This Forum To Blame For Carbon Emissions

[Muddypause]

what about trying to microwave yer beets in a small amount of water. Never tried it me sel, and it will bing at you just the once, however at least it stops cooking once it's times up!.

Not a bad idea. And it won't peep at me - the first thing I did when I got the microwave was take it apart and remove the bleeping bleeper. Trouble is, microwaving is not really cooking, is it? I mean boiling a saucepan of water is much more fundamentalist, hard-core culination*.

I think I'm right in saying they use up less energy than heating a pan of water.

Actually I think that when it comes to liquids the amount of energy expended is very similar. The most efficient way to heat liquid is in a kettle

Hmm... Possibly. But then again, possibly not. Don't forget that most electricity started off as gas in the first place, and the conversion may have been a pretty inefficient process.

* I just made that word up - from culinary. It doesn't exist, and ought to. I was thinking of using 'culiningus', but thought better of it.

[hedgewizard]

Don't quite follow that last bit Stew, but never mind. Microwaves are only about 65% efficient (the rest is lost as heat). For most uses this is far outweighed by their ability to put the heat into the body of a substance rather than relying on conductance to slowly warm the thing through, but for liquids this isn't the case.
Moreover, using a microwave to boil water is dangerous (unless you buy a microwave kettle). Find out why!

[Muddypause]

Don't quite follow that last bit Stew

For most of us in the UK, who plug the electric kettle into the national grid, you have to bear in mind that most power stations consume gas, using it to superheat water (with heat losses), which in turn drives a steam turbine (with energy losses), which then drives a generator (with energy losses), which is then distributed through a network of wires, transformers and other substations (at each stage of which there are more losses), until it reaches the element in the kettle.

So, figuring out just how efficient that electric kettle is, compared to one that sits on a gas ring, is not altogether straightforward - the gas that burns in that ring heats a great deal of air, rather than just the water in the kettle.

I wouldn't really like to guess either way about which is most efficient.

[hedgewizard]

gotcha. The article I read (and I cn't find it now) only looked at energy comparisons for electric kettle v microwave.

[Cheezy]

Ahh but, I was not advocating boiling the same amount of water as you would with a pan of water. That not how to cook with microwaves. What I suggested was use a "Small" amount of water in with the beets, you also need a lid with a hole in it eg clingfilm. Then you actually are steaming the beets. The reason microwaving food is more effcient, is that you are not heating a large amount of water which then has to transfer it's heat to yer beets.

Instead you are creating a steam enviroment, PLUS the fact that microwave work by exciting water molecules, and there is quiet a lot of water in most veg, therefore you are heating up the beets directly, and indirectly.

P.S Muddy culination. I know what you mean. We've got one which was a wedding present and it has two use's
1. heating up milk to make milky coffee (aka Latte) without dirtying a pan
2. Melting/softening butter
and
3. Cooking peas (small amount of water cling film)

DOH, the three principal uses for our microwave are:

1. heating up milk for coffee
2. softening butter
3. cooking pea's
and
4.steaming cauliflower/broccolli florets in the same dish that I then put cheese sauce on and put in the oven to bake

Arrggh... amongst the many things we use the microwave for are:

adinfinitum (copywrite MPFC)

[hedgewizard]

Ah right! Now I'm clued in. I was enjoying that argument too!