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

471–480 of 528 posts

Re: Barilla passive cooker

#471

Post by MrFantastic »

leoedin wrote: post #463
diordiderot wrote: post #384

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Watch this video about how the idea that gas was better for cooking was a marketing ploy with no basis in reality and how they used lobbyist to force has connections into building codes https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=hX2aZUav-54

"no basis in reality". Do you cook? Gas is functionally superior than traditional electric resistance cooking. That's not some evil lobby, that's practical experience. You can instantly control the temperature without juggling multiple burners at different heats. That makes it better. I'd take gas over electric (resistive or halogen) all the time - and I've lived with both. Induction is on par with gas in controllabi…

Every gas range( Wolf, Viking, GE, Bosch, Maytag ) I've used seems to vary dramatically with temps at different settings.

The lowest setting on some ranges might be a High setting on others.

Re: Barilla passive cooker

#472

Post by MrFantastic »

jve wrote: post #430
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

Speaking about electrical kettle: why aren't there insulated kettles that would help me save energy when I re-boil water after 20 minutes? EDIT: Ah, there are some: https://www.amazon.com/DASH-Insulated-Electric-Kettle-Cordle...

Throw a kitchen towel over the kettle after you pour off your first drink.

Re: Barilla passive cooker

#473

Post by asah »

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…

He soaked in hot water.

Re: Barilla passive cooker

#474

Post by benj111 »

briHass wrote: post #456
benj111 wrote: post #445

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How?

It provides a non-smooth surface to induce steam bubbles to form. I know in chem labs we used to use little chunks of ceramic for test tubes, but those aren't desirable in your tea.

>My microwave has a picture of a cup with a spoon in it, this stops superheating.

This appears to be a microwave setting. I don't see how that would provide a non smooth surface

Re: Barilla passive cooker

#475

Post by jasondozell »

vonseel wrote: post #388
_whiteCaps_ wrote: post #2

Backpackers have been using this technique to save fuel - I've got a cozy for my cookpot. I also remember seeing this on one of the Victorian Farm shows - it was something like a pot roast brought to a boil in the morning, then put in a well insulated container to sit for the day. Edit: Whoa, I just clicked through to "The Product" section, and it's an open source design using an Arduino. Super cool!

> a pot roast brought to a boil in the morning, then put in a well insulated container to sit for the day. Don't you need to worry about some sort of danger zone with regards to bacteria in meat thriving between 100-140F? My friend always leaves meat out for several hours and never gets sick, but I've just assumed he's been lucky so far.

I’d assume if the lid was kept on then there’s little scope for new bacteria to enter the chamber

Re: Barilla passive cooker

#476

Post by newaccount74 »

ants_a wrote: post #470
newaccount74 wrote: post #454

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> All the devices I have used were perfectly fine generating a low, constant heat I have never seen an induction cooktop that could generate low, constant heat. Even pretty pricy ones (eg. a 3000€ Bora hob with integrated extraction) showed a clear on/off cycle at the lowest heat settings. But maybe tech has improved in recent years, and there are hobs now that have constant low power output? Maybe the effect also ju…

All of the cheap tabletop cooktop I have seen have terrible cycling at lower powers, there seems to be two power levels and when you need something below the lower one, it cycles power at ~10s frequency. In contrast a Bosch integrated cooktop from a couple of years ago also does cycling, but seems to have more power levels available and the cycling is faster, around 1Hz or so. At least for me that is good enough. My…

> there are no useful review sites

Right! The only thing there is are occasional reviews on shopping websites, but people can usually only compare it to their previous one, so there really are no useful reviews (spoiler: most induction hobs are faster than whatever people had before, and people seem to hate touch controls)

Especially once you get to the fancy features (eg. internal and external temperature sensors) there are almost no reviews at all and all you have is the manufacturers marketing.

Re: Barilla passive cooker

#477

Post by thebiss »

bch wrote: post #378
nerdponx wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I always wanted some kind of "collar" that I could put around a burner to try to direct that excess heat back into the pan/pot.

There used to be (still is?) a sort of vertical chute/collar available to put around camp pots. Think mountaineering applications. The idea was that they would capture heat energy escaping off the bottom of the pot that would rise/disperse into the environment, and channel it close to the side of the pot where it would heat the vessel as it rose. Think of wrapping a section of corrugated cardboard around the outside…

Typically, those collars are used as a wind screen.

https://www.rei.com/product/139472/toaks-titanium-windscreen

Re: Barilla passive cooker

#478

Post by harg »

selcuka wrote: post #336
hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But the whole point is that Barilla's definition is ludicrous. The only definition that really makes sense is how much energy did it take to get the pasta from the box to my plate, and Barilla is excluding the vast majority of that energy in their 80% number for the sole purpose of inflating it to make it look better.

Barilla's definition is ludicrous, and I'm playing the Devil's advocate. > The only definition that really makes sense is how much energy did it take to get the pasta from the box to my plate Including the energy required (and the carbon footprint) to manufacture the pasta in the first place, yes? Or no?

no, because we're only comparing the energy required to cook the pasta; not the whole lifecycle.

Re: Barilla passive cooker

#479

Post by SECProto »

thaumasiotes wrote: post #449
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…

> While the time savings is modest, if you have an electric kettle it's a no brainer to prefer that over gas. Not quite. Water is heavy and boiling water is dangerous; if you're boiling your water in a teakettle you then have to transfer it to a pot on the stove without scalding yourself. (This isn't the exact problem I'd experience if I adopted your advice. I have an electric teakettle, but it is low volume and is a…

Presumably you mean you have a gooseneck kettle, which I agree is not well suited to this task (though if it takes 30s to pour out the kettle, it's not really a big deal). Regardless, pouring boiling water out of a kettle is far less dangerous than pouring the cooked pasta + boiling water out of the pot and into a strainer.

If I'm looking to boil say 2 litres of water, I'll put 1.5 l in the electric kettle, 0.5l in the pot on the gas stove with a lid on. Generally the kettle boils first.

Re: Barilla passive cooker

#480

Post by KennyBlanken »

danpalmer wrote: post #418
ghayes wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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*.

Except that would not cook the pasta. I haven’t tried this technique yet, but one of the aims is to still cook the pasta effectively. I know from experience that your hypothetical won’t cook most dried pasta.

You "know" incorrectly. Pasta "cooking" is mostly rehydration, and that happens at temperatures well, well below boiling.

https://www.seriouseats.com/tips-for-better-easier-pasta

Getting the water to a boil is probably just a way for Barilla to make the instructions foolproof- after adding the pasta, the water will still be hot enough to rehydrate said pasta.

Post reply on HN