What is your opinion of ReRev, outfitting gym equipment to generate electricity?

[Toucano]

At ReRev™, we are retrofitting gym equipment to make alternative energy in a safe, fun, carbon-neutral and healthy manner. The kinetic motion of aerobic exercise is captured in an efficient and cost effective way to convert otherwise wasted energy into productive renewable energy that feeds back into the building’s electrical system.

Your facility could be ideal for the ReRev™ system based on the number and types of machines in your location. Your center’s workout volume, combined with the amount of equipment, will produce significant amounts of utility grade electricity -- allowing members to participate in the production of renewable energy.

http://rerev.com/default.html

I realize the output is limited, but with our problem of obesity and sedentary lives, doesn't it just make sense to capture as much energy as we can?

I am a bit put off that the company's "In the News" page is full of FoxNews stories. Perhaps it's just coincidence.

What do you think?

[DCKit]

1. They should be using their AC systems to generate all their hot water too.

Simple heat exchange and, voila, free hot water for all those showers. And it's easy.

[Toucano]

5. Do you have any links to such a set up?

I am interested in learning more.

[DCKit]

14. Something I decided to do for myself.

I've been looking at it for years.

However, just past the compressor, the refrigerant needs to dump the heat (of compression). Instead of dumping it to the outside air (which is actually a really good INSULATOR), dump it into water using a counter-flow heat exchanger. Water absorbs a great deal of heat compared to air (or rocks, or metals) and even if you only get the water temp up a few tens of degrees, it'll take a lot less natural gas or electric to take it the rest of the way.

Knock yourself out. Just don't try to patent it.

[Lance_Boyle]

2. return will never catch up with cost

It's a gimmick that may be worth the investment if it attracts enough suckers ("Oooh! Let's get a membership at that gym where they make electricity from the equipment 'cuz we're so green!"), but it will never, ever, ever pay for itself in power bill savings.

[Toucano]

7. I'm not so sure what the initial outlay is.

Since gyms already have the equipment, I think the initial investment is less that we might suppose. The website says the ROI is 15 years, the same as solar electric.

It seems better than wasting the energy and may raise consciousness of fitness and greener living.

[Lance_Boyle]

10. The equipment would all have to be retrofitted to generate power

and all power generated would have to be harnessed. Up front costs are no doubt significant. It would be a better investment for a gym to install solar. Similar upfront costs, but the ROI is orders of magnitude higher.

And then there's the safety issue (tied to upfront cost). You really, really don't want any possibility of backfeeding electricity from storage to the individual generators (exercise equipment). Especially when sweaty.

[Warpy]

3. Every little bit helps

but I doubt it will make a dent in the amount of energy a gym uses. Still, it's a hell of a lot better than nothing.

[Toucano]

8. I think it's about combining a lot of small steps

Maybe solar and wind on the roof and human generation inside the club could at least get the gym close to carbon neutral.

[Electric Monk]

4. Depends what your definition of 'significant' is, I suppose.

[Dr Morbius]

6. In theory, it should enable the gym to offer lower prices.

As worker-outers generate electricity it should reduce the gym's energy costs, which can then be passed along.

[MineralMan]

9. Each machine might make enough power to run the little LCD

TV where you watch Fox News. Humans don't generate that much power while exercising at the gym. When you consider the friction losses, etc., there won't be a lot of power generated at all.

[Lance_Boyle]

11. Maybe enough to run the little LCD that counts how long you've been at it. MAYBE.

Probably not enough to power a television. Every wonder why all those exercise bikes and treadmills, etc., all have batteries behind their little display panels? ;-)

[Toucano]

12. Humans don't generate that much power individually.

But combined, over the hours of constant use in a gym setting, it seems plausible.

It may be smoke, but one of their press releases says:

"Each facility creates enough electricity to run a small home, and one recently surpassed a megawatt of utility-grade power."

It seems possible: ~100 watts per person, per hour. 20 machines being worked for 12 hours a day.

[muriel_volestrangler]

15. The BBC needed 80 cyclists to keep a home going for a day

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/8392451.stm

78 cycling at peak load (when someone uses an electric shower - and gyms need heat for showers).

http://www.open2.net/bang/bang_humanpowerstation.html

The company's page says:

"A typical 30-minute workout produces 50 watt hours of clean, carbon-free electricity.". I think the BBC clip rates that shower at 8.5 kW - 50 Wh would heat the shower for 21 seconds. So the gym is only 'green' if almost no-one using it ever takes an extra shower because of it (ie they'd need to stop showers at home, to make up for the one they take at the gym).

[cali]

13. haha. my dad did that 40+ years ago.

he hooked up an exercycle to the tv and the only way it worker is if one of us kids was pedaling away. Man, that guy had more ways to torture us re tv then you could shake a stick at.