Coffee Pods Are Good For The Planet Now?!

[@discgolfwes]

Thank you for addressing personal carbon footprints being a deflection by the oil industry

[@xyzpdq1122]

Wait, you mean switching from a plastic straw to a paper isn’t going to save the world???😂

[@Saucisse_Praxis]

The fact that "concept" was invented by BP doesn't make it untrue, you should look into it before seeking validation.

[@AndrewOliverHome]

@@Saucisse_Praxis 😂 ok. Would you like to swap your cow for some beans?

[@mikecrill02]

Seriously! I liked the video just for that comment haha.

[@patavinity1262]

Can you provide evidence for that assertion?

[@gjdakin]

I love James' videos because as someone whose mother tongue is not English, I can learn many new ways to express my utter and complete disdain without resorting to insults.

[@deaddoll1361]

Avoiding profanities doesn't mean it's not an insult.

[@cian.horgan]

Honestly it's also good for native English speakers, I love a new source of fun phrasing

[@cian.horgan]

@@Grandier with all due respect to you, absolutely not. The man is an idiot, I've listened to far too much of his bile

[@andrewtsai777]

@@Grandier Agreed, but it's the other way around: learn what expressions to avoid using.

[@clawedsimian]

​@@Grandier yes if you want to learn how to say nothing with many words. Just admit the bible is as fictional and true as Dostoevsky, it's all good, man

[@groundzero_-lm4md]

The coffee pod is less carbon intensive during disposal is basically like saying that throwing away your ceramic plate every time you're done a meal is more environmentally friendly than washing it since it uses less water.

[@renenowicki]

Well said.

[@livemadseason]

Or buying new iphone is more green, than replacing your broken screen 😀

[@SatchmoBronson]

Exactly!

[@AMPProf]

No washing Dishes? Well 🤔 Fully made by manual labor then processed in a Solar Kiln.... 🤔 Then transported to my Home by foot! Might be better! Now if I could eat that plate!!!!

[@worawatli8952]

Maybe yes if you live on a aluminium planet with no water, so you try to conserve water and just grab the ground and mush it into new plate everyday. of course, we don't live on aluminium planet. So this make no sense. lol

[@Vermoot]

Your PSA about comparing the impact of our individual practices vs industrial and bigger-scale practices made me very happy. I do agree we should all do better, but I get really angry when I see people, or worse, corporations, exacerbate individuals' culpability in this thing. I'm always happy to see people point that out.

[@eljefeamericano4308]

Not to mention that the people who preach this stuff the most travel the country, and the world, in their own private jets in order to do it.

[@nevim007]

I have just thrown a plastic bottle into a general waste bin instead of plastic waste bin and feel much better about it than before.

[@eljefeamericano4308]

@@nevim007 You probably should, honestly. So much plastic recycling just gets sent to countries that say they'll do it, and then dump it into the ocean instead.

[@Vermoot]

@@nevim007 you’re very smart, you got me

[@ghostAFsky]

I honestly only half-agree with this sentiment. Corporations continue their practices because people are happy to continue with their destructive habits. People like to complain like they don't have a choice, but they really do most of the time. They just don't want to be inconvenienced.

[@kanguruster]

Wow! A KZbin influencer not only unafraid to support social responsibility, but also prepared to loudly reject corporate greenwashing language like "your carbon footprint". Thank you, James.

[@onemorechris]

I enjoyed the knife slicing into BP at the start

[@kanguruster]

@@onemorechris The man certainly knows how to roast!

[@violetviolet888]

Carbon Footprint concept was created by British Petrolem (BP). Learn more: Your ""Carbon Footprint" Is A Scam" by FuseSchool - Global Education · Apr 10, 2016

[@StuartCrabtree]

@@violetviolet888 can you please send me a link to this?

[@chiefpacman]

I like James too but is there a popular youtube influencer that doesn't atleast pretend to 'support social responsibility'? KZbinr worship is annoying.

[@lifeenmasse]

I typically airfreight my 14g of coffee directly to my office every morning, but it’s sustainable because it’s in a coffee pod.

[@Quixan]

How wasteful. My coffee doesn't have to get transported because I fly a private jet to where my coffee is grown whenever I want a cup.

[@kidShibuya]

Hmm... I didn't think coffee people were easily butt hurt jerks, but I stand corrected.

[@matthewn1805]

You should upgrade your quad-copter so it can carry a whole packet of pods, then you can declare yourself fully green

[@chrisstrider]

I use a Chinook to plunge my Aeropress

[@ed32568]

@@chrisstrider I use the US's entire Defense budget for mine :) instant press

[@FunkyPeanut7]

As a coffee lover with a background in academia, I'm always amazed by how James chooses to approach topics like these. This video is not just for coffee drinkers, it's an example of how everyone should challenge and try to understand "scientific" articles that are written using fancy words and graphs which makes it hard to understand for the average person. I have no doubt that most people sharing this article have not read past the title, which is troubling since James showed us how flawed their method is. Thank you James for taking your time to teach us about our favorite beverage with such a scientific approach!

[@CJski]

There's nothing more infuriating than journalist "science" - to which, this article is an insult. Give me some real statistics instead of just an average.

[@VIK_1903]

My Hero Academia rocks!!!!!!!!!

[@CJski]

@@MaakBow you’re absolutely right. As should the “journalist” reviewing and summarizing the research.

[@daleykun]

@@MaakBow They should, but unfortunately even in academia you have individuals who have biases and agendas to push and will represent data in a way that best supports their argument - or more likely in this case, the agenda of their (likely) coffee pod making employer/funder to their study

[@User123456767]

If you like the approach you should checkout the work of Michael Hobbs he's had lots of podcasts analyzing different studies and methodologies but always very human focused. He's got a new podcast called if books could kill that I haven't actually listened to yet but I'm sure will be just as good.

[@richardfinestra9218]

I did not except to see academic James Hoffman today but yes I would like to see James roast academic papers as a monthly podcast.

[@louisenielsen928]

The new coffee salons 🙌

[@oliver1367]

"The Roast"

[@PaladinofRealm]

Yes please

[@GilesRafol]

Yeah I would love to see more "literature reviews" and analysis on coffee for the average person. That said, I didn't read this myself, either. Good to remember there's potential for James to be incorrect or misunderstanding something too. Specifically for this one though, the study does seem sus on the face of it.

[@FartPanther]

I like how after he's roasted it to exactly the right level he dials it in by offering a palatable plausible but not overplayed alternative

[@PhosphorAlchemist]

As a scientist who has a little experience with life cycle analysis and a lot of experience spotting sensationalized tautologies, I'm intrigued with figuring out how this study arrives at its weird-seeming conclusions. These are my first impressions having read the original writeup in The Conversation (which reads like an advert for his literature review) and done a quick web search for top-15 Google hits. The lead author is a grad student who apparently did not exist the arricle to go viral. This both makes me feel sympathetic to the maturity of his scientific efforts and Very Critical of the decision to allow syndication across a prolific array of platforms. I hope he got paid for the mass publication of his work, or I'll also be embarrassed for him. First, I'm struck at the style switches between "serious science" tone and the lifestyle-magazine asides like a reminder to properly fill the dishwasher. I think the authors know mostly what they want to say but not who they want to say it to. The confusion unfortunately carries through the analysis. I agree with James's observation that it's unfair to compare unrealistic brew amounts of coffee to get to the "standard" cup size. I think there is a legitimate argument to be made for using different brew amounts for the different methods, but those amounts really should be reasonable for the method. There is some very slick graph magic being done with the "overbrew" portion of the plot. The ground and instant coffee are increased by 20% but the pod magically cannot change size and suddenly looks a hair better than a truly hair-raising strength of instant/soluble coffee. Moving the order and having a long column of bars to compare obscures that the pod bars behave differently than all the others. In addition, I would prefer the different factors to be presented separately to better view the differences between the methods beyond just having more/less coffee. The sum effect is important too, but this is one where I think the plots would be MUCH more clear if they were organized differently. Unlike most respectable US news outlets, the NY Post headline actually gets the science right: "people should drink less coffee to combat climate change, study says." Of course the National Review (US right wing political news magazine) characterizes this as "The war against coffee." An obvious shortcoming in this article is failure to show the difference between a person satisfied with one super-strong cup of coffee vs someone taking 2-3 quantized K-cups. People who drink a giant pot of coffee in a day might brew one big one and fill it in a thermos or they might blow through 6 k-cups. Even with the potentially dubious estimates of greenhouse gas emissions, the bulk pot is the clear environmental winner. I'm about to start to dig into the literature cited, after which I'll be able to say more about the actual data, not just the presentation of findings. I'm keenly interested in whether the analysis included all the packaging for the coffee or just the immediate layer. After all, k-cups come in a paperboard box, the packages are shipped in corrugated cardboard cases, and packing efficiency of bagged beans or jarred instant coffee is very different from loosely packed k-cups. And again, it would be super helpful to know if they're talking about k-cups or nespresso pods, which pack more efficiently. So. Many. Questions. I feel like I'm back in journal club again.

[@LightGrime]

I'd love a follow up on this if you get a chance :)

[@segamble1679]

What about the production of the Nespresso machine itself? Manufacturing electronics must be incredibly carbon intensive (although averaged over the life of the machine, carbon footprint per cup is probably low). Great analysis by the way.

[@DellaStreet123]

Brewing one big pot, drinking a cup and then pouring the rest into a thermos to drink over the day what was adults did when I was a kid. Every man had a bag to carry a thermos and some sandwiches to work. Now businesses have pod machines for use by their staff, and of course people make use of it.

[@MrAsh1100]

@@DellaStreet123 I still do it with my tea. Boil some water, and just throw a tea bag in. Done as my tea for the day. The one thing I have to sort of control is probably the temperature inside the thermos where I can't literally pour boiling water in since in a thermos, it will sort of "cook" the tea leaves until the more bitter side of it comes out (usually lighter tea like green tea)

[@worawatli8952]

​@@segamble1679 They are mostly plastics, so they use less energy in production than well-built machine that are mostly metal. But in the long run, they wouldn't last over a decade and would need to be replaced, not to mentioned the way they constantly push for newer versions and phase out older versions or give you less coffee choice than new one. So people would morel likely to buy new machine every 4-5 years, which is wayy more frequent than traditional machine that would last a lifetime if well cared for.

[@gheistlich]

This video is a perfect example of why we need more James Hoffmanns in the world.

[@TheWhiteDragon3]

Well my first thought upon seeing that title was, "Alright, who funded the study?" Mr. Hoffmann, you're a much more patient man than I am for never bringing that up and instead focusing on the scientific method itself.

[@TheWhiteDragon3]

@@H_avox_ When it gets published by a journalist who doesn't understand the scientific method at all, and most people just read the headline and first paragraph, yeah honestly it does. You can butcher the method all you want like this study does as long as you get the desired outcome.

[@ybab-j]

@@H_avox_ just because it’s common doesn’t mean it’s not relevant.

[@CherylTheWaysideStitcher]

@@H_avox_ as a former doctoral student and grad assistant in nursing, I can promise you that it is vitally important to know who funds any study. There are certainly studies funded by people with a vested interest in the outcome, but many more are not.

[@PaulKGriffin]

Nestlé no doubt.

[@squidstar111]

This is the closest I've seen James to being angry and I'm here for it

[@romanburic6956]

On no no no, I think badly designed brewer made him far more angry

[@shuaichenwu9931]

Check out his Kopi Luwak video

[@griffhawkins8909]

​@@shuaichenwu9931 oh man the kopi luwak one is amazing. Both because it's a very serious subject that is of a very upsetting industry...but also because he made sure to save some anger for "The blockchain will fix everything" born agains. You can practically feel him reaching out through the screen to swat you on the forehead over it.

[@tjkabdn]

Watch the aldi espresso machine review

[@regiondeltas]

I just love that it was such raw honesty - no mincing his words

[@purpleguy3000]

The funniest part of that study is suggesting that a biodegradable material is somehow worse for landfill versus the only material that is currently not only cheaper but more efficient to recycle than produce.

[@NishithThakkar]

True for aluminum but false for plastic which is what the study is based on.

[@ihtfp69]

I think the article argued that it takes more coffee with traditional filtered brew which is why it is worse. It's not the filter itself. I'm curious, though, if they take into account the process of mining the metal and then manufacturing the pod itself.

[@ricochet4674]

@@ihtfp69 Yea that is a good point actually. Also their premise of "Aluminum doesn't release any emissions so its fine to just bury in the ground and forget" is fucking wild. Like that's still pollution? Just not air pollution.

[@ElectraFlarefire]

There is kind of an odd one. Plastics, burred in landfill are TECHNICALLY a form of carbon capture. Compared to leaving it in the ground or anything that is more carbon neutral(Like paper) is's STUPID.. But better than burning, from a carbon point of view. :)

[@skeetsmcgrew3282]

To be fair, biodegradable products are only good if we are planting more than 100% of the trees we are cutting down to make the paper. Which afaik is rarely the case, if ever. But I feel like opening a new aluminum mine because we exhaust the ones currently opened would be far worse than almost anything imaginable. Unless they fill that first mine with soil and plant a forest, I suppose

[@s10e]

really appreciate your time and effort in diving into the papers!

[@NewAgeRetroHippi3]

I love the sci hub shout out at the end. Such a tremendous resource to anyone without an affiliation to an academic institution who wants to read scientific articles!

[@spookyfm4879]

And anyone _with_ an affiliation to an academic institution which refuses to buy Elsevier's ridiculously over-priced package deals of journal subscriptions that have the hundred or so journals that people might want along with the tens of thousands that no-one will read. (Almost all German universities have suspended their Elsevier subscriptions. Now you have one guess where I get my papers these days...)

[@tahoforbreakfast]

I was an academic from a developing country and I used to get all my articles from sci-hub since my institution was too poor to afford subscription aside from jstor.

[@vespirited]

glad to see James endorsing sci-hub in the description. information shouldn't be privatized for profit.

[@KanielD]

RIP Aaron Swartz

[@TomaszStachewicz]

Thank you for the part about origins of "personal carbon footprint" at 0:48, this needs repeating.

[@felixokeefe]

I wonder did they calculate the energy cost of making an aluminum coffee pod? Producing aluminum uses massive amounts of energy.

[@xyzpdq1122]

That’s why aluminum is so important to recycle. Extracting the aluminum from the bauxite is terribly energy intensive, but recycling just involves melting. And unlike most things, aluminum can basically be infinitely recycled.

[@windowdoog]

They based it on K-Cups. Which are plastic.

[@Mike-rp1zt]

But recycling aluminum [AI] Also uses a lot of energy because its melting point is at 650-ich °C. If you compare it to other metals like iron or gold its quite low, but you to remember that you have to head your Ofen up to 650 minimum (if its even hotter than that its faster) it can not be more eco friendly than the hole process of producing paper bags.

[@JohnA...]

They were probably just counting clicks and the 0s going into their bank account from one of the pod producers. Obviously they didn't have a clue what they were talking about otherwise.

[@smgibb]

@@windowdoog K Cups often have an aluminum lid.

[@nikhilsai9613]

When the boss says: “Damn it son, make the numbers work!” It happens way more frequently than one can imagine!

[@MakooWallinen]

3:58 YES! That's what I noticed, not only did i drink LESS cups of coffee when I started going down the more nerdy route of speciality coffee, pour overs and grinders. But they felt more satisfactory and made me drink less at work too, if I had one proper cup at the start of the day. But it also made me more conscious of how t was brewed and I did with it. Now I am dirty Chemex sinner so I probably should use that much paper but....

[@ArandelaGriffe]

... NO BUT; hey Pal, your chemex is made of Glass and wood ! Any Nespresso machine is made of so much plastics n' Alloys that all the papers you'll use in your life will still be more ecologic, less toxic by far... 😏

[@spookyfm4879]

@@ArandelaGriffe But they take up so much less space in a landfill than all those filters!!! (Is probably their argument? idk)

[@kelpsie]

Love the BP "carbon footprint" disclaimer. I think that needs to be pointed out a lot more in discussions like this.

[@Sir99percent]

Yes, "carbon footprint" may have been coined by BP, but no, that doesn't mean that you don't have an impact as a consumer. You do, especially because choices like what we eat command what is being offered. Vote with your wallet, so to speak. If you buy meat and dairy, your're voting for that industry to keep breeding and killing animals in an unimaginable way (ie. quantity/brutality), which we know is terrible for the environment. Around 3/4 of the land mass we use for agriculture could be freed up, just by taking up a plant-based diet, which in turn can then be used for reforestation/rewilding/... Also, agriculture is the sector with the highest greenhouse gas emissions after our energy sector. So yeah, f* BP, but please stop lying to yourselves that we can't also have an impact, by making more sustainable choices AND putting pressure on our governments to commit to system changes. I personally believe that the latter also just won't happen without the conviction to do the first.

[@recurveninja]

@@Sir99percent I think it's important to consider the tangible impact "voting with your wallet" can have. We've seen time and time again that boycotts don't work, not really. Megacorporations can stay solvent for longer than your lifetime of activism would allow. History does tell us, however, that voting important executives in the head with your wallet when they leave the house in the morning, does in fact work and has worked for thousands of years.

[@martinrozanski9073]

100% agree on this but also we were just talking about coffe, electricity to brew and landfill "footprint" but they haven't even at all dived in to the energy and material consumption to make the pod itself (the aluminum shell and plastic cover) and also for the transport you can definitely carry more coffe per m³ packed in conventional bags than pods which take more space. And also the amount of waste you produce. For example if you buy pods they are usually packed in another box (even more material) but the coffee used in filter brewing usually comes just in one bigger bag (0.5-1kg). Oh and I haven't even touched the rare materials(and materials in general) and energy consumption that goes into making one of those pod machines and the planned obsolescence of the machine for you to then buy a new one after a few years (cause capitalsm).....

[@traviskitteh]

Fun fact, those pod machines also have VERY short use lives. Keurig machines, specifically, have a rated use life of about 2-3 years of daily brewing. Once they break, the replacement parts are almost impossible to source without scrapping old machines, and most of the parts aren't designed to be replaceable be the average user.

[@martinrozanski9073]

@@traviskitteh yeah that's exactly what I meant by planned obsolescence and thank you for evaluating the point with straight facts.

[@dixonstroi]

I am impressed at how deeply you've gone into the sources, or more accurately: the sources for the sources for the sources. For all the garbage on KZbin, I feel you and other creators I watch are underappreciated for regularly doing a great job presenting thorough research.

[@Emily-hd9sm]

It generates so much dopamine for me 🤩

[@Mike-rp1zt]

I have to say: i study chemistry and i don't go that deep in topics im interested in. If i read an article im more like: yup, sounds oke or - in this case- that sounds odd wouldn't trust the source and that's it

[@TamarLitvot]

James is great on that. Also Ann Reardon. I’d love to know who else you watch

[@dixonstroi]

@@TamarLitvot oh yeah! I haven't subscribed yet to Ann Reardon but I enjoy her DIY debunks. I enjoy a bunch when it comes to education/research/STEM oriented. Some of these vere towards entertainment, some towards debunk/polemic, and some are just straight ahead information, but all demonstrate a connection to solid sources if not explicitly citing, quoting AND summarizing source material. And all take time to go as deep as necessary to fully hash out an idea. A few I check out on a regular basis: Hank Green/SciShow, 3Blue1Brown, numberphile/computerphile/Periodic Videos, pbs eons/spacetime, Forrest Volkai, Stefan Milo, Coffeezilla, Ryan McBeth, Practical Engineering, miniminuteman, Legal Eagle, J. Kenji López-Alt, Real Engineering, Adam Something, Alpha Phoenix, Veritasium, Ze Frank, Tom Scott, Technology Connections, Alan Fisher/Armchair Unbanist, Caitlin Doughty/AskAMortician, Lawful Masses with Leonard French, Jay Foreman, MinutePhysics. I think The History Guy and Smarter Everyday give me the biggest wholesome, educational/curiosity buzz.

[@TamarLitvot]

@@dixonstroi we have some overlap: Forrest Volkai (did you see his video on how gender is not a simple binary? So damn good!), Legal Eagle and I love love love Kenji. Have you watched asapSCIENCE - I heartily recommend them. And some videos from Mark Rober - his squirrel obstacle course videos are truly amazing. And hilarious.

[@mamacoffeecat5542]

Love that James fronted the video by stating the fact that no matter what we do personally, the system needs to change for things to get better.

[@combatwombats]

Thank you for hammering it in early in the video that yes, everyone needs to do better, but that it's mostly companies and factories that hurt the planet the most. Change is absolutely needed at higher levels, asap. And thank you for the thoughtful, easy to understand explanation of the issue!

[@aanmaaklimonade]

The vast majority of capsules end up in landfill, all of my ground coffee is composted with paper filter or straight out of portafilter. Also, I tend to use my espresso machine when the sun is providing the 1200 W from solar panels these days, so that’s a plus 👍🏼 . I think you are right in saying that there are way to much variables to make hard claims on this subject matter. And a thumbs up for sharing the BP story on carbon footprint!

[@d00dEEE]

I'm in the same boat, just across the deck from you. I compost my grounds in my garden. I re-use my Aeropress filters for a week(!), then they too go into the garden. My 1500 W electric kettle heats my water in ~2 minutes, and the big solar array on the roof keeps us about net-zero over the course of the year. My cleaning water use is probably less than the coffee, as I simply give a short rinse of the brewer components before drying them. As far as I can figure, my only landfill-bound waste is the bag and box in which the 5-lbs of beans are delivered every month or two.

[@Joseph-C]

Yes, James, I did read that article! My first thought when I read it was "Huh, well I'm pretty sure my single origin coffee, which is traceable all the way back to the person who owns the coffee farm it came from, is doing a HELL OF A LOT LESS harm to people and the environment than the commodity grade, untraceable coffee that most of these other coffee products are made from..."

[@RobertSmith-up9rz]

... and that's why your first thought was right.

[@ForgivingCross]

There is something interesting here. It feels to me (and I don't have any data on hand to back this up) that the most "efficient" agricultural production doesn't equate to the most sustainable farming practices in terms of the environment (sustainable agriculture is a huge umbrella of things) or in terms of the human cost. There's an element of "which do we value more" here, carbon cost or environmental cost or human cost because they aren't all the same thing.

[@Webfra14]

But many coffee farms use child labor. Children are lighter than adults and therefore waste less energy on moving their bodies around. Voila, green coffee! - Thanks child labor!

[@finestPlugins]

@@ForgivingCross It is. Cost is socialized, profits privatized. The former is reduced the more sustainable the production is.

[@amunak_]

@@ForgivingCross Absolutely; this is also an interesting paradox from, say, the POV of various bio-farms. It's much more ecological to farm animals in a tiny farms fed on crap feed than to have grass-fed animals with plenty of space; but then the animals suffer. With crops it's similar but not so clear cut (as huge fields contribute to negative factors like erosion and ecosystem damage), but still you extract (and thus feed) much more people with a huge homogenous field thanks to the larger yields than when you farm more "eco-friendly". Or to look at it from the other side you have larger yields so you need less of the farmland (that can be then used for other purposes), use less energy, etc.

[@ncc74656m]

Just like you James, I'm kind of astonished at the actual numbers of things like instant coffee and some pod machines. The one catch for me with pod machines is... Nestle. It's a ghoulish company and I despise giving them money when they're making up for the slight efficiency differences with such outright evil.

[@CorySchoolland]

They probably funded the research for the headlines.

[@eljefeamericano4308]

Yeah, I'm not about to give that company any extra money if I can help it.

[@Lecari]

There's plenty of alternatives to Nestlé - many companies produce their own compatible pod machines now, independently, and there are lots of options for compostable pods too. It's definitely getting better.

[@AramisWyler]

Giving the money I stead to the fossil industry for the extra power is also yuk.

[@letsgocamping88]

Starting to smell like the paper was sponsored

[@homeloanhealthcheck]

Always nice to see other human beings that think first and act accordingly instead of taking things for granted. Love your content, love your approach to coffee. Keep at it and thank you!

[@workaholica]

Thank you for redeeming my guilty pleasure of instant coffee. I use it when I have a kettle on, but suddenly decide that a cup of tea might be too long of a wait.

[@VincentGroenewold]

@0:50 Thank you! Besides that, my biggest red flag was where this was published and the fact it was catchy picked up by all media, who (almost as a rule) never look further than the title. Meta analysis I also always have some issue with (when I worked in science), it totally depends on the quality of whatever was used, it gets messy fast... but hey... it produces a paper. What I do find interesting is the compost argument, if aluminum stays insert and produces less emissions from the coffee inside, than I could definitely see where that idea comes from. Waste is always not great, but our biggest problem is gas.

[@mdkc3404]

The analysis of the paper itself and the way you have broken it down has been a more useful example to me of critical analysis/reading than anything I was ever taught at university :')

[@TamarLitvot]

As a researcher, I was taught these skills, some in undergrad but mainly in grad school. But I agree that in the US at least, this kind of analytic thinking is not taught to most students.

[@eclogite]

@@TamarLitvot Definitely an institutionally undervalued skill. I myself was lucky to have several teachers in high school that really emphasized this, and it's come in handy

[@ek-nz]

This.

[@peterclarke7240]

The tragedy is that, in the UK, and at least when I was in school in the 90s, we're taught this sort of thing in humanities subjects like history, where you're taught to critique your sources, far more than it was taught in science. Sadly, I suspect that's why certain people in society believe that liberal arts academia is a hotbed of lefty-liberal thinking, when really it's a hotbed of people who know how to dissect an argument.

[@jirizalsky9937]

I heard and read in completely unrelated affairs that hiring someone to come up with a (scientific) research that will make your products look good is quite a cool way of making money. I also heard and read that making people feel bad through guilt and shame for what they do or love to do is a great way for certain individuals to feel better about themselves. I reckon that these two observations would explain this pod affair quite well. Also, thank you James for the kind stance on personal footprint (y)

[@galat1a]

Thank you James for this video. Very interesting. I wanted to add that there are a also plastic pods(cheaper version of the nespresso) which are even worse for the environment because they cannot be recycled. Plus my used coffee, I use it for fertilizer… So, less waste. People think that recycling is the answer to the waste. No its not because the recycling factory needs energy to run. Best option is not having waste and then recycle. In my country, NO pod is recycled. It needs special factories to do so…

[@colbyvasquez29]

I used to work for Devocion coffee in Brooklyn. They airfreight all of their coffee from Columbia to the US. “Origin to Cup in 10 days or less” is the driving idea behind the brand.

[@beefcakesensei]

There's something very satisfying when James says the word, "weird."

[@xyzpdq1122]

It’s the extra syllable

[@GrantMcWilliams]

I just immediately translate it to "bullshit". He doesn't say it but I think that's what he means.

[@thecatofnineswords]

Oh gods, there's so much fabulous material for Hames. I swear James is just feeding him these lines now.

[@shashank0404]

Can’t wait for the new Hames Joffman video!

[@LacayoDe]

Hames is cooking this video faster than Dominos Pizaa

[@cthambrecht]

Hames is probably contributing to the script.

[@alejandracartwright8923]

“No one really agrees on anything” is a shoo-in for me

[@stirfryjedi]

You never know, some folks at Nestle might end up with the Hames version and glow in the endorsement.

[@campbelltron]

fun article idea: why is science communication in mainstream media so consistently terrible?

[@AdamBuckley1964]

Because MSM has already decided the 'conclusion' long before the science turns up.....

[@jarzz3601]

cause they only care about interesting headlines and companies use this knowledge to commission studies that they hope will give an interesting headline the truthfulness of the study is optional

[@pjhenry1216]

I don't think it's a mystery. They just peddle science studies in the most controversial way possible without outright lying. I've seen articles that have drawn the opposite conclusion than the study itself drew. It's all about clicks these days which is disappointing. That's why I tend to just follow niche news for subjects I enjoy because they don't need to dress it up to get viewers. They already know their viewers will like it as is. Mainstream news is only useful in my opinion to find out about large events and then it's up to the individual to actually figure out how it affects them because whatever editorializing the media does is going to have a spin and it's not always obvious what that spin is (and it's not even just left vs right).

[@NishithThakkar]

There's a fantastic Sabine Hossenfelder video on that topic.

[@campbelltron]

@@NishithThakkar thank you!

[@sammylauc7]

Very impressive and also kind of sad that James is a better scientific communicator than a lot of health professionals

[@Pasta221]

"health professionals" but rather "corporation marketing communicators" :( this stuff is not new but is everywhere all the time. It is a bit like the promotion of electric cars and self driving cars. Yay they are so great. But they are not, they solve nothing. What we need is public transport and not more cars on the road. I guess electric cars are fine but its still promoting cars which takes up space, pollute(if not driving then the production of them, also they are not fun if they get caught on fire! Takes half an ocean to put out..) and is usually at least 1-2 cars per family. That is quite wastefull too! But corporations will keep giving cherry picked data etc just to promote thier products and make a profit. We will never solve anything like climate change as long as we have capitalism. No profit? Dont matter that you stare down the barrel of a gun. They will keep grinding away anyway. :/

[@priapulida]

@@Pasta221 eco-fascist

[@Brent-jj6qi]

@@priapulida more like eco communist but that's kinda just nitpicking

[@priapulida]

@Singlespeedpunk they are communist in theory, fascist in praxis, as has been done before

[@Brent-jj6qi]

@Singlespeedpunk I mean, one wants a brutal dictatorship to commit genocide, and the other wants a brutal dictatorship to commit genocide, but promises some fancy utopia after the whole genocide part, so yeah, nitpicking

[@Lady-Lilith]

Thank you so much for mentioning the pressure put on consumers when massive companies are the ones getting away with killing the planet.

[@Campfire_Bandit]

The fact that there are research organizations that will take contracts and not do their due diligence in the results of that research is a huge problem across the entire science community. It erodes trust in that research and ultimate our trust that any data is reliable enough to change our behavior's for. This KZbin channel from my humble perspective takes that oath of integrity seriously when doing research and making claims, and I cannot overstate how valuable it is that you are spending the time and energy to build that trust.

[@woofowl2408]

I can't see where Luciano Viana has even published his data in a peer reviewed journal. Looks like he has simply published it online on "The Conversation" and his bio states that he is a "doctoral student" in environmental sciences ie. he is still working towards getting his PhD

[@thomassemrov9403]

Campfire Bandit is right, it's these kind of flawed studies that drive skepticism about climate change, it sounds as if this study was some kind of clickbait to build support for the cause, not an actual serious effort, big fail.

[@MrGmaloq]

A huge part of the problem is also journalist sharing this type of data without having a proper dive into the article, clearly this article was not published in a proper journal and is very incomplete, yet news forward it as "information"

[@Loasion]

The article in question wasn't peer reviewed. It may as well have been made by British Petroleum.

[@AFlockOfToasters]

@@woofowl2408 I really hope, the academic body that evaluates his eligibility for a PhD sees this publication.

[@Grumpist1]

James quietly seething with barely repressed rage: "And another thing that confused me..."

[@jessbee]

Always a good morning when it starts with a James Hoffmann video.

[@Mike-rp1zt]

It's 5 pm

[@jessbee]

@@Mike-rp1zt not everywhere in the world. It was 9 am here in my part of the US when I posted that.

[@Koyangi]

@@jessbee There's only one time zone, Jess, everyone knows that! 😄

[@stirfryjedi]

​@@Mike-rp1zt perfect time for a v60

[@Mike-rp1zt]

@@Koyangi exactly

[@Maffoo]

I was the primary software developer on one of the most famous greenwashing projects by one of the biggest oil producers. I see it get referenced on Twitter and Reddit all the time. It was great fun to see the absolute shitstorm from within, and utterly terrifying how easily the client just brushed off all the negativity and media furore. And it's funny because I had no idea who the client would be when I signed the contract, and I'm a proper crusty composting hippy. I've just always felt guilty and feel I need to share it somewhere lol. Oh and something about coffee..? I drank a lot of coffee making it?

[@oscarcacnio8418]

Oh geez... One heck of a thing hidden inside the KZbin comments section.

[@violetviolet888]

Maffoo: You're not sharing it at all, by not naming names.

[@DornaSoph]

As a scientist, I enjoyed watching this video. This is the right way of reading anything that's published out there. Always look at the data and what the paper/article is sourcing with a critical eye and try to understand it yourself instead of just accepting what the article is trying to tell you.

[@EuroBedouin]

We need more of James Hoffmann in the world.

[@Thermalions]

It's on The Conversation, which you rightly call a blog. I always view their articles with a critical eye. A not insignificant number seem to be opinion pieces used by academics to push their own agenda, or as output puff pieces to contribute to boosting their visibility and their University's rankings, in between applying for funding and trying to get actual peer reviewed research reputably published.

[@thecoffeeloop5688]

I love how James is visibly bothered by this article 😂

[@stribb]

I think this is the most rattled I've seen him

[@MetalheadAndNerd]

Imagine his reaction if the outcome of the article was that instant coffee is the only acceptable way to drink coffee environment friendly

[@xyzpdq1122]

I’d say that quality instant is better than basically every k-cup. Nespresso pods and Mars pouches tend to taste better because they use hotter water with more contact time. But I don’t think I’ve ever had a k-cup that I didn’t want to load with creamer.

[@MetalheadAndNerd]

@@xyzpdq1122 I don't know K-Cups. But for my Senseo pad machine the difference between the first cup from a cold machine and the next cup is huge.

[@thecoffeeloop5688]

@@ME-mf7xp 🤣

[@pierre-mariebernard7075]

Journalism in mainstream media has become so ridiculous that KZbinrs are now doing the job. Thank you so much for this, including the opening note on BP.

[@mitchellelder5540]

Thank you for wading through all of this data and filtering it for us. Definitely my favorite channel on KZbin. 👍🏼

[@nick_5488]

From Québec - aluminum production is relatively important here. I wonder if the research was indirectly funded by the aluminum industry. Obviously, I’m merely speculating, but it’s not unheard of that industries fund research projects with the intention that the results align with their interests. Food for thought. Also, bravo for that PSA. Well said. Love your content James. Keep it up!

[@sallys2423]

Excellent point.

[@skeetsmcgrew3282]

Or just the coffee pod people. They aren't exactly small companies

[@nick_5488]

Or alu and coffee pod industries working together

[@dkedavid]

This was my initial thought - the article conveniently overlooked that aluminium production is an extremely energy-costly process!

[@RobGemmell82]

All the researchers are staffed at Université du Québec à Chicoutimi in Saguenay, aka Aluminium Valley.

[@jellybelly4600]

The 6grams demonstration was so funny 😂

[@wilfriedreichardt6364]

Firstly, I'm a researcher myself and utterly enjoyed JH picking apart this publication....:-) Secondly, this video also highlights the benefits of using a manual espresso maker (Cafelat Robot, Flair, etc.) possibly together with a (good) handmill with regard to energy consumption! And, the espresso/flatwhite/cafe crema is still fantastic!

[@Conservator.]

In winter, the ‘extra’ energy used by a traditional espresso machine, is used to warm up your kitchen. Unless you have a much more efficient heatpump, this wouldn’t use extra energy. In summer the extra heat could cause your airconditioner to use more energy to cool everything down again, so that would be very bad. There are good espressomachines that use a thermoblock instead of a boiler.

[@philipsegal8475]

Valid point except when using a manual espresso machine you have to heat water and heat the brew chamber several times before pulling the shot. My preference would be to use a regular machine powered by solar panels or a watermill. Thanks for the inspiration.

[@wilfriedreichardt6364]

@@philipsegal8475 sure, but Im not sure why I should not be able to use my solar panels to heat up the electric Waterkettle...:-) The robot requires only one preheat anyways....

[@AdamHill42]

@@philipsegal8475 are you familiar with steam preheating? For my Flair, I put the brew head on top of the kettle. The steam heats it in the 5 minutes it takes the water to boil, though I do hit "boil" 2 more times to get ~15 seconds of full steam. Overall much less energy than a big machine, though more than pod makers.

[@TamarLitvot]

My aeropress, which I bought about 10 years ago (but only really started using after James’ 5 part series), needs only minimal hot water. I reuse the tiny paper filter 3-4 times so even though the aeropress is plastic, overall there’s very little waste. And I love the coffee!

[@bluesinmontreal]

As always.. impressed by the nuance you bring to your analysis. Thank you. How about a video of you and the author(s) of that article to really get tothe bottom of this? Living in Montreal, and knowing Quebecers, I'm sure they would love to dive deeper with you on those questions. (Also, given all the authors are all pretty high profile academics from the UQAC, maybe they'd care enough to explain more).

[@DoctorEyeHealth]

This is just wonderful. It inspires me to talk about contact lens waste and recycling.

[@Helixcards]

when James started spooning out the instant coffee, the tiktok sound of "thats enough slices" started playing in my head

[@error.418]

Time to get off tiktok and hydrate, my friend

[@ColtonMakesStuff]

Really great video, I love when people break down skewed statistics and I really appreciate you taking the time to do that here! It is mind-boggling to me that so many things weren’t taken into account in this study. And the fact that even if everything was correct in their numbers, it’s incredible for them to suggest that burying Aluminum was a better solution then using compostable materials.

[@in9463]

I'm glad you're making videos about these things, James. Thank you for taking responsibility and shedding light on these science/research-clad articles and actually applying critical thought + broadcasting your findings to a large audience.

[@CherylTheWaysideStitcher]

We compost our coffee, filters, loose tea, and tea bags; along with our other plant waste. It’s great for the garden!

[@joniparras]

The content and production level of this channel is just in another level

[@Rijnswaand]

2:26 Hello from Germany here. So when I do a pour-over I use your ratio of 15g coffee to 250ml of water. But I've had very traditional and conservative Germans comment my coffee as "strong". So the traditional ratio for filter coffee here in Germany contains much more water (or less coffee if you want) than what you're proposing which is way less than what was used in the study you're quoting.

[@Markus__B]

Ein Löffel pro Tasse und einen für die Kanne ;)

[@Webfra14]

Ich darf bei uns im Büro keinen Kaffee mehr machen. Alles Weicheier...

[@SusanIvanova2257]

TBF the average coffee in Germany is weak and often horribly acidic. For the amount of coffee we consume overall as a nation a lot of it really isn't great.

[@error.418]

Coffee is personal, so people use different ratios. Specialty coffee lovers will often brew "stronger" coffee. "Strong" is a problematic word, but I assume you just mean the coffee to water ratio being high or low. It's encouraged to play with the recipe to find what you like. And try new things, you don't have to figure out a recipe and stick to it. Enjoy!

[@skeetsmcgrew3282]

I drink 21 grams to 400 grams of water. 25 grams to 250 grams is stupidly strong, that's friggin sludge. Maybe they were saying how much water comes out at the end being 250 grams? Because at 25 grams you'd lose about 50 grams of water to absorption.

[@eccentricbeliever7]

Thanks for the disclaimer re: the term 'carbon footprint'. So many ppl do not understand this.

[@GregoryRobertsLx]

James, just a reminder for the landfill issue on which you said the paper was based; K-Cups are plastic. I would think that would be even less environmentally friendly for land fill over paper or recycled aluminum.

[@Kalimerakis]

being plastic, it might well be less energy intensive to produce than paper

[@VPCh.]

The amount of money that goes into greenwashing things in massive. I had an internship at a lab where each day the entire team would spend an hour just pushing the products as green on websites before actually starting the lab work.

[@Seelingfahne]

Thanks for taking the time and effort to dispel corporate marketing misinformation. Cheers ☕️

[@luciocardoso6306]

It's always a happy day when there's a new James Hoffmann video!

[@MCKoolperson9]

There's a fantastic short book called how to lie with statistics. The premise is that you can say pretty much anything you want with any data, and it's important to be critical of any data that's been processed. It's hilarious, and can often be picked up for around $2 to $3 at used book stores

[@markoliver6251]

“There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics.” Mark Twain

[@danielridzon]

I think that with the instant coffee you also save energy on the transport. (presuming, that the instant coffee extraction happens at the start of the travel of the coffee) -> as the instant coffee is highly concentrated (compared to standard beans) you dont have to ship a lot of unused weight. (You drink 100% of the instant coffee, but coffee beans contains a lot of unsoluable solids, which goes to waste after extraction with your V60)

[@twotgfltandahalf]

The brands of instant I have access to still ship the beans to their "local" facilities to produce the instant. From there, however, it is very efficient to transport. Taking into account that those brands' instant tastes like dirt, people also drink very little of it. So I guess that makes it even better for the environment?

[@wenderis]

In some cases, yeah sure. Take for example Indonesia and The Philippines. Philippines is the highest importer of coffee solubles in the world, by some distance. The leading brand of instant coffee in PH is Kopiko, an Indonesian company. For this case, probably the biggest case of instant coffee supply-demand relationship, yes it save lots of energy on transport. But then again, PH is a coffee producing country, perhaps just produce and consume your own coffee?

[@michaelarighi5268]

@@wenderis When I visited Guatemala in 1967, the family I stayed with drank a sort of concentrated cold-brew, made by hanging a bag of ground local coffee under a slightly dripping tap overnight. This produced a thick extract, looking a bit like soy sauce (in fact, I wondered why there was a cruet of soy sauce on the table the first time I saw it). This was then diluted to a drinking strength with boiling water. VERY good. Somewhat low-acid, as one would expect from a cold brew, but excellent flavor. When I returned to live there for a time in 1975, the same family had switched to Nescafé (boy, what a come-down!). The wife still had a stall at the airport which sold "typical" products, including local coffee beans, but they'd gone over to Nescafé. I didn't ask why, though I did have coffee elsewhere fairly often.

[@sarahsovereign4522]

also, thank you so much, Academic Hoffman, for linking your reference and giving us the scihub option, too!

[@somethingbob1210]

James, some of us absolutely are having 6g of instant coffee in the one cup (if not more!). Using some rough estimation based on how much coffee I go through and drinking habits, I average a bit over that a cup.

[@23wjam]

When I heard this, my first thought was "I need to see the data as this paper sounds flawed." My second thought was "Assuming it is valid, I'm sure going into the back garden and adding mud to your cup and adding water has a lower carbon footprint than filtered coffee too, but I'm not going to do that."

[@ThisGM]

Now I have those horrible ads for "Mud" water stuck in my head. I'd only just managed to forget the sound of a smug tech valley hipster saying "people would come up to me and say what the **** is in your mug?"

[@thehousecat93]

@@ThisGM mudwtr is strangely delicious in its own way and I like how it makes me feel but oh god the public face of the company itself is possibly the worst combination of tech bro and crunchy granola possible. Under that first layer, it gets a little better with all of their work with therapeutic psychedelics but, man, that first impression is hard to get past.

[@CBarker151]

I read the main article when it first came out but questioned the actual science in it so much I never botherd to read the linked papers. It felt very intentionally biased and I did look to see if I could find who sponsored the paper in the first place! The science was really rigged to the outcome. Lets vary the quantity of coffee, the volume of water, the brew method etc to get the outcome we want. Perhaps being a little harsh. As always love the content.

[@MaksimKalenik]

Thank you a lot for bringing this up! I believe this article is just sponsored by capsule-based coffee manufacturers and can be recignised as greenwashing.

[@fredrichardson9761]

Really nice review of that article. Great job going through the analysis in detail! I think another cost in the case of nespresso is that the pods are aluminum. The energy cost and carbon foot print of melting the aluminum and casting the little pods is not zero. I would think that paper filter manufacturing would in general have a smaller foot print per filter compared to the foot print for each pod.

[@FuzzFace]

Brilliant work. Nespresso is owned by the larger Swiss food conglomerate I can’t recall the name of. Their most recent hustle has been to push eco-friendly pods with a smiling George clooney who has a majority stake in the Nespresso corporation. If you dig deep enough you’ll find out who funded the Quebec paper. Composting coffee is a no brainer. I do it with every puck.

[@maxheadroom5532]

What I'd be really interested in is a review of the Didiesse pod coffee machines. As far as I understand it, they are incredibly popular in Italy and make pretty decent coffee, and most importantly they have the huge benefit of using paper-based pods.

[@uffa00001]

They are paper-based pods but in order to preserve the aroma the good quality ones are individually packaged in aluminium foil or some sort of foil. Buying beans remains the most ecological solution.

[@sorenfuhrer401]

0:50 - 1:17 stating facts and nothing but facts. Mr, Hoffmann, Sir, we love you!

[@Fitz557]

I saw this article and I saw many flaws when I read it, it was a bit frustrating. I thought it would be a great subject for a video here (and it is :) ) It could also make a really good interview of the authors ; maybe they could explain their choices :)

[@Webfra14]

That would be a great idea! But I'm not holding my breath that they really want to talk to someone who knows a thing or two about coffee...

[@Fitz557]

@@Webfra14 oh I think that they would be interested. They most likely spent months on that paper, so I guess they are interested in coffee :)

[@livemadseason]

That's part of new science we are facing in many areas. Get an outcome, and make data that will support it. When someone told me that those aluminium pods are more green than my paper filter coffee, I had no strength to elaborate on it like you did, I just said "What the .... .... ... .... ? Are you mad?" 😀

[@Sam-do4oj]

Very important! It's incredible how easy it is to write a poorly sourced "article" and get loads of media to pick it up just because its controversial/unintuitive. Stuff like this really goes a long way to obscure the actual topic and make common people give up and fall into a sort of nothing-matters-anyway-mentality, which is exactly what it's designed to do.

[@Grandier]

the fact that the research did not consult to James is a clear red flag in the first place. Hames on the other hand is SALIVATING to rip this research a new one 🤣

[@KellyS_77]

I can see it now, a several minute loop of spooning instant into the cup lol.

[@RyanReynolds1]

"two or maybe three of these, to get a normal amount of caffeine which might be why I'm drinking pod coffee in the first place." I'm dying 😂, I love this shade

[@slovitzmusic8201]

OMG, this is all about this global, social shame and guilt! Now you can't even make yourself a cup of coffee in the morning without thinking "maybe I'm doing something wrong". Such a BS!

[@ArandelaGriffe]

First, Thank you James for sharing this. ***reading the publication in sci-hub*** Second, big mistake for those people who pretend to know how to make an Nespresso and James too : You don't know how to make a Nespresso (idem for the coffee ball). Making a Nespresso need 30minutes of warmup or flushing 2 Large Cups (2 Lungo ~6 expresso cup) of water, the you can make a good Nespresso shot and wait 30min for standby to active Power saving energy (it's written in my Delonghi user manual, any tea addict will tell you so and you also do it before going in your bath tube...). Consider those and these to the Nepresso use and the Energy cost will sky rocketed (x7) and won't be so fast to use, not 2min but a good 7min. ***reading another similar publication in sci-hub : Carbon footprint of different methods of coffee preparation*** ...The Nespresso testing is pretty wrong : Do 5 Nespresso cup in 100min then divide the total by 5 (this hide the warm- up cost of energy, the 30min before the machine go into saving energy mode and who will drink 5 cups in 100min). Also anybody can do a Energy cost estimation : Install a multi-meter with watt-meter abilities on a multisocket, grind your coffee, make your Expresso (Gaggia ^^) look at the result; Do the same with the "good" Nespresso warm-up method then compare...

[@jeffandersen6233]

Very thought provoking analysis. One reason I've been using an Aeropress with it's little paper filters and a small amount of water to heat. ( I rewatched your review of electric kettles recently looking for a new ergonomic and intuitive kettle- another gem review) As much as I used to love my morning espresso at home I found the warm up time and waste was getting too much besides losing so much counter space. Thank you for your passion and thoroughness.

[@PrzezObiektyw]

It worries me, that right now „personal carbon footprint” is being talked about so much. (In Poland) 2 banks, already started monitoring online shopping/card payments, in regards to gather data of what and how much of it we buy - then we have rumors of „limits” in purchasing goods, according to „personal carbon footrpint”. Does not make me feel good at all

[@slovitzmusic8201]

Dzień dobry z Mazur!

[@pithyginger6371]

I understand this isn’t really the main focus of the channel, but I’d love to learn more about how to process coffee waste in a more sustainable and environmentally friendly manner.

[@esidarapmot]

Compost! We don’t have means to actually compost at our he but our city has a program that will collect compost for you and use it toward their garden or other city gardens

[@xyzpdq1122]

I put it in my garden, especially on the plants that like higher acid soil. I also know that all of the solid waste I put down the drain eventually gets composted by the city and used in public projects, so in the winter it ends up in the sink.

[@zettai--zetsumei]

@@xyzpdq1122 Same. My peppers and gardenias seem to love it.

[@jiahaotan696]

- The instant coffee weight demonstration could have been improved by a shot down the cup to see how much 6g looks like. - If someone felt like doing some sleuthing, I'm sure the scientists are getting funded by some big company with vested interest in publishing such an article... - Obviously, all coffee generates a larger carbon footprint than tea, so drink tea instead. (lol... It's true though)

[@DepressedHandsomeSpaceCop]

Almost certainly the case. A lot of primary research is industry -funded these days.

[@KellyS_77]

Hmm....I have instant coffee, and I have kitchen scale (scurries to kitchen). A teaspoon of instant coffee (what I would normally use for about a 12 ounce cup) is about 3 grams. 6 grams of instant would be a very large cup of coffee.

[@ex-nerd]

Mount Hagen instant recommends 1-2tsp per cup. I translate that to "a heaping teaspoon" in my 12-13oz mug, which for me seems to average around 4.5g. 6g is certainly high but still within the realm the high end of 2tsp recommended.

[@recelehberger1603]

We need hank green to fact check this video. James Hoffman Hank Green Collab is the thing I need that I didn't know I needed!

[@JackOfAllTrades026]

Life cycle assessment certainly is a complex field! It was very interesting to hear your thoughts about this study. Have you tried contacting the authors (of the meta-analysis) about your concerns? I'm sure they'd be happy to comment --- if you look at the comments section of the article you shared, the main author personnally addressed many questions on the paper methods and findings.

[@mauri_TV]

"Coffee pod carbon footprint better for planet than filtered brew" an article brought to you by George Clooney

[@error.418]

*Nestlé

[@julian7]

I'm missing a lab coat on James for this one. By the way, the electric filter brewers also use the same heating method, boiling only a small amount of water at once. It would be interesting to see something like that disguised as a gooseneck kettle.

[@rarra]

It would have to be corded and that will make it uncomfortable to use unfortunately. But I love the idea

[@nommh]

Thanks for this. I use a french press. Sadly this makes the grounds so wet, that I do not like them in my little compost bucket and rinse them down the drain. I used to buy my coffee in bulk, but at christmas I was gifted a coffee that tasted so much nicer. It is organic and roasted in my home town, but about 45 minutes away by bike. I will make that trip as soon as the weather is more clement and buy that coffee in bulk again. I grind it by hand (to get a tiny bit of cardio in and and to save counter space). The water is heated on an induction hob. I always heat a little more than I need because my plants like their water boiled and cooled down. If you put an aluminium pod in landfill everyday, your impact should include the environmental havoc wreaked by producing one for the next day.

[@unbekannter_Nutzer]

Much thanks for that insightful, critical lecture of this article. About small and big farms: If you have a small farm, you probably have small trucks but many of them, and they produce more co2 per kg coffee, than large farms with large trucks (but fewer trucks per kg coffee of course). It has been calculated to compare locale fruits with far traveling bananas and the like, and the result was, that the shipping oversea in big containers adds nearly nothing to co2-footprint of each banana, because it is distributed over millions of bananas. But a small farmer driving 50km with a small truck for one ton of apples, for instance, this adds proportional a bigger amount of Co2 to the sum. In general, the first and last ways - from the farmer to the distributor and from the shop to the home of the consumer have the biggest impact. From distributor/wholesale to the other and distributor to supermarket/shop not so much. About consumer machines warm up time: I just measured my low quality espresso machine (tank, no integrated grinder), but I had been using it about 30 or 60 minutes before, so it hadn't completely cooled down. It took 45s to give me "ready to start" light and another 15s to finish brewing, where I could turn it off. I guess it might be 15 more seconds for the first espresso in the morning in winter time. Thereby - of course: Grinding the coffee myself is of course much less efficient, than grinding thousands of tons of coffee in industrial scale machines.

[@bakakafka4428]

Here, finally, they accept you put the pods in the bag with recyclable plastic and metal stuff. Just happened recently that they managed to change their machines so they can properly recycle them. Unfortunately, pads are no longer accepted in the organic waste bin, since some manufacturers decided it was a good idea to add plastic to the paper filters...

[@Webfra14]

I hope they actually do the recycling, seeing how much (or rather: little) they do with plastics...

[@stevegee218]

I wonder if they included the CO2 to Oxygen conversion during the growth cycle of the coffee.

[@sallys2423]

Right? They are shrubs/trees after all.

[@ChrisSheridan295]

Well said James. Question: is there much different in environmental impact between Washed vs Natural Coffees? As in do washed coffees require more water and resources? Might be a silly question but I'd like to know

[@xyzpdq1122]

Hmmm, but don’t natural coffees eventually get washed after fermenting? Otherwise your coffee would be very…sticky. I do know that some smaller coffee production facilities use the runoff for irrigation or other crops.

[@avrok]

I do actually use 6+ grams of instant coffee at work sometimes. it'll be more like 3-4 heaped table spoons really with just a half and half cup of just boiled water and milk

[@jeanne-marie8196]

Yay! A fellow nerd. I read studies cited in news articles because conclusions drawn are not always as concrete as stated! Another issue that you showed; who was presenting the information, and what their motivation might be. It was eye-opening for me to research and find the recycling triangle on plastics was corrupted by, surprise!, the plastics industry. Instead of it being a way for consumers to know which plastics actually could be recycled and reused, to industries just adding a triangle to every plastic to make consumers feel they were helping plastics to be reused. Most plastics with the triangle are not only not recycled, they can not be reused! The actual recyclable plastics, can only be reused once. It's enough to make one feel, large companies are only out for profits🤔