@iggy71 I wanted to give that article the benefit of the doubt because it was Wired, but that headline is exceptionally misleading. The article itself isn’t bad, but it does do a real strong tap dance in favor of pods. There were a number of flaws or loopholes (i.e. comparing energy production with espresso machines??). The cynic in me also very much wonders which pod-producing corporation paid for the cited study.
But most everything in the article boils down to “but if everyone recycles pods perfectly, it could be just as good!”
And that’s the problem I was trying to say on my original comment… Recycling programs in America basically suck. It’s the evil truth that no one wants to admit. Even most plastics in recycling do not actually get recycled. So my whole point was to say that it would be better to avoid even using the plastics in the first place, in order to help the planet. And single use plastics are the best to ones to stop using.
@haydesigner They were obviously talking about the “hot plates” that keep the unconsumed coffee hot which is not applicable only to espresso machines (critical thinking skills be damned ). And then there’s the unconsumed coffee that gets tossed meaning more has to be produced (raw materials, energy to produce, etc.) to meet demand which is fine by the manufacturers. These are the MAIN impacts to environment. Both of which do not apply to single serve.
Your ONLY focus seems to be recycling (as indicated by your bolding). You’ve already admitted to not being a coffee drinker so it’s “safe” for you to attack this and take a “high and mighty” stance but coffee pods are a drop in the ocean (pun intended) regarding plastic recycling compared to plastics in say toys, other food containers, etc. which I’m sure you and everyone are using.
Obviously the point went clear over your head. Nice deflect to “try” to control your false narrative.
@haydesigner@iggy71 I am a coffee drinker, and that article does nothing to refute the fact that disposable pod systems have added an element of waste to a process that didn’t need it. For our “convenience”.
@haydesigner@unearth Add another non-critical thinker to the “not looking at the whole picture…” list.
The popular 12 oz plastic container of ground coffee makes about 24 x 8 oz cups. The equivalent would be 2 x 12ct boxes of k-cups. Want to guess which of the two contains more plastic?
Let’s try this one more time. The energy consumed by coffee maker “hot plates” that keeps unconsumed coffee hot until used as well as the unconsumed coffee that gets tossed (meaning MORE has to be produced using additional raw materials, energy to produce, etc. to replace the tossed stuff) cause the MAIN impact to the environment. Both of which do not apply to single serve. The convenience and less raw material plastic used in paper thin k-cups vs. the much thicker 12 oz ground coffee plastic container is just a bonus.
Fun fact: ONLY 9 percent of plastic actually gets recycled. OTOH about 70 percent of cardboard-boxes (like the boxes the k-cups come in) ARE recovered for recycling.
@haydesigner@iggy71 Specious reasoning. Some assumptions there (e.g. unconsumed coffee, extra time on hot plates) that don’t apply to me or many non-pod coffee drinkers. Also, the “popular 12 oz plastic container”? Mine comes in a paper bag. And those special facilities where consumers bring (if they bring) the pods? How do they get there? They have to be brought there at the expense of more fuel energy. But, somehow, that doesn’t make it into the article’s energy equation.
@haydesigner@iggy71 The article also glosses over the energy used to make the pods, including extracting the materials and producing the cups. Not to mention it doesn’t state specifics of that energy equation. And with regards to recycling, my original point was that if no pod is made in the first place, there is no additional piece of waste to dispose of.
@unearth “Specious reasoning”? Project much? My argument was in response to your comment that disposable single serve pods/k-cups add an element of waste to a process that didn’t need it for “convenience” and I destroyed it. You selectively pulled out excerpts from the article for your failed rebuttal which I clearly wasn’t referring to. Nice try.
If you bothered to actually READ the whole article you would have seen the link to energy consumption and coffee waste (it doesn’t gloss over it like you erroneously state, in fact, just the opposite) which was the crux of my argument, TWICE. And if you read further you would have seen the references to the recyclabilty of plastic pods which AGAIN was what I focused on and compared to the mass produced plastic packaging of bulk ground coffee. Hence the rest of your points are nonsense as a rebuttal to my argument.
Instead your narcissistic cognitive dissonance focused on one type of aluminum pod and all its “evils” you claim which I didn’t even mention in my argument because that WASN’T my argument, capisce. I don’t know what planet you live on but my plastic pods can be recycled along with my other plastic at the curb. Then you make a strawman argument of your “coffee in a paper bag”. The vast majority of coffee sold in a bag (which is the most prevalent packaging) is NOT paper but a composite with a freshness valve and is ironically 0% recyclable - worse than the recyclabilty of the popular plastic container ground coffee AND the plastic k-cup/ cardboard box packaged coffee (both of which I already mentioned).
@haydesigner It’s called responding in kind. Just because your “attack” was passive aggressive by dismissing my argument doesn’t it make it any less, as you say, “low class”. Poor baby, get a thicker skin.
@iggy71 responding in kind?? At no point did I write anything remotely personal about you, let alone insulting. Just because someone disagrees with you, does NOT mean they’re being passive aggressive.
And “poor baby, get a thicker skin”…? Really? Now you’re just doubling down on being a dick. And again, needlessly and for no reason. Please stop acting like an 8-year-old. If you can’t do that, then stop engaging with people here.
For those who may want coffee pods without the ecological guilt, I highly recommend San Francisco Bay Coffee. Great flavor, cheaper than most others (30-40 cents each), and the pods are made entirely of plants. They’re compostable if you have access to industrial facilities (I put them in my school’s compost) and they’re working on making them compostable at home.
I don’t love the flavor of coffee. I only drink half a cup to wake myself up in the morning. For that reason, Nescafe INSTANT continues to be my only choice, and requires one minute in the microwave to boil the water, and 5 seconds to stir half a teaspoon in. Can’t beat that speed, price, and NO plastic waste.
So I just got my entenmenn’s coffee, and EVERY one of the apple caramel flavor is “deflated”, while all of the others are still filled with nitrogen, and have the nice bulge in them that tells you that the coffee is still good inside. Anyone else get this, or is it somehow “normal” for that flavor?
I bought Entenmans. I am not a coffee snob. I drink it only 3 times a week. I drink Tea the other days. Tried all them, and even the Pumpkin spice is good. I bought them before a while ago on MEH and enjoyed them. I can’t speak for the other brands, but Entenmans is damn good for the casual coffee drinker.
Problem with the Jim Beam K-cups is the top seal is defective on about a third of the cups and separate during brewing. This of course creates a mess in the coffee maker. The coffee is really good though.
If your Jim Beam K-cup has the top seal a little loose or off center, toss the cup and get the next one. Guaranteed to create a mess. Unless you like your cuppa little chewy. Cleaning the mess negates the “convenience” of the K-cup. The flavor isn’t that great. Bottom line, not a bargain.