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

391–400 of 528 posts

Re: Barilla passive cooker

#391

Post by modeopfer »

shepherdjerred wrote: post #370
bradleyjg wrote: post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s not exactly what you are referring to but I like to call out conservation theater. Like when restaurants in California were forbidden from giving water to people unless they asked for it. As if drinking water was even a rounding error on California’s water issues.

That's the perfect word for it! On one hand small actions can lead to big change. On the other hand, no matter how many small actions are taken, this problem isn't going to be solved with government intervention.

Is that a typo? I feel that this problem isn't going to be solved _without_ government intervention. Large groups of people have an unbelievably high inertia.

But yeah, forbidding restaurants to distribute drinking water is probably not the right move.

Re: Barilla passive cooker

#392

Post by kkfx »

vineyardmike wrote: post #328
namuol wrote: post #318

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have a gas stove in my studio apartment. I still use an electric kettle to get water boiling before dumping it into a preheated pan to cook noodles/whatever. Highly recommend this approach if you are stuck with gas.

> Highly recommend this approach if you are stuck with gas. My partner, who cooks more, bemoans that our new apartment has electric. Grew up using gas and claims that it’s better for cooking. I prefer not to intentionally dump gas into our house and welcome the minor benefit of energy efficiency. Funny how different people see the world (and technology).

> claims that it’s better for cooking

It's not really "better" it's simply easier keep a constant heat. Most electrical cooking stuff works on intermittent on-and-off cycles. An electric oven power up, then start cycling it's internal resistences let's say 10" powerd 5" off, then again 10" powerd etc. Some users here show me in a video an induction plate who use "mini-coils" who seems rotating constantly nearly nullifying such cycle effects on food cooking, but most other electric gears choose a "simpler" approach for their OEM.

Personally I'm all electric since around 8/10 years or so, I've made a habit and not a professional cook (while remaining a professional eater) but I understand those who dislike the initial impact...

Beside that: most actual tech is developed in crappy ways, most product explicitly made not to last and not to ensure evolution with plugged-in recycling but simply ensure a constant buy of new gears who are just crappy like the ones they substitute. Now most people might not realize that as well as a techie but anyone feel that. So...

Re: Barilla passive cooker

#393

Post by kenneth »

rad_gruchalski wrote: post #317
killjoywashere wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

> We make our daily coffee in a French press Moka pots are much better. Your French press will start letting the coffee powder through at some point. I use these: https://www.rommelsbacher.de/en/coffee-tea-co/espresso-maker... .

You can't compare a moka pot with a french press, they are fundamentally different things that make different styles of coffee. Espresso and coffee are not identical.

Personally I find french press too grainy, so at home I use aeropress, but when out prefer a properly done pour over filtered coffee. Black of course.

Re: Barilla passive cooker

#394

Post by ReptileMan »

AaronFriel wrote: post #96
jiggawatts wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A better way to save energy is to use an electric kettle to get the water up to boiling. This is about three times as energy-efficient as a gas hob. Combined with passive cooking it could save real money… Technology Connections on YouTube has a good video about how electric kettles are the superior way to boil water: https://youtu.be/_yMMTVVJI4c

Alec, of the Technology Connections YouTube channel, shows it's not just energy saving, but faster and cleaner. Even with US outlet power limits a kettle will boil a volume of water much more quickly than a gas stovetop, and my indoor CO2 sensor won't spike by hundreds to a thousand PPM of CO2. While the time savings is modest, if you have an electric kettle it's a no brainer to prefer that over gas. Though induction…

>Though induction stovetops can be faster yet, and just as clean.

You have the mother of all hotspots on the pan (less relevant for boiling) where the induction ring itself is and getting simmer right is harder. Induction as implemented right now is on/off with full blast for the duration and just increased downtime. It is not the same as low constant output.

Re: Barilla passive cooker

#396

Post by kergonath »

vineyardmike wrote: post #328
namuol wrote: post #318

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have a gas stove in my studio apartment. I still use an electric kettle to get water boiling before dumping it into a preheated pan to cook noodles/whatever. Highly recommend this approach if you are stuck with gas.

> Highly recommend this approach if you are stuck with gas. My partner, who cooks more, bemoans that our new apartment has electric. Grew up using gas and claims that it’s better for cooking. I prefer not to intentionally dump gas into our house and welcome the minor benefit of energy efficiency. Funny how different people see the world (and technology).

Induction is much better than gas about 90% of the time. Because the heat can be set much lower than a flame’s temperature, and because heat transfer happens through the whole bottom surface of the pan, it’s much better to keep a low-ish temperature for any length of time, which opens a lot of possibilities. For high heat, the larger contact area makes it much quicker to heat up evenly the whole pan. It pairs very nicely with a cast iron pan as well.

And that’s just from a practical, cooking point of view, without mentioning all the health benefits.

It was not our choice when we got an induction cooktop the first time, but now it would be.

Re: Barilla passive cooker

#397

Post by kenneth »

askvictor wrote: post #99
jiggawatts wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A better way to save energy is to use an electric kettle to get the water up to boiling. This is about three times as energy-efficient as a gas hob. Combined with passive cooking it could save real money… Technology Connections on YouTube has a good video about how electric kettles are the superior way to boil water: https://youtu.be/_yMMTVVJI4c

Americans don't really do electric kettles, largely on account of using 110V mains, which limits power to around 1100W, making it a lot slower than ~2000W electric kettles in the 200+V world.

I'm a European who finds kettles stupid. I own one because someone didn't appreciate my house's lack of kettle and got one despite my protestations. I own (1) a induction stovetop, (2) a microwave… both will perfectly boil water just as fast. Why do I want to waste counter space on a kettle. My kitchen is tiny.

I have the same complaint about a ricecooker. It's perfectly easy to cook rice in a pot. Sure it's convenient to use the automated device, but it's wasteful.

Re: Barilla passive cooker

#398

Post by allisdust »

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…

We used to hear this encouraged as an efficient method for cooking rice on government radio when we were kids. Cooking gas was precious and everyone wanted to save it. Basically this is how probably everyone used to cook before pressure cookers became a thing.

Re: Barilla passive cooker

#399

Post by bowsamic »

I'm tired of cutting these weird corners to save energy. My wife won't even let us use the oven anymore. I don't think these things are gonna save the planet, or even save us that much money

Re: Barilla passive cooker

#400

Post by kergonath »

ReptileMan wrote: post #394
AaronFriel wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Alec, of the Technology Connections YouTube channel, shows it's not just energy saving, but faster and cleaner. Even with US outlet power limits a kettle will boil a volume of water much more quickly than a gas stovetop, and my indoor CO2 sensor won't spike by hundreds to a thousand PPM of CO2. While the time savings is modest, if you have an electric kettle it's a no brainer to prefer that over gas. Though induction…

>Though induction stovetops can be faster yet, and just as clean. You have the mother of all hotspots on the pan (less relevant for boiling) where the induction ring itself is and getting simmer right is harder. Induction as implemented right now is on/off with full blast for the duration and just increased downtime. It is not the same as low constant output.

> You have the mother of all hotspots on the pan (less relevant for boiling) where the induction ring itself is and getting simmer right is harder.

Not at all. There is no significant hot spot as heat is actually produced by the bottom of the pan and not the coils themselves.

> Induction as implemented right now is on/off with full blast for the duration and just increased downtime. It is not the same as low constant output.

Again, not at all. All the devices I have used were perfectly fine generating a low, constant heat. what you describe may be the case for bargain basement ones, and it was the case for most resistive cooktops, but is definitely not the case for inductions ones.

Post reply on HN