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

391–400 of 647 posts

Re: The case for induction cooking

#391

Post by kergonath »

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.

Our old induction cooker cost us €600 more than a decade ago. It’s our old one only because we moved and the kitchen in our new flat had a gas one and we’d need to rip all apart and rebuild to remove it. But otherwise we used it for 11 years without any issue, so I would call that reliable.

Re: The case for induction cooking

#392

Post by dillondoyle »

stellar678 wrote: post #375
dehrmann wrote: post #318

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Natural gas for cooking is a negligible contributor to climate change. 2.8% of natural gas in the US is used for cooking. On a per-BTU basis (which isn't fair because natural gas has fewer carbons), the natural gas/oil split of US consumption is around 40/60. You're looking at around 1% of CO2 emissions in the US coming from natural gas used directly for cooking.

The thing is "I absolutely must have gas installed in my house for cooking" turns into "well let's buy the gas water heater, and the gas central heating, and the gas dryer" and all of a sudden you're using was more piped-in gas for for non-cooking things than you are for cooking, but "cooking with gas" was the hydrocarbon foot in the door at your house. Otherwise you might opt for an electric tankless water heater, a…

Yes!

I've read that the gas industry uses the cooking specifically in advertising and lobying to keep this toehold for the even bigger emissions. [1]

And 2-3% isn't nothing either. Such an easy win. we desperately need to rack up easy points yesterday...

Relatively as in compared to say utility scale production/storage or hell even replacing home heating like you mention.

I wish we could replace our 110 year old giant cast iron steam heater thing. Would have to either replace all the radiators with electric board things (i hate them) or find an electric boiler (which would have to plasma cut apart the old boiler to get it out lol).

Heat pumps sound cool too but all those options have upfront costs which some of my hoa neighbors can't afford. We couldn't get a loan for other repairs we did with longer term than 3 years.

[1] https://www.motherjones.com/environment/2021/06/how-the-foss...

Re: The case for induction cooking

#393

Post by kergonath »

ksec wrote: post #265
chimeracoder wrote: post #263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Pretty easily mitigated with a vent hood which all these tests don't have running. Almost nobody in New York City (where the NYT is based and focuses its coverage) has a vent hood that vents outside the apartment. Older buildings don't have a hood at all, and new buildings have hoods which circulate air within the apartment, which doesn't really address concerns about accumulation of environmental pollutants.

>Almost nobody in New York City (where the NYT is based and focuses its coverage) has a vent hood that vents outside the apartment. Thanks. If this bit of context was clear from the get go it would have been a lot easier for those from EUR where we would expect vents outside the apartment to be the norm. ( Not speaking for all EUR, so there may be places this is not the norm ) As a matter of fact this is the first ti…

> If this bit of context was clear from the get go it would have been a lot easier for those from EUR where we would expect vents outside the apartment to be the norm. ( Not speaking for all EUR, so there may be places this is not the norm )

It is the norm in newer buildings, but there are plenty of older houses or flats blocks in the EU that don’t have a good ventilation system. It’s similarly expensive same in the UK and I cannot say about Norway and Switzerland, but I would think that it is not better in the other non-EU bits of Europe.

Re: The case for induction cooking

#394

Post by nullityrofl »

kergonath wrote: post #383
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…

> 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.

My Miele induction cooktop is physical buttons/knobs and has no auto offs. Honestly, I was confused by all of the replies with complaints about induction UI's because it's the first induction cooktop I've owned and it's been a joy. I couldn't go back to gas.

Re: The case for induction cooking

#395

Post by TooKool4This »

comex wrote: post #281
netsharc wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 personall…

There are definitely a few more benefits than aesthetics. Comparing to electric stoves rather than induction (which are in the same price range) a few benefits I’ve noticed are:

1. Instant heat off/heat on response. In electric stoves the cook top still remains fairly hot and cooking can happen from residual heat after you turn off the heat. Same issue with turning the heat on. While the gas stove has minimum hearing from the thermal mass after you turn it off

2. Psudeo-grilling ability

3. Cost for gas vs. electricity. In an ideal world the heat output per $ would be exactly the same but there are subsidies, pricing structures, different supporting infrastructure etc.

As the article implies, at the current price point, gas stoves are competing with electric stoves rather than induction stoves. And there are definitely a few benefits.

Re: The case for induction cooking

#396

Post by stellar678 »

dillondoyle wrote: post #392
stellar678 wrote: post #375

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The thing is "I absolutely must have gas installed in my house for cooking" turns into "well let's buy the gas water heater, and the gas central heating, and the gas dryer" and all of a sudden you're using was more piped-in gas for for non-cooking things than you are for cooking, but "cooking with gas" was the hydrocarbon foot in the door at your house. Otherwise you might opt for an electric tankless water heater, a…

Yes! I've read that the gas industry uses the cooking specifically in advertising and lobying to keep this toehold for the even bigger emissions. [1] And 2-3% isn't nothing either. Such an easy win. we desperately need to rack up easy points yesterday... Relatively as in compared to say utility scale production/storage or hell even replacing home heating like you mention. I wish we could replace our 110 year old gian…

I feel like we live in the same building with an ancient boiler and HOA neighbors who are extremely cost sensitive!

I do wonder if there's a reasonable heat pump retrofit for old buildings with boiler-based heating. Ultimately you're just heating up a liquid and pumping it through everyone's radiator, right? Seems like a sensible product given the number of old buildings with this kind of heating.

Edit: And here it is! https://electrek.co/2022/01/05/these-new-affordable-electric...

Re: The case for induction cooking

#397

Post by kergonath »

Module_compile wrote: post #322
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…

Just curious, if we are discussing cooking, safety, health and the environment, why did the author not discuss Teflon™ pans and how "unsafe" and damaging this is not only to health but also the environment? If you want to make certain forms of energy "illegal" because of some "lung-irritating pollutants", I mean why not start with the unsustainability and cancer risks of these poly type chemicals, no? Especially ones…

> If you want to make certain forms of energy "illegal" because of some "lung-irritating pollutants", I mean why not start with the unsustainability and cancer risks of these poly type chemicals, no?

This is a fallacy. Regulations can be improved even without being perfect and your pet peeve not being addressed in a specific discussion does not make the discussion useless. Gas is harmful, as well as some antiadhesive coatings. Saying we should not do anything about either because the other would still be bad is not particularly smart. It is also the contorted logic that lobby groups use when they know they are on the wrong side of a public health issue.

Re: The case for induction cooking

#398

Post by morsch »

universa1 wrote: post #109
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.

Even in Germany there are very few left with knobs... I think a price comparison listed like 10 models... Miele had/has some... Then there is neff with a "puck" thingy, somewhere in the middle and then some high priced stuff... [1] actually lists a few more, was looking for something bigger than 60cm (23inch??) wide. [1] https://geizhals.de/?cat=hkochf&xf=4220_11~4220_4~4220_5~422...

Those are standalone induction cooktops. It's common to install a cooktop on top of an oven by the same manufacturer. In that category, there are still many devices (from many manufactures, low and high end) with rotating knobs, integrated into the oven component.

https://geizhals.de/?cat=hherdset&xf=1959_Induktion~8421_60~...

Re: The case for induction cooking

#399

Post by trabant00 »

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…

I wonder who would push anti gas ideas and why. /s

My dilemma as I catch more and more propaganda: should we support it as it is our side or should we try to expose it as it is not true?

Re: The case for induction cooking

#400

Post by zahma »

Installed an induction cooktop from Smeg a couple years ago. It’s not top of the line but it offers granular enough control. I was a doubter at first but it was the right thing to do to avoid using gas and to electrify more appliances in our home.

I quite like it. I don’t miss gas. I’m not a chef but I do a fair amount of cooking and even an entry-level cooktop will serve most well. Best part for me is easy on and easy off. The surface heats up very quickly and cools down fast enough that I can reuse the cooktop as part of the counter. A major bonus for tight kitchen spaces.

Post reply on HN