I currently have a gas cooktop, but I’ve had induction tops and as has been said, no noise except on the boost setting.
Thanks. I guess I need to read reviews carefully.
But I don’t think this “add a fifth burner and use it when I want induction” will work. There just isn’t enough extra space in the kitchen for it.
And I really really don’t want to give up my oven. So I think I’ll be sticking with gas for a while.
I use my single burner one to cook on the back porch when it’s hot out. Mine makes no noise except for a small fan.
I’ve been using a single burner portable for years and love it!
Pros: Cleanup is super easy and I really like the precise temp control. I set the temp at 190-200 degrees to keep from getting to a full boil and burning what’s on the bottom of the pot.
I also like that it turns off automatically if left untouched for a couple hours and knowing that even if I forget something on it, even if it boils over, it possibly extinguish a gas flame or short out an electric range.
Cons: The fan can be a bit loud at high temp or sear, but I don’t find it annoying a few feet away.
The automatic turning off means I have to check every few hours for long simmer things like stews and soups. But not hearing the fan is a reminder that it’s not running.
It’s not great for a hard sear because the pan/pot cools quicker than on my electric stove.
The metal transfer plate I have doesn’t work at all. The plate I have may be too large for the burner, but it doesn’t get very hot, losing a lot of heat on the sides.
It doesn’t work well for flat bottomed wok cooking because there’s no heat outside the contact surface. Of source a gas stove is best of wok cooking.
Edit: it [won’t] possibly extinguish a gas flame or short out an electric range.
I have two singles and a double. Would never go back even tho I like gas.
The best feature is temperature control. A sensor looks up thru the glass and directly controls the temperature of the bottom of the pan.
They will also run on 1-10 type heat settings similar to using gas or electric.
I no longer fry bacon or other meat inside the house.
We had a pretty high end induction cooktop in our house when we bought it. I was a bit leery but got used to it. I can only use my cast iron stuff on my outdoor gas cooker, but I’m okay with that. I bought about $500 in new pans, but my mum was happy to get my old (many almost new) ones so no biggie.
It conked out after ten years (so at 17 years of age) during the first year of the pandemic when supply chain issues were horrible, especially for home improvement stuff.
We took the only model was available that would fit our countertop. It is a much lower grade model and I hate it. It makes a humming sound that is much louder than the old ones. And we found that the “big burner” actually has a disc that is 8” in diameter, same as the medium one. The only thing “big” about the burner are the markings on the cooktop. You can put a 12” pan on it fill it with water and watch an 8” circle of bubbles come out of the bottom. Apparently this is a problem with lower end models.
It also seems to take a lot longer to boil water. I’m assuming it is just generating less heat. But it draws more current than the old one. At least we had to rewire all the way back to the panel and upgrade the circuit breaker.
Why is that? I would have thought that cast iron would be ideal for an induction cooktop.
sure, we have an induction top and my cast iron pans get very hot, very quickly (much more so than with gas). They are excellent for when you want to get a good char or a sear. (though you are advised to get some silicon discs to stop any scratching of the glass top)
I must admit, every time I see the word “burner” used for a decidedly non-burning induction plate in this thread, my eyeball twitches a little.
We have a single plate induction stove, and I love it. Yes, the cooling fan makes a noticeable sound, but no more than my PC when it’s rendering a 3D model.
IME, the thing they do best is boil water. It is lightning-fast at that, so anything that involves that kind of cooking is what I use it for. I don’t use it for frying or simmering things, it can but I prefer the fine control of gas there, my particular model doesn’t have continuous power settings, only big increments.
Maybe the bottom is not smooth enough. I see that the bottom of the one I’m looking at has a small raised disk in the middle (about 3” across) and then the outer rim has a raised ring about half inch wide.
If I put them on the induction (at least the old one) there was a loud buzzing sound and then the whole cooktop turned off with an error code. Which I had to reset by turning the breaker off and on.
Thats just a gimmick. Induction Burners do not generate less CO2 !! In fact depending on the energy mix in your home electricity, it is likely to generate more CO2
Here is the calculation sheet to show the same :
0.95 lb CO2 from the gas stove. vs 0.96 lb CO2 for the induction stove
The calculations might be correct, but they are deceptive. Converting the energy for the gas burner from BTUs (8150 according to that sheet) to kWh (2.3, rounded down) shows that it uses over twice the energy at the consumer end. Producing electricity from fossil fuels is very inefficient, so with the high percentage of thermal electricity plants burning coal in the US it ends up a wash, but including the direct energy comparison shows that the induction top will improve greatly with increased green energy in the electricity mix while the gas burner will chug out the same CO2 no matter what.
Another interesting fact is that the dirtiness of the electricity production is driven by coal. Burning gas in power plants is much more efficient and if you power your cooking by gas it is better to do so using a power plant and an induction cook top than to pipe the gas to your house.
Unless proven wrong, the calculations are correct. I’d like to look if you have better calcs. The calculations are not deceptive either.
Its a rating for a burner when operating on full flame - you can operate the burner to a setting of your liking. The BTUs are the BTUs required to cook. So if you need 1000 BTUs to boil water, those are the same whether you use a gas burner or an induction heater or a laser.
This statement is deceptive.
Inefficiency has nothing to do with fossil fuels. It has to do with thermodynamics.
A Solar Panel efficiency is : 15 to 22%
A Wind turbine efficiency is : 20% to 40%
A fossil fuel Natural Gas Combined Cycle plant efficiency is : 45% to 57%
Wrong again. Japan’s path to decarbonization is to use synthetic methane. Methane made from Hydrogen (from renewables like solar and wind ) and Carbon captured or recycled. The process is called methanation and has been used for decades in ammonia manufacture.
There are many places that have started injecting hydrogen into natural gas pipelines for domestic use. CPUC Issues Independent Study on Injecting Hydrogen Into Natural Gas Systems
So NO to “the gas burner will chug out the same CO2 no matter what” . You can have natural gas made from renewable sources delivering Net Zero CO2.
If the induction burners are more efficient than conventional electric burners as claimed then the induction burners produce less CO2 than conventional electric burners if power is provided by a coal burning plant. In the case of the OP the alternative is gas so there may be no reduction in CO2.
That is another greenwashing tactic
" The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) has estimated electric coil efficiency as about 74-77% and induction at 84%.1 Utility studies have shown similar results of about 80-81% efficiency for induction.2"
There is not a big efficiency gain between conventional electric versus induction either !!
I had an induction range at a house that had not run gas to the kitchen. It cooked as well as gas on the cooktop. I had young kids, so I liked the fact the surface doesn’t get hot. It was easy to clean. I recommend them. I’ll be buying another one shortly, when I move into my new house.
This is a great find. Thank you for posting it! The only item that I really hated not being able to use with my induction was my stovetop popcorn maker. I improvised something like this with a small tortilla griddle.
The very first cite in the document fails to include what it’s supposed to show. I thoroughly explained why I considered them deceptive.
The calculations state that 8150 BTU is the daily energy consumption and compares it to a daily energy consumption of 0.933 kWh. It’s natural to assume those are meant to represent the same usage pattern. Converting the numbers to the same unit shows that, as expected from the technologies involved, a gas burners delivers a lot less of the energy converted at the point of delivery to the food than an induction top. They are only the same if what you’re measuring is what goes into the water, and you’re not.
When comparing converting fossil fuels to heat in your home in different ways it is of course relevant how large the losses are.
Funny how the first result I find about synthetic methane talks about “pilot projects” and possible reduction in dependency on natural gas imports.
There is absolutely no chance that you can use electric energy from renewables to produce natural gas to then burn for heat in a stove more efficiently than just sending that energy to the grid and having an induction top. And that’s assuming these pilot projects are a success and manage a conversion rate comparable to lab bests.
From your latest link:
Therefore gas stoves are about as efficient as electric stoves, only if you assume gas-fired electric power plants, which is a bad assumption.
I was just cooking on an induction range in Europe and it was quieter than my portable unit at home in the US. No idea who made it or if it was a nicer unit or not.
————
A natural gas stove primarily has heat losses in the kitchen. An induction stove has them at the power plant. So yes, it takes more energy in the kitchen to perform the white paper’s cooking routine with a gas stove, but that is currently, on average, offset by the losses associated with generating and transmitting electricity.
The linked calculations take both into account based on current US average grid mix and thermal power plant heat rates. This will change as the grid mix changes and turbines get better. YMMV; my grid mix is lower-emitting than the US average, so induction comes out 25% better than gas.
The only factor missing based on my cursory look at the numbers is local distribution system gas losses, which are hard to pin down. IIRC between 0.3 and 1.5% of gas that enters the transmission system leaks after the city gate, with the EPA GHG inventory on the lower end of that range.
There are also arguments around residential air quality, but that’s a separate topic.