by Kate Steadman
Via the NYTimes, one of their reporters calculated the effect of using less water when boiling pasta:
My rough figuring indicates an energy savings at the stove top of several trillion B.T.U.s. At the power plant, that would mean saving 250,000 to 500,000 barrels of oil, or $10 million to $20 million at current prices. Significant numbers, though these days they sound like small drops in a very large pot.
And actually the author puts the pasta into the pot with cold water and boils it all at once. It’s faster because you don’t have to wait for the water to boil before putting in the pasta and it’ll boil more quickly with less water. He admits that it takes more stirring and that the left over water is thicker when you’re done, but all in all I think I could get behind this.
Although I’m a little concerned by the author’s fondness for pasta water:
Whole-wheat pasta water is surprisingly delicious.
My thought was one only does such things like add the pasta water to a sauce, not eating it alone?