Cleaning of airbrush
Posted in: Tech Help, Tips, Tricks, Techniques
Scott
I use warm vegetable oil, especially when I am done spraying for the day or an extended period of time so that butter doesn't crystillize in the brush.
brian
Forum Activity for @Brian Donaghy
Posted in: Tech Help, Tips, Tricks, Techniques
Cleaning of airbrush
Posted in: Tech Help, Tips, Tricks, Techniques
You don't need to clean between colors. Take one color off, blow out as much remaining color as you can, attach you next color and spray again to make sure you aren't getting residual before spraying your molds or whatever. You need to clean the sprayer when you are done. Check Chef Rubber for a food-safe cleaner they sell for sprayers.
Cleaning of airbrush
Posted in: Tech Help, Tips, Tricks, Techniques
I'm teaching myself airbrushing of cocoa butter colors. I have a good background in airbrush work from my hobby of building plastic models.
However: what do you use as a thinner to clean the equipment after you have finished with one color and which to change to the next? Thinking alcohol would dissolve fats I tried Everclear with no luck (straight ethanol), hot water works poorly.
What works best?
updated by @Scott Hoffman: 04/11/25 09:27:36
Moisture percentage in storage room
Posted in: Tech Help, Tips, Tricks, Techniques
Thank you Ruth,
Lebanon can get really humid especially during summer.I have humidity removing machines installed in almost every room. That's why Inever knew if itaffects the product..until now. Thanks again!
Moisture percentage in storage room
Posted in: Tech Help, Tips, Tricks, Techniques
Our humidity here rarely goes over 20% (unless it is raining) and I don't have problems. I rather think it is an advantage. I can take chocolate from a cold room to room temp without condensation collecting. It might be just what you are used to. I don't know if I could produce in high humidity with the same results.
Moisture percentage in storage room
Posted in: Tech Help, Tips, Tricks, Techniques
Hey Guys,
Most of us know that moisture is an important factor in controlling quality and that it should not exceed 50% where chocolate is stored.
My question however is how low can the moisture in the room drop down to without affecting the product(if it does affect it at all) For example, what happens if the moisture goes below 30% or even less?
Thanks,
Omar
updated by @Omar Forastero: 04/11/25 09:27:36
POS displays
Posted in: Classifieds ARCHIVE
Hi George. I am not certain where you are located, but you may want to check out www.aspecialtybox.com . They do have a custom box business that does smaller runs, and they may be able to do something more permanent. I am not certain that they do anything other than disposable, but you might look into it.
Good luck.
Jayne Hoadley
POS displays
Posted in: Classifieds ARCHIVE
I'm trying to find sources for POS displays, something small that I can give to retail shops to display and merchandise my chocolate bars. I'd prefer something more permanent/non disposable as opposed to a printed paper box that can be used as a merchandising tool.
Ideally, I'm looking for a manufacturer that will do small runs at a reasonable cost.
Any leads?
Thanks!
updated by @George Trejo: 04/07/25 13:00:14
"fair trade is dead" - an interesting perspective
Posted in: Uncategorized
I loved the reply to this article: "Please remember that Fairtrade refers to the FLO global system, whereas fair trade is a concept and anyone can claim to be fair trade without having to show compliance to any standard or practice"
This is like saying that anyone that doesn't believe in God cannot possibly be a good person and do the right thing.
"fair trade is dead" - an interesting perspective
Posted in: Uncategorized
http://www.justcoffee.coop/blog/%5Buser%5D/2012/01/13/fair_trade_is_dead
FULL WEBSITE TEXT AT BOTTOM OF POST
This article was written by coffee specialists but it applies equally in cacao / chocolate in my opinion.
He nails it when he writes " In 1997...... farmers knew that, despite good intentions, they had already lost control of what would become branded as Fair Trade. Over the years the certifying bodies in the north controlled the conversation and set the norms with feedback from farmers, but without farmers truly having any ownership of the organization. Consumers could see farmers' faces on marketing materials and bags of coffee, but could not hear producer voices. Now farmers want their voices heard."
I've spoken with hundreds ofunaffiliatedcacao farmers in peru and ecuador, and it never made sense to any of them. I've spoken with dozens ofaffiliatedcacao farmers and they ranged from lukewarm to confused about FT. Nobody I've ever spoken to loved it except european administrators who derived a living from it. something grass roots and farmer-based should now take Fair Trade's place. people on this forum can be a part of it.
Brian
FULL WEBSITE TEXT
Sitting in San Cristobal de Las Casas in Chiapas, Mexico things are crystal clear. Underneath the din of organizations in the North clamoring to set the definition and terms of Fair Trade, small-scale coffee farmers-- the original and supposed main beneficiaries of the system(s)-- have a unified opinion that Fair Trade has not worked. This of course, on the surface, is not a new revelation. However, where in the past we often discussed Fair Trade as not working, we now are closing the book on it-- we are speaking in the past tense. In the wake of FLO's slow and steady sell out of the model to large corporations and TransFair USA's sprint to complete the deal, Fair Trade has bitten the dust. Now is the appropriate time to spill an espresso shot in the dirt and say a few words.
Now dry that tear because I have some good news. Out of Fair Trade's ashes there is already a movement to build something better and it is coming from the people who were virtually shut out of the old system-- the producers themselves. After four days of meetings with coffee farmers from all over Latin America, as well as mission-based coffee roasters and other allies, it is clear that there is abundant energy for rebuilding a model of fair trade with true representation from all involved and that comes from farmers themselves. This new spirit can be seen in many initiatives, but most concretely in the Coordinadora Latinoamericana y del Caribe's ( CLAC) new label that highlights products grown and sold by small-scale producer cooperatives under terms defined as fair by the producers themselves and agreed upon with buyers in true partnership. This small farmer-owned certification system is up and running and will be a market force to be reckoned with by the end of 2012.
During our conversations a veteran of the small-farmer movement in Mexico summed up the situation nicely:
In 1997 we were in meetings with other fair traders when FLO announced that they were forming and would be setting the standards for our movement. Many of us stood up and walked out.He said that from that moment on farmers knew that, despite good intentions, they had already lost control of what would become branded as Fair Trade. Over the years the certifying bodies in the north controlled the conversation and set the norms with feedback from farmers, but without farmers truly having any ownership of the organization. Consumers could see farmers' faces on marketing materials and bags of coffee, but could not hear producer voices. Now farmers want their voices heard.
Fair trade is not a brand owned by companies and non-profits in the global north. The look for the label movement bet that people were simply consumers who could not stop for longer than a few seconds to think and truly care about what they were supporting with their purchases. They were wrong. True fair trade can start with a simple communication on a product, but it goes deeper as people start to ask questions about every product that they purchase-- including those bearing the label. Real fair trade is in small-farmers and their democratic cooperatives as well as in our hometown farmer's markets, small businesses, and communities-- these things are connected and worth supporting and fighting for. Authentic fair trade is a mutual agreement between people who produce things and the people who buy them. Its standards are the result of equals transparently negotiating in good faith with the intention of both parties satisfying their basic needs. All of this results-- little by little-- in a world where producers and consumers see each other as people and together work toward creating a sustainable global economy and global society.
Fair Trade is dead. It is played out, stale, corrupted, and largely meaningless. When the CEO of the US body that claims ownership of it makes a quarter million dollars a year , drops gems like Small is not beautiful, and brands small farmer advocates as fanatical, you can go ahead and close the coffin lid. When Starbucks becomes corporate leader of the system while it simultaneously boasts of paying under world market prices for its coffee in its own CSR report , rigor mortis has set in. When plantations-- with their traditionally indentured labor forces-- are welcomed in with open arms while small farmers' voices fall on deaf ears, the bucket has officially been kicked.
Fair Trade is surely dead.
Long live fair trade.
updated by @brian horsley: 04/10/15 06:39:26
How many per day?
Posted in: Tech Help, Tips, Tricks, Techniques
HI all,
i have been looking at solution for our production and also to keep a certain standard and not just simply roll truffles to get "numbers".
i have a 25kg tempering machine but FBM also does a 7 kg with enrobbing belt.
7 kg tank means about 40 kg (+/-) an hour... that should be able to speed up truffles making a bit! we are starting testing next week for a client that need 4000 pcs per order.
will let you know how it goes...
Cheers Nino
How many per day?
Posted in: Tech Help, Tips, Tricks, Techniques
We just finished revamping our COGL spreadsheet and I needed the analytics so I could understand the true costs. On an average day our main chef can dip about 550+ truffles in about 5 hours. This is lower than our old average, we're now using TCHO as our dipping chocolate as well as our main chocolate and it's much thicker which requires more drain/tap time.
Like you mentioned startup, re-temper times, and "SQUIRREL" moments all create delays. Not quite sure how to get things faster at the moment. Looking into enrobing machinery and all that.
How many per day?
Posted in: Tech Help, Tips, Tricks, Techniques
Oh, definitely! Used to be even longer, but I keep making adjustments. I think I made record time this morning, but I haven't run my numbers yet. I keep reminding myself I haven't been at this long, but the inefficiency keeps bugging me. I'm determined to keep working at it!
How many per day?
Posted in: Tech Help, Tips, Tricks, Techniques
Kathryn;
It's good that you're calculating setup and takedown time. It will give you a very good idea where your inneficiencies are. I bet you're finding them in the set up and takedown time.
Here are some benchmarks we have for minimum performance here at Choklat.
Scooping: 200 per hour
Hand Rolling: 450 per hour
Dipping and coating: 230 per hour.
Foil Wrapping: 240 per hour
My staff all surpass these minimums, and do it all day.
Cheers.
How many per day?
Posted in: Tech Help, Tips, Tricks, Techniques
It's really just a matter of practice and planning your production carefully. I've been at it for two years now and my speed has increased gradually along the way. I'm also careful about how many different flavors I'm making in any one day. When I'm by myself I top out at 5 different flavors, anything above that becomes overwhelming. I also try not to work with multiple chocolates for coating the truffles, i.e. I'm either dipping in dark chocolate that day or dipping in milk chocolate.
How many per day?
Posted in: Tech Help, Tips, Tricks, Techniques
400 in one 8-hour day including making ganache sounds absolutely miraculous! How do you manage? I don't even make my ganache the same day, though I do scoop and roll the same day I dip. I've been analyzing my time to try to figure out where it's all going, how I can get more done in the same amount of time. Please tell me more!
How many per day?
Posted in: Tech Help, Tips, Tricks, Techniques
You say you're slow, but it looks like my average is 120, so my hat's off to you!
How many per day?
Posted in: Tech Help, Tips, Tricks, Techniques
Just dipping or the whole shebang from scooping, rolling, etc.? And would you already have your chocolate tempered and ready to go or not? By writing down the time I start and stop each task and then dividing by the number of truffles, I came up with an average of about 30 seconds to dip each truffle. I also learned that I had to stop what I was doing and re-warm my chocolate about every hour. Plus there is some setup time, since I'm working out of my home kitchen. It could be realistic for me to have scooped and rolled the day before, but I'd still have to temper the chocolate that day. So let's say out of an 8-hour day I'd have to subtract about 2 hours for setup/cleaning, and packing upall the truffles at the end of the day. Then subtract another hour and a half to temper the chocolate, that leaves me with 5 1/2 hours to work in. I'd also spend about 5 minutes out of each hour, conservatively, re-warming my chocolate, so let's just cut that back to 5 hours because it's an easier number for me to work with. 5 hours x 60 minutes per hour x 2 truffles per minute comes out to 600. In some universe where someone else is tempering my chocolate and setting up my kitchen and all I have to do is stand there and dip for8 hours, I guess it would be 960. Now, if I was starting from having to scoop and roll ganache, each ganache ball takes me an average of 45 seconds to scoop and roll. So if I take that 5 hour time to work in and each truffle needs 1 minute and 15 seconds of my time then I could do 240+ (cause less dipping time means less times I need to stop and rewarm). And all of these estimates would only apply if I were using a single type of ganache (so I didn't have to stop and wash my scoop--because I only have one) and dipping in just 1 type of chocolate. I haven't established yet what a typical workday is for me. I worked for about 10 hours on Tuesday and only made 161 truffles because I was using 4 different ganaches, a pureed fruit filling, and making a little truffle mortarboard and doing some writing with a syringe.
Someone please tell me I'm not the only person analyzing their time in the kitchen?
ETA: And I also need time to bring all my stuff into the kitchen, remove all my stuff from the kitchen at the end of the day, and photograph the truffles.
How many per day?
Posted in: Tech Help, Tips, Tricks, Techniques
Hi Krista,
I'm not sure if you're looking for an actual production total or just the number you can dip in an hour. My average production is around 400 chocolates/8 hour day if I'm working by myself. This number includes everything - making the ganaches, tempering the chocolate, cutting and/or rolling the set ganache, dipping, decorating, packaging, dishes, cleaning up and packing away (I share kitchen space and need to pack all my equipment and move it back to my storage cage at the end of my production day). Hope that's helpful.
How many per day?
Posted in: Tech Help, Tips, Tricks, Techniques
HI There,
when you talk about dipping by hand, do you mean single dip with the fork? you could try to speed up the process by first rolled them by hand with a very thin coat.
that should help you with "stickiness", also keep your chocolate at right temp. to prevent getting thicker and slow down the process.
otherwise if you hand-roll them you should be able to do about 200/250 hour. just take 4 or 5 truffle in your hand at time.
Ciao
Antonino
How many per day?
Posted in: Tech Help, Tips, Tricks, Techniques
Hi Krista.
I am very slow at dipping, but on average I can do about 125 per hour. 150 if I really concentrate lol. I wonder what someone who is really fast can do? I hope more people post, so I can ask a few questions too.
Warm regards.
Jayne
How many per day?
Posted in: Tech Help, Tips, Tricks, Techniques
Hi, how many truffles do you average (completely dipping by han) per day? I'm trying to figure out how many I should be able to do in an 8 hour shift.
updated by @Krista2: 04/11/25 09:27:36
Modding stock Ultra Grind+ wet grinder for chocolate use
Posted in: Tech Help, Tips, Tricks, Techniques
Hi Antonino,
Thank you for the kind reply. I completed the changes on friday and have tested throughout the weekend. Temperature readings on the case don't go over 130f even after 4-6 hours of continued use but I did notice a bit of a ''motor" smell and one drop of black fluid on my first batch.
The lack of cacao beans brought me towards gianduja making and the texture and flavour is just amazing. I never thought I would be producing such smoothness at home.
I will keep on reporting on my progress.
Felipe
Modding stock Ultra Grind+ wet grinder for chocolate use
Posted in: Tech Help, Tips, Tricks, Techniques
just keep the the whole engine cool all the time and that should make the work. if something brakes (belt or other moving parts) change them for something more resistant.
just make sure to not overheat the electric motor!if you use cocoabeans just crush them and add bit at time, be patience and add ingredients slowly otherwise will block and you have to remove everything and start from scratch again.
Good luck and have fun!!!
Modding stock Ultra Grind+ wet grinder for chocolate use
Posted in: Tech Help, Tips, Tricks, Techniques
From what I have researched the basic modification would require opening vents at the top of the motor cover (either drilled holes or lines), lifting the machine on a stand and adding an extra fan at the bottom.
I already have a fan from an old video card with it's own 12V 0.15amps that I will use for cooling. While I get a hold of cacao beans I will try making gianduja with some nuts this weekend.
Felipe
Modding stock Ultra Grind+ wet grinder for chocolate use
Posted in: Tech Help, Tips, Tricks, Techniques
I was recently in Bangalore, India and found wet grinders almost everywhere. I bought an Ultra Grind+ at a good price and brought it back with me to Colombia.I understand people need to modify the machine for continuous operation for chocolate use. Could anyone describe these changes? I should be able to find local help to increase ventilation or change fans as needed.Also, should I avoid using the machine for other culinary uses? It even comes with a kneader accessory and to justify the purchase I promissed my wife all kinds of tasty recipes including our own arepas (from ground corn) or dahl (ground lentils).My quest for homemade chocolate is just beginning but 2012 will be my bean to bar year.RegardsFelipe
updated by @Felipe Jaramillo F.: 04/11/25 09:27:36
When a Guide to Good May Not Be
Posted in: Opinion
Chris -
You assume that anyone who's seen the tour sees the entire manufacturing operation - and that they are sophisticated enough to know what they are seeing and can evaluate what they are being told. That's not always the case, in my experience.
The updates to the TCHO web site are recent - they post-date the date of my original post on this subject by several months. To the best of my knowledge and ability to ascertain, I act on information that is correct as of the time I post it. If things change I am happy to acknowledge that things have changed, address the changes, and then move on.I appreciate your noticing that things have changed and bringing those changes to my attention.
TCHO's opinion regarding their being bean-to-bar is not one that is universally shared by the craft/artisan chocolate community. Just because they believe that it does, doesn't make it so in the eyes of their peers. Their position was undermined because their marketing position at the beginning was bean-to-bar on the pier and that message did not evolve as their manufacturing situation evolved.
I was with Shawn on his first bean buying trips (April 2006) and was also involved, very early on, in helping him get the business started. My assistance included working on marketing communications and I can assure you, from the very beginning, that the level of openness about sourcing and other aspects of the business has been integral to the operation both in their packaging and on the web site and electronic communications. The operation has evolved in many ways, so he's doing a better job at communicating than at the very beginning, but he has always been at the vanguard, at least in the US, IMO.
From the beginning, Shawn wanted to take personal responsibility for the relationship with the growers he sourced from, not abdicate that responsibility to a third party that, in his opinion, did not deliver the value (and the values) that he was interested in providing. His Chocolate University project in Tanzania is just one aspect of the work he does that would never be recognized within an institutionalized fairtrade model. The world (of chocolate) is way too complex to reduce to formulas on a general consumer web site.
When a Guide to Good May Not Be
Posted in: Opinion
Chris:
TCHO is one of the most exasperating chocolate companies in the US today. A bit of background.I first met the founder of TCHO, Timothy Childs, three to four years before he started the company, at a previous chocolate startup called Cabaret. I met sourcing director, John Kehoe, back in 2003 in Ecuador. I met Jane Metcalfe and Louis Rossetto (co-founders of Wired) back in 1990.
Back in late 2007 I wrote the first serious coverage (from inside the chocolate industry) on the company. Their go-to-market strategy was brilliant, and they muffed it. I so much wanted them to succeed and it seemed like they couldn't get out of their own way. They were vaporware for over a year and then, when they did start production, it was not as the bean-to-bar manufacturer on the pier in SF that they claimed to be, so they misrepresented a basic brand positioning and have been slow to address it. I think their new web site does a better job of discussing what they are doing than the old one did. But, oneof the points I've made to them repeatedly since their post-beta vaporware period is that the founders of Wired don't get a free pass when it comes to communicating via the Internet.
What I have been astounded at is how bad the company has been at highlighting one of its major contributions, which is the TCHOSource program. IMO, it's one of their strongest assets (always has been) and they still don't understand how to leverage it to their best advantage. I've had discussions with several members of the company about that point in the last six months, in fact.
The thread you cite in your link was started in 2008 and it looks like my last contribution was late in 2009. As I state above, I have been in contact with the company recently about many of the issues you raise.
When a Guide to Good May Not Be
Posted in: Opinion
Bill, thanks for coming on the boards and replying. I learned a lot from your post. I appreciate your position and I actually ran across your website probably a year ago and have used it from time to time. I think you guys do a great job with what you can reasonably do and I agree that most consumers don't have enough bandwidth to learn about each purchase they are planing. I suffer from bandwidth problems myself and yet I want people to look into their chocolate more. Hypocrisy I know.
Now that I own a smallish cacao farm I see the certifications in a different light. They are a cost in terms of time, money, resources that we just don't have. Nowhere do I get to brag about the fact we don't slash and burn or that we provide meals and housing for our workers as well as pay them a reasonable wage that is a good 30% higher than others. Or that we are developing a land owners program as a pension for our long term workers so that when they no longer can work with us they will own enough land to support their family. Anyways, I'm just venting my frustration that I'm sure many can share as many of us are small enough that certifications are a serious burden that I'm interested in pursuing but just can't at this point and still be able to treat our workers like we want to.
Sorry I took so long to reply and again i really appreciate your response on the boards. What is your take with the latest fair trade shenanigans?
Ethan
When a Guide to Good May Not Be
Posted in: Opinion
I'm the Chief Scientist at GoodGuide and want to respond to the methodological issues you raise about our ratings of chocolate products.
1) Role of eco-certifications
GoodGuide uses third-party certifications throughout its product and company ratings, because third-party efforts to validate performance against environmental or social standards typically represent the strongest evidence available for identifying the best products/companies in a category. In the absence of certifications, the preponderance of evidence about a product or company is comprised of whatever information a company opts to make public via its website, CSR reports or marketing. As I'm sure you would agree, company-provided information rarely discloses the negative aspects of operations or products, and can often be characterized as "greenwashing." While third-party certification services vary in what attributes they cover, the stringency of their standards, and their degree of authoritativeness, I think there is no question that they generally produce more credible evidence of "goodness" than a manufacturer's unverified self-assertions. Your alternative approach - that consumers should "develop the personal relationships necessary to understand what is really going on" with each producer - is simply not realistic for most consumers. Most purchasing decisions are made by consumers who have have limited bandwidth for identifying which products match their social or environmental preferences. GoodGuide is designed to be a service for these consumers - they rarely research the production context of their purchases, and want actionable decision support at the point of purchase. Few are going to conduct independent research, or establish personal relationships with producers.
At GoodGuide, we review the certifiers active in any given product category, determine what issues a system covers, assess the stringency of a certification and the proportion of a manufacturer's catalogue or a product's components that are certified. As a result, different certifications impact a company or product score in ways that are influenced by our overall judgement of a system. We are transparent about how we judge different certifiers (see http://www.goodguide.com/categories/255760-candy##btr for chocolate and http://www.goodguide.com/categories/255779-coffee##btr for coffee). We are open to feedback criticizing the relative weight we assign to different certifiers on different issues, and we are aware there is a lot of controversy currently about changes in the certification landscape such as those associated with Free Trade labels. GoodGuide definitely does not see itself as replacing the good work being done by third-party certifiers - we are not a standard-setting or auditing entity, we are an aggregator and integrator of the public information available on products or companies. From our perspective, the most important limitation of certifiers is that they typically address only a very small percentage of the products in a consumer product category - they can help identify the best performers, but they don't help distinguish between the majority of products that a consumer finds on a retail shelf.
2) Penalizing products that lack certification
Your comments (and separate emails from Shawn Askinosie) have raised a legitimate issue regarding whether it is appropriate to penalize a product with a lower score if it lacks certification. In most product categories, GoodGuide rewards a product that has a certification with a higher score. However, in the case of chocolates and coffee, our methodology penalizes products that lack certification in addition to rewarding products that have certifications. We provide the following explanation for this practice: "While there are some gradations between the least stringent and the most stringent certifications, all of them represent a clear step above coffees [or chocolates] that do not have any certification in an environmental or social context. As a result, products that do not have any certifications generally earn lower scores. Certifications provide credible evidence to consumers that a product has been produced in accordance with basic environmental and social standards. The absence of a certification does not mean that a product was grown under unacceptable conditions, but the consumer has no way of knowing what practices were utilized to produce the commodity they are purchasing."
This practice can result in inaccurate scores if a company operates with sustainable practices but does not seek verification of these practices by third-party certifiers. Askinosie maintains that its environmental and social performance exceed the requirements of chocolate certification systems and that the company and its suppliers have legitimate reasons for not engaging third-party certifiers. We are currently considering how to revise our system so that well-documented but self-asserted performance information can displace the default negative score we assign due to the absence of certifications.
3) Health impacts of chocolate ingredients
GoodGuide uses a standard scientific method for evaluating the nutritional value of different foods. The Ratio of Recommended to Restricted Nutrients (RRR) is a measure of nutrient density designed to apply across multiple types of food. The goal is to utilize a measure that will help people select foods both within categories and across categories, so it necessarily focuses on a defined sub-set of nutritional components. You are correct that there is recent research suggesting that not all saturated fatty acids are created equal. However, this research is in its infancy and there is little information on the percentage of each type of saturated fatty acid in different foods. In the absence of detailed saturated fat composition data across categories, we are unable to include this variable in our ratings. Note that this is not as simple an issue as your blog post implies. The existing information on fatty acid composition (from the USDA Nutrient Database) of chocolate vs. olive oil vs coconut oil indicates that these three products are quite different. Calling the saturated fat in chocolate "healthy" by comparing it to these other fats would be a stretch. Olive oil is primarily comprised of monounsaturated fat (and very little saturated fat, in fact). Coconut oil, on the other hand, is primarily comprised of saturated fat - specifically lauric acid, a medium-chain triglyceride that may not be as harmful as other, longer-chain saturated fatty acids. Chocolate/cocoa butter is also primarily comprised of saturated fatty acids - specifically palmitic and stearic acids. Although stearic acid may not be as bad as other saturated fats, palmitic acid has not been exonerated at all. Again, detailed research on saturated fatty acids is in its infancy - so much so that no major worldwide health organization has revised its position on limiting saturated fat in diets. While we recognize the distinction between different types of saturated fatty acids, we do not yet believe there is enough evidence or data to incorporate this distinction into our rating system.
When a Guide to Good May Not Be
Posted in: Opinion
Thanks for the astute analysis Clay. One of the main points you make is all about marketing-the big guys have the money and voice to shout, shout, shout about how great their products, certs. etc. are, and if you say something enough times unfortunately it often becomes "truth" even though it may not be. It's going to be a long slog but for those of us who are the "little guys" with direct connections to farmers, producers, and small scale chocolatiers, we know it's the only way to go. Direct connections/relationships are the key.
When a Guide to Good May Not Be
Posted in: Opinion
Ignore the money. Follow the cacao. In the same way that buy local, locavore, farmers markets have become big in an attempt to move away from the certification /big agro mess and muddle, why can't artisan chocolate makers do the same? Lead the way for others: educate, stimulate, generate!!! Connect with the farmers, or the co-ops, or at least get as close to the source as you can. If you buy beans buy them from someone who has gone to the farm, touched the soil, heard the birds. Certification is just certification - how many of us really trust the certificates we have? I think it must be time for the local connections to penetrate the artisan chocolate world.This last week I've heard from two people who want to develop beans specifically for individuals or small businesses. Who are looking to form personal connections with their clients. I'm not anywhere in the league of you all out there who have the experience and the developed taste to know the different varieties and nuances of beans. And I don't know how big a part that is of your businessess. I do know the difference between a bean that's been fermented for different lengths and under different conditions, and what that does to the chocolate. And I do know a bean that has been grown in healthy, vital conditions.What is important to you all? What are you looking for? If the artisan producers start dictating to and educating - and paying - for better quality beans from small producers, they'll get them. Connection is the key. And only key.
When a Guide to Good May Not Be
Posted in: Opinion
Clay thanks for highlighting the weakness of the certification programs. My partner and I own a cacao farm in Ecuador. We have gone back and forth on if we want to pursue fair trade certification/rain forest alliance. So far that answer has been no as we haven't needed it from a marketing standpoint so the hassle is not worth the time and money. I like the idea of a certificate to show that we are good citizens, treat our workers well, areenvironmentallyfriendly, etc etc. However I feel like many of them are so fundamentally flawed as to be worthless.
-Ethan
When a Guide to Good May Not Be
Posted in: Opinion
Last week I was made aware of a web site called GuideGuide.com by Shawn Askinosie. The About page says that the site's mission is to "provide the worlds largest and most reliable source of information on the health, environmental, and social impacts of consumer products." (Note: Shawn objected to the ratings of his products and they are no longer on the GoodGuide web site, pending review I assume. The observations that follow are based on notes I took before the listings were removed.)
GoodGuide claims that they have more than 100,000 products in their database and an extensive roster of scientists who review every product (or, more likely, set the criteria for what "good" is and then computer programs parse data about the products and come up with ratings).
There is a problem, though with the ratings methodology, in my mind.
A great deal of weight for the environmental and social rankings is placed on the presence of eco-label certifications. No organic certification? Then you get bad environmental ranking. No social certification? Then you get bad society ranking. It doesn't matter what other programs a company might have in place. It doesn't matter what actual benefit a company delivers to its suppliers.
All that matters is the certifications.
If there is a chocolate company on the planet that - measured by dollar of revenue or per employee - delivers more positive impact to the communities it works with than Askinosie, I'd like to know about it. I've traveled with Shawn on bean buying trips and knew about the way he wanted to do business before he made his first bar of chocolate. We've talked regularly since we first met in mid-2005 about how he runs his business, influenced by Jack Stack's A Stake in the Outcomeand his practice of open-book accounting and profit sharing with the communities he buys from. Shawn takes personal responsibility for doing what he knows to be the right thing to do.
Let's take a chocolate company that got higher Good Guide ratings, TCHO. One of the things that has never been clear (to me - and I know the founder and major funders) about TCHO is how closely the actual manufacturing processes match the claims on their web site. I am pretty confident that they have never manufactured any significant amount of product - from the bean - in the factory on the pier in San Francisco. They can't fire up their roaster and I don't know anyone who's seen the entire line in operation. Their TchoSource program is interesting, but it's meaningless unless they can stay in business - probably one of the reasons that the funders ousted founder Timothy Childs. They've always had a small lab producing their beta samples and pre-production runs so they can claim to be manufacturing bean-to-bar on the pier, but the quantities are not commercial quantities.
But TCHO has several products that are made with both FT and organic certified beans. They get great marks on the environmental and social scale, while those that are not get much lower marks (which is to be expected).
Askinosie uses packaging that is quite environmentally friendly. TCHO uses less environmentally friendly paperboard and gold foil imprinting for their boxes. But there is no place in the Good Guide methodology for any chance to think about the marketing messages and other aspects of the companies' businesses - like packaging and ethics - affect factors like environment and society.
Jif peanut butter got higher ratings than Askinosie. Is that a "good" thing?
The Good Guide health rating for chocolate is dominated by one factor - the saturated fat in chocolate. What the scientists fail to recognize is that the triglyceride structure of the saturated fat in chocolate makes it a "healthy" fat (like olive oil and coconut oil) and not a "bad" fat like saturated animal fats. (Specifically, "the nutritional value of the food, as characterized by a standard method of nutrient assessment called the Ratio of Recommended to Restricted Nutrients (RRR)." Easy to write a program to do that, hard to take into account differentiations that make a meaningful difference.)
While there are issues with the density of calories in chocolate and the percentage of calories that come from sweeteners, the Good Guide has no place in its ratings methodology for the growing science into the very real health benefits of chocolate: they make no meaningfully useful distinction between chocolate (i.e., a bar of chocolate from a craft producer) and candy (i.e., a Snickers bars) in their ratings.
Their shopping tips for buying chocolate bars are way too general on the issues of child and slave labor, entirely misrepresent issues in traceability, and confuse the need for fertilizer with the use of pesticides.
They also place way too much emphasis on certifications saying that, "Certifications ensure the chocolate has been produced under industry leading labor and environmental conditions." I BEG YOUR PARDON? You're confusing cacao growers and chocolate makers here in a way that is not defensible.
Which, for me, these issues make the entire Good Guide methodology for all products suspect. I can tell you that I will never be using their service and will never recommend it to anyone, either.
If that weren't enough, I received a confusing press release from a magazine called Organic Monitor over the weekend. Organic Monitor is hosting the Sustainable Foods Summit in San Francisco next week (January 17-18). I won't be attending as members of the press who are not employed by the media sponsors of the event must pay to attend (though the rate is discounted.)
In taking a look at the list of presentations one thing becomes instantly clear: There are no producers making presentations. The only people talking are the companies and organizations who have made millions of dollars successfully selling eco-labeling.
The absurdity of the situation was further highlighted in the press release, in which Organic Monitor posits that consumers are becoming disillusioned and confused by what organic certification really means and what the meaningful differences are between FLO Fairtrade, FTUSA Fairtrade, Rainforest Alliance, Utz, Fair for Life, and more.
Organic Monitor suggests that mobile apps that enable consumers to use QR (quick response) codes and other techniques to look up information about products as they are making their purchases and make better, more informed, decisions.
They point to Good Guide as being an exemplar of the way the industry seems to be going.
But wait. Don't the Good Guide ratings rely on the very eco-labels Organic Monitor predicts they are going to supplant?
What's an informed chocolate consumer supposed to do?
1) Buy from small producers who work you like and that you can get to know personally or through close friends and/or people you trust.
2) Don't blindly assume that because a product is organic means that it was produced in an environmentally sustainable fashion.
3) Don't assume that "Fair" trade means that smallholder farmers are treated fairly. Even when organized, growers lack the economic leverage to ensure they receive the benefits the fair trade certification process says that they are entitled to and that they have paid for. AND, remember, all of the "Fair" trade certifiers are non-profit organizations that rely heavily on industry support. Kraft pays dearly for the use of the Fairtrade label on their bars and probably pays nearly as much in licensing fees as it does in premiums. That is a fundamental conflict of interest that people blithely ignore - to the detriment of producers.
In other words - do your homework and develop the personal relationships necessary to understand what is really going on. Certification is a huge business with the backing of huge corporations. Follow the money. Who controls the economic leverage?
updated by @Clay Gordon: 04/10/15 09:52:34
Stages of Chocolate Melting Points
Posted in: Tech Help, Tips, Tricks, Techniques
Assuming you're not too creative with your ingredients (ie you're n ot using nuts or nut oils), yes - temper it properly, ensure you cool it appropriately, and then don't store it in a warm place - and you'll be good!
Stages of Chocolate Melting Points
Posted in: Tech Help, Tips, Tricks, Techniques
Thanks Sebastian, so by just tempering and cooling andstoragethe chocolate properly, it will be just fine right?
Thank you so much Sebastian!
Stages of Chocolate Melting Points
Posted in: Tech Help, Tips, Tricks, Techniques
You're getting into some very fine technical points here that, while interesting, i'd not spend a great deal of time on learning and trying to control the finer points of. What you're referencing is the fact that cocoa butter is polymorphic - ie, when it converts from a liquid to a solid, it can take one of 5-6 different solid forms. Tempering is the process of trying to control that to some extent, and result in a cocoa butter that is predominantly what we call beta prime. Without having a great deal of very expensive equipment, you'll not know which form you have - however, if you temper the chocolate, and it releases properly and doesn't bloom, you've got what you're looking for. Conching has almost no impact on your crystalline form - it's the tempering process that controls crystallization (well, that and cooling after tempering, and storage).
Stages of Chocolate Melting Points
Posted in: Tech Help, Tips, Tricks, Techniques
Hi,
Ive read somewhere in the internet, but now when I try to go back searching for it, I couldnt find the information.
Ive read that chocolate have 5 melting stages, and in order for the chocolate to still stay solid in your hand is when you reach the fourth stage.
How do we know what stage is our chocolate is in?
Or if we conche and temper it normally will it directly go to the fourth stage?
And if I want my chocolate to reach the fifth stage (to make chocolate chip) how do I do that? Longer and hotter conche?
Thank you for all of your advices and guidelines. 
updated by @Panod: 04/11/25 09:27:36
Adding Cacao Butter
Posted in: Tech Help, Tips, Tricks, Techniques
If you're talking about Tom's 60 nibs, 30 sugar and 10 cocoa butter, that is a 70% chocolate.
Adding Cacao Butter
Posted in: Tech Help, Tips, Tricks, Techniques
Is this considered 60% or 70% chocolate?