Rotor

Not its intended use but maybe this is the way to go for rural houses with low electrical supplies or using solar / inverters for power ,it also only uses 60 watts


Sous Vide Water Over For Home Use..

The Sous Vide Supreme is the world’s first water oven designed specifically to bring the gourmet sous vide cooking method into home and small restaurant kitchens. Sous Vide cooking locks in the flavor and preserves the nutritional quality of whatever food is cooked inside. The result is food of incomparable taste and texture: steak perfectly cooked edge-to-edge, vibrant vegetables, juicy tender chicken breasts, and ribs with the meat literally falling off the bone. All at the push of a button.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sous-vide

http://www.sousvidesupreme.com/Shop_...tID=1&AdID=193

Fred James

Or alternatively use a slow cooker or steamer - both are relatively low wattage and a lot cheaper.

I think you will find that the sous-vide unit uses a lot more than 60w although it might tick over at that rate.

spainrico

We (well OK my wife) use a pressure cooker which helps save energy given its much shorter cooking times.

Fred James

True but I think Rotor's point is that it could be useful when the maximum power is low rather than energy saving as such.

Slow cookers and water baths aren't very efficient as they cook for such a long time that they lose a lot of heat in the process.

PeterWithesShin

how does this differ from other thermal conductive circulators ?

not all sous vide cookery takes hours, Salmon and most fish take under an hour .

Alectryon

Unfortunately however the taste of the food prepared in pressure cookers is highly reminiscent of 1950's school dinners.

Fred James

That just depends on what you cook in them.

Even Heston Blumenthal recommends them for making stock.

Not so good for cooking fresh vegetables though! I use one for cooking the classic Spanish bean stew - Fabada - it works really well.

All these clever cooking devices try to convince you that you can do absolutely anything in them - remember the early days of microwaves?

If you believe the blurb you might be convinced you can cook a roast dinner in a toaster!

Water baths have huge benefits in a commercial kitchen but the benefits are more limited in the home kitchen. You can get the same effect on a joint of beef by cooking it for 4 hours in an oven at 50 degrees.

Alectryon

Yes, come to think about it I bet that does work well. I left my pressure cooker in the wheelie bin when I left the UK and I haven't missed it.

My sister and her husband are really into energy saving (and the past) and once cooked an entire leg of lamb in a hay box. OK, so they had to 'brown' it first on a conventional cooker and then it took 12 hours in the box. It was superb and came with its own toothpicks (the bits of hay that could not be removed from the finished meat). I must confess that I am not big in the saving energy debate - as long as I can continue to pay Endesa then my halogen cooker reigns supreme as cooking is a great pleasure for me.

spainrico

Well I wasn't eating school dinners in 1950's but I have no complaints about the cuisine produced by my Spanish wife from the pressure cooker.

Fred James

I'll bet she doesn't cook roast dinners in it!

The French and Spanish shops are full of them - in the UK they almost died out but there is a slight comeback now.

Like all these devices - horses for courses!

I cooked an amazing Lamb Rogan Josh recently. 4 lamb shanks cooked for 16 hours in a slow cooker - it was superb but I wouldn't waste my time cooking most of the recipes that came with the cooker. It also was brilliant for cooking a whole octopus.

Alectryon

I agree with you about the slow cookers. I did bring one with me and I make some pretty acceptable meals in it - tho' I do have to 'finish' some of them off on top of the stove - like reducing the liquid. 90% of recipes for slow cookers that I have tried I certainly would not do again. Most recipes I have tried have been from the Internet, a lot of them were from the USA where every recipe demands (or seems to) 'a can of condensed mushroom soup'. My sister sent me a British paperback slow cooker recipe book and a lot of those are acceptable, but I doubt if I would serve any of them up for a dinner party.

Fred James

I wasn't impressed with it either but I thought it was worth experimenting with.

The truth is that they are slow to cook but they are not low temperature cookers which could be really useful - a bit like a dry water bath!

They just take longer to reach boiling point and they always reach it eventually even on the low setting. Unlike a water bath they don't have a proper thermostat - just a reduced power supply.

I'm pretty sure it is for "elf and safety" reasons. Heavens forbid that someone might not get the food hot enough to kill the bugs!

Great for people out all day who want a stew when they get home but nowhere near as clever as a Sous Vide.

EsuriJohn

Reminds me of when I joined the Royal Marines 40 yrs ago we would take a troop hot meal on exercise in a hay box and at the end of the first day it was a welcome sight see the lid come off and the hot food served up in January with frost on the ground.

Rotor

Its just the following few weeks that get you down doing all your cooking on a hexamine stove ! been there done that

bob_bob

Depends what you cook and the level of skill you have, if you know what and how to cook in them they are first rate.

Slow cookers are OK for a stew sort of thing but I'd be very wary of Sous-vide cooking, if the temperature is not right it becomes a breeding ground for bacteria.

I have slow cookers and pressure cookers but mostly use my gas range/ovens. The Wok burner on it is superb.