instead would just put on a pair of running shoes and would not have to exercise in a room that had not to be lit and heated for the purpose of them having a place to exercise.

While that's true, running isn't ever going to replace gyms. Two immediate reasons are that running does little or nothing for building up muscle bulk, and it's a high impact exercise (as opposed to something like swimming or cycling, where you're not pounding the pavement the whole time).

Re:Inefficient use of human body

[Aladrin]

Maybe it's about efficiency. If they spare time, they might choose to do just that. For the rest of us (who have NO spare time) it's about getting the most efficient exercise in the time we have.

Re:Inefficient use of human body

[Eivind]

True. Nevertheless, for this application, even an order of magnitude reduction in price wouldn't be enough. Currently it takes 82 years for payback -- assuming 10 hour/day usage (which is excessive, very few machines are in practice used even half of this)

So, with an order of magnitude improvement, (i.e. $1500 not $15.000) in price, you'd still be looking at 8.2 years of 10 hour days for payback. (or on the order of 20 years or more for more typical gym-use) this for equipment that is typically replaced after aproximately 3-5 years.

Harvesting "human power" will never be able to do much for your energy-bills. It can make sense for other reasons though. For example, a handy that is powered by movement, and thus stays charged forever aslong as you're walking/moving would be a very practical thing to have for many people. I'd love this in my GPS too: I only bring it along when I go hiking in the mountains anyway, if my movements could somehow supply the (small; sub 1w) power-requirements it'd mean I could have it on all the time and never worry about running out of batteries again, rather than turning it on to log a certain point-of-interest only occasionally during the hike as I do today.

With low-enough energy-demands I could see this for for example remote-controls or wireless game-controllers too. Never having to replace batteries is a nice thing, more for practical reasons than for cost-reasons. (rechargable batteries aren't that expensive anyway)

Infantry also has need for gadgets. Many of them would benefit from being able to work indefinitely without access to recharging and/or new batteries. (nigth-vision, GPS, radio, led-torches, ...)

Re:Inefficient use of human body

[Dr_Barnowl]

Five or six people on exercise bicycles could generate a megawatt

To put this in perspective, this is like saying each person is outputting sufficient energy to boil 166 jug kettles simultaneously.

Please, think about your numbers before you post them. I think you mean a kilowatt. These people would be hotter than the Human Torch, people would be running, screaming, their lycra pants melting from their roasting flesh.

While I agree that the wasted energy which is ordinarily all just converted into heat in the gym atmosphere would do something useful before it ends up in it's ground state, if you could generate a megawatt from six people on bicycles, every major city in China would be a roiling cloud of vapour. Either that, or they'd have built a huge deathray and vapourised the West by now.

Re:Inefficient use of human body

[bmwm3nut]

Those calories are kilocalories. So your average power is actually 2,800W. But we know that can't be right. First those calorie calculators are very innacurate, they just get you in the ball park. Second, that's the amount of energy you're burning to produce the motion, but your body is very inefficient. So you may be burning 2,800J/s of energy, but the usable output of work could easily be 1% of that. And then as you said, you have to worry about the efficiency of the generator.

Re:Inefficient use of human body

[twitchingbug]

Actaully the top peak wattage of sprinters is somewhere in the 1200-1600 range. But that's peak. Lance on a 1 hr TT, sustains about 400-450 watts.

And from my experience, 200W is pretty high for the average person that I know. I'm thinking 150W sustatined is probably more realistic for average weekend riders.

I think 1 hr is a better measure than 100 miles, since I don't think people will sit on an exercise bike for 5 hours.

Also I think the bike is probably going to be the most efficient transfer mechanism to generate power. Somehow I don't think you'll get the same efficiency on an elliptical or a treadmill...

Re:Inefficient use of human body

[yarbo]

I usually walk to the gym from work, but I do work out one day on the weekend. I drive to the gym. I'd estimate it's a 30 minute walk, 10 minute drive.
I don't care about the calories I could have burned, they're insignificant compared to the calories I burn from deadlifting and squatting. All it's going to do is keep me away from my post workout protein shake and boost my cortisol levels. Deadlifting is far better for burning energy than jogging. If I wanted to run, I'd do some 40 meter sprints in my neighborhood, I don't need the gym for that unless it's raining. While I am into serious weight training, most people would be better off deadlifting, squatting, or sprinting rather than jogging.

Re:Inefficient use of human body

[blahtree]

I'm afraid you've been mislead. Take a look at www.caloriesperhour.com and do some calculations based on your weight. Jogging will come out on top.

Yes, you can make the argument that powerlifting builds muscle mass and thus burns more calories at rest. Jogging raises your metabolism and essentially does the same thing.

The number of calories burned is somewhat irrelevant though. For optimum health, you need both aerobic and anaerobic exercise. Balance is good.

More like

[Zouden]

It is just one of a wave of projects that are trying to tap the power of the human body

I'd say it's just one of a wave of projects that are trying to tap the venture capital being thrown at "environmental-yet-supposedly-profitable" schemes.

"I wanted to do something with all that sweat."

[lysergic.acid]

make a gym sweat cologne. now you can tell people you just got back from the gym even if you haven't!

Re:"I wanted to do something with all that sweat."

[drinkypoo]

you could always make a sports drink...

The Stupid! It Burns!

[SQL Error]

"I've trained my whole life, and many megawatts have been wasted," says Mr. Woodring, who has worked out at the Hong Kong gym for years.

Spending one of those years in science class might not have been a bad idea.

solve america's weight problem

[scenestar]

What if they started "paying" (like 1 buck per somethingsomething) people for producing energy. they could store and resell it and some people would have a psychological incentive to excersise.

How about

[antifoidulus]

putting a generator on a bicycle that is capable of say charging a cell phone or a laptop battery. Perfect for people such as myself who commute by bicycle anyway. Would that be feasible? How much do you think it would cost to retrofit a bike to do that?

Re:How about

[MichaelSmith]

putting a generator on a bicycle that is capable of say charging a cell phone or a laptop battery. Perfect for people such as myself who commute by bicycle anyway. Would that be feasible? How much do you think it would cost to retrofit a bike to do that?

You can still get generators for running lights at night, probably not much different from the one I had when I was very young, back in the 1970's.

I have hydraulic disks on my commuting bike. Sometimes I want to just drag the brake slightly if I am waiting for a light to go green, etc. Something which inductively couples to the disc would be ideal for that.

Re:How about

[MightyYar]

Have you ever used those lights on the bike which use a little generator that goes down on the wheel?

In my experience, quite a bit of resistance is added to my peddling, and that's just to light up a puny bike headlight!

Re:How about

[Anonymous Cowpat]

I'd agree, I cycle a bike everyday and wouldn't put a dynamo on it. See, the difference with a dynamo on your bike is that you're not tapping energy that would otherwise be wasted, you're sapping the energy that should be going towards moving you between A & B. Sticking a dynamo on an excercise bike may not be such a bad idea, but slowing yourself down to squeeze a few joules into your phone is just silly.

Re:How about

[MrNaz]

Err... you'd want to watch the gearing ratio. Using a friction pin against the wheel, say the friction pin was large at 5cm in diameter, that's still an insanely high gearing ratio. The motor would put out hundreds of volts and probably fry your phone. Perhaps using an intermediate battery as a voltage regulator would be a good idea.

Re:How about

[drinkypoo]

See, the difference with a dynamo on your bike is that you're not tapping energy that would otherwise be wasted, you're sapping the energy that should be going towards moving you between A & B.

So toggle charging by the dynamo based on a tilt switch and a delay. Bike goes downhill for more than a couple seconds, start charging. Bike goes uphill for more than a second, stop charging.

Only one Matrix reference in 25 comments?

[Alex Belits]

What the world is coming to?

Are you working on the assumption

[benhocking]

Are you working on the assumption that treadmills require electricity? Because I can tell you from experience that they do not. My grandparents had an antique treadmill that still worked 10 years ago (I have no idea what happened to it after they died), and there was no electricity involved.

If your merely stating that treadmills are not as efficient at generating electricity (or if there is some joke I'm just not getting, which is quite possible), then I won't disagree with you on that one.

Re:Are you working on the assumption

[ettlz]

GP said "threadmill". I interpret this to mean one of those new-fangled multi-threaded SPARC processors from Sun; then again, I hear they're supposed to be very energy-efficient, so I guess the guy yelling faster must be either just greedy or running Vista under emulation.

Walt Disney never pictured this

[Spacezilla]

Morpheus: What is the Matrix? Control. The Matrix is a computer-generated dream world built to keep you under control in order to change a mouse into this.
[holds up a Duracell battery]
Mickey Mouse:: No, I don't believe it. It's not possible!
Morpheus:: I didn't say it would be easy, Mickey. I just said it would be the truth.

Re:Ob. Simpsons

[ObsessiveMathsFreak]

I suspect most slashdotters have never seen the inside of a gym, let alone know what it is.

I've seen it. It's full of sweaty, unhappy looking people in awkward clothing. You're better off going for a walk instead.

I've got a better idea

[capn_buzzcut]

Let's harness the energy generated by having sex. Or even better, the energy wasted by my pathetic attempts to get laid in the first place, which there is sadly a lot more of.

Fallout

[Ostsol]

Wasn't this an easter egg in Fallout? There was a bonus area that randomly appeared. It was a building where several people inside were running on treadmills, generating power. . .

Help Cut and Move Some Stone

[rohar]

If you feeling a bit out of shape and bored of sitting behind a desk, you can come and help me build some massive towers out of stone blocks. If the convection towers were built from stone, it will take some up-front human labor, but in the end you can say you put together part of a megawatt renewable power station that in the worst case will leave people wondering what we were up to a few centuries from now like we do about Stonehenge.

Re:You're missing the point...

[moeinvt]

"Remind me again why you treadmill people don't just go outside?"

Well, lets' see . . .

below zero(F) temps with high winds
Sunset prior to the end of the work day
Precipitation
Treacherous footing
narrow roads with high snow banks

I love to run outside, but it's not worth frostbite, a twisted knee or ankle, or being hit by a car.

Gilligan's Island?

[proxy318]

The professor was able to generate electricity with a couple of coconuts and a stationary bike, how hard could this be?

Re:pedal bikes can be used to generate power

[Rob the Bold]

A typical non-competition cyclist will produce between 125 and 250 watts of power during long term sustained cycling (1/6 to 1/3 HP). Around here, cost of generation is between 2.5 and 3 cents per kilowatt-hour. Even at 8 hours per day, you're looking a getting back about a nickel's worth of energy. If you discount the wear and tear on the machine, who's going to pay for the extra food these inmates are going to need?

I actually ran the numbers once. I was sitting there on an exercise bike in the basement in winter, and I was really bored. I thought, "I could be generating electricity now". I couldn't find a food source that would provide you the energy to convert into . . . energy . . . economically even if you were paying 25 cents/kWh for your electrical power. And I made some pretty generous estimates of human efficiency, too. At least that effort made my ride to nowhere go by a little faster that morning.

usefully applying human power

[plzdontspamme]

I've been riding a bike for a living for the past 16 years, frequently hauling loads of 600 lbs or more. IMHO, human power has not been given the serious consideration it deserves. There are plenty of applications where human power could be usefully applied. For instance, there are lots of little devices, like LED task lights, digital cameras, etc., powered by 2-4 AAA batteries. A person riding on a stationary bike could easily charge four 1000 mAh batteries like these in a half-hour workout. As electronic appliances get smaller and more efficient, the number of devices that can be practically powered by human power is only going to increase. Inkjet printers, scanners, and laptops are already within the capability of being powered by a fit person. While the human body can't practically generate enough energy to do tasks that require significant amounts of heat (e.g., cooking), it is very effective at producing enough heat to keep itself warm. People often wonder how I can stand doing my job outside when the temperature is well below zero and I'm only wearing a few light layers of clothing. They forget that the human body is only about 25% efficient at converting energy to work, so hauling a heavy load produces sufficient heat to keep me comfortable.

Re:You're missing the point...

[karnal]

I use a Precor at the local Y - it seems as if their line of exercise devices (at least the non-impact ones) have been cord-free for quite some time. It's not a treadmill (which will always take power unless you really want odd resistance) but it's self contained and might be easier on your joints over time...

For those who don't know what a "handy" is

[Zontar_Thing_From_Ve]

For example, a handy that is powered by movement, and thus stays charged forever aslong as you're walking/moving would be a very practical thing to have for many people.

The reference to "handy" is probably meaningless to most Slashdotters, but it's what Germans call a mobile telephone. I have no idea if the term is in use in Austria or Switzerland, but I've seen it used in Germany.

Oh sure, make a joke at someone elses expense...

[Afecks]

Fat people get it the worst. No other group of people are so easily attacked and mocked. Most people wouldn't dare say "look how black that guy is!" for fear of being labeled a racist. However, very few of the same people would have any problem saying "look how fat that guy is!". Calling someone a nigger, faggot or fatass are all in the same group of insults. They are insults designed to hurt someone by mocking their differences. Yet somehow we all let that last one just slide by.

We accept each others differences when it comes to race, religion, sexuality but since being fat is "unhealthy" then it's unacceptable. I call bullshit on that. There are no special exceptions when it comes to bigotry.

But I'm not telling anyone what to do, just making an observation.

Poor Implementation

[necro81]

The article describes the system as siphoning off excess power from the generators already built into the equipment to run the exercise computers. It is like the dynamo on a bicycle - a parasitic power sink. They are only capturing a small fraction of the available power. The majority of the power the human inputs into the gym equipment still goes into waste heat production, same as the unmodified equipment.

A much better way to capture human power would be to scrap the power sink (the friction mechanism, for instance) and replace it with a real electrical generator, not just some dynamo rated for a couple of watts. With the proper power electronics, you can adjust the mechanical resistance that the human feels by adjusting the electrical power drawn from the generator. This would be similar to how regenerative braking works in hybrid cars. The braking action can be soft or hard, depending on the pedal input, and works by modulating the power drawn out of the generator and into the battery bank. Like a hybrid car, the mechanical resistance (i.e., traditional brakes) becomes almost superfluous.

This system would allow you to capture far more of the human power and convert it to electricity. With a well-chosen generator and well-designed power electronics, the conversion efficiency can be over 75%. For a human producting 100 W on a stationary bike (a decent workout), that would be 75 W of electricity.

This idea does, however, require a more substantial redesign or retrofit of the existing equipment, designed into the equipment and the gym from the beginning. As a result, I think it is unlikely to come about anytime soon. It would be a fun home project, however. Anyone know if Make Magazine has done something with this?

Re:pedal bikes can be used to generate power

[Suidae]

I ran the numbers recently as well, here is what I came up with. Note that I didn't do any actual measurements and relied only on what I could find in google with a few minutes searching. I've made some pretty generous (read, unrealistically optimistic) assumptions about what the human body is capable of and what people will put up with to have power.

Here is a ballpark estimation of the practicality of human power generation.

Let's assume that a person who's profession was power generation would be highly fit and well suited to long hours turning a generator at high output. If such a person could maintain an electrical output of 400W for 10 hours a day he would produce 4 kilowatt hours of electrical energy (ignoring conversion loss for the sake of simplicity). This is beyond mere 'Olympic' performance and well into the realm of the 'heroic', similar to a good bicycle sprint for 10 hours.

Given a heroic muscular efficiency of 30% (beyond the human normal range of 14-27%) this 4 kilowatt hours represents about 13kWh of input power, or food. This is about 11,000 dietary calories. I'll presume that the waste heat is too low-grade for power generation, but could be used to offset living space heating requirements during cold weather.

If we feed our hero nothing but soybeans (inexpensive and fairly energy dense at 1.75cal/gram and 0.00025 cents per gram in bulk ($6.80 for 60lb) he will need about 6.25 kilos of beans a day, at a price of about $1.60.

So your human power will cost in the range of 40 cents per kilowatt hour, or about 4 times the price of grid electrical power, presuming you can find teams of heroes willing to donate their time for free.

The US consumes around 4,000,000,000,000 kilowatt hours per year. At a rate of 1460 kWh per hero per year, you will need to employ 2,700,000,000 people (almost half the world population) each year to produce the required electrical power. Feeding them will require about 6,100,000,000,000 kilos of beans a year, or about 90 times the annual US soybean crop. You may be able to reduce the number of people required slightly with a methane capture system :) You can probably increase efficiency by feeding the heros that die in the line of duty to the living heros, thereby recyling a hundred or 2 pounds of material.

A typical household in the US consumes about 30 kWh per day. Consider that this is about 8 heroes pedaling generators in your basement, consuming a 40 pound bag of soybeans each day.

Powering a typical smallish refrigerator requires about one kilowatt-hour per day, so it would only take one hero two and a half hours to keep your food cold (or, if he is charging a battery, 5 hours after losses).

A typical real person could reasonably be expected to produce 200W for an hour a day (maybe 2 for extremely dedicated individuals), certainly enough to charge small devices like laptops, but just a drop in the bucket next to the power used by a typical person.

Kinda puts the power of fossil fuels into perspective.

refs:
http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/reps/enduse/er01_us.ht ml
http://www.los-gatos.ca.us/davidbu/pedgen.html
http://globalis.gvu.unu.edu/indicator_detail.cfm?I ndicatorID=46&Country=US
http://www.whfoods.com/genpage.php?tname=foodspice &dbid=79
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2006/03/06032 2113511.htm
http://coachesinfo.com/category/rowing/77/
http://homepage.mac.com/moises.santillan/paper

Re:typical ignorant comment

[brer_rabbit]

Yeah, a heterosexual can choose not to have sex at all, either.

With a name like "Beardo the Bearded", it may not be a choice.

Re: Does it affect me?

[Migraineman]

My brother-in-law is tipping the scales at 450+ lbs. He goes out of his way to make eating easier. He stores food on the couch ... days-worth of food, not just a bag of chips. He goes out of his way to eat poorly - fast-food and junk-food are at the top of his list. He was recently hospitalized due to a combination of sleep apnea, narcolepsy, and pneumonia - all related to his obesity.

He's not a bad guy, but he does have psychological issues. His obesity is completely elective - when he was dating several years ago, he got down to about 250 lbs. If he wishes to flush his life down the toilet, that's his preroggative. However, the moment it affects me, it becomes my problem. When he visits, we have to make all sorts of special accommodations for him. I don't recall ever making special accommodations for someone based on their religion, their skin color, their hair color, their sexual preference, etc. My next door neighbor has been in a wheelchair as long as I've known him, and he requires less "special attention" than my brother-in-law.

And the part that makes me furious, is that he's unwilling to accept responsibility for his situation. The denial and littany of excuses are monumental - it's glandular, it's an endocrine imbalance, it's a disease. Disease? How the hell do you "catch" obesity from someone else?

Here, I'll solve the problem with physics: (1) Eat less, you'll lose weight. Your body can't manufacture fat out of the aether. (2) Sell the TV. Now that you've freed up some time, go for a walk.

Re:Oh sure, make a joke at someone elses expense..

[ZDRuX]

No, that is not true.. You *CAN* deal with obesity and overweight problems and "beauty" problems, but you CANNOT deal with or *cure* your skin colour, or if you're missing a leg, or you have problems breathing, this is the main difference why I find it "easier" to laugh at people who are dirty, smelly, fat, lazy, or stupid - because all those can be taken care of, whereas anything you're born with, or physically stuck with is not. This is why it's NOT OK to laugh at handicapped people or people with mental retardation or anything of that kind.