since even the green leaf, the cells are dehydrated, probably
proteins,enzymes, etc are inactive,

would light have any effect on it anymore?
(maybe not continuous direct sunlight since that has alot of energy
and radiation),
but light from light bulbs in the kitchen/ or those fluorescent tubes
at supermarkets...

On Nov 5, 1:38 pm, SN > wrote:
> since even the green leaf, the cells are dehydrated, probably
> proteins,enzymes, etc are inactive,
>
> would light have any effect on it anymore?
> (maybe not continuous direct sunlight since that has alot of energy
> and radiation),
> but light from light bulbs in the kitchen/ or those fluorescent tubes
> at supermarkets...

I'm not a scientist (don't even play one on TV) but I keep all forms
of light away from my tea. Air, light, smells all are on my no-no
list. Again, I go with the "old school" ways of tea storage... they
used opaque containers and they were generally air tight (or close to
it). If it worked for a couple hundred/thousand years then it's good
enough for me. I do use clear glass jars with screw on tops and they
stay in their own fairly sealed cabinet.

Beyond staying out of direct sunlight which is #1 on my list, I keep
two or more jars of each tea so that only what is being used gets
exposed to air at any time.

HTH,
- Dominic

Dominic T. wrote:
> On Nov 5, 1:38 pm, SN > wrote:
>> since even the green leaf, the cells are dehydrated, probably
>> proteins,enzymes, etc are inactive,
>>
>> would light have any effect on it anymore?
>> (maybe not continuous direct sunlight since that has alot of energy
>> and radiation),
>> but light from light bulbs in the kitchen/ or those fluorescent tubes
>> at supermarkets...
>
> I'm not a scientist (don't even play one on TV) but I keep all forms
> of light away from my tea. Air, light, smells all are on my no-no
> list.

I am a scientist, or at least I play one in the lab, and I agree with
everything Dominic said. Intensity/brightness is different from photon
energy. Further, AFAIK, staling reactions in tea are non-biological - it
doesn't matter if there's no life happening. (With Pu-erh, who knows?)

Basically, any light of wavelength shorter than deep red is capable of
doing photochemistry on large molecules. It might be very slow under
incandescent light, but still an issue. In art conservation, people know
that even yellowish filament bulbs can cause more damage than bluer
fluorescents, as the latter are UV-filtered and the former still produce
a tiny amount of UV.

Photochemical damage is cumulative - doesn't fade away - and
photoproducts can have strikingly bad tastes and smells. (Ask any beer
aficionado what happens to bottled ale when left in the light too long.)
Dark is best, whether via opaque containers or cabinets.

-DM

cool! thanks, i didnt know there are non-biological effects.