The science behind the gas vs charcoal debate

H

hominamad

Knows what a fatty is.
Joined
Jul 12, 2010
Messages
162
Reaction score
43
Points
0
Location
New York
Hi - was wondering if any scientific-minded brethren can help me answer this question.

I don't want to debate the merits of cooking on gas vs charcoal here, but my buddy and I are trying to figure out the science behind the heat produced by different cooking fuels.

When you read something such as "charcoal can get up to xxx degrees", what does this mean exactly? Is this the temperature of a briquette if you were able to stick a probe directly into it? I guess the crux of what I'm trying to understand, is what is the effect of simply starting with more coal? For instance, if I light my grill with 10 briquettes, it's nowhere near as hot as lighting it with 75. So, is heat a cumulative property? Or is this BTUs? I'm very confused here!

When people say things like "gas can get as hot as charcoal", how does the science change by just adding more charcoal? With a gas grill, there's a limit to how much heat I can get - I can just turn the knobs up to high, wait a certain amount of time, and reach some sort of max temp. But with a charcoal grill, I can always start with more coal, let the thing come up to full temp, and sear the crap out of something with more heat than any gas grill could.

Last night I cooked some steaks with a full chimney of briquettes, and the heat was so hot at first, that I couldn't even come near the grates with my utensils without using a pot holder. I never experienced anything like this with a gas grill. So how can anyone claim that gas gets as hot as charcoal? There seems to be too many variables involved.

Sorry if I'm rambling all over the place. It's hard to articulate exactly what I'm asking.
 
Gas grill can certainly get hot enough to compare to charcoal. There are 1500 degree F burners out there for commercial use. The science of heat is quite complex in terms of all the methods of moving heat around. BTU's are not the best measure of cooking heat. Obviously, the more gas you use, just like charcoal, the more heat you can create.
 
First there is no debate, gas is inferior to charcoal wood.:biggrin1:

Now thats out of the way i think its a matter of equipment. Sure a big ole pile of coals can put out more heat than an average backyard propane grill but you can't get much hotter than those steakhouse broilers (salamanders? ). So ya its a matter of btus as to how hot something can get. Its all very scientific. Bbq is an art though, if you want science, go bake a cake:becky:
 
I think it depends on the equipment you're going to use. Yes gas can theoretically get as hot as anything if your grill can burn enough of it, but normal gas grills have an upper limit. A WSM won't ever get as hot as a gas grill (at least not without melting - see the recent thread about that), and a gas grill can't get as hot as a kamado. For charcoal, it depends on how much fuel you can light and how much air flow you can get through it. So, I would say that charcoal can get hotter, if you are using a grill designed to get that hot.
 
OK, lets try this--> Wood and Charcoal when burned produces Nitrate gas which creates the smoke ring on meats. Gas when burned does not give off Nitrate gas.
 
Let's say your gas grill is turned up all the way. It heats to 500 degrees at full blast. Let's say 30 briquettes put out 500 degrees worth of heat as well. You want a hotter fire, you add more fuel, right? Easy enough to do with charcoal. With gas, you're stuck. Can't turn that dial up anymore, so yea, you could say charcoal is hotter in that there is really no upper limit (within reason) on your fuel usage.

Propane burns very efficiently. It's very clean. No biproducts from combustion. Which isn't really optimal for smoking. Combustion with woods and charcoal (charcoal is made from wood) puts off flavor compounds, nitrates and other goodies which bond with the meat for extra layers of magical flavor.
 
Meh

Give me an old Weber kettle from the side of the road, some Kingsford blue, and a little apple wood and get ready for a little magic :wink:

Honestly, I rebuilt an older Weber Summit gasser and it is a very impressive piece of equipment. I do enjoy cooking on it and it can really cook a steak or chop when called upon.

I really believe heat is heat and all reasonable equipment can make good food. Gas does not give nearly the smoking options in my opinion though. I guess a lot of it is in ones mind. Are gas fireplaces adequate or just faking it? I like a nice crackling wood fire myself when it comes down to it. It's more work and less convenient but there are times when only the ultimate will do.
 
The science of my belly: Charcoal seems to produce better results than gas. But some gas grills produce better results than other gas grills. So maybe I haven't had food off the premier gas grill to say it's better or worse than charcoal.

Charcoal/wood just feels right... It's how the cave man did it.
 
I agree with many above, the amount of fuel burned and the equipment's ability to burn it well (or not) has a lot to do with how hot a cooking fire will be.

Having agreed with that, I also remember from school that a blue flame is the hottest. Mostly what I see on charcoal and wood flames are yellow, orange and red with blue spots here and there. Blue flames are mostly what I see on my gas grill and gas stove.

This link shows some flame colours as they relate to temperatures…. though it's an art website and not a scientific one. http://maggiemaggio.com/color/2011/08/fire-ii-color-and-temperature/

I found an article by the U of Illinois Dept of Physics website that said not every blue flame is the hottest but they were talking about added chemicals creating colour change. We don't add chemicals to our cooking fires so I think that aspect has no or little bearing on your question. http://van.physics.illinois.edu/qa/listing.php?id=1545
 
Thanks guys. Interesting discussion. So I guess when people make a statement like "charcoal can get up to 600 degrees", they are talking about withing the confines of "normal bbq use". What I'm trying to figure out is: If I can get up to 600 degrees with half a chimney of fully lit coals, if I use a full chimney, am I now at 1200? Forgetting about melting my bbq, is there an upper limit to how much heat can be generated by just adding more fuel? What would happen if I put a grate off the ground at a campfire site, and lit 2 full bags of Kingsford on there? Would it measure 2000 degrees?

Another question - my friend has a blowtorch that he uses to char meat when he does sous vide at home. He says the torch spec says it gets up to 1400 deg, but when he's using it, he doesn't feel any heat coming from it when he holds it normally. But I imagine if I got my grill up to 1400 degrees, I wouldn't even be able to go near it. So does the mass of the coals somehow play a part in how hot it feels? Or is 1400 degrees, 1400 degrees?

Finally, is there a tool that can measure this kind of heat? I'm thinking that the infrared ones probably don't go that high?
 
hominamad said:
Thanks guys. Interesting discussion. So I guess when people make a statement like "charcoal can get up to 600 degrees", they are talking about withing the confines of "normal bbq use". What I'm trying to figure out is: If I can get up to 600 degrees with half a chimney of fully lit coals, if I use a full chimney, am I now at 1200? Forgetting about melting my bbq, is there an upper limit to how much heat can be generated by just adding more fuel? What would happen if I put a grate off the ground at a campfire site, and lit 2 full bags of Kingsford on there? Would it measure 2000 degrees?
Another question - my friend has a blowtorch that he uses to char meat when he does sous vide at home. He says the torch spec says it gets up to 1400 deg, but when he's using it, he doesn't feel any heat coming from it when he holds it normally. But I imagine if I got my grill up to 1400 degrees, I wouldn't even be able to go near it. So does the mass of the coals somehow play a part in how hot it feels? Or is 1400 degrees, 1400 degrees?

Finally, is there a tool that can measure this kind of heat? I'm thinking that the infrared ones probably don't go that high?
Click to expand...

Not sure what you have been smoking, or drinking, but it must be some good high potency product! :laugh::laugh: :becky:

Blessings,

Omar
 
Don't know no scientific type stuff, but charcoal wins.......

VegQ7-10-2011001.jpg
 
hominamad said:
Thanks guys. Interesting discussion. So I guess when people make a statement like "charcoal can get up to 600 degrees", they are talking about withing the confines of "normal bbq use". What I'm trying to figure out is: If I can get up to 600 degrees with half a chimney of fully lit coals, if I use a full chimney, am I now at 1200? Forgetting about melting my bbq, is there an upper limit to how much heat can be generated by just adding more fuel? What would happen if I put a grate off the ground at a campfire site, and lit 2 full bags of Kingsford on there? Would it measure 2000 degrees?

Another question - my friend has a blowtorch that he uses to char meat when he does sous vide at home. He says the torch spec says it gets up to 1400 deg, but when he's using it, he doesn't feel any heat coming from it when he holds it normally. But I imagine if I got my grill up to 1400 degrees, I wouldn't even be able to go near it. So does the mass of the coals somehow play a part in how hot it feels? Or is 1400 degrees, 1400 degrees?

Finally, is there a tool that can measure this kind of heat? I'm thinking that the infrared ones probably don't go that high?
Click to expand...


Not sure exactly how the physics of this works, but yes, adding more charcoal will increase the temperature output. BUT, there is an upper limit as to how hot the fire will get under "normal" conditions. One way to increase the upper limit is direct forced air flow, like bellows in a forge.

If you want to get an extreme amount of heat in your grill or chimney starter, rig up a blow dryer or leaf blower to direct air in from underneath.

[ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UGlkdmZig8Y"]Webber barbecue forge with adjustable air blower - YouTube[/ame]
 
hominamad said:
Thanks guys. Interesting discussion. So I guess when people make a statement like "charcoal can get up to 600 degrees", they are talking about withing the confines of "normal bbq use". What I'm trying to figure out is: If I can get up to 600 degrees with half a chimney of fully lit coals, if I use a full chimney, am I now at 1200? Forgetting about melting my bbq, is there an upper limit to how much heat can be generated by just adding more fuel? What would happen if I put a grate off the ground at a campfire site, and lit 2 full bags of Kingsford on there? Would it measure 2000 degrees?

Another question - my friend has a blowtorch that he uses to char meat when he does sous vide at home. He says the torch spec says it gets up to 1400 deg, but when he's using it, he doesn't feel any heat coming from it when he holds it normally. But I imagine if I got my grill up to 1400 degrees, I wouldn't even be able to go near it. So does the mass of the coals somehow play a part in how hot it feels? Or is 1400 degrees, 1400 degrees?

Finally, is there a tool that can measure this kind of heat? I'm thinking that the infrared ones probably don't go that high?
Click to expand...

Not sure what ANY of this means but for bbq your only looking to get into the 250-300 range.
Its not about how many coals you need to make X temp but more about how to CONTROL those coals. :thumb:
 
Bbq Bubba said:
Not sure what ANY of this means but for bbq your only looking to get into the 250-300 range.
Its not about how many coals you need to make X temp but more about how to CONTROL those coals. :thumb:
Click to expand...

While that's true for smoking, the max temp can be important for grilling.

But, as has been pointed out, that can be equalized to an extent by the equipment. My Saber IR gasser will get to 850 degrees (measured by IR thermometer) and does a fantastic job on searing steaks, chops, burgers, etc. Plus, it is ready to go in 10 minutes.

But... The flavor isn't the same as a good old charcoal fire in my Weber Kettle or BGE.

Just as the equipment can make a difference with gas, it will make a difference with charcoal. I can easily get lava temps in my Large BGE (it pegs my IR therm, which goes to 950), but trying to get that hot in the Kettle would probably damage the Kettle.

I look at it this way... If it's a weeknight and I am on video calls until 6 or 6:30 with the Left Coast, and we want to eat at a reasonable time, I'd rather grill on the Saber than cook on the stove. But, if I have the time, I'll fire up a kettle or an Egg as my first choice.
 
Charcoal for grilling takes no time for me with the weed burner. I hit the coals for under a minute, go inside and prep some things and the coals are ready, I'd say in under ten minutes.
 
I just want to reiterate - I'm not asking these questions in order to try to help me cook. This is more for the sake of science. A bunch of us at work were talking about gas heat vs charcoal heat and we were trying to get some things straight.
 
Charcoal, gas, oven, stove top, crock pot, are all heat sources used to cook. It's the operator's skill that provides the end result.
 
I think they are both capable to producing the same heat (in theory). However I see charcoal/wood as an ingredient, where gas is pretty neutral.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

T
Pitts & Spitts adjustable charcoal grill. Reviews?
Replies
7
Views
1K
Nuco59
N
R
Gas Grill Problems
Replies
8
Views
378
Happy Hapgood
Happy Hapgood
I
Issue with Memphis Pro Pellet Grill
Replies
2
Views
288
Vision
V
NCGrimbo
Food Science: Steaks
Replies
1
Views
315
LYU370
LYU370
G
Charcoal offset vs kamado
Replies
4
Views
419
WeberWho
W
Back
Top