In all seriousness I too notice a different taste between electric kettle boiled water and stove boiled water and microwaved water. But I believe that you can bring stove boiled water up to par with electrically boiled water by simple boiling it for longer so that it aerates the water for longer.
As I think someone said above, its the aeration that is important, putting air in the water is what matters. I wonder if using RO or Activated Carbon water would help with the taste and texture of the water too.
I know personally that I have a tendency to take boiled water off the stove sooner than an electric kettle would trip its thermostat breaker/switch.
I just don't see how there could be a difference between water boiled on a stove vs on a campfire vs in an electric kettle. They should be identical. Especially an electric kettle that is metal construction vs a metal kettle put on a campfire or stovetop. I've never seen a plastic kettle intended for a campfire or stovetop.
Going forward with this idea boiling water in a microwave to the same high standard as in an electric kettle should simply just be a matter of aerating the water as it is being boiled or boiling it hot enough so that it aerates.
According to mythbusters the only reason "tap water always boils because it has impurities". So more impurities = better tasting cup?
Could this whole thing be simply a matter of boiling dissolved organic compounds in the water, aka fish poop? dead boiled Bacteria. dissolved plant matter from the nearby dam, minerals etc.
As I think someone said above, its the aeration that is important, putting air in the water is what matters. I wonder if using RO or Activated Carbon water would help with the taste and texture of the water too.
I know personally that I have a tendency to take boiled water off the stove sooner than an electric kettle would trip its thermostat breaker/switch.
I just don't see how there could be a difference between water boiled on a stove vs on a campfire vs in an electric kettle. They should be identical. Especially an electric kettle that is metal construction vs a metal kettle put on a campfire or stovetop. I've never seen a plastic kettle intended for a campfire or stovetop.
Going forward with this idea boiling water in a microwave to the same high standard as in an electric kettle should simply just be a matter of aerating the water as it is being boiled or boiling it hot enough so that it aerates.
According to mythbusters the only reason "tap water always boils because it has impurities". So more impurities = better tasting cup?
Could this whole thing be simply a matter of boiling dissolved organic compounds in the water, aka fish poop? dead boiled Bacteria. dissolved plant matter from the nearby dam, minerals etc.
Last edited:
Holy cow.
Did you never heard from the new medicine homeopathic or globuli?
Thats why water tastes different at differnt temperatures.
But seriously, i like more water contaminated with Hopfen or Coffeebeans for example.
For hot coffeewater there is a machine doing all things necessary and the electric bill is apx the same for one cup, i can calculate all day long, in the end the machine wins since the chips inside go for fast heating , because here nobody has patience to wait for a hot coffee.
Did you never heard from the new medicine homeopathic or globuli?
Thats why water tastes different at differnt temperatures.
But seriously, i like more water contaminated with Hopfen or Coffeebeans for example.
For hot coffeewater there is a machine doing all things necessary and the electric bill is apx the same for one cup, i can calculate all day long, in the end the machine wins since the chips inside go for fast heating , because here nobody has patience to wait for a hot coffee.
There's more than enough sites in the vessel to induce large scale bubbles to form (as opposed to vapor release on the surface) even with ultra pure water. I do it all the time at work (sometimes intentionally!).
Now, nuked water may experience less degassing than more conventionally boiled water, but I haven't done that sort of analysis.
I can't tell the difference, tbh, but here in Portland, we have really good water, and when I lived in San Diego (HARD WATER), I filtered it before drinking and left the pitcher on the countertop, so plenty of time for it to degas.
Now, nuked water may experience less degassing than more conventionally boiled water, but I haven't done that sort of analysis.
I can't tell the difference, tbh, but here in Portland, we have really good water, and when I lived in San Diego (HARD WATER), I filtered it before drinking and left the pitcher on the countertop, so plenty of time for it to degas.
Try raising the microwave above the receptacle so those earth electrons stay in the ground where they belong.
Interesting because boiling the water is an easy and quick method to get that darned dissolved oxygen out of the water and back into the air where it belongs.
That's right Groove.
It tastes boiling hot at around 100º
It tastes really hot at 80º
It tastes warm at 50º
It tastes cold at 10º
It's icy cold at 0º
I think you like the taste of your kettle. Either that you don't clean your microwave often enough.
Non GMO, gluten free, cruelty free, artisan grade electrons, harvested during a thunderstorm by virgins.
I've done tea with RO water (I always have several gallons on hand for evaporation top off in my aquariums) and it tastes odd. A little mineral content seems to help the taste a bit, but I'm not blessed with a Golden Tongue (well, not for tasting, at least
) so take that for what you will.
Last edited:
That doesn't make any more sense to me than what I said but I'm sure its true.
Just like in the dark ages when people would believe that light would shine out of peoples eyes instead of into people's eyes.
Electric heaters are something like 94% efficient.* There will be some loss (heating the air, not the water, but that loss also exists in your microwave) but a good inductive kettle (means no cord to deal with when you pour) is in my opinion the best option for making a poured brew.
Inductive heaters are nearly perfectly efficient as they heat the metal of the container, not the air. Any losses to air are only from the heat radiation from the kettle walls itself. Mine is faster to heat water than the (Panasonic 1100w) microwave, roughly twice as fast, actually, for the same volume of water.
Microwaves are OK, I use mine a lot, but the process removes a lot of oxygen from the water, and all microwaves heat the water unevenly; some "pockets" are super-heated, others are not heated at all, the rotation of a turntable helps to move those pockets but doesn't deal with them completely. You can easily end up with water that is more than 212F as well. Microwaves can "super-heat" water to well above 212F, something that is impossible in a kettle.
A kettle heats water to a rolling boil, with warmed water moving via convection to the top being replaced by cool water, which is then heated, moves to the top, and so on. It's a much more even temperature gradient over the entire body of water.
For coffee, you want to either remove the kettle from heat just before boiling (boiled water brings out negative flavours in coffee, unlike tea which needs boiling water to steep properly), or give it a shot of cold water from the tap before pouring into your press to take the temperature down just below 212F (at sea level, of course).
Next best is a simple kettle on the stove, you lose more heat to the air but it's still pretty efficient. Let's not forget that even though a microwave uses a sophisticated switch-mode power supply, it's still heating up a vacuum tube. That's where your efficiency is lost.
* That's why the humble, beleagured incandescent light bulb gets a bad rap. The "inefficiency" of a standard bulb versus, say a CFL or LED bulb, is based on the premise that the *only* wanted output is light. If, on the other hand, you are using said bulb in a building that is using any form of environmental heat, like, I dunno, all winter long, the heat is wanted output as well as the light, therefore they are then nearly 100% efficient. A truly "green" person would be swapping out their LEDs for incandescents in fall and back to LEDs in spring, unless of course you live somewhere where air conditioning is used year round.
Inductive heaters are nearly perfectly efficient as they heat the metal of the container, not the air. Any losses to air are only from the heat radiation from the kettle walls itself. Mine is faster to heat water than the (Panasonic 1100w) microwave, roughly twice as fast, actually, for the same volume of water.
Microwaves are OK, I use mine a lot, but the process removes a lot of oxygen from the water, and all microwaves heat the water unevenly; some "pockets" are super-heated, others are not heated at all, the rotation of a turntable helps to move those pockets but doesn't deal with them completely. You can easily end up with water that is more than 212F as well. Microwaves can "super-heat" water to well above 212F, something that is impossible in a kettle.
A kettle heats water to a rolling boil, with warmed water moving via convection to the top being replaced by cool water, which is then heated, moves to the top, and so on. It's a much more even temperature gradient over the entire body of water.
For coffee, you want to either remove the kettle from heat just before boiling (boiled water brings out negative flavours in coffee, unlike tea which needs boiling water to steep properly), or give it a shot of cold water from the tap before pouring into your press to take the temperature down just below 212F (at sea level, of course).
Next best is a simple kettle on the stove, you lose more heat to the air but it's still pretty efficient. Let's not forget that even though a microwave uses a sophisticated switch-mode power supply, it's still heating up a vacuum tube. That's where your efficiency is lost.
* That's why the humble, beleagured incandescent light bulb gets a bad rap. The "inefficiency" of a standard bulb versus, say a CFL or LED bulb, is based on the premise that the *only* wanted output is light. If, on the other hand, you are using said bulb in a building that is using any form of environmental heat, like, I dunno, all winter long, the heat is wanted output as well as the light, therefore they are then nearly 100% efficient. A truly "green" person would be swapping out their LEDs for incandescents in fall and back to LEDs in spring, unless of course you live somewhere where air conditioning is used year round.
Last edited:
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.