Boiling water more efficiently

  • Thread starter Thread starter Warp
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Boiling Water
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

Boiling one liter of water is more efficient when done all at once rather than in stages. The discussion compares two methods: boiling 1 liter of water directly versus boiling 1 deciliter at a time. The latter method increases heat exchange with the environment and leads to energy loss through surface evaporation, ultimately making it slower and less efficient. Therefore, for optimal energy use and time efficiency, boiling water in a single batch is recommended.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of basic thermodynamics
  • Knowledge of heat transfer principles
  • Familiarity with energy conservation concepts
  • Experience with practical cooking techniques
NEXT STEPS
  • Research thermodynamic principles related to heat transfer
  • Explore energy efficiency in cooking methods
  • Learn about the effects of evaporation on heating processes
  • Investigate practical applications of boiling water in culinary science
USEFUL FOR

Cooks, culinary students, energy efficiency advocates, and anyone interested in optimizing cooking methods for better performance and reduced energy consumption.

Warp
Messages
141
Reaction score
15
While boiling water, I was thinking: Would one liter of water boil faster or slower if I boil it all at the same time, or if I do it in stages, ie: First boil one deciliter, then add a deciliter and wait it to boil, and so on until there's one liter of boiling water.

Stated a bit more formally: Suppose you have 1 liter of water at a certain temperature (just for the sake of example let's say 10 degrees celsius) and you have a hot plate and a pot, and you want to raise the temperature of the water to 100 degrees celsius. Two different methods are tested:

1) Just put the 1 liter of water in the pot, and wait for it to reach 100 degrees.

2) Add 1 dl of water to the pot, wait for it to reach 100 degrees, and repeat this 9 more times.

Which of those methods would be faster, or does it make any difference?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
As a practical matter, it takes longer to do it in steps, because of the transitions. Ignoring that it would take the same amount of time because the heat quantity needed is the same.
 
Doing that in steps increases the heat exchange with the environment, so not only does it take longer, it wastes more energy.
 
Not to mention the above two answers, in the second scheme you will lose energy via surface evaporation at each stage.
 
Thread 'A high school physics problem demonstrating relative motion'
I remembered a pretty high school problem from kinematics. But it seems it can help even undergraduates to develop their understanding of what a relative motion is. Consider a railway circle of radius ##r##. Assume that a carriage running along this circle has a speed ##v##. See the picture. A fly ##M## flies in the opposite direction and has a speed ##u,\quad |OM|=b##. Find a speed of the fly relative to the carriage. The obvious incorrect answer is ##u+v## while the correct answer is...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 46 ·
2
Replies
46
Views
8K
Replies
15
Views
3K
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
35
Views
5K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
Replies
6
Views
5K
  • · Replies 41 ·
2
Replies
41
Views
6K
Replies
5
Views
2K