Electric hob vs gas: 40 euros more on the monthly bill

Electric hob or gas: the bill that settles the debate

Swapping a gas hob for an electric one cost a family in Spain 40 euros more per month on their electricity bill. The jump, from 46 to 84 euros, sparked a discussion that has been going on for years in consumer forums: which is cheaper, cooking with gas or with electricity? The short answer is that it depends, and the long one is that it depends on almost everything: the price per kilowatt hour, the price of gas, the appliance's efficiency and whether you know how to use what you have.

The data from the original case are striking: before the electric hob, electricity consumption averaged 7.37 kWh per day over the last four bills. With the electric hob, the first bill pushed the average up to 12.61 kWh per day. A 71% increase in electricity consumption. The bill went from 46 to 84 euros a month. The reasonable question is how much of that increase is offset by what is no longer spent on gas, a figure that had not yet arrived at the time of the discussion.

Why an electric hob uses more than gas

A conventional radiant hob is essentially an electric heating element under a glass surface. It heats by radiation and conduction, and a significant part of the heat is lost to the air before reaching the pot. The energy efficiency of a radiant hob is around 70%, while a gas hob barely uses 40% of the energy it consumes. The paradox is that, despite being less efficient, gas is usually cheaper because a kilowatt hour of gas costs a fraction of the electric one.

The calculation that circulates in these debates is revealing: to heat 1.5 litres of water you need about 0.19 kWh with induction, 0.21 kWh with a conventional radiant hob and 0.29 kWh with gas. Induction wins on efficiency, but the radiant hob is not far behind. The real difference lies in the price of each energy source, not in the physics of the appliance.

Some argue that butane gas is the cheapest option of all, trinc by natural gas, and that an electric hob only pays off when the price of electricity drops or gas prices spike. Against it weighs the argument that butane requires a bottle, installation and ventilation, and is not always viable in an urban flat.

The problem is not just consumption: it's the cooking

The complaint running through the whole affair is not economic but culinary. A radiant hob has huge thermal inertia: it is slow to heat up and slow to cool down. That means you cannot control the temperature with the precision of gas. For a sofrito, a Spanish potato omelette or a coffee in a moka pot, the difference shows. The food doesn't taste the same, they say. And they have a point: flame control is instant, that of an electric element is not.

Induction solves part of the problem. It heats the pan directly through a magnetic field, without heating the glass, which makes it faster, more efficient and easier to clean. The glass of an induction hob never reaches 100 degrees; that of a conventional radiant hob can hit 580 degrees, enough for any residue to get baked on. The trade-off is the price: an induction hob costs considerably more than a radiant or gas one.

The original case ended with the owner trying to sell the electric hob second-hand. It was not a question of maths but of adaptation. Cooking with a radiant hob requires changing habits: choosing the right burner, adjusting the power, switching off before finishing to make use of residual heat. Without that learning curve, the experience is frustrating.

Gas, induction or butane: what the cost comparison says

The economic comparison depends on three variables that change constantly: the price of the electric kWh, the price of the gas kWh and the efficiency of the appliance. With electricity prices at the levels reflected in the case, the electric hob is expensive. With gas prices rising, gas's advantage narrows. Induction, being more efficient, reduces electricity consumption, but its purchase price is higher.

Some argue that butane is unbeatable in cost per kWh, while others point out that natural gas has a logistical advantage in cities with a grid. The final decision is not only economic: it is about health, comfort and safety. Burning gas indoors produces nitrogen oxides and particles, and studies link gas stoves to a higher risk of respiratory symptoms. It is not a minor argument, though neither is it cause for alarm: proper ventilation reduces exposure.

---

The question left hanging is not which is cheaper, but how much you are willing to pay to cook the way you like. The owner of the electric hob has made up her mind: she wants to go back to gas. So does her bill.