Dozens of public housing apartments will get plug-in induction ranges as part of the initiative, which aims to eventually shift 10,000 NYCHA homes off the use of polluting fossil fuel appliances.
After thinking about this for a while… I can’t say I agree with that.
Sensors can fail. Some companies may even produce sub-standard sensors or faulty logic. I think it’s OK to tell people that copper and aluminum aren’t allowed on an induction top, and the makers of induction tops seem to think similarly, they just add a sentence “unless equipped with a magnetic base”.
Let’s take a manual of a randomly chosen induction cooker:
Cookware made from the following materials is not suitable: pure stainless steel, aluminum or
copper without a magnetic base, glass, wood, porcelain, ceramic, and earthenware
On one hand, an aluminum pot won’t heat. On the other hand, aluminum foil will melt, or if placed somewhat closer, catch fire. I think I should be allowed to claim that “aluminum is forbidden” on induction tops and add that “aluminum foil is extra forbidden”.
Will you kindly restore my post? People can downvote or argue it if they don’t like my interpretation, but I don’t think it’s misinformation. It explains some things they might not even know about. I would be sad if people think that ferromagnetism is required for induction heating to happen. It would be nice if people understood how their cooker accomplishes heating in more depth than “if a magnet sticks, it’s OK”.
That manual entry is different from the danger case; it’s just telling you that the stove won’t do anything, which is what ones I’ve actually encountered do: they have a sensor which detects a non-ferromagnetic material, and keeps the stove from activating.
Sure stuff can fail. But designed right, it means that the stove breaks, not that it puts people in danger.
Then you should also remove my post about it being possible to blow out a wall with a gas stove. It might also scare people. It’s here, I kindly request that you review it:
The key difference is this: gas explosions happen fairly regularly, and require training to prevent even some of them. Some sort of stove-melts disaster is something that doesn’t seem to actually happen that I can tell.
After thinking about this for a while… I can’t say I agree with that.
Sensors can fail. Some companies may even produce sub-standard sensors or faulty logic. I think it’s OK to tell people that copper and aluminum aren’t allowed on an induction top, and the makers of induction tops seem to think similarly, they just add a sentence “unless equipped with a magnetic base”.
Let’s take a manual of a randomly chosen induction cooker:
https://www.caple.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/C850I-Instruction-manual-May-2017.pdf
Let’s examine what it says:
On one hand, an aluminum pot won’t heat. On the other hand, aluminum foil will melt, or if placed somewhat closer, catch fire. I think I should be allowed to claim that “aluminum is forbidden” on induction tops and add that “aluminum foil is extra forbidden”.
Will you kindly restore my post? People can downvote or argue it if they don’t like my interpretation, but I don’t think it’s misinformation. It explains some things they might not even know about. I would be sad if people think that ferromagnetism is required for induction heating to happen. It would be nice if people understood how their cooker accomplishes heating in more depth than “if a magnet sticks, it’s OK”.
That manual entry is different from the danger case; it’s just telling you that the stove won’t do anything, which is what ones I’ve actually encountered do: they have a sensor which detects a non-ferromagnetic material, and keeps the stove from activating.
Sure stuff can fail. But designed right, it means that the stove breaks, not that it puts people in danger.
This is a bunch of scaremongering.
Then you should also remove my post about it being possible to blow out a wall with a gas stove. It might also scare people. It’s here, I kindly request that you review it:
https://slrpnk.net/comment/19887409
Moderation practises should be consistent, in my opinion.
The key difference is this: gas explosions happen fairly regularly, and require training to prevent even some of them. Some sort of stove-melts disaster is something that doesn’t seem to actually happen that I can tell.
True.