Air fryers may be the quickest and most energy efficient cooking appliance - but it depends on what dish you’re cooking, according to new research from Which?
The consumer champion tested a variety of recipes using air fryers, microwaves, pressure cookers and slow cookers to see what appliance would come out on top.
Testers calculated how long it took, how much energy it used and, crucially, how much it cost to use different appliances to cook the same foods.
While air fryers and microwaves provided impressive results, Which? say it’s important to consider the initial outlay when looking at cost savings.
For example, the air fryers used by Which? cost anywhere between £30 and £300, whereas most homes have microwaves and ovens.
So even if an air fryer may save money on running costs compared to an oven, it could be a while before you start making a return on your investment.
Here’s how each appliance fared when cooking a range of different foods:
Roast chicken
The pressure cooker came out on top as the cheapest and fastest way to cook a roast chicken.
Which? found that it cost 11p and took just 32 minutes - but it also meant having to sacrifice the distinctive crispy skin that other appliances still managed to achieve.
An oven took a much longer 76 minutes, and also cost more at 39p, although Which? testers noted that the meat was a little dry.
Testers found that the air fryer produced a perfectly cooked roast chicken, with juicy, flavoursome meat and a crispy brown skin.
For an added bonus, it only cost 18p to achieve this result.
This means if you were to cook a roast chicken in an air fryer once a week for an entire year, you’d save almost £11 compared to cooking in the oven.
While some claim that halogen ovens are cheap to run, Which? found the halogen oven tested was most expensive, costing 40p.
The chicken looked and tasted great, but Which? says there are cheaper ways to get the same results.
Chips
If you’re trying to save time and money, the best appliance for cooking chips is an air fryer, according to Which?
For two portions of chips, it costs 10p and takes 23 minutes to cook using an air fryer.
Comparing the same quantity in an oven, the cost is almost three times more at 29p.
But the big drawback of the air fryer is its limited capacity.
The model Which? tested recommends filling the basket just halfway and using a maximum of 500g of chips, which is enough for around two to three portions.
This means it wouldn’t be the most practical appliance if you’re feeding several people, or want to cook a few different food items simultaneously.
For that, a regular oven is more versatile than the air fryer or halogen oven.
When testing the halogen oven, Which? Found that it was only slightly cheaper than a regular oven, costing 23p.
All the chips cooked similarly regardless of the appliance - with a mixture of over-cooked and under-cooked chips, even though testers stirred or shook them halfway through cooking.
Baking a cake
If you love to bake but don’t yet own an air fryer, now might be the time to invest in one.
Which? found that baking a cake in an air fryer costs just 8p and takes almost half the time needed for a regular oven, without compromising on taste and texture
The test found that an air fryer could bake a cake in 33 minutes, while an oven took 56 minutes.
If you were to opt for the oven instead, you’d also have to pay 24p - three times as much as it would cost when using an air fryer.
But again, due to the air fryers size limitations Which?’s experts did have to make a smaller cake than for the other appliances.
Of course, for larger, more elaborate cakes, it would be best to stick to the trusty oven.
While the pressure cooker and halogen oven produced great cakes, they took longer than the oven and used more energy, costing 2p and 7p more respectively.
For baking on a budget, the air fryer came out on top overall.
Soup
The cheapest way to make soup is to use either an induction hob or pressure cooker, Which? found.
Both cooked vegetable soup quickly and efficiently, at just 9p.
While the slow-cooked option required the least amount of work, it was 22p more expensive, costing 31p in energy.
The induction hub came out on top for quality of cooking, while the pressure cooker was the quickest, taking 19 minutes to cook the soup.
Steamed vegetables
The most affordable way to steam your vegetables is the microwave.
Which? found that a microwave was 3p to 4p cheaper than using an induction hob or pressure cooker, both of which cost 7p.
However, the induction hob offered the best results in terms of taste.
Which? found that the pressure cooker used slightly more energy than the induction hob and overcooked the broccoli.
Testers noted that the benefit of using the microwave or hob was that you have more control over the cooking time, which took five minutes and nine minutes respectively.
Jacket potato
When it comes to jacket potatoes, the microwave is usually your best bet.
According to Which? it takes just eight minutes to cook a soft and fluffy jacket potato, and uses just 5p worth of energy.
But the air fryer also provided impressive results, taking half the time of an oven and only using 9p worth of electricity.
As with a lot of the other recipes though, it would only work well if you were to cook one or two potatoes due to size limitations.
The oven took the longest amount of time and used 37p worth of energy - over 7 times more than the microwave.
Cooking results were strong across the board but the oven was best for crispy skin.
Emily Seymour, Which? energy editor, said: “ Energy bills are a real concern for millions of households across the country, especially when many are already feeling the pressures of the cost of living crisis, and cooking is one of the everyday costs that really mount up over time.
“There has been a surge of interest in air fryers and smaller cooking appliances in recent months, and our research shows that the hype could be justified in some cases, as we’ve found these products cost less to cook certain foods than conventional ovens.
“The cost savings will soon be lost if you have to cook more than one batch though, so it’s still better to use your oven if you’re cooking large quantities. But for quick, small meals, we’ve found that it’s worth trying out the alternatives.”
