Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

A chemist explains the chemistry behind decaf coffee

theconversation.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 180 posts

Re: A chemist explains the chemistry behind decaf coffee

#11

Post by crazygringo »

wnolens wrote: post #6

Will an entrepreneur please make high quality (great tasting) decaf coffee ubiquitous? There's a growing anti-drug sentiment that should be a great tailwind. It's hard for me to find as good tasting a bean as it is with non-decaf. I've tried subscription services or pay huge shipping and product premium from some boutique retailer, the beans are always just ok. Decaf still doesn't get enough priority as the product i…

I'm not sure what your standards are, but I'm not sure if this is even possible.

I drink Stumptown which I grind at home for my espresso machine -- their caffeinated Hair Bender blend in the morning, and then in the afternoon I'll often have their decaf Trapper Creek (Swiss water process) on the days I don't need an extra jolt.

It tastes perfectly great to me. Maybe my palette isn't refined enough.

But decaffeination is always going to alter/remove flavor somewhat. So if you've tried high-quality versions like Stumptown and find them lacking, I'm not sure it's even chemically possible.

(Also I'm not super clear -- have you found high-quality decaf and you just wish it were more common? What brand(s) are high-quality? Or you haven't found it, and you're complaining that they're all "just ok"?)

Re: A chemist explains the chemistry behind decaf coffee

#12

Post by philipkglass »

johntb86 wrote: post #7
martinpw wrote: post #4

The decaf process seems expensive so you might expect the end result to cost more, but it never does. Which means either the producers are making less profit on decaf, or they are using lower quality beans. If the latter is true, which seems more likely, that might explain why decaf sometimes tastes less good, separately from the effect of the process itself on taste.

Maybe the extracted caffeine has some market value that can make up for some of the cost of extracting it.

Dry Arabica beans are about 1.5% caffeine by weight. Synthetic caffeine costs maybe $40 per kilogram, wholesale. A kilogram of beans could have perhaps $0.60 worth of caffeine extracted from it, unless there's a price premium for "all natural" caffeine extracted from beans.

Re: A chemist explains the chemistry behind decaf coffee

#13

Post by et-al »

wnolens wrote: post #6

Will an entrepreneur please make high quality (great tasting) decaf coffee ubiquitous? There's a growing anti-drug sentiment that should be a great tailwind. It's hard for me to find as good tasting a bean as it is with non-decaf. I've tried subscription services or pay huge shipping and product premium from some boutique retailer, the beans are always just ok. Decaf still doesn't get enough priority as the product i…

There was a recent lifestyle article about decaf coffee. Have you tried any of the roasters listed here?

https://sfstandard.com/2024/07/15/decaf-coffee-is-finally-wi...

Re: A chemist explains the chemistry behind decaf coffee

#15

Post by BostonEnginerd »

hooverd wrote: post #2

SWP is trendy and "chemical-free" but in my experience every decaf made with it is lacking something. C02 is neutral. EA is probably the best for fruity coffees.

I agree. SWP coffee usually has a very flat profile to my taste. EA is far and away the better processing method.

Re: A chemist explains the chemistry behind decaf coffee

#16

Post by AnotherGoodName »

I'd like to talk a bit more about the cheapest and most common process here. They state that ethyl acetate is below the FDA limits and therefore safe. For a start ethyl acetate is still pretty bad but it's not the cheapest.

Another common solvent not mentioned here is Dichloromethane. It's a pretty clear cancer causing agent https://www.reddit.com/r/todayilearned/comments/pr8k9v/til_s...

You know what else is a solvent for decaffeinating coffee? Benzene. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benzene#Health_effects

Don't drink decaf. The CO2 method is pretty safe but the simple fact is unless you're sure how your beans were decaffinated you're better off not drinking it.

Re: A chemist explains the chemistry behind decaf coffee

#17

Post by edkennedy »

criddell wrote: post #5
martinpw wrote: post #4

The decaf process seems expensive so you might expect the end result to cost more, but it never does. Which means either the producers are making less profit on decaf, or they are using lower quality beans. If the latter is true, which seems more likely, that might explain why decaf sometimes tastes less good, separately from the effect of the process itself on taste.

I suspect that when you buy decaf beans from a roaster they don't aren't the ones decaffeinating the coffee beans. I think roasters have a lot less choice when buying decaffeinated beans so I bet your theory is correct.

There are two main decaf plants, one in Vancouver and one in Mexico.

The Mexican one is supposedly superior in taste, but the majority is processed through Vancouver with the Swiss Water plant. https://www.swisswater.com/blogs/sw/swiss-waters-new-decaffe...

Re: A chemist explains the chemistry behind decaf coffee

#18

Post by infecto »

wnolens wrote: post #6

Will an entrepreneur please make high quality (great tasting) decaf coffee ubiquitous? There's a growing anti-drug sentiment that should be a great tailwind. It's hard for me to find as good tasting a bean as it is with non-decaf. I've tried subscription services or pay huge shipping and product premium from some boutique retailer, the beans are always just ok. Decaf still doesn't get enough priority as the product i…

Beanfruit generally ranks as one of the decaf favorites online. You should check it out.

Re: A chemist explains the chemistry behind decaf coffee

#19

Post by ptsneves »

AnotherGoodName wrote: post #16

I'd like to talk a bit more about the cheapest and most common process here. They state that ethyl acetate is below the FDA limits and therefore safe. For a start ethyl acetate is still pretty bad but it's not the cheapest. Another common solvent not mentioned here is Dichloromethane. It's a pretty clear cancer causing agent https://www.reddit.com/r/todayilearned/comments/pr8k9v/til_s... You know what else is a solve…

The reddit post mentions that DCM is evaporated and it is basically not present after the process. Actually the thread mentions that all the fuss like your post is mostly scaremongering without actual understanding the mechanisms. Do you have evidence that indeed the phase change and separations may not happen?

Re: A chemist explains the chemistry behind decaf coffee

#20

Post by bonestamp2 »

AnotherGoodName wrote: post #16

I'd like to talk a bit more about the cheapest and most common process here. They state that ethyl acetate is below the FDA limits and therefore safe. For a start ethyl acetate is still pretty bad but it's not the cheapest. Another common solvent not mentioned here is Dichloromethane. It's a pretty clear cancer causing agent https://www.reddit.com/r/todayilearned/comments/pr8k9v/til_s... You know what else is a solve…

This reminds me of a reddit post from about 10 years ago where people started to notice that when they get decaf coffee at work it sometimes bleeds through the styrofoam cup while the regular coffee never does. There have been several other reports of this since. The most credible theory was that sometimes there is solvent left over after the decaf process:

https://www.reddit.com/r/mildlyinteresting/comments/2m2fiy/o...

Post reply on HN