Herbert Graf ranted:
>>> A human is supposed to be "about 100W" at normal (in)activity
>>> levels.
>>
>> I thought it was more like 30W.  I remember seeing various human
>> activities rated in terms of Kcal/hour.  Just sitting around was
>> rated at 25 Kcal/h, which is about 30W.
>
> WAY off.

I did say I *thought* it was 30W, which was based on Kcal/hour numbers I sa=
w
many years ago.

> Google is your friend Olin, might try using it before wasting the
> lists time.

Oh get over yourself.  Apparently you need to try this yourself too.  Don't
worry, nobody will look while you wipe that egg off your face.

I did just now look around on the net, and it's amazing how widely calorie
estimates vary for different activities.  I found one for sleeping to be as
high as 50Kcal/hour (58W) while another claimed sitting and watching TV was
only 34 Kcal/hour (40W).  So my 30W recollection appears to be low, but
probably still closer to reality than the 100W figure.  Best guess at this
point is that the truth is somewhere in the middle.


********************************************************************
Embed Inc, Littleton Massachusetts, http://www.embedinc.com/products
(978) 742-9014.  Gold level PIC consultants since 2000.
--=20
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist
.