Dirty ovens, dirty skillets
Tim May
the "Deady Airborne Fecal or Urine Contaminants" apparently so
ominipresent in restrooms that one dare not fill up a water bottle at
the sinks....let alone breath or open one's mouth.
Amusing.
But the syndrome is clear. I was just watching "Last Restaurant
Standing" on BBC America, about some aspiring chefs. The comes an
advertisment for Easy Off, the oven cleaner. Said in a properly British
accent (for BBCA) "You can't cook that sea bass in a greasy
oven!....You'd never cook with pots and pans that dirty, woudja?"
(Essentially exact transcription, courtesy of my DVR.)
This epitomizes the fetish with "gleaming spotlessness."
Well, ObCooking, if not ObBa.Food, I like cooking in my half dozen or
so pieces of cast iron cookware. All from Lodge, except from some
no-name skillets I picked up for free. No Griswold or Wagner, but Lodge
is the surviving maker. My favorite is my 10-inch skillet, with a small
handle on the far side. I also have a couple of Dutch ovens, a 12-inch
skilled, a 12-inch ridged skillet (grilling), a large pizza pan (just
got it, haven't played with it yet), and even a cast iron wok. (I know
the arguments about ultra-thin steel...I have a couple of variants of
those. Great for extremely high center temperatures. I usually use mine
outdoors, over a 100,000 BTU gas wok heater. But indoors, the big Lodge
cast iron wok has some interesting possibilities. I haven't fully
explored them.)
The point being, my cast iron cookware is not "gleaming." As you all
should know, it should not be. I just scrape off all the burned bits
with a bristle brush under hot water, put it back on my stove top to
heat it until the water is completely gone, and that's the extent of my
cleaning.
So, too, with ovens. Unless and until the cooked-on grease is some kind
of fire hazard, which I've never seen in my 38 years of cooking for
myself (minus a few years where girlfriends volunteered to do the
cooking), there is just no threat that ovens subjected to 140 F temps
and higher, usually much, much higher (350-400 F being common) are
going to be laden with cooties.
I've seen ex-girlfriends scrubbing their pots and pans while I just
hung my Lodge pans back in the rack. My All--Clad pans are nice, for my
induction cooktop (which my Lodge pans work on as well, of course),
but, man, are they hard to clean! The slightest amount of burning means
scrubbing with Ajax or Comet and then another scrubbing with
Bartender's Friend (oxalic acid). ("Did he just say acid? Didn't the
Berkely City Council declare us to be an "Acid-Free Zone Except for
LSD"?)
This phobia about minor or airborn egerms and cooties is just plain weird.
--
-- Tim May, Corralitos, California
Geoff Miller
Tim May <tc...@att.net> writes:
> [...] there is just no threat that ovens
> subjected to 140 F temps and higher, usually
> much, much higher (350-400 F being common)
> are going to be laden with cooties.
I suspect that most people clean their ovens for
aesthetic reasons, not cootie prevention. After
all, if 212 degrees is hot enough to kill bacteria
in boiling water, 350-400 degrees would keep an
oven plenty sanitary simply in the course of its
being used.
(One time when I was a sprat, my mother got
distracted and sprayed Easy-Off oven cleaner
instead of Easy-On spray starch onto one of
my father's shirts while doing the ironing.)
> This phobia about minor or airborne germs and
> cooties is just plain weird.
It's just another facet of the Culture Of Fear
that's gripped the country for decades.
Geoff
--
"Where's Jack Bauer -- or for that matter, Dick
Cheney -- when we need some adults to help
protect our country?" -- John Hawkins
Ciccio
> The point being, my cast iron cookware is not "gleaming." As you all
> should know, it should not be. I just scrape off all the burned bits
> with a bristle brush under hot water, put it back on my stove top to
> heat it until the water is completely gone, and that's the extent of my
> cleaning.
I agree. I knew this woman who would scrub her cast iron skillet. No
way could I prevail upon her that doing such was counterproductive. I,
however, do have dedicated cast iron skillets. One for eggs, mostly
frittate, and one mostly for fried chicken.
> This phobia about minor or airborn egerms and cooties is just plain weird.
I agree. It is almost embarrassing to see men act with such
effeteness. Though, I don't think a woman any less feminine for
drinking from a water fountain. Indeed, I have found that women who
exhibit squeamishness about trivial germs have been, well, let's say,
less than exciting in the sack, which stands to reason. After all, if
a woman is squeamish about drinking from a water fountain, then she's
not going to, well you know...
That is not to say, that good hygiene and good basic health practices
should be shunned. Of course, matters such as daily exercise, bathing,
brushing teeth, etc. are in order. That is a far cry, however, from
living life like Bubble Boy.
Ciccio
(null)
>So, too, with ovens. Unless and until the cooked-on grease is some kind
>of fire hazard, which I've never seen in my 38 years of cooking for
>myself (minus a few years where girlfriends volunteered to do the
>cooking), there is just no threat that ovens subjected to 140 F temps
>and higher, usually much, much higher (350-400 F being common) are
>going to be laden with cooties.
Cooties aside, at some point a dirty oven is also going to have a
functional impact. Temperature regulation is bound to be off if too much
crust builds up. Granted, it doesn't need to gleaming to work right, but
there is a threshold where things will start to go downhill. Also, normal
usage usually doesn't get hot enough to burn off odd smells/flavors. Don't
want those cookies to taste like fish, you know. Again, doesn't have to be
gleaming but there is a threshold.
>hung my Lodge pans back in the rack. My All--Clad pans are nice, for my
>induction cooktop (which my Lodge pans work on as well, of course),
>but, man, are they hard to clean! The slightest amount of burning means
>scrubbing with Ajax or Comet and then another scrubbing with
>Bartender's Friend (oxalic acid).
Odd. My cheapo stainless cookware just needs a bit of deglazing (re-heat
if it's not still hot and shock it with cold water) to get most stuff out
and a few strokes with a bit of Barkeep's Friend will polish off the rest.
Since discovering Barkeep's friend, I've never had to resort to Ajax/Comet.
Tim May
> In article <2010012121575811272-tcmay@attnet>, Tim May <tc...@att.net> wrote:
>> So, too, with ovens. Unless and until the cooked-on grease is some kind
>> of fire hazard, which I've never seen in my 38 years of cooking for
>> myself (minus a few years where girlfriends volunteered to do the
>> cooking), there is just no threat that ovens subjected to 140 F temps
>> and higher, usually much, much higher (350-400 F being common) are
>> going to be laden with cooties.
>
> Cooties aside, at some point a dirty oven is also going to have a
> functional impact. Temperature regulation is bound to be off if too much
> crust builds up. Granted, it doesn't need to gleaming to work right, but
> there is a threshold where things will start to go downhill. Also, normal
> usage usually doesn't get hot enough to burn off odd smells/flavors. Don't
> want those cookies to taste like fish, you know. Again, doesn't have to be
> gleaming but there is a threshold.
Nope, the typical amount of crud on the walls will NOT affect
temperature regulation. An oven behaves pretty much like a classical
"black body." All the carbon on the walls can possibly do is just act
as more insulation for the walls, which is good, not bad.
I've never detected any "smells/flavors" from this carbon, nor do I
think it plausible that any are there.
Steve Pope
>>hung my Lodge pans back in the rack. My All--Clad pans are nice, for my
>>induction cooktop (which my Lodge pans work on as well, of course),
>>but, man, are they hard to clean! The slightest amount of burning means
>>scrubbing with Ajax or Comet and then another scrubbing with
>>Bartender's Friend (oxalic acid).
>Odd. My cheapo stainless cookware just needs a bit of deglazing (re-heat
>if it's not still hot and shock it with cold water) to get most stuff out
>and a few strokes with a bit of Barkeep's Friend will polish off the rest.
>Since discovering Barkeep's friend, I've never had to resort to Ajax/Comet.
Firstly, in terms of abrasive content, Ajax/Comet are at the
low end, Barkeep's friend at the high end, and Bon Ami in-between.
Good stainless cookwear should not be "shocked" with cold
water; the manufacturers warn against this.
I find that if a dish sponge doesn't clean it, the next
product to try is those orange-yellow scrubbers sold as
"Tuffy". If that doesn't work, I use a slurry of coarse
salt. That always works, with some effort.
I use the same procedure with enameled cookware and it
seems non-damaging. Barkeep's Friend will definitely
damage enamel.
Steve
Tim May
> On Fri, 22 Jan 2010 10:06:15 -0800, Tim May wrote:
>
>> I've never detected any "smells/flavors" from this carbon, nor do I
>> think it plausible that any are there.
>
> If it was pure carbon, it probably wouldn't be sticking to the walls
> the oven in the first place. So it's probably more than just
> carbon.
It's virtually all carbon, I guarantee. It started out as various
volatiles of the usual hydrocarbon variety (with some small component
of nitrogen). The temperature of the oven drives the oxidation and
what's left is mostly pure carbon, just about like the stuff that coats
the bottom of a properly-seasoned cast iron pan.
And, yes, it will indeed stick very, very well to most metal surfaces.
>
> As an aside, I just tried the self-clean feature of my gas oven for
> the first time. Any chance of getting that shit off of the window
> is now pretty dim. I guess the glass doesn't get hot enough to burn
> that shit off. Any suggestions?
I just used Comet or Ajax and a Scotch-Brite pad. It took some elbow
grease, but it got rid of nearly everything on the glass. I did let a
lot of the Comet-water slurry sit on the glass for a couple of
hours....the door being in the horizontal position, of course. I don't
know if this helped, but it didn't hurt.
I didn't bother with the walls, as per my earlier comments.
Tim May
On 2010-01-22 11:02:16 -0800, Steve Pope said:
(null) <dl...@sonic.net> wrote:
hung my Lodge pans back in the rack. My All--Clad pans are nice, for my�
induction cooktop (which my Lodge pans work on as well, of course),�
but, man, are they hard to clean! The slightest amount of burning means�
scrubbing with Ajax or Comet and then another scrubbing with�
Bartender's Friend (oxalic acid).
Odd. My cheapo stainless cookware just needs a bit of deglazing (re-heat
if it's not still hot and shock it with cold water) to get most stuff out
and a few strokes with a bit of Barkeep's Friend will polish off the rest.
Since discovering Barkeep's friend, I've never had to resort to Ajax/Comet.
Firstly, in terms of abrasive content, Ajax/Comet are at the�
low end, Barkeep's friend at the high end, and Bon Ami in-between.
I don't know which direction your "low end/high end" scale goes in, but Barkeeper's Friend relies almost solely on oxalic acid to remove stains on stainless steel (which is of course not "stainless," which is why Germans prefer to call it "rostfrei," or "rust-free"). More precisely, rust-resistant.
Good stainless cookwear should not be "shocked" with cold
water; the manufacturers warn against this. �
I find that if a dish sponge doesn't clean it, the next
product to try is those orange-yellow scrubbers sold as
"Tuffy".� If that doesn't work, I use a slurry of coarse
salt.� That always works, with some effort.
I use the same procedure with enameled cookware and it
seems non-damaging.� Barkeep's Friend will definitely
damage enamel.
Barkeeper's Friend is a stainless steel product; it is not intended to be used for cleaning other materials, nor does it have any good effect on them.
sf
wrote:
>I suspect that most people clean their ovens for
>aesthetic reasons, not cootie prevention.
I have an oven that is so dirty I might have to call the fire
department when I turn on the self cleaning cycle. It's almost at the
well seasoned cast iron pan stage now. It would be a shame to ruin
it.
--
I love cooking with wine.
Sometimes I even put it in the food.
Julian Macassey
> So, I've been reading all of these comments about the "dirty water" and
> the "Deady Airborne Fecal or Urine Contaminants" apparently so
> ominipresent in restrooms that one dare not fill up a water bottle at
> the sinks....let alone breath or open one's mouth.
There is a school of thought that believes that if
Americans were not so microbe-phobic, they would be in better
health and not suffer from odd maladies like asthma.
I am endlessly amused by the "cooties" mentality. These
are often the same people concerned about urine spray in toilets
giving them a fatal disease yet happy to indulge in oral sex.
Also the same people who will not drink out of another's glass
but happily pass a joint or bong from person to person. If that
doesn't show the illogic of the microbe-phobia, what does?
>
> But the syndrome is clear. I was just watching "Last Restaurant
> Standing" on BBC America, about some aspiring chefs. The comes an
> advertisment for Easy Off, the oven cleaner. Said in a properly British
> accent (for BBCA) "You can't cook that sea bass in a greasy
> oven!....You'd never cook with pots and pans that dirty, woudja?"
My mother who was a nurse trained in Glasgow would say
that anything out of a deep fat fryer is sterile. So the
condition of the chip shop was not a concern.
> Well, ObCooking, if not ObBa.Food, I like cooking in my half dozen or
> so pieces of cast iron cookware. All from Lodge, except from some
> no-name skillets I picked up for free. No Griswold or Wagner, but Lodge
> is the surviving maker.
I own a Volrath cast iron frying pan. They don't make
them anymore. The company now makes professional kitchen
equipment, Smart and Final carry some of their line.
>
> This phobia about minor or airborn egerms and cooties is just plain weird.
It is indeed.
--
"War was God's way of teaching Americans geography." - Ambrose Bierce
Peter Lawrence
>
> As an aside, I just tried the self-clean feature of my gas oven for
> the first time. Any chance of getting that shit off of the window
> is now pretty dim. I guess the glass doesn't get hot enough to burn
> that shit off. Any suggestions?
Self-clean the oven again for three times longer than you originally did.
The gunk on the glass should eventually turn into a white powder that should
be very easy to wipe off.
- Peter
Dan Abel
Julian Macassey <jul...@tele.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 21 Jan 2010 21:57:58 -0800, Tim May <tc...@att.net> wrote:
> > So, I've been reading all of these comments about the "dirty water" and
> > the "Deady Airborne Fecal or Urine Contaminants" apparently so
> > ominipresent in restrooms that one dare not fill up a water bottle at
> > the sinks....let alone breath or open one's mouth.
> I am endlessly amused by the "cooties" mentality. These
> are often the same people concerned about urine spray in toilets
> giving them a fatal disease yet happy to indulge in oral sex.
> Also the same people who will not drink out of another's glass
> but happily pass a joint or bong from person to person. If that
> doesn't show the illogic of the microbe-phobia, what does?
OK. One of my favorites (which I think I stole from Geoff) is bathroom
doors. Most public bathrooms (which, strangely enough, almost never
come equipped with an actual bath) have doors. The inside of the door
is covered with germs, since it is in the bathroom. The outside of the
door is free of germs, since it isn't in a bathroom.
--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA
da...@sonic.net
Peter Lawrence
>
> OK. One of my favorites (which I think I stole from Geoff) is bathroom
> doors. Most public bathrooms (which, strangely enough, almost never
Which is why they are generally referred to as 'Restrooms' even though they
don't have any beds or sofas (except for some well equipped Ladies restrooms
that do have sofas).
- Peter
Steve Pope
>On 2010-01-22 11:02:16 -0800, Steve Pope said:
>> [ Barkeeper's ] Friend will definitely
>> damage enamel.
>
>Barkeeper's Friend is a stainless steel product; it is not intended to
>be used for cleaning other materials, nor does it have any good effect
>on them.
Thanks for pointing this out.
From barkeepersfriend.com,
If you're looking for a cleanser you can trust to clean
your stainless steel, porcelain, ceramic tile, plastic,
copper, china, fiberglass, imitation marble, tile, grout,
chrome, and composition sinks--trust Bar Keepers Friend.
So it seems they claim a little broader use than SS, but
pointedly not including enamel cookware or enamel sinks
(which is will damage, although temporarily they will look
extraordinarily clean and white...)
Steve
Tim May
> On Fri, 22 Jan 2010 11:11:04 -0800, Tim May wrote:
>
>> On 2010-01-22 10:47:17 -0800, Sqwertz said:
>>
>>> On Fri, 22 Jan 2010 10:06:15 -0800, Tim May wrote:
>>>
>>>> I've never detected any "smells/flavors" from this carbon, nor do I
>>>> think it plausible that any are there.
>>>
>>> If it was pure carbon, it probably wouldn't be sticking to the walls
>>> the oven in the first place. So it's probably more than just
>>> carbon.
>>
>> It's virtually all carbon, I guarantee. It started out as various
>> volatiles of the usual hydrocarbon variety (with some small component
>> of nitrogen). The temperature of the oven drives the oxidation and
>> what's left is mostly pure carbon, just about like the stuff that coats
>> the bottom of a properly-seasoned cast iron pan.
>
> But if your oven never gets above 450-500F, then I would think
> that's not nearly enough heat to carbonize cooking and food oils.
Sure it is. In fact, Lodge and others (Alton Brown, several cookbooks)
talk about doing the seasoning, or carbonization, at 350 F.
Remember, the _time_ is long: an hour for a typical recommended
seasoning. (I don't do this--I just do it the old-fashioned stovetop
way: I cook up some bacon and suchlike and a few sessions later, even a
plain old unseasoned pan is nicely blackened.)
The time for a few oven sessions will be a few hours at a fairly common
375 F, or higher.
But you can verify all of this for yourself: put a few ounces of your
favorite high smokepoint cooking oil in a container you can afford to
throw away. An old can will do nicely.
Put it in your oven for several oven cycles. See what's left.
And remember, the thin film on the oven walls is just that: a thin
film. Oxidation will proceed to near-completion even faster.
Tim May
A few more points about this. Though I'm not a chemist, it was my main
passion when I was in junior high school, so I read with interest the
analyses by Harold McGhee and others about food chemistry.
What happens with oils as they oxidizes is a process of thickening, as
polymers become cross-linked. Some oils polymerize very rapidly:
linseed oil is a good example, which is why it's used as a wood
treatment and NEVER, EVER as something humans would consume. The oil
soaks into the wood and then turns into a varnish, that is, a heavily
cross-linked, polymerized "nearly solid" material.
Old cooking oil also oxidizes, or turns to a kind of varnish. Rancidity
is one manifestation of this. Thickening (turning more viscous) is
another.
The process of "seasoning" a pan is closely related to this. Oil at a
high temperature penetrates the pores of cast iron (yes, cast iron is
covered with a myriad of small pores, as part of just the way it
forms....completely different from, say, glass or enamel or most
stainless steels).
If the pan is washed in soapy water, or with detergents, a lot of this
fresh oil will just wash away.
But if the pan is only lightly scrubbed, with coarse salt and paper
towels, or with a scrub brush just to remove the worst crud, the oil in
the pores will increasingly polymerize, becoming more and more
carbonized as well.
According to those who have done cross-sections and SEM (Scanning
Electron Microscope) views, the coating extends into these pores and
between these pores and becomes almost a continuous sheet of nearly
pure carbon. Sort of like a varnish that has gone completely solid.
This is the stage where the pan becomes almost completely nonstick
(though a few proteins, like eggs, will stick stick, at high temps).
(I have a couple of Teflon-coated pans with magnetic bottoms, so I can
use them on my induction cooktop for eggs, omelettes, etc. I know some
folks use a cast iron pan even for eggs, but I've found the low temps
for eggs makes the Teflon pan pretty easy to use. I think I saw an old
Julia Child show where she was using a French-made cast iron pan for
omelettes, but then years later I saw her saying she recommended a
Teflon-coated pan just for delicate things like eggs and omelettes.
This probably shaped my thinking. Plus, I saw an America's Test Kitchen
review of a Reverewear Teflon-coated pan with a very thick, magnetic
base. I think it's the "Millennium" series. Bed Bath and Beyond was
selling them for about $20, so I got a small one and a large one. They
work well on my induction cooktop.)
Tim May
> (I have a couple of Teflon-coated pans with magnetic bottoms, so I can
> use them on my induction cooktop for eggs, omelettes, etc. I know some
> folks use a cast iron pan even for eggs, but I've found the low temps
> for eggs makes the Teflon pan pretty easy to use. I think I saw an old
> Julia Child show where she was using a French-made cast iron pan for
> omelettes, but then years later I saw her saying she recommended a
> Teflon-coated pan just for delicate things like eggs and omelettes.
> This probably shaped my thinking. Plus, I saw an America's Test Kitchen
> review of a Reverewear Teflon-coated pan with a very thick, magnetic
> base. I think it's the "Millennium" series. Bed Bath and Beyond was
> selling them for about $20, so I got a small one and a large one. They
> work well on my induction cooktop.)
Sorry, I erred. It's _Farberware_, and I just checked the name: Millennium.
Revereware was the horrible stuff my mother cooked with for 50 years.
It sort of looked cool, with an exposed copper layer on the bottom, the
rest stainless steel.
But it turns out the walls and bottom are _very_ thin, and the copper
layer is so thin as to be utterly meaningless in terms of thermal
conductivity. (The lateral conduction is what is needed for even
heating, without hot spots. This is why most of the newer cookware,
even the el cheapo stuff sold at TJ Maxx and Target, has thick bottoms,
often with a plate of aluminum sandwiched between the layers of
stainless steel. This is what All-Clad uses.
In the past decade or so, as I figured out this stuff--courtesy of my
own induction cooktop explorations, and shows on The Food Network, and
the Net, and books--I realized why my mother was always struggling with
burned-on food and uneven cooking and having to soak the frypans and
saucepans for hours in the sink: hot spots due to the incredibly thin
metal and stainless steel that is notorious for having food stick to it.
This is an area where all three of the "revolutions" in cookware over
the 1950s-70s were actual steps _backward_ as compared to the cast iron
skillets and Dutch ovens so common prior to the 1950s:
-- thin-metal stainless steel, like Revereware.
-- early generations of Teflon-coated pans, like "T-Fal" and even
"Silverstone." (This is what I cooked on in the 1970s-90s, and it got
all scratched-up, the pans warped over high heat, etc. And this was
even before I'd heard about the "canary effect."
-- aluminum, which may be OK, and is certainly fine for stock pots and
the like. A lot of restaurants swear by them. They're cheap, and they
conduct heat well. (Laterally, that is. Vertical conductivity is not an
issue, obviously)
Nonstick aluminum involving hard anodization came along, and I bought a
couple of those (Anolon, I think the brand was).
But now I stick (no pun intended) to Lodge cast iron, All-Clad
stainless, a Le Creuset Dutch Oven (duplicative of the Lodge one, but I
got it at the outlet in Gilroy), a Le Creuset tagine, and the
aforementioned Farberware nonstick pans for eggs.
All of these are magnetic, so all work well on my induction cooktop.
I converted one of the Anolon pans to a cat water bowl, gave a couple
of things away to friends with gas or electric stoves, and basically no
longer use any of the old pots.
Considering how horrible it was to fry things in my scratched-up,
heat-warped Teflon-coated pan, I wish someone had told me about cast
iron way back. Even on a conventional cooktop, a better way to use a
skillet.
Mr. Joseph Littleshoes Esq.
Tim May wrote:
> So, I've been reading all of these comments about the "dirty water" and
> the "Deady Airborne Fecal or Urine Contaminants" apparently so
> ominipresent in restrooms that one dare not fill up a water bottle at
> the sinks....let alone breath or open one's mouth.
>
> Amusing.
>
> But the syndrome is clear. I was just watching "Last Restaurant
> Standing" on BBC America, about some aspiring chefs. The comes an
> advertisment for Easy Off, the oven cleaner. Said in a properly British
> accent (for BBCA) "You can't cook that sea bass in a greasy
> oven!....You'd never cook with pots and pans that dirty, woudja?"
>
>
> This phobia about minor or airborn egerms and cooties is just plain weird.
>
Even more so when it extends to personal hygiene products, especially
those marketed to women, but even guys are now shaving their pits and
don't even get me started on "metro sexuals"!
However, to be fair, if i had convinced a significant portion of the
population that their health, well being, attractiveness, 'sex appeal'
depended on smelling like "nice" and made a fortune off it i would
probly not be setting here in the bay area in winter griping about it.
Probly be on a yacht some where in the southern hemisphere reveling in
the organic delights a less 'civilized' world.
--
Mr. Joseph Littleshoes Esq.
Domine, dirige nos.
Let the games begin!
http://fredeeky.typepad.com/fredeeky/files/sf_anthem.mp3
Owner|Moderator
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/JoeTarot
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/SomeThingsTarot
Golden California Girls
>
> Nope, the typical amount of crud on the walls will NOT affect
> temperature regulation.
But the coating on the temperature probe will.
Tim May
Nope.
Tim May
>
> Even more so when it extends to personal hygiene products, especially
> those marketed to women, but even guys are now shaving their pits and
> don't even get me started on "metro sexuals"!
Disgusting trends.
However, I saw some interviews with "supermodels" who happen to be
married and/or into guys. They said they prefer their husbands or
boyfriends to be natural, hairy, etc.
Apparently the effete metrosexuals mainly appeal to other effete
metrosexuals (that is, homosexuals).
>
> However, to be fair, if i had convinced a significant portion of the
> population that their health, well being, attractiveness, 'sex appeal'
> depended on smelling like "nice" and made a fortune off it i would
> probly not be setting here in the bay area in winter griping about it.
>
> Probly be on a yacht some where in the southern hemisphere reveling in
> the organic delights a less 'civilized' world.
Moving around to different parts of the world is not all it's sometimes
cracked up to be.
Without getting into details, for the past 20 years or more I've had
the ability to live anywhere I wanted to, at any time of the year.
However, I choose to live in California. A benign climate, even during
the coldest months (shudder: it got down to 47 F last night, and I even
turned on the heat this morning!).
The supposed benefits of a "constant 68-76 F range," said to be the
case in some parts of Hawaii, are just not worth the effort.
Nor is moving to the Southern Hemisphere to follow the sun. The massive
labor and headaches in moving my "presence" (my stuff, my accounts,
etc.) does not even warrant my buying a "winter place" in the San Diego
area, which I once gave serious thought to doing. They get rain and
cold temps too, just a little less rain and maybe 5-10 F warmer temps
even during the coldest periods. Not enough to balance out the massive
hassle of moving for the winter.
(Where people move south for the summer is in places like Quebec and
Ontario, where the drive to Snowbird enclaves in Florida is
better-justified.)
BTW, I expect I got a sunburn today. I was outside from 10 am to 4 pm,
working on my deck replacement project. (By the way, the Stiletto
titanium "TiBar" is the cat's paw meaow when it comes to dimpling old
nails, cat's pawing them up, then levering them out. Superior to my
Dead-On cat's paw and my old Vaughn cat's paw.)
A friend of mine just got back from several weeks in Kerala, India,
certainly a "warm" locale. He said the beaches are now unusable, due to
nearby industrial development.
He said it was a relief to get back to Sonoma, where, while not always
summer-like, the cooler temps are bearable and the benefits are
manyfold.
Steve Pope
>A friend of mine just got back from several weeks in Kerala, India,
>certainly a "warm" locale. He said the beaches are now unusable, due to
>nearby industrial development.
>He said it was a relief to get back to Sonoma, where, while not always
>summer-like, the cooler temps are bearable and the benefits are
>manyfold.
But isn't it communism (er, zoning that is) that has kept Sonoma
county beaches relatively unspoiled?
Steve
Tim May
No.
Sonoma beaches, like Mendocino beaches, like Big Sur beaches, and so
on, are simply way too far from "commerce" to be developable in the way
the Kerala beaches are.
Oh, and Kerala is highly, highly Communist. Beyond anything even Nancy
Pelosi, Bawney Fwank and Obama Bin Laden could ever imagine.
Look to the commies in the former USSR and in the current PRC for
evidence about how commies treat the people's land.
Julian Macassey
Funny you should say that. Kerala has had a commie
government since the early 1950s.
Communism Hasn't helped thier beaches it seems.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_of_Kerala
"Politics in Kerala is dominated by two political fronts: the
Communist party-led Left Democratic Front (LDF) and the Indian
National Congress-led United Democratic Front (UDF). These two
parties have alternating in power since 1982. According to 2006
Kerala Legislative Assembly election results, the LDF has a
majority in the state assembly "
Peter Lawrence
>
> The supposed benefits of a "constant 68-76 F range," said to be the case
> in some parts of Hawaii, are just not worth the effort.
Huh? Why not?
It's really not that much harder to live in Hawaii (if you're retired) than
California since the cost of living is roughly comparable. While I wouldn't
want to live Oahu -- too crowded, there are many areas of Maui which would
be ideal. Close enough to civilization for all the necessities and niceties
of life, but rural enough not too worry about too much congestion (except
around the touristy northwest coast in and around Kaanapali which can easily
be avoided).
- Peter
sf
>Apparently the effete metrosexuals mainly appeal to other effete
>metrosexuals (that is, homosexuals).
That terminology used to carry a lot less baggage. In the beginning,
it just described a straight guy who had the fashion sense of a gay
guy.
Tim May
> On Sat, 23 Jan 2010 18:11:07 -0800, Tim May <tc...@att.net> wrote:
>
>> Apparently the effete metrosexuals mainly appeal to other effete
>> metrosexuals (that is, homosexuals).
>
> That terminology used to carry a lot less baggage. In the beginning,
> it just described a straight guy who had the fashion sense of a gay
> guy.
Not insofar as I can tell.
There were certainly "well-dressed men." Calling their fashion sense
"gay" is a well-known slur.
But by the very first time I heard the term "metrosexual"--and I have
had cable t.v. since the early 80s and am relatively up-to-date on
media trends--it was fairly clearly a code word for a "bisexual," that
is, a homosexual with delusions about someday being normal.
The good news is that now that we see someone with "Queer Eye for the
Straight Guy" fashion we can assume he's probably a queer and not hire
him, or it, or zir, or zim.
Peter Lawrence
>
> There were certainly "well-dressed men." Calling their fashion sense
> "gay" is a well-known slur.
I think dapper was the customary word to use for well-dressed men.
- Peter
Michael Sierchio
> On Sat, 23 Jan 2010 18:11:07 -0800, Tim May <tc...@att.net> wrote:
>
>> Apparently the effete metrosexuals mainly appeal to other effete
>> metrosexuals (that is, homosexuals).
>
> That terminology used to carry a lot less baggage. In the beginning,
> it just described a straight guy who had the fashion sense of a gay
> guy.
Which is really fucking stupid - a gay plumber? gay truck driver?
gay heavy equipment operator? Or are they all aestheticians and
interior decorators?
sf
You're making no sense at all.
Tim May
On 2010-01-24 19:26:24 -0800, Sqwertz said:
On Fri, 22 Jan 2010 17:45:11 -0800, Tim May wrote:
According to those who have done cross-sections and SEM (Scanning
Electron Microscope) views, the coating extends into these pores and
between these pores and becomes almost a continuous sheet of nearly
pure carbon. Sort of like a varnish that has gone completely solid.
Reference?
Carbon bonds with almost anything and forms the base for many
substances. But "almost pure" carbon would fall right off.
My copy of McGhee's "Science of Food and Cooking" (or whatever) is not handy, but Cook's Illustrated did some testing and had this summary several years ago:
"
Cook's has also tested the pre-seasoned cookware for those who would like to start:
Quote
--
Preseasoned Cast Iron Cookware
Written: 5/2003
We decided to test the difference in cooking with a preseasoned cast-iron skillet, compared to that of a new cast-iron skillet we seasoned ourselves, and with our own 60 year old well seasoned cast-iron skillet.
The Lodge Manufacturing Company in South Pittsburg, Tenn., longtime maker of plain, old-fashioned cast-iron cookware, brought a new, preseasoned line to the market in late summer 2002. According to Jeanne Scholze, product manager at Lodge, this new line, called Lodge Logic, gives the home cook the equivalent of one to two years’ worth of “seasoning” in a brand new pan and makes it unnecessary for customers to give a pan its first seasoning at home. (As explained in previous issues of Cook’s, the more use a cast-iron pan gets, the more seasoned it becomes, the more its performance improves. Over time cast iron absorbs and transforms the oils and fats from cooking to produce a smooth, black surface that keeps food from sticking and cleans up easily. Lodge instructs home cooks to give a traditional pan its first seasoning by coating it with vegetable shortening and then baking it upside down in a 350-degree oven for one hour.)
The company preseasons each piece of cookware in the Logic line by spraying it with oil electrostatically, a process similar to that used in painting automobiles. After being sprayed, the pan goes to a very hot oven that opens the pores of the metal and thereby allows the oil to penetrate deeply—more so than is possible in a home oven, according to Scholze. Lodge won’t reveal the temperature at which the pan is seasoned; Scholze would say only that it’s higher than what can be achieved in a home oven. Likewise, Lodge will not disclose the type of vegetable oil it uses. According to Scholze, it contains no animal fat and is kosher.
To see if this logic about preseasoning applied in the kitchen as well as on paper, we purchased a preseasoned skillet and an unseasoned skillet from Lodge, seasoned the latter according to Lodge’s instructions, and compared the performance of both with that of a cast-iron skillet that had seen 60 years of use and careful seasoning. We seared steaks, pan-fried salmon, and fried eggs in each pan. The food browned well in all three pans, but the browning was the most even and thorough in the 60-year-old pan. What’s more, the food did not stick to this pan at all. The food stuck slightly to Lodge’s preseasoned pan and a bit more to the new pan we had seasoned ourselves.
To test the extent to which the pans would transfer a metallic taste to acidic foods, we cooked canned diced tomatoes in each one, checking the flavor every five minutes. (Acid dissolves some of the metal from the surface of cast-iron pans; a more seasoned pan will be more resistant to the acid because its surface has been better sealed with the oils and fats from cooking.) The newly seasoned pan picked up a metallic taste in only 10 minutes, the preseasoned pan in about 20 minutes, and the old pan in about 30 minutes.
Finally, we noted how easily each pan cleaned up after each of the tests. The 60-year-old pan cleaned up just as easily as a new nonstick pan would. Both the preseasoned and newly home-seasoned pans required equal amounts of elbow grease to remove all traces of food.
Based on our tests, Lodge Logic outperforms a pan purchased unseasoned, but it can’t hold a candle to the performance of a pan that’s been seasoned by generations of cooks. And while the Logic pan does release you from the responsibility of that crucial first seasoning, thereafter the company recommends spraying the cooking surface with oil prior to each session on the stovetop or in the oven, so it’s not maintenance-free. Preseasoned pans are more expensive than the old-fashioned kind, but not by much: A 12-inch preseasoned skillet can be purchased from the Lodge Web site (www.lodgemfg.com) for $21.95, whereas the company’s 12-inch unseasoned skillet sells for $17.95. Lodge Logic is also available at Williams-Sonoma.
"
The Lodge website also discusses seasoning. A book on woks, "The Breath of a Wok," devotes about 15 pages to steel and cast iron woks (generally much thinner and more fragile than Lodge- or similar pots), but still seasoned in roughly the same way.
From several of my carbon steel woks which have been used for stir fries and with only very light cleaning, the patina or coating is similar in touch to that on my Lodge pans.
Considering the temperature some of the woks have been at--dull red at the bottom--there is no way any significant amount of organic materials, in the sense of fats and oils, would persist. This is what I meant by "almost pure" carbon.
As to your claim that if this were so, it would "fall right off," there are several issues:
1. The precise chemistry. I haven't found any good studies on this.
2. The role of microfissures or "pores" in integrating with the patina. I may provide mechanical strength to the coating, in addition to the chemical sticking aspects.
(I remember seeing a diagram showing the carbon-rich patina "covering the roughness" of a cast iron pot, but this may have been some artist's conception. I do know that my best Lodge pan, the 10-inch skillet I use more than other pan, has gotten a better and better coating on it--smoother and the pan is even more nonstick than it was several years ago. A lot like the description above of the older pan. And the coating is black, like carbon.
Looks like a duck, quacks like a duck....only carbon from the cooking oils could plausibly be causing this thicker and better black surface to form.
So I am persuaded that this high temperature "polymerization driven almost to pure carbon" is the likely mechanism.
Again, I take my skillets to very high temperatures. My noncontacting probe has hit 700 F. Usually I back things off, of course. With peanut oil, I try to set the temp to 450 F maximum.
The stuff left on the pan after seasoning is mostly carbon.
Tim May
I found a few more speculative summaries about what is happening during the seasoning process. I think this excerpt captures what I have seen in the transition from "tacky surface" with oil put on a not-high-temperature to the much deeper, smoother black surface which develops over time. Here's the summary, then my comments afterward:
http://ths.gardenweb.com/forums/load/cookware/msg0918171717144.html
"
|
"
This seems like a plausible explanation. Some work with a SEM equipped with backscatter spectroscopy equipment would be good for a nice little paper.
The key line is here: "You MUST heat cast iron above the smoke point to get actual carbon black into the patina matrix"
My experience is that my woks and cast iron get better when I have definitely exceeded the smoke point (not always dangerous, of course).
Travis James
> which would be ideal. Close enough to civilization for all the
> necessities and niceties of life, but rural enough not too worry about
> too much congestion (except around the touristy northwest coast in and
> around Kaanapali which can easily be avoided).
I just got back from a week in Maui for a combined conference and
vacation. It was great, and I'll probably go back again in the next
couple of years. I took the time to do some driving off the beaten path
along with some touristy endeavors too.
There's something about Maui, maybe all of Hawaii, that I cannot put my
finger on where I don't leave with that "if I could only live here"
fantasy that goes with other enjoyable trips. Is it the island
isolation? tourism and its ubiquitous industry? the class separation? I
don't know, but it's different than other tourist havens like Santa
Barbara where I'd have no problem living given the right conditions.
Tim May
I live in Santa Barbara, 1970-74, while in school, and went back many
times over the decades since. I often stop there on my trips down and
back up from LA. Usually just for several hours, but sometimes
overnight. And I spent almost a week there a couple of years ago.
When I stopped working a while back, I thought carefully about where to
live. Two places were uppermost in my mind: the Santa Cruz/Monterey Bay
area and Santa Barbara. I didn't consider Marin/Sonoma as I have no
connection to those areas...and they are even cooler than the Monterey
Bay region is. Friends of mine are happily retired up there, though.
I chose the Santa Cruz area (well, Aptos, and then later, Corralitos)
for some reasons which seemed good at that time. Close to the beach, of
course, and:
1. Close to my long-established Silicon Valley connections and friends.
2. In case I wanted to go back to work, or had to, if my investments
didn't work out well, I could make the commute and/or rent a small
place in the Valley for M-F.
3. Santa Barbara had been losing some of its charm by then (1986), with
more tourists, more of a "Rodeo Drive North" feeling on State Street
than I had seen during the less-affluent, less-touristy 1970s.
4. I realized that the climate or temperature differences are slight.
(Since then, I've followed it even more closely, for various reasons.
The Monterey Bay area is just about 5 F cooler than the Santa Barbara
area, most of the year. The number of near-freezing days is larger, but
it depends on microclimate. I can grow avocadoes on my property in
Corralitos, though they are not exuberant producers as in the Santa
Barbara-San Diego corridor.)
5. When I lived in Santa Barbara, I savored the sense of isolation from
LA. It was 100 miles away, and a world away to a student like myself.
(No car. No desire to drive with others to LA. I think I visited LA 5-6
times in my years at UCSB.)
However, today I would find it a bit isolating. LA is the only big city
nearby, whereas the area I'm in has the Valley a short drive away and
SF about the same distance as SB to LA was. Plus Santa Cruz is a
pleasant city to shop in, every bit the equivalent of SB. (SB has more
Rodeo Drive places, but an inferior selection of bookstores as compared
to Santa Cruz. The only stores I shop in are places like bookstores,
the Apple Stores, big box stores, or food stores and restaurants. So
State Street in SB offers me nothing over SC.)
6. House prices. In 1986 the big price run-up in Santa Barbara had not
yet occurred, but prices in the Monterey Bay region were still mostly
about 2/3 or so of most Santa Barbara places. Depends on a lot of
factors, obviously. Pebble Beach vs. Hope Ranch is not the same thing
as Rio Del Mar vs. the Mesa.
I briefly looked into Santa Barbara properties in the mid-90s. This was
after the "military base shut down" mini-recession, so a lot of Santa
Barbara aerospace companies had laid-off engineers. Some nice places
came on the market.
Ditto for the Santa Cruz area, and I found the Spanish-style house of
my dreams on a hill overlooking the Monterey Peninsula, with Loma
Prieta and Mount Madonna visible in the other direction(s). It cost me
more than I'd ever expected to ever pay for a house, $364K, but I
couldn't have gotten the same water view in Santa Barbara, with a big
lot, for that price.
If I ever get a place in that area, it may well be something like a
beachfront condo that I could safely lock up and forget about. Maybe
even in Pismo Beach or that area. Which has even less culture and less
shopping, but it might be a good place for a weekend getaway that is
easily driveable (3 hours for me).
But then I realize the hassles of having two places--upkeep, security,
insurance, moving "stuff" between the two places--and the fact that
it's only _slightly_ warmer than where I now live. (Probably not even
that, as Corralitos has a balmy, slightly inland microclimate.)
So I stay. A friend of mine debated buying a property in Hawaii....he's
been there many times. But he's found the "island fever" issue is an
important one for him. That, and his friends who bought investment
properties on Maui have had problems with the locals. A growing gang
problem, and resentment about the "haoles" who move in.
I see nothing but trouble ahead.
Peter Lawrence
>
> There's something about Maui, maybe all of Hawaii, that I cannot put my
> finger on where I don't leave with that "if I could only live here"
> fantasy that goes with other enjoyable trips. Is it the island
> isolation? tourism and its ubiquitous industry? the class separation? I
> don't know, but it's different than other tourist havens like Santa
> Barbara where I'd have no problem living given the right conditions.
Ironically, I have that same feeling about Santa Barbara that you have about
Maui. I guess we have different tastes and priorities in regards to places
where we would like to live (or retire). For me, I would completely enjoy
the more laid back, less stress, slower paced life of Maui. The only thing
I would miss is attending major league sporting events, something I do
frequently in the Bay Area. Of course, the good paying job opportunities
are far more rare in Maui than even other tourist locales like Santa
Barbara, which why I think most people won't consider moving there until
they retire.
- Peter
me
> But then I realize the hassles of having two places--upkeep, security,
> insurance, moving "stuff" between the two places--and the fact that
> it's only _slightly_ warmer than where I now live. (Probably not even
> that, as Corralitos has a balmy, slightly inland microclimate.)
>
> So I stay. A friend of mine debated buying a property in Hawaii....he's
> been there many times. But he's found the "island fever" issue is an
> important one for him. That, and his friends who bought investment
> properties on Maui have had problems with the locals. A growing gang
> problem, and resentment about the "haoles" who move in.
>
> I see nothing but trouble ahead.
>
> --
> -- Tim May, Corralitos, California
The way to solve this would be to use someone like me. I've often
done work exchange. If a bunch of moneyed people want a safe house or
getaway, a flexible time share property would be a logical answer.
Instead of it being a "co-op", I would be more the "trustee" of the
property to make sure each ownership partner would have his/her
comfort spread. I would be responsible for scheduling, maintenance,
security (keeping out the type of people who Tim often colorfully
describes), and farming (such as avocados, fruit, artichokes, but not
marijuana or other illegals). I would have my fun, and everyone else
would have their fun.
So if someone like Tim would have ten friends who he could venture
with over something like this, it would be like buying a second place
at about a tenth of the price.
sf
wrote:
I love both places and could happily live in either. So there.
Geoff Miller
Travis James <travis...@gmail.com> writes:
> There's something about Maui, maybe all of Hawaii,
> that I cannot put my finger on where I don't leave
> with that "if I could only live here" fantasy that
> goes with other enjoyable trips. Is it the island
> isolation? tourism and its ubiquitous industry? the
> class separation?
What class separation? That's an interesting observation.
I lived in several locales on Oahu for three years and hung
out all over the place, and I never perceived any such thing.
Maybe calling the place home and living among the folks (as
Bill O'Reilly would say), rather than staying in a resort
area and making excursions out into the *real* Hawaii, warts
and all, would make a difference in a person's impressions.
Perhaps what you feel is a combination of all the above, along
with an uneasiness at the fact that while Hawaii is definitely
America, in many respects it's like a foreign country, culturally
as well as geographically halfway to the Far East.
Geoff
--
"Where's Jack Bauer -- or for that matter, Dick
Cheney -- when we need some adults to help
protect our country?" -- John Hawkins
Peter Lawrence
>
> Perhaps what you feel is a combination of all the above, along
> with an uneasiness at the fact that while Hawaii is definitely
> America, in many respects it's like a foreign country, culturally
> as well as geographically halfway to the Far East.
... in many respects it's like a foreign country?
I never felt that while visiting Hawaii. To me, it has always felt like
what I think it was, an extension of the United States into the tropics.
It's hard to think of it as a foreign land when I have done most of my
grocery shopping in Hawaii at Costco and Safeway.
:)
- Peter
Golden California Girls
> On Fri, 22 Jan 2010 17:45:11 -0800, Tim May wrote:
>
>> According to those who have done cross-sections and SEM (Scanning
>> Electron Microscope) views, the coating extends into these pores and
>> between these pores and becomes almost a continuous sheet of nearly
>> pure carbon. Sort of like a varnish that has gone completely solid.
>
> Reference?
>
> Carbon bonds with almost anything and forms the base for many
> substances. But "almost pure" carbon would fall right off.
Really? You mean the pure carbon known as graphite, the stuff in your pencil,
would fall right off. Now if that pure carbon was in the form of diamond, I
might agree with you. Then there are a bunch of other forms, nano tubes, buckey
balls, ...
Travis James
> What class separation? That's an interesting observation.
> I lived in several locales on Oahu for three years and hung
> out all over the place, and I never perceived any such thing.
>
> Maybe calling the place home and living among the folks (as
> Bill O'Reilly would say), rather than staying in a resort
> area and making excursions out into the *real* Hawaii, warts
> and all, would make a difference in a person's impressions.
I agree with you. It's simply the net effect of my 2 visits and that I
left without any desire to live there but with the desire to come back -
as a tourist. My other travel experiences, which are by no means
extensive, have me left in wonderment of what it's like to live there -
Tahoe, Chicago, San Diego as examples.
My Santa Barbara example wasn't a good one because I lived there both in
the slums of Goleta and in a modest apartment 2 blocks off of State (on
Cota by the DMV). It was a great experience, even as a poor grad student.
I'm pretty sure I could adapt to Maui if my middle-class lifestyle and
family were with me, but that's just it. My professional and personal
life is not tourism, fishing, sugar cane, nor pineapple farming.
>
> Perhaps what you feel is a combination of all the above, along
> with an uneasiness at the fact that while Hawaii is definitely
> America, in many respects it's like a foreign country, culturally
> as well as geographically halfway to the Far East.
I don't think it's that. I've worked alongside Indians, Chinese, and
Russians in the Bay Area for 15 years and take their cultures in stride
(as they usually do my Euro/semi-Mexican American culture). I've lived
stints in the heart of Cupertino's Chinese culture, no big deal. I was
probably least comfortable in Menlo Park among my so-called white folks
and their mid-peninsula rich liberal elitism (yes, painted with a super
broad brush).
Further, when I watch the occasional episode of Dog The Bounty Hunter
(guilty pleasure), which takes place in Honolulu, it just looks like any
other dirty big city with poor drug addicts living on the fringes of the
city limits.
Boy, that's more than I thought I'd say about this. G'nite Gracie.
Geoff Miller
Peter Lawrence <humm...@aol.com> writes:
> ... in many respects it's like a foreign country?
Yup, that's what I wrote.
Guam, also American territory, is much the same
from what I hear. Puerto Rico, too. Why would
hearing this come as a surprise?
> I never felt that while visiting Hawaii. To me,
> it has always felt like what I think it was, an
> extension of the United States into the tropics.
You really believe that it's no different from, say
Miami?
> It's hard to think of it as a foreign land when
> I have done most of my grocery shopping in Hawaii
> at Costco and Safeway.
It's not *that* different. Obviously, you're
going to see familiar stores and name brands,
shopping malls and chain restaurants. (The
first Tony Roma's I ever saw was on Kalakaua
Boulevard in Waikiki.) People generally speak
English, and you won't have to point at the
menus in restaurants. Then again, how often
do you find Japanese retailiers like Mitsukoshi
or Daiei on the Manland?
The differences come across in a number of subtle
ways: in the custom of taking off your shoes when
going into the house, for example, or the way a
lot of Japanese words (e.g., referring to children
as "keiki") are used in everyday speech. And then
there's the pidgin that's used informally, which
isn't something one encounters in, say, Los Angeles.
Nobody would be motivated to write a book like
this about a place that was no different from
anywhere in the continental U.S.:
http://preview.tinyurl.com/yapk4jz
Geoff
--
"The problem isn't that Johnny can't read. The
problem isn't even that Johnny can't think. The
problem is that Johnny doesn't know what thinking
is; he confuses it with feeling." -- Thomas Sowell
Peter Lawrence
I never said that Hawaii isn't different from the mainland. It has a
different vibe to it (which I find appealing), just like how the different
regions on the mainland (the South, the Midwest, Northern and Southern
California, New England) have different vibes compared to one another.
What I said is that it does not feel at all like a foreign country, just
like I don't feel I'm in a foreign country when I visit the Deep South, even
though the Deep South does feel culturally different compared to California
(even more culturally different than Hawaii does).
- Peter
Tim May
> You know that graphite is glued to the wood int he pencil, right?
> And it's one of the slipperiest substances on Earth - used to
> lubricate certain moving parts(*), right? It wipes right off as I'm
> sure you've noticed.
The slipperiness of graphite--a particular form of carbon--is not the
issue. (Also, pencil lead is in a binder of clay, not glued in.
Extruded in.)
Think instead of the almost pure carbon that fouls the inside of car
engines. Nobody would say that form of carbon is so slippery that it
slides right off.
The baked-on, mostly-carbon stuff on the inside of hot ovens and inside
cast iron pans or woks is definitely not slippery and doesn't just
slide right off.
cph
> I live in Santa Barbara, 1970-74, while in school, and went back many
> times over the decades since. I often stop there on my trips down and
> back up from LA. Usually just for several hours, but sometimes
> overnight. And I spent almost a week there a couple of years ago.
>
I went to UCSB in 1983-87. Things were probably a bit different
then....The
"granola bar culture" seemed to be on its way out, although still in
existence.
Replaced, of course, by the materialistic "Rodeo Drive" stuff you
mention later.
> 3. Santa Barbara had been losing some of its charm by then (1986), with
> more tourists, more of a "Rodeo Drive North" feeling on State Street
> than I had seen during the less-affluent, less-touristy 1970s.
>
I noticed that too, especially after I left school and occasionally
drove back up
for daytrips, etc. Everything started to get expensive.
> 5. When I lived in Santa Barbara, I savored the sense of isolation from
> LA. It was 100 miles away, and a world away to a student like myself.
> (No car. No desire to drive with others to LA. I think I visited LA 5-6
> times in my years at UCSB.)
I'm from LA, so I shuttled back and forth more than that. But I didn't
go home
every weekend.
No car either, it was MTD, Greyhound (for trips to LA) or parents
picking me up
(beginning and end of quarters only, so I could bring everything home)
I wanted to visit San Francisco, but never got around to doing so
until much later (1991....)
>
> However, today I would find it a bit isolating.
I would too. I'd miss being able to go to Santa Barbara one weekend,
then San Diego or Palm Springs the next.
Where I live now, Vegas and Santa Barbara are both a 3-hour
drive....San Diego is about an hour and a half, as is Palm Springs.
>
> So I stay. A friend of mine debated buying a property in Hawaii....he's
> been there many times. But he's found the "island fever" issue is an
> important one for him. That, and his friends who bought investment
> properties on Maui have had problems with the locals. A growing gang
> problem, and resentment about the "haoles" who move in.
Hawaii is relatively economically depressed, and does not produce much
(other than tourism, which
has its ups and downs). It's fun to visit, but would be difficult to
live there, especially
if you needed to work.
who
> all of which won First Place (1973, 1982, 1994).
You were in elementary school for a very long time.
You must have been the only fifth grader with a beard and a drivers
license.
Tim May
On 2010-01-27 11:40:58 -0800, Sqwertz said:
On Tue, 26 Jan 2010 19:23:35 -0800, Tim May wrote:
Think instead of the almost pure carbon that fouls the inside of car�
engines. Nobody would say that form of carbon is so slippery that it�
slides right off.
The baked-on, mostly-carbon stuff on the inside of hot ovens and inside�
cast iron pans or woks is definitely not slippery and doesn't just�
slide right off.
<sigh>.� Again, not pure carbon.� Have you ever run the self-clean
cycle of your oven (apparently not, that's what started this damn
thread).
But of course I did not say "pure carbon."
Read what I wrote here, and in earlier articles: I said "baked-on, mostly-carbon."
The percentage of carbon in the black crud backed onto the walls of ovens or the bottoms of cast iron skillets is most all carbon, with far less hydrogen and oxygen than the oils and fats it started out as.
This is the whole point of seasoning a cast iron pan. Which is how this thread really did start. (I started it, so I know.)
The car engine is constantly getting basted with fresh petroleum
products, polymerizing it - just like your cast iron pan and wok.
Shut off the engine, drain it, and then throw it into your self
clean oven and guess what...?
The pyrolosis reaction typically takes place way above 600 F. Most self-cleaning ovens have interlocks to prevent the oven from being opened when it way up there in temp. Here's one mention of 900 F temps:
"The basic idea is "burn baby, burn!"
Self-cleaning ovens use an approximately 900 degrees Fahrenheit (482 degrees Celsius) temperature cycle to burn off spills leftover from baking, without the use of any chemicals. A self-cleaning oven is designed with a mechanical interlock (patented in 1982) to keep the oven door locked and closed during and soon after the high-temperature cleaning cycle, which can be approximately three hours. The door stays locked to prevent burn injuries. You can open the oven door after the oven cools to approximately 600 F (315 C)."
http://recipes.howstuffworks.com/tools-and-techniques/question559.htm
These temps are much, much higher than oventop skillet or even most "jet engine wok burner" wok cooking.�
As the temps increase, the carbon content increases"
-- 300-350 max temps, oils will barely get "sticky." This is why the CYA Lodge documents on seasoning pan for 350 F in an oven often lead to "sticky" pans. The percentage of carbon (e.g., by weight) is lower than in the starting oil, but not by much
-- 400-450 F max temps, above the smoke points. Pans seasoned at these temps will develop more of a "black sheen," with much less stickiness.�
-- excursions to 500-550 or so, the pans really get a hard seasoning layer. Mostly carbon, with small amounts of hydrates (H and O) linking an extremely hard "varnish" that is, several studies have reported, mechanically attached to the pores of cast iron. (BTW, why enamel coatings don't develop this carbonized seasoning.)
-- intense heat in a bonfire or charcoal grill at maximum, for� ~ hours. The mostly carbon is now nearly all carbon, or ash. Mechanical adhesion no longer happens, and the ash falls off the skillet.
Which changes nothing about my claim that the black sheen on a well-seasoned cast iron skillet is mostly carbon.
Golden California Girls
> On Mon, 25 Jan 2010 20:52:00 -0800, Golden California Girls wrote:
>
What wood?
> And it's one of the slipperiest substances on Earth - used to
> lubricate certain moving parts(*), right? It wipes right off as I'm
> sure you've noticed.
Funny, when I write with a pencil on metal I can read it.
Yes, it can be rubbed off, but it doesn't "fall off." You have to apply energy
to break the chemical bond.
> -sw
>
> (*) Like the axles of my three Pinewood Derby cars all of which won
> First Place (1973, 1982, 1994).
My, it fills out the micro pores in the metal making a nice smooth surface.
Surprise, surprise.
Finally the stuff in your oven isn't 100% graphite. It has a fair amount of
nano tubes and buckey balls mixed in, as well as some hydrocarbons.
Consider charcoal.
Gregory Morrow
Lol...
--
Best
Greg
Gregory Morrow
> Cub Scouts, drafting class in high school, and then my own son's
> first Pinewood Derby car.
>
> It's called "a life". Try it sometime.
It *was* funny, Steve...
--
Best
Greg
who
>> Like the axles of _MY_ three Pinewood Derby cars
>> all of which won First Place (1973, 1982, 1994).
> Cub Scouts, drafting class in high school, and then
> my own son's first Pinewood Derby car.
You did say "my".
So you're one of those parents who made the car for their kid.
We always figured when a pinewood derby car had MacPherson strut suspension,
coil springs, and a torsion bar that they weren't built by a fifth grader.
Now we know.
> It's called "a life". Try it sometime.
We have one. Since we aren't busy making our kid's pinewood derby car we
have time to (ObFood) cook and go out to dinner.
Bonus ObFood: 99 Chicken in Santa Clara for KFC. The Colonel never made it
this good. Try the kimchee fried rice.