During the trial it was revealed that McDonald’s knew that heating their coffee to this temperature would be dangerous, but they did it anyways because it would save them money. When you serve coffee that is too hot to drink, it will take much longer for a person to drink their coffee, which means that McDonald’s will not have to give out as many free refills of coffee. This policy by the fast food chain is the reason the jury awarded $2.7 million dollars in punitive damages in the McDonald’s hot coffee case. Punitive damages are meant to punish the defendant for their inappropriate business practice.

  • The Quuuuuill@slrpnk.netEnglish
    182·
    1 year ago

    Step one: keep it on a hot plate that keeps it at 200° so that you can serve it longer

    That is all the steps

    • jarfil@lemmy.worldEnglish
      4·
      1 year ago

      There is an additional step:

      • Serve it in a disposable container that doesn’t soak up any of the heat.

      Pouring hot coffee into a thick cold porcelain cup, tends to quickly cool it down to drinkable levels. A flimsy paper cup… not so much.

    • Swedneck@discuss.tchncs.deEnglish
      812·
      1 year ago

      but water only goes to 100 degrees, even with other stuff dissolved i can’t imagine a water-based liquid going much higher than like 120 degrees at most…

      • shuzuko@midwest.socialEnglish
        221·
        1 year ago

        200 Fahrenheit. That’s 93.3C. Just below literal boiling.

        Edit for more information, an adult human will suffer 3rd degree burns if exposed to 150F (65.5C) liquid for two seconds. This was 133% hotter than liquid that will cause 3rd degree burns. And it was poured directly in her lap, soaked into cloth that she could not easily remove. This was straight up evil levels of negligent.

        • Instigate@aussie.zoneEnglish
          12·
          1 year ago

          Just a quick note but neither Celsius nor Fahrenheit degrees can be used the way you’ve described - 200°F isn’t 133% of the temperature of 150°C and neither is 93.3°C 133% hotter than 65.5°C because the ‘zero’ point on both of those scales are entirely arbitrary.

          The two temperatures you’re talking about are ~366.45 K and ~338.65 K, as kelvin is the only true SI measurement for temperature whose zero point describes a natural or true zero, meaning that the higher temperature is roughly ~8% hotter.

          Brought to you by the National Department of Pedantry

        • assassin_aragorn@lemmy.worldEnglish
          21·
          1 year ago

          To add on, even when something isn’t boiling, it’ll generate an appreciable amount of vapor. The boiling point is just the temperature at which bubbles form within the liquid. The top surface is still going to give off hot steam. I honestly don’t know if near boiling vs boiling is a meaningful distinction in terms of how dangerous it is.

          I wonder actually if a boiling liquid would be slightly safer because there’s more vapor and less liquid.