will he ever write again
Yes I will write again. Do have a writers block but also busy as all get out with a four acre yard to tend. Year to trim all the trees. Hmm, that would be a good story, me, a tree, a ladder and a chain saw. What could go wrong?
Banadin
Hmm, that would be a good story, me, a tree, a ladder and a chain saw. What could go wrong?
That would depend on whether you have a knothole fetish. :)
Hmm, that would be a good story, me, a tree, a ladder and a chain saw. What could go wrong?
Got a buddy at work with a great scar from that. Cut himself so deep with the saw when it kicked back that the only thing he could do was hold the saw in one hand, rev it up so the exhaust was hot, and then stick the muffler on his arm to cauterize it. Sealed it enough that he could then make it the ER - he would have bled to death otherwise.
I was on a ladder one day at my mother-in-laws pruning the limbs of a very large tree with an electric chainsaw. I rested one foot on a limb to reach out a bit further, rather than shift the ladder. I didn't notice it but the limb was wet. My foot slipped causing the ladder to shift. I lost my grip on the chainsaw and fell about 5 feet landing in a sitting position on one of the lower limbs, about 1 foot in diameter, and the chainsaw ended up sitting on the limb beside me. Bruised my tailbone and thankful for the chain break that stopped the chain. I considered myself lucky and haven't done something like that since.
Got a buddy at work with a great scar from that. Cut himself so deep with the saw when it kicked back that the only thing he could do was hold the saw in one hand, rev it up so the exhaust was hot, and then stick the muffler on his arm to cauterize it.
I thought I was being careful keeping everything well clear of the chain (and only handling the chain with gauntlets). Didn't think and burned myself on the exhaust / muffler. Long way from home and luckily the grass was wet to cool the skin.
Yes I will write again. Do have a writers block...
You need to abuse your muse until she gives up and inspires you again. I want to see Rick Jackson win an Oscar before Stupid Boy does. :D
On the topic of stupid chainsaw incidents: many years ago I worked a summer job on a two-man Forest Service trail maintenance contract. The 'old timer' and I (the kid) rode saddle horses and guided a pack horse carrying our camp gear and tools. It was a summer-long job that took us many miles into the North Cascade mountains.
We were clearing heavy brush that had been flattened by snow slides. It hung over and blocked a long canyon-slope section of trail. The old timer was using the chain saw, bracing his foot against the steep upper slope and swinging the saw down through the base of the hanging brush. I was behind, pulling and tossing the slashed brush off the trail.
I heard a grunt and a loud yell; the old timer's foot had slipped. When he lost his footing, the high-speed cutter chain came down across his upper thigh. This was early days, before chain saws had chain brakes. For some inexplicable reason, he still had a key-ring holding a cluster of keys in his blue-jeans pocket. One of the keys was driven into his thigh, but the wad of keys stopped the chain.
For a number of years I had nightmares of trying to carry him out to civilization on horseback while stopping to loosen and reapply a tourniquet to keep him from bleeding out. We were two days ride from the closest road at Harts Pass, overlooking a place named appropriately enough, "Dead Horse Point."
The pass's name seems prophetic. Hope he survived. Accidents always seem to happen at the worst possible times and places. Of course some accidents are the result of inattention and ignorance.
Of course some accidents are the result of inattention and ignorance.
Very few accidents occur because they are intended.
Ignorance and apathy, I don't know and I don't care.
Very few accidents occur because they are intended.
True, but an accident is often the result of our actions.
There are very few traffic "accidents." Virtually all are wrecks, at best, caused by inattention, aggression, impatience, disregard for others, and an ignorance of defensive driving.
Our primary highway here on the island is two lanes, 50 mph speed limit, essentially a 'no-passing' zone from end to end. Yet every year we have at least two fatal head-on collisions. Far more frequently, someone stopped and signalling a left turn gets rear-ended. Or a motorcyclist is killed by that same left-turning vehicle sensing a chance to make a fast left turn.
Some things never change, but in this case, it's steadily changing for the worse. Maybe that's why the big push for self-driving cars. And that, too, will be fun to watch. Hmmm... how about self-driving buses?
Maybe that's why the big push for self-driving cars. And that, too, will be fun to watch.
And maybe if they push too hard what ends up on the market is self crashing cars.
what ends up on the market is self crashing cars.
In the for what it's worth department, Subaru (and you know how they are with safety) says that by 2025, they will have cars that can be autonomously controlled on freeways. Realistically, with adaptive cruise control (which already exists), lane keep (which already exists), blind spot (which already exists), it's simply a matter of tying all the systems together.
Audi already has sort of a self-driving car available, but it's not perfect. The most I've ever seen one do is a 4 mile trip, albeit on surface streets, not on highway. I remember when I was a kid seeing a Popular Mechanics story about freeways that were designed to keep cars in their lanes - not the cars themselves, but the highway, with high, curved walls. So taking drivers out of the equation is something going back 40 plus years, if not longer.
it's simply a matter of tying all the systems together.
I venture to guess that all those systems assume near-optimum driving conditions, and consistent infrastructure. Structural breaks in infrastructure of the type that distract and confuse drivers, or severe weather events can defeat all current sensors and systems. So... here in the Pacific Northwest, depending on a self-piloting vehicle that cannot cope with days (and nights!) of heavy rain, fog, black ice, broken pavement, wind storms, and the occasional snow event... we'd be sitting around much of the time waiting for a 'safe day' to take to the roads again.
...here in the Pacific Northwest, depending on a self-piloting vehicle that cannot cope with ... broken pavement ...
I don't know about broken pavement, but I drove I-90 through Spokane and it was almost like having a self-guided vehicle. The ruts left by studded tires and snow chains were so deep I actually let go of the steering wheel and let the car follow the ruts for a couple of miles!
So... here in the Pacific Northwest, depending on a self-piloting vehicle that cannot cope with days (and nights!) of heavy rain, fog, black ice, broken pavement, wind storms, and the occasional snow event... we'd be sitting around much of the time waiting for a 'safe day' to take to the roads again.
Weather and non-perfect roads are why all that stuff right now is listed as driver assist, NOT driver replacement. Note also that what I mentioned was a system designed for freeway driving - meaning interstate highways or other, limited access, highways. NOT a winding country road.
And ultimately, the driver would still be responsible. Weather goes to pot, driver is still going to have to take over. You'll note that I was simply talking about these systems - not saying that I specifically approved of them. (Having said that, Adaptive Cruise and Lane Keep on a Subaru make a 40 mile drive on I-40 in Oklahoma a LOT more tolerable. I wish I'd had it when I was making the 1600 mile round trips from Indiana.)
Realistically, with adaptive cruise control (which already exists), lane keep (which already exists), blind spot (which already exists), it's simply a matter of tying all the systems together.
As if any of those systems were flawless. Which they would have to be for autonomous cars to cause zero accidents.
Sure, all the bits and pieces are sort of there, but the same can be said for flying cars.
I remember when I was a kid seeing a Popular Mechanics story about freeways that were designed to keep cars in their lanes - not the cars themselves, but the highway, with high, curved walls.
Over the decades, Popular Mechanics, and Popular Science have showcased all sorts of interesting concepts, that while they look great on paper, decades later no one has even managed a working prototype.
And for the most part the reason most of those concepts never got implemented is because while they look great on paper, in practice, they fall somewhere between uneconomical and impossible.
decades later no one has even managed a working prototype.
Actually there are several models and a couple are sold commercially.
https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=flying+cars&view=detail&mid=1A20CE2CC052B61326561A20CE2CC052B6132656&FORM=VIRE
Actually there are several models and a couple are sold commercially.
The problem is all governments world wide treat them as aircraft, not flying cars. The technology is there for flying car it's government regulations that as stopping it from happening.
You need a pilots license to fly a flying car.
In fact, US regulations prohibit marketing something as a flying car. You have to sell it as a roadable aircraft.
In fact, I have seen one company claiming to have a car sized (4 passenger) quad copter. With drone style controls, it should be nearly as easy to fly as a car is to drive, but regulators will never allow it.
Evidently you edited your post to delete the comment I highlighted and responded to.
I agree with you they are practical for most purposes and people aren't going to go to the effort to get licensed.
The sky is crowded enough now and we really don't need people who can't handle a car in a safe and sane manner up in the skies cutting in and out of the air lanes like they do on the roads.
I read a Star Trek paperback many years ago that was set on the Romulan homeworld, and as part of the world building described their personal transit system.
Instead of autonomous cars, each acting on their own, once you got going your car would be logged into a traffic control system which guided all the cars. Seems like it work fine...unless it got hacked or crashed. Then all the cars would crash. So you might have an emergency system to return control to the driver, but my goal for my self-driving car is to let me take a nap in the back seat on my way to work. (Better yet, let me work from home!)
I remember when I was a kid seeing a Popular Mechanics story about freeways that were designed to keep cars in their lanes - not the cars themselves, but the highway, with high, curved walls.
To show case what I was talking about thees things being impractical think about your choice of example.
Assuming they could build a wall strong enough to reliably contain a triple bottom Semi under any conditions thing about what using walls to guide a car actually means.
It means that the sides of your car will be constantly rubbing against those walls. Do you think that there is a car on the road today that could take that?
I remember when I was a kid seeing a Popular Mechanics story about &hellips;
You're dating yourself. Seriously, "Popular Mechanics"? I haven't seen that magazine sold for over 30+ years.
You're dating yourself. Seriously, "Popular Mechanics"? I haven't seen that magazine sold for over 30+ years.
Saw it on the shelf last time wife and I went to Barnes and Noble for an evening of reading. We'll go there, get a coffee, find a couple of books, grab a comfy chair if they have one, and just sit for 3 - 4 hours reading.
As for age ... JFK was President when I was born.
As for age ... JFK was President when I was born.
Wow, you're not as much older than me than most of these old farts. You're only two presidents older than I am. :)
As for age ... JFK was President when I was born.
That puts you close to a decade younger than me.
Saw it on the shelf last time wife and I went to Barnes and Noble for an evening of reading. We'll go there, get a coffee, find a couple of books, grab a comfy chair if they have one, and just sit for 3 - 4 hours reading.
As for age ... JFK was President when I was born.
Hmm, I haven't seen it in ages—but then again, I'm not exactly looking for it either. It may just not be in high circulation, thus not receiving prime placement on the magazine shelves. There are always a TON of magazines stuffed behind the main sellers.
As for ages, that makes you younger than me, but not by much.
As for age ... JFK was President when I was born.
FDR was President when I was born. His first term.
(Yeh... really... sigh....)
JFK was President when I was born.
From the rumors I heard while in that darn so-called hospital where I lost my citizenship. He deserved to be shot or better yet tortured.
There are very few traffic "accidents
It is odd that when someone says accident almost everyone thinks of a traffic accident.
Very few accidents occur because they are intended.
I concur, all the accidents I 'plan' for others always go awry! :(
I also hear they want to switch to self driving trucks and tractor-trailers. 80,000 pounds of vehicle and cargo.
I also hear they want to switch to self driving trucks and tractor-trailers. 80,000 pounds of vehicle and cargo.
Running on Microsoft Windows. Gives a whole new meaning to blue screen of death. :)
Nobody has yet mentioned the insurance nightmare resulting from an accident involving a self-driving car, or cars. That alone is enough to make them unrealistic, unless of course the car manufacturers accept the legal responsibility. Or will the lawyers find a way to make the passengers liable?
the insurance nightmare
I worked as an insurance underwriter for many years although not for the last 13. I am almost certain if the plaintiff can't sue the driver, they will go after the owner of the car.
I worked as an insurance underwriter for many years although not for the last 13. I am almost certain if the plaintiff can't sue the driver, they will go after the owner of the car.
or, more likely, the people responsible for the 'self-driving' software.
or, more likely, the people responsible for the 'self-driving' software.
If you can actually find the person responsible. Other wise it will probably be like that person who sued McDonalds (I think that was the company) because she spilled a cup of hot coffee on herself in her car. Dumb part is I think she won. If I had been on that jury I would have awarded damages to the company for the bad publicity.
Dumb part is I think she won. If I had been on that jury I would have awarded damages to the company for the bad publicity.
From what I remember reading of that case she won a fortune because no one specifically told her it was dumb to put a cardboard cup of hot coffee between your legs and not expect the cup to crush and spill hot coffee on to you. And added factor was the temperature was high to ensure the coffee stayed hot longer.
It's because of that court case some take away places now only sell coffee that's not hot enough to stay hot after you walk away from the counter.
Other wise it will probably be like that person who sued McDonalds (I think that was the company) because she spilled a cup of hot coffee on herself in her car. Dumb part is I think she won. If I had been on that jury I would have awarded damages to the company for the bad publicity.
My understanding is that initially the judge rejected her demand for a huge settlement because of her stupidity
Apparently there was/is a recommended maximum temperature at which the water should go through the coffee grounds; the staff member grossly exceeded that temperature and it was that increased temperature which was responsible for the severity of the injury. Hence she got compensation for McD's failure to adhere to the maximum temperature. She got a fraction of the amount claimed (my guess is that her lawyers got the entire amount!)
Apparently there was/is a recommended maximum temperature at which the water should go through the coffee grounds; the staff member grossly exceeded that temperature and it was that increased temperature which was responsible for the severity of the injury.
Actually, no. The coffee in the case referred to was at 190 degrees (F), the temperatures needed for brewing coffee are between 195 F (91 C) and 205 F (96 C). The closer to 205 F (96 C) the better.
https://blackbearcoffee.com/resources/87
ETA: The McDonald's franchise that was sued in that case had more complaints that their coffee was too cold than complaints that it was too hot.
I think some fact-checking re the McDonalds coffee case is needed.
Try this page.
Or this one.
The coffee was hot enough that the woman had third degree burns over 6% of her body.
That branch had over 700 claims of burns in a ten-year period, not coffee that was too cold. The branch manager knew tht the coffee, at that temperature, was likely to produce burns, and had no intention of changing the temperture they stored coffee at.
Plaintiff was awarded $160k damages after being held 20% liable. They were also awarded punitive damages of $2.7M, later reduced to $480k.
There's a lot of misinformation and erroneous beliefs flying around in this case, so care needs to be taken when talking about it.
Marissa's right.
They were giving people not hot coffee, but coffee at boiling temp. And, not putting the lids on all the way (And honestly, we all know that happens, how many times have you gotten a soda at McDonalds and gone to drink it and shit spills out the side cause they didn't push the lid down). I know the cup being properly closed wasn't the problem in this case, but in some of the other scalding incidents leading up to the one in question it was.
But really, look into the case, cause that case was not frivolous.
That branch had over 700 claims of burns in a ten-year period, not coffee that was too cold. The branch manager knew tht the coffee, at that temperature, was likely to produce burns, and had no intention of changing the temperture they stored coffee at.
Yeah, hot coffee at the proper temperature will cause burns, particularly if you spill it on your clothing which will hold the hot liquid against your skin for an extended period.
The point of my comment was a reply to a comment that they were brewing the coffee at an excessive temperature. No, they were not.
The point of my comment was a reply to a comment that they were brewing the coffee at an excessive temperature. No, they were not.
You're correct in that they were brewing the coffee at the correct temperature. Where the confusion comes in is that they were also SERVING the coffee at very nearly that temperature. You simply can't drink coffee that hot and not burn the crap out of yourself.
If the coffee had been served at the proper temperature for immediate consumption (which is between 120 and 140) - or even within 10 degrees of that - then she would have had time to react and perhaps pull her pants down. At 185, she had all of 2 - 3 seconds to realize what had happened, and by that time, she was burned.
And of course, also keep in mind that the woman was nearly 80. Older people bruise easier, get skin tears, and generally tend to be more fragile that those of us younger. (As many authors on here can attest from personal experience.) Something that would be an annoyance or perhaps a minor injury can be a serious injury or fatal to someone older.
If the coffee had been served at the proper temperature for immediate consumption (which is between 120 and 140)
She got the coffee from the drive through window. Had it been served at the proper temperature for immediate consumption, a responsible buyer who didn't try drinking a potentially hazardous beverage while driving would have found the coffee too cold on arrival at their destination.
Even for a young healthy adult, getting out of their pants in time (even if just at 140 degrees) would be difficult at best. What would have happened if she spilled it on herself in traffic? On an interstate highway?
I have little to no sympathy for people who think that they can safely drink hot coffee from a disposable container while driving a motor vehicle.
She wasn't driving. Every story says she pulled over and parked.
She pulled over, parked, put the cup between he legs to open it to add the cream and sugar so she could drink it while driving.
However, since that case most McDonalds stores (and other type operators) have lowered the temperature at which they keep the coffee and serve it. The result has been more coffee thrown out earlier, increased complaints about it being cold when they get to drink it, and some stores making it fresh from instant coffee while you wait - meaning a slightly longer delay in service. While others have gone the barista route and you have an even longer delay, now.
I don't know if it is covered in the stories, but when the story broke the news was the temperature McDonalds kept and served their coffee at was a common temp for the industry prior to that case.
edit to add: whatever way you try to apportion the blame, only an idiot would put a cardboard cup of hot fluid between their thighs and think it was a safe thing to do.
I don't know if it is covered in the stories, but when the story broke the news was the temperature McDonalds kept and served their coffee at was a common temp for the industry prior to that case.
At the time, one of the local Broadcast TV News operations did a survey of the temperature of coffee from local drive-throughs. The local McDonalds were serving DT coffee at the same temp in the lawsuit. Most (80% IIRC) were serving it at 195-200 degrees.
She pulled over, parked, put the cup between he legs to open it to add the cream and sugar so she could drink it while driving
According to earlier links, she was a passenger. Her Grandson was driving and she had him stop so she could add crème and sugar to her coffee. She spilled the coffee when she tried to remove the lid.
Still, trying to remove a coffee cup lid with the cup held between your legs is not the easiest way to remove a lid and not the smartest thing to do.
Still, trying to remove a coffee cup lid with the cup held between your legs is not the easiest way to remove a lid and not the smartest thing to do.
That's why she was found to be partially at fault. Keep in mind she'd asked McDonalds for $20,000, and they offered her $800. So it went to trial and it was obvious that McD's knew the coffee was too hot AND they'd had hundreds of other people burned - just their philosophy was that, yeah, we burned 600 people with up to 3rd degree burns, but we serve 2 million cups of coffee a day, so it's just a few people we've hurt. The callous indifference was their undoing.
Volvo have discovered that their animal detection system can't figure out kangaroos because of their random hopping movement. We won't get self drive anything in Aus until systems can avoid kangaroos. Mind you, we drivers cant figure them out either. About 80% of animal collisions in Aus are with a kangaroo.
About 80% of animal collisions in Aus are with a kangaroo.
And we also have the odd case where the kangaroo lands on the vehicle or jumps into the side of it instead of in front of it. That makes a vehicle radar warning system hard detect them.
And we also have the odd case where the kangaroo lands on the vehicle or jumps into the side of it instead of in front of it.
Is that sort of like here in the U.S. with deer? I've seen them jump right over a 4' woven wire fence right into the side of a car before. I've only hit two so far, knock on wood.
First one was going through a small rural town with an S curve in the middle of town, came through the second curve and it was just standing in the middle of the road. I spun around and the back bumper ended up just touching him - so he kicked my trunk and then ran off. And yes, he punched a hole right through the metal.
Second one, just driving down the road at 60 mph. Deer just jumped across the road, zero time to react, bam. Hood crinkled and flew him up and over the car. Car was still drivable, destroyed the hood, bent both fenders, and the grill (airbag did NOT deploy), and the deer was DRT.
Is that sort of like here in the U.S. with deer? I've seen them jump right over a 4' woven wire fence
You need at least an 8 foot fence to keep deer in or out.
right into the side of a car before.
I know someone that happened to without the fence.
I know someone that happened to without the fence.
It's difficult installing an 8' fence around a moving car! 'D
Is that sort of like here in the U.S. with deer? I've seen them jump right over a 4' woven wire fence right into the side of a car before.
A 4 foot fence is nothing to an adult kangaroo of the most common breeds which are fairly large. I often see them going over such farm fences.
One of the best accident claims for damage by a kangaroo was a decade or so ago for about $45,000 repairs to a boat. It was being towed on a trailer when the roo tried to pass behind the car and in front of the large motor yacht on the trailer. Hit the front of the boat and destroyed both the front of the boat and the roo. Expensive repairs to the boat.
Expensive repairs to the boat.
The dang Roo ROOined the damned boat, all cause they didn't install the necessary 8' fencing around it. 'D
And we also have the odd case where the kangaroo
Don't forget the Emus. I had one run full speed out of some scrub next to the road. It crossed the road about 50 feet in front of me and I just barely missed it.
Don't forget the Emus.
Of course, hitting a wombat with a vehicle is a sure fire way to do major damage to your vehicle. I've seen 4 tonne trucks have to be towed away after hitting a wombat.
I had the air dam on my car destroyed when, late at night, I went round a bend into a badger; it cleared off.
Someone on another site recounted how he went around a bend at night and saw a red deer (they are the big Highland beasts). He woke up in hospital and later found the entire front end of his motorbike destroyed.
Where I am now I see dead fallow deer at the side of the road every couple of months despite very high fences to keep them out.
As to the Popular Mechanics story a concrete wall, provided it was properly build would deflect vehicle back onto the road to endanger other road users. Armco is designed to absorb the hit and reduce the risk of deflection. It comes in various strengths, some will hold a semi (as you seem to call them)but are used only in high risk places like bridges etc. It CAN be effective - where I was working a geezer put a BMW M3 into Armco at close to 90 degrees, got out and walked away uninjured (and no airbag inflated) . Investigation showed that the impact speed was between 92 and 98 mph.
BTW - never ever touch Armco when there is a possibility of something hitting it; vibration will travel a long way and we were taught that it can break a thigh 50 yards from the impact site if you are leaning on it.
semi (as you seem to call them)
The term semi comes from the fact that they are a combination of a tractor and a trailer.
The term semi comes from the fact that they are a combination of a tractor and a trailer
The semitrailer has only half the corners supported as a trailer. Put another way, if there isn't a vehicle to support the other end of a semitrailer, it won't roll down the road, there aren't wheels at every corner. A colon has round things at both ends, a semicolon only has one, the other end is sort of a comma. Think of it as the trailer hitch to be attached to a tractor.
As to the Popular Mechanics story a concrete wall, provided it was properly build would deflect vehicle back onto the road to endanger other road users.
One lane roads, and they weren't walls, per se. Not even like a Matchbox car track. It was more like a U-shaped road surface, so the driver would just center the car and when the car would wander to the side, it'd send them back into the middle. Which could give you some interesting harmonic oscillations as well.
I don't remember the whole thing, it's been a good 40 years since I read the article. I have a good memory, just not photographic.
As to the Popular Mechanics story a concrete wall, provided it was properly build would deflect vehicle back onto the road to endanger other road users.
"Jersey wall" has become the generic term for the walls on the roadway edges with flared bottoms. They were developed by the New Jersey DOT but there are other versions with other names, and their intent is just that - to have the tires impact first and bounce the vehicle away from a major impact with the wall
"Jersey wall" has become the generic term for the walls on the roadway edges with flared bottoms.
We call 'em "Jersey barriers" out here on the left coast. They get used for all sorts of barrier and blocking purposes.
We call 'em "Jersey barriers" out here on the left coast. They get used for all sorts of barrier and blocking purposes.
In the west (and other mountainous areas) we call them 'cliffs'. If you run off the road, you end up 1,000 or 2,000 feet lower than you were a minute ago. That tends to wake you up when you're driving, realizing you're only inches away from death at any given moment!
Truman was President when I was born. I'm sure there's probably one or two Franklin era birthers on here.
I must say, I've made coffee (all types) for most of my life, and I've never received 3rd degree burns when pouring coffee from a pot, so claiming 'that's the normal brewing temperature' five minutes after they pour it and it's been cooling in a paper cup is no excuse. It's too fucking hot for human consumption at that temperature. If you want friggin' hot coffee, do like the rest of us and buy an insulated or heated mug!
so claiming 'that's the normal brewing temperature' five minutes after they pour it and it's been cooling in a paper cup is no excuse.
CW,
The way to make good coffee is to boil the water, the way to keep it good in the pot over many minutes is to keep it at just below boiling point. The boiling point of water, at sea level, is 212 degrees F or 100 degrees C. Thus to make it the water has to get to 212 F and will usually go over a few degrees before you turn it off. If you keep it sitting around you should keep it just below that, thus 190 to 200 F is a reasonable temperature. I agree, insulated mug is best, not paper cups, but no one will buy the coffee is they have to pay a lot for the cup / mug as well.
Some places get around this by only serving coffee in insulated mugs, you bring your own and they fill it, or they sell you one.
The way to make good coffee is to boil the water
No. I posted a link to the website of small coffee company. They recommend using water between 195F and 205F. According to that site, boiling water will burn the coffee.
No. I posted a link to the website of small coffee company. They recommend using water between 195F and 205F. According to that site, boiling water will burn the coffee.
many years ago I used to be a coffee fanatic, and there was a LOT of discussion on what is the best way to make coffee. I forget who did it, but one of the universities did some research on the issue (the also did tea) and found the best way to make tea or coffee depended on the type you were making, and the process being used. The best temperature for making coffee by peculating was different to that for instant and again for an expresso machine - and so on. To make it worse they found the best temperature can vary with the type of bean and also with the brand of coffee when making instant. The final analysis had that the best 'genera' method was to bring the water to the boil unless using a machine with a preset temperature control built-in.
Another thing they covered was adding the milk / cream before or after the coffee / tea etc.
The link to that research, like a lot of my best research is still in the Gestapo lock-up.
No. I posted a link to the website of small coffee company. They recommend using water between 195F and 205F. According to that site, boiling water will burn the coffee.
That's always been my understanding as well. They also recommend 'room-temperature' water quickly heated, rather than hot coffee heated even more because it degrades the coffee flavor even more.
Some places get around this by only serving coffee in insulated mugs, you bring your own and they fill it, or they sell you one.
Starbucks has long done this. You bring in one of their mugs and they'll make your coffee in your mug (though often, the mug size and the coffee size (especially for the Venti size) vary a bit.
But the idea here, is since many of us already transfer the coffee to an insulated mug, it should reduce the need for 3rd-degree-burn coffee just so the paper-cup coffee is reasonably hot after sitting in a paper cup for ten minutes!
However you cut it though, McDonald's has never served decent coffee. They might make it hot, but that's about the only thing going for it! Dunkin Donuts, for a long time had decent coffee, but since the majority of stores are now owned by Indians (who've never understood the entire concept of coffee), it's no longer reliable.
Every time someone starts talking coffee, I think of Arron Elkins book Twenty Blue Devils. It is a murder mystery with the dead man being the manager of Tahiti's Paradise Coffee plantation. The producers of the most expensive coffee in the world. It defines my opinion of the coffee culture.
Every time someone starts talking coffee, I think of Arron Elkins book Twenty Blue Devils. It is a murder mystery with the dead man being the manager of Tahiti's Paradise Coffee plantation. The producers of the most expensive coffee in the world. It defines my opinion of the coffee culture.
I liked that book.
The producers of the most expensive coffee in the world.
Are those the beans defecated by the animals who eat the beans, supposedly producing a 'delightfully subtle' flavor, or a purely invented fictional plantation?
Are those the beans defecated by the animals who eat the beans, supposedly producing a 'delightfully subtle' flavor, or a purely invented fictional plantation?
Has to be fictional. The poop coffee is from Indonesia, not Tahiti.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kopi_Luwak
The poop coffee is from Indonesia, not Tahiti.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kopi_Luwak
Yep. I live in Indonesia. The local coffee tastes like shit, but the shit makes a really good cup of coffee. :-)
or a purely invented fictional plantation?
fictional plantation and company. For a serious murder mystery, it made me laugh a lot. Of course, Elkins' plots are like that.