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

281–290 of 647 posts

Re: The case for induction cooking

#281

Post by comex »

netsharc wrote: post #207
js2 wrote: post #142

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 work…

The article gets weird a few paragraphs in: people like cooking with gas because it's primal and sensual? Really? Is that the best you can come up with, in an NYT article?

> people like cooking with gas because it's primal and sensual? Really?

Yes, really. I personally love the aesthetics of flames on the stove, and this might lead me to choose a gas stove over the alternatives despite minor downsides like being slower to bring water to a boil. On the other hand, the air quality issue seems like a much more significant downside, though I haven’t researched it much. (I haven’t personally ever had the opportunity to choose the type of stove for a place I’ll be living, so it hasn’t come up. Someday.)

Re: The case for induction cooking

#282

Post by shaklee3 »

tomchuk wrote: post #169
cespare wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's true that most induction cooktops/ranges aren't great for woks, but in principle the induction surface doesn't have to be flat -- it can be a concave shape to match the wok. In fact these exist -- if you search for "induction wok burners" you can see some pictures. (I only recently became aware of this after watching this video of a chef who uses induction cooking in a small kitchen: https://www.youtube.com/watc…

Kenji Lopez-Alt, of Seriouseats and “The Food Lab” fame, is coming out with his new book, “The Wok”, here is his travel rig: https://www.instagram.com/p/CaxbNwdvOTR/ . I’ve had a similar wok hob for years, and while fitting the wok to the curvature of the hob is essential, once you’ve got that figured out, it’s an absolute joy to use. Even, fast, powerful heat - nowhere near to a commercial gas hob, but neither is my…

his book came out a couple days ago. highly recommend it.

Re: The case for induction cooking

#283

Post by worik »

unmole wrote: post #250
samarthr1 wrote: post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps because you will want to cook 4-5 things at the same time? Aor of Indian households when preparing a traditional lunch will have 5-6 items (in the south, particularly in a Brahmin household, you will have one sambhar, one rasam, three vegetable currys, rice, and a fried item usually appalam). This entire meal takes three hours or so to prepare from scratch on my stove (a three burner lpg stove). Two more usab…

> south, particularly in a Brahmin household, you will have one sambhar, one rasam, three vegetable currys This is not even remotely typical.

>> south, particularly in a Brahmin household, you will have one sambhar, one rasam, three vegetable currys

> This is not even remotely typical.

Digress!

What is typical?

It is always good to learn about people's lifestyles....

Re: The case for induction cooking

#284

Post by Wowfunhappy »

dimitrios1 wrote: post #114
buran77 wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think today more than ever we can agree that relying on gas may put any country in a far more precarious position. Remember that you can make enough electricity at home if need be, even if at a hefty cost maybe. The same cannot be said for the gas to power your stove and heating for any reasonable cost.

No, I don't think we can agree on that, especially not in America, where a mere 3 short years ago, we had an abundance of natural gas, and prices plummeting to near record lows (adjusted for inflation). The current situation we are in is due to bad policy.

The price of every type of fossil fuel is a gigantic lie that future generations will pay for. So what if the downpayment is lower, when it’s such a minuscule portion of the loan?

Re: The case for induction cooking

#285

Post by chii »

noveltyaccount wrote: post #218
Aaargh20318 wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It heats and cools instantly, performing the essential function of a wok. The bottom has a flat surface inside and out. It performs one essential function, it needs both a round shape and has to be made of thin sheet steel. You can only have one if you need to place it on a flat induction stove: either it’s thin and flat on the inside, or it’s round on the inside but thick.

Instead of arguing, why don't you educate? You're clearly passionate about this issue. We've covered the importance of thin carbon steel. Why is the round bottom so essential that without it we can't call it a wok ?

> Why is the round bottom so essential that without it we can't call it a wok?

you need the round bottom to be able to scoop up the food and churn it. Try using a spatula on a flat bottom "wok" and flip the food to churn it - it doesn't work very well.

There's also an edge between the flat bottom and the round sides. This causes food to get "stuck" there under high heat - leading to burning. A wok is round all the way, so the spatula scrapes everywhere evenly, and you leave no burnt bits.

A flat bottom "wok" is just a pan with high edges.

Re: The case for induction cooking

#286

Post by shaklee3 »

nojonestownpls wrote: post #241
noveltyaccount wrote: post #218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Instead of arguing, why don't you educate? You're clearly passionate about this issue. We've covered the importance of thin carbon steel. Why is the round bottom so essential that without it we can't call it a wok ?

From another part of the thread: > Easy tossing for stir fry is just one feature of a wok. For example, the round bottom causes liquids to pool in the center.

kenji just released his new book (700 pages) on woks. while OP is correct about the heat deltas, it makes no difference in practice if you have the right technique. if you want to dispute that, you're going to be disputing someone who wrote a book about this over 4 years and made thousands of recipes.

Re: The case for induction cooking

#287

Post by worik »

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…

Cannot use copper bottomed pots.

I got a nice collection of copper bottomed pots when my mother bought her induction cooker....

Re: The case for induction cooking

#288

Post by chii »

radicalbyte wrote: post #132
eyeball wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

you find a flat induction stove better than a gas one with wok ring for wok cooking?

Yup - induction heats up quicker, although you have to use a heavy iron wok which sits still. It probably says more about how bad the consumer wok rings are though. If you have a commercial one you'd never switch from gas.

> although you have to use a heavy iron wok which sits still.

but you need a flat bottom for such a "wok" to sit - otherwise a round bottom wok isn't close enough to heat up evenly.

Re: The case for induction cooking

#289

Post by worik »

angry_octet wrote: post #133
contingencies wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are shaped induction systems, most commonly for woks or industrial heating applications. However, as it needs to very closely match the external shape of the cookware, the technical and commercial viability of a generic system would be relatively low, which is why you don't often see them marketed. Copper and aluminium capable induction systems exist by varying the frequency. https://na.panasonic.com/us/food-se…

These systems are used commercially all the time, just not in the backwater of the US.

It is odd how so many of these consumer advances take a generation longer to penetrate the USA.

Bit harsh to call it a "back water".. Corporate advances in malfeasance often originate there!

Gotta love the pop art too, real inovators

Re: The case for induction cooking

#290

Post by worik »

formerly_proven wrote: post #179
phtrivier wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As another commenter said, it was electric but "vitro ceramic", so terrible performance and pretty dangerous. This actually gave gas a "better rap". Now I honestly only use gas at the moment because I moved in recently enough that I haven't bother to change - but it's getting higher on n my list every day...

> it was electric but "vitro ceramic", so terrible performance and pretty dangerous How exactly is that dangerous?

We have one of these.

It is a nice flat surface in the kitchen, and too many things in my household have been burnt by being placed on it.

They are easier to clean....

Post reply on HN