Microwave vs stove - Heating water

[PhoKingGuy]

I read that 600-800psi quote from some grad student's abstract at some university. What, if I had forwarded the article to you, you'd kindly shut the fuck up you fucking retard? Same goes for the 1 wheel drive vehicles you artard.

God you're an idiot

 

[fleabag]

Well, technically some heating elements get hot enough to glow thereby wasting energy in the visible light range. Seeing as visible light is not readily absorbed by the water, I'd say that makes it 99% efficient or so.

I think you're an idiot.. primarily because you're not looking at the whole energy equation which is what should dictate "efficiency".

 

[fleabag]

God you're an idiot

I'm an idiot because I know that 1-wheeled drive vehicles are the original vehicle drive and still exist? You realize one wheel drive means the power shaft is connected to one wheel, right? Do you know of any one-wheel drive vehicles that are made today? I can think of one...can you?

 

[Cogman]

Ok then.

It would be easier if you could help us narrow it down you know...



Well, technically some heating elements get hot enough to glow thereby wasting energy in the visible light range. Seeing as visible light is not readily absorbed by the water, I'd say that makes it 99% efficient or so.

99? Psh. Incandescent blubs are 90% efficient (at making heat), and their job is to make light! And while the light doesn't have to be absorbed by the water, so long as it is absorbed by something in the pot (the wall.) it will still be converted into heat. So long as you don't open the lid to look inside, that's going to convert a huge portion of the light into heat.

My guess is more like 99.95% If not higher. Turning electricity into heat is something we don't have a problem with in this universe.

 

[Born2bwire]

I think you're an idiot.. primarily because you're not looking at the whole energy equation which is what should dictate "efficiency".

Hes a successful physics teacher with a degree and you're a random shit head 13 year old taking middle school classes

That's your answer

Wrong.

Let me know when we finally get close.

 

[Cogman]

I think you're an idiot.. primarily because you're not looking at the whole energy equation which is what should dictate "efficiency".

Oh? What energy equation are you referring to?

A heating element, submerged in water, is going to transfer practically all of its energy into the water. Efficiency, with regards to energy, is the measure of how much energy it takes to do the job in an ideal situation vs how much energy is actually put in.

In this case, the job is the absorption of heat. In which case, essentially all the energy that goes into the heating element is going to go straight into the water.

If you are talking about Ohms law type stuff. Well, the heating element is essentially just one giant resistor. at 120 or 220V, the only difference is going to be how fast the water heats up. The actual work done in each situation is going to be exactly the same. (Ok, so there will be slightly less work done in the 220V situation where some of the heat is radiated off of the water, so less time is spent compensating for heat lost due to convection... It shouldn't be THAT much of a difference in the grand scheme of things.)

What do you think the electricity is being turned into besides heat and light? For there to be a loss of efficiency it HAS to change into something else that isn't absorbed by the water and turned into heat.

 

[fleabag]

Oh? What energy equation are you referring to?

A heating element, submerged in water, is going to transfer practically all of its energy into the water. Efficiency, with regards to energy, is the measure of how much energy it takes to do the job in an ideal situation vs how much energy is actually put in.

In this case, the job is the absorption of heat. In which case, essentially all the energy that goes into heating the element is going to go straight into the water.

If you are talking about Ohms law type stuff. Well, the heating element is essentially just one giant resistor. at 120 or 220V, the only difference is going to be how fast the water heats up. The actual work done in each situation is going to be exactly the same. (Ok, so there will be slightly less work done in the 220V situation where some of the heat is radiated off of the water, so less time is spent compensating for heat lost due to convection... It shouldn't be THAT much of a difference in the grand scheme of things.)

What do you think the electricity is being turned into besides heat and light? For there to be a loss of efficiency it HAS to change into something else that isn't absorbed by the water and turned into heat.

Well it's about the fact that when you use a stove, you heat the heating element, which heats air which heats the metal pot which heats the water... A lot of waste there.. The point I was trying to make with the OP was does Ohms law take precedence over the conductive losses of using a pot and pan on an electric burner or not. Pot and pans at 220V vs microwave at 120v but having all of the energy being directed at the food with some energy lost due to the food radiating the heat into the container. The container in a microwave is not directly heated like it is on a stove.

 

[Bignate603]

I read that 600-800psi quote from some grad student's abstract at some university. What, if I had forwarded the article to you, you'd kindly shut the fuck up you fucking retard? Same goes for the 1 wheel drive vehicles you artard.

Link to abstract?

Well it's about the fact that when you use a stove, you heat the heating element, which heats air which heats the metal pot which heats the water... A lot of waste there..

What are you talking about? On electric stoves the pot sits directly on the heating element.

The point I was trying to make with the OP was does Ohms law take precedence over the conductive losses of using a pot and pan on an electric burner or not. Pot and pans at 220V vs microwave at 120v but having all of the energy being directed at the food with some energy lost due to the food radiating the heat into the container. The container in a microwave is not directly heated like it is on a stove.

This whole section makes no sense at all. You keep on saying things about voltages making a difference. They don't. The power used to heat up something in either of those appliances is determined by watt-hours, not voltage. If you're trying to be the most efficient you'd be worried about the number of watts the appliance draws and the amount of time to get your food to a nice temperature, not the number of volts the machine runs off.

I don't even know why you're mentioning Ohm's law here. The efficiency of the heating methods is going to have everything to do with the losses inherent to each method, not the relationship between voltage, resistance, and current. It sounds like you may want to ask your teacher to go over Ohm's law again, you seemed to have misunderstood him when he explained it the first time.

 

[fleabag]

Link to abstract?

If I had it, I would make you people beg me to give it to you.. Unfortunately I can't link to it because I read it then forgot where I got it from.. I've learned my lesson and have since then written down the URLs of where I get this information.

What are you talking about? On electric stoves the pot sits directly on the heating element.

No matter how hard you mash those two pieces of metal together, you're still sitting on a bed of air. If you want them to actually be touching, you either have to smelt them together or add a thermally conductive paste. There is a reason why computer processors use a thermal paste when attaching a heatsink.

This whole section makes no sense at all. You keep on saying things about voltages making a difference. They don't. The power used to heat up something in either of those appliances is determined by watt-hours, not voltage. If you're trying to be the most efficient you'd be worried about the number of watts the appliance draws and the amount of time to get your food to a nice temperature, not the number of volts the machine runs off.

I don't even know why you're mentioning Ohm's law here. The efficiency of the heating methods is going to have everything to do with the losses inherent to each method, not the relationship between voltage, resistance, and current. It sounds like you may want to ask your teacher to go over Ohm's law again, you seemed to have misunderstood him when he explained it the first time.

It has everything to do with voltage.. How do you think the electricity gets to your house? If you pump electricity through the house at a lower voltage, it is less efficient than pumping it through at a higher voltage..
2X 120V @ 10a each is better than 1X 120V @ 20a. The more you step down the voltage, the more is lost in the wiring and in the transformer itself. There is a reason why your high power consumption appliances run off 220V while everything is 120V.

 

[grrl]

Roasting in pleabag tread.

 

[Born2bwire]

Roasting in pleabag tread.

Boasting in pleabat treat.

 

[Bill Brasky]

If you inflate your tires to sidewall pressure, the gas you save can be used in a Gas stove.

This is the most efficient way to boil water.

You win the thread.

 

[potion]

If you pump electricity through the house at a lower voltage, it is less efficient

lol

 

[lefenzy]

What would be more efficient, using a 120V microwave to heat water or to use a 220V electric stove to heat water? The reason I ask is because resistive heating is generally not as efficient as the microwave when it comes to heating water. Microwave ovens are most efficient at heating water and since they emit little heat, all the energy being directed is used to heat the water unlike in a stove where it heats the coils, which heats air that heats the pot which heats the water. Maybe I should put thermal paste on the stove to improve efficiency.

We've drifted from the original question, but why pose a question when it's clear you already have an answer?

 

[ahenkel]

I die a little inside when I read fleabag threads.

Every fleabag thread ever in a nutshell

Fleabag: Hey Everyone this square is red

ATOT (aka everyone else) No its blue

Fleabag : Long winded post about why its red


ATOT : Science and intelligent shit


Fleabag : More winded post about why its red, and some insults you heard in middle school

and on and on and on and on

oh and sidewall

 

[fleabag]

Fleabag: Hey Everyone this square is blue

ATOT (aka everyone else) No its navy blue

Fleabag : Long winded post about why its blue


ATOT : Memes and generic news articles that know jack shit about anything.


Fleabag : More winded post about why its blue, and some anecdotes
and on and on and on and on

Fixed

 

[ahenkel]

not clever

 

[fleabag]

not clever

Not all repairs are "clever"... For example, in most cases on cannot fix a cleaver, they just have to buy a new one.

 

[x-alki]

No matter how hard you mash those two pieces of metal together, you're still sitting on a bed of air. If you want them to actually be touching, you either have to smelt them together or add a thermally conductive paste. There is a reason why computer processors use a thermal paste when attaching a heatsink.

Correct, all my pans hover above the element. I think the heat causes them to rise.

 

[darkswordsman17]

Has anyone suggested the most efficient way to boil the water would be for fleabag to ingest it and then light himself on fire?

 

[darkswordsman17]

Not all repairs are "clever"... For example, in most cases on cannot fix a cleaver, they just have to buy a new one.

I'm pretty sure sharpening a cleaver will fix it right up, no need to buy a new one. Or hell, melt it down and make a new one from the same material. Stop being so wasteful with our limited resources asshole!

 

[darkswordsman17]

We've drifted from the original question, but why pose a question when it's clear you already have an answer?

That's the biggest mystery of all when it comes to fleabag. He [claims] to already know it, and considering his disdain and lack of confidence in the knowledge of the people he's asking, it makes you wonder why he bothers. My guess, he's lonely because no one in his life can stand to be around him so he tries to get attention somewhere.

 

[darkswordsman17]

I read that 600-800psi quote from some grad student's abstract at some university.

Very reliable source you've got there.

If I had it, I would make you people beg me to give it to you.. Unfortunately I can't link to it because I read it then forgot where I got it from.. I've learned my lesson and have since then written down the URLs of where I get this information.

Big surprise, it doesn't actually exist other than in your own mind.

 

[sdifox]

Oh? What energy equation are you referring to?

A heating element, submerged in water, is going to transfer practically all of its energy into the water. Efficiency, with regards to energy, is the measure of how much energy it takes to do the job in an ideal situation vs how much energy is actually put in.

In this case, the job is the absorption of heat. In which case, essentially all the energy that goes into the heating element is going to go straight into the water.

If you are talking about Ohms law type stuff. Well, the heating element is essentially just one giant resistor. at 120 or 220V, the only difference is going to be how fast the water heats up. The actual work done in each situation is going to be exactly the same. (Ok, so there will be slightly less work done in the 220V situation where some of the heat is radiated off of the water, so less time is spent compensating for heat lost due to convection... It shouldn't be THAT much of a difference in the grand scheme of things.)

What do you think the electricity is being turned into besides heat and light? For there to be a loss of efficiency it HAS to change into something else that isn't absorbed by the water and turned into heat.

Hey hey hey, don't hurt his brain! He has precious few neurons as it is. Do not blow away his brain!

 

[sdifox]

There is really only one thing wrong with Fleabag, he believes he knows it all. And he will die defending that belief.