How to keep opened coconut safely? Once the coconut is opened , it is attracting fruit flies and other flies. Also, the white color changes to brownish, rendering it unusable.

Is there any way we can "save" an opened coconut. I do not have a  refrigerator yet, so techniques that don't involve a fridge are appreciated.

I would suggest just put some plastic foil around it, so the bugs aren't on it. And don't put it in direct sunlight. Since you have no fridge, maybe search for a 'cooler' place (cellar, cabinet, a place where the sun never comes etc.) to put it.

I myself take out all the meat of the coconut, put plastic foil around it and put it in the fridge. That way, it's good for a couple of days.

Do you have a freezer? You can also put some in there. It will be good for longer than a couple of days (up to a couple of months if you preserved it well). I have no idea how it turns out afterwards. I'm guessing it will be a bit less 'juicy'.

Another way to preserve it, is to dry the coconut. But this will of course damage the flavour.

Cutting the coconut pieces and put it in the cup of water and for an hour dispose the water and pour new water into that


Extent of poultry denaturing via freezing(ice crystal formation)? I am told that during freezing ice crystals rupture vessels in poultry and denature them.  This causes the poultry to have larger pores and so when cooking things like soup the poultry absorbs more water.

If you have a thin layer of ice crystal formation on your poultry is this going to denature just as much as if you had larger ice crystals forming?
I notice varying degree of ice crystal formation on different parts of my poultry in the freezer, do you know what factors might cause this to be the case e.g. perhaps bagging prevents ice crystal formation?
Will the length of time left in the freezer make a difference to the degree of pores size opening i.e. if you leave it for one day will that have near as much affect as if you had left it for a week?

Ideally like somebody who understands the chemistry of these things to answer with explanation but anybody who knows the correct answer will do.

Thanks in advance.

Please clarify two things in your answer.

1.You said if the container is not air tight frost will develop.  Will this frost develop 'on' the food i.e. have no affect to denaturing as you say or is it likely to make its  way 'in' the food and have a denaturing effect?

2.You have said if a food is frozen it is frozen and thereafter no denaturing can occur.  Are you saying if frost develops in an already frozen food no denaturing will occur?  Are you also saying the denaturing only occurs when meat is in the process of freezing and during this time only do any developing ice crystals have an affect?

There's not really much chemistry happening here. It's just basic physics - ice crystals form when you freeze it, tearing through things a bit, and then they melt back into water when you thaw it. Some proteins are indeed sensitive to denaturing during freezing, but that's basically going to be a constant no matter how you freeze it. (Denaturing is just a destruction of the tertiary structure of the protein - so it will mess with its structural properties, but since it doesn't destroy the amino acids, it won't alter nutritional value. I don't know if structure-giving proteins in meat are sensitive to freezing denaturation, but I don't think there's anything you can do to affect it anyway.)

With respect to your first question: it's not the ice formation on the surface that matters. That's just sitting on the surface. It's the ice forming in the chicken that's tearing it apart. Amount of surface ice doesn't have an effect on the food underneath. It does mean that there'll be more water when you thaw it, though, and sometimes that's very undesirable (e.g. for bread) and sometimes it's just annoying (vegetables that you want to cook without much water). But all that matters for the food itself is the fact that it's frozen. This is the same kind of the thing that you see with fruit - if you freeze and thaw it, it'll be completely mushy, now that the ice crystals have destroyed its internal structure. This isn't so pronounced with meat, since it doesn't have as high a water content, but the texture is still somewhat altered.

For your second question: it's just a matter of how much moisture-containing air was able to get to the food. This is a common problem. The ideal case is a completely vacuum-sealed, airtight container: only the food will freeze, and there's no room for moisture to get to it and form surface ice. If something is airtight but was sealed in with normal, somewhat humid air, that moisture will create frost on the food. If it's not airtight, air will leak in, and humidity is brought in when you open the freezer, so it'll slowly accumulate frost.

For your third question: once something is frozen, it's frozen. It's not moving anymore. Pores aren't being opened. There's no effect from food being frozen longer. (Unless it's not airtight, in which case it can take on odors from the freezer - but that takes a while.)

I can think of two things which could conceivably have an effect: freezing at different rates, and freezing and thawing multiple times. The former is hard to mess with at home, but freezing very rapidly reduces the amount of destruction. In a home freezer you're already freezing very slowly; freezing more slowly probably wouldn't be significantly different. Multiple freeze/thaws should tear things up a bit more (though probably two freezes won't tear things up twice as much, since some crystals will just form in the same place they did last time).

Regarding the Ice crystals on the chicken: Where is this ice forming? Is this an ice glaze on the chicken or is this "frost" in the package?

'Frozen with ice glazed' is a commercial procedure. The glaze helps to reduce oxygen penetration or absorption by the surface protein - to retard lipid oxidation. This is done, when vacuum packaging is not an option.

Frost in the package is in most cases a sign of Freeze-Thaw-Freeze (as from defrost cycles) and the resulting dehydration of the chicken. Ice crystal formation is generally extra-cellar. The amount of damage is dependent on several factors.

The rate of freezing. Quick freezing produces smaller crystals than slow freezing. Second
Did the the processor utilize a "Cr-yo-protect-ant", an added substance (Eg, refined sugar)  added to minimize freezer damage to the protein - to stabilize the water.

So it does matter how we freeze and to what temperature. A chicken at -18 C is not frozen. The solutes of the  protein prevent freezing. In order to declare solid frozen will require -62 degrees C (In most commercial cases the temperature is -25 to-27 C).

The point of Frost variability makes freeze thaw a concern, the retained moisture content is not the same under the skin of a breast and thigh.

Immersion chilled, for young light weight birds, the water is taped under the skin. note the  actual meat (MC) is about the  same 73.5%. What you see, may well be, retained water. Migration from under the skin, in the skin.

Perhaps, is the chicken "enhanced"? - this a 12% water added product.

Denaturing of a whole chicken is initiated by heat, or cold (Frozen Induced Denaturation ), acid or salt.

What is of significance, is the length of time in the freezer. The period of time for frozen storage is a factor of Denaturation. A maximum of four months is suggested. There are a significant amount of   Chemical reactions happening here. The point is while the alpha helix - the coiled structured is relaxed - it provides a weak point for the initiation of  Lipid Per-oxidation, that shall result in a free radical chain reaction - resulting in a product unfit to eat.


Time&Temperature vs energy needed for molecules structure's changes Recently I've read an interesting post about time vs temperature (Time vs. Temperature - What changes what?)

I've been thinking about this problem for a long time.
and I'd like to share an idea..
"A single piece of meal, need certain amount of energy to modify its molecules structure."

Sous vide technique for cooking pork cheeks says (made by a well known Chef):

48h at 65ºC or 24h at 80ºC

This long time is needed to denature the myosin and other internal transformations...and so
For those transformations, we need to give energy to the meat.

So, if we asume, that both temperature/time alternatives, give us the perfect result.

Is it possible to know how much energy is used in each situation? could it be a similar amount of energy?

If this hypothesis is valid, then, we could use that value, to answer two questions:
1.-how many hours will be needed if we cook it at 70ºC?
2.-if we'll cook it for 36h, what should be the temperature than we need to keep?

anyone could help us with the formulas?
thanks a lot!

The hypothesis is somewhat valid. The version which is true is: there is a correlation between the total amount of energy which went into the meat and the degree of doneness. And because the total energy is the rate of energy input multiplied by the time you are adding energy to the system, time and heat are interchangeable to some extent.

However, there is no constant "total amount of energy" which needs to go into the meat. Protein denaturing is a complicated stochastic process. If we were to assume that we have a uniform thin layer of meat and a perfectly uniform heat source parallel to it, we still wouldn't have a constant total amount of energy. It is a bit less noticeable with meat, where preparation methods are limited (*), but in eggs it is easy to observe that the speed at which yolks are heated will have a noticeable difference on the final texture of a custard.

Even if you could get away with a usable range for the "total amount of energy", you could still not predict the time needed by a given piece of meat at a given temperature. We are talking about a complex nonlinear system here. That part is a duplicate of another question, so I will simply post a link to my older answer.

So in the end, there is a very good reason why you should check for doneness instead of try to predict doneness. Or, in the special case of sous vide, use the empirically determined charts somebody else went to all the trouble compiling. Calculating it for yourself is completely impractical.

Heat transfer is going to be the temperature difference X area X coefficient X time.

Since the temp of meat changes it would really be an integral equation but let's not make it hard.

There is also obviously a minimum temp as meat does not cook in a refrigerator.  The guideline from USDA is cook pork to 145 F / 63 C so that would be the minimum cooking temperature and it would take a while.  That 65 is very close to the finish temp.

What meat temp would have those two heat transfer the same

48(65-t) X a X c = 24(80 - t) X a X c
2(65 - t) = 80 - t
130 = 80 + t
50 C = t = 122 F
But that is taking a constant temp so finish temp would be higher

If you extrapolate this to 36 hours you are going to be pretty much at final meat temperature.

The meat has an initial and final state. It takes fixed amount of heat to break it down. Temperature is not what cooks the meat. Heat cooks the meat and temperature is what drives the heat transfer. It is done when it gets to a final temperature but heat transfer is what got is there. The cooking temperature needs to be at least final meat temperature or heat transfer stops.

You would need to take case by case.  You are only going to get estimates with heat transfer equations.


Cleaning burr coffee grinder I have a medium-end, drop-through burr espresso coffee grinder (a Solis Maestro Plus).  I haven't cleaned it since I first bought it, and I thought it was about time.  Both the plastic bean funnel and the grounds drawer were coated in extremely stubborn caked-on coffee oils and grounds.  So, some questions:

Getting the caked coffee oil off the plastic parts was very difficult, requiring multiple soakings in hot water and citrus-based dishsoap.  Was there an easier way to do this?
How do I clean the burrs themselves, now?  I can't remove them from the machine.  Presumably I can't use water, and I certainly can't soak them.

Thanks for any advice!

I use Minute-Rice to clean mine (any instant-rice will do - it's partially cooked, so it's softer than raw rice and does a better job cleaning).  I just run a bunch of rice through until it's coming out clean, then run some old beans through before using it for coffee.

Here's a Youtube video on it.  I'm sure there are tons more.  Check out the CoffeeGeek or Home-Barista forums for more information than you ever wanted.

I would suggest a soak in neat vinegar to try and get the caked on coffee off the removable parts. You could also try running a vinegar cycle through where you normally use water. This will of course require several rinsing water runs before you use the machine again. Another solution that you could use is scalex. It is very strong acid and eats through multiple sins of grime. You can purchase it from hard ware stores.


Chicken has a strong, offensive chemical odor when boiled. I purchase grocery store chicken and boil it for chicken and dumplings, as well as to feed my dog.  It has a strong chemical odor that doesn't go away in spite of seasonings, etc.  How do I get rid of that odor?  I tried soaking it in vinegar, but that didn't help.

I would identify the source of the smell before consuming it. That said, I would certainly not consume any product (or wear it for that matter) that had a strong chemical smell, even if I were able to identify it.

If it's a recurring issue, perhaps it's the allegedly benign carbon monoxide used at some of the bigger stores to preserve meat for lengthier shelf life.  CO itself does not have an odor, but perhaps the meat develops a scent after being on the shelf that long.  I prefer to go to a smaller food chain in my area that does not prepackage the meat. I would find another meat source. There is no reason to have to perform detective work prior to eating food you just paid for. I don't think anything you eat should have an uncertain and questionable smell or taste.


Does placing a metal spoon in an open bottle of sparkling wine (etc.. .) help keep its fizz? Does placing a metal spoon in an open bottles of bubbles, sparkling wine &  Champagne help keep its fizz ? If so why is this ?

As a beer brewer, I'm pretty concerned with fizz ;)  Since the below may be a little tl;dr, the short answer to your question is, "I don't think so."

This is actually the first time I've heard of the metal spoon "trick", so I can't directly comment on that, but I'll share a little of what I know about carbonation.

Carbonation is carbon dioxide (CO2) that is dissolved in the liquid (beer, champagne, soda).  The fizz is that CO2 coming out of solution and escaping into the air.

Keeping it cold helps keep the fizz, as CO2 dissolves more readily into a cold liquid.  And conversely, comes out of a warm liquid more readily.  Ever pour a glass of warm soda or champagne straight after opening?  It'll foam over everywhere.

The only way to not lose all that CO2 is to seal the container.  Even then, the CO2 will come out of solution and pressurize the headspace (space in the top of the container).  That's why you get a hiss when you first open a bottle.

Again, temperature comes into play.  In a warm bottle, more of the CO2 comes out of solution and pressurizes the headspace.  Chill that same bottle down, and the CO2 can dissolve back into the liquid, giving you a sparkling beverage again.

Now, back to the spoon.  I would think that putting a spoon in the carbonation liquid would produce nucleation points, causing the CO2 to come out of solution faster.  This is why many beer glass manufacturers are coming out with laser-etched designs on the bottom of their glasses - the effervescence caused by the nucleation points helps bring out the hop aromas.

It works to me, & I've been doing it continuously for more than 30 yrs- since a friend show me the trick  -to keep the fizz put a spoon on top of a bottle, beer, cava, whatever sparkling it works.
  since ever I wonder why. and browsing out for an answer i fuond you

Still i do not know why it keeps but it does. I suspect it has to do with some geometric issue: the spoon intercepting  fitzz waves coming from within the bottle. i don't know


How can huge bubbles in pizza crust be prevented? When making pizza, often the dough bubbles up hugely, displacing toppings and generally making a mess of the pie.

Are there any secrets to preventing this? Does the key lie in the dough recipe, the distribution of toppings, or something else? Or is there no real secret, other than watching and popping the bubbles when they form?

From Encyclopizza

  There’s a difference between bubbles
  formed from under-proofing versus
  over-proofing. Bubbles from
  under-proofing tend to be flat but
  large in diameter. If unpopped, they
  can blow up an entire pizza. This is
  the process by which pita or pocket
  bread is made. Bubbles from
  over-proofing tend to be high but
  smaller in diameter. They rise up like
  little ping-pong balls and eventually
  form a hole at the top, at which time
  they stop expanding. They almost
  always burn. Most pizza bubbling
  problems are of the under-proofed
  type.

  To resolve a bubbling problem, dough
  fermentation must be adjusted
  accordingly. To stop bubbling caused
  by under-proofed dough, increase the
  amount of fermentation. To stop
  bubbling caused by over-proofed dough,
  reduce the amount of fermentation.

  In addition to proper proofing, it has
  been found that reducing the amount of
  water in a dough formula can help with
  reducing bubbling when dealing with
  the under-proofed type. The reduction
  in moisture aids in creating the
  pinpoint holes in the cells walls.

In addition, you want to make sure you properly knead your dough. Some people poke tiny holes in the dough to prevent overly large bubbles. As a final resort you could observe your pizza in the oven and poke bubbles as they form.

its all in the proofing and density of the dough ! I find a dense and underproofed dough to be bubbly and simply hard to work with as its usually hard as a rock when refrigerated for service !


Exploding or alcoholic soda Well, I tried to follow a very simple recipe from "Cooking for Geeks" for Ginger Lemon Soda.

I made a simple ginger syrup by cooking ~200g of chopped ginger together with 2 cups of sugar, then I used half of that syrup together with 1/2 a teaspoon of yeast (from the local home-brew store), and topped off with 900 ml of water.

The recipe says: Let rest at room temperature for two days, then refrigerate and drink.

Well, for the first batch, I had so much pressure that when I opened it, it came out like champagne and I lost half of the soda.

For the second batch, I put it in the fridge after one day. Now the level of carbonation is just right, but it's still a bit alcoholic. I had half a glass and I can definitely tell that there was some alcohol involved.

I wonder: What is the way to go to get nice sparkling soda that isn't also high in alcohol?

This recipe is listed under the section for fermentation, together with beer, wine and mead. The section starts with the sentence "Wine, beer and traditional sodas all depend on yeast to ferment sugar into alcohol and generate carbonation".

I don't know enough about the history of soda to know if early sodas were alcoholic. Or rather, I am quite sure that there were alcoholic, fermented, carbonated drinks long before what we call "soda" today existed, but I don't know if they were called soda.

Whatever the language problem is, this recipe is definitely intended to produce a low-alcohol beverage, comparable to beer. If you want carbonated syrup, you should buy a carbonating machine. These take a bullet full of CO2 and press it into the drink base you have selected.

As for the too-strong carbonation, this is probably due to the vague term "room temperature". Yeast growth speed depends on temperature. Because it is an exponential growth, even small changes in temperature can lead to vastly different results. If you want to repeat the experiment despite the alcohol production, try better controlling for the temperature. As I don't brew, I can't tell you the temperature for optimal carbonation after two days, you will have to find it out by yourself.

Use yogurt way instead about 2 tsp to 2 liters  , or half a assiduous tablet. Presto None alcoholic bubbles.

Now what I do is only foment with half as much water so bottles half empty. Chill it then open let out some gas careful. Then add water rechill. If you want it more fizzy leave it out a bit. The idea that they used Yeast in the ye old days is not true.

They used Kefir, Ginger Plant or Yogurt Way. These yeast soda recipes are written by idiots. Bc it will Ruin the Flavor and produce a alcoholic beverage unfit for children,that turns to vinegar left open. Using Kefir, Ginger Plant or Yogurt Way you get a probiotic that got good flavor very healthy.. to get yogurt Way just strain yogurt from the curt with clean cloth the liquids Way, last 6 month in fridge!


Cleaning wax and pesticide from apple skin I love apples. I like to eat them with skin as it has plenty of fiber in the skin. But apples are famous for wax and pesticides on the skin which I don’t want to ingest. I have read many articles on the web and suggestions for removing the wax from the surface.

These suggestions include soaking in vinegar or hot water and other methods. They suggest that soaking apples in vinegar removes the wax that can be seen in the vinegar. I have done that, but never seen any residue of wax in the vinegar.

So I have set aside a new kitchen sink Scotch-Brite scrubber for this purpose and been scrubbing the apple skin under running water before eating. I think this method should remove most of the wax and pesticides. I would like to hear your input.

Just rinse them quickly with hot water, and afterward with cold water. That should melt the wax, and remove everything.

I have seen people use their microwave.  Put washed apples on paper towel and nuke for 10 seconds or more.  Keep watch to see if wax is melting off. If not, maybe no wax.  If you buy apples directly from the market farmers they aren’t usually waxed.  It is the ones that are stored for winter that are waxed and at the supermarkets.


What's the purpose of sugar in a pickling solution? This might seem like a dumb question, but I am going to make a pickled pepper relish of sorts that is really just chopped carrot, onion, and habanero pepper cooked briefly in a pickling solution and jarred. In reviewing several recipes for pickled peppers, all use vinegar and salt, and some but not all use sugar.  I'd rather just count on the natural sweetness of the habaneros and carrots for flavor.

My specific question is: does the sugar do anything to the texture of the vegetables or affect the preservative qualities of the brine in pickling recipes, or is it just for flavor?

UPDATE: I just cracked open the first jar of the pickled peppers, and I have to say that I don't think the sugar would have added anything to the flavor of them. The carrots and habaneros are both naturally pretty sweet (if you can taste it past the habanero's capsaicin bonfire).  The onions also mellowed with just the vinegar brine. I've made pickled onions and jalepenos (which are less naturally sweet), and even there I've had to be careful to avoid making the pickling solution cloying.  All in all, in this case I'm glad I didn't use it.  Thanks everyone for the info!

The sugar is mostly just for flavor.  I use sugar when making pickled beets and eggs, but don't use it in my dill pickles or pickled peppers and onions.  It just depends on if you are trying for a sour, sweet and sour, or sweet pickle (note that there is no vinegar in many fruit pickles).

Before you decide to run off and leave out the vinegar, however, I would note that for pickling safety purposes there has to be enough acid to keep botulism causing bacteria from forming and peppers are a low acid vegetable.  If you wanted to eliminate the vinegar, you'd have to move to pressure canning.

Hi all: From my search for quick pickle recipes I've found there are nearly as many unique twists of flavor added spices as there are people that write them. Vinegar and cucumbers are the only common denominator among them. On the dill side, kosher salt is used in most but not all of them. On the sweet side sugar was used in most but not all of them. Sugar is not a required but only a preferred (by some) ingredient. If you are looking to make a low sodium pickle you can cut salt by what ever amount you like based on how it appeals to your taste. The same holds true for making low sugar (if low sugar) pickles are what you require. So in summary I would say "have fun, and  don't be afraid to experiment". The total exclusion of both salt and vinegar will have a bearing on how long your quick pickles may be stored before spoiling in the refrigerator.


Is it safe to use plastic wrap in boiling water? While I've come across one or two recipes that call for using plastic wrap in pots of boiling water (for example, to cook eggs), I've always been a bit wary of putting the wrap in boiling water. Can someone confirm or deny whether it is safe (or a good idea) to put plastic wrap in boiling water?

Agree with ceejayoz that melting isn't the issue.  Melting is just the upper bound for problems.  The common concern is about leaching, the diffusion of chemical toxins from the plastic into the food.  It's known to be accelerated through fats and at heat, hence the concern.  There seems to be consensus that "some" leaching occurs; the issue is that it's unclear how much, from which plastics, whether the body absorbs or excretes it, and if it matters.

Alarmists will tell you that the chemical run-off is toxic and causes everything from cancer to birth-defects.

Governments have looked into the issue but not come out with a hard no.  Industry groups are fighting the issue, but losing public opinion on things like waterbottles (see nalgene, which removed Bisphenol A (BP-A)from their formula).

Chefs generally care more about results than fringe chances of non-lethal toxicity and they have been using plastic wrap for as long as it's been around.

What should you do?  It depends.  Weigh fear with convenience.  Use good quality products if you do use it.  Don't do it too often. Or just enjoy it.

Clingfilm is safe for using cold and wrapping cold foods to store in the (cold) fridge, NOT wrap foods up and put in hot water. This is insane. Please people, don't do this.
Sorry to be five years late, but I was searching for the best ways to poach eggs and found this. This is NOT it.


Is it safe to eat smoked bacon without grilling? The reason I ask this is due to the fact nothing on the bacon packaging indicates it can or cannot be eaten 'raw' and in general eating raw meat is a bad idea.

I might disagree a little with rumtscho - traditionally cured bacon is one thing, what you get in packets from the supermarket is another. It looks similar and it tastes similar, but commercial products are processed rapidly and not tested for immediate consumption without cooking.

Products like Parma ham and Schwartzwaldschinken are proven to be adequately preserved for consumption without cooking. Modern bacon is not, in general. OTOH I know for a fact that raw packet bacon is commonly eaten in Spain without cooking, and I've met people who eat raw sausages (not a good idea in my opinion).

Me, I wouldn't eat it uncooked ...

I use to visit my uncles meat locker in Minnesota as a child and we would get the bacon out of the smoker and bring it right to the slicer. We would eat it straight off the slicer by what seemed like by the pound. I was probably 9-12 years old and had not built up to much of an immune system by that age. I never felt or got sick. As a matter of fact ,it was what I remember to be one of the best tasting things I had ever eaten up till then. I would venture to say its much safer than the dozens of raw oysters I eat now in Florida every year.


Why do you need to peel peaches to can them? I am going to be canning a bunch of peaches tonight, and I know that you have to peel them first (and I know how to do it easy), but I got to wondering, why do I have to do it?

I have always done it.  That is the way it was taught to me by my mother, but why?

The inside is the part that wants to rot, the out side is the protective coating (or so it seems).  Why do we need to remove it to can the peach?

My opinion- I haven't done rigorous testing:

Canning softens the interior of the peach but when I have (in my laziness) left the skins on they stay tough and quite unpleasant tasting.

I doubt it has any effect on the longevity of the product but it would make it a little less pleasant and versatile.

I can peaches with the skin on the skin completely desolves and the syrup is a light pink  super tasty  i also use less sugar then what is called for in a light syrup recipes

jo


Reusing coffee grounds Besides using it as a fertilizer, how else can I reuse my coffee grounds?

An actual culinary application for used grounds:
http://www.instructables.com/id/Gourmet-mushrooms-in-an-old-coffee-cup/

Grow mushrooms in them.

A friend flushed them in the sink, he said that it cleans the pipes. But then I don't really know if it's true except his sink never got stuck. But that's not a proof!


What changes should I make to accomodate vegan naked fatties? I would like to make naked fatties on the barbeque this weekend, but want to accomodate some vegan friends (and my on/off lacto-ovo wife). I can easily swap regular pork breakfast sausage for Gimme Lean, some other brand, or homemade. Ideally, I would like to have a hearty protein/nutritional medium at the end that is full of smoky flavor and could be used in other dishes too (i.e. chili, soup, casseroles).

I have lingering questions though:

Which brand (if I go with store bought, as I don't really see trying homemade breakfast sausage out for the first time as part of a meal for others) works the best? Not necessarily the 'meatiest'; which holds its texture and flavor through the cooking process without either breaking down? (Particularly with respect to long cooking, i.e. through smoking)
Would this work better with a quinoa chub instead of the vegan breakfast sausage? Or would the chub end up inedible? (Don't answer that if you think quinoa is already inedible.)
The recipe calls for using 1 lb sausage chubs (whole) with "indirect heat at 250 degrees until the internal temperature reaches 160 degrees, which will take about an hour"; how should I adjust cooking temps/times to account for it not being actual meat? (since veggie burgers, links, etc "cook" much faster than their meat counterparts.)
How can I ensure the range of effect in terms of the cooking process (smoking) imparting flavor is best preserved?

So yesterday I tried out the experiment. I made the naked fatty per the normal recipe, and using the gimme lean breakfast sausage. The two primary concerns I had were (a) to ensure the sausage didn't come apart during the smoking process and (b) to ensure a good amount of smokiness was imparted.

With respect to (a), the heat I
worried might denature the exterior
sausage bits, so I rubbed my hands,
cutting board, grill grate, and the
sausage with some canola oil. The
hope was to try to have a protectant
layer on the outside that would be
hydrophobic, and reduce stickiness.
With respect to (b), I assumed the
smoke from the charcoal would
sufficiently suffuse the pork
sausage, but was concerned about the
vegan one. To create more smoke I
roasted peppers and tomatillos for
the latter half of the cooking
process.

Results: Both ended up smoky and nicely textured. Neither was on the verge of crumbly bits, but rather tender on the inside and nicely glazed on the outside. The "meats" were very smoky, very well flavored (the rub was great, but my vegan bbq sauce from scratch not so good). When I incorporated it into chili I quartered the chubs lengthwise and put a quick sear on each edge. They were good short term, not so good long-term and became pretty soft and the flavor dimished. Next time I may try rolling it flat and smoking it that way so it can just be crumbled.

Takeaway: Smoking vegan sausage pulls out some really good stuff. Obviously it's not pork sausage, but it is a tasty meat substitute and smoking it is worth the effort. It doesn't take well yet to stock; further searing/cooking might be required.

There is no such thing as a vegan substitute for pork. You can make something that will be roughly the same shape and color, but it won't taste anything remotely like it, so don't even bother.

There are many delicious vegan foods that don't pretend to be something they're not. Here's one idea:

Take cooked black beans, rinse and drain well. Toss with halved cherry tomatoes, red onion, parsley, olive oil and lime juice. Add fresh chilies if you're so inclined. (This will be served cold.)

Make a plain bread dough (flour, water, yeast, salt). Let it rise for an hour. (Or, skip the preceding steps and buy some raw pizza dough at the store). Divide into small pieces, roll them out flat, grill on medium heat for a couple minutes per side. (They won't stick, I promise.)

After grilling the bread, grill some vegetables. Eggplant does well on the grill, so do zucchini, peppers and mushrooms. Top with olive oil and balsamic vinegar (I like to put the oil on after grilling, so it doesn't flare up).


Fat free cooking in 18/10 stainless steel cookware I'm considering a set of stainless steel cookware from either AllClad or Inoxia

Both cookwares are made of 18/10 stainless steel but Inoxia states you can cook fat free in their cookware:

  During the use of the cooking unit the heat accumulates in the
  high-thickness structure of the capsular base, which spreads it back
  gradually and uniformly inside the pot, so that foods can be cooked
  without water or fats addition.

Is this true for AllClad? (or any cookware made of 18/10 stainless steel with 5-ply construction?) Otherwise what is the technical feature allowing for the water/fat free cooking in Inoxia?

I wouldn't believe this - it sounds like marketing hype to me. Stainless steel consistently sticks unless you add at least some small amount of fat. That's true of All-Clad or any number of other brands and pans using 18/10 or 18/8 stainless steel. This copy says nothing about any special non-stick surfacing that would explain the claim; it's nothing more than an aluminum pan with a topcoat of stainless.

Additionally, that page features a ton of other hyperbolic nonsense, like this gem:

  With our Cooking System, described below, also thanks to the perfect fit of the lid to the pot that creates a natural hermetic seal, it is possible to cook at a lower temperature saving time and energy, without condiments addition and preserving both nutritional and organoleptic features of the foods. In short, foods are cooked more delicately in their own natural fluids, for more vitamins, less fats and less calories.

They're talking here about... braising. That's it. You can do this in just about any cookware with a lid. Someone went overboard with the marketing jargon here, and it's not even particularly well-written. Don't believe a word of it.

Any good-quality pan can do this, and All-Clads certainly qualify. So would a $30 All-Clad knock-off, as long as it has a thick aluminum or copper base and reasonably tight-fitting lid. Cookware salesmen often use this as a trick to make their pots seem special.


How to avoid collapse of yeast-raised dough? I prepared yeast-based bread with both hand and bread machine. The dough looks perfect, but when I try to bake it whether in bread machine or oven, it starts to collapse upon heating.

The dough preparation was based on common bread recipes, e.g. 300ml water, 450g all-purpose flour, yeast, sugar, salt. The process was conducted by bread machine within 90min (programmed for dough preparation).

What is wrong? And how to avoid collapse of yeast-raised dough in the course of baking?

There are three major things that will cause collapsed yeast raised breads:

Underdeveloped gluten (possibly from insufficient kneading), which doesn't create enough of the gluten network to hold the gas from the yeast, especially during oven spring.  This may be exacerbated by using low-protein flours, which do not generate as much gluten as high-protein flours (called strong flours in Europe).  This tends not to manifest as a collapse, so much, as a failure to rise.
Considerable overkneading, to the point where the gluten network begins to break down, and cannot hold the gas (this is quite unlikely, unless machine kneaded)
Over-proofing (allowing to rise or ferment too long), which creates more gas than the gluten cells can hold, leading to their rupture and collapse when the heat of the oven causes expansion and oven spring.  This leads to collapse of the loaf.

Without more information, it is difficult to tell which of these you are experiencing.

If you are at a high altitude try reducing the yeast by ¼ teaspoon at a time until you find the right amount and replacing 1/4 cup whole flour for part of the all purpose.


Can I substitute Molasses for Honey in Baking Recipes? Can I substitute one for the other in baking recipes?

Yes, you can substitute molasses for honey.  They're going to function essentially the same measure for measure since they are both syrups.

Keep in mind however there will be a difference in flavor (not necessarily bad, just different...which would be the case for one honey over another...different tastes).

Yes it is equal in measure but will make whatever your baking sweeter.


Ingredients vs. Temperature Control in Chocolate Fudge In reading through a LOT of different approaches to making fudge, I am wondering about how the non-sugar ingredients affect the issue of temperature control (both heating AND cooling) and, therefore, the results in the recipes.

First of all, a question about heating the sugar solution - am I correct that in bringing a sugar solution to the soft-ball stage temperature, what you are doing technically is boiling-off water to the point where the sugar concentration is appropriate for the re-crystallization properties desirable in fudge?  So, the temperature gives you an indication of the concentration of sugar in solution and different concentrations behave differently when cooled, is that right? Basically, the temperature is documenting sugar concentration achieved by way of evaporation.

If that is true, then I can buy that in heating the sugar and milk or cream or condensed milk to make fudge, the temperature would still be dictated by sugar concentration in the water part of the milk-product.  So if we think of a a milk-product as water + solids + fats, the sugar concentration is still reliably documented by the temperature since the sugar will dissolve in the water of the milk and is (basically) unaffected by the solids and fat content.  Is that, more-or-less correct?

Continuing along this same line of reasoning, would it also be correct to assume that as long as you add to the pot only ingredients that contain NO water, that you would preserve the integrity of the relationship between the temperature of the ingredients and the concentration of sugar in solution?  So heating the chocolate or marshmallow (or whatever) with the milk/sugar solution won't fundamentally alter the relationship between sugar concentration and temperature?

Then what about adding ingredients during cooling?  Most recipes where you heat all of the ingredients together (except butter and vanilla) instruct you to let the mixture sit undisturbed until it cools to (like) 110° F - I thought that the goal there is to have the sugar in a supersaturated state so that crystallization will occur rapidly when you stir.

But some recipes instruct you to add other ingredients after bringing the sugar/milk to the soft-ball stage - I would think that adding ingredients during cooling could induce a temperature change that could screw-up the supersaturated state and give you grainy fudge.  Most of these types of recipes contain marshmallow.  So, since marshmallow is mostly corn syrup, is the corn syrup controlling the re-crystallization properties of the sugar?  If that's true, do you need to be careful with a marshmallow fudge during cooling at all?

I think you may well be over thinking this just a little.

Water boils at 100c at sea level, sugar raises this temperature to around 110c depending on sugar content.

  Specifically, adding 1 gram molecular weight of nonionizing solute (like sugar) to 1 liter of water increases the boiling point by 0.52 degree Celsius (C). 1 gram molecular weight nonionizing solute per liter =0.52 degree C increase in boiling point.

So when you boil your sugar syrup to soft ball 116c you've essentially, boiled all the water away and your left with sugar. Heating it to this temperature changes the shape and direction of the crystals. Adding fat to this generally allows it to set (plus flavour). Just as butter would.

The reason you don't add chocolate as it's warming is water plus chocolate ends badly. You also don't add it at 116c as you will burn your chocolate. Again not a good thing.

  Make sure the temperature of the chocolate rises to between 104° F. and 113° F. when melting. Do not heat above 115° F. (milk and white chocolate) and 120° F. for dark chocolate, otherwise it will burn.

The reason you add water to sugar is to allow more control over the heating. If you have no water you'll find the bottom part will burn while the top part is still solid crystals. Which considering you only need 116c, is again... Bad.

Try boiling 1000ml water with 100g sugar and see how quickly it takes for the mixture to reach 110c (5min?) and then see how long it'll stay at that temperature before hitting 116 (30-40mins I guess). Then leave it and watch how within moments of hitting 116c it's suddenly hit 176c and then your pan turn black and your kitchen full of thick yellow smoke :-).

Heating and cooling is one of the trickiest subjects to baking right after tempering eggs and plain old understanding the product you are working with.  One thing to remember with chocolate is that it will literally melt in the palm of your hand so high heat and chocolate don't mix.  You can temper chocolate although by bringing to 110 degrees Fahrenheit and then cooling it back to room temperature.  Any way more information than I was originally going to share.  My advice tour a bakers kitchen of a experienced chef w/ 25+ years.  Books are great but first hand mistakes and accomplishments are the only true way to really know.

A rainy day can change the outcome of your recipe!


800g of peanuts give 700g of peanut butter – why? I’m making my own peanut butter from roasted peanuts that I’m buying. I just got a wet grinder in order to make a larger amount at the same time.
From the packaging I know that I used 800g of peanuts. But the end result was 692g of peanut butter. I expected it to be the same as what I started with, but am I simply wrong in this assumption? Or does that loss come from leftover peanut butter on the sides and floor, plus the small amount that I tasted during the making?

About 100 grams of peanut butter will fit into about 6 tablespoons, or slightly under 1/2 cup.  If you tasted, and there was peanut butter left on the sides and floor of wet grinder, that could certainly explain the difference. There is really nowhere else for it to go.

Depending on how long you whip it, Water weight also dissappears via moderate evaporation.


What causes water to boil over? What are the mechanics of water boiling over? How can you stop it from happening? Is it more likely to happen with certain ingredients? Which? How does the amount of water effect the likelihood of water boiling over? What role does burner temperature have? Will it only occur during a rolling boil?

This is brought up by this comment by MeltedPez in one of the cooking pasta questions:

  The only other argument for using more
  water is that less water is more
  likely to cause the pot to boil over.
  Basically the starch in the pasta
  makes it easier for the water to form
  bubbles that collect and spill over
  when not paying attention. I've found
  that with a very low pasta to water
  ratio can end in a messy kitchen.

This seems very counter intuitive to me initially, as I feel less water should make it harder to boil over the edges.

Adding a starchy substance such as rice or noodles to boiling water increases the surface tension of the water. When it's just plain water boiling the surface tension of the water can't hold back the force of the steam rising and the bubbles burst. Starches increase this surface tension making the bubbles more elastic/pliable (essentially creating a foam), thus requiring more force for them to burst. This makes the bubbles last longer which allows them to build up and eventually boil over.

It's more likely to occur with anything starchy like rice and pasta.

A lower temperature should help to control a boil over as it will allow the water to cool somewhat and slow the boil.

I'd assume that, from your quoted text, that if you use less water you're still imparting the same amount of starch making a thicker solution. More water would dilute this and bring it closer to normal water. In my own experience, small amounts of water allow lots of bubbles to form but nothing really boils over, it just splatters a bit. But reducing temperature and tilting the lid to let some air in has helped me in the past.

A small amount of salt will raise the boiling point of water, giving a bit more leeway.


Is putting meat in the fridge to marinate necessary? I watched some cooking videos and sometimes I see that in order for the pepper, salt, sake, or whatever go into the meat, the meat needs to be put in the fridge, even for 30 minutes. Why is that? Is there any reason it needs to be put in the fridge?

For a 30 min marinade, no, you don't have to put it in the fridge.  In fact, many recipes will call for removing thick beef cuts from the fridge 20-60 min before cooking, to let the meat come up to room temperature.

That being said, there has been some testing of what sort of difference bringing a steak to room temperature makes, and the general concensus is that cooking a cold steak gives better results.  America's Test Kitchen's tests found that people preferred frozen steaks, although it required freezing to ensure you didn't develop surface ice crystals, and cooking in more oil than typical.

In order to put the decomposition process on hold you need to put the meat in the fridge.


Is putting pots on the stove without oil or water damaging the pot? My mother always told me that I shouldn't put pots on the stove without any content, because otherwise they would get damaged. Is this actually true?

Assuming your mom was talking about putting them on the stove while the burner was on, yes, she was right.

It is ok to warm them slightly just prior to adding a little oil. Some people say it helps the subsequent fried foods not to stick. Don't know if that is true, but don't leave the room and let the empty pot get too hot, which can happen very quickly.

Overheating can cause thin pots and pans to warp. An enamel coating on a pan can chip off, or even melt onto your heating element. "Teflon" type non-stick coatings can burn off and be damaged releasing toxic gases into the air. Even cast iron can get too hot, and the seasoning can be messed up.

Your mother must have been referring to the residual heat from the oven vent pipe, Or the pilot lights. That may slowly damage your cookware. Like heating it up for long periods of time with nothing in it.


Is my dry aged beef spoiled? I cut out 30 days dry aged prime rib into pieces and then put in a vacuum seal bag and froze them. I found these brownish spots on the inside of each piece. Is this normal or they are spoiled?

I dry aged them by myself. Temperature is around 2-4 degree Celsius and humidity level is around 80%. The outer layer that I trimmed off seemed a little oily, not slimmy, and formed a crust.

Yes, you should dump them out. If you cook that you will right away smell the rotten blood coming out of it. But if you would like to make sure the only way to do it is to cook it and try a piece. Remember always cook your meat to 155 degrees to be safe that there is no bacteria left. 165 if possible.


Making gelatin from scratch I found on Wikipedia that it is made from animals' skin and bones. The article describes the steps of gelatin production from a technical perspective:

The manufacturing processes of gelatin consists of three main stages:

Pretreatments to make the raw materials ready for the main extraction step and to remove impurities which may have negative effects on physiochemical properties of the final gelatin product,
The main extraction step, which is usually done with hot water or dilute acid solutions as a multi-stage extraction to hydrolyze collagen into gelatin, and finally,
The refining and recovering treatments including filtration, clarification, evaporation, sterilization, drying, rutting, grinding, and sifting to remove the water from the gelatin solution, to blend the gelatin extracted, and to obtain dried, blended and ground final product.

How can you make gelatin from scratch in your own kitchen?

It's the refinement that's the real issue: anyone who's braised a big joint of meat knows that a couple of hours of low-temperature stewing will net you large amounts of gelatin. Hooves and antlers were the preferred media, but anything that's got a bunch of collagen will work. Talk to your butchers shop, and see if you can buy some bones.

Refinement was done the old fashioned way: by hand. You skim the top to remove the scum, you add egg whites to degrease and to clarify the "broth", and then you strain and strain and strain and strain.

And strain. And strain. And strain. The skimming/straining process is similar to rendering sugar from sugar cane, if you've ever done it (slightly less esoteric, because people still like molasses). They obviously don't use egg whites in rendering sugar.

It's a huge amount of work (and OMG it stinks...do it outdoors if possible), and the end result is probably not going to be on par with the stuff you buy from the store. Unless you're hankering to re-invent an ancient technology just for the fun of it, I'd just buy it.

Edit: I dug around, and there are a number of products for straining jelly that might make it easier, and they should be able to deal with the viscosity of the gelatin soup. Unfortunately they seem to be made for smaller batches, and that may not be helpful if you're doing a huge kettle.

That sounds as though they are speaking about how gelatin is made for making commercial, powdered gelatin. I actually have a "recipe" method in an old cookbook from the early 1920's that tells how to do it. Unfortunately, I am not at home, so I will have to post it later tonight. It was very interesting to read, but I got a little grossed out when I read one of the steps. It actually said, "Remove the scum."


How much does a "large" potato weigh? I have a recipe that calls for "6 large baking potatoes." So the question becomes, what is considered the average size of a large baking potato?  I've looked online, but sadly do not have time to continue my search and the results appear to be all over the place.

Tough question - there are a lot of non-scientific ways to measure small/medium/large potatoes and nobody seems to agree on exactly what weight each is.  However, there are a few ways I identify large vs medium at home.

In my experience, a large potato is about the size you would get in a restaurant (I know, not very specific).  That is, when I cook at home, the potatoes I purchase tend to be medium - round (not oval) and about the size of a tennis ball or baseball.  When I'm at a restaurant their potatoes are noticeably larger, and generally more oval shaped it seems (closer to a sweet potato in shape and size), which makes them great for stuffing like for a loaded baked potato.  Luckily most of the recipes I have at home that involve potatoes don't require precise measurement, so I just stick with my eyeball measurements and don't even bother weighing them.

I found a source online that says this:

  According to Shape magazine, eatbetteramerica.com and prevention, a medium potato is the size of a computer mouse, so somewhat bigger than that.

And I think I can get behind that answer.  I'd say your average computer mouse (like, one you would get with a new PC, not a fancy third-party mouse) is about the size of an average medium potato.  Another way to eyeball: I'm a 30 year old male with hands that are neither very large or very small.  The medium potatoes in this bag are about the size of a loose fist for me.  So a large potato would be bigger than either of those things.

As for measurements, I have a bag of medium potatoes and it says they're 5.3 oz (150g) a piece.  I weighed one and it was closer to 6.5oz (185g).  Based on that I'd say a large potato would be anything over 8oz (225g), pushing as high as 12oz (340g).

I found a way to search online for this info: calories.  By searching for "large potato calories" I was able to find pages with weights and measures:

3 to 4 1/4 inches in diameter
300 grams (about 10.5oz)

So, in short, it seems like I would consider these good numbers:

Medium potato: 2 to 3" in diameter, 5-8oz (140-225g)
Large potato: 3 to 4.25" in diameter, 8-12oz (225-340g)

Below is a picture of the medium potato from my bag, compared to some common household/kitchen items.  The gift card is the size of a normal credit card, and the knife is a common steak knife from my utensil drawer.  Apparently a medium potato is almost exactly the size of a 1 cup measure!

When cooking for larger numbers of people, size and weight become important. Since restaurants are now including calorie counts, it makes sense to get a feel for the energy density of different types of food. i.e. calories/gram. For example a search revealed 100g of potatoes had 77 calories or .77 cal/g. For an adult requiring about 2,500 calories per day, this would mean they need to eat 3.25kg of potatoes to meet their calorie needs (all else being equal).

At the low end, with a large potatoe weighing 225g, this would mean they would need to eat 14 potatoes in a day! (if that is all they ate). So, for a recipe calling for "6 large baking potatoes", it would make sense that this would be enough for a half dozen people, eating one of three meals in a day.

Having a small scale in the kitchen can be handy for questions like this, as I find both temperature and weight are difficult to determine by feel alone.


Is it possible to have a good crust without prebaking a quiche? I'm planning on making a quiche (Lorraine with leek to be exact) and I was looking up recipes for quiches. Most recipes call for blind-baking the crust in advance (or at least partly), but some skip this step and pour the filling in the raw dough and bake it like that.

I think blind-baking would prevent the dough from getting soggy since the filling is quite liquid. The other recipes look nice (judging on the picture), but won't the dough be soggy?
Or should you put the temperature lower and the time higher so the liquid can evaporate?

Does it matter whether you blind-bake your crust for a quiche? Or does it mainly depend on the type of dough (puff, shortcrust...)? Or on the amount of liquid or type of veggie/meat (precooked)? Any other factors that I don't think of?

In the normal cooking time of a quiche (20 to 30 minutes), the crust doesn't really get soggy from the filling, even if it is quite liquid, as is expected for quiche Lorraine. So, you can without problem cook your quiche without first blind-baking the crust. The difference will be in the crispness of the crust: if you try to get it crispy, you should prebake, if you don't mind it being rather, well, “plain”, you don't.

The only real reason for me to blind-bake a crust is when you put something on it that won't be cooked (tartelettes), that will only get grilled or that will be baked less that it would require to bake the crust (meringue tart). Most of these examples are fruit tarts, however.

How about placing the pan on a heated pizza stone? That should sort it out.


How long is garlic butter safe, and why is it not a botulism risk like garlic in oil? I've been making garlic butter for years, storing it for months at a time. When I read that garlic-in-oil can grow dangerous amounts of botulinum toxins after similar lengths of time, I wondered how safe garlic butter is and why.

Evidently, the safety warnings specifically target storage in oil. I couldn't find a satisfactory explanation for butter not being mentioned with a preliminary search. The first Google result turns up a grossly unhelpful Yahoo! Answers page whose sources do not mention butter at all.

To the point: is garlic butter safer than garlic-in-oil, and why? Is butter not also an anaerobic environment, so that the same precautions should apply as with oil?

There's no reason to believe it's safer.

Garlic in oil is "unsafe" by FDA standards.  Which means that roughly one in 100,000 bottles of homemade garlic oil kills someone.  Before reading about the botulism risk, my friends and I used to make garlic oil at home and hand it out; I'd say we distributed probably 100 bottles, some of which stayed on the shelf for years before being used.  In that time, nobody got sick from it (most bottles went to friends, so we'd have heard).

So the fact that your garlic butter hasn't killed anyone yet just means that you're playing the odds.  Chances are, unless you get really sloppy, you could go on making garlic butter for the rest of your life and never get botulism poisoning.  But not everyone is comfortable with that risk.

EDITED PER BELOW:  You can improve your odds of avoiding botulism by straining the oil/butter through cheesecloth (to eliminate solids which would hide spores), and heat-treating it to 160F or more for 45 minutes.  This will not eliminate all risk of botulism, but will improve your odds.

Lactic acid has been shown to inhibit the growth of Clostridium botulinum.  That is why it is safer to use butter than oil.  link


How to add more toppings to frozen pizza? I generally buy frozen Pizza Margherita in store for making a quick lunch if I am running out of time. However, I don't really like the taste of the baked Pizza because it is just Tomato and Cheese. I am a vegetarian and I would like to add toppings but when? Should I directly add veggies on frozen pizza and put it in the oven or let the frozen pizza bake for a few minutes and then add the toppings ? Suggestions are most welcome.

The method I've used to add toppings to frozen pizza is- use frozen toppings. For example, green peppers are in my opinion a great addition to pizza. I usually keep frozen green peppers and other pizza-worthy vegetables for use with many things, and frozen pizza is one of them. This way, I simply add the toppings to the pizza before baking and viola! Easy, simple, and much more tasty frozen pizzas.

Chop up lunch meats , leftover fully cooked chicken or hamburger, Kroger has a frozen bag of peppers and onions diced and your very simple plain pizza just became something from the heyday of pizza when flavors were in incredible.add it all at the beginning cook at 400 for roughly twenty minutes.


How to make Jell-O less sweet? I made a Jell-O last night and it turned out too sweet for me. Is it doable to increase the amount of water used but the same amount of Jell-O powder? So instead of 1 cup of hot water, 1 cup of cold water, and 1 Jell-O pack, it would be something like 2 cups of hot water, 2 cup of cold water, and 1 Jell-O pack. Or would doing this result in the Jell-O not solidifying?

If you add too much water your jello (jelly in some parts of the world) will not solidify. What I would suggest is looking for a non-sweetened gelatin mix and adding less sugar to it. Alternatively you could get gelatin sheets or powder and make your own from scratch. It's not that hard to do and you get exactly what you want.

Add a extra cup of water and mix it good.


What is the type of cheese in "chips and cheese" UK fast-food? (with photos) I went to England a few years ago for a couple months. I took pictures of a fast-food dish, "chips and cheese" that is uncommon where I live. More than that, the taste of the cheese intrigued me. The pictures were took in Stafford in case regional culture matters for the answer.

I've tried to replicate the taste once in a while, but I don't know what cheese is being used. Internet research points towards cheddar as the most likely match, however every time I gave it a try the taste did not seem to be it. Therefore I've tried to sprinkle various other types of cheese to no avail.

Based on the cultural details above and the provided picture, what would be the type of cheese?

If it is cheddar, is there a "specific type" of cheddar I would have to look for that would taste similarly when used in cooked dishes?

The cheese you saw was, if it was real cheese at all, probably cheddar or just plain white cheese. Whatever they put on was not high-quality stuff - takeaways are not known for lavishing money on ingredients.

Whether you will be able to get anything similar depends on where you are. American and British cheddars have different flavors, so if I was in the US I'd try Monterey Jack, or maybe Provelone.

It's halloumi cheese. Personally as a Brit never heard of it until it was mentioned on a meeting today. It's supposedly a salty type of cheese with a lot of protein and is typically used in Cyprus. Can be bought from any Eastern European store of from Wegmans/Wholefoods.


How long can you store used cooking oil How long can you store used cooking oil then re-use it? I deep fried a turkey one year ago and have had it refrigerated since.

Does the oil smell anywhere near rancid ?  You sure you had it in the fridge, not the freezer ?

Pure fat in the fridge keep a long, long, time... but I suspect some turkey juice got into it... would be fat-coated and not exposed to oxidation though...


what is the correct consistency for cream cheese frosting I'm having an issue making decent cream cheese frosting.

I have a recipe that says to use:

  1 pound (450g) cream cheese, at room temperature
  4 oz (110g) unsalted butter, at room temperature
  2-3 cups (240-360g) powdered sugar, sifted
  a few drops of vanilla extract

and then to

  To make the frosting, beat the cream cheese and butter together until smooth. Slowly add the powdered sugar (do this on low speed to avoid a dust cloud) and mix until light and silky. Add the vanilla.`

The problem I have is that it comes out way too runny to frost anything with.  I've tried adding a bit more powdered sugar and it still maintained it's runny state.  I'm using the K paddle for my Kenwood mixer to mix the frosting.

I've put the icing in the fridge for the moment to see if it will harden up a little.  Is this standard or am I doing something wrong?

EDIT:

So after putting the cream cheese in the fridge for a few hours, it still didn't harden up, just turned a cold runny goo.

One thing I have noticed is that the supermarkets in the UK sell "Soft Cheese" as opposed to "Cream Cheese" which makes me think there is a difference between cream cheese and soft cheese.  Philadelphia in the UK is sold as Soft Cheese, and many UK based recipes that include a cream cheese frosting often include lemon juice.

My current favorite cream cheese frosting recipe comes from Thomas Keller's book Under Pressure - page 218. The proportions of the major ingredients include:

cream cheese: 100%, butter: 68%, sugar: 132%

Your recipe uses:

cream cheese: 100%, butter: 24%, sugar: 80% (using the maximum recommended amount).

It may be that you just need a lot more sugar (or more sugar and butter), or it may be that the cheese being sold in your part of the world is not the "cream cheese" we know of here in the USA.

It's the proportions.  I had a bad recipe as well and ended up with about 3 servings of the frosting when I was finished because of all the powdered sugar that had to be added.  I eventually had to split the bowl and continue to add the sugar.  My experience is for one 8 oz package of cream cheese, you need 1 stick of butter and about 3-4 cups of sugar and vanilla flavoring to taste.


How important is drying hands for sanitation? Several sites describing how to wash your hands list drying as the last step. Some say you can use a clean towel or air dry them.

I've been curious about something for a while. What if I'm preparing some ingredient or recipe that requires or benefits from having wet hands? For example, handling ground meat with wet hands reduces sticking; sometimes you want to use wet hands to handle dough, either to add more moisture or prevent sticking. What if I'm just picking up vegetables and sticking them back under the running water to rinse them before cutting and cooking or eating them raw?

Is it unsanitary wash hands and skip drying them before handling food items? What types of contaminants are especially risky when doing this?

I prefer answers with sources from health or food safety agencies or organizations.

If you are immediately going to moisten your hands your hands anyway, I can't see a difference. But otherwise, food safety studies do say that you should thoroughly dry your hands after washing using a clean (or paper) towel.

Decades of research from hygiene authorities suggest that wet hands transfer bacteria much more readily than dry ones, as the residual moisture left on hands after leaving the wash station allows bacteria and viruses to transfer to food and solid surfaces by touch...
Multiple studies have looked at the effectiveness of air dryers versus hand towels and results strongly favor paper towels. For example, one study published by the University of Leeds in 2014 found that levels of airborne germs collected and counted near warm air dryers to be 27 times more than those near paper towel dispensers. Another paper, published in 2012 by the Mayo Clinic Proceedings, which observed research from a dozen investigations, stated that “from a hygiene standpoint, paper towels are superior to electric air dryers” and “should be recommended in locations where hygiene is paramount.”

-Food Quality and Safety Magazine (A source of peer-reviewed scholarly articles)

What I have on this issue comes more from an hospital-restauration point of vue than scientific papers but is considered good practice when dealing with cancer patients food (alongside a lot more of precautions obviously)

Bacterias and such are very water friendly, the use of soap merely gets them off your skin and into the water.

When you have finished washing your hands, the residual surface water is still polluted. Thing is with hair dryers is that it merely puff high velocity air on your wet hands which tends to vaporize the wet along with the pollution thus creating a bacterial fog on your person. Using paper towels will a contrario absorb the grand majority of the polluted water.

Plus there is something of a efficiency problem here. Basically if your hands are still wet after washing, it's equivalent to not have washed them. Thus a great variety of hair dryers are inoperant because you would have to use them for ten minutes or so to be completely dry, using paper towels is in this regard way more quick.

So the better thing to do here is to wash your hands with soap, dry them thoroughly with a paper towel and then put some gloves on.


Why did my roasted pumpkin soup smell foul and seem sour after only 1/2 day? I made 2 batches of roasted pumpkin soup and both went sour and smelt horrible within 1/2 day.  I am unsure why and am baffled as I have made soups heaps of times, but not this roasted pumpkin soup.

Were there a lot of onions in the soup? My uncle was a chef and he said that you should never put onions in soup as it would add a sour flavour.


Safety: Keeping sous-vide cooked chicken in vacuum My Problem

I have sous-vide cooked some chicken breast, forgot about it, and kept it in the refrigerator for 2 weeks. The chicken breast was thoroughly cooked (63c for 1 hour) and kept in good vacuum.

I have re-cooked it in the sous vide at 63c for and additional 1.5 hour, and finished by frying it in the pan. I am not sure whether it is safe to eat or not.

What Have I Tried

Google Search
Meat and Poultry Charts at foodsafety.gov
Read How long can I store a food in the pantry, refrigerator, or freezer?, but it features general rules, not sous-vide specific ones. I want to know whether sous-vide cooked chicken would last longer.

My Question

For how long can I safely keep cooked, vacuumed and refrigerated chicken breast?

Images

Refrigerated and vacuumed

Recooked and fried

I originally voted this question as a duplicate.  However, the OP is correct in that the proposed duplicate does not address the specific case of sous vide.  Here, I attempt to help in that regard.

The definitive source for the answer to your question is Douglas Baldwin. From the information you've supplied, it is difficult to make any safety claims. However, you can compare your product, and your practice, to the points made by Baldwin.

First, sous vide (true sous vide...in a vacuum) can indeed extend shelf life...

IF certain hurdles are cleared.

FIRST, your product is cooked to the pasteurization stage.  It is hard to tell how thick your chicken breasts are from the photos.  Baldwin has tables that cross reference thickness, temperature, and times so that you can achieve pasteurization.  You'll have to compare your practice to this chart to see if you met the threshold. So, once sealed in a vacuum, the first hurdle is to pasteurize your product.

THEN, your product must be cooled as quickly as possible for long term storage. This usually means in an ice bath, then immediately refrigerating or freezing.  The method is called "cook-chill." Baldwin cautions, however that "The danger with cook-chill is that pasteurizing does not reduce pathogenic spores to a safe level. If the food is not chilled rapidly enough or is refrigerated for too long, then pathogenic spores can outgrow and multiply to dangerous levels."

Cook-chill, done correctly, greatly reduces the risk from listeria, and spore forming pathogens. However, he goes on to write:

"spores of Clostridium botulinum, C. perfringens, and B. cereus can all survive the mild heat treatment of pasteurization. Therefore, after rapid chilling, the food must either be frozen or held at

below 36.5°F (2.5°C) for up to 90 days,
below 38°F (3.3°C) for less than 31 days,
below 41°F (5°C) for less than 10 days, or
below 44.5°F (7°C) for less than 5 days

to prevent spores of non-proteolytic C. botulinum from outgrowing and producing deadly neurotoxin (Gould, 1999; Peck, 1997)."

I would recommend that you read the PDF.

There are a LOT of variables that this question raises.

For me, smell is the important factor. If the chicken smells even slightly "off", it IS off! Chicken is cheap, don't take chances if there is even a hint of there being an issue.


How to get flavours to infuse into rice When I try cooking some asian rice dishes, Nasi Lemak, or Hainanese Chicken rice, I always add the "active ingredient" straight into the water used for boiling the rice (Coconut milk and sesame oil respectively in these cases) When cooking they smell really good, however when the rice is done and I taste it tastes bland like normal white rice. How can I make the flavours "go into" the rice?

Nasi lemak means fat rice. The fat is from the coconut milk, which is up to 20% fat depending on how you make it. The fat will change the flavour and mouth feel of the rice but it is not particularly going to give a strong flavour .
The nasi lemak needs aromatics in the rice. These would be lemongrass, ginger and pandan leaf. Pandan leaf is particularly important. The lemongrass and pandan are whole and don't disappear in cooking so will continue to impart aroma to the surrounding rice even after it is cooked.
Nasi lemak is mainly about the condiments so the rice is not supposed to be too strong since you have fried fish, sambal, etc. But with the herbs you will get a good aroma in the rice.
You could also try adding shallots lightly fried before cooking (in addition to the aromatics)
Rice is not really boiled but steamed in SE Asian cooking. Just use a rice cooker. The other ingredients are optional, but coconut milk and pandan leaf are the only 100% essentials.
If making Hainan rice then you should start by frying ginger/garlic paste, then add star anise, cinnamon, cardamom (I am not sure all of these are required), then coat the rice in that. The rice should not be cooked in water but in chicken stock from poaching the chicken. Sesame oil is not for cooking, it is a garnish, so always add it at the end of whatever you are cooking. Again you need pandan leaf in the rice cooker, and lemongrass is unlikely to be a bad idea either. You can add sesame oil when serving.

Fat is the powerhouse of the taste. When preparing rice put some fat (stock, oil, butter) first, then add spices/herbs, wait till they start sizzling and add rice.
Mix well until rice begin to look transparent and then add water.
When you add ingredient to rice with water you make "ingredient flavoured water" as there is nothing that can stick to the rice itself.


Does oak aged wine contain vanillin? "Vanilla" is one of the aromas used when described red wines.

I am allergic to natural proteins in vanilla, per Elisa blood test. I am interested to know whether the red wine will contain actual vanillin, or whether the aroma comes from unrelated substances.

Oak aging can indeed produce real vanillin, whether in wines or other liquids (spirits, beer, even vinegars can all be oak-aged)  among thousands of other flavorful compounds. Somewhat surprisingly, it seems that vanillin is commonly synthesized for use in artificial vanilla extracts from lignin, a fibrous compound that serves to strengthen the cell walls in wood, or from guaiacol, an oil derived in turn from lignin.

However, this doesn't imply that you will necessarily have an allergic reaction to vanillin based on the information you've provided. Vanillin is a flavorful aromatic compound, and not a protein (which typically have much larger, more complex molecular structures). "Real" vanilla extracted from the eponymous bean gets much of its flavor and aroma from vanillin, but it contains much else besides. If you're definitely allergic to the proteins, those would be present in extract from actual vanilla beans, but not in vanillin produced from other sources such as wood, and therefore not present in oak-aged wines.

The caveat, of course, is that I'm not a doctor, an allergy specialist, or anything remotely close. You should confirm this with them before risking discomfort or bodily harm.

First, you should ask your doctor at what level of the chemical Vanillin is considered dangerous in comparison to use of vanilla in industrial food products.

Second, there are many wines, good wines, red and white that are made without the use of oak (either as oak vats or oak chips)

They are made in stainless vats or concrete vats or lined terracota vats.

Ask your local wine store about un-oak wines.


Is it ever more accurate to measure by volume rather than by weight? I've been thinking about the fact that although many recipes specify volume, measuring by weight is much more accurate.

Are there any cases where it would be objectively better (i.e. more accurate) to measure by volume - that is where a weight measurement would leave you scratching your head?

I'm really thinking theoretically here: if you're just trying to come up with a reliable, reproducible way to measure an ingredient, perhaps so you can write down a recipe for yourself, would you end up always using weight or are there cases where volume would be more precise? Cases where they are equally accurate (such as water) don't count.

This question is not regarding the practicality of different ways of measuring but rather the accuracy.

I've thought of a few borderline cases, but I was wondering if there was anything more straightforward:

When serving a whole "unit" as a portion, such as a baked apple, one would count the number of apples to prepare rather than getting a total weight - although it would probably be a good idea to weigh them afterward to figure out how much of the other ingredients to use.
A garnish might be measured by volume - it doesn't really matter how much the whipped cream on top of the brownie weighs as long as it covers it.
When greasing a pan, one needs the volume necessary to cover the pan, but no one ever measures this.

Reminder: This question is not about what's subjectively better, or what you think I "should" do, just what's accurate.

Update: I guess I started a bit of an interesting discussion here, but there are only a couple answers that gets even close to what I was looking for. I'll try again:
An person preparing food in a kitchen somewhere on dry land on earth, can measure most items by either weight or volume.  In some of those cases weight will be more reproducible than volume (such as flour or salt) and in some of those cases there will be no difference (such as water). Are there any cases where using weight will cause more difficulty than volume - that is the volume is more relevant than the weight.

Two more cases:

when filling something (say a pie shell) or making equal layers (thank you rackandboneman and rumtscho) if the mousse came out more or less dense than you intended, you need to use the same volume, and the weight is irrelevant.
when the ingredient is not so precise to begin with, such as "x mL jarred tomato sauce" will surely cover the pasta, but "y g jarred tomato sauce" may not

Again, no question about practicality or personal preference here.

Better is a subjective term, however you can see what is done in practice as a guide to what people think is generally efficient as a balance of preparation speed, accuracy and cleanup.

Many recipes use a combination of volume and weight. Volume for most liquid measurements like milk, water or stock is considered more efficient than weighing them because although weighing is more accurate in most recipes the differences are small enough not to make a difference.

Weight is generally considered more efficient than volume for larger quantities of dry ingredients or gels (butter, lard, shortening) as it's faster, more accurate, and less cleanup.

Small amounts of wet and dry ingredients like spices, herbs, powders, flavorings etc are usually measured using volume measurements like teaspoons and tablespoons. I've tried it both ways and I've found that using teaspoon fractions is much faster than trying to weigh out small amounts of ingredients, and that my scale isn't accurate enough to weigh the fractions of grams you'd need to get that level of accuracy.

It's a good question, but it's really a matter of what the recipe says and what tools you have available. Not everyone has a scale, and to be honest a scale that produces a level of accuracy that's any better than volumetric measure is too expensive for 65% percent of households (I made that number up). Additionally, although I would like to have a scale, I have other tools that I would prefer to buy first. I suspect that is the case in most kitchens.

Regarding whether it's better? Again depends on the recipe. Most recipes are volumetric or by the each and is usually dry measure. So to get dry measure, you scoop up some stuff in your spoon or measuring cup, and scrape off the top without packing down any of the ingredient.

If you use the same tool on the same ingredient and measure it the same way every time, I bet if you measured it say 10 times, that the results would be close enough every time. Close enough meant to mean the difference will have no measurable affect on the outcome of the dish.

Now there are certain fancy ingredients that need to be spot on, but those aren't usually in the average kitchen.

Even with a perfect recipe, we adjust as we go. That 1 tsp of cumin might not really be enough, maybe I'll use 1 and a half tsps.

So although cooking is indeed chemistry, we don't need to be so accurate as a chemist does.


Why does cooked fruit seem to retain more heat than the other foods in the recipe? Why does fruit retain heat when cooked?

The same phenomenon occurs with tomato sauce on pizza, or vegetables in a casserole: the moist filling feels much, much hotter than surrounding crust or noodles.
In short, this phenomenon is caused by differing thermal properties of the materials involved. The quoted excerpts below (from PhysLink.com) provide some explanation of the physics involved, and I've attempted to extend and simplify it a bit more.
Imagine an apple pie fresh out of the oven:

Despite the temperatures being equal, your tongue is still more likely
to get burned by the [pie] filling than the [pie] crust, though. There
are 2 principles behind this: thermal conductivity and specific
heat capacity.
Thermal conductivity is just the measure of how quickly heat energy
travels through a substance.

Pie crust has lower thermal conductivity, since it has less water in it and more pockets of air (even small ones) and the heat energy is not conducted through it as easily.
In contrast, the fruit filling (which is relatively full of water) has a higher thermal conductivity, and can more easily transfer its stored heat to your mouth.
Either hot pie crust or hot fruit filling can burn your tongue, but the hot fruit filling will burn you more quickly.

Specific heat capacity is something like energy density of a
substance, and measures how much energy must be contained in a
substance for it to have a certain temperature. For example, 100 grams
of aluminum at 100 degrees C has more heat [energy] in it than 100 grams of
copper at the same temperature. If you dropped both pieces of metal
into separate cups of water, the one with the aluminum chunk will get
warmer than the other- there's just more energy contained in it. Since
the filling is mostly made of water, and water has a very high
specific heat, the filling must give off a lot of heat for its
temperature to decrease
This has 2 effects: when the pie comes out of
the oven, the filling cools down much more slowly, and as a fragment
of filling gives up heat to your tongue, it only cools down a tiny
bit.

The specific heat capacity is a bit trickier to understand, but it essentially means that the filling (remember, full of water) absorbs more energy to reach the same temperature and therefore has to transfer more heat energy (either to the air or to your mouth) to cool down compared to the crust, with lower heat capacity.

It's the sugar in the fruit. Sugar tends to hold heat FAR longer than other substances. I can't give you a whole post regarding the chemistry and thermodynamics of it all, but sugar is one of those molecules that tends to hold heat quite well.


Chinese noodle dough breaking when pulled How can I make the dough for Chinese ramen noodles stretchy? It keeps breaking when I pull just a little bit.

I used wheat flour, water, and baking soda. What else am I missing?

EDIT:
400g flour
200g water
1 teaspoon baking soda.

I mixed everything together and started to knead the dough for about 5minutes then i saw it just breaks, so i knead it for about another 10min or more.

Baking soda, being alkaline, makes the dough unstretchable. The hand-pulled noodles recipes I see on the internet do not contain baking soda. But even if you use a noodle maker, you need to add wheat gluten if you want to include baking soda.

More info here : Use high gluten (bread) flour for hand pulled noodles

also: What flour and technique do I need for hand pulled noodles?


How can I get my bread to be more fluffy and less dense? I've been making bread for a while now, but I can never get it to rise enough. The bread comes out really dense, so it's not very useful for sandwiches. I give it ten minutes after kneading, bash it down again, then another hour before baking. I've tried adding sugar as well but this hasn't made much impact.

A big factor besides the dough is the temperature at which you bake the bread.

If you are not baking it at some recipe specified temperature you are probably playing on the safe side and your breads won't raise much.

You have to heat the CO2 pockets quickly so that they expand before the dough hardens. The more temperature you can give it the better.

Another possible factor may be the yeast. Are you waiting enough? Are you using enough? Like temperature, more yeast and longer fermentation times can't go wrong.

Add baking powder and don't punch it down.


Is it safe to eat a lump of Jamon that grew some mold? A lump of Jamon in my fridge grew some white mold. Is it safe to eat if I scrape all the mold away?

Edit: this is white mold, of the sort that grows on Camambert cheese, or so it appears. Not green or black mold.

Only for your information. The spanish ham can get moldy every time, because the curing process will not stop. And for sure you can eat after cleaning with oil. All this ham have mould but before it is sold they also clean it with oil or fat. Mostly the customer don't see it, but sometimes because of the humidity or if it is hot it can appear again, but it is not a problem for health (it is exactly the same as with the cheese.

No. Toss it. Yes, i know, this hurts. But the thing is, molds are not entirely identifiable by visual means. And contamination of one part means the whole thing has spores on it, they just haven't grown enough to be visible. Some molds are highly toxic. As gorgeous as Spanish jamon can be, and especially if this is the luscious jamon Iberico, it really isn't worth the risk. Toss it and move on, Sorry.


Can't Get That Grilled Cheese Done Right I've been trying to make grilled cheese on the grill for a while now. While at first this sounds funny, but I believe that it is 100% possible to do. I just have no idea even how to approach this meal. Also, please keep in mind that this is my first post here so apologies if this has been asked before or seems like a joke.

Prepare your sandwich [buttered/dry - cheese - dry/buttered] and wrap in aluminum foil. Place on the grill (or directly on the coals), turning to toast on both sides of the bread. Timing is going to be a trial and error lesson. My thought is 2-4 minutes per side, but this will be largely dependant on the heat of the coals.

I always butter both sides of each peice of bread and try not to use grated cheese, as it falls out. Make sure the pan is hot, non stick, and don't grease it, the butter on the outside of the bread will do well enough.


In a tomato sauce recipe, how can I cut the acidity? It seems that every time I make a tomato sauce for pasta, the sauce is a little bit too acid for my taste. I've tried using sugar or sodium bicarbonate, but I'm not satisfied with the results.

My secret weapon is onion. Caramelize the onions first.  This creates a natural sweetness.  Always use ripe tomatoes; if you cannot then use canned.  The canned are made from ripe tomatoes and tend to be a very good substitute.

Also, the celery and carrot suggestions are very much a good addition - you are making a classic tomato sauce when you include the celery and carrots, 1 part each celery and carrot to 2 parts onion.  Add the onions first to get the caramelization.

I don't get too fancy with herbs, usually one good fresh herb does it for me, basil or sage are two favorites of mine.

There is a suggestion to add cream, why not use the parmesan end you may have in your fridge, it is dairy and allowed to slowly simmer in the sauce will lend a very nice flavor note.

Acidic sauces are usually reserved for nights when I make a puttanesca sauce - it goes with the capers and calamata olives I add to it.

Don't forget to season with salt and pepper.

The biggest reason why your tomato sauce is acidic is because of citric acid. Companies add this crap to their tomato sauce because they pick tomatoes when they are not yet ripe and it helps the ripening process in the can. The biggest way to rid yourself of the acidity is to buy tomatoes that don't have citric acid in the ingredients on the  label, then if you want to add sugar or whatever else you can.

This tomato doesn't have citric acid and if you don't like whole tomatoes, just cook them on low for a long time (30 minutes or so). As they cook the whole tomatoes will break down and you can take a fork or potato masher to puree them more. Enjoy!

Oh yea, tomatoes without the citric acid are going to be more expensive because they are better tasting and more ripe.


How do I rid my new plastic appliance of its plastic smell? I've just purchased a new coffee maker, and it has a terrible plastic smell to it. It smells like something between new car and hot glue gun.

I've run two or three pots of water through it, but the smell lingers.

How do I get rid of this smell?

You could also try running white vinegar through the coffeemaker. It's a technique used to clean the coffeemaker. Vinegar in general is good for getting rid of smells, so I'm thinking it will be useful here.

If it is a Keurig, fill the entire water container with straight vinegar.  Run though one or two cycles to fill the heat chamber with the vinegar. Leave the unit on with the vinegar for at least four hours.  After that, run remaining vinegar and clean water through as many cycles as necessary until the vinegar taste is gone.  Plastic taste will be gone from coffee.  It will take awhile for the plastic smell to wear off the outside of the unit.


Safety of glues in wooden chopping boards It seems to be becoming more difficult over time to get a wooden chopping board that isn't made of separate pieces of wood that are glued together.

I did find some sites discussing how to choose a food safe glue:

http://www.thewoodwhisperer.com/articles/food-safe-glues/
http://www.ehow.com/about_4727757_glue-making-cutting-boards.html

The latter site states "Boards that are not made with FDA-approved glues should not be used for food preparation as the toxins in the glue could leech into the food."

Is anyone aware of any studies done into whether the chopping boards generally for sale are actually safe? (For the US, does the FDA check when they are imported?)

Obviously the quantity of glue that would make it into food would be very low, and probably undetectable by taste or sight. Has anyone experienced any ill effects from using a chopping board made with glue that's not food safe?

My research led me to the fact that it is the glue that gets the FDA food-safe approval or not.  The Wood Whisperer's website addresses the different kinds of glues used for cutting boards:

http://www.thewoodwhisperer.com/articles/food-safe-glues/

I heard that some of the glues have formaldehyde in them. I like to use solid piece timber chopping boards with no glues or laminates because of the glues, I like to use Camphor Laurel as it has a natural anti bacterial also, there is a great mob at Byron Bay chopping boards that do this.


How do you make a cake lift equally and minimize doming? Some time ago, I baked a cake (Sachertorte to be exact).
The taste and texture was fine, so my recipe is okay.

My biggest issue was the shape. In the middle it was really a lot higher than on the sides.
I would like to redo it in the near future, but preferably with a flat(ter) surface.
(Especially since I put icing on top and I don't want it to drip off this time.)

Anyone knows the cause of my problem, or even better a solution?
I think I put enough butter on the side of my springform pan, in case this is an option.

Why the doming happens

When you heat leavened dough, two things happen:

leavening agent creates bubbles, causing the soft dough to rise. For chemically leavened doughs (baking powder or baking soda), the amount of lift mostly depends on the time the bubble creating reaction goes on and the concentration of non-spent leavening agent.
The gluten in the dough sets, building a sturdy 3-d mesh of long, branchey molecules. When the mesh is strong enough, further bubbles cannot stretch it more, despite the fact that the leavening reaction is still going on. The setting of the mesh depends mostly on heat and the amount of gluten present in flour.

The pattern you are seeing means that your cake gets hotter on the sides than in the middle. The sides get set early and stop rising, while the middle is still soft and continues rising.

This happens because the walls of the pan conduct heat to the sides of the cake quicker than heat is conducted inside the cake. You see the phenomenon in an exaggarated form in a muffin, which is usually higher than wide: it is always rounded on top, and often split, because the liquid core from the middle continues to rise after a crust has formed on the surface.

How to prevent it

Slower heating
One good solution could involve a slower, more even heating method.

This can be accomplished by using a pan which insulates well. With an insulating pan, the sides will stay liquid longer and rise more. Unfortunately there are no insulated drop-out-bottom pans.

Porcelain
I have had good results in a porcelain or Pyrex pan. The pan insulates the cake from the bottom and the sides, but not from the top, so you will need to bake it on a lower rack and/or reduce temperature on the upper heater in order to not burn the upper surface.

Getting a cake layer out of the pan in one piece can be hard.
To deal with this problem, if your batter is not too sticky, the bottom of the pan can be lined with parchment paper. The sides can be lined with a strip of parchment or well lubricated with fat. This approach is a hassle.

Insulate a metal pan
Perhaps, when combined with other approaches, a metal cake pan with thicker walls will work well enough.
You could also try a more DIY solution, like attaching 2-3 layers of a cut-to-fit silicone rolling mat stripes to the outside of the walls of a metal pan. However, it is quite hard to come up with a good attachment method (glue could release toxic fumes at oven temperatures, if it holds at all). So this method should work, but is somewhat hard to apply.

Glass and silicone pans
There are pans with glass bottoms and silicone walls but I think these would not help because the glass would insulate better than the thin silicone.

Preheating
Perhaps preheating the detached bottom of a metal pan with the oven could help, but I haven't tried it.
Minimize the center
A second approach is to minimize the liquid core by making a thin cake.
If the middle of the cake is heated quickly enough from above and below, it will set shortly after the walls do, and there will be no unset center to "bloom".

Use a bigger pan.
I think that Americans mostly use 9 inch pans, but if you used an original sacher recipe from Austria, it is probably meant for a 26 or a 28 cm pan.

Bake the two layers separately
Divide the batter into two pans instead of making a single layer and cutting it. This is unorthodox, as you get more crust but it's better than a hunchbacked sacher. You should use a scale or at least a measuring jug to divide the batter, or you'll end up with different thicknesses. Also remember to reduce the baking time, as the core will heat up faster.

Use a toothpick for probing doneness.
Reduce the leavening
The third idea is to reduce the amount of leavening agent.

The walls will always set before the core and, if there is enough baking powder, the core will still expand a little bit more. If the concentration of baking powder is low you'll get less bubbles, so less lift.
Of course, using too little baking powder will also ruin the cake, so you'll have to be cautious and experiment a bit before hitting the correct amount.
Lower heat
The fourth approach is to give the outer portions of the cake more time to rise by baking at lower heat.

This is somewhat risky, as it can result in a different texture of the final product, due to the different rate at which water will evaporate from the dough and a longer baking time. Also, if your temperature is too low, you won't get a golden crust on a light-coloured dough. This should not be a problem for a frosted cake like the sacher.
Less gluten
The fifth approach is to use a flour with less gluten.

With less gluten you get a mesh which is less dense and needs more time until it gets firm enough to prevent rising. Use cake flour instead of all purpose flour. A bit more fat will also help to inhibit gluten development but too much will change the taste and texture.

All methods I described should attribute to a solution, but probably none of them will be sufficient by itself. You'll have to pick a combination of them and see what works best for you.

General Cake Techniques

You should also apply all the usual methods for getting a good cake:

measure with a scale
use room-temperature ingredients
sift your flour
only combine dry mix with fluid mix at the last moment before putting it into the oven
preheat the oven well

These techniques ensure a better batter texture, which means a more even heating. They will also ensure a more consistent leavening process because:

the ratio of leavening to other ingredients will be correct
the batter will be more thoroughly mixed
the leavening reaction will not start early

Not following these techniques is more likely to result in a lopsided cake or a big bubble. I realize that this hasn't happened in the case you describe, but it would be too bad to get an asymmetrically risen cake after you took all the precautions against a disproportionally rising center.

Ok, I am late coming to this question, but the simple solution is to turn the baked cake OVER. you get a flat top by making the bottom become the top. Once it has been iced it doesn't matter....


Black mold inside Misto oil sprayer collar There is some black mold I can see inside my sealed Misto internal clear plastic air collar that is just below the sprayer and around the sprayer tube when the sprayer mechanism is unscrewed.  I cannot find an obvious way to get into that apparently sealed plastic collar to clean the mold out.  Does anyone know how to disassemble the round donut shaped clear plastic collar?

I'm not sure if you can take that piece off, from what I can remember.  But perhaps you could run some diluted bleach solution through it to get rid of the mold.  Hopefully this will dislodge it and disinfect the area as well.

I'm not sure how you can take it apart, but to avoid future mould contamination, keep it in the refrigerator where mould cannot form.