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

What a gas stove ban means for restaurants

latimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

541–550 of 614 posts

Re: What a gas stove ban means for restaurants

#541

Post by marak830 »

syntheweave wrote: post #512
marak830 wrote: post #447

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Chef here: I've used induction, but the biggest annoyance is heat loss when lifting a pan. Most pans section dishes are moved quite rapidly, lifting then off of the burner, to toss the ingredients(I could be cooking 5-6 dishes at once, so speed is very important), with a gas burner this doesn't matter as the radiant heat is there. Now I'm assuming there are radiant stovetops that are designed for hospitality, but I'v…

I wouldn't be surprised if the market is unready to provide something professionals are happy with, and that could be a disaster - but if it's mandated throughout the state, the demand will exist for a supplier to try to do better. I can say that for my own home cooking purposes, electric coils have always been acceptable, and that's really where my attention is with the ban - I already know I won't feel direct pain…

It's all about the heat transfer, previous to gas we used bur ing wood, so a high heat transfer without physical contact. I'm not sure if there is even a way for a ln induction cooktop to provide heat over a distance.

But sure, if it's mandated then chefs will have to change their cooking style, which -with plenty if grumbling from chefs - won't be the end of the world.

Re: What a gas stove ban means for restaurants

#542

Post by kkfx »

linsomniac wrote: post #390
kkfx wrote: post #264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I do cook on indution since years, simply I have to say that it does work but it's not on par nor better than gas in cooking terms , for me suffice, I like the ability to move most electric appliances around also, I like the easiness to clean the induction plate BUT I understand people who don't, that's is. Having built a new home I do not have gas at all and I have a p.v. system so no interest in gas "extra comfort/…

Just curious: what about induction is not up to par? What sorts of foods does it fall short at?

On frying mainly because with plates I've used/tested (as pointed below in the conversation) is next to impossible keeping a certain temp constant, or it's way too hot or is a stop&go with cycles around 1.5 or so seconds that making good frying very uncomfortable.

Limits in kind of pot (for instance no earthenware some like here in southern EU) or some aluminum classic fryer can be also added to the cons list.

The pro is the easiness of install, for electric appliance in general their move ability around the house without special intervention, for those like me with p.v. of course the self-consumption option.

That's is. As pointed by another user below top-of-the-line plates can do frying at a substantially constant temp, but for me 3k+ buks for a plate is simply excessively expensive for my cooking, illogical to buy, some might consider that an investment.

Re: What a gas stove ban means for restaurants

#543

Post by DocG »

wbsss4412 wrote: post #453
DocG wrote: post #451

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not a professional cook. I miss gas stove over the induction because: 1. I have visual indicatation on how hot it is. The numbers is just not so good indicator. 2. I miss trashing pans around, specially when managin multiple things at once. Glass induction would not be able to withstand it. So suddenly I have to be gentle with machinery. 3. God forbid I spill something in the middle of cooking on induction. Sudde…

> God forbid I spill something in the middle of cooking on induction. Suddenly I have to try to cleanup a hot glass and manage the whole mess. I think you’re overestimating how hot induction stoves get, the element itself doesn’t heat up at all. When you have a significant spill on a gas stove, it can put the flame out partially or entirely, which is much more of a challenge than wiping off an induction element.

I've been using a nice one for over a year now.

But my main sadness is I can't leave food on the cooktop to cleanup later. Imagine water boils over, suddenly I have to start cleaning cooktop in the middle of cooking. Gas might be extinguished but I can restart and deal with it later once I'm finished cooking.

Re: What a gas stove ban means for restaurants

#544

Post by petre »

cmclaughlin wrote: post #537
petre wrote: post #527

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Carbon steel deforms over heat. Also leaks oil through the pores. Or maybe I should have bought a more expensive pancake pan? Otherwise I like it; using both but I am extra careful with the cast iron.

Yes thin carbon steel cookware warps. My wok is a good example of that. But there plenty of high quality thick carbon steel cookware on the market that’s stronger. What do you mean it leaks oil? I’ve never noticed any like that.

I always find oil on the induction cooker glass, under the pan. So I assume it leaks through pores when the oil gets hot and fluid? It's an ok quality pancake pan.

https://www.amazon.com/Kitchencraft-Non-stick-Crepe-Master-C...

(the reviewers that claim it sticks have not heated it up properly and the peeled off "teflon" is just burned crêpe)

Re: What a gas stove ban means for restaurants

#545

Post by peace4all »

I wonder how come gas stove, an artifact of the 20th century, became a "traditional" thing?

The way people cook on gas stove is just one of many ways it can be, and I'm sure in year 1900, cooking on coal was rather different, and gas must have been an improvement, but also met with skepticism, and probably laments about the lack of charcoal smell or taste.

Gas isn't a tradition written in stone. It has serious issues like hot surfaces and higher chances of burning your skin, scurf on the pans, benzopyrene in the air, and risk of suffocation, heating of the indoor air, etc. Personally, I switched to induction for all these reasons.

It looks like the only downside to induction is that some users need walls hot (I don't) and need cooking to continue if they raise the pan up. I think this is doable with different forms of the oven, and with thicker iron pans: iron absorbs EM waves, it conducts heat well, and it will add thermal inertia. These pans will be heavier, but IMO that's a small price for all the benefits of induction.

Re: What a gas stove ban means for restaurants

#546

Post by imtringued »

Gibbon1 wrote: post #538
marvin wrote: post #460

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Negative externalities would ideally just be handled through proportional taxation. Then market incentives work it out. Taxes are used to clean up the externalities.

That's the standard neoliberal solution that never works vs California's experience that phase outs and bans work well.

The problem with neoliberalism is that it is about cutting taxes like these. The FDP in Germany is basically a tax cut party and nothing else.

Re: What a gas stove ban means for restaurants

#547

Post by imtringued »

hammock wrote: post #526
turtledove wrote: post #430

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Electric pollutes less. Electric induction has a faster response. Electric is more energy efficient. Electric doesn't require a separate line and utility run to the house. Electric boils water faster. Electric produces less greenhouse gasses. I mean, there's subjectively better ("I prefer to cook with it") but there are objectively better traits too.

Imagine if someone told you you had to marry someone other than your wife, because your wife’s genes are more likely to produce disabled offspring that would place a great burden on the social safety net.

Stoves are just machines, they don't have feelings nor do they have a self preservation instinct.

Re: What a gas stove ban means for restaurants

#548

Post by wheels »

marvin wrote: post #457
b112 wrote: post #431

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's an interface issue. Instead of a knob, it's usually a touch interface, with +/- control, and slowish.

Don't understand why this was downvoted. The induction stoves I've used all had a touchpad controls, for some reason. They take one second to change the power output 10%, with hotkeys for 100% and 40%. It would be trivial to add a dial with some simple fail-safe. They're incredibly responsive, though, more so than the gas stoves I've used. Never tried the following with gas, I'm guessing it would work, but you can ea…

It's just a stupid trend in electric cooktop design, not something specific to induction. I've got an SMEG induction combo oven/stove and it has real knobs – out front, where they belong. They also make induction cooktops with real knobs.

Re: What a gas stove ban means for restaurants

#549

Post by imtringued »

colinmhayes wrote: post #450
hammock wrote: post #386

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pretty much every argument I have read in this post boils down to "electric is better" but crucially ignores a) the idea that preferences are individual, and b) even accepting something as universally "better" doesn't mean we ought to legislate it across an entire group of people (AKA centrally plan the economy).

The problem with "just let individuals choose" arguments is that our population seems to be extremely opposed to taxes that counteract externalities. Of course we should let people choose, but when their choice harms others we have to either charge them more or force them into making a different choice. I'd prefer taxes, but bans seem much easier politically.

It is considered "social engineering" if your tax internalizes costs. I honestly have no idea how people come up with these arguments.

Surely, secretly subsidizing harmful behaviour is twice as bad, first due to the subsidy itself and second for the harm it causes to other people.

Re: What a gas stove ban means for restaurants

#550

Post by chmod775 »

If the goal was carbon neutrality, why would you start with gas stoves instead of first removing (non-electric) cars from your city?

That's like trimming someone's beard when they're currently bleeding out from five stab wounds to the chest.

You shouldn't even be thinking of that yet, unless you've already given up.

Post reply on HN