9 ms·

I realise this is probably the least relevant comment this essay is going to get... but you can make good rice in the microwave - the only advantage a rice cook

by frossie 17y ago

I realise this is probably the least relevant comment this essay is going to get... but you can make good rice in the microwave - the only advantage a rice cooker has is that it will keep your rice warm for hours. Get a deep microwave-safe covered dish (your grandmother probably has some old corningware lying around, also easy to find in garage sales), put 2 cups of water for every cup of rice (but don't fill more than half the dish), a bit of salt, a bit of olive oil, cover and microwave. Some microwaves have a rice setting, otherwise microwave on high for about 10 minutes and then let stand for at least 10 minutes. If you are making white rice, it will turn out nicer if you rinse it before you start (that washes away the starch); a trick for doing this is using a sieve and a bowl. In some cultures it is traditional to rinse the rice 7 times - I find 6 is less symbolic but equally adequate. I now return you to your normal programming.

cperciva 17y ago
microwave-safe covered dish ...and be careful that the cover isn't on too tightly. We all know that water expands explosively when it boils, but every year some people get severely injured by microwaving water inside sealed containers...
- mattmaroon 17y ago
  Are you thinking of the superheating effect? Reasonably pure water in a smooth cup doesn't boil in a microwave. It becomes superheated, and then when moved nucleation sites form causing some of it to flash evaporate into steam and blow up out of the cup, taking lots of very hot water with it. This burns some people making tea or instant coffee. This almost certainly would never happen in this case as the rice would provide ample nucleation sites.
  - cperciva 17y ago
    No, I'm not talking about superheating -- I'm talking about boiling in a sealed container. People do this deliberately with pressure cookers, where the pressure typically reaches double atmospheric pressure; but it can happen to a lower yet still dangerous pressure by accident.
  - billswift 17y ago
    Fortunately, all new microwaves seem to have turntables which keep this from happening.
  - misuba 17y ago
    You can fix the superheating problem by putting a toothpick or unpolished chopstick into the smooth container.
- icey 17y ago
  If you ever want a safe(ish) demonstration of this, microwave an egg without cracking the shell first. Make sure you have some sponges and soap handy.
  - jacquesm 17y ago
    If it wasn't for that second line I'd chalk you up as evil :)
rarrrrrr 17y ago
FYI there's some concern regarding microwaves heating food so quickly that they destroy much more of the nutritional value compared to conventional cooking. Lower end microwaves are especially bad -- when you set them to half power (or defrost, etc), they modulate between full power and no power, rather than actually using less power.
- frossie 17y ago
  Speed has nothing to do with it. Cooking destroys some heat sensitive vitamins, but the method is neither here nor there, and anyway you are not going to eat raw rice as an alternative.
  - jodrellblank 17y ago
    I don't think it matters here because rice doesn't really have 'nutritional value'. :p I mean, the claim isn't about the speed of microwave cooking, but the method. When you heat something normally, heat hits the outside surface by radiation and convection of the surrounding gas, and the heat is conducted deeper into the item at a fairly slow rate. When you microwave an item, microwaves travel straight through it from outside to inside, and as they do so they cause resonance in water molecules, which are taken from room temp to boiling or even superheated in moments when the surrounding matter is still cold and hasn't enough time to expand. This (is claimed) to be much more violent heating and consequently much more damaging than ordinary cooking. Also, cooking does more than destroy heat sensitive vitamins - otherwise there wouldn't be any point in doing it if that was all it did. It changes enzymes and proteins and chemical bonds and all sorts. Of course there are people claiming much of this is less than healthy - and no you aren't going to eat raw rice as an alternative, so why would you eat cooked rice? Why not eat something you can eat raw instead?
- evgen 17y ago
  What interesting timing as just this morning I was listening to a little news bit on NPR where they talked about research into the nutritional impact of various cooking methods (and of _not_ cooking food a la raw food enthusiasts.) The research has shown that you must cook your food to get the full nutritional value of beta carotenoids, lycopenes and a couple of other important nutrients. The cooking method which preserves all nutrients best is the microwave. It is equivalent to or better than other cooking methods for every nutrient they tested does not have any impact on the water-soluable nutrients.
nihilocrat 17y ago
Someone please tell me how a microwave or rice cooker are better than just using a normal old covered pot with a clear lid. I seem to be able to make decent rice if I just very closely follow the correct rice/water/heat/time ratios. I figure the microwave is faster, but I don't think the rice cooker would be. I guess if you constantly eat rice, not having to pay attention is a plus?
- silentbicycle 17y ago
  They're also good for cooking many other things - think of it as something that cooks something until the amount of liquid remaining has simmered down to almost nothing. See also: http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/2008/11/the_pot_and_how_to_use_it.html http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/2008/11/the_pot_and_how_to_u...
- msluyter 17y ago
  Rice cookers turn off automatically (or rather, switch from hot to warm), so they're easier to use because you can't really overcook the rice.
- SwellJoe 17y ago
  If you cook rice more than once per week, and you're doing it with a pot, you're a masochist. A rice cooker makes the process dramatically less error prone, and the resulting rice is better: fluffier, more consistently cooked, etc. A girlfriend bought me a fuzzy logic rice cooker (about $150, I think) a few years back. Best kitchen device ever. It cooks brown rice, oatmeal, etc. in addition to white rice, and it gets it right every single time. The pan also has measurement marks inside so I don't even have to measure the water. The big problem with a pot is that you'll often get the temperature wrong, and end up baking the lower layer of rice onto the pot bottom, or not quite cooking it fast enough and end up with mushy rice. I only get great rice from a pot about 75% of the time. It's 100% of the time with a rice cooker. So, yes, not having to pay attention to the rice while I work on other parts of the meal is a huge bonus. If you only need white rice, you can get a basic rice cooker that will work very well for about $25 (I've heard brown rice is possible with the lower priced devices by giving it a bit more water, and leaving it to "warm" for a few extra minutes, but I've never tried it).
swolchok 17y ago
Also, do remember that brown rice takes slightly over twice as long to cook as white rice.
msluyter 17y ago
Also regarding the recipe: I quibble with the suggestion not to drain the beans. Canned beans tend to be accompanied by a funky smelling bean sludge, IME; if, like me, you find that unappealing, rinse the beans in a colander.
- frossie 17y ago
  "I quibble with the suggestion not to drain the beans" I was a bit taken aback by that too, I always rinse heavily for the reason you mention, but I wasn't sure what the rationale for not rinsing is. I prefer frozen beans anyway - cheaper when you buy in bulk, and saves having to look for the can opener :-)
  - RobGR 17y ago
    I don't rinse the beans from the can; the "bean sludge" you refer to is what makes the juice thick and hearty. Also, in beans (as in rice and other plants) a lot of the trace vitamins and etc are in the hull, and if you are on a rice and beans diet you don't want to be avoiding that. The introduction of polished rice into asian countries caused a rise in a disease called beriberi among poor people: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beriberi http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beriberi I also endorse frozen or dried beans. Frozen ones are about as fast to cook as canned.
- jackchristopher 17y ago
  Washing removes sodium. It's good for health but not taste. But canning soaks them longer, which is better for digestion. I doubt startups want to spend the time to soak manually. There's a tradeoff. Can sludge is nasty. And other bad stuff probably seeps into canned food. The FDA says canning is fine but I doubt it's totally healthful. But who wants to spend the time?
  - jodrellblank 17y ago
    Who wants to spend the time preparing quality food when you could be rushing back to work to build a company to earn enough money that you can break out of the ordinary working life and spend time really enjoying your life. I guess what I'm pointing out is that you could skip all the work and enjoy your life right now by spending some time preparing some great food. ;)
xiaoma 17y ago
"the only advantage a rice cooker has is that it will keep your rice warm for hours." s/hours/days/ And even after a week, the outside layer makes perfect crunchy rice duck blood & vegetable soup!

by frossie 17y ago

cperciva 17y ago

microwave-safe covered dish ...and be careful that the cover isn't on too tightly. We all know that water expands explosively when it boils, but every year some people get severely injured by microwaving water inside sealed containers...

mattmaroon 17y ago
Are you thinking of the superheating effect? Reasonably pure water in a smooth cup doesn't boil in a microwave. It becomes superheated, and then when moved nucleation sites form causing some of it to flash evaporate into steam and blow up out of the cup, taking lots of very hot water with it. This burns some people making tea or instant coffee. This almost certainly would never happen in this case as the rice would provide ample nucleation sites.
- cperciva 17y ago
  No, I'm not talking about superheating -- I'm talking about boiling in a sealed container. People do this deliberately with pressure cookers, where the pressure typically reaches double atmospheric pressure; but it can happen to a lower yet still dangerous pressure by accident.
- billswift 17y ago
  Fortunately, all new microwaves seem to have turntables which keep this from happening.
- misuba 17y ago
  You can fix the superheating problem by putting a toothpick or unpolished chopstick into the smooth container.
icey 17y ago
If you ever want a safe(ish) demonstration of this, microwave an egg without cracking the shell first. Make sure you have some sponges and soap handy.
- jacquesm 17y ago
  If it wasn't for that second line I'd chalk you up as evil :)

rarrrrrr 17y ago

FYI there's some concern regarding microwaves heating food so quickly that they destroy much more of the nutritional value compared to conventional cooking. Lower end microwaves are especially bad -- when you set them to half power (or defrost, etc), they modulate between full power and no power, rather than actually using less power.

frossie 17y ago
Speed has nothing to do with it. Cooking destroys some heat sensitive vitamins, but the method is neither here nor there, and anyway you are not going to eat raw rice as an alternative.
- jodrellblank 17y ago
  I don't think it matters here because rice doesn't really have 'nutritional value'. :p I mean, the claim isn't about the speed of microwave cooking, but the method. When you heat something normally, heat hits the outside surface by radiation and convection of the surrounding gas, and the heat is conducted deeper into the item at a fairly slow rate. When you microwave an item, microwaves travel straight through it from outside to inside, and as they do so they cause resonance in water molecules, which are taken from room temp to boiling or even superheated in moments when the surrounding matter is still cold and hasn't enough time to expand. This (is claimed) to be much more violent heating and consequently much more damaging than ordinary cooking. Also, cooking does more than destroy heat sensitive vitamins - otherwise there wouldn't be any point in doing it if that was all it did. It changes enzymes and proteins and chemical bonds and all sorts. Of course there are people claiming much of this is less than healthy - and no you aren't going to eat raw rice as an alternative, so why would you eat cooked rice? Why not eat something you can eat raw instead?
evgen 17y ago
What interesting timing as just this morning I was listening to a little news bit on NPR where they talked about research into the nutritional impact of various cooking methods (and of _not_ cooking food a la raw food enthusiasts.) The research has shown that you must cook your food to get the full nutritional value of beta carotenoids, lycopenes and a couple of other important nutrients. The cooking method which preserves all nutrients best is the microwave. It is equivalent to or better than other cooking methods for every nutrient they tested does not have any impact on the water-soluable nutrients.

nihilocrat 17y ago

Someone please tell me how a microwave or rice cooker are better than just using a normal old covered pot with a clear lid. I seem to be able to make decent rice if I just very closely follow the correct rice/water/heat/time ratios. I figure the microwave is faster, but I don't think the rice cooker would be. I guess if you constantly eat rice, not having to pay attention is a plus?

silentbicycle 17y ago
They're also good for cooking many other things - think of it as something that cooks something until the amount of liquid remaining has simmered down to almost nothing. See also: http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/2008/11/the_pot_and_how_to_use_it.html http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/2008/11/the_pot_and_how_to_u...
msluyter 17y ago
Rice cookers turn off automatically (or rather, switch from hot to warm), so they're easier to use because you can't really overcook the rice.
SwellJoe 17y ago
If you cook rice more than once per week, and you're doing it with a pot, you're a masochist. A rice cooker makes the process dramatically less error prone, and the resulting rice is better: fluffier, more consistently cooked, etc. A girlfriend bought me a fuzzy logic rice cooker (about $150, I think) a few years back. Best kitchen device ever. It cooks brown rice, oatmeal, etc. in addition to white rice, and it gets it right every single time. The pan also has measurement marks inside so I don't even have to measure the water. The big problem with a pot is that you'll often get the temperature wrong, and end up baking the lower layer of rice onto the pot bottom, or not quite cooking it fast enough and end up with mushy rice. I only get great rice from a pot about 75% of the time. It's 100% of the time with a rice cooker. So, yes, not having to pay attention to the rice while I work on other parts of the meal is a huge bonus. If you only need white rice, you can get a basic rice cooker that will work very well for about $25 (I've heard brown rice is possible with the lower priced devices by giving it a bit more water, and leaving it to "warm" for a few extra minutes, but I've never tried it).

swolchok 17y ago

Also, do remember that brown rice takes slightly over twice as long to cook as white rice.

msluyter 17y ago

Also regarding the recipe: I quibble with the suggestion not to drain the beans. Canned beans tend to be accompanied by a funky smelling bean sludge, IME; if, like me, you find that unappealing, rinse the beans in a colander.

frossie 17y ago
"I quibble with the suggestion not to drain the beans" I was a bit taken aback by that too, I always rinse heavily for the reason you mention, but I wasn't sure what the rationale for not rinsing is. I prefer frozen beans anyway - cheaper when you buy in bulk, and saves having to look for the can opener :-)
- RobGR 17y ago
  I don't rinse the beans from the can; the "bean sludge" you refer to is what makes the juice thick and hearty. Also, in beans (as in rice and other plants) a lot of the trace vitamins and etc are in the hull, and if you are on a rice and beans diet you don't want to be avoiding that. The introduction of polished rice into asian countries caused a rise in a disease called beriberi among poor people: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beriberi http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beriberi I also endorse frozen or dried beans. Frozen ones are about as fast to cook as canned.
jackchristopher 17y ago
Washing removes sodium. It's good for health but not taste. But canning soaks them longer, which is better for digestion. I doubt startups want to spend the time to soak manually. There's a tradeoff. Can sludge is nasty. And other bad stuff probably seeps into canned food. The FDA says canning is fine but I doubt it's totally healthful. But who wants to spend the time?
- jodrellblank 17y ago
  Who wants to spend the time preparing quality food when you could be rushing back to work to build a company to earn enough money that you can break out of the ordinary working life and spend time really enjoying your life. I guess what I'm pointing out is that you could skip all the work and enjoy your life right now by spending some time preparing some great food. ;)

xiaoma 17y ago

"the only advantage a rice cooker has is that it will keep your rice warm for hours." s/hours/days/ And even after a week, the outside layer makes perfect crunchy rice duck blood & vegetable soup!