Cold cucumber and halloumi salad with griddled apricot
Ingredients
5 tbsp extra virgin olive oil
A small bunch of coriander
A small bunch of basil
2 limes, juice
4 tsp sweet chilli sauce (or a little honey and a pinch of chilli flakes)
2 cucumbers
6 apricots, halved and destoned
1x 225g block of halloumi, cubed
5 tbsp natural or Greek yoghurt
1 tsp Tajin (chilli and lime seasoning)
Method
Step
Put 4 tbsp extra virgin olive oil in a blender with a small bunch each of coriander and basil, juice of 2 limes, 4 tsp sweet chilli sauce and plenty of salt and black pepper. Blend until smooth.
Step
Peel 2 cucumbers – either entirely or in alternate stripes. Halve each lengthways and remove the watery centres. Cut into 1cm slices. Put the cucumbers in a big bowl with all but 2 tbsp of the dressing. Mix well, cover and put in the fridge for at least 30 minutes, more if you like.
Step
Meanwhile, set a small frying pan over a medium heat with 1 tbsp oil. When hot, add 6 halved and destoned apricots cut side down. Cook for 2 minutes, or until browned, then flip and cook for another minute. Transfer to a plate and sprinkle with salt.
Step
Add 1x 225g block of halloumi, cubed, to the pan. Cook, using tongs to turn the pieces occasionally, until well browned all over. Set aside.
Step
Mix the remaining green dressing with 1 tbsp extra virgin olive oil, a pinch of salt and some more black pepper. Dot extra spoonfuls of dressing on the apricots. Sprinkle 1 tsp Tajin over everything and serve straight away.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
2 hours ago
- The Independent
Researchers reveal what Ancient Rome smelled like – and it's disgusting
The roar of the arena crowd, the bustle of the Roman forum, the grand temples, the Roman army in red with glistening shields and armour – when people imagine ancient Rome, they often think of its sights and sounds. We know less, however, about the scents of ancient Rome. We cannot, of course, go back and sniff to find out. But the literary texts, physical remains of structures, objects, and environmental evidence (such as plants and animals) can offer clues. So what might ancient Rome have smelled like? Honestly, often pretty rank. In describing the smells of plants, author and naturalist Pliny the Elder uses words such as iucundus (agreeable), acutus (pungent), vis (strong), or dilutus (weak). None of that language is particularly evocative in its power to transport us back in time, unfortunately. But we can probably safely assume that, in many areas, Rome was likely pretty dirty and rank-smelling. Property owners did not commonly connect their toilets to the sewers in large Roman towns and cities – perhaps fearing rodent incursions or odours. Roman sewers were more like storm drains, and served to take standing water away from public areas. Professionals collected faeces for fertiliser and urine for cloth processing from domestic and public latrines and cesspits. Chamber pots were also used, which could later be dumped in cesspits. This waste disposal process was just for those who could afford to live in houses; many lived in small, non-domestic spaces, barely furnished apartments, or on the streets. A common whiff in the Roman city would have come from the animals and the waste they created. Roman bakeries frequently used large lava stone mills (or 'querns') turned by mules or donkeys. Then there was the smell of pack animals and livestock being brought into town for slaughter or sale. The large 'stepping-stones' still seen in the streets of Pompeii were likely so people could cross streets and avoid the assorted feculence that covered the paving stones. Disposal of corpses (animals and human) was not formulaic. Depending on the class of the person who had died, people might well have been left out in the open without cremation or burial. Bodies, potentially decaying, were a more common sight in ancient Rome than now. Suetonius, writing in the first century CE, famously wrote of a dog carrying a severed human hand to the dining table of the Emperor Vespasian. Deodorants and toothpastes In a world devoid of today's modern scented products – and daily bathing by most of the population – ancient Roman settlements would have smelt of body odour. Classical literature has some recipes for toothpaste and even deodorants. However, many of the deodorants were to be used orally (chewed or swallowed) to stop one's armpits smelling. One was made by boiling golden thistle root in fine wine to induce urination (which was thought to flush out odour). The Roman baths would likely not have been as hygienic as they may appear to tourists visiting today. A small tub in a public bath could hold between eight and 12 bathers. The Romans had soap, but it wasn't commonly used for personal hygiene. Olive oil (including scented oil) was preferred. It was scraped off the skin with a strigil (a bronze curved tool). This oil and skin combination was then discarded (maybe even slung at a wall). Baths had drains – but as oil and water don't mix, it was likely pretty grimy. Scented perfumes The Romans did have perfumes and incense. The invention of glassblowing in the late first century BCE (likely in Roman-controlled Jerusalem) made glass readily available, and glass perfume bottles are a common archaeological find. Animal and plant fats were infused with scents – such as rose, cinnamon, iris, frankincense and saffron – and were mixed with medicinal ingredients and pigments. The roses of Paestum in Campania (southern Italy) were particularly prized, and a perfume shop has even been excavated in the city's Roman forum. The trading power of the vast Roman empire meant spices could be sourced from India and the surrounding regions. There were warehouses for storing spices such as pepper, cinnamon and myrrh in the centre of Rome. In a recent Oxford Journal of Archaeology article, researcher Cecilie Brøns writes that even ancient statues could be perfumed with scented oils. Sources frequently do not describe the smell of perfumes used to anoint the statues, but a predominantly rose-based perfume is specifically mentioned for this purpose in inscriptions from the Greek city of Delos (at which archaeologists have also identified perfume workshops). Beeswax was likely added to perfumes as a stabiliser. Enhancing the scent of statues (particularly those of gods and goddesses) with perfumes and garlands was important in their veneration and worship. An olfactory onslaught The ancient city would have smelt like human waste, wood smoke, rotting and decay, cremating flesh, cooking food, perfumes and incense, and many other things. It sounds awful to a modern person, but it seems the Romans did not complain about the smell of the ancient city that much. Perhaps, as historian Neville Morley has suggested, to them these were the smells of home or even of the height of civilisation.
The Independent
3 hours ago
- The Independent
National Grid aware of fault behind Heathrow shutdown fire for seven years
Friday 21 March was a miserable day for more than 200,000 airline passengers who were planning to fly to or from London Heathrow airport. The UK's busiest airport closed down almost completely for the day due to a fire at an electricity substation that provides Heathrow with power. What went wrong – and could it happen again? The National Energy System Operator (NESO) has just published its final report into the incident. National Grid is blamed for the fire that triggered the catastrophic power outage. But the report also says Heathrow was aware that such an incident would have serious consequences, and that the airport accepted the risk as a 'high-impact, low-probability event'. These are the key questions and answers. How did events unfold? At 11.21pm on Thursday 20 March, a 'supergrid transformer' at North Hyde substation near Heathrow caught fire and shut down. An adjacent transformer that had been 'running on hot standby' switched into service according to NESO, 'with no interruption of supply to customers'. But as the fire spread, within 28 minutes all power from the substation was lost – affecting 71,655 customers, including Heathrow airport. The power cut at the airport hit Terminal 2, parts of Terminal 4 and the access tunnel to Terminals 2 and 3 – 'critical parts of the infrastructure', according to Heathrow's chief executive, Thomas Woldbye. He said that power was also lost to 'buildings that house systems that are airport-wide, such as CCTV, some of the fuelling safety systems, and security locking systems for doors'. Mr Woldbye was uncontactable at the time of the fire because his phone was switched to silent. In the early hours of Friday morning the chief operating officer, Javier Echave, took the decision to close Heathrow on safety grounds – despite the devastating emotional and economic consequences. The airport later said the decision was the correct one and that the CEO would have made the same call. One hundred and twenty flights were in the air at the time, heading for Heathrow, and had to divert or fly back to where they started. Nigel Wicking of the Heathrow Airline Operators' Committee later said: 'They had run out of space for aircraft to divert to in the UK. Aircraft were then going to Europe, and some were even halfway across Europe and were going back to base in India. More than 1,400 flights were cancelled as a result of the closure, and the airlines – which are responsible for caring for stranded passengers – lost up to £100m as a result, according to Mr Wicking. Normal operations were restored three days later. What have we learnt from NESO? The transformer fire was 'most likely caused by moisture entering the bushing causing a short circuit', the report says. 'The electricity likely then 'arced' (causing sparks) which combined with air and heat to ignite the oil, resulting in a fire.' Crucially, the report says that 'an elevated moisture reading' had been detected in oil samples from the transformer taken in July 2018. NESO says: 'According to National Grid Electricity Transmission's relevant guidance, such readings indicate 'an imminent fault and that the bushing should be replaced'. While the reading was recorded in National Grid Electricity Transmission's online system, the mitigations appropriate to its severity were not actioned.' Subsequently, decisions were taken to defer basic maintenance on the transformer. The report also says that none of the parties involved in supplying electricity to Heathrow knew how the airport's internal electrical distribution network was configured, nor of the potential impact of losing a supply point. Meanwhile, Heathrow knew that power disruption could 'greatly impact operations' but 'assessed the total loss of power to one of its three supply points as a high-impact, low-probability event'. How prepared was Heathrow? The report says: 'Its internal electrical distribution network was not designed or configured in such a way as to take advantage of having multiple supply points to provide quick recovery following such a loss and was reliant on manual switching.' In other words, Heathrow could have organised its power network differently to be much more resilient. The airport boss, Thomas Woldbye, had previously said: 'We have to power down maybe 1,000 systems before we do that switch, and then we have to switch it back on and power up 1,000 systems.' While this process was happening, operating the airport was impractical, he said. 'We would be able to land aircraft, but we would then be leaving them on the runways with passengers in them, not being able to process them because we did not have the safety. That is not an acceptable situation for passengers.' What should change in future? Electricity infrastructure needs to be properly monitored and maintained – with better risk assessment of the consequences of a failure. And all 'critical national infrastructure' (CNI) including Heathrow airport should boost resilience so that 'the loss of one supply point does not impact the entire CNI site'. The report recommends: 'The use of short duration uninterruptable power supply while switching takes place such that operations can be maintained.' Ofgem has ordered an investigation. Akshay Kaul, director general for infrastructure at the regulator, said: 'We expect energy companies to properly maintain their equipment and networks to prevent events like this happening. Where there is evidence that they have not, we will take action and hold companies fully to account.' What does National Grid say? A spokesperson said: 'National Grid has a comprehensive asset inspection and maintenance programme in place, and we have taken further action since the fire. This includes an end-to-end review of our oil sampling process and results, further enhancement of fire risk assessments at all operational sites and re-testing the resilience of substations that serve strategic infrastructure.' What does Heathrow say? A spokesperson for the airport said: 'Heathrow welcomes this report, which sheds further light on the external power supply failure that forced the airport's closure on 21 March. 'A combination of outdated regulation, inadequate safety mechanisms, and National Grid's failure to maintain its infrastructure led to this catastrophic power outage. We expect National Grid to be carefully considering what steps they can take to ensure this isn't repeated.' What happens next? Now that responsibility has been apportioned, it may be that legal action begins to recover some of the financial losses – particularly those sustained by airlines. Airports across the UK will be looking more closely at vulnerabilities – but putting mitigations in place for all 'high-impact, low-probability' events would be extremely expensive, with the cost ultimately paid by passengers.
The Independent
3 hours ago
- The Independent
Fire that shut Heathrow was caused by a preventable technical fault known for years, report finds
An electrical substation fire that shut down Heathrow Airport, canceling more than 1,300 flights, was caused by a preventable technical fault identified almost seven years earlier, a report found Wednesday. Europe's busiest air hub shut for about 18 hours in March after a fire knocked out one of the three electrical substations that supply Heathrow with power. More than 200,000 passengers had journeys disrupted. Counterterrorism police initially led the investigation into the fire, which came as authorities across Europe girded against sabotage backed by Russia. Though authorities quickly ruled out vandalism or sabotage, the fire's huge impact raised concern about the resilience of Britain's energy system to accidents, natural disasters or attacks. The government ordered an investigation into 'any wider lessons to be learned on energy resilience for critical national infrastructure.' The report by the National Energy System Operator said that an 'elevated moisture reading' had been found in oil samples at the substation in west London in July 2018, but action wasn't taken to replace electrical insulators known as bushings. It said that the March 20 blaze was caused by a 'catastrophic failure' in one of the transformers, 'most likely caused by moisture entering the bushing causing a short circuit' that ignited the oil. Energy Secretary Ed Miliband said that the findings were 'deeply concerning.' He said that energy industry regulator Ofgem had opened an investigation into whether the substation's operator, National Grid Electricity Transmission, had breached its license conditions.
