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

The case for induction cooking

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 647 posts

Re: The case for induction cooking

#141

Post by angry_octet »

schroeding wrote: post #57
benoliver999 wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I do think I could use an upgrade though, my induction hub just clicks on and off PWM style. Not great for a steady heat. Having read this article I noticed that they aren't all like this.

Can absolutely recommend the upgrade, these stoves are far superior to PWM style "2000W or off" ones. I can even melt chocolate without a water bath on mine, they can keep temperatures as low as 55°C / 131°F steadily no problem. :D

I just have to be pedantic and say that what you are describing is the very opposite of PWM, which runs at high frequencies (e.g. 30kHz), varying the duty cycle over the tiny slice of time. The only problem with good PWM is audible harmonics, usually only children can hear them.

Re: The case for induction cooking

#142

Post by js2 »

Top reader comment seems apt w/r/t the pollution aspect anyway:

As a scientist (an immunologist) who leads a research lab on lung inflammation including asthma, the cavalier attitude Times columnists have toward scientific references in their articles is appalling.

RMI is a thinktank with an agenda. Not a research institution. And Brady Seals is not a scientist. Note the lack of PhD. She has an MBA and has never worked in science. Nor did she 'author a study'. She authored a REPORT. Which is not peer-reviewed and not published in a reputable journal.

As an immunologist I assure you that scientific evidence does not indicate that 'increase of asthma is on par with living in a home with a smoker'.

And frankly- just walking outdoors in NYC you're exposed to far higher levels of lung-irritating pollutants than you are cooking stir fry on your stove. But that doesn't fit the agenda the Times is pushing with multiple induction stove articles lately all focused on bogus health effects and the (more legitimate) climate concerns.

https://nyti.ms/3i1tj3B#permid=117337268

Re: The case for induction cooking

#143

Post by baq »

ChrisMarshallNY wrote: post #91
buran77 wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

With induction charging you're trying to charge a battery and unfortunately producing heat in the process which is unwanted and entirely a waste. With induction stoves pretty much all the electricity is converted to heat in the bottom of the pan which is exactly what you want. A minor portion is lost elsewhere in the circuitry but not much in the grand scheme of things. Efficiency refers to the ration between what yo…

OK. I'll accept that. My electrical bill is (a fair bit) higher than with the old electric stove, though. That's interesting. I still love it, and have no intentions of giving it up.

if you love it, maybe you just cook more? :)

Re: The case for induction cooking

#144

Post by qbasic_forever »

hprotagonist wrote: post #4

my local library will let you check out a portable induction hob. The last time i checked, the waiting list was about a month long, which certainly speaks to the interest in the idea. As long as my rangeware doesn't warp, I'm all for more even heating! It didn't occur to me until very recently that a reason why pans might warp on an induction hob is that they can now heat up fast enough to thermal shock on the way up…

Get thicker pans if you're experiencing warping. I had loads of problem with inexpensive but thin tri-ply aluminum/stainless cookware. I switched to big thick cast iron and carbon steel, and 8mm thick aluminum disc base nonstick/stainless and have never had a warping problem since.

Re: The case for induction cooking

#145

Post by com2kid »

ascar wrote: post #92
hades32 wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

German here. So few people here have induction because people still think that most pans couldn't be used. But I love it! But also few here use gas. It's mostly ceramic hobs

As a fellow German I didn't go induction on purpose, because I prefer the ceramic hob cooking experience. "Pans cannot be used" wasn't part of the decision. Having "control nobs" on the front rather than a touch area on the cooking surface was a hard requirement for me though and seems to be getting rarer every year. I'm actually amazed how much people love induction here, but I guess that's also because it's mostly…

What? Ceramic cook tops are crap, they get stained easily, scratched easily, and in the US at least, the way they work to "adjust" the temperature is to cycle on and off every few seconds.

Oh and if any of your pots or pans get warped, they become completely unusable!

Drop anything heavy on it, and the cook top breaks.

I once waited for 20 minutes for a small pot of water to boil on a ceramic cook top.

The old fashion coil burners are better than the stupid glass top ones.

Re: The case for induction cooking

#146

Post by onli »

ouid wrote: post #135

I don't buy it, sorry. Electric ovens are garbage, and there's no such thing as an induction oven. Most of the health concerns are probably solved by requiring the installation of range hoods. I don't believe the claims about burning natural gas being the causal factor here either. I rather think that culprit is aerosolized oil, and houses with gas ranges are simply more likely to cook with oil at temperatures hot en…

The article explains pretty well the advantages of induction. I had induction in my last appartment, gas before and currently a glass-ceramic cooktop (without induction). Induction was clearly the best. Very fast to make water boil, no issues with the gas sometimes not starting to burn or other maintenance work the gas needed. And I see no reason to doubt the negative health effects of gas, burning stuff is always bad.

Being able to select a target temperature would be awesome for cooking, my induction stove couldn't do that.

> Electric ovens are garbage

What, why? All ovens I have ever seen outside of pizza places are electric. Why should a thing that just needs to get hot at the sides be bad if it gets hot by electricity? That's nonsensical.

> In fact, I think it's pretty obvious that they are complimentary, and that gas is more universal.

Not a fact at all. As I see it, there is simply no positive of gas compared to induction, not a single one. Thus there is nothing complementary about it. You are just used to it - or seen broader, it's simply one more technological area where the US seems to be stuck in the past.

Re: The case for induction cooking

#147

Post by noveltyaccount »

Aaargh20318 wrote: post #140
noveltyaccount wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I got a flat bottom wok that I am happy stir frying on my induction cooktop. The flat bottom gets rippin hot and the sides only warm. Have to work within that smaller hot zone but I prefer the wok to skillet for containing the mess.

> I got a flat bottom wok There is no such thing. A round bottom is a defining feature of a wok. If it doesn’t have a round bottom it isn’t a wok by definition . A round bottom is essential to how a wok is used.

Lol this is an unusual hill to die on

Re: The case for induction cooking

#148

Post by jimbokun »

finiteseries wrote: post #80
BrandoElFollito wrote: post #61

I did not know that induction cooking is a novelty (or at least worthy of an article) in the US. When you go to an appliance shop in France they would be 90% of the offer (and 9% gas, 1% vitro-electric). BTW the big photo on the top of the article is not induction but vitro-ceramic (the first version of something that would look at glass and not have flames, but this is not induction, just heating of a tingie under t…

I’ve always wondered how Italians will handle the transition when it inevitably happens, that tilting & just a ton more movement in general over the flame seems super common there

Italians are very good at not changing things if they don’t want to. If they believe something to be the best way, they will continue doing it regardless what the rest of the world thinks.

Re: The case for induction cooking

#149

Post by muxator »

finiteseries wrote: post #80
BrandoElFollito wrote: post #61

I did not know that induction cooking is a novelty (or at least worthy of an article) in the US. When you go to an appliance shop in France they would be 90% of the offer (and 9% gas, 1% vitro-electric). BTW the big photo on the top of the article is not induction but vitro-ceramic (the first version of something that would look at glass and not have flames, but this is not induction, just heating of a tingie under t…

I’ve always wondered how Italians will handle the transition when it inevitably happens, that tilting & just a ton more movement in general over the flame seems super common there

I love my induction cooktop, but you are right: that gesture becomes impossible. Somewhat I manage :)

Re: The case for induction cooking

#150

Post by noveltyaccount »

angry_octet wrote: post #131
bch wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you wrangle the wok on the surface (or a frying pan) for a sauté[0]? What I'm really trying to find out is: how durable is the work surface? Does it deal well with pans being slid over it, and on/off it? [0] https://youtu.be/CTyV3JExDT8

Yes, never had a scratch.

I have microscratches on the ceramic surface but nothing horrible. The instructions said explicitly to lift pots and not drag them. I don't baby it and it's fine.
Post reply on HN