freed photography

Q. Dear Umbra,
I am a fairly active, athletic person; that being said, I love my pasta. When I
boil the water for my pasta, I run the tap water for about 5–10 seconds until
the water becomes very hot, then fill up my pot, and set it on my glass-top
stove to boil. The water seems to boil almost instantaneously when I fill it up
with hot water, and when I fill it up from the tap right away with cooler
water, it takes longer. So, my question is: Is it more wasteful to let the
precious water run to get hot for 5–10 seconds, reducing the boiling time? Or
is it more wasteful to fill it up with cooler water, not wasting any water, but
using more electricity to boil the water? One other consideration is that I
live at high altitude, and water takes longer to boil here. Thanks so
much!

Nate W.
Redmond, Ore.

A. Dearest Nate,

Photo: lucadea via FlickrYou know, I actually dropped a few pounds on a pasta diet
once. I just had to walk pasta the refrigerator, pasta the bakery, and pasta
the ice cream shop. A 3-year-old told me that joke.

But you know what's really nothing to laugh at (besides my
pasta joke)? Wasting our precious resources. Cooking noodles is one of those
small things I'm always telling you not to sweat; but conserving water and
energy is a big honking thing to sweat, so I'm happy to fill you in. Plus, it
gives me a chance to play around in the Grist test kitchen.

Since I have some better solutions to come, let's go ahead
and take the letting-water-run-until-it's-hot option off the table right now.
After space heat—that is, heating your entire home—water heaters are the
largest household energy consumers. And there are more efficient means of
heating such a small amount of water that also don't let natural resources just
run down the drain (I don't suppose you had a bucket there each time to catch
excess water?).

So does that just leave us waiting for the recommended six quarts of cooler tap water to
boil on the stovetop before adding our pasta? Not necessarily. First off, you
do not—I repeat, do not—need six
quarts of water to make a bowl of pasta. Yes, I know that's what it says on the
box. Grist's own food guru, Tom Philpott, and
food-science writer Harold McGee both concur that six quarts are overkill. About a quart and a half should do
the trick (I actually used even less for mine).

Secondly, here's the real coup: You can put the pasta right
into the cold water! That's right. You don't need to boil the water first. Pop
your pasta in, put a lid on the pot (contains the heat), and stir as needed to
prevent sticking. This method produced the same delectable rotini for me as the
boil-first method, saving water (ta-ta, six quarts) and energy, and it was
really no extra effort.

I wasn't satisfied to stop there, though, as I wanted to
give you options, plural. I'm not
sure how the cold water method works at high altitude, or if there's any
difference at all, but let's say you decide to stick with the boil-first
method. We know from my previous column
on boiling water for tea that the electric kettle is No. 1 in water-heating
efficiency. Thusly, how about getting your pasta water started in an electric
kettle? Once it's boiling (or nearly boiling) pour it over your pasta in a pot,
and then pop the lid on. Turn the burner on to keep the water's momentum going,
and voila. Cooked pasta in 10 minutes (or however long your particular type of
pasta takes)—which reminds me of yet another energy-saving tip: You don't have
to leave the stove on for the duration of the cooking time. Turn off the burner
a few minutes before the pasta is finished, leaving the lid on. The pasta will
continue to cook in the pot.

And don't just toss that water post-cooking. Pasta water in
restaurants is liquid gold—used as a sauce thickener. While you may not be able
to replicate the starchy water made from boiling order after order of
spaghetti, you can still try mixing some pasta water in with your next batch of
homemade tomato sauce. Or you can just let the water cool to room temperature
and use it to give your houseplants a little hydration.

Saucily,
Umbra

Other helpful links:

Ask Umbra on
water conservation
Ask Umbra on
boiling water for tea
Ask
Umbra on water heaters
Ask Umbra on
waiting for warm water

Q. Dear Umbra,
My granddaughter uses Clorox Disinfecting Wipes constantly on everything. She
has a 2-year-old son, who is asthmatic and seems to have a somewhat compromised
immune system. The least little trigger can set him off into an asthma
attack, which on occasion has developed into pneumonia and resulted in hospital
stays. She is obsessed with certain hygiene, and I tend to think she overdoes
it. Plus, she tends not to wipe off the kitchen counters with a dishrag before
she uses the wipes, which leaves scum on the counters. Please help me with
recommendations I can pass on to her. Thanks!

Carol J.
Scottsdale, Ariz.

A. Dearest Carol,

Advising loved ones on child-rearing or cleaning techniques is
a slippery slope indeed, as is giving this question a definitive answer.

Let's first start by breaking down what exactly is in these
wipes. A couple of the key ingredients are alkyl dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride and alkyl dimethyl ethylbenzyl
ammonium chloride (whew, glad I didn't get those words in my fourth grade
spelling bee). The production of these compounds results in harmful dioxins,
which can cause cancer, immune system problems, and reproductive issues.
Additionally, the ingredients themselves can cause skin irritation, headaches,
and respiratory issues. In short, these chems are not a good thing to have around a child who's
already having his share of breathing problems, methinks.

Plus, these wipes are utterly disposable, equaling a lot of unnecessary
waste. One swipe, and then into the trash bin—sad. Not to mention the fact that
they are packaged in a plastic bottle, which is a big petroleum-sucking no-no
in my book.

I'm not a doctor and don't even pretend to play one in this column
(though I do look mighty authoritative wearing a stethoscope), so I'm not going
to try to diagnose whether your great-grandson's condition warrants the kind of
disinfection these wipes offer, harsh though their ingredients may be. Try
referring his mom to my April
12 column on sanitizing counters with white vinegar and hydrogen peroxide
(in two separate bottles). The combo kills almost all Salmonella, Shigella, and
E. coli bacteria. However, if whiter,
grime-free surfaces are all your granddaughter is after, then our friends vinegar,
baking soda, and castile soap along with a reusable dishcloth and a little
elbow grease should do the trick.

Spotlessly,
Umbra

Other helpful links:

Ask Umbra
on bleach
Ask
Umbra on green cleaning
Ask Umbra
on having kids
Ask
Umbra on mini-dilemmas

In my April
5 column, I responded to 9-year-old Ian's question about eco-friendly
packaging for his newly designed card game. In return, I received a package
this week with a handmade thank-you card from Ian, a lovely letter from his
mom, and pictures of Ian and his completed product, which I wanted to share
with you guys.

Ian, rocking a rad fedora and showing off his upcycled game packaging.Hello! I wanted to say thanks, because your ideas really
helped! My updated format looks great, and it's eco-friendly, not to mention
cheap. Here are some pictures for you to enjoy.

Ian

Dear Umbra,

Several weeks ago, you answered my 9-year-old son's question
about creating eco-friendly packaging for a game he's invented. Your reply
thrilled him—he was surprised that he got a reply. It made his day. He ended up
rethinking his packaging and created drawstring bags out of a variety of
leftover fabrics. It significantly lowered his costs, taught him sewing skills,
and added an element of personalization to each game. And eco-friendly to boot!

Many thanks from a grateful mom,
Gwyn R.

Before the park’s grand opening, Harry Potter expert Melissa Anelli was magically granted access into Universal’s Wizarding World of Harry Potter for a “chill-inducing” walk through the gates of Hogwarts and a taste of some genuine “butterbeer.”

I will never get over the bizarre feeling of strolling through a snowy British town in air so hot and so humid I could boil pasta in the palm of my hand. Nor will it ever feel natural to gaze upon Hogwarts, flanked by its iconic boars—and the palm trees that surround it—from afar. But (sorry, mayor of London), there really isn’t a better place than Florida for the wedge of Harry Potter paradise that is Universal Studios’ Wizarding World of Harry Potter. After a few minutes, the superb detailing of the attraction fully distracts from the environmental ironies.

Months ago, I attended a press preview of the theme park on behalf of my website, The Leaky Cauldron. During that preview we were given a quick tour of the still-under-construction park and offered samples of food from its Three Broomsticks restaurant. After all the deliciousness that ensued, I started joking that we fans were going to enter the park, which officially opens this week, as our normal selves, but walk out fat and poor.

Fast-forward to Memorial Day weekend, when all three hosts of The Leaky Cauldron’s PotterCast—John Noe, Frank Franco, and I—gained entrance to the park during its soft opening period. We get a lot of tips in our inboxes, and quite a few of them indicated a soft open around the end of May. Nothing was certain, but we knew there would be a theme park “experience” for people who had bought a certain vacation package, so we figured, why not just spend Memorial Day in Orlando… just in case? The gamble paid off. It turned out that a guest at one of the Universal Resort hotels could get into the park an hour before it opened to everyone else—and that was how we got into the Wizarding World of Harry Potter. It closed after a few hours, but we spent those hours making the most of everything and my wisecracking prediction came true inside two hours. Three butterbeers, five souvenir pins, a Hog's Head Ale, a pumpkin juice, a Cauldron Cake, a set of wax seals, a Hogwarts shirt, and an annual pass later, my stomach had grown as my bank balance diminished—and I can honestly say it was the happiest I've ever been under such conditions.

At 7:30 a.m. sharp on May 29, we stood on line with roughly 400 other people, awaiting entrance to the Promised Land. Every last person there was part of the largest human train I’ve ever seen, speed-walking like ducks all the way to the back of Universal Studios' Islands of Adventure theme park to get into Hogsmeade. We squealed like children as the arch, with its wrought-iron sign that reads “Please respect spell limits,” drew near, and almost ran to get right into Hogwarts and onto the Forbidden Journey ride, the park’s signature attraction.

Sadly, we never got on: As we were reminded, the soft opening was like the technical rehearsal for a show. We instead spent 20 minutes wandering around the magnificently built Hogwarts, ogling the so-real-looking moving portraits and trying to restrain ourselves from hopping into a seat next to the Gryffindor common room fire, before the queue came to a standstill and a mild-voiced announcer evacuated us.

Who cared? We had all of Hogsmeade to explore—a life-size recreation of the world I’ve immersed myself in for nearly a decade. We moved on to Ollivanders, the wand shop from the franchise, where a wand master carefully selected two young children from our group and performed tests on them to determine their wands. Of course, in true theme park tradition, this meant they would have to buy them in the neighboring shop.