Quote:
|
This seems odd.
|
I don't see how there would be a problem with this if California has major wind, geothermal, and solar energy infrastructure.
|
Quote:
https://i.imgur.com/opYWaL7.png |
Quote:
|
Quote:
And if Berkeley was anything important in the culinary world then this wouldn't even be considered. Any place that would consider itself to have "world-class" culinary scene would never consider this. Try passing a law like this in Asia, France, or Southern Europe and heads would roll. Its very obvious from reading this thread who cooks professionally or at home in a serious manner and who doesn't. Anybody that cooks knows that gas is 100 times better than induction. Turning on a gas stove gets you an instant, constant flame that you can adjust visually.The flames produced by a natural gas stove also cook food more quickly and evenly, because the flames spread themselves along the bottom and sides of the pan. There are a lot of dishes out there that can't be cooked without gas stove. Try making a curry or stir fry on an induction stove (you can't). Watch any food network show and you will never see any chef who takes himself seriously caught dead with an induction stove top. My guess is restaurants will just use portable butane cookers that are common in Asia. I have a few commercial grade ones at 15,000 BTU and the work great (no gas line in my building). |
Totally agree with floor and chef on this topic. You don't need to be a pro to realize how limiting electric cookers are, esp. in Asian cooking. Try frying rice without proper heat going up the sides of a wok. Good luck w that.
|
Sounds like a good idea to me. I will just have to trust the restaurants of the world to figure it out. People often find changes to be awkward but this(The move away from fossil fuels) is one that is absolutely necessary. So we will have to adapt. This is likely one of the easier changes we will be faced with in the coming years.
|
We get along fine with no natural gas in any buildings in South Florida.
|
I'm proposing an experiment:
1) Observation: Folks in Berkeley seem to be triggered easily, at anything. 2) Hypothesis: The degree of triggering could result in death or severe injury in which the degree of triggered nature and subsequent death/injury probability for "X" subject is exponential depending on how large the trigger factor is. I wonder what would happen if the following scenario occurred at Berkeley; Parameters of the experiment: Experimental Group: A pick up truck (F350 Ford), with black diesel exhaust, no muffler, no catalytic converters, rolling coal every 2 minutes... with pro MAGA bumper stickers, assault life stickers on the back, "the south will rise again" slogans on the truck, the truck is raised, playing outlaw country, fume pipe near the cab, the old banned Arkansas flag displayed on small flag poles extending from the sides of the cab on both ends, and a bumper sticker that states "coal is the future", pro-life, pro-marriage, "god will punish those that go against scripture" slogans, and finally... some hay in the cab that hasn't been tied correctly, and is thus, going all over the road. Now with the truck, same truck, but replicated in the following cities: Berkeley, San Francisco, Los Angeles, Seattle, and NYC. What I'm curious to learn from this experiment are the indicators of "time" , magnitude of injury, trigger factor, how many folks get triggered, and to what means of out-lashing do they resort too; verbal, violence, twitter/S.Media volume influx, and I want to measure in units of m³ the volume of tears, and how many barrels (assuming 50 gallons) the tears could fit from conducting the experiment over the span of 5 hours. Disclaimer: Some drivers understand that this might be a one-way mission. I think this experiment could further help us understand anthropological, and the human psychology even further in 2019. |
Someone has to take the lead in pushing technological innovation.
If it happens to be a poster-child bastion of liberal hippy thought like Berkeley (which also happens to be a major center of technological innovation), so be it. |
Quote:
But of course, everyone here overlooks this and just has to inject their personal political views into this discussion. |
^^^^
I just wonder what the cost will be to both residents and businesses to make the transition. I apologize for the troll post, I know... I just had to get it off my mind... sometimes a good idea comes to mind due to creativity. I mean, possibly rolling it out over "X" years would of been appropriate. California has always pushed the frontier of change, but I feel at the expense (cost) to the residents or general business environment. Transition is key I feel. Like imagine if you have a business that relies on natural gas, and now... you have all of this expense at once. Even with exceptions, all it does is create bureaucracy, more paperwork, and makes it even harder to do business. |
Quote:
There will be no transition. It doesn't need to be "rolled out". It is inherently being rolled out by focusing on new construction. Goddamn, fucking read for 2 minutes. |
I did read it. And I think the time frame for new construction is too short of a notice. In a state that has a housing crisis, this is just further adding to the giant stack of bs that developers have to go through.
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
I guess you've never heard of Chez Panisse, Alice Waters, and the birth of California cuisine? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chez_Panisse Berkeley has some good ethnic restaurants too. My partner and I have even made it a point a few times when we visit San Francisco to go into Berkeley and eat at a very good Himalayan/Nepalese restaurant. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 7:54 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.