Really Magazine, magazine, stuff and nonsense, science, technology, satire, satirical, irony, ironic, interviews, 1001, cartoons, marting, martin g, martin gardiner, computers, mobiles, memes, Aaron Foyer, Dr. Nahiv, patents, nuclear, waste, nanotechnology, nanotech, oil, pharma, GM, global warming, university, research, daft, private eye, smoking, obesity, hydrogen economy, viruses, snowflakes, space, bullshit, IQ, chocolate, food additives, organic, software, daft, spacejunk, cloning, clones, humour, humor, voice recognition, fusion, robots, robotics, thylacine, sunublock, UV, AI, green, asteroid, florensis, florrie, hobbit, finger length, transgenic, C02, carbon sinks, RFID, windfarms, sens, entropy, telemedicine, caffeine, satellite, vitrification, Neanderthals, pipelines, arms manufacturers,

Global human warmth

Being warm blooded, an average human being produces somewhere around 200 Watts of power, continuously, in the form of heat. ( The figure is used as a rule-of-thumb by air conditioning engineers when calculating how much cooling will be required in a closed space for a given number of people – say, a theatre )

The current world population is reckoned at around 6.5 Billion. So, at all times, the heat generated would run at about 1.3 Trillion Watts ( i.e. 1,300,000 MegaWatts )

Roughly equivalent to 1,300 average-sized power stations - running 24/7.

Hardly an insignificant number ?

Then there are all the other warm-blooded animals ( including birds ) on the planet – outnumbering us by a few orders of magnitude – all contributing heat to the environment, like us, by ‘burning’ oxygen.

Have these figures been factored into any of the global-warming computer models ?

Is our math(s) wrong ?

Really Magazine has no idea.

comments ?