how many calories does 30 mins of moderate paced running burn?
955596
Generally the guideline is  for a 150-lb person and is roughly 100 calories per mile. If you are heavier, you'll burn more calories per mile - if you are lighter you'll burn fewer.
102680
What I do is about one hour on the treadmill, as fast as I can go (with a bit of an incline) to get me sweating and my heart rate up and then I get off of there and go to the leg and arm machines (lol, sorry for the lack of technical terms) and work out there for about 30 mins and then I get back on the treadmill and work out for another 30 mins (this burns more calories when you stop and start back again). I hope this helps and good luck with your exercise routine!! :)
765932
Timing your walking while on your virtual treadmill, along with performing some simple math, will tell you how many calories you are burning. For each half-hour you march in place at a normal brisk pace of 120 steps per minute (about 3.5 miles per hour), you will burn an amount of calories that equals your weight in pounds. In other words, if you weigh 150 pounds, marching in place on the virtual treadmill will burn 150 calories each half-hour, or 300 calories each hour. To find out how many calories you are burning per minute, simply divide 150 calories per half-hour by 30 minutes, or divide 300 calories per hour by 60 minutes, which, in this case, equals 5 calories per minute.
479446
treadmill would lkely burn 30% more calories for average users, but this would depend on intensity.\nIf boht users achieved similar target heart rates, and maintained them , the calorie consumption would be similar.
246617
I have to disagree with the previous posts.\nIn 1/2 an hour, you'll burn around 300 + calories because an increase in temperature (112 - 116 degrees) over your normal body temp causes fat cells to liquify and excrete out with your sweat.  Your body burns calories just trying to keep your normal body temp!
426308
Running 300 feet once per day will not amount to any appreciable weight loss.  The exact calorie expenditure is unknown since you didn't indicate your weight.  But on average you're probably looking at around 50 calories which is about half a yogurt.  \n\nHere's some calorie calculators to give you a rough idea of what it takes to burn calories through various activities:\nhttp://www.preventdisease.com/healthtools/tools.html#cbva
428747
Nope.  Look at an exercise table and it will tell you how long you have to do a given activity to burn so many calories.  A small portion of ice cream probably has 200 calories, which you would have ro run for say a couple of hours for to burn.  Exercise is good, dieting is better, and both is best.
1060049
Fartleks work wonders.  Warm up run (5-10 min) followed by (1) 200m sprint, (2) 400m at 5k pace [repeat 6-10 times] then cool down.
32173
Running is the simplest at 500-900 calories per hour.  Snowshoing is about the same despite the previous post (unless you shoe at about 60 mph)\nCheck the link below for other sports....
117566
Depends on your age/weight/height and activity level.\n\nA female who is 25, weighs 150, 5'5" and moderately active- would burn 2307 calories/day.\n\nhttp://www.calorie-count.com/calories/calories-burned.php
881079
I do 25 mins on the treadmill at a speed of 8kph. This burns 300 calories which I think is good enough.
1018821
Most of the answers I've seen are offer dubious advice about the problems with running.  Running minute vs. swimming minute, running burns more calories than swimming. Running is also more convenient, you can do it practically anywhere, while swimming requires a pool and the right temperature.\n\nWhile swimming is a great source of exercise, do not discount running.  Yes, running can be damaging to one's joints, but only if someone abuses their body, involved competitively, and doesn't give it time to repair itself after hard training.  Swimming can also be tough on the shoulder joints.\n\nAll in all, enjoy both sports (I do), but don't discount running does indeed burn more calories.  You can prove this to yourself by using the calorie calculator at: http://www.healthstatus.com/calculate/cbc to determine how many calories you burn (based upon your weight and intensity).  I did running for 45 minutes (at 160 pounds) at a 6 mph pace (fairly slow) and 45 minutes of swimming at a moderate pace.  Swimming came in at 331 calories, running 547 -- nearly double that of swimming.\n\nGood luck.
280969
350-500. It seems most workouts that i have done with professionals they have been around 350-400 calories.
680164
It really depends on how fast you are running those k's, and if there are any hills involved.  The faster you are running them, and the more hills there are, the more calories you burn.  If its taking you an hour to run 4 k's, you arent burnign nearly as many as if you run them in 20 minutes.  I run about 7.75 K's in 35 minutes, and burn just over 600 calories.  You are right that weight (as well as sex and age) also make a difference in how much you burn.
484402
Everyone is different when it comes to calorie burning due to heart rate, age, weight etc.. As an indication I would assume that you would burn about 150 calories for every 10 minutes. Which is really high. \n\nThe biggest issue with this is that you are placing a great amount of emphasis on knees and ankles which are the areas that tend to get injuries. \n\nWhat you need to do is have a balanced routine. There are many exercise out there that are better for your total body. If possible consider other alternatives but include this as your warm up for 5 minutes to get your heart rate higher. It is an intense exercise if done correctly. \n\nMaybe consider running or sprinting uphills or sand dunes as an alternative. Anything on the sand or even snow is so better as there is less jarring on the body and you can get the same amount of calorie burning and intensity. \n\nGood luck!
462357
Since you are trying to lose weight, the question is really which will burn more calories per session.  Whichever requires the body to do the most work is going to end up burning the most calories.  This figure is provded to us by something called METs (metabolic equivalents).  Overall jogging requires more METs than the eliptical, and the elipitcal requires more than biking.  SO jogging is going to burning more calories in the same amount of time than the other two.  \n\nHowever, either one of the other equipment could utilize more calories than jogging if you are exercising at a high enough intensity.  So if you are biking with a lot of resistance you will most likely burn more calories than if you are jogging at a slow rate of speed.\n\nThe best thing is to find an exercise that you like and are most likely to stay with.  Or better yet, mix it up and crosstrain.\n\nAs far as how long to exercise, it's not how long that's as important as how intense the workout is.  So instead of trying to exercise for an hour with a slow jog, you better better off going at short time period, but at a higher intensity.
1043247
Run... burn those calories.