Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Barilla passive cooker

barilla.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 528 posts

Re: Barilla passive cooker

#181

Post by fuckstick »

BurningFrog wrote: post #145
fuckstick wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What do they use the kettles for? For most non tea drinking households in the US there is no essential use for a kettle. They do sell them here, people buy them, they are usually tea drinkers.

To perhaps state the obvious, I use mine mainly for coffee. And the occasional tea cup.

Ok exactly - in addition to keurigs /nespressos etc mentioned (which I will refuse to buy) - for years the predominant coffee making apparatus in the US has been the automatic drip coffee maker.

French press, pour over, chemx are all niche.

Re: Barilla passive cooker

#182

Post by [deleted] »

bombolo wrote: post #159
bravura wrote: post #20

According to Kenji, you don't even need boiling water to cook pasta: https://www.seriouseats.com/how-to-cook-pasta-salt-water-boi... https://www.seriouseats.com/tips-for-better-easier-pasta "Want to get even more crazy efficient? Try soaking pasta in water as your prep your other ingredients. By the time your sauce is ready, you can just add the pasta (along with some of its soaking liquid) to the pan and, with a min…

You can just eat dry pasta like chips and save a lot more energy!

[deleted]

Re: Barilla passive cooker

#183

Post by maxerickson »

armada651 wrote: post #174
sltkr wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is about three times as energy-efficient as a gas hob. I sincerely doubt this figure in cases where electricity is generated from fossil fuels in the first place. For example, I lived in the Netherlands where 80% of electricity is still produced by fossil fuels, mostly in gas-fired power plants. As I understand it, generating electricity from gas has an efficiency of only about 50%. That means you lose a lot o…

> In the winter, the gas stove will be more efficient since all the heat that doesn't go into your food, heats up the room (heating is typically also based on gas in the Netherlands, so this is basically free energy). The efficiency loss of the electric kettle also gets converted into heat that heats up your home, energy doesn't just disappear.

Not the waste heat from the power plant.

Re: Barilla passive cooker

#184

Post by fuckstick »

joezydeco wrote: post #180
vel0city wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honestly it seems more likely for an American household to have a Keurig machine (or hell, even multiple Keurigs) than to have any kind of kettle.

A Keurig machine is just an electric kettle with an electric pump inside of it.

Can it be used like a kettle - ie can it rapidly heat up a quart of water without a coffee residue taste? No, it cannot.

Just because they both heat water doesn’t make them similar.

Re: Barilla passive cooker

#186

Post by killjoywashere »

bmitc wrote: post #178
vel0city wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Americans largely don't use electric kettles because Americans largely don't drink tea at home and thus don't use kettles as often as the rest of the world. Most households I know don't even own a kettle. Not a stovetop one, not an electric one. If you were to ask most Americans why they don't have an electric kettle at home they won't say "because I only have 120V outlets in the kitchen." They'll say it is because t…

Once introduced, it's hard to downplay the usefulness of an electric kettle.

I'm American and learned about electric kettles during trips to Asia. They are definitely handy, even at 110V. We make our daily coffee in a French press, so the electric kettle is a no-brainer.

Re: Barilla passive cooker

#187

Post by selcuka »

ghayes wrote: post #101
unpythonic wrote: post #37

The claim: reduces CO₂e emissions by up to 80%* The asterisk: water boiling phase excluded When I boil pasta, I use full heat to get the water boiling, drop in the pasta, then let it come back up to a boil, then drop the temperature as low as possible to keep a slow boil going--about medium-low. Guesstimating that the boil takes about as long as the time to cook the pasta, I'd say that the pasta cooking portion only…

The claim is weird, though. If they said “just add to boiling water and turn off immediately” then they would claim it’s 100% more efficient*. If you turn off your water right before it’s boiling and cook your pasta, then Barilla is an energy generator*.

Actually reverse cycle air conditioners are said to have a heating efficiency of over 100%, but what they really do is to move the heat from one point to another. It's all about definitions; if you define the system as your room, it will be more than 100% efficient. If your system is the universe, then it's always 100%.

By the same logic, yes, your hypothetical statement can be rephrased as "if you already have boiling water, cooking pasta doesn't require any energy".

Re: Barilla passive cooker

#189

Post by pkulak »

unpythonic wrote: post #37

The claim: reduces CO₂e emissions by up to 80%* The asterisk: water boiling phase excluded When I boil pasta, I use full heat to get the water boiling, drop in the pasta, then let it come back up to a boil, then drop the temperature as low as possible to keep a slow boil going--about medium-low. Guesstimating that the boil takes about as long as the time to cook the pasta, I'd say that the pasta cooking portion only…

Also probably assuming gas. Induction would take another 90% off.
Post reply on HN