Has anyone else seen these new (to me at least) giant size Paulaner cans? I picked one up from my local Trader Joe's this morning, and am enjoying the effort to empty it down to weigh it as I type.



It seems to be a great candidate for use as a MYOG pot. It's just a few mm larger (2-3mm at most) in diameter than a Foster's can and so it won't fit inside my Caldera-F cone (it feels like it could fit if I wanted to stretch out the cone, but I don't so it doesn't). However, it's plenty tall enough to house the entire length of the caldera cone, probably 4 cm taller than the Foster's. It also has a nice, flat bottom for heating and has more traditional 90 degree angle top that should preclude the need to file down a can opener to get it open. Since opener is already filed I can't be 100% certain about that last point, but it certainly looks that way. It also feels to be constructed of a thicker aluminum than a Foster's can which should preclude the need for a caddy.

The only thing that I do see that gives me pause for jumping in to use it as a pot is the presence of a what appears to be some kind of plastic that runs the entire height of the can that is used to pin two edges of a rectangle of aluminum into the can's cylinder shape. I don't know a lot about the industrial manufacturing of aluminum cans, but this plastic strip certainly isn't used in either the Foster's or Heineken cans; perhaps they are extruded as cylinders instead of starting their lives as flat rectangles as these appear to? Anyway, I'm not sure whether this strip would pose any problems when it is heated while boiling water.



I'll be sure to post a weight after I've finished the beer.

Edited by schassey on 01/21/2012 17:10:51 MST.

I may have to make an extra trip to TJ. It isn't often that I go shopping there for backpacking gear.

Maybe that plastic strip is just a coating to prevent the tinning metals on the joint from dissolving into the brew.

--B.G.--

>"Maybe that plastic strip is just a coating to prevent the tinning metals on the joint from dissolving into the brew."

I had a similar thought that whatever coats the inner surface of the metal may be discontinous at the cut and joined seam so that strip could be to isolate the exposed metal from the beer and vice-a-versa.

Boil a few pots of water in it at home. If that strip leaches anything into the water, it will leach the most initially and less over time.

Is there a way to see from the manufacturer if the can is BPA free?

"Boil a few pots of water in it at home."

I say focus on properly emptying the initial contents first.

--B.G.--

>Boil a few pots of water in it at home. If that strip leaches anything into the water, it will leach the most initially and less over time.

Any thoughts on how I can determine if the strip is leaching anything into the water? Just watch for any visibile dissolution of material into the water as it heats up?

Either the strip will change its appearance or else the water will.

Beyond that, tiny traces probably won't hurt us unless you get an awful lot of them.

--B.G.--

>I say focus on properly emptying the initial contents first.

Which is proving to be an enjoyable aspect of this experiment.

Well, the beer was great. The findings upon finishing the beer, not so great.



94.9g.

Or, roughly 3x the weight of a Foster's can. The trade offs include an 'easier' to remove lid (as you don't have to modify your side-cut can opener), a flat bottom for more efficient heat transfer, 250mL more volume, the ability to pack your cone inside the stove and I would think that it's much less prone to dings and damage. I don't think you'd have to baby this can one bit, it's some pretty thick aluminum. I'd say it's comparable to my REI/Evernew Ti pots in terms of the plasticity feel to it when I squeeze it in my hand. It should hold up to plenty of packing/unpacking/tossing abuse.

I'll conduct some test burns later in the week and report back any findings.

I consider that to be good results. Thank you.

--B.G.--

>"Any thoughts on how I can determine if the strip is leaching anything into the water? Just watch for any visibile dissolution of material into the water as it heats up?"

I order up different leachability tests, usually conducted with a mild acid and get a report with results for a hundred componds, but that's a few hundred dollars.

Presumably it doesn't leach anything at room temperature or they wouldn't use it, so the really Q is if something leachs or breaks down at boiling.

I'd boil water in it for a while, when new, and then sniff and test it. If there was a "plasticy" or "chemical" smell or taste to it, I'd repeat with boiling more water and rechecking to see if that effect fades with time. In the C6 to C15 range, I can smell a lot of chemicals to about 1 part per million. I'm not as sensitive on higher molecular weight stuff (which tends not to be as toxic) and most inorganics don't small much at all.

The can is great, but most of this cans whis this design are made with tinplate instead of aluminum. In my opinion it does not work pretty well in combination with a alcohol stove. I would prefer the 1l cans made with aluminum

"Presumably it doesn't leach anything at room temperature or they wouldn't use it..."

(excuse me while I don my hat of sarcasm)

Oh, yeah....just like BPA. Don't worry kids. We wouldn't use it if it leached...and if it did and was anything but delicious and nutritious mothers milk, it wouldn't be on the store shelves. ;)

Is it wise to ignore the possible health risks involved?
I am pretty sure i would not be comfortable drinking something to see if it tastes funny as my indicator of 'safe for consumption'.
Drinking a cold beer from the can is one thing, but to repeatedly boil water in it to consume is another.\

Matt B.

Edited by mbnow on 01/22/2012 10:24:01 MST.

"Is it wise to ignore the possible health risks involved"?

In my opinion, no, it is not wise....cause no one can say with any kind of certainty what "risks" are involved. Will it kill ya? Well, probably not. What other ramifications are there? Again, no one knows. The wise thing, IMHO, is to never assume anything when it comes to the regulatory system and our health.

You won't see anything leaching into the water. With BPA and other chemical issues, we're talking parts per million.

And where mother's milk has many advantages for immunity, etc, it is as contaminated as everything else. You *are* what you eat and the crud is everywhere. Caveat emptor!

Bisphenol A (BPA) leaches from the plastic lining of canned foods and polycarbonate plastics much more when cleaned with detergents or when used with acidic or high-temperature liquids. BPA is an ingredient in the internal coating of metal food and beverage cans used to protect the food from direct contact with the can. -condensed from Wikipedia

Beer is acidic: pH of 3.5 to 5 while the water you'd be using is typically 6 to 8.5 (MUCH more neutral) depending on the local geology (and the upwind coal plants). Colas are 2.5 to 3 - 10 to 100 more acidic than beer.

High temps definitely leach more. That's why if I was using ANY recycled food or beverage can as a cooking pot, I'd boil water in it for an extended time.

I think I've reduced my BPA exposure more in the last few years by not using my older polycarbonate water bottles and not brewing tea in a one-liter plastic water bottle like I used to. Which is what I try to do in a lot of arenas of life - accept that I won't eliminate all risks but take steps to minimize them. But to each their own.

I haven't look into health issues with titanium, but different people have different concerns about plastics, aluminum, stainless steel, and zinc in different pots. And yet I use those on the trail and at home because, to quote Commander Spock, it's harder to get things done "with stone knives and bearskins."

>"And where mother's milk has many advantages for immunity, etc, it is as contaminated as everything else."

Dale,

Agreed, you can find most any toxic compound in milk (from a cow or a countess). While not true in the developed world, the immunity benefits of breastfeeding are so great that in Africa it is recommended that mothers KNOWN TO HAVE HIV breastfeed because the risks of HIV transmission in mother's milk is less than the risk of dying of diarrheal illness.

As a 50-year-old male, I'm less concerned about my low BPA exposures, some of which are almost unavoidable (if you eat in restaurants or otherwise use canned foods or drinks), than I would be for a gestating or lactating woman. But again, I look for ways to reduce those exposures without getting all worked up over it.

"And where mother's milk has many advantages for immunity, etc, it is as contaminated as everything else".

I hesitated posting what I did but went ahead anyway as so few people are aware that mothers milk is contaminated these days. Figure of speech, only. Sadly, some mothers are being told not to breastfeed because their milk is so contaminated. Take the Artic people, for example. Their new born come into the world already highly contaminated with dioxins that were passed through the placenta. The poor kids then continue taking in high doses every time they are breast fed. Really sad.

All thanks to cravings (greed, desire or whatever one wants to call it) down here creating pollutants that travel northward via the airstream.

>"All thanks to cravings (greed, desire or whatever one wants to call it) down here creating pollutants that travel northward via the airstream."

True. That's how and why the toxics get up here. But a 3- or 4-year-old salmon, especially a filter-feeder like a sockeye, doesn't bioaccumulate much and they test as quite low in toxics and have great nutritional qualities.

The Inupiat, harvesting so many critters at the top of the food chain, are especially vulnerable plus their diet is SO high in animal products, much of it sea mammals.

There are downsides to eating 160-year-old stuff.