Bowl of Plenty

Kitchen envy, Tour de France style

noreply@blogger.com (Kit Chen) — Thu, 22 Jul 2010 01:42:00 +0000

See the mobile kitchens accompanying the cycling teams at the Tour de France.

Team Garmin-Transitions built up a custom kitchen from the back end of a van. This is better than my home kitchen.

But Team Saxo Bank's kitchen puts them to shame by taking up an entire semi trailer.

Fried butter

noreply@blogger.com (Kit Chen) — Fri, 04 Sep 2009 23:26:00 +0000

Yikes, as if state-fair food doesn't already suffer from a terrible fat- and sugar-laden reputation, now comes deep-fried butter.

Now I have to go ride my bike.

Left-handed dishers (ice cream scoops)

noreply@blogger.com (Kit Chen) — Tue, 01 Sep 2009 20:48:00 +0000

From looking over this blog's (brief) history, I guess it must be nearly impossible for me to write a post without making a follow-up to it. So, well, here's another one.

After giving dishers some more thought, it occurred to me that some types would be unsuitable or at least inconvenient for left-handed people to use. Basically, the sweeper in the scoop can be actuated in one of two ways, either by squeezing the entire handle or by pressing a thumb lever. Squeeze-handle dishers are actually ambidextrous, but to my knowledge thumb-lever dishers are only made for right-handed use. For the dishers listed in my previous post, I've made a chart of which ones are left-hand friendly:

Size	Adcraft (metal)	Adcraft (plastic)	Fox Run	Hamilton Beach	Johnson Rose	Norpro	OXO	Vollrath (metal)	Vollrath (plastic)	Zeroll
6		No		No	No				No	Yes
8		No	Yes	No	No			Yes	No	Yes
10		No		No	No			Yes	No	Yes
12		No		No	No			Yes	No	Yes
16		No	Yes	No	No			Yes	No	Yes
20		No	Yes	No	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	Yes
24		No		No	No			Yes	No	Yes
30	Yes	No		No	No	Yes		Yes	No	Yes
40	Yes	No	Yes	No	No		Yes	Yes	No	Yes
50	Yes		Yes					Yes		Yes
60	Yes					Yes	Yes	Yes		Yes
70	Yes		Yes					Yes		Yes
100	Yes		Yes			Yes		Yes		Yes

THE TAKEAWAY

If you're left-handed, give squeeze-handle dishers (ice cream scoops) your top consideration. To learn more about disher sizes, see my previous post.

Disher (aka ice cream scoop) sizes

noreply@blogger.com (Kit Chen) — Sat, 01 Aug 2009 21:59:00 +0000

Update: Also see my post on dishers for left-handed use.

To ensure that cookies, cupcakes, and muffins bake evenly, one of the steps should be to divide the dough or batter into uniform quantities. For the best way to do this, the common advice is to use portion-control tools. These are known as dishers in the food-service industry, although to the rest of us they look like ice cream scoops. In addition to their use in baking, dishers can also ensure consistent portioning of meatballs or hamburger patties. You can buy them at your local restaurant-supply store.

In the US, commercial-grade dishers are denominated in sizes (numbers) that represent quart fractions—for example, a No. 12 disher should hold 1/12 of a quart (in other words, it takes 12 scoops to fill a quart), a No. 16 holds 1/16 quart, etc. Using this standard, we can create a chart of disher sizes and their equivalent nominal volumes, in both US customary and metric units:

* Color codes are only available on dishers with plastic handles.
Size	Color*	fl oz	tbsp	cup	(fraction)	mL
6	White	5.33	10.7	0.667	(2/3)	158
8	Gray	4.00	8.00	0.500	(1/2)	118
10	Ivory	3.20	6.40	0.400		94.6
12	Green	2.67	5.33	0.333	(1/3)	78.9
16	Blue	2.00	4.00	0.250	(1/4)	59.1
20	Yellow	1.60	3.20	0.200		47.3
24	Red	1.33	2.67	0.167		39.4
30	Black	1.07	2.13	0.133		31.5
40	Orchid	0.800	1.60	0.100		23.7
50	Rust	0.640	1.28	0.0800		18.9
60	Pink	0.533	1.07	0.0667		15.8
70	Plum	0.457	0.914	0.0571		13.5
100	Orange	0.320	0.640	0.0400		9.46

You'll notice there are gaps between sizes. As far as I know, these are the only ones available for the US food-service market, and not all manufacturers make this entire size range. But that's not the problem. The real problem is that the quart-fraction standard is only followed loosely, and actual disher capacities vary both from the nominal size and among different manufacturers. How far off are these scoop sizes, you ask? Let's look at the numbers.

The following table contains a semi-random sampling of product lines and shows how much the scoops' specified capacities deviate from nominal sizes. These calculations are based on the manufacturers' specifications, which I've collected into a spreadsheet you can either view online (HTML) or download (Excel, with formulas). The file is also available in Google Spreadsheets format if you're logged in to a Google account. In addition to the manufacturers' specifications and my calculations, the spreadsheet also contains details such as the dishers' scoop diameters shown in both inches and centimeters.

Deviation of specified capacity from nominal size. **Bold** indicates sizes accurate to within 2%. Details.
Size	Adcraft (PDF)	Fox Run	Hamilton Beach	Johnson Rose	Norpro	OXO	Vollrath (metal)	Vollrath (plastic)	Zeroll
6	12.5%		12.6%	12.5%				0.0%	12.6%
8	0.0%	0.0%	9.0%	8.3%			0.0%	0.0%	9.0%
10	17.2%		0.3%	14.6%			2.3%	1.6%	0.3%
12	21.9%		4.3%	25.0%			3.1%	0.0%	4.3%
16	37.5%	0.0%	3.5%	0.0%			0.0%	0.0%	3.5%
20	56.3%	0.0%	10.6%	4.2%	6.3%	6.3%	6.3%	1.6%	10.6%
24	31.3%		11.8%	0.0%			3.1%	0.0%	11.8%
30	17.2%		3.4%	6.3%	6.3%		17.2%	6.3%	3.4%
40	9.4%	6.3%	15.0%	16.7%		6.3%	9.4%	6.3%	11.3%
50	2.3%	0.0%					2.3%		1.6%
60	5.5%				6.3%	37.5%	5.5%		0.6%
70	9.4%	0.6%					6.0%		0.6%
100	17.2%	0.0%			4.2%		17.2%		0.0%

As you can see, disher size accuracy can be way off the mark. In this table, scoops accurate to within 2% of the nominal size are highlighted in bold. If this seems to be too tight of an allowance for size variations, think about it this way: a 12-inch ruler that's off by 2% will be either too long or too short by roughly a quarter of an inch, making for a potential variation of nearly half an inch from one ruler to the next.

While it's possible that dishers are made to match nominal sizes but their true capacities are rounded off for publication formatting (thus calculations based on published specifications will show more deviation than actually exists), seeing that there is no uniformity even within one manufacturer's own two product lines leads me to believe this is not the case, since there is no reason to think different rounding standards would be used here. Moreover, by comparing the ratios between sizes, one is likely to find that manufacturers' guidance for real-world applications (e.g., hamburger patties) further deviate from both the nominal and specified volumes. Makes one wonder which numbers are really right.

Please note, however, that in spite of these discrepancies, inaccurate dishers aren't necessarily defective or inferior. This is because dishers are primarily portioning tools instead of measuring tools, so if you find some that fit your recipes, there's not much point to worrying about whether they match some fixed standard or not. You just need to be aware that size designations are not reliable indicators of actual capacity, and dishers of identical (nominal) size from different manufacturers may hold different amounts of material.

Now, how do you know which dishers will fit your recipes without buying every size and trying them? That's a good question. From what I've seen, recipes generally don't tell you that. At least for muffins and cupcakes, since standard muffin tins have a capacity of 1/2 cup (4 fl. oz., or 8 tbsp) per pocket, we should figure to place only about 1/4 to 1/3 cup of batter in each to avoid overflowing during baking—in other words, #12 and #16 (nominal size) should work in most cases. However, I've also seen recipes that exceed this quantity to deliberately create overflowing muffin tops, so exceptions do exist.

THE TAKEAWAY

Disher (ice cream scoop) sizes can be inconsistent, so it's better to know their actual (or at least specified) capacities than to rely on nominal sizes. In terms of nominal size, 12 and 16 should, in principle, fit most muffin and cupcake recipes.

C'mon Max, don't hate

noreply@blogger.com (Kit Chen) — Thu, 07 May 2009 17:12:00 +0000

A brief response to Max Fisher's column in The Atlantic's Food Channel, because I don't have time and don't want to get drawn into any potentially long arguments with the other commenters on his post.

Anyway Max, I get the impression you feel that vegans and vegetarians are somehow in a contest to see who is holier than the other. Why do you see it this way? I don't get it. Don't let the hate mail from a vocal minority of angry vegans skew your perspective. It seems to me every time the subject of veganism or vegetarianism—or even a suggestion to reduce meat consumption just a bit—is brought up in the mainstream press, it is invariably met with a torrent of vicious and belittling responses from meat eaters, yet I know from real-life experience that most omnivores aren't rabid foaming-at-the-mouth hate-spewers. Live and let live, you know?

A quick note

noreply@blogger.com (Kit Chen) — Tue, 28 Apr 2009 15:27:00 +0000

Just to say that I haven't abandoned this blog. This is a quick glimpse into what I'm working on right now.

Yes, it's food-related. Food geeks rejoice. Everyone else cower in fear.

Foraging?

noreply@blogger.com (Kit Chen) — Mon, 13 Apr 2009 18:57:00 +0000

Was just reading a couple of folks on Twitter who have been foraging. Sounds like fun. Better than Central Market. Better than Whole Foods. Even better than the farmers' market, yes? But how does one learn to separate the food from the poison? No Recipes replies, in two parts: "go at least once with someone who knows what they're doing and take photos and notes," and "ramps look similar to toxic lily-of-the-valley, but they have a distinct garlic smell that the toxic ones don't have." Um, yeah, just what I was afraid of.

Anyway, dear readers, has any one of you in the Dallas area ever foraged? Care to give me some pointers? Or do you know of any resources that I can call up? Thanks.

Texas caviar, for the patience-challenged

noreply@blogger.com (Kit Chen) — Mon, 06 Apr 2009 13:09:00 +0000

This is a simplification of my earlier Texas caviar recipe to eliminate cooking by using canned products. I've also attempted to streamline the instructions and improve their readability by trimming away details that should be self-evident. So with brevity in mind, let's get on with it.

RECIPE

Makes 6 servings

INGREDIENTS

For the base

Qty	Unit	Item
1	14–16 oz can	Black-eyed peas
1	14–16 oz can	Black beans
1	14–16 oz can	Yellow corn kernels (not cream style)
1	small	Red bell pepper (about 2/3 cup diced)
3	stalks	Celery (about 2/3 cup diced)
1	small	Onion (about 1/2 cup diced)

For the dressing

2	medium	Garlic cloves
1	medium	Jalapeno chile, fresh
1/4	tsp	Ground cumin
1/2	tsp	Table salt
1	tsp	Ground black pepper
1/4	cup	Apple cider vinegar
1/2	cup	Neutral-tasting vegetable oil

EQUIPMENT

Can opener
Colander
Large (6 qt) and small (2 qt) mixing bowls
Knife and cutting board
Garlic press (optional)
Gloves (recommended for handling jalapeno)
Measuring cup (1- or 2-cup size)
Measuring spoons
Whisk
Wooden spoon or spatula

INSTRUCTIONS

Steps 1–3 are for the base, and Steps 4–6 are for the dressing. You can treat these as two separate tasks and do them at different times if you'd like.

Empty the cans of black-eyed peas, black beans, and corn into a colander and rinse well. After rinsing, let the colander drain for a few minutes.
In the meantime, dice the bell pepper, celery, and onion into 1/4" squares and place into the large bowl.
Add the drained ingredients from the colander into the large bowl.
Mince the garlic and place it into the small bowl.
Dice the jalapeno into 1/8" squares and place it into the small bowl.
Add the remaining dressing ingredients (cumin, salt, pepper, vinegar, and oil) to the small bowl. Whisk until the vinegar and oil are blended.
Pour the dressing over the base ingredients in the large bowl, then stir to mix well.

TECHNIQUE

You know what's better than me blathering on and on about technique? Having an expert show you. I've included a few links above, but you know what's even better than text links? Videos. Check'em out.

Finally, although I already have a link to mincing garlic, ya gotta watch this video. Too bad he doesn't allow embedding, but it's really impressive how he rocks the knife (literally, starting at about 1:50). A master mincer, right there.

Raw sweet corn and cashew chowder (sort of)

noreply@blogger.com (Kit Chen) — Thu, 26 Mar 2009 07:32:00 +0000

[Direct link to recipe]

First of all, let me just say that since I'm not a dedicated follower of the raw foods diet, I've never heard of Ani Phyo until seeing her mentioned in The Kitchn a few weeks ago. But if you had been paying attention (unlike me), you'd already know about her from all the coverage. She got my attention this time, though. Corn and cashew make an unusual pairing for ingredients—does she develop her recipes by alliteration? Anyway, the instructions can hardly be simpler: the steps basically boil (can I use that word here?) down to "toss stuff in a blender and go." Problem is, it's nowhere near the season for fresh corn. What to do?

Well, not being a raw foodist came in handy at this point to save me from having to violate my own dietary rules. The only corn I had at hand were frozen kernels, meaning that they were blanched before being packaged. In other words: not raw. Being the experimental sort, I also wanted to find out if roasting the cashews would make any difference, so I halved the recipe and made two batches.

As you can see from the comparison image below, the bowl made with plain (that is, not roasted) cashews is just a bit less intense in color than the one with roasted cashews. If I had used raw corn, then I'd imagine the color would've been even paler. Flavor-wise, the roasted cashews contributed a bit of extra depth and, well, nuttiness, to the second batch. As the recipe contained only a small amount of cashews relative to the corn, though, the differences were subtle and probably not discernible unless the two versions were compared side by side. It's probably not worth the extra effort to roast the cashews.

Another factor that made the taste-testing somewhat inconclusive was that I thought the first batch was too oily and salty and so used less of each for the second batch. While kosher salt and extra virgin olive oil make for a great combination, the quantity used in the original recipe overwhelmed the corn flavor. Now, this isn't a knock against Ani Phyo specifically, since I find that just in general many recipes specify too much oil and salt, and I've come to expect having to reduce their quantities as a standard modification.

As for texture, I did not find it as heavy as the guys over at The Bitten Word, although I did have similar pureeing issues. Commenters both there and on The Kitchn advised soaking the cashews overnight to ensure smooth pureeing. They are right. With un-soaked cashews, chunks up to half-piece in size remained after my blender ran for 30 seconds on its highest speed; this did not happen with soaked cashews. Also, in both batches the corn did not puree completely, and bits of the hull were dispersed throughout the soup. Extending blending time by 30 more seconds (for a total time of one minute) made no appreciable difference, and I think the puree needs to be passed through a strainer to achieve smoothness. Technically, the rough texture may not be an issue because this is a chowder instead of a bisque, although I have a feeling that this soup was really meant to be liquefied with one of those King Kong blenders favored by the raw foods community instead of the weaklings the rest of us own.

RECIPE

Makes 4 servings. Adapted from Ani Phyo's original, with less oil and salt.

INGREDIENTS

Note: This recipe uses 450 g (1 lb, or 3-1/4 cups) of yellow corn kernels in total, either fresh or frozen. If using fresh kernels, this is equivalent to 4 large ears. If you're a raw foodist, please keep in mind that frozen corn is blanched, not raw.

For the chowder

Quantity	Alternate Measures	Item
68 g	2-3/8 oz (1/2 cup)	Cashews, preferably raw, plus water for soaking (soaking is optional)
312 g	11 oz (2-1/4 cups)	Yellow corn kernels
473 g	16-3/4 oz (2 cups)	Water
60 ml	4 tbsp	Extra virgin olive oil
1 small	1 small	Garlic clove
5 ml	1 tsp	Kosher salt

For garnish

138 g	5 oz (1 cup)	Yellow corn kernels
To taste	To taste	Cilantro leaves
To taste	To taste	Freshly-ground black pepper

EQUIPMENT

Weighing scale and/or measuring cups
Measuring spoons
Small bowl, for soaking cashews
Knife and cutting board
Blender
Pepper mill
Strainer (optional)

INSTRUCTIONS

If you don't own a high-powered blender, it's recommended that you place the cashews in a small bowl, cover them with water, and let them soak overnight.
If you're using fresh corn, take off their husks, remove the silk, then use a knife to cut the kernels off the cob. If you're using frozen corn kernels, let them thaw before putting them in the blender.
To prepare the cilantro for garnish, pull or slice the leaves off the stems, then chop roughly with a knife (video).
If you've soaked the cashews, take them out of the bowl and put them into the blender.
Peel the skin off the garlic clove, then place it and the remaining ingredients from under the chowder heading (corn, water, oil, and salt) into the blender.
Turn on the blender and puree this mixture until smooth. For an even smoother texture, you may want to pour the puree through a strainer.
Divide the puree into four bowls.
Divide each of the garnish ingredients into four portions.
Into each bowl, place one portion of the garnish corn and then sprinkle with cilantro leaves and ground peppers.

VARIATIONS

Parsley, either the curly- or flat-leafed variety, can be used instead of cilantro.
If you're not a strict raw foodist, this recipe will likely work well with grilled corn.

ARE THE CASHEWS REALLY RAW?

Aside from the frozen corn, the reason that I attached the "sort of" qualifier to my post title is because my cashews came from a regular supermarket. Why is this a problem? Well, while the general public classifies unroasted nuts as being raw, cashews from non-specialist suppliers are likely to have been heat processed before reaching market and are thus unacceptable or at least suspect to raw-foods purists.

So why are cashews heat processed? This is because freshly-harvested cashews are encased in an urushiol-containing double shell. Urushiol is the active irritant in poison ivy, so it's critical that the nuts are extracted from their shells without contamination. As this irritant is destroyed by high temperatures (PDF, p. 2), traditional extraction methods all use heat—either drum roasting, oil roasting, or steam roasting—to decontaminate the nuts as well as to separate them from their shells. For the raw foods market, special tools must be used for safe low-temperature extraction.

What are the risks that raw (or semi-raw) cashews are dangerous to eat, then? For that, I have no answer. I've had no problems from eating semi-raw supermarket cashews, but as shown by the current peanut problems or last year's Chinese milk scandal (you're being way too optimistic if you think something similar can't happen in the US), contamination of our food—whether from bacteria and viruses, artificial impurities, or a plant or animal's own natural toxins—is an always-present possibility.

Vegetarians watch out!

noreply@blogger.com (Kit Chen) — Tue, 17 Mar 2009 19:16:00 +0000

First, there was the meat cake from 2006. Now comes meat fruit. I kid you not. Fruits made of meat. Meat. Fruit. The mind boggles.

Edited to add: Well, this cut tag is kind of obnoxious for short posts. No, sorry, there isn't any more inside. But it does take you to the comment form, so comment away!

Creamy split pea and petite pea soup

noreply@blogger.com (Kit Chen) — Tue, 17 Mar 2009 05:11:00 +0000

Happy St. Patrick's Day, everyone. Even if you're not going to make anything specifically Irish, a green soup still seems appropriate, no? This is based on a recipe originally found in the December 2006 issue of Bon Appetit, which spikes an ordinary split pea soup with green peas to boost its color and dill to brighten its flavor. The result was delicious, but its consistency was a lot thinner than what I had expected from a split pea soup. So I set to work, and after some tinkering, this is my take on it.

RECIPE

Makes 4 servings. Modified from Bon Appetit, December 2006.

INGREDIENTS

I tested this recipe with both the basic and preferred/optional ingredients. The basic ingredients will work, but the preferred ones will give you much more flavor.

Quantity	Alternate Measures	Item
140 g	5 oz (1 cup)	Frozen petite peas (also sold as baby sweet peas)
200 g	7 oz (1 cup)	Green split peas
115 g	4 oz (about 1½ cup)	Leeks (from one large or two small leeks, white and light green parts only)
1 ea.	1 ea.	Bay leaf
30 g	1 oz (5 tbsp chopped)	Fresh dill leaves (from about 8–10 stalks), or 1 package baby dill
30 ml	2 tbsp	Vegetable oil, or extra virgin olive oil (preferred)
950 g	2 lb 1½ oz (4 cups)	Water, or vegetable stock (preferred)
8 g	1 piece, about 4"–6" long	Dried kombu (optional)
5 ml	1 tsp	Table salt (if using water; use less with stock)

EQUIPMENT

Weighing scale and/or measuring cups
Measuring spoons
Various bowls for mise en place
Knife and cutting board
4-quart cookpot
Spatula, for sauteeing
Blender, or immersion blender
Ladle

INSTRUCTIONS

Measure out the frozen peas and set aside to thaw.
Pick over the dried split peas and check for pebbles or other debris, then rinse and drain the peas.
Cut off the dark green parts of the leek and wash thoroughly to remove any dirt. Once the leek is clean, slice it crosswise into ¼" rings.
Separate the midrib of the bay leaf by either folding it lengthwise or running the tip of a knife along both of its sides. Discard the midrib.
Pull the dill leaves off the stems and chop the leaves. Save a few fronds for garnish.
Heat oil in the cookpot over medium-high heat until it shimmers, then dd the leeks and bay leaf to the pot and saute until the leeks wilt, about 3 minutes.
Add the split peas and stir to coat, then add the water/stock and kombu.
Bring the liquid to a boil, then turn the heat down to between low and medium-low. Cover the pot with a lid and simmer for 45 minutes, or until the split peas are soft.
Turn off the heat. Add the thawed petite peas and chopped dill to the pot.
Puree the soup until smooth. An immersion blender is most convenient, but if you don't have one, carefully fill the pitcher of a blender only halfway full (or less), then blend in batches.
Add salt to taste.
Ladle the pureed soup into bowls and garnish with dill fronds.

NOTES

Depending on the supermarket, fresh dill may be located either with the produce or with the herbs. Baby dill is usually sold as a packaged herb.
I did not test this out, but you should be able to use mature green peas if you can't find petite peas.
The bay leaf and kombu stay in the soup and get pureed.

Raw almond butter

noreply@blogger.com (Kit Chen) — Thu, 12 Mar 2009 16:31:00 +0000

Update: Please also see my other almond butter posts:

Homemade almond butter (using roasted almonds)
Can you freeze almond butter?

Ack. This is going to look like I just can't let go, but the fine folks from Hangry Pants (love that name, BTW) asked about processing raw almonds instead of roasted ones, so I figured it'd be much better to find out for sure if there are really any differences than to spout off some half-cocked nonsense.

Guess what. They're different.

In short, without adding extra oil to the ground almonds, it takes about twice as long for a food processor to turn raw almonds into a creamy paste/butter as it does for roasted almonds. In my specific case, the right consistency was reached at 13 minutes.

Why is this? It's possible that the roasting heat weakens the almonds' cell walls so that oil is released faster, but I'm only speculating and don't really know the answer. That being the case, I won't bore you with another 286,973-word dissertation and just let the pictures do most of the talking here. The total elapsed processing time, in 30-second intervals, is superimposed on the food processor's spindle:

A couple of other notes and observations:

You can see my original almond butter recipe, using roasted almonds, here.
The almonds did not turn into random shades of brown during processing. As the 00:30 and 01:00 photos show, most of the lighting for this setup came from the side (bottom left in the images) instead of the top. The specific shade in each photo only indicates how thickly the almond particles coated the sides of the workbowl (thus blocking the light) and does not reflect color changes in the ground almonds themselves.
Overall, though, roasted almonds do make for a darker finished product than raw almonds, which should be expected. This is a color sampling from my two batches:
Unlike making almond butter with roasted almonds, I had to scrape down the sides of the workbowl this time. To preserve the grinding and clumping characteristics, this was only done after each photo was taken.
A side benefit of the extended processing time is that it really isn't crucial to stop the machine at some exact specified moment. Although I said the right consistency was reached at 13 minutes, the changes in texture from about 11 minutes onward were really pretty minor.
I have no idea if the specific equipment matters or not, but I used a full-sized KitchenAid food processor to make both this and the roasted almond butter.
I split this batch and froze part of it. The result after thawing? Skin, stir, and a side-by-side tasting: no difference. So, homemade almond butter can be frozen with no problems.
Update 2009-09-11: Based on a question in the comments below—homemade almond butter should be refrigerated, and you should keep it there for no more than four months. This is to prevent (or delay) the oil from going rancid. If you need longer storage, freeze it.

A NOTE FOR RAW FOODISTS

The almonds started at room temperature and became warm as a result of the long processing time. I did not take any measurements, but the temperature increase may be a concern for strict raw foodists. I don't know what effects starting with frozen almonds would have.

Update 2009-09-06: By law, since September 2007 all almonds grown and sold in the United States must be pasteurized, either through fumigation or heat treatment (PDF). This means that domestically-grown almonds are no longer acceptable for people on a strict raw-foods diet, even though marketers can still label these almonds as "raw" for sale to consumers. This law does not apply to foreign-grown almonds imported into the US, however, so if you're on a raw regimen, it would be advisable to assume that regular supermarket almonds are not raw (no matter what the label says) and buy truly raw almonds only from a specialist supplier.

Can you freeze almond butter?

noreply@blogger.com (Kit Chen) — Mon, 09 Mar 2009 13:30:00 +0000

Update: Please also see my other almond butter posts:

Homemade almond butter (using roasted almonds)
Raw almond butter

After making that batch of almond butter, I got curious: what if I went nuts (heh) and made a whole pile of this stuff? Can I freeze the extras? Well, there's no better way to find out than to actually do it, is there? So I went ahead and put what's left of the almond butter into the freezer, took it out the next day, and waited for it to thaw.

What happened next?

Not much, that's what happened next. A bit of a skin had formed on top of the almond butter, but after giving it a few stirs, I couldn't detect any changes in flavor or texture as a result of the freezing. I suppose a better test would have been to taste the before and after versions side by side, but, well, maybe next time. Update 2009-03-12: Next time came (see the bottom of this post). Side by side tasting done. No differences.

Wanna try it yourself? These are my numbers:

Quantity: Around 7 oz (estimated 190–200 g) homemade almond butter, or a little over 3/4 cup (190–200 ml).* My recipe originally made a little over one cup of almond butter, but some already got eaten.
Freezer temperature: -4 °F (-20 °C)
Freeze time: 24 hours
Thawed at room temperature. Exact temperature not recorded.
Thaw time: around 6 hours.

Curiously enough, people are being advised not to freeze peanut butter (PDF), with the reason that the oil will separate. I can only surmise that this advice is given with mass-market peanut butters in mind, though. Without emulsifiers and stabilizers, the oil in all-natural peanut butter will separate anyway, and I can't imagine how it would freeze differently than almond butter. But I'll have to make and freeze some peanut butter to see if that's true or not.

Anyway, to get back on topic:

Q: Can you freeze almond butter?
A: Yes. You. Can.

__________________________
* Of course there was no way to remove the almond butter for weighing by itself without leaving some of it behind in the jar, so instead of trying that, I tared with another jar of the same type and size, which should be pretty close. The jar is also only marked in rough graduations, so the volumes are eyeball estimates.

Homemade almond butter

noreply@blogger.com (Kit Chen) — Tue, 03 Mar 2009 18:46:00 +0000

Update: Please also see my other almond butter posts:

[Direct link to recipe]

Man, that clementine cake post just won't leave me alone. One of the questions I had while making it was how long I could grind the almonds in a food processor before they turned into almond butter. Well, I went and found out.

Let's get straight to it, shall we? This is a photo sequence of the almonds being processed, taken at intervals of 30 seconds each, and stopping after 6 minutes. You can click on each thumbnail for a larger image:

0:00

0:30
The almonds are nicely ground at this point. Knowing what I know now, this (or earlier, even) is where I would stop if I were making almond meal.

1:00
I don't think the granule size here is really any smaller than at 0:30, and clumping has started as the almonds' cells begin to rupture and release oil.

1:30
Between 1 and 3 minutes, the clumps continue to get bigger as more oil is released.

2:00

2:30

3:00
The clumps start to come together.

3:30
Between 3:15 and 3:30, the clumps are swept into one mass. At this point, the consistency is still thick, dry, and gritty. It is not spreadable yet.

4:00
Soon afterward the ball of almond butter is broken up. With more processing, more oil is released and the texture gets creamier.

4:30

5:00
I didn't notice it at the time, but from these photos it appears that the almond butter got significantly smoother between 4:30 and 5:00.

5:30

6:00
A good visual consistency is reached between 5:30 and 6:00, which is later verified by taste. Further processing may thin out the almond butter a bit as more air is mixed into it and perhaps still more oil get released, but airiness or fluidity aren't qualities we usually look for in nut butters.

If you'd like, you can also see these photos together as an animated sequence (671 KB GIF file).

RECIPE

Makes a little over one cup almond butter (estimated 9–10 fl. oz., or 270–300 ml).

INGREDIENTS

Quantity	Alternate Measures	Item
286 g	10 oz (2 cups)	Raw almonds with skins

EQUIPMENT

Weighing scale or a dry-ingredient measuring cup
Rimmed baking sheet (for roasting almonds)
Food processor, fitted with steel blade
Rubber spatula
Canning funnel
Glass or plastic jar, 10 fl. oz. (300 ml) or larger in capacity

INSTRUCTIONS

Steps 1–4 are optional and only applicable if you want to roast the almonds. If you want to make raw almond butter or use store-bought roasted almonds, you can start at Step 5. Update 2009-03-10: Well, maybe roasting almonds is a bad idea. Yikes.

Make sure the oven rack is at the center position. Turn on the oven and set the temperature to 375 °F.
Spread the almonds out evenly on a rimmed baking sheet.
Once the oven has reached its temperature, place the baking sheet into the oven and toast until fragrant, about 12 to 15 minutes.
NOTE: This timing is only a guide. Every oven is different, and baking sheets come in different thicknesses. The best way to tell if the almonds are done is by aroma. USE YOUR NOSE. If you adhere strictly to the time and get burnt almonds, I'm not responsible.
Remove baking sheet from oven and let the almonds cool.
Once the almonds are at room temperature, place them into the workbowl of the food processor and process for 6 minutes or until the consistency is smooth. Stop the machine a few times to scrape down the sides of the bowl if needed. Update 2009-03-12: Raw almonds will need between 12 to 15 minutes of processing time.
With a rubber spatula, scrape the almond butter from the workbowl into a jar. A canning funnel fitted over the jar will minimize messy drips and spills.
Update 2009-09-11: This had completely escaped me, but a question in my raw almond butter post was a reminder: homemade almond butter should be refrigerated, and you should keep it there for no more than four months. This is to prevent (or delay) the oil from going rancid. If you need longer storage, freeze it.

EXTENDING THE RECIPE

Look, I know the way I break down recipes into infinitesimal detail makes them look scary, but all that verbiage can be reduced to one essential procedure: Put almonds in a food processor and run it until the consistency is right. With this knowledge as a foundation, it's a small conceptual step to extend this recipe to other nuts or even seeds, such as sesame seeds for tahini—there is certainly no shortage of recipes on the Internet. Although the specific processing times for each nut or seed may be different, the general idea is the same. You can also add salt or honey to fit your own tastes if you'd like.

YIELDS

I used a one-pint jar for this post's header photo, and as you can see, this batch filled it to just a bit over the halfway mark. So, two cups of raw almonds makes a bit over one cup of almond butter. As a rough estimate, I'd guess around 9 or 10 fluid ounces (270 or 300 ml).

Another unresolved issue from the clementine cake post was whether roasting the almonds will result in their weight loss. I was disciplined this time and did not snack on any of the in-process almonds. For this batch, 286 grams of raw almonds yielded 280 grams after roasting, so it's apparent that some loss of moisture or perhaps also volatile oils (hence the "done" aroma) does take place in the oven. I don't know if the almond's skin and flesh evaporate in similar fashion, though, so we will need further confirmation with blanched almonds.

Update 2009-08-18: Just found some photos of roasted nuts under an electron microscope (scroll about halfway down the page). You can see that their cell contents have shrunken after roasting, so a weight reduction should be expected.

Baking powder

noreply@blogger.com (Kit Chen) — Mon, 16 Feb 2009 22:07:00 +0000

Update 2009-03-01: I found a LOT more reference materials, and it's just much cleaner to integrate them into the original post than to write them out as addenda.

In my previous post I had a brief discussion about homemade baking powder. I think, though, that it will be useful to devote a separate post to baking powder in general and expand on the topic a bit.

Baking Powder and Leavening
Shelf Life
Single-Acting vs. Double-Acting
Aluminum-Free Baking Powders
Rumford Baking Powder
Do Brands Matter?
Homemade Baking Powder
Substitutions
How Much Should You Use?
High Altitude Baking
Sodium-Free Baking Powders
References and Notes

BAKING POWDER AND LEAVENING

Baking powder belongs to a class of ingredients known as leaveners, the purpose of which is to produce adequate gas pockets (bubbles, if you will) so that the dough or batter will rise and lighten the texture of baked goods. Further, baking powder and baking soda are known as chemical leaveners, which release gas through a reaction between alkaline and acidic ingredients. Other leaveners used in home baking include yeast, which acts biologically, and egg whites, which leaven mechanically by the air pockets formed from whisking. Once in the oven, steam also contributes to the leavening of baked goods.

Baking powder is made by combining baking soda with one or more dried acids. Baking soda, which is also known as either bicarbonate of soda or sodium bicarbonate (formula NaHCO₃), is an alkaline (or base) material and will release carbon dioxide gas (CO₂) when dissolved with the help of an acid, so it is used in recipes that contain ingredients such as buttermilk, natural cocoa powder, or fruit juices. When we combine baking soda with dried acid(s), we create a complete leavening system that is then activated (i.e., gives off gas) by introducing moisture into the mix.

Note, however, that baking soda will release carbon dioxide not only as it dissolves with acid, it will also break down and release gas at temperatures above 120 °C (250 °F) without any acids involved¹. In other words, carbon dioxide is not produced from a combination of acid and baking soda, but is released as baking soda itself breaks down. Baking soda is the carbon dioxide source², and the acid-soda reaction is really more accurately described as acid-activated decomposition of baking soda. The generalized equation for the breakdown of baking soda with acid (denoted here as H⁺) is:

NaHCO₃ + H⁺ → Na⁺ + CO₂ + H₂O

The thermal decomposition of baking soda is:

2 NaHCO₃ + heat → Na₂CO₃ + CO₂ + H₂O³

SHELF LIFE

Since moisture is what triggers baking powder into action, it must be kept dry during storage. To prolong shelf life, a starch (such as cornstarch) is added to commercially-made baking powder to absorb moisture and prevent its alkaline and acidic components from reacting with each other prematurely. This moisture-absorbing capacity isn't infinite, of course, so manufacturers will indicate an expiration date on the product's package. To be on the safe side, you should throw out any baking powder that has expired. Oh, foods made with out-of-date baking powder aren't harmful per se, but the shame from turning your cakes and breads into bricks might just kill you (or at least make you wish you were dead).

If, on the other hand, you like to live on the edge or just can't find the expiration date, you can test baking powder's effectiveness by dropping a small amount of it into just-boiled water: if it foams vigorously, then the powder is still good; if it sinks to the bottom, then the powder has passed its prime.

Testing baking powder (verdict: still good)

How much baking powder and water should you use for this test? Considering the large discrepancies in published guidelines—for example, Cook's Illustrated⁴ recommends using 1/2 tsp powder in 1 cup water, while Fine Cooking recommends 1 tsp powder in 1/3 cup water—I think it's safe to conclude that exact quantities are not crucial.

SINGLE-ACTING VS. DOUBLE-ACTING

Baking powder is typically divided into two categories: single-acting and double-acting. Single-acting baking powder, however, can be either fast-acting or slow-acting⁵. As the name implies, single-acting powders undergo one chemical reaction: the acid in a fast-acting powder dissolves relatively quickly so that the gas-producing reaction takes place upon mixing with liquid; on the other hand, the acid in a slow-acting powder requires either prolonged time exposure or temperatures above 120 °F⁶ in the batter to dissolve. Double-acting baking powders contain both fast- and slow-acting acids so that gas pockets can be formed in the dough or batter both as it is mixed and after it is in the oven; allowing two reactions to take place increases baking powder's reliability as it makes the length of time between mixing and baking less critical.

Some of the commonly-used acids in baking powder and their reaction times are listed below⁷:

Leavening acid	Abbrev.	Formula	Reaction time
Cream of tartar		KC₄H₅O₆	Immediate
Glucono delta lactone (also called δ-gluconolactone or D-glucono-1,5-lactone)	GDL	C₆H₁₀O₆	Slow at room temperature
Monocalcium phosphate (also called calcium acid phosphate)	MCP	Ca(H₂PO₄)₂ [or · H₂O]	Immediate (but see Rumford discussion below)
Sodium aluminum pyrophosphate		NaAlP₂O₇⁸	Slow at room temperature
Sodium aluminum sulfate	SAS	NaAl(SO₄)₂	Slow and heat-activated
Sodium aluminum phosphate	SALP 1-3-8	NaAl₃H₁₄(PO₄)₈ · 4 H₂O	Heat-activated
Sodium aluminum phosphate	SALP 3-2-8	Na₃Al₂H₁₅(PO₄)₈ [anhydrous]	Heat-activated
Sodium acid pyrophosphate	SAPP⁹	Na₂H₂P₂O₇	Variable

Variable reaction time? How can that be?

Well, it turns out that a leavening acid's molecular formula isn't the only determinant in its reaction speed. Manufacturing-related parameters such as heat treatment, particle size, or coating materials can all be manipulated to affect the specific acid's behavior without altering the chemical make-up of its main constituent. Specifically, SAPP is manufactured in multiple grades, each with a different reaction rate^{10, 11}.

ALUMINUM-FREE BAKING POWDERS

Most of the baking powders sold to US consumers today are labeled as double-acting, and market leaders Calumet and Clabber Girl both use SAS as the slow-acting acid. I'm not a medical scientist so I can't tell you whether the health concerns over aluminum are valid or not, but I do know that its metallic flavor is unpleasant to some, so it's worth your time to seek out aluminum-free baking powders. These are the products I'm aware of, in alphabetical order (comments are "to the best of my knowledge"):

CaCO₃ = calcium carbonate. MgCO₃ = magnesium carbonate. KHCO₃ = potassium bicarbonate.
Brand	Ingredients	Sodium Free?	Comments
Argo	Acid 1: MCP Acid 2: SAPP Base: baking soda Starch: cornstarch	No	Smallest container is 12 oz.
Bakewell Cream	Acid 1: SAPP Acid 2: Base: baking soda Starch: redried starch¹²	No	Mainly sold in New England. Packaging does not look airtight.
Bob's Red Mill	Acid 1: MCP Acid 2: SAPP Base: baking soda Starch: cornstarch	No	Mainly found in specialty-foods stores. Packaging does not look airtight. Smallest container is 16 oz.
Ener-G	Acid 1: citric acid Acid 2: GDL Base: CaCO₃ and MgCO₃ Starch:	Yes	Mainly found in specialty-foods stores. Kosher for Passover. Smallest container is 7.05 oz (200 g).
Hain	Acid 1: MCP Acid 2: Base: KHCO₃ Starch: potato starch	Yes	Mainly found in specialty-foods stores. Kosher for Passover. Not labeled as double-acting.
Rumford	Acid 1: MCP Acid 2: Base: baking soda Starch: cornstarch	No	Best availability nationwide. Made by Clabber Girl. Smallest container is 4 oz.

As mentioned above, baking powder has a limited shelf life, so I would recommend getting the smallest and best-sealed package available.

Ener-G's formulation is unusual for consumer-oriented baking powders, using citric acid and GDL, two bases, and no starch. Glucono delta lactone is derived from glucose and is, in spite of the impression its name may give, dairy free. The calcium and magnesium carbonates provide alkalinity (calcium carbonate is the active ingredient in many antacid tablets), and magnesium carbonate further functions as a drying agent so that no starch is needed in this baking powder. The company recommends using twice as much of its baking powder as regular double-acting powder to achieve the same leavening effect.

Of the single-acid powders, only Hain does not label its product double-acting. Since the reaction rate of SAPP can be made to vary, it's possible that Bakewell Cream contains a mixture of multiple SAPP grades so that the powder can provide leavening action at different temperatures. But what about Rumford? Isn't MCP only a fast-reacting acid? Well...

RUMFORD BAKING POWDER

Yeah, I know, giving this brand its own heading seems like so much product placement, but among the lay food-science types, there is some confusion over how this baking powder really works, so I think we need to talk about it.

Rumford lists only three ingredients for its baking powder: calcium acid phosphate, bicarbonate of soda, and cornstarch. Notice from the top table that calcium acid phosphate is just another name for MCP, which is classified as a quick-acting acid. However, the product canister is also marked "double acting." How can that be possible when there is only one leavening acid present?

Well, not all MCPs are created equal. For starters, it's available in two forms: with a water molecule attached to it (monocalcium phosphate monohydrate, Ca(H₂PO₄)₂ · H₂O), or without water (anhydrous monocalcium phosphate, Ca(H₂PO₄)₂). It may be counterintuitive, but MCP monohydrate is a granular powder¹³ even with the water hanging around—that makes as much sense, though, as baking powder releasing a gas upon decomposing while it normally exists as a powder. MCP monohydrate is indeed a quick-reacting acid; on the other hand, anhydrous MCP is typically manufactured with a coating to protect the acid from exposure to liquids and thus delay its reaction. The following graph shows the slower room-temperature gas-release rate that results from dissolving baking powder with coated anhydrous MCP as compared to MCP monohydrate¹⁴:

In the general case, baking soda reactions with coated anhydrous MCP will release 15% of the available CO₂ during the first 2 minutes, 35% during the next 10–15 minutes, and the final 50% during baking¹⁵. Specifically, we can compare the gas-release rates of several different baking powders made by Clabber Girl:

Product (PDF datasheets)¹⁶	Leavening acids	Approx. CO₂ release (mix/bake)
Rumford	MCP	60%/40%
Clabber Girl SAS	MCP, SAS	30%/70%
Clabber Girl SALP	MCP, SALP 3-2-8	30%/70%
Fleischmann's	MCP, SAPP	10%/90%

I believe the SALP and SAPP formulations are available only to commercial bakers, which is why Fleischmann's is not listed in the aluminum-free baking powder table above.

At any rate, based on this knowledge I think we can make the following conjectures on how Rumford can label itself as "double acting":

Even though coated anhydrous MCP has a faster room-temperature reaction rate than aluminum-containing leavening acids (compare against SALP in the graph above), it may be delayed enough so that baking powders containing only coated anhydrous MCP can approximate the performance of double-acting powders without actually having a two-stage gas-release characteristic. Since the coating material is likely to show up under analysis only as trace elements, Rumford may not be required to specify this material on the ingredients list.
It's also possible that Rumford contains both uncoated and coated MCP so that there does exist two spikes of gas production. However, as the main constituents of both MCP types are identical, they may then be shown in the ingredients list only once.
Further, in Bakery Technology and Engineering, the author states that "[d]ouble-acting baking powders are really a version of the slow-acting type which exhibit somewhat more gas production potential during mixing and on the bench."¹⁷ Based on this, we should be able to apply the same description in reverse to MCP-only baking powders such as Rumford, as it uses a fast-acting acid that exhibits delayed gas production behavior.
Finally, "double acting" may be a phrase with no regulatory definition, at least in the US. If this is the casee, then Rumford may well declare, on its own, that its baking powder is "close enough" to the two-acid powders in behavior for the "double acting" label to be suitable. In other words, they did it because they felt like it and could get away with it. I am, however, not skilled enough at searching through US food regulations to confirm or deny this conjecture (I've tried, really).

DO BRANDS MATTER?

The conclusion from Cook's Illustrated's March 2003 baking powder test was that all the powders in the review showed similar performance. This may be a result of the US FDA regulations that require all baking powders to release at least 12% CO₂¹⁸ coupled with the constraints imposed by the acid-base chemistry itself, leading to only small differences in the amount of gas released from each brand. In other words, aside from the concerns over aluminum, we should reasonably expect double-acting baking powders from the leading brands to be interchangeable with each other in recipes.

Update 2009-08-19: Baker Debra Wink at the excellent bread-making resource The Fresh Loaf disagrees, and has empirical evidence that different brands exhibit different behaviors.

HOMEMADE BAKING POWDER

Sift or mix the following ingredients thoroughly:

2 parts	Cream of tartar
1 part	Baking soda
1 part	Cornstarch (optional)

Each "part" is measured by volume (e.g., teaspoons, tablespoons, cups—just keep them all the same). A 2:1 ratio between cream of tartar and baking soda is the classic formula, although to be exact, the ratio should be 5:2¹⁹. As mentioned above, the cornstarch is for moisture absorption and is only necessary if you're going make a large batch of baking powder and store it for a while; otherwise just make the quantity needed for each recipe, skip the cornstarch, and use it right away (keep in mind that if you've skipped on the cornstarch, then you should use less of the resulting powder than the quantity specified in the recipe—see the Substitutions section below for details). If my understanding is correct, excluding cornstarch also makes this baking powder kosher for Passover.

Since cream of tartar is a quick-reacting acid, homemade baking powder is single-acting. To make sure the leavening action from this baking powder doesn't fizzle out prematurely, place the batter into the oven as soon as possible after it is mixed. For extra insurance against early fizzling, it's also been suggested that you should add the baking soda and cream of tartar into your baking mixture separately, which seems like a good idea.

SUBSTITUTIONS

To substitute for 1 tsp double-acting baking powder, follow one of the options below (based mainly on David Joachim's The Food Substitutions Bible²⁰):

For homemade baking powder without cornstarch, either use ¾ tsp (i.e., ½ tsp cream of tartar + ¼ tsp baking soda) based on the classic formula, or 7/8 tsp (5/8 tsp cream of tartar + ¼ tsp baking soda) if your measuring tools are accurate enough. Place batter in oven as soon as possible.
1¼ tsp single-acting baking powder. Place batter in oven as soon as possible.
¼ tsp baking soda + ½ cup buttermilk. You will then need to reduce the other liquids in the recipe by ½ cup. This will alter the flavor of the recipe.
¼ tsp baking soda + ¼ cup molasses. You will then need to reduce the other liquids in the recipe by 3 tbsp and adjust the sweetener. This will alter the flavor of the recipe.

It seems a bit confusing that ¾ tsp of homemade baking powder and 1¼ tsp of of single-acting baking powder are both listed as appropriate substitutes for 1 tsp double-acting powder. I'm guessing that the 1¼ tsp quantity refers to commercially-made single-acting baking powder, which may have less leavening power or have been bulked up with non-reacting ingredients, but not having the author's resources, I really can't tell. Based on the suggestions for homemade powder without cornstarch, though, you should be able to use the same amount of homemade pre-mixed (that is, containing cornstarch) baking powder to substitute for commercial double-acting powder.

HOW MUCH SHOULD YOU USE?

You mean, other than following the recipe? Okay, I won't be so flip about it. As I'm sure you can figure, too little baking powder will mean too little rise and a dense result in your baked goods, which is undesirable. But does this mean more is better? Well, only to a degree. Too much baking powder creates supersized bubbles that burst and deflate—imagine blowing up bubblegum so much that it pops and gets all over your face—which, again, leads to dense baked goods with an added helping of nasty taste from the extra powder. So, then, what is the magic amount?

It's actually a little complicated. Shirley Corriher explains²¹:

The general rule is 1 to 1¼ teaspoons of baking powder per cup of flour in a recipe....[However,] many variables determine the proper amount of baking powder to be used, and you need to adjust the general rules for your own cooking conditions. More leavening can be used if the recipe calls for a lot of heavy ingredients like chopped fruits. When you change pan size, the amount of baking powder should be altered.

Corriher further notes that for the same amount of batter, the shallower it is in the pan (that is, with wider pans), the less powder you need. She also references Rose Levy Beranbaum's The Cake Bible for the exact amount of leavener to use relative to different pan sizes and batter quantities, but I don't have that book so I can't tell you more about it.

HIGH ALTITUDE BAKING

The rule of thumb is that general-purpose recipes should work well from sea level up to about 3,000 feet (910 m). Above that, the amount of baking powder as well as baking soda should be reduced. I have no first-hand experience with this, but the literature suggests that determining exact reductions is a somewhat complex issue. King Arthur Flour has some general guidelines, and the Colorado State University Extension makes slightly different recommendations specific to cakes while noting "[o]nly repeated experiments with each recipe can give the most successful proportions to use." In BakeWise, Shirley Corriher mentions that cookbook author Susan Purdy has done just that, making "all kinds of baked goods at sea level, 3,000, 5,000, 7,000, and 10,000 feet"²² (910 m, 1,520 m, 2,130 m, and 3,050 m), and published her results in Pie in the Sky. I have not seen this book myself, however.

SODIUM-FREE BAKING POWDERS

As noted in above (under aluminum-free baking powders), Ener-G and Hain are the two brands of sodium-free baking powder that I know of. Ener-G recommends using twice as much of its powder as regular baking powder to achieve the same leavening effect. Hain provide no such guidance, although some have tested it and found that it is one-for-one compatible—that is, use the same quantity—as regular powder. Other than these two specific instances, however, general guidelines vary (or are unreliable?). Most sources on the Internet recommend using 1.5 times as much sodium-free powder as standard baking powder. This advice, however, does not take into account the specific formulations of the different sodium-free powders. Although the greater atomic mass of potassium over sodium means that 19% more potassium bicarbonate (by weight) is needed to neutralize a given amount of acid as compared to baking soda²³, the ingredients listing doesn't tell us how much potassium bicarbonate is actually contained in the product that we buy. The Williams-Sonoma Kitchen Companion recommends doubling the quantity²⁴ but does not indicate the specific ingredients involved.

REFERENCES AND NOTES

W.P. Edwards, The Science of Bakery Products, Royal Society of Chemistry, 2007, p. 70
Lallemand Inc., Lallemand Baking Update (PDF), Vol. 1 No. 12, 1996
W.P. Edwards, The Science of Bakery Products, p. 71
"Baking Powder Expiry," Cook's Illustrated, 11/2002
Shirley O. Corriher, CookWise, William Morrow-Harper Collins, 1997, p. 73
Christopher Kimball, The Cook's Bible, Little, Brown, 1996, p. 348
Based on Harold McGee, On Food and Cooking (revised ed.), Scribner-Simon & Schuster, 2004, p. 533, with additions and changes from other sources.
I was unable to find a formula for sodium aluminum pyrophosphate—or, in fact, any mention of it in food industry literature of its use as a baking powder ingredient. Anyhow, given the charges of sodium (Na¹⁺), aluminum (Al³⁺), and the pyrophosphate compound (P₂O₇^4-), this formulation seems reasonable.
This item is not listed in McGee's table, and he uses SAPP as an abbreviation for sodium aluminum pyrophosphate. However, all the food industry references I've come across use SAPP as the shorthand for sodium acid pyrophosphate, so that's the convention I'm following here.
Samuel A. Matz, Bakery Technology and Engineering (3rd ed.), Springer, 1992, pp. 67, 69
Clyde E. Stauffer, Functional Additives for Bakery Foods, Springer, 1990, p.196

Based on the description of another product, I assume that "redried starch" is cornstarch.
George A. Burdock, Encyclopedia of Food and Color Additives, CRC Press, 1996, p. 409
Graph based on Robert C. Lindsay, Food Chemistry (3rd ed.), CRC Press, 1996, Owen R. Fennema, Ed., p. 772.
Shirley O. Corriher, BakeWise, Scribner-Simon & Schuster, 2008, p. 47
These datasheets are stored under two different sections of Clabber Girl's website (Foodservice and Ingredients), and it's a bit confusing because there are multiple datasheets, with different gas-release rates specified, for each product. I don't know why this is, but I've selected the most rounded-off figures for my table.
Samuel A. Matz, Bakery Technology and Engineering (3rd ed.), Springer, 1992, p. 71
Ibid.
Harold McGee, On Food and Cooking, p. 534
David Joachim, The Food Substitutions Bible, Robert Rose, 2005, p. 38
Shirley O. Corriher, CookWise, p. 138
Shirley O. Corriher, BakeWise, p. 50
W.P. Edwards, The Science of Bakery Products, p. 71
Mary Goodbody, Carolyn Miller, and Thy Tran, Williams-Sonoma Kitchen Companion, Oxmoor House, 2000, p. 23.

Clementine cake

noreply@blogger.com (Kit Chen) — Tue, 03 Feb 2009 20:55:00 +0000

With inspiration from smitten kitchen and knowledge that oranges are (one of the) symbols representing fortune for the Chinese New Year, it seemed only appropriate to mark the occasion by baking this cake. The ingredients list is short enough: oranges, eggs, sugar, almonds, and baking powder. Among the distinguishing features of this cake is the exclusion of both flour and butter from its recipe; however, I think what people will find most unusual here is the usage of whole oranges—both flesh and peel—as its main ingredient.

Before I can make this cake, though, there are hurdles to overcome...like, not owning a springform pan. Okay, no problem, I'll just call my friends to borrow one. Now, with a springform pan in hand, are we all set to bake? Uh, not so fast. It's the wrong size: the recipe is written for an 8-inch cake, but what I have is a 10-inch pan. This means that, to avoid ending up with an orange-flavored chapati, I need to make changes to an untried recipe before even taking the first step. Yikes.

Volumetrically, a 10" diameter cake is 56% larger than an 8" cake of the same height, and the most straightforward way to modify the recipe is simply to increase all ingredients by this amount. However, orange and egg quantities aren't amenable to being altered with such precision. The only practicable solution, then, is to change the recipe in whole-orange or whole-egg increments, change the other ingredient quantities accordingly, and make a cake that will be somewhat different in height from the original recipe and monitor the baking time to accommodate these changes. As it happens, the original recipe makes it easy to increase the egg quantity by 50%, and I was able to parallel this increase fairly well with the oranges I had on hand.

Oh, Just so you know, I did bake this cake in time for Chinese New Year, but it's taken me until now to finish this post. On to the recipe!

INGREDIENTS

Makes one 10-inch cake.

Quantity	Alternate Measures	Item
560 g	1 lb 4 oz (6 to 8 ea.)	Clementine oranges
375 g	13¼ oz (3½ cups)	Ground almonds
338 g	12 oz (1½ cups + 3 tbsp)	Granulated sugar
10 ml	2 tsp	Baking powder
9 large	9 large	Eggs
As needed	As needed	Butter or shortening, for greasing cake pan

EQUIPMENT

3- to 4-qt. saucepan, for boiling oranges.
Electric kettle or small saucepan, for boiling water to blanch almonds.
Medium-sized bowl (about 4 qt.), for blanching almonds. You can use this same bowl later to whisk the eggs.
Large bowl (about 6 to 8 qt.), for final mixing of cake ingredients.
Rubber spatula or wooden spoon.
Whisk.
Colander.
Knife and cutting board.
Wide and shallow baking pan (such as a rimmed baking sheet, aka jelly roll pan), for toasting almonds.
Food processor, fitted with steel blade. This will be used for both grinding the almonds and pureeing the oranges. There is no need to clean the workbowl between the two operations.
10" springform pan.
Parchment paper and kitchen shears/scissors.
Toothpick, for testing cake for doneness.
Kitchen timer, or other time-keeping device.
Kitchen scale and/or dry-ingredient measuring cups and spoons.

INSTRUCTIONS

You can also click on each of the images below to zoom in for more details.

PREPARE ORANGES AND ALMONDS

Oranges

Wash the oranges thoroughly. Remember, you'll be eating the skin.
Remove and discard any stem and calyx still attached to the fruits. I've found that these hard remnants tend not to get pureed in the food processor (see Step 8 photo), so it's best to remove them beforehand.
Place oranges in a 3- to 4-qt. saucepan and fill with enough water to float the oranges up by one-half to one inch.
Place saucepan on the stove. Bring water to boil over high heat, then place a lid over the pan, reduce heat to between Low and Med-Low, and simmer for two hours.
While the oranges are being boiled, check occasionally and refill the water if necessary.
Remove oranges from the cookpot (or drain into a colander) and let the oranges cool.
Once cooled, cut the oranges in half crosswise to check for seeds (pips). Remove and discard any seeds that you find. As you slice open the fruit, juice will run out. Be very careful to save as much juice as possible.
Now chop the oranges into pulp. This can be done with a knife, but is easier with either a food processor or a blender.

Almonds

Commercially-ground almonds, sold as either almond flour or almond meal (different terms for the same product), can be purchased online or in natural- and health-food stores. I've seen Bob's Red Mill almond meal in the natural foods section at a Kroger store near me, so I'm guessing it's the most widely available brand for local purchase. If you have or plan to buy commercially-ground almonds, then you can skip this entire almond-prepping section.

Before grinding the almonds, I removed their skins by blanching to avoid a mottled appearance in the cake and possibly avoid any additional bitterness from the skins. This is probably an optional step, though, depending on your preference. You can also buy blanched almonds in the store, in which case you can grind them up immediately.

The advantage of commercially-ground almonds, beyond the obvious labor savings, is a finer and more consistent grain size than almonds ground with a food processor. However, toasting nuts before adding them to recipes enhances their flavor, and, as far as I can tell, almond flour sold in stores is not toasted before grinding. Can you toast store-bought almond flour? Maybe, but I'd imagine the margin of error between "toasted" and "burnt" is a lot smaller with the flour than with whole almonds. Commercially-ground almonds also retail for about $12 per pound, whereas raw (skin-on) almonds cost around $6/lb. Update 2009-03-10: Well, maybe you shouldn't roast the almonds. Yikes.

You should prepare the almonds while the oranges are being cooked.

Place raw (skin-on) almonds into a bowl. As I mentioned above, if you have already-blanched almonds on hand, steps 2–5 are unnecessary.
In a separate pot (not the one with the oranges in it), boil some water. The quantity is not critical—you just need enough to cover the almonds.
Pour the boiling water over the almonds to cover, and soak for 1 minute.
Drain the almonds into a colander and rinse with cold water. Pinch the almonds between your thumb and forefinger, and the skin should slip off. Discard the skins.
Place blanched almonds on a towel and pat to dry.
Make sure the oven rack is at the center position. Turn on the oven and set the temperature to 375 °F.
Spread the almonds out on a wide baking pan. Place the pan into the preheated oven and toast until fragrant, about 10 to 15 minutes.
Remove almonds from oven and let cool.
Place the almonds into a food processor and grind into flour. I did not record how much time this took and simply stopped processing once the almond grains appeared "fine enough." The top image at left shows the ground almond's texture in the food processor, and the bottom image is a closer-in photo of the almonds in a mixing bowl. I don't know if it's possible to get the grain size to be much smaller and more consistent than this without using millstones, and I was afraid that I'd end up with almond butter if I had let the food processor run for much longer. Update 2009-03-03: Grind for no more than 30 seconds. See my homemade almond butter post.
Pour the ground almonds into a large mixing bowl so that the food processor can be used for pureeing the oranges.

PREPARE BAKING PAN

If you haven't already done so for toasting the almonds, make sure the cake rack is at the center position, turn on the oven, and set the temperature to 375 °F.
The original recipe (see Nigella Lawson, below) instructs to prep. the pan with both butter and parchment paper but doesn't explain why. The 1997 Joy of Cooking mentions that butter can applied between the pan and the parchment to keep the paper in place, yet How To Cook Everything has a recipe that instructs adding butter to the top (exposed) surface of the paper, which seems redundant to me. (I mean, isn't parchment non-stick already? Why add butter on top of it? Isn't that just gilding the lily?) Now that I've baked this cake, though, and know how sticky it is, this is what I think the procedure should be:
1. Cut a 10" diameter disc of parchment paper and place it onto the bottom of the cake pan. Apply butter to the top side of the parchment. With this cake, this is not redundant, as it needs all the help it can get to release from the pan.
2. Butter the sides of the springform pan, then line with a parchment. A total length of 31½" is needed to fit a 10" pan, although it is not necessary to have this in one continuous strip. Add butter the exposed surface of the parchment.

COMBINE INGREDIENTS AND BAKE

Add the sugar and baking powder to the ground almonds in the large mixing bowl. Mix thoroughly with a rubber spatula or wooden spoon.
In a medium mixing bowl, whisk the eggs.
Pour the whisked eggs into the large bowl and mix with the dry ingredients already in the bowl.
Pour the orange puree into the large bowl. Mix thoroughly with the egg/almond batter.
Pour cake batter into the prepared springform pan.
Place cake pan into the preheated oven and bake at 375 °F for approximately 1 hour. The cake is done when a toothpick inserted into its center comes out clean. When I checked my cake at 45 minutes, it was still jiggly, but had firmed up at 1 hour. My cake was done at 1 hr 10 min., which is consistent with other recipes that call for 1-hour bake times.
Once done, remove cake from oven and let cool in the pan.

Note: The original recipe suggests that you may need to cover the cake with aluminum foil after 40 minutes to avoid burning its top. I did not find this extra step to be necessary.

RECIPE COMMENTARY

First of all, this cake is easier than my recipe makes it look—it's actually easy, period. I just didn't want to leave out any details or render any steps ambiguous. If you've read this far, congratulations, and go make the cake. If you know anyone who wants to make a simple cake but got scared by the length of my post, tell them they can follow Nigella Lawson's recipe for it.
This is apparently a very popular recipe, and copies of it are all over the Internet, most of which refer back to Nigella Lawson. However, from what I can tell this cake is probably Middle Eastern in origin, and Claudia Roden has a variant that uses large oranges (such as Valencias or navels) instead of clementines; you can find her recipe at the bottom of this page. It was also pointed out on Chowhound that James Beard had included a large-orange cake recipe in one of his cookbooks from the early 1980s.
I think the original recipe is a bit vague in its instruction to boil the oranges. Should I cover the pot with a lid? How hard should I boil them? With the amount of water originally specified (just enough to cover the oranges), I'd be afraid of cooking the pot dry if it's left on high heat without a lid for two hours. It's much safer, I believe, to cover the pot and leave it at a gentle simmer for this amount of time.
Speaking of vagueness, I have a feeling this recipe can tolerate pretty broad variations in the ingredient quantities, so measurement accuracy isn't a crucial factor in its outcome. As an example, the original recipe called for one heaping teaspoon of baking powder for an 8-inch cake, which is an imprecise quantity that can vary up to about 2x depending on how tall the heap is. For the sake removing ambiguity, though, I've specified exact quantities for all ingredients.

CAKE COMMENTARY

The cake domed up during baking, but it fell as it cooled so that the top of the cake flattened nicely.
The texture of this cake is denser than those made with wheat flour; however, it is not heavy.
The cake is also very moist—so moist, in fact, that it almost feels underdone. However, as the toothpick came out clean, my cake was properly baked by that test. I've seen descriptions that range from a soaked sponge to being almost pudding-like.
There is a bit of graininess from the almonds, though it is not unpleasant. I'd imagine that commercially-ground almonds will result in a smoother texture. The occasional bites of orange zest provide zing to the cake.
I like this cake, and, judging by the comments from the Food Network page, so do most people; the few negative reviews, however, are rather strident. Aside from just a matter of individual taste, I think it's possible that the negative reviewers may have expected a cake similar to those made with wheat flour instead of something so dense and moist. Another issue is that clementine oranges are by no means uniformly sweet, and it may be difficult to predict their flavor until they're baked into the cake; it is possible, then, that the negative reviewers may have mixed bitter oranges into their cakes.
It's not entirely clear to me why this cake is so sticky. I tried to compare it to cake recipes that contain butter, which only revealed to me that either a) there is no such thing as a standardized cake recipe (and therefore no comparison is possible), or b) my search skills stink. At any rate, my guess is that it's a combination of the number of eggs (more than most recipes, it seems, though not excessively so) and the amount of butter used (zero). While almonds contain a lot of fat, I think they're still bound up in the ground particles, and thus are not useful for lubricating the cake. On the flip side, the protein in the almonds is similarly bound up, so it should not contribute to making the cake any stickier.

KOSHER FOR PASSOVER?

Well, I'm not going to get into details about Jewish dietary laws, because I know almost nothing about them. From what little I understand, though, I believe chemical leaveners are acceptable for Passover, and the only offending ingredient in most baking powders is cornstarch. If that's the case, then it's easy to make this recipe kosher by mixing your own baking powder at home.

The standard formula for homemade baking powder is two parts cream of tartar to one part baking soda by volume. Cornstarch is sometimes added (same quantity as baking soda) to absorb moisture during storage, but if you're going to make and use your own powder right away, this is a non-issue. For this recipe, the quantities are:

1 tsp	Cream of tartar
½ tsp	Baking soda

Sift together the two ingredients. This will make 1½ tsp of baking powder, which at first appears less than what I had specified above; however, please realize that the original quantity assumes usage of commercially-made baking powder, which has added bulk from cornstarch whereas this homemade powder doesn't.

This is a single-action baking powder, which is activated by mixing with a liquid. All the baking powders I've seen in stores are double-acting, which are activated again by the high temperature inside an oven. To make sure the leavening action from this baking powder doesn't fizzle out, make sure to place the cake into the oven as soon as possible after the batter is mixed.

Of course, feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.

CLEMENTINES, MANDARINS, & TANGERINES

So what's the difference between a clementine orange, a mandarin orange, and a tangerine anyway? Well, to start with, the tangerine is a type of mandarin orange, not a different variety of citrus fruit. While the clementine is commonly thought to be an accidental cross between a mandarin and a sweet orange discovered in the Algeria by Father Clement (Vincent Rodier) in the early 1900s, some scholars maintain that "it is indistinguishable from and probably identical to" the mandarin orange common in the Guangzhou (Canton) province of China. Now, I'm no expert so don't take my word as gospel, but it seems the short answer is: they're all mandarins.

The satsuma is yet another member of the mandarin family, though I don't think I've seen it in the stores around here lately. This may well mean that, in terms of eating and cooking, the question of distinguishing between different mandarin breeds will become moot as the clementine increases its market share and displaces other mandarins. Specifically with regard to this recipe, considering that a large-orange variant of it exists, I'd venture to say that all mandarin types can be used interchangeably for it.

YIELDS

I did not record this, but if my memory is correct, I started with 388 grams of raw almonds. After removing the skins and toasting them (and eating a few along the way, I admit), I weighed them again and got 358 g of almonds and 14 g of skins. Did I eat that many? Almonds with skins weigh, roughly, around 1.7 to 2 grams each, which calculates out to a loss of between 8 to 10 almonds. Except I don't think I ate that many. Really, I don't. My guess is that the difference between the original quantity, what I ate, and the final weight is the result of moisture lost during toasting, but I don't have enough data to be sure. For future planning, though, I think that the weight ratio of these blanched/toasted almonds and skins (358:14) is a good place to start.

For this cake, I added a second batch of almonds to bring the blanched/toasted almond weight up to 375 g, although as noted above, exactly quantities are probably not imperative for this recipe.

Update 2009-03-03: From my homemade almond butter post, 286 grams of skin-on almonds yield 280 grams after roasting. If whole almonds and blanched almonds evaporate similarly, we should expect an after-roast weight of 380 g for a start weight of 388 g. From above, the blanched almonds and skins add up to 372 g, meaning an unaccounted-for loss of 8 grams. Taking into consideration how much an individual almond weighs, this calculates to a loss of 4 or 5 almonds—which actually sounds about how many I snacked on, so the data appears correct.

Prefab mirepoix

noreply@blogger.com (Kit Chen) — Thu, 22 Jan 2009 21:17:00 +0000

Seen at Whole Foods Market: packages of diced fresh onions, celery, and carrots in foam trays, wrapped in plastic film and labeled "mirepoix." Um, what? Okay, I'm not saying that Whole Foods has mislabeled this item, because those ingredients are just what go into mirepoix, but what's the point of packaging it?

Look, I understand why people buy convenience foods that require only reheating to be served. I can also see the appeal of meal kits where all or most of the ingredients are included and a person only has to follow the package instructions to prepare it. I have no issues with packaged stock as a time-saver, either. However, if someone is going to the trouble of starting with mirepoix in making a dish, it seems to me that this person would be interested more in using minimally-preprocessed ingredients than in saving time or effort. If this is the case, then why not start, you know, at the beginning? With whole ingredients? How much extra effort is involved in chopping up these vegetables that makes it worthwhile to pay someone else to do it?

Do I spend too much time at Whole Foods? Do other stores carry prefab mirepoix? Why would anyone buy it? Will someone explain this to me?

How much does water weigh?

noreply@blogger.com (Kit Chen) — Tue, 13 Jan 2009 15:30:00 +0000

Update 2009-08-07: Now the slightly lower density of water at room temperature is taken into account, improving the answer by 0.3%.

Is this a silly question? Not at all, if you're using either American or Imperial measurements.

I just ran across two web pages that say one cup of water weighs 8 ounces (oz). To protect the guilty, I won't mention the sites except to say that one is from a physicist and the other from a cooking magazine, both of whom should know better—though from different perspectives—than to publish this incorrect information. Let's do the math:

By definition, 1 liter (L) holds 1000 cubic cm (cm³, or cc) of volume, thus 1 milliliter (mL) is the same as 1 cc in volume. The weight of water was also initially defined as being 1 kilogram (kg) per liter, but that definition has been discarded since the density of water changes with temperature and atmospheric pressure (if you're curious, this PDF outlines some factors to consider when measuring water in a lab). Taking this into account, the following calculations are based on data at room temperature (25 °C/77 °F) and 1 atmosphere (basically, air pressure at sea level). Tap water is slightly denser than pure water, but the difference is negligible at room temperature. Under these conditions, water has a density of 997.13 kg/m³. For the calculations, we'll also need a few conversion factors:

1 m = 100 cm
1 kg = 1000 g
1 L = 1.0567 US quarts (qt)
1 qt = 4 cups
1 lb = 16 oz = 453.59 g

Just to be explicitly clear, all non-metric weights in this post are expressed in avoirdupois units. This is the ordinary weight system used in the US (as opposed to troy units, which are used for weighing precious metals). Since avoirdupois is the system in common usage, I think it'll be a bit cleaner to omit this extra notation in the equations. Now we calculate,

(997.13 kg/m³) × (1000 g/kg) × (1 m/100 cm)³ × (1000 cm³/L) = 997.13 g/L

Converting to US units,

(997.13 g/L) × (1 lb/453.59 g) × (1 L/1.0567 qt) = 2.0803 lb/qt

Finally, converting to cups,

(2.0803 lb/qt) × (16 oz/lb) × (1 qt/4 cups) = 8.3214 oz/cup (US)

In the US customary measurement system, then, one cup of water, which is 8 fluid ounces (fl. oz) in volume, is actually 8.3214 oz in weight. Is it close enough? I don't think so. If you were measuring water on a digital scale that displays 1/8-oz increments, the nearest reading would be 8-3/8 oz. For scales with 1/4-oz resolution, the nearest reading would be 8-1/4 oz.

Based on the above, we can make some handy tables for various volumes. Let's start with metric figures first:

Weight of water at 25 °C (77 °F) at sea level.
Metric Volume	US Volume	Imperial Volume	Metric Weight	Avoirdupois Weight
1 milliliter (= 1 cc or cm³)	0.03381 fl oz	0.03520 fl oz	0.9971 g	0.03517 oz
1 liter	1.057 qt	0.8799 qt	0.9971 kg	2.198 lb
1 cubic meter	264.2 gal	220.0 gal	997.1 kg	2198 lb

In US units:

* Based on these defined (i.e., exact) figures: 1 US liquid gallon = 231 in³ and 1 inch = 2.54 cm. See the Wikipedia links below for source data.
US Customary Volume	Multiplier (exact)	Metric Volume*	Avoirdupois Weight	Metric Weight
1 teaspoon	N/A	4.929 mL	0.1734 oz	4.915 g
1 tablespoon	= 3 tsp	14.79 mL	0.5201 oz	14.74 g
1 fluid ounce	= 2 tbsp	29.57 mL	1.040 oz	29.49 g
1 cup	= 8 fl oz	236.6 mL	8.321 oz	235.9 g
1 pint	= 2 cup	473.2 mL	16.64 oz (1.040 lb)	471.8 g
1 quart	= 2 pt	0.9464 L	33.29 oz (2.080 lb)	0.9436 kg
1 gallon	= 4 qt	3.785 L	8.321 lb	3.775 kg
1 cubic inch	N/A	16.39 mL	0.5764 oz	16.34 g
1 cubic foot	= 1728 in³	28.32 L	62.25 lb	28.24 kg
1 cubic yard	= 27 ft³	764.6 L	1681 lb	762.4 kg

Let's pause for a moment and think about terminology a bit. It seems that some people have trouble distinguishing between how weight and volume are defined. What's the difference? Simply,

Weight = how heavy
Volume = how big

It's important to remember that different substances filled to the same size (volume) can have different weights. To use a classic example, a bucket full of feathers will be lighter in weight than the same bucket filled with rocks. The same principle applies to liquids in the kitchen as well. A cup (that is, 8 fluid ounces) of oil will weigh less than a cup of water.

Speaking of fluid ounces, what do you think happens when the name of a unit normally associated with weight (oz) gets included in a unit for measuring volume (fl. oz)? Constant confusion, that's what. The nomenclature makes for a huge mess, but it's what we're stuck with.

It also doesn't help matters that the US measures are colloquially called "English" or "British" units, even though the official US and Imperial systems differ significantly when it comes to measuring volume. As it happens, 1 Imperial fl. oz equals 0.96076 US fl. oz, so 8 Imperial fl. oz of water is equivalent to 7.9948 oz by weight, which I believe is actually close enough to 8 oz for cooking-measurement purposes.

Further, not only do the measurements differ between US customary and Imperial units, so do the multipliers. An Imperial pint, for example, is 20 Imperial fl oz, whereas a US pint is 16 US fl oz. So a pint of water weighs either 16.643 oz (US) or 19.987 oz (Imperial). Not quite "a pint's a pound the world around," there. At any rate, we can also calculate a table for Imperial units:

* Based on these defined (i.e., exact) figures: 1 Imperial gallon = 4.54609 L & 1 Imp. tbsp = 5/8 Imp. fl. oz. See the Wikipedia links below for source data.
Imperial (UK) Volume	Multiplier (exact)	Metric Volume*	Avoirdupois Weight	Metric Weight
1 teaspoon	N/A	5.919 mL	0.2082 oz	5.902 g
1 dessertspoon	= 2 tsp	11.84 mL	0.4164 oz	11.80 g
1 tablespoon	= 3 tsp	17.76 mL	0.6246 oz	17.71 g
1 fluid ounce	= 1.6 tbsp	28.41 mL	0.9994 oz	28.33 g
1 cup	= 10 fl oz	284.1 mL	9.994 oz	283.3 g
1 pint	= 2 cup	568.3 mL	19.99 oz (1.249 lb)	566.6 g
1 quart	= 2 pt	1.137 L	39.97 oz (2.498 lb)	1.133 kg
1 gallon	= 4 qt	4.546 L	9.994 lb	4.533 kg
Cubic inch, foot, and yard figures are the same as US measures.

Notice how close an Imperial gallon of water comes to weighing 10 lbs. That's because, similar to the original kg/L equivalence, the Imperial gallon was defined as the volume occupied by 10 lbs of distilled water, but at a lower temperature and slightly higher pressure than what I used here (specifically, 62 °F and 30 inches of mercury, which is about 1.0025 atm).

Conversely, we can also figure volumes based on a starting weight, again under the condition of 25 °C (77 °F) at sea level:

Weight of water	US Volume	Imperial Volume	Metric Volume
1 gram	0.03391 fl oz	0.03530 fl oz	1.003 mL
1 kilogram	33.91 fl oz (1.060 qt)	35.30 fl oz (0.8824 qt)	1.003 L
1 avoirdupois ounce	0.9614 fl oz	1.001 fl oz	28.43 mL
1 avoirdupois pound	15.38 fl oz (1.923 cup)	16.01 fl oz (1.601 cup)	454.9 mL

You know, this post started as a rant but turned into a bunch of conversion tables. How did that happen? I think I'll stop here before I get all worked up over the distinction within the US system itself of liquid quarts vs. dry quarts or how the customary measures used in cooking differ from the FDA-regulated measures used for food nutrition labeling. Makes me wish all of our recipes would be published in metric, but I know I'll never see the day.

Oh, if you've read this far (thank you, really), you may now be wondering why I haven't yet provided a conversion table between US and Imperial volumes or between cubed lengths and volumes. The reason is because this post is about the weight of water, expressed in multiple units, and not about converting a volume from one unit to another. Besides, the existing tables already contain enough information, in the form of metric volumes or weights, for you to derive these conversions yourself—or, for a more direct route, you can use any of the calculators available online. You can also check with Wikipedia for conversion tables and unit definitions:

Texas caviar

noreply@blogger.com (Kit Chen) — Thu, 08 Jan 2009 12:12:00 +0000

Update: For a simplified version of this recipe, using canned products, go here.

A belated Happy New Year to everyone. Around these parts, black-eyed peas are traditionally eaten on New Year's Day for good luck. Given how the last half of 2008 went, I think 2009 will need all the help it can get. While one can simply prepare black-eyed peas (which are also called cowpeas, but are actually beans) with just a few flavorings, I like to mix it with other ingredients into a bean salsa called Texas Caviar. As far as I know, there is no such thing as a canonical Texas Caviar, and a search on the Internet shows that recipes are certainly all over the map. My version is based on the recipe from p. 280 of American Home Cooking by Bill and Cheryl Jamison, but in reality I'm still tweaking it. The recipe below, then, is not what I had just made for this past New Year's, but what I'm planning for the next time around. (It's pretty close, though—the base ingredients are in good shape, I just need to get the after-cooking yields straightened out, as you'll see.)

INGREDIENTS

Beans and Corn

6 oz.	Black beans (dried, about 3/4 cup), plus
	3 cups water and 1 tsp table salt
8 oz.	Black-eyed peas, fresh or frozen, plus
	4 cups water and 1 tsp table salt
3/4 cup	Yellow corn kernels

Aromatic Vegetables

1 small	Red bell pepper (about 2/3 cup diced)
3 stalks	Celery (about 2/3 cup diced)
1 small	Onion (about 1/2 cup diced)
1 medium	Jalapeno chile, fresh or pickled

Dressing and Seasoning

1/4 tsp	Ground cumin, or
	1/4 heaping tsp whole cumin seeds (preferred)
2 medium	Garlic cloves
1 tsp	Coarsely ground black pepper, or more to taste
1/2 tsp	Table salt, or more to taste
1/4 cup	Apple cider vinegar
1/2 cup	Neutral-tasting vegetable oil

INSTRUCTIONS

COOK THE BEANS AND CORN

For beans, there are evidently some pretty strongly-held opinions on soaking methods (long soak, quick soak, or no soak) and when to add salt during cooking. From all I've read, none of it really matters, as soaking vs. not-soaking merely changes the cooking time, and, contrary to much handed-down advice, adding salt early doesn't toughen the beans. But if you disagree with this and have another way that you have (and can be) relied upon, then hey, do whatever works for you; I'm not going to argue.

Black beans

Spread the beans out on a flat surface and pick out any pebbles, loose skins, and broken bits and discard.
Place the beans in a cooking pot and fill with water. Pick out any floaters and discard.
If you are able to plan ahead, soak the beans overnight (8 to 12 hours) before cooking. If not, it's no problem to cook the beans right away, it'll just take more time.
If you've let the beans soak, drain the soaking water.
Fill the pot with 3 cups water and place on a stove.
Bring the water to boil over High heat, then reduce heat to between Low and Med-Low so that the water is simmering. Skim off the foam, add 1 tsp salt, then place a lid on the pot and let simmer until the texture is to your liking. Check on the beans starting at about 30 minutes. Soaked beans that are fresh will cook the quickest, while old and/or unsoaked beans will take longer.

Black-eyed peas

Place the beans in a cooking pot (approx. 3 qt. capacity) and fill with water. Pick out the floaters, loose skins, and broken bits and discard. Drain water and rinse/drain a few more times until the water is clear.
Now fill the pot with 4 cups of water and place on a stove.
Bring the water to boil over High heat, then reduce heat to between Low and Med-Low so that the water is simmering. Skim off the foam, add 1 tsp salt, then place a lid on the pot and let simmer for until bean texture is to your liking. As with the black beans, start checking at about 30 minutes.

Corn

You can use kernels cut off a cob or frozen kernels. Here in the middle of winter, I just zapped some corn straight from the freezer into the microwave on high power for about 2 minutes.
Place the cooked corn into a mixing bowl (6 qts is a good size) to combine with other ingredients later.

PREPARE THE VEGETABLES

Red bell pepper

Remove and discard the stem, core, and seeds. Then trim away the white portions of the ribs.
Cut the pepper into 1/4" square pieces (technically, a small dice).
Place the pepper dices into the mixing bowl with the corn.

Celery

Either wash the stalks under running water or swish them in a bowl of water to make sure that all the dirt and grit have been removed.
Remove the leaves if there are any. Cut off approx. the bottom 1" of each stalk. Either discard these trimmings or save them for making stock another time.
Cut each stalk into 1/4" squares.
Place the celery dices into the mixing bowl with the corn and bell pepper.

Onion

Cut off the very top and bottom portions of the onion. Remove the papery skin. Discard trimmings or save for stock.
Chop the onion into 1/4" squares.
Place the onion dices into the mixing bowl with the corn, bell pepper, and celery.

Jalapeno

I recommend handling hot chiles (such as jalapenos) with gloves. Disposable or surgical gloves are nice for this purpose. Otherwise, at least be very careful not to touch sensitive parts of your body, such as your eyes or any cut skin, if you've handled hot chiles with bare hands.
Remove and discard the stem. You may keep or discard the core and seeds depending on your desired level or heat. Chiles with removed core and seeds will be less hot.
Cut the jalapeno into 1/8" squares. For you fancy-schmancy types, this is a brunoise.
Place the jalapeno pieces into the mixing bowl with the previous ingredients. Stir to mix.

PREPARE THE DRESSING

Ideally, you'd like to have a good oil/acid emulsion, and the best emulsions are achieved by running a blender with vinegar in its pitcher while slowly drizzling oil into it. However, this is potentially a messy operation (I'll get to that in a bit). The next-best method as far as emulsion quality goes is to keep whisking the vinegar by hand while drizzling oil into it. But you need three arms to whisk, drizzle, and hold the bowl! Well, you can put a wet towel on the counter and set the bowl on that to keep it stationary. But if you're just not up to that, simply putting the oil, vinegar, and seasonings together and whisking them all at once works, too; the emulsion won't hold, but the taste really doesn't suffer much.

I should also mention here that classic oil:acid ratio is 3:1 for vinaigrettes, but I think this recipe has enough sweet ingredients in it (corn, bell pepper, and celery) that a stronger acidic bite in the dressing serves to balance out the flavors better.

If using ground cumin, place it into a mixing vessel—either a small mixing bowl or a blender's pitcher. Otherwise, put the whole seeds into a small skillet and place it on the stove. Toast the seeds over medium heat until fragrant. Stir the seeds or shake the pan to prevent burning. After toasting, grind the seeds with a mortar and pestle, spice grinder, or coffee mill, then place the ground seeds into the mixing vessel.
Peel and mince the garlic cloves, then place into the mixing vessel.
Add the vinegar to a mixing vessel, either a small mixing bowl or a blender's pitcher.
Add the salt and pepper to the mixing vessel. You can adjust for taste later.
Add the vinegar to the mixing vessel and combine with the oil as mentioned above, either by running the blender or whisking manually.

Now, about the blender mess. I don't know how common this is, but evidently the "small" hole in my blender's lid is still big enough to allow vinegar and oil to spew out of it when the blender is running. Result? Oil and vinegar droplets all over the countertop and upper cabinets. I'm thinking that maybe next time I should put a funnel over the lid to cover up most of this opening. That'll probably help with the drizzling, too. Or use a stick blender in a cup. I just have to remember to make sure the blades are fully immersed before turning it on, otherwise I'll have another mess. Or, maybe I could practice first. With water. Outdoors.

COMBINE BEANS AND DRESSING

Pour the cooked black beans and black-eyed peas into a colander and drain completely.
Empty the colander into the mixing bowl that already contains the corn, celery, bell pepper, onion, and jalapeno.
Pour the oil/vinegar mixture over the cooked beans and stir with a spatula or wooden spoon to mix. Adjust salt and pepper to taste.
You can serve this immediately, but it's better to let it rest in a refrigerator for at least a few hours for the flavors to combine.

YIELDS

Measurements taken while making this year's batch:

8 oz. raw black-eyed peas measure approx. 2 cups (!?)
8 oz. raw black-eyed peas weigh 9.6 oz. and measure approx. 1-2/3 cups by volume after cooking. This makes no sense. Either the before or after cooking volumetric measure is wrong, or some of these beans mysteriously disappeared during cooking.
8 oz. dried black beans weigh 1 lb. and measure 2 cups after soaking but before cooking.
8 oz. dried black beans weigh 1 lb. 2 oz. and measure approx. 3 cups by volume after cooking. This is somewhat in conflict with my earlier measurements, which showed that 8 oz. dried black beans yield between 2-2/3 and 2-3/4 cups after cooking. Also, we can see that there is additional water absorption during cooking, but I'm surprised that the volume increased by 50%. I'll have to see where this data anomaly comes from.

Adding all the ingredients together and considering the uncertainties, this recipe should make between 6 to 6.5 cups of finished Texas Caviar.

Bowl of Plenty

Kitchen envy, Tour de France style

Fried butter

Left-handed dishers (ice cream scoops)

THE TAKEAWAY

Disher (aka ice cream scoop) sizes

THE TAKEAWAY

C'mon Max, don't hate

A quick note

Foraging?

Texas caviar, for the patience-challenged

RECIPE

INGREDIENTS

EQUIPMENT

INSTRUCTIONS

TECHNIQUE

Raw sweet corn and cashew chowder (sort of)

INGREDIENTS

EQUIPMENT

INSTRUCTIONS

VARIATIONS

ARE THE CASHEWS REALLY RAW?

Vegetarians watch out!

Creamy split pea and petite pea soup

RECIPE

INGREDIENTS

EQUIPMENT

INSTRUCTIONS

NOTES

Raw almond butter

A NOTE FOR RAW FOODISTS

Can you freeze almond butter?

Homemade almond butter

INGREDIENTS

EQUIPMENT

INSTRUCTIONS

EXTENDING THE RECIPE

YIELDS

Baking powder

CONTENTS

Clementine cake

INGREDIENTS

EQUIPMENT

INSTRUCTIONS

PREPARE ORANGES AND ALMONDS

PREPARE BAKING PAN

COMBINE INGREDIENTS AND BAKE

RECIPE COMMENTARY

CAKE COMMENTARY

KOSHER FOR PASSOVER?

CLEMENTINES, MANDARINS, & TANGERINES

YIELDS

Prefab mirepoix

How much does water weigh?

Texas caviar

INGREDIENTS

INSTRUCTIONS

COOK THE BEANS AND CORN

PREPARE THE VEGETABLES

PREPARE THE DRESSING

COMBINE BEANS AND DRESSING

YIELDS