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

531–540 of 647 posts

Re: The case for induction cooking

#531

Post by r_klancer »

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…

I'm redoing my kitchen (in the US) with induction and ruled out anything with touch controls. I noticed that particular issue as soon as I stepped into the showroom. Thanks for letting me know about the auto-off problem.

The other problem to watch out for is poor reliability due to gradual "cooking" of the circuit board -- after all, the knobs are not physically connected to the power electronics; they're just a digital input to a controller, same as for the touch controlled units.

The showroom had this Beko range with knobs and no Wifi or "smart" stuff for ~half the starting price of their (so-called) "pro" ranges: https://www.yaleappliance.com/kitchen/cooking-appliances/ran...

I think I'm going with this GE ("Café") double-oven option for my small kitchen, as long as I can confirm the Wifi stuff is strictly optional and isn't in the failure path: https://www.yaleappliance.com/kitchen/cooking-appliances/ran...

Other options with knobs were from Miele, Fischer and Paykel, and (less expensively) LG. I believe Samsung also sells a range with knobs; see the photo in the article.

Re: The case for induction cooking

#532

Post by antattack »

Cooking with gas releases SO2, NOx, CO and PM2.5

In winter, when people don't open their windows the pollution will accumulate.

Induction cooking is not just better because of less pollution at home, it's cheaper than gas cooking and is easy on the power grid, many solar installations can power it directly.

Re: The case for induction cooking

#533

Post by acdha »

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…

I just got a modest Frigidaire. I would prefer knobs but the buttons are normal covered plastic which work fine with wet hands.

Re: The case for induction cooking

#534

Post by acdha »

ekianjo wrote: post #446
DeathArrow wrote: post #407

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would rather want to see what reputable scientists have to say than some random youtubers and activists.

Reputable scientists from the Lancet published hoaxes not too long ago. You cant trust anyone.

Here’s the difference: bad publications happen but when they’re discovered that leads to retractions and other professional consequences. For example, Andrew Wakefield did get a bad paper into The Lancet but it was retracted and he’s now a former doctor.

Re: The case for induction cooking

#535

Post by acdha »

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.

I don’t know where you live but we literally just did this yesterday – we picked a modest $1,300 unit, but there were multiple options at most price points in stock at most stores here in the DC area. I don’t know if there are specific features or brands you require but it doesn’t seem like there’s a massive supply issue or one specific to induction hardware.

Re: The case for induction cooking

#536

Post by VBprogrammer »

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…

Induction cookers must have been designed by the same person who designed the door opening and closing mechanism on Virgin train toilets.

For those who haven't experienced that particular abomination, they had sliding quadrant doors and separate buttons for locking and unlocking the doors as opening and closing the door. Originally the colour of the lights around the buttons was the only clue to the state of the lock (I think these have been redesigned). This resulted in the unintended comedy of someone sat down to do the toilet as the next person came along, pressed the door open button and slowly unveiled the person doing their business to the whole carriage of people. Inevitably resulting in a mashing of buttons from both sides trying to get the door to close again.

Re: The case for induction cooking

#537

Post by tristor »

SECProto wrote: post #344
tristor wrote: post #293

I switched from induction to gas after a kitchen renovation. My experience is that induction is more efficient and powerful than gas, but is also much more uneven, more picky about cookware, and does not work well with “professional” cooking techniques which were created around gas and wood stoves. I gave induction a solid trial run and in the end, it didn’t cut it. The stupid controls design made it even worse. Also…

> My experience is that induction is more efficient and powerful than gas, but is also much more uneven, more picky about cookware, and does not work well with “professional” cooking techniques which were created around gas and wood stoves Anyone else's may vary, but my experience differed from this: 1 I found induction to produce a very even heat - much more even than a gas stove, where there's a heat spike wherever…

I used induction in EU while traveling and found it really great which us why I switched to it initially when back in the US. The available models (at any price) in the US are all subpar. Commonly you will have a single 7” diameter induction ring in a 10” burner, which is /horribly/ uneven compared to any other range type.

Look in cooking forums, it’s well understood at this point that radiant is the most even, induction is the least even, and gas is in the middle. But gas has the advantage of working with any cookware (including warped or wobbly/spun pans) and can be used in tilted/lifted cooking techniques that don’t work on induction or radiant and are common in gourmet cooking done in the French tradition.

I really wanted induction to work for me. It’s so much safer and more energy efficient (e.g. cheaper) than other options, but it just sucked in the US. Even EU brands sold in US use subpar designs and the quality cooktops sold in EU are not available here.

If you want to know conclusively how even your cooktop is do a flour scorch test or use a thermal imaging device. I know from scorch test that induction was significantly worse (and from behavior while cooking). Try using cast iron on induction and you’ll hate life.

Re: The case for induction cooking

#538

Post by acdha »

ekianjo wrote: post #450
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…

You seem to think electricity is not produced by fossil fuels. In most countries the majority is made with gas and coal.

In most countries is changing rapidly as renewables ramp up and it’s not uncommon to hear about major countries having entirely renewable days.

The important part to remember is that natural gas infrastructure is always polluting, and tends to leak a fair amount of fuel which is never even used (around me, there are estimated that this is as high as a third of the total usage). That’s all locked in when you use gas, whereas an electric stove can be powered by a mix of sources which change hourly without the owner even having to know about it.

The other thing to consider is that a professionally-managed and monitored power plant is usually better than equipment as maintained by the average person. Lots of people don’t even get their gas appliances checked once a year on average, and you’ll pretty regularly hear about leaks or fires caused by poor maintenance at apartment buildings where you’d think they’d be at least a little more responsible.

Re: The case for induction cooking

#539

Post by happymellon »

pwr-electronics wrote: post #503
happymellon wrote: post #457

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My Zanussi induction has physical knobs. I haven't actually seen a stove in the stores that are touch only.

The portable ones are often touch-only.

People are not replacing gas stoves with portable induction, surely.
Post reply on HN