How many calories a run burns is mostly a question of how much mass moved for how long — with intensity priced by a standard table. This Running Calorie Calculator uses MET values from the Compendium of Physical Activities: pick the activity and pace, add your weight and duration, and get the energy cost — for running first, with walking, elliptical and stair climbing alongside.
Worked Example: 30 Minutes at 6 mph, 70 kg
Running at 6 mph (a 10-minute mile) is rated 9.8 METs in the Compendium — 9.8 times the energy cost of sitting still. The calorie formula is MET × body mass in kg × hours: 9.8 × 70 × 0.5 = 343 calories for the half hour. Read the formula’s levers in their true proportions: duration and weight move the answer linearly (a 90 kg runner burns 441 in the same half hour; the 70 kg runner needs 39 minutes for the same), while speed’s effect runs through the MET table and is gentler than folklore claims — an hour at 8 mph (11.8 METs) burns about 826 kcal for our runner against 686 for an hour at 6 mph, a 20% premium for a 33% faster pace covering 33% more ground. That last clause is the runner’s famous rule of thumb in its honest form: the energy cost of running is roughly 1 kcal per kilogram per kilometre (for the example runner, about 70 kcal/km, or 113 per mile) nearly independent of pace at ordinary speeds — speed mostly decides how quickly the kilometres accumulate, not what each one costs. Walking breaks the rule downward (roughly 0.5–0.7 kcal/kg/km at strolling speeds, because the gait recycles energy differently) — which is why the activity select carries separate walking METs rather than a slow running discount, and why a walked mile and a run mile, twins in distance, are strangers in cost.
What a MET Is, and How Far to Trust the Table
A MET (metabolic equivalent of task) is a measured multiple of resting metabolism: 1 MET ≈ 3.5 ml of oxygen per kilogram per minute, the scientific sitting-still. The Compendium of Physical Activities — maintained from laboratory measurements and now in its 2011 and 2024 editions — assigns each activity its multiple, and the formula kcal = MET × kg × hours is the standard conversion from that table into energy. The trust calibration matters as much as the formula. In the table’s favour: these are population averages from actual oxygen measurements, and for steady, rhythmic activities like running and walking they predict group energy cost well. Against false precision: individual running economy varies by ±10% or more with training, biomechanics, shoes, surface, wind and gradient — none of which a single MET value can see — and treadmill displays that ask only for time are famously optimistic, sometimes by 15–20%, because they assume a default body. Heart-rate-based estimates add individual signal but import their own errors (cardiac drift, heat, caffeine). The defensible use of this page’s figure: an honest central estimate for planning — fuelling, energy balance, comparing activities — held to two significant figures in your head (“about 340”), never four. For a weight-management ledger, consistency beats accuracy: the same table, the same formula, week after week, and the trend will be true even if the constant is a few percent off.
Gross, Net and the Calorie Conversation
One accounting subtlety decides whether the calculator’s number is the one you wanted. The MET formula returns gross calories — everything burned during the half hour, including the ~35 kcal (1 MET × 70 kg × 0.5 h) you would have burned sitting on the porch instead. The net figure — the run’s true additional cost — subtracts that resting hour’s share: 343 − 35 = 308 net kcal for the example. Which belongs in your ledger depends on the bookkeeping: if your daily budget already includes resting metabolism (a TDEE-based plan counts the day once), adding gross exercise calories double-counts the rest slice, and the net figure is the honest entry; activity trackers split on this convention, which is why two devices can disagree by exactly the resting slice while both “work.” Post-exercise elevation (EPOC, the afterburn) is real but small for steady runs — single-digit percents — and belongs to high-intensity intervals in any meaningful size; this page does not add it, and your plan should not miss it. Finally, the comparison shoppers’ table the activity select encodes: at 70 kg for 30 minutes, walking briskly (4.3) ≈ 150 kcal, elliptical (5.0) ≈ 175, running at 5 mph (8.3) ≈ 290, stairs (9.0) ≈ 315, running at 6 mph ≈ 343 — a fair map of the gym floor’s true exchange rates, with running’s efficiency of misery explained not by magic but by the simple fact that it is the only common gait where both feet leave the ground and the body pays full freight for every metre.
Hills, Heat and the Marathon’s Full Bill
The MET table prices flat, calm, temperate running, and three honest adjustments cover the usual weather of real runs. Gradient: climbing costs roughly the vertical work itself — a rule of thumb puts a 1% average grade’s surcharge near 10–12% of the flat cost for the same distance, a 5% climb near half again — which is why a hilly 10K and a flat 10K are different meals at the same distance, and why trail runners fuel by time and climb rather than by kilometres. Heat and cold tax the cardiovascular system modestly (a few percent in real heat, as blood is shared with the skin) — real, but smaller than the gradient bill. And the marathon’s full bill, the number runners plan gels around: our 70 kg runner’s 42.195 km at the ≈1 kcal/kg/km rate costs about 2,954 kcal gross — call it 2,950 — of which the body stores perhaps 1,600–2,000 kcal of accessible glycogen. The gap between those two figures is the wall at kilometre 32, expressed in the calculator’s own units; fuelling strategy (30–90 g of carbohydrate per hour, by tolerance) is arithmetic aimed at that gap, and it begins, like everything else on this page, with an honest estimate of the cost. Run the formula for your weight and your long-run distance before your next build and the aid-station plan writes itself.
The Walker’s Ledger: 10,000 Steps, Priced
The same machinery prices the day’s other famous number. Ten thousand steps is roughly 8 km of walking for an average stride, and at walking’s economy of about 0.53 kcal per kilogram per kilometre, a 70 kg walker spends on the order of 300 kcal earning them — the activity select’s walking rows (3.3–4.3 METs) applied to the same total give a consistent figure by the other road. The comparison instructs: the run mile and the walked mile differ about twofold in cost, the step goal and the run are both honest exercise wearing different exchange rates, and a ledger that records each by its own table — rather than by the pedometer’s cheerful single number — is a ledger that survives contact with the scale.
Common Mistakes
Trusting the treadmill’s calorie display as measured fact (it is an estimate wearing a lab coat — often generous). Entering your weight in pounds in a kilogram field (the formula scales linearly with mass, so the error is a clean 2.2×). Comparing gross calories from one source against net from another in the same ledger. Believing faster miles cost proportionally more per mile — per kilometre the cost is near-constant; speed buys time, not burn rate per distance. And treating any single estimate as exact enough to eat back precisely: the estimate plans the week, it does not adjudicate the biscuit.
Related Tools
Continue with the Training Pace Calculator, the VO2 Max Calculator, the Swim Time Converter, or browse the full Sports Calculators hub.
Frequently Asked Questions
How many calories does running burn per mile?
About 1 kcal per kilogram of body weight per kilometre — roughly 113 kcal per mile for a 70 kg runner, nearly independent of pace at ordinary speeds. A 30-minute run at 6 mph (5 km) for that runner costs about 343 kcal gross.
What is a MET?
A multiple of resting metabolism from the Compendium of Physical Activities: 1 MET is sitting quietly (≈ 3.5 ml O₂/kg/min), running at 6 mph is 9.8 METs. Calories = MET × weight in kg × hours.
Why does the treadmill show a different number?
Treadmill estimates often assume a default body weight, skip the gross/net convention you expect, or run optimistic constants — deviations of 15–20% are documented. Entering your real weight in a MET-based calculator is the more defensible figure.
What is the difference between gross and net calories?
Gross counts everything burned during the exercise window, including the resting metabolism you would have burned anyway. Net subtracts that slice (≈ 1 MET × kg × hours). For a 30-minute run at 70 kg, gross 343 vs net 308 kcal.
Does running faster burn more calories per mile?
Only slightly at ordinary training speeds — the cost per kilometre stays near 1 kcal/kg. Faster running burns more per minute, and covers the distance sooner; per mile, the difference is second-order (very fast and very slow running are both a bit less economical).
How accurate is a MET-based estimate?
A solid central estimate: the underlying values are measured population averages, but individual running economy varies around ±10%. Use it consistently for planning and trends, and read it to two significant figures, not four.