E.S.E. Pods v Capsules
In this article, we look at two popular questions we regularly ask regarding E.S.E. coffee pods.
The first question concerns owners of portion control equipment requesting us to confirm if E.S.E. coffee P.O.D.s suit their machines.
The second question is - We like strong coffee.
Can I make two large cappuccinos from your E.S.E. coffee pod?
Unfortunately, we cannot always provide clear answers to these questions.
Firstly, we will tackle the challenge of coffee capsules and E.S.E. coffee pod compatibility.
The purpose of this discussion is not to draw up a list of machines that support E.S.E. coffee pods but to note why there is a difference between E.S.E. coffee pods and capsules.
There are hundreds of brands and models of equipment (new and old) in the market.
Many of these manufacturers tend to be very careful (perhaps bordering upon deception) in releasing the CLEAR and CONCISE details of what consumables can be supported or used on their systems.
We know of a few companies that sell their machines with literature stating simply "P.O.D. compatible".
Unless your machine specifications explicitly declare the words E.S.E. or Easy Serving Espresso (E.S.E.) compatible, then you are best served to contact your equipment maker directly - don't rely upon P.O.D. supplier websites to answer your queries - they may have the information wrong, and ultimately they want to sell pods!
Closed versus Open Systems
The perfect dream product for any manufacturer is popular, uses proprietary consumables (or restricted complementary components) and has a long lifecycle.
This concept has been mastered exceptionally well by Apple, making it the most profitable outcome for designers and manufacturers.
A proprietary (or closed) system can offer performance, reliability and function, but it comes at a premium to comparable open systems.
Having worked in the technology industry for 30 years, I have personally experienced the transformation from large (and expensive) proprietary mainframe and mini-computer systems into low-cost, powerful, open systems.
The ubiquitous mobile device is rapidly taking over as our preferred platform of choice.
The I.T. industry is a classic example of how proprietary systems have ultimately faded through the evolution of cheaper open systems - there are a few notable exclusions, of course - Apple and, to a lesser extent, Microsoft.
Still, despite the billions of $$ in their war chests, there are already storm clouds on the horizon for both Microsoft and Apple.
Regarding single-serve portion control coffee, capsules are the equivalent of a closed system, whilst E.S.E. coffee pods are open.
Coffee capsules come in different forms, including varying shapes, sizes, materials, dosages, and extraction methods.
They must be compatible with the coffee machine or appliance used for brewing or extracting.
The design of capsules is similar to managing printers, such as inkjet or toner.
It is important to use the right consumables, or else the results will not be suitable; it can be messy or even worse - there are increased risks of damage to your equipment.
"Closed system" coffee capsules are marketed like inkjet and laser printers.
Flog the device/appliance/machine for a very attractive price, or in many cases below cost, to "seed" the market with an army of machines forcing owners to return and purchase your consumables sold at higher margins - in other words, this is simply portfolio pricing at work.
E.S.E. coffee pods are an international, open standard. It is not "owned" by a corporation.
These standards govern the size and shape of E.S.E. coffee pods and their expected extraction results.
Manufacturers of ESE coffee pod machines are embracing the appliance concept, designing low-cost devices that can be sold in white goods stores.
Traditionally, the E.S.E. coffee pod manufacturers have been focused on the European markets and stuck in the mindset for many years building strong, reliable E.S.E. coffee pod machines having components leveraged from "commercial" espresso machine construction - heavy brass, copper, etc.
This created an opportunity for the cheap capsule machines to take a large slice of the market.
In Australia, Breville and Sunbeam have expanded their footprint in espresso coffee.
Their focus needs to be narrower, allowing Nespresso Systems to build a considerable market share.
We understand Sunbeam and Breville are considering dedicated E.S.E. coffee P.O.D. machines to compete with Nespresso, but they have somewhat missed the boat.
In Australia, the instant coffee segment continues to shrink considerably, and the natural transition for many instant drinkers is either capsules or E.S.E. coffee P.O.D.s.
Many have been lured to capsules and then left a little disappointed by the experience, the cost or the inconvenience of having to source tablets from limited suppliers.
What about the flavour (strength)
In the second part of our discussion, we dissect the dosage issue and how it relates to what happens in practice within the Australian coffee scene.
Generally, capsules (regardless of vendor) have around 4.5g to 5.5g per serving compared to E.S.E. coffee pods containing 7g to 7.8g per serving.
E.S.E. coffee pods are also available in 10g and 14g portion control sizes.
These larger dosage E.S.E. coffee pods are typically used in commercial situations like fast food outlets or where there is a distinct limitation on available barista skills.
14g E.S.E. coffee pods have been around for a long time, whilst the new 10g E.S.E. coffee pods are emerging as a viable standard intended to balance the demands for stronger coffee flavour with a reasonable cost per serve.
Australian coffee drinkers prefer rich, smooth, creamy milk-based coffees in large cups or mugs.
In contrast, Europeans have more short-black drinkers in small cups.
Australians also demand sweet, non-bitter coffees that do not require sweetening with added sugar.
As a nation of 95% milk-based espresso, adding milk to the coffee alters the "flavour" balance; in many respects, it dilutes and weakens the beverage.
The term "cut-through milk" is an overused saying that very few people understand, and unfortunately, it can be incorrectly applied when rating or ranking coffees.
In Europe, to solve the issue of low-dosage coffee extraction, they use rougher blends with higher proportions of robusta, which Australian palates may need to be more accustomed to.
This method of preparing "rough, sharp coffee with bite" might suit Europe as they can easily operate on price-sensitive, lower-quality metrics.
Still, in Australia, we have a taste-sensitive market.
These cheap, "sharp" E.S.E. coffee pods and capsules are still being imported into Australia in volumes and sold to consumers as a "premium" experience.
As a side note, the whole "arabica versus robusta" debate is a much-maligned topic.
Unfortunately, hundreds of thousands of ill-informed, technically incorrect articles and posts have circulated online from the last 20 years of espresso coffee evolution - most centred around the alleged paranoia that roasters substitute cheap robusta to make more profit.
The plain and simple facts are there will always be a place for robusta and arabica in the coffee world.
Robusta prices have rallied up high over the last six months, meaning the price differentials between quality robusta and arabica are minimal.
However, the competition to produce great coffee is so intense that compromises are becoming increasingly impossible.
Thus, the decisions made by roasters are always around making the best product for the customer rather than the cheapest product.
Now, back to the discussion on flavour.
Most of the larger and more successful cafes in Australia use a double-shot basket on their commercial multi-group espresso machines to make a standard coffee - irrespective of whether it's an 8oz (small), 12oz (medium) or 16oz (large) takeaway - except when they are extremely busy and need to pump out the volume.
Undoubtedly, people out there will argue with me about it and debate dosage and extraction times.
A few years ago, the practice of running a double shot split across 2-cups was more common (and is still the norm in many average or down-scale establishments that don't know any better); however, with every physical location now saturated with an over-supply of coffee outlets, the competitive nature means cafes must offer more "bang for the buck" when it comes to coffee.
This has led to the increased popularity of a style of espresso extraction known as the "double ristretto."
A double-ristretto extraction provides a high dosage of coffee with a shot cut a bit shorter during the execution of the extraction.
Instead of allowing the shot to run for 25 - 30 seconds, the barista may miss the shot at 15 seconds.
This technique captures the predominant intensity of sweetness and body when a shot runs longer and begins to blonde (as is the case for many unskilled baristas); the extraction contents become increasingly watery and bitter.
Therefore, if you have successful cafes using 16, 18 or even 21-gram baskets for your milk-based espresso (latte, flat white, macchiato, cappuccino, etc.), then it becomes difficult or impossible to compare that coffee experience to a 7g P.O.D. extraction.
We are trying to demonstrate that a 16g cafe coffee differs from a 7g E.S.E. pod or a 5g capsule.
In designing the coffees used in our mycuppa E.S.E. Pods, we are trying to pack more coffee intensity into a 100% arabica blend to at least deliver a drinkable cup from the 7g P.O.D.
We prepare our mycuppa E.S.E. coffee pods with 7.8g coffee.
We use our premium high-grade Kenyan and Central American arabica with a deliberately "tuned" acid balance, given that most Australian coffee drinkers add milk to their espresso.
Does Packaging make a difference?
Absolutely.
Capsules are generally available in plastic (clone), aluminum (genuine), or a hybrid of new-generation oxygen barrier plastics combined with aluminum sections.
We know from many years of experience with our coffee bean and ground packs the need for effective barrier protection.
Coffee is a fresh food, and it's impossible to suspend the coffee's oxygenation (or deterioration) as it ages.
There are fancy methods, such as nitrogen flush, that exhaust oxygen and, therefore, limit the CO2 effects.
Still, these are only intended for coffee products destined for a very long shelf life, such as the Italians who seem persistent on placing a ridiculous Best Before date of 2 years on their coffees.
Different metalized films used in barrier protection perform with various results. Plastics, regardless of their density, could be better choices when packaging coffee.
We have seen the emergence of clone capsules hitting the market in an attempt to bring the price of capsules down.
Competition in these "closed systems" is a great thing.
However, many clone capsules are manufactured using plastic instead of aluminium.
Aluminium provides a better barrier than plastic, making it more effective at preserving the flavour and essence of coffee.
Additionally, while aluminium capsules can be recycled, most plastic capsules cannot.
While a biodegradable plastic capsule has been released, we do not have any anecdotal evidence regarding the efficacy of the barrier technology used to preserve coffee flavour and essence.
Considering our bio-degradable coffee bean packaging experiments, we found that the beans had lost considerable character over 4 - 6 weeks.
We were different from the packs of traditional metalized foil-lined coffee bags.
Bio-degradable coffee packaging should only be used for short transit periods, such as from retailer to customer, typically lasting for a few days.
It is not recommended for long-term storage due to the rapid staling effect.
On the other hand, E.S.E. coffee pods are fabricated in a controlled environment using two sheets of bio-degradable filter papers that can be composted.
Each E.S.E. coffee pod is individually wrapped in foil packaging, providing effective barrier protection against staling.
