Jump to content

  • Welcome to the eG Forums, a service of the eGullet Society for Culinary Arts & Letters. The Society is a 501(c)3 not-for-profit organization dedicated to the advancement of the culinary arts. These advertising-free forums are provided free of charge through donations from Society members. Anyone may read the forums, but to post you must create a free account.

Electric Stove or Gas

Franci

By Franci
in Kitchen Consumer

 Share

Recommended Posts

Martin Fisher

Martin Fisher

Posted
Posted (edited)
17 hours ago, rotuts said:

induction cooking  saves energy  

 

that's for certain.

 

how much is open to analysis .

 

the induction surface doesn't heat up , and transfers more energy to the pot by far than any other method.

 

the now hot pot can transfer energy back to the induction glass surface , but little energy moves through the glass to the surounding

 

induction top.  glass is an insulator.  not the best , but decent.

 

the issue is fine control of the  temperature of the pot and  durability of the electrical components and possible noise of the magnets  

 

 

 

FWIW,

Is Induction More Efficient Than Electric Coil or Gas? An Energy Efficiency Comparison Between Stoves DEBUNKING THE MYTH THAT INDUCTION IS MORE EFFICIENT THAN ELECTRIC COIL

 

Edited by DiggingDogFarm (log)

~Martin :)

I just don't want to look back and think "I could have eaten that."

Unsupervised, rebellious, radical agrarian experimenter, minimalist penny-pincher, and adventurous cook. Crotchety, cantankerous, terse curmudgeon, non-conformist, and contrarian who questions everything!

The best thing about a vegetable garden is all the meat you can hunt and trap out of it!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Martin Fisher

Martin Fisher

Posted
Posted
11 hours ago, weedy said:

 

https://www.fastcompany.com/3062598/induction-cooking-is-way-more-efficient-and-even-faster-than-gas

 

"Gas range, 7,000 BTU burner: time to boil 1 quart of 60°F water was 8 minutes 30 seconds, consuming 992 BTUs of heating energy.

Induction cooker: same pot, same temperature and quantity of water, the burner draws 1,300 watts (4,436 BTUs) at the highest setting and took 5 minutes 50 seconds to boil. Total electrical consumption was 0.126 kilowatt-hour of electricity, equivalent to 430 BTUs of heating energy."

 

He doesn't explain exactly how he reached this conclusion.

The comments following the article are also very interesting.

~Martin :)

I just don't want to look back and think "I could have eaten that."

Unsupervised, rebellious, radical agrarian experimenter, minimalist penny-pincher, and adventurous cook. Crotchety, cantankerous, terse curmudgeon, non-conformist, and contrarian who questions everything!

The best thing about a vegetable garden is all the meat you can hunt and trap out of it!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
boilsover

boilsover

Posted
Posted (edited)
12 hours ago, weedy said:

 

https://www.fastcompany.com/3062598/induction-cooking-is-way-more-efficient-and-even-faster-than-gas

 

The value for Btus for the gas is meaningless in this "study".

 

I don't think anyone has ever claimed gas is as efficient as induction measured at the point of use.  It's that bothersome little detail of having to generate the electricity that brings efficiencies closer.  And the relative prevailing prices for gas and electricity can easily be such that cooking with gas is cheaper.

 

Likewise, I don't think anyone has claimed gas will win a speed-boil race against induction.  But such a race isn't a very realistic way to assess overall efficiency.  The CenturyLife tests show that, the longer the cooking task, the less efficient induction is--to the point that it's slightly LESS efficient than electric coil.

Edited by boilsover (log)
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Martin Fisher

Martin Fisher

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, boilsover said:

Likewise, I don't think anyone has claimed gas will win a speed-boil race against induction. 

 

It will with a super-burner!!!

Will totally kick it's ass! LOL xD

"High heat, jet burners can produce up to 432,000 BTU of heat per square foot of burner area."

hNIZbTy.jpg

Source: https://tejassmokers.com/Jet-Burners/32

 

  • Like 2

~Martin :)

I just don't want to look back and think "I could have eaten that."

Unsupervised, rebellious, radical agrarian experimenter, minimalist penny-pincher, and adventurous cook. Crotchety, cantankerous, terse curmudgeon, non-conformist, and contrarian who questions everything!

The best thing about a vegetable garden is all the meat you can hunt and trap out of it!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
boilsover

boilsover

Posted
Posted (edited)
44 minutes ago, DiggingDogFarm said:

 

It will with a super-burner!!!

Will totally kick it's ass! LOL xD

"High heat, jet burners can produce up to 432,000 BTU of heat per square foot of burner area."

hNIZbTy.jpg

Source: https://tejassmokers.com/Jet-Burners/32

 

 

Yes, very true.  I pimped my 2-hob "camp stove" for wokking with a variable pressure regulator/gauge that will also win this race at 180K Btu.  Do not try this indoors without a suppression hood!

 

Now we wait for the reductio ad absurdum of an aluminum smelting induction heater hacked for culinary use... ;)

Edited by boilsover (log)
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...