QUSAC used the European Process up to the year 2005. In 2005 QUSAC adopted a new mission. We set out to produce the best decaffeinated coffee with the lowest environmental impact. Our journey led to the development of our DFE Process. Although DFE refers to the EPA recognition of products which us safer chemical ingredients without compromising efficacy, we chose to apply the same approach to the manufacturing of food stuff, such as our decaffeinated coffee. DFE is a mindset first. The key points are the elimination of waste, reduction of water usage and the overall reduction of energy requirements and safe work environment.Back to top
DFE is the acronym of “Designed For Environment”. The term was first used by the EPA in the early 1990's. The purpose was to consider the environment when developing a product.Back to top
The DFE Process uses only methylene chloride and water to extract caffeine from coffee beans.Back to top
The answer is Green Chemistry. Key characteristics of methylene chloride when combined with water makes it the perfect compound to extract the caffeine from the green coffee beans with minimal impact on the flavor profile. The DFE Process uses methylene chloride & water compound with the same surgical precision that a brain surgeon controls his scalpel.Back to top
No, not at this time. we have elected to keep our developments private. Our proprietary Target Specific Extraction Technology (T-SET) has dramatically reduced the amount of methylene chloride and water required to extract caffeine from one kilogram of coffee.Back to top
All decaffeination methods are safe for consumers and have a proven track record of delivering quality alternatives to their caffeinated counterpart. No process is safer than another. Let your taste buds be your guide.Back to top
Yes, all decaffeination companies use chemicals in their process when extracting caffeine from green coffee beans. Nevertheless, some roasters, retailors, marketers and decaffeinators claim that their decaffeinated coffee has been manufactured without chemicals. That is a false and misleading claim. Without chemicals, the world would not have the option of drinking their favorite coffee without the caffeine kick.
Even decaffeinated organic coffee can contain trace amounts of the most popular decaffeination chemical – methylene chloride.Back to top
Scientifically speaking, the best flavor retention is achieved when the extraction time is reduced, and the amount of required water is reduced. Water is a common solvent which is used by all the decaffeinated coffee manufacturers. Sometimes it is a primary solvent, such as with the direct water process and other times as a co-solvent such as with an indirect process using methylene chloride, ethyl acetate and carbon dioxide.Back to top
The direct water process uses the most water. In general, the direct water method, requires fifty-six (56) kilograms of water to decaffeinated one kilogram of green coffee.Back to top
The DFE Process requires only one (1) kilogram of water to decaffeinated one kilogram of green coffee.Back to top
One of the benefits of reduced water usage is lower energy requirements to dry the coffee after the decaffeination process. Another benefit with the DFE process is the recovery of the caffeine. Caffeine is a commodity in demand in the world but not enough of the natural energy powder is available, so companies are forced to synthesize the caffeine molecule. The process required to synthesize the molecule has a very large carbon footprint.Back to top
No. Although most of the manufactures recover their caffeine, some of the direct water processors are simply incapable of recovering their caffeine. As a result, the caffeine is released to the environment. The companies that are not able to capture the caffeine make claims that the recovery of the caffeine by other processors is the primary reason for decaffeinating coffee beans.Back to top
No. The amount of coffee required to produce one kilogram of caffeine is approximately 150 kilograms. The revenue generated from one kilograms of caffeine is about 17.00 USD. After removing the cost of manufacturing, a company would need to purchase coffee for less than 12 cents per kilogram or about 5.5 cents per pound. The last time coffee sold for 5.5 cents a pound was more than 100 years ago.
The primary focus of all decaffeinators is to produce the best quality decaffeinated coffee possible. The caffeine will always remain a by-product and secondary. The caffeine revenue simply helps to reduce the cost associated with the decaffeination process.Back to top
The two are exactly the same. In the 1980's, the industry was faced with a movement to discredit Methylene Chloride. The scientific community determined that methylene chloride was possibly connected to cancer based on the results of research on lab animals.
Once the findings made public, consumer protection groups pounced on the opportunity to connect the lab study findings to how your decaffeinated coffee could possibly cause cancer.
It didn't take long for non solvent based decaffeinators to exploit the opportunity provided by the scientific publication. They began to promote their decaf as the “safe choice” for consumers.
Once the facts had been revealed it was clear that the lab findings had no correlation to coffee decaffeinated with methylene chloride. Unfortunately, the damage was done and the industry needed to find an alternative method to describe the process. Hence the birth of the European Process.Back to top
While no evidence supports the healthier claim made by certain decaffeinators they continue to promote their product as a healthier choice for consumers. What these promoters of false claims don’t discuss is the fifty years worth of studies that contradict their claims.
Methylene chloride continues to be the solvent of choice for more than fifty years. In that time not a single piece of evidence has been uncovered that supports their claims of risks associated with methylene chloride.
If you do choose to grab a cup of decaf, we recommend that you let your taste buds be your guide and don’t worry about how the caffeine was removed from the coffee beans.Back to top
It starts with sampling a variety of decaf products. As with many things in life the most expensive is not necessarily the best product for you. With a little bit of taste testing you will find the right decaf to fit you taste profile. Keep in mind the process used to decaffeinate is irrelevant. What is truly relevant is how the decaf tastes to you and how the experience makes you feel.Back to top
Actually the statement is nonsense and very misleading. No product can be "100% Chemical Free".
The Royal Society of Chemistry reclaimed the word "Chemical" from the advertising and marketing industries.
They determined that "Chemical" has been misappropriated and maligned as synonymous with "poison".
The truth, as any right-minded person will say, is that everything we eat, drink, drive, play with and live in is made of chemicals - both natural and synthetic chemicals are essential for life as we know it.
In 2008 the RSC offered a £1 million pound bounty to anyone that could deliver to them any material that could be consider 100% chemical free.
If the public believes materials can be "100% chemical free", the RSC will soon be inundated with examples from people wishing to claim the £1 million pound bounty.
To this day the bounty remains unclaimed.Back to top
Yes, as a matter of fact they could contain trace amounts of decaffeination solvents including methylene chloride. The USDA has determined that trace amounts of methylene chloride can be present in Organic decaf coffee. They have set a threshold of 500 parts per billion (PPB).
What is interesting is that an independent consumer protection agency performed random laboratory tests on decaf products. They determined that in many cases products tested did not have any detectable amounts of decaffeination solvents. Non of the products tested had detectable solvent levels greater than 500 PPB.Back to top
Both the United States and Canadian gouvernments have approved the use of the following four solvents:
a. Methylene Chloride
b. Ethyl Acetate
d. Carbon DioxideBack to top
The United States has not established a maximum level of residual caffeine. Instead they only provide a guide line of 97% of the original caffeine must be removed to be recognized as decaffeinated. The problem with the guideline is the starting caffeine content is not specified.Back to top
Food and Drug Regulations (C.R.C., c. 870)
B.05.003 [S]. Decaffeinated (indicating the type of coffee)
(a) shall be coffee of the type indicated, from which caffeine has been removed and that, as a result of the removal, contains not more than:
(i) 0.1 per cent caffeine, in the case of decaffeinated raw coffee and decaffeinated coffee, or
(ii) 0.3 per cent caffeine, in the case of decaffeinated instant coffee; and
(b) may have been decaffeinated by means of extraction solvents set out in Table XV to Division 16.Back to top
The Canadian Food Inspection agency has a clear definition as to how the word “Nature” and “Natural” may be used when referring to foods and food ingredients. An excerpt from the relevant section reads as follows:
“Foods or ingredients of foods submitted to processes that have significantly altered their original physical, chemical or biological state should not be described as "natural". This includes such changes as the removal of caffeine.” (read more)
The USA has a different definition. The following summary was extracted from Wikipedia:
“In the United States, neither the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) nor the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) has rules for “natural". The FDA explicitly discourages the food industry from using the term. The Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act prohibits labelling that is false or misleading, but does not give any specifics. The USDA's Agricultural Marketing Service has a standard for organic food.>
Because there is no legal definition for natural foods, food manufacturers can include ingredients that may not be considered natural by some consumers.
The poultry industry has been criticized by the Center for Science in the Public Interest for labelling chicken meat "all natural" after it has been injected with up to 25% of its weight with a saline solution, but there is no legal recourse to prevent this labelling.
Although there is no legal U.S. definition for natural foods, there are numerous unofficial or informal definitions, none of which is applied uniformly to foods labelled "natural".
In conclusion the use of “Natural” will be entirely up to the roaster in his choice of labelling practices.Back to top
All of the chemicals in the chart below have been approved for use to decaffeinate coffee. Which one would you prefer to be used to decaffeinate your coffee? No matter which one you choose, all are safe and pose no risk to your health.
|Dihydrogen monoxide||Dichloro-methane||Ethyl ethanoate||Methane-dione|
|Contributes to Acid Rain||YES||NO||NO||YES|
|Contributes to the “Greenhouse effect”||YES||NO||NO||YES|
|Fatal if inhaled at 40 deg C and above||YES||NO||YES||NO|
|Contributes to landscape erosion||YES||NO||NO||NO|
|Can cause electrical failures||YES||NO||NO||NO|
|Accelerates corrosion in iron||YES||NO||NO||NO|
|Found in tumors of cancer patients||YES||NO||NO||NO|
|in nuclear power plants||YES||NO||NO||YES|
|in the production of Styrofoam||YES||NO||NO||NO|
|as a fire retardant||YES||NO||NO||YES|
|in many forms of cruel animal research||YES||NO||NO||NO|
|in the distribution of pesticides||YES||NO||NO||NO|
|as an additive in certain "junk-foods" and other food products||YES||NO||NO||YES|
|Decaffeinated Coffee Characteristics:|
|Flat neutral taste||YES||NO||NO||YES|
Most likely you chose the second column and with good reason. The chemical found in the first column is clearly one to stay away from; or is it?
Well, DiHydrogen MonOxide or DHMO, also known as Hydric Acid, Hydronium Hydroxide, is usually called just plain water. The common names for all the chemicals shown are: Water, MC, EA and CO2 respectively. First-year University Chemistry students have made laboured jokes about water's chemical properties for years.
But, here's the point about misinformation, or disinformation.
You can give people this totally accurate (but emotionally laden, and sensationalist) information about DHMO. Then survey these people and about three-quarters of them will willingly sign a petition to ban it and it doesn't matter where in the world you do the survey.Back to top