first k-cups (coffee) experience [Food/Vendor]
2009 May 1
Keurig can't be that bad for waste ... they have an 'Environmental Policy' ...
see ---> www.keurig.com
2009 May 1
Um, you've heard the term "Greenwashing" have you not Captain?
Here is one of the most disgusting examples of it I've seen in a long time : www.youtube.com
Here is one of the most disgusting examples of it I've seen in a long time : www.youtube.com
2009 May 2
Ha, ha! That's hilarious! Had sent that to a buddy of mine. It's a funny one though :-)
Here is the one I meant : www.youtube.com
Here is the one I meant : www.youtube.com
2009 May 2
We had one of those at work for a while, it made such horrible coffee that the vendor pulled the machine because it wasn't profitable. Keurig systems make consistently horrible coffee - end of discussion!
2009 May 3
I never waste the money or the material to try out that machine. Thanks for doing it so I didn't have to. :)
2009 May 3
We have a Keurig machine at our work, and although the coffee is not good, it's not the worst we've had. It's certainly better (at least in variety) than the last machine (years ago) we had at work. I'm curious if anyone has tried the Nespresso system (aluminum cups, so more waste, but better coffee storage?) and can compare/contrast it with the Keurig system? I, like FF own the fancy dancy Nespresso frother, but have not tried their coffee...
2009 May 3
Small point of clarification, Pete: I only *aspire* to owning a Nespresso Aeroccino frother. My brother owns one and I wanna be like him.
My aunt and uncle in Switzerland shocked us all by adopting the Nespresso system. They have a reputation for environmentalism, in part because they built solar heating into their house 30 years ago. They grind their own spelt flour to make bread, make their own yogurt, keep chickens and sheep for eggs and meat. I admit that I would have expected them to be more on the home-roasting end of the spectrum rather than the disposable-cup end! However, they did their homework and were convinced that it wasn't a bad choice overall. It certainly seems to be one of the better automatic systems according to espresso snobs.
The Nespresso site advertises the sustainability of their system: www.nespresso.com
My aunt and uncle in Switzerland shocked us all by adopting the Nespresso system. They have a reputation for environmentalism, in part because they built solar heating into their house 30 years ago. They grind their own spelt flour to make bread, make their own yogurt, keep chickens and sheep for eggs and meat. I admit that I would have expected them to be more on the home-roasting end of the spectrum rather than the disposable-cup end! However, they did their homework and were convinced that it wasn't a bad choice overall. It certainly seems to be one of the better automatic systems according to espresso snobs.
The Nespresso site advertises the sustainability of their system: www.nespresso.com
2009 May 3
"recycling" != "sustainable"
recycling is only a tiny step above throwing something into the garbage.
reduce, reuse, recycle
in that order
recycling is only a tiny step above throwing something into the garbage.
reduce, reuse, recycle
in that order
2009 May 3
That is not exactly correct Zym. In the end, everything that is used, is recycled in some form or other on the planet. Grass into cows, is cycled into fertilizer for the grass. All any cycle reaction really needs to be circular is energy. I am not semantically against recycling, or other forms of resource use, as you can be, but would like to evaluate each thing on it's own merits. I do quite agree with you that the consumption of raw materials from this world is entirely unsustainable, but that to me is mostly because the cost to throw things out (i.e. remove them from the useful cycle) is too low. I can imagine a future, where clean consumption is only limited by the amount of energy available to cycle the components of that consumption. If energy was cheap, and plentiful, and natural resources expensive, but recycled resources cheap, then it would all work out in the wash! I prefer this scenario to the one where the humans of the world are forced to um.. reduce, because of man made calamity... I think I need a coffee after writing all that...
2009 May 4
Our friends in Zurich have owned a Nespresso for years. It makes very good coffee. One hotel we went to even had one in the room - makes much better coffee than the pretend stuff available in hotels in North America :)
As for the waste, I know that in Switzerland, our friends save their used pods and return them to the store for recycling. North America has just not caught up to that yet. Don't blame the coffee system, blame the resellers and retailers, and of course the governments for allowing them to dump their waste.
As for the waste, I know that in Switzerland, our friends save their used pods and return them to the store for recycling. North America has just not caught up to that yet. Don't blame the coffee system, blame the resellers and retailers, and of course the governments for allowing them to dump their waste.
2009 May 4
I've used a Nespresso at home for slightly more than two years. I had a bare-bones Essenza C100 until just recently, when I splurged on a Lattisima EN680. (Why the upgrade? The EN680 has a built-in milk steamer, which makes better foam than the Aeroccino does.)
The espresso the Nespresso machines makes tops every capsule machine I've tried, as well as every home-scale maker I've ever seen. Not only that, but it's better than at least half of all of the cafe or restaurant espressos I've had, too.
It makes fantastic crema, and there's a vast selection of espresso strengths and flavours to choose from. Since I only have 3-4 espressos a week, there's no way I could ensure that my beans are always at peak freshness without buying them 100g at a time. That's why capsules really appeal to me.
Are there any drawbacks to the Nespresso machine? Well, maybe. It doesn't make coffee: just espresso and (double-volume) lungos. And some people really like the manual feel of having to grind their own beans, tamp it down, and pull a shot.
Me, I love breech-loading a capsule, pushing a button, and receiving espresso.
This evangelistic moment has been brought to you by Nespresso.
The espresso the Nespresso machines makes tops every capsule machine I've tried, as well as every home-scale maker I've ever seen. Not only that, but it's better than at least half of all of the cafe or restaurant espressos I've had, too.
It makes fantastic crema, and there's a vast selection of espresso strengths and flavours to choose from. Since I only have 3-4 espressos a week, there's no way I could ensure that my beans are always at peak freshness without buying them 100g at a time. That's why capsules really appeal to me.
Are there any drawbacks to the Nespresso machine? Well, maybe. It doesn't make coffee: just espresso and (double-volume) lungos. And some people really like the manual feel of having to grind their own beans, tamp it down, and pull a shot.
Me, I love breech-loading a capsule, pushing a button, and receiving espresso.
This evangelistic moment has been brought to you by Nespresso.
2009 May 4
Cookie - I just read somewhere this week that reusable pods are available somewhere in Ottawa (idea being that people can use whatever coffee this wish in them).
Zym - As for the recycling arguement... you know where I stand... Ok it isn't the best solution but it is still better than the alternative (throwing everything into the landfill)... the fact that you refuse to believe that things are actually recycled is your choice, but hardly factual.
BTW, with all your mighter than thou take on "reduce, reuse, recycle" I must say that I was surprised to discover you even chose to try out this coffee machine...
Your Quote being...
"while I will definitely not use it because it creates so much garbage, I did want to try it to form an opinion on the coffee it makes."
IMO, that is a fair statement... but then when you said:
"They use the cups from Timothy's, and I tried 2 different ones so far. One was the Kona blend (medium) and I forget what the other one was but will follow up next week. Will also try more next week too."
Totally laughable, when you have on more than one occasion put others here down for the choices they make (myself included). I dare say, you can't stand on your soap-box one minute and chastise other OF's the next, all the while doing whatever it is "suits" you at any given moment!
Actually, you can do that... but then be prepared to be called a hypocrite!
Zym - As for the recycling arguement... you know where I stand... Ok it isn't the best solution but it is still better than the alternative (throwing everything into the landfill)... the fact that you refuse to believe that things are actually recycled is your choice, but hardly factual.
BTW, with all your mighter than thou take on "reduce, reuse, recycle" I must say that I was surprised to discover you even chose to try out this coffee machine...
Your Quote being...
"while I will definitely not use it because it creates so much garbage, I did want to try it to form an opinion on the coffee it makes."
IMO, that is a fair statement... but then when you said:
"They use the cups from Timothy's, and I tried 2 different ones so far. One was the Kona blend (medium) and I forget what the other one was but will follow up next week. Will also try more next week too."
Totally laughable, when you have on more than one occasion put others here down for the choices they make (myself included). I dare say, you can't stand on your soap-box one minute and chastise other OF's the next, all the while doing whatever it is "suits" you at any given moment!
Actually, you can do that... but then be prepared to be called a hypocrite!
2009 May 4
F&T, first of all, when and where did I say I refuse to believe that stuff gets recycled?
And if you think recycling is "better than the alternative (throwing everything into the landfill)", then you are closing your eyes to other alternatives. Like for example, not using a resource in the first place! Recycling is not better than this alternative. Back to my "reduce" option. THAT is the BEST alternative. And that goes to PiO as well in reply to his 2nd last comment in the thread. Anyone who thinks that recycling is the only alternative to garbage is part of the reason our grandchildren are probably going to have a very tough time surviving on this planet.
As for my using the pod system at work - you say "fair statement" but then lambaste me for it! WTF? So which is it? A fair statement or not? Yup, I tried it again - French Roast this time. It was probably the best of the 3. Not because I wanted a coffee, but because I plan to try each one of the 5 or 6 varieties they have so that I can develop an informed opinion on the system. After that I would not go near it with a 10 foot pole. Believe me, I cringe every time I use it. If I want coffee at work (which I almost never do), I'll buy myself another Aeropress and take it in. How is this in any way laughable? If I'm going to be critical of the system for the garbage it creates, is it not at least fair of me to judge the product on its own merits as a food product? That is what I am doing. I am biting my tongue and trying the product so that I'll know if it is at least a decent product. Which I can now authoritatively say, "not really". What is laughable about that? I think it is the most fair-minded thing a person could do. If I criticized the product for the garbage creates without trying the product, then you'd probably lambaste me for that, too.
And if you think recycling is "better than the alternative (throwing everything into the landfill)", then you are closing your eyes to other alternatives. Like for example, not using a resource in the first place! Recycling is not better than this alternative. Back to my "reduce" option. THAT is the BEST alternative. And that goes to PiO as well in reply to his 2nd last comment in the thread. Anyone who thinks that recycling is the only alternative to garbage is part of the reason our grandchildren are probably going to have a very tough time surviving on this planet.
As for my using the pod system at work - you say "fair statement" but then lambaste me for it! WTF? So which is it? A fair statement or not? Yup, I tried it again - French Roast this time. It was probably the best of the 3. Not because I wanted a coffee, but because I plan to try each one of the 5 or 6 varieties they have so that I can develop an informed opinion on the system. After that I would not go near it with a 10 foot pole. Believe me, I cringe every time I use it. If I want coffee at work (which I almost never do), I'll buy myself another Aeropress and take it in. How is this in any way laughable? If I'm going to be critical of the system for the garbage it creates, is it not at least fair of me to judge the product on its own merits as a food product? That is what I am doing. I am biting my tongue and trying the product so that I'll know if it is at least a decent product. Which I can now authoritatively say, "not really". What is laughable about that? I think it is the most fair-minded thing a person could do. If I criticized the product for the garbage creates without trying the product, then you'd probably lambaste me for that, too.
2009 May 4
Oh I'm just getting started Captain! Now I actually have a bit of time to say what I really have in mind.
First back to PiO's post about "cheap" energy and "recyling is the natural order of things".
Cheap energy? Hmmm. Best I can tell the cheap energy - i.e. oil - is half gone now. And it ain't coming back for about 200 million years. Yup, solar is cheap, but we cannot generate enough of it to meet our needs. The fact of the matter is that once oil, then coal are gone, there will be no way on this earth to generate nearly the amount of energy we need to meet our current needs, let alone any "needs" based on the almighty "growth".
That's one of our basic problems though - there are "needs", and there are "wants", and precious few of us are able to distinguish between the two. The problem is that over the last 50 or 60 years we've turned our everyday lives into an orgy of consumption. And very little of it is sustainable. What does that mean? It means that if we have not changed in 100 years, we'll pretty much be dead or dying as a species. And we may well take out a whole crapload of other species with us before we go.
Now back to the "natural order" comment. The problem with this is that also over the last 50 or 60 years we have progressively separated ourselves from nature in our food chain, and also in most of the rest of what we do. So it is rather ridiculous to take a tiny portion of what we are doing on this earth and hold it up as some kind of example of the natural order, when 95% of what we do flies in the face of the natural order. In the natural order, everything is a cycle, and one cycle it intricately intertwined with the rest of them. But we in our arrogance believe that by understanding one or two of these cycles, that we understand them all. To grow our food we literally poison the earth and kill just about every living thing in it except for the one species we are growing. This is not sustainable, and it is a major kick in the b**ls to the "natural order". We cannot cherry pick 2 seconds out of a week and say "aha, but this 2 seconds of what we do is the natural order at work"! By definition, the "natural order" works 24x7x365 ...
And what I really find laughable - since we are using that word - is how everyone gets all up-in-arms about the "nanny state" when it comes to letting us buy beer at the corner store, but then we turn around and curse that same state for not regulating us enough when it comes to regulations around companies being allowed to produce this stuff in the first place, as though not a single one of us had an iota of self-control that we could exercise.
And that is the basic problem. Yes, what coookie said is very true that government really has to step in and create far greater regulations on this stuff. But in the mean time for goodness sakes we are human beings and we do have self control, and it is up to us to exercise it.
And for the record, yes I'm a hypocrite because I commit the 2 biggest environmental sins : I drive a car and I eat meat. So I'm penny-wise and pound foolish with the environment. But these are facts that actually weigh on me, and I'm actively seeking to change them. I already buy most of my meat from local farmers who use sustainable methods, so yes, I still consume 3x the resources as a vegetarian, but I consume 5x less than the average carnivore. And I'm not supporting very much unsustainable practices. As for the car - I had converted myself over to public transit, and once I get settled into my new job I hope to get myself back to it. And ultimately I want to get myself over to using Vrtucar but that is a longer term goal. So where most people are trying to figure out how to get from 0 to 1 to 2 cars, I'm trying to figure out how to get from 1 to 0. But at very least, while I am indeed a hypocrite - I KNOW THAT I AM AND WILL ADMIT IT. And more importantly, I know exactly where I need to improve myself, and I am actively trying to do so. And I am actively looking harder and closer at everything I do to discover where there is more room for improvement. Instead of just throwing up my arms and blaming everyone else, I point the finger first-and-foremost at ME, because that is the only person I can really do anything about. But at the same time I believe it helps to educate others.
The simple fact of the matter is that most of our current lifestyle is not the least bit sustainable. If we really have so little self-control that we refuse to give it up, then we are dead as a species and possibly as a planet. Which brings me back to the "natural order". In the natural order, Pete, there is daily hardship to survive. Not a single one of us on this site probably have the slightest clue what that is. Finger pointing first at me. Maybe one way to get back to the natural order is to experience that hardship in knowingly fighting hard against ones "wants" and not giving into them, and being completely satisfied that we meet our "needs". Wantonly giving into our wants will be our destruction as a species. There is no magic "cheap energy" or technology to save us from ourselves.
First back to PiO's post about "cheap" energy and "recyling is the natural order of things".
Cheap energy? Hmmm. Best I can tell the cheap energy - i.e. oil - is half gone now. And it ain't coming back for about 200 million years. Yup, solar is cheap, but we cannot generate enough of it to meet our needs. The fact of the matter is that once oil, then coal are gone, there will be no way on this earth to generate nearly the amount of energy we need to meet our current needs, let alone any "needs" based on the almighty "growth".
That's one of our basic problems though - there are "needs", and there are "wants", and precious few of us are able to distinguish between the two. The problem is that over the last 50 or 60 years we've turned our everyday lives into an orgy of consumption. And very little of it is sustainable. What does that mean? It means that if we have not changed in 100 years, we'll pretty much be dead or dying as a species. And we may well take out a whole crapload of other species with us before we go.
Now back to the "natural order" comment. The problem with this is that also over the last 50 or 60 years we have progressively separated ourselves from nature in our food chain, and also in most of the rest of what we do. So it is rather ridiculous to take a tiny portion of what we are doing on this earth and hold it up as some kind of example of the natural order, when 95% of what we do flies in the face of the natural order. In the natural order, everything is a cycle, and one cycle it intricately intertwined with the rest of them. But we in our arrogance believe that by understanding one or two of these cycles, that we understand them all. To grow our food we literally poison the earth and kill just about every living thing in it except for the one species we are growing. This is not sustainable, and it is a major kick in the b**ls to the "natural order". We cannot cherry pick 2 seconds out of a week and say "aha, but this 2 seconds of what we do is the natural order at work"! By definition, the "natural order" works 24x7x365 ...
And what I really find laughable - since we are using that word - is how everyone gets all up-in-arms about the "nanny state" when it comes to letting us buy beer at the corner store, but then we turn around and curse that same state for not regulating us enough when it comes to regulations around companies being allowed to produce this stuff in the first place, as though not a single one of us had an iota of self-control that we could exercise.
And that is the basic problem. Yes, what coookie said is very true that government really has to step in and create far greater regulations on this stuff. But in the mean time for goodness sakes we are human beings and we do have self control, and it is up to us to exercise it.
And for the record, yes I'm a hypocrite because I commit the 2 biggest environmental sins : I drive a car and I eat meat. So I'm penny-wise and pound foolish with the environment. But these are facts that actually weigh on me, and I'm actively seeking to change them. I already buy most of my meat from local farmers who use sustainable methods, so yes, I still consume 3x the resources as a vegetarian, but I consume 5x less than the average carnivore. And I'm not supporting very much unsustainable practices. As for the car - I had converted myself over to public transit, and once I get settled into my new job I hope to get myself back to it. And ultimately I want to get myself over to using Vrtucar but that is a longer term goal. So where most people are trying to figure out how to get from 0 to 1 to 2 cars, I'm trying to figure out how to get from 1 to 0. But at very least, while I am indeed a hypocrite - I KNOW THAT I AM AND WILL ADMIT IT. And more importantly, I know exactly where I need to improve myself, and I am actively trying to do so. And I am actively looking harder and closer at everything I do to discover where there is more room for improvement. Instead of just throwing up my arms and blaming everyone else, I point the finger first-and-foremost at ME, because that is the only person I can really do anything about. But at the same time I believe it helps to educate others.
The simple fact of the matter is that most of our current lifestyle is not the least bit sustainable. If we really have so little self-control that we refuse to give it up, then we are dead as a species and possibly as a planet. Which brings me back to the "natural order". In the natural order, Pete, there is daily hardship to survive. Not a single one of us on this site probably have the slightest clue what that is. Finger pointing first at me. Maybe one way to get back to the natural order is to experience that hardship in knowingly fighting hard against ones "wants" and not giving into them, and being completely satisfied that we meet our "needs". Wantonly giving into our wants will be our destruction as a species. There is no magic "cheap energy" or technology to save us from ourselves.
2009 May 4
p.s. to Pete : I think I finally just now understood this comment of yours : "I prefer this scenario to the one where the humans of the world are forced to um.. reduce, because of man made calamity... "
When I first read it I thought you were saying that you did not personally want to "reduce" as in "reduce, reuse, recycle". But now I clearly see that you are talking about "reducing" the number of people i.e. dying out as I rant about above. So I think I owe you a bit of an apology.
When I first read it I thought you were saying that you did not personally want to "reduce" as in "reduce, reuse, recycle". But now I clearly see that you are talking about "reducing" the number of people i.e. dying out as I rant about above. So I think I owe you a bit of an apology.
2009 May 4
No problem Zym. You're allowed to rephrase, and don't have to apologize. In fact, say anything you want, as you are the only one here who has ever invited me to a BBQ at his house (still sorry I couldn't make it...) I was just trying to inject a little utopian balance into the dystopian (albeit realistic) portrayals that were being thrown around.
2009 May 4
Zym,
Some Ottawa Foodies would like a Perfect(CHEO)Kitchen, some may want a Perfect(CHEO)Kitchen while others NEED a Perfect(CHEO)Kitchen or they will be haunted their whole lives .... and become sad when that kitchen goes to someone else.
ottawafoodies.com
I wonder what one would do when the red island and chairs go 'out-of-style'.
A wise person once told me "We may not be responsible for the world we find ourselves in ... but we will surely be held accountable for the one we leave behind."
2009 May 5
Monty - You win at life.
I enjoy the healthy discourse that we have over sensitive topics like this. From what I gather we're all thick-skinned enough that we don't take it personally when other people disagree.
But let us not forget the true goal of this specific forum topic, which is to tell the world that K-Cups taste terrible and Nespresso tastes awesome ;)
Once Ottawa gets its green-box program in gear I will be more than happy to cut open my capsules to compost the grounds, and then recycle the capsule. Until that time I'm far too lazy and unmotivated!
I enjoy the healthy discourse that we have over sensitive topics like this. From what I gather we're all thick-skinned enough that we don't take it personally when other people disagree.
But let us not forget the true goal of this specific forum topic, which is to tell the world that K-Cups taste terrible and Nespresso tastes awesome ;)
Once Ottawa gets its green-box program in gear I will be more than happy to cut open my capsules to compost the grounds, and then recycle the capsule. Until that time I'm far too lazy and unmotivated!
2009 May 6
these are entertaining threads to read... oh, and i'm sipping my jura americano as i read it...and loving it...
zymurgist
They use the cups from Timothy's, and I tried 2 different ones so far. One was the Kona blend (medium) and I forget what the other one was but will follow up next week. Will also try more next week too.
The Kona was your basic Maxwell House. Pretty blah and uneventful. The other one - which I do recall was a dark roast and may have been Sumatran but I will have to double check - was a bit better but not much. Neither were anywhere near good enough to make me want to purchase one of those systems even if I didn't care about the mountains of garbage they produce.
I guess that's what happens when you roast your own - everything else becomes pretty pale by comparison. Actually I have drunk Starbucks reasonably recently and find it to be a lot better than the K cups at work today.