511–520 of 614 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Doesn't that omit the impact of natural gas on climate change?
I mean it impacts the climate whether it’s burned in a burner or in a power plant. We shouldn’t do either, but if you stop just the appliances you’ll just end up burning more in a power plant.
That power plant doesn't have to use natural gas.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I honestly would be interested for an actual chef to weigh in. I'm all for using an induction stovetop at home, but have people actually seen chefs fry over an open flame? They're moving the pan around, lifting it up and around, using it to toss the food, etc. That would basically be impossible with an induction stovetop. It seems rather tone deaf to me to not address the issues that the chefs are actually concerned…
Chef here: I've used induction, but the biggest annoyance is heat loss when lifting a pan. Most pans section dishes are moved quite rapidly, lifting then off of the burner, to toss the ingredients(I could be cooking 5-6 dishes at once, so speed is very important), with a gas burner this doesn't matter as the radiant heat is there. Now I'm assuming there are radiant stovetops that are designed for hospitality, but I'v…
I can say that for my own home cooking purposes, electric coils have always been acceptable, and that's really where my attention is with the ban - I already know I won't feel direct pain from it; whereas restaurant food as a consumer service is a case of "just make something good and I don't care how you do it if it's in line with laws and norms", and the rest is a matter of how much has to change in operations, cooking style etc to make a technology switch. Gas cooking has only been around since roughly the 1850's, following heating and lighting introductions; coal stoves remained popular well into the early 20th century, but coal in cooking today mostly conjures up backyard barbecue. It could easily turn out that the gas-centric styles become a "flash in the pan" niche if we make the switch.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I would argue that corporations have zero carbon footprint and consumers have 100% of the carbon footprint. Nope, because they have no control over the products that are available, how they are produced and most likely cannot afford to pay more. > Consumers have 100% of the power. No, 0%. They have _NO_ vote on how industry does what it does. Industry is not a democracy. They cannot just not buy food and electricit…
>No, 0%. They have _NO_ vote on how industry does what it does. Industry is not a democracy. They cannot just not buy food and electricity. That's stupid. They have to buy the things they can afford. The working class doesn't just have extra cash laying around, they buy what they can afford.. There are options to buy low carbon, and nobody does. People can vote with their wallets or they can vote at the ballot box. T…
That's a misconception spread by the anti-tax crowd. The seller can take the increased cost out of their own profits or they can try to pass it along as an increased the price, but they can't just demand that people buy their product at the higher price.
First, in this respect, there is no difference between regulatory costs and other costs (e.g., raw materials); it's just costs. Second, goods are generally already priced to maximize profit (profit each x items sold), and not based on cost (e.g., not 'cost + 50%'); increasing prices (the first factor) causes the quantity of sales (the second factor) to drop. The ability to increase prices without sacrificing profits depends on the price elasticity of the item: if you have the only well in a desert, you can charge what you want for water; if it is 100 yards from a clear, running river, your ability to increase prices is limited.
For example, it might cost Coca-Cola to 2 cents to make a liter of Coke and they might charge $2. If regulations increase the cost to 10 cents, will they now charge $2.10? No, they chose $2 as the price that generates maximum revenue; that doesn't change with the increased cost. They likely eat the cost themselves.
A large reason electric (restive and induction) are seen as inferior to gas is that portable units are limited to 120v/15a (few are 20a) so the total possible power is technically less than a gas stove; 2800w effective. However, gas stoves are very inefficient so in reality it's not a huge problem and 240v electric stoves could even be hotter (~4000w) than a gas stove. > Xie estimates that he pays around $500 to $700…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not a professional cook. I miss gas stove over the induction because: 1. I have visual indicatation on how hot it is. The numbers is just not so good indicator. 2. I miss trashing pans around, specially when managin multiple things at once. Glass induction would not be able to withstand it. So suddenly I have to be gentle with machinery. 3. God forbid I spill something in the middle of cooking on induction. Sudde…
> God forbid I spill something in the middle of cooking on induction. Suddenly I have to try to cleanup a hot glass and manage the whole mess. I think you’re overestimating how hot induction stoves get, the element itself doesn’t heat up at all. When you have a significant spill on a gas stove, it can put the flame out partially or entirely, which is much more of a challenge than wiping off an induction element.
That doesn't sound like possible to me (I've never used those stove, so I've no knowledge). Although induction only heats the pan, wouldn't the pan simply heat up the stove by contact?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I would prefer gas over regular electric for kitchen stove and range. I like having a gas water heater, although I understand there are more expensive electric units that end up being more efficient, and that is appealing. I would like to have a gas clothes dryer vs. electric, but don't have the option. Regular electric ranges typically do not perform as well for cooking. They can be better for cleaning and aesthetic…
> I like having a gas water heater, although I understand there are more expensive electric units that end up being more efficient, and that is appealing. Oh for sure - for heating the house and water, I prefer gas. At least where I live it's more cost effective than electric. In fact, my electric bill in my 1 bedroom apartment (all heating was electric) was just a tad lower than my gas + electric when I moved into a…
Doesn't this prove the opposite of your point that gas is more cost-effective than electricity? Perhaps I'm misunderstanding, but the last sentence seems to illustrate that electricity is more cost-efficient.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
People don’t want a lack of gas line. Those that care can turn their own gas off, yet sell to someone that does care.
Do we have statistics on people's preferences? Anecdotes: I've yet to live in an apartment/house that actually had a gas stove. No one I know made gas a criterion when house/apartment hunting. They use whatever the place has. When leaving a place with a gas stove, none of them cared if the new place would be electric or gas. On the flip side, I know quite a few people that exclude places with gas stoves when hunting…
I like cooking with gas, I've had electric and induction as well.
Generally I like having options and backups.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
15% of all natural gas use is residential. https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/natural-gas/use-of-natur... These laws are about removing the need for gas lines entirely. I think that restaurants count as commercial so the impact would be even higher. It's nonsense to claim that these changes won't have an impact.
Using natural gas in an appliance is more efficient than burning it to produce electricity (heat pumps are the exception here). Plus, there's a good chance we will want to use the natural gas grid to move renewable hydrogen, methane, or dimethyl ether because those forms of energy are easier to store and move than electricity.
A large reason electric (restive and induction) are seen as inferior to gas is that portable units are limited to 120v/15a (few are 20a) so the total possible power is technically less than a gas stove; 2800w effective. However, gas stoves are very inefficient so in reality it's not a huge problem and 240v electric stoves could even be hotter (~4000w) than a gas stove. > Xie estimates that he pays around $500 to $700…
I'm all electric at home but using a wok on an induction stove is a pita and doesn't even resemble a wok. I have friends who cook as a hobby and swear by gas.
Korean BBQ could be probably done on electric as well. Takes more time though. If I'd open a KBBQ restaurant tomorrow I'd probably do it on electric anyway, for safety reasons.
Would hydrogen be a viable replacement for natural gas? Maybe mixed with sodium (table salt injection?) to have an orange flame instead of invisible.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think that this is relevant at all in the context of this discussion - electric cooking methods - particularly induction - are superior to gas in essentially every way, shape or form - barring the production of wok hei, which is why the article stresses that so much, while conveniently leaving out all the massive downsides of gas stoves. Gas stoves are also generally used by gas companies to get gas lines dra…
Everything you have written is wrong. Gas is very efficient. If you have the choice of burning gas at a power station (which is how a lot of electricity is generated now a days) and piping it directly into people's homes for the end goal of generating heat, piping wins every time. The inefficiencies of converting gas to electricity and transporting that electricity are significant and well known. Additionally, I don'…
In addition to all the other responses you've received disputing technical aspects of your post, I'd just like to comment on this one. I've used both extensively (coil, solid resistive, halogen, and infrared for electric, and both bottled and piped for gas), and I far prefer an induction or even a coil stove over gas for everything except for wok. For example, I currently live in a place with a gas stove, and if I want to boil water quickly, I will put 1.7 litres in an electric kettle and 0.3 in a large pot on an appropriately sized burner. By the time the 1500W kettle boils, the water in the pot on the gas stove is ~80°C.