• TurboWafflz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    22 hours ago

    Is a kettle really more efficient than a microwave? I would have thought a microwave would be best since it directly heats the water

    • Buddahriffic
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 hours ago

      Electric elements are actually pretty efficient. Usually the heat generated by an electric current is the inefficiency (as well as sound, radiation, and vibrations), but for a heating element you’re using that heat waste. It still can generate sound, radiation, and vibrations, so it’s not 100% efficient, but you can do well just sticking an element in the middle of the thing you want to heat, especially if it’s a fluid. If you don’t stick it in the middle, then you lose heat in all the directions away from the thing you’re trying to heat.

      Heat pipes are more efficient because the heat isn’t being generated but just moved. Natural gas (or fossil fuels) seems more efficient but is actually just cheaper, as it used energy that was stored a long time ago.

      Even induction burners still lose heat from the bottom of the pot into the induction burner itself, hence why they usually have cooling fans. And the reason why they are more efficient than radiative heat or those spiral elements is because they create the heat closer to the food using an electric current in the bottom of the pot/pan itself, though even the induction part has additional losses.

    • noerdman@discuss.tchncs.deOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      11 hours ago

      A magnetron is usually only a bit above 50% efficiency when converting electricity to microwaves (according to Wikipedia, that is), so I had actually assumed the difference to be even bigger.