I doubt that my electric bill goes down 10% if I set my brewer 6*C cooler, but I do know my coffee would not taste as good. I've done that experiment dozens of times over the past 3 years.

If this study is about getting the same EY using lower temps then the industry would need to adopt different brewing methodologies to to get these EYs at lower temps which will probably be something like grinding finer and/or use more coffee. I can't see however the industry adopting any practices that require them to dose higher if this is indeed the case and they are generally looking for more efficient extraction to use less coffee. The study said they were motivated to update the 70 year old brewing chart by Lockhart so it's unclear how this contributes to the development of this updated chart.

Almico wrote:I doubt that my electric bill goes down 10% if I set my brewer 6*C cooler, but I do know my coffee would not taste as good. I've done that experiment dozens of times over the past 3 years.

Yes, of course you're right. I was just thinking of the water heating but there are obviously other significant energy requirements.

So that again begs the question, what good is this study? Science often takes little baby steps. Maybe that's all this is, just one little step.

DamianWarS wrote:If this study is about getting the same EY using lower temps then the industry would need to adopt different brewing methodologies to to get these EYs at lower temps which will probably be something like grinding finer and/or use more coffee. I can't see however the industry adopting any practices that require them to dose higher if this is indeed the case and they are generally looking for more efficient extraction to use less coffee. The study said they were motivated to update the 70 year old brewing chart by Lockhart so it's unclear how this contributes to the development of this updated chart.

From my reading the doses are staying the same. Updosing increases TDS, but decreases EY, all things equal. Their methodology is to grind finer and brew longer to increase EY with cooler water.

Modern batch brewers, like the Curtis G4 they used, makes changing brew times easy ands brews coffee with remarkable consistency. You can program the water temp, water amount and time that it takes to dispense that amount of water. You can even program bloom amount as a % of total water and bloom time. My Fetco works so well I have come to use it for "cupping" my roasts. It does not, however, have a mixing valve, so changing water temp on the fly is not as convenient. I'm getting a G4 for the new bar and I'll be dialing it in with various coffees soon enough.

So they used 93* water with x grind and y brew time and measured EY. Then they ground finer and brewed longer until EY was the same with 87* water. Their claim is that the details of the grind and time were mostly irrelevant as long as EY was maintained.

To my thinking, that's like saying roast temp and roast time are irrelevant, as long as Agtron roast level is maintained. True to some extent. Most coffee drinkers will not notice the difference given one or the other. But most coffee lovers will be able to tell something is different if A/B-ing two cups side by side.

Well it's good more coffee isn't being used. I wonder how much of savings it really is by going cooler and going longer. Coffee lovers may be able to tell the difference between A/B cups but can they consistently pick A over B (or whatever the case may be) as the better cup. I'll wait until Hoffmann makes a video before I make my conclusions.

DamianWarS wrote:I'll wait until Hoffmann makes a video before I make my conclusions.

That's really funny!