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

381–390 of 647 posts

Re: The case for induction cooking

#381

Post by kwhitefoot »

oh_sigh wrote: post #261
firecall wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thank you! I'd previously seen reports on the studies about gas stoves being harmful even when off, and wondered about the credibility.

I guess stoves have electric pilots these days, but many installed gas stoves/cooktops have a constantly burning pilot light.

> many installed gas stoves/cooktops have a constantly burning pilot light.

Not for many decades surely. I'm 66 and I haven't used a gas stove that had a pilot light for at least forty years, all have had piezo-electric or mains electric ignition. But then again, I live in Norway now and formerly England not the US.

Re: The case for induction cooking

#382

Post by rtpg »

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 get what you're talking about but you can actually pick up an induction pan for a bit and shuffle things around and then put it back on the pan.

It's not 100% exactly the same heat distribution but when you pick your pan off of the fire it's also not getting mots of that heat either.

Somebody can correct me if I'm wrong about this (apparently wok cooking "needs the fire"), but like... I dunno, I've done a lot of stir fries and messing around with pots on an induction thing. The "auto-turn-off" thing only happens for me if I really leave it picked up for a couple minutes, otherwise it just re-engages pretty quickly.

Re: The case for induction cooking

#383

Post by kergonath »

DyslexicAtheist wrote: post #359
Zenbit_UX wrote: post #238

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Before anyone reads this and decides, "oh ya the NYT is lying to me and gas is fine", it's not. Gas in your home is objectively bad for your health, the environment and is overall worse than induction when it comes to the cooking experience in just about all ways. That being said, It might not be as bad as living with a smoker (as the NYT asserted) but it is bad for you. The YouTuber Climate Town did an excellent vid…

> environment and is overall worse than induction would love to see an induction stove with a usable UI. everything I have used is designed by a person that never had to cook for more than 1. the automatic off during the slightest spill, and the impossibility to operate buttons with wet/greasy hands, has to be one of the biggest design mistakes in the history of engineering. my idea of a great time is to invite this…

> would love to see an induction stove with a usable UI.

To me, induction with physical knobs and buttons would be the best. Other than the stupid touch things, induction is just so much better than gas for almost anything.

Re: The case for induction cooking

#384

Post by coryrc »

oh_sigh wrote: post #261
firecall wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thank you! I'd previously seen reports on the studies about gas stoves being harmful even when off, and wondered about the credibility.

I guess stoves have electric pilots these days, but many installed gas stoves/cooktops have a constantly burning pilot light.

In the US, that's forbidden in residential, so I doubt you'll find many in people's homes. They are common in commercial.

Re: The case for induction cooking

#385

Post by fy20 »

jazzyjackson wrote: post #334
pdog wrote: post #331

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you know what isn't bad for your health? Good, clean healthy home-cooked food. Which, in millions of homes, is cooked swiftly and efficiently on gas ranges. Politicians and their media lackeys in the media need to stop trying to micro-manage peoples' lives.

I am a big fan of electrification but an induction range to replace my glasstop is on the order of $3-4,000 (and not in stock anywhere anyway) so I can't blame anyone for sticking with an old reliable gas range.

In Europe you can get 4 burner stoves for under €250. IKEA sell a portable single burner for €40. Why are they so expensive in the US?

Re: The case for induction cooking

#386

Post by yason »

ptomato wrote: post #42

Let me know when you can buy one of decent quality in the US with actual physical controls instead of some insane touch system designed by somebody who has apparently never actually been in a kitchen and marketed to people who won't use it but just want a thing that looks cool.

Indeed, I will never buy a stove without physical knobs. Add to that a stove top that can handle some real usage without breaking up. My circles have had too many reports on cracked induction or ceramic tops. Kettles can get heavy and hands get weak, and especially when you're busy in the kitchen the cooking ware do inevitably bang onto the stove top occasionally.

Re: The case for induction cooking

#387

Post by punnerud »

donw wrote: post #371
DyslexicAtheist wrote: post #359

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> environment and is overall worse than induction would love to see an induction stove with a usable UI. everything I have used is designed by a person that never had to cook for more than 1. the automatic off during the slightest spill, and the impossibility to operate buttons with wet/greasy hands, has to be one of the biggest design mistakes in the history of engineering. my idea of a great time is to invite this…

God, this. I like induction stoves. Easier to clean, and do 90% of what I need doing in a kitchen. Not having to run gas lines is a plus, and for the other 10%, I'm probably working on a grill or using a dedicated burner anyway. But the UIs are awful. Stop turning yourself off. Yes, I do intend to cook the thing I put on you for six hours. Just fucking do it. Give me a knob. Gas stoves use knobs for good reasons. You…

You get them with knobs: https://www.smeg.com/cookers/electric

Spilling have to be a gas thing? I experience it maybe once every three months on a induction oven (what I have at home).

I hated the gas oven when I studied in US, impossible to control the temperature accurately and boilover almost every time. Not even any faster.

Re: The case for induction cooking

#388

Post by coryrc »

katbyte wrote: post #377
ghostpepper wrote: post #300

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Gas is also universally considered better to cook with than electric (not induction) which is presumably why every restaurant kitchen uses it. My guess is ‘sensuality’ is not even in the top five considerations when equipping a kitchen.

By what measure? Induction wins hands down for control, responsiveness, efficiency, and heat output: https://youtu.be/hX2aZUav-54 Doing a super low temp simmer on gas is hard. Double boilers are only something you need with gas. Induction imho and experience is just better all around. What the video for someone putting it far more eloquently then I ever could.

Try stir-frying with a wok, lift the pan to shake it without losing all heat or not having to be gentle when setting it back down because it's metal-on-metal not metal-on-glass.

Or how about my 11" cast iron; the induction only heats the middle 7". Half the pan is useless.

Re: The case for induction cooking

#389

Post by kwhitefoot »

worik wrote: post #274
galangalalgol wrote: post #264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I like cooking with gas because when my power goes out I can use a match to boil water when the boil water orders go into effect because mains keep bursting. Also I can make smores when I don't feel like getting a fire going. I do have an induction plug in hot plate and for actually cooking its really quite good. It boils water faster than all but my 21k btu burner on just 110v, dumps no heat into the room, cools dow…

When I put a log burner in my house I choose one with a flat top for this reason. I get your point. But many things that cause electricity to go out (floods, earthquakes... Russian invasion) will put out the gas too

I don't have mains gas. My gas hob uses propane.

Re: The case for induction cooking

#390

Post by rtpg »

itcrowd wrote: post #35

Induction cooking is good. UI is terrible: touch screen that only allows control over one heat source at a time. Please, please please give me knobs like the ones in gas tops

crazy that they would put a touch screen. Ones in Japan are just like little plus/minus arrows (plus button serving as the per-heat-source on button as well). Built-in timer and everything.

The buttons are those little plastic overlays on simple button, so super easy to clean, usable when dirty... and definitely dirt cheap.

American appliance designers should really try just copying good foreign products one of these days. Y'all are in million dollar homes with appliance setups worse than student appartments in many places

Post reply on HN