A great article Jim. I was there with you and I couldn't remember half of the details you seem to recollect so well. During SCAA 2007 in Long beach, we had the opportunity to meet with many roasters, and I solicited some opinions from them on the matter. George's purist view is in the extreme minority. I'd say he is standing there almost alone pointing the way. This of course does not mean that he is wrong, I just wanted to provide a bird's eye view of the playing field.

Now to the heart of his argument: a better way to deal with a stone age dry process is improving it, not throwing it away. More to the point, take a cue from what Daterra and other Brazilians have done and apply it to dry processing. It will add a dollar or two to the cost of processing per pound, but it has the potential to add much higher value to the wholesale price which will go to the farmers. The key is foreign investment in processing plants. No new technology is required, it is all there. The food industry has perfected a variety of controlled fermenting processes and those can easily be applied to coffee.

His take on DP Yrgs (and presumably Sidamos in general) is more negative than DPs from dry growing areas where the method is traditional. The Sidamo region is a wet climate, where dry processing runs a higher risk of badly fermenting the lot and leaving the farmer with a loss.

This added negativity is hard to catch, since he doesn't believe any dry processed coffee is drinkable.

One of his points is that dry processing, along with organic and fair trade certs, are long term traps for the farmers, since the high end market will, in the long run, always favor well prepped wet process beans.

I don't think this is correct, for several reasons. It looks like conscience and health factors are increasingly affecting how people buy all sorts of products, so fair trade and organic certified coffees are likely to get premiums for a long time. Also, more and more coffee is being brewed on espresso and quasi-espresso (e.g. super-autos, pod, and crema gadget) machines. To some extent, people are lerning how to pull shots with more acidic coiffees; but the demand for the enhanced body and sweetness found in naturals is likely to rise for the foreseeable future.

However, the urgings of George and others is having the good effect of prompting a lot of research into improving natural processing methods. Pulp-natural and Daterra's "penta process" are cases in point.

Been wondering if some of the jute bag smells and tastes are possibly from chemicals used in making some jute bags. Being a sheep farmer I know that when wool fiber is processed many chemicals can be used. Some in the cleaning called scouring and some in the spinning to lubricate the machinery in the process. Some spinners use a veg. oil based and others a mineral oil type others a concoction. I've read that some jute bags are also treated with some stuffs to make them rot, pest and fire resistant. Some of the jute storage bags for wool that I get have a much stronger "off" smell than others. I wonder if some of the chemicals used in making jute coffee bags may be affecting the coffee. Does anyone know more about this? Saw this online too. http://www.jute.com/foodgradejute.html seems as foodgrade usage bags are rather recent and probably not yet used by all. Ed

Thanks for putting that up, Jim. I think, first of all, that it's important to separate out the few controversial areas of George's philosophy with the great mass of unarguably important ones. Clearly, improved packaging at origin and improved conditions during shipping are good for the coffee and good for the farmers who adopt them. Clearly George is right that the small farmers whose variety we all value are going to get steamrollered if the overall quality of large mechanized farms rises without theirs doing so as well. That implies, in most cases, that it has to be done without a huge capital investment, or that the relationships forged between farmers and roasters in developed countries may have to include some capital investment or loans of machinery for things like vacuum packing.

In the one area where George's philosophy is controversial, I come down on your side. I think it's analogous to the effect that UC Davis had on winemaking in the 1980s. They came in and taught everybody to make extremely clean wines, devoid of taint. What they lost at first was the fact that many compounds we experience as unpleasant in large quantities add much-valued complexity in small enough ones: no classic Burgandy would ever have gotten past them. As a result, a lot of flawless but rather boring wines were produced, particularly in California where their influence was highest. Eventually, people realized this, and realized that what they needed to do was to understand and be able to put on a more repeatable footing some of the traditional practices. Dry-processing on raised screens with good airflow instead of on patios is an example. George's point about the long-term negative economics of things like dry-processing assume the current level of risk to the crop in doing it. If that is reduced, and if people are willing to pay enough for those flavors to compensate for the remaining risk, then it's covered.

Best,
David

Thanks David; you explained the issues more clearly than I did. It was good meeting you again at the SCAA.

another_jim wrote:I've put up a webpage report called Cupping with George which goes into more depth on how all the specific practices at Terroir we've mentioned add up to an overall approach to coffee.

I think George's vision merits discussion, so feel free to agree or disagree; or object to my portrayal.

One of my favorite books is On Writing Well, 2nd. Edition, by William Zinsser: clarity of thought and uncluttered writing. Cupping with George has these qualities for me. It addresses a fundamental issue: What are practices that lead to improvements in coffee cup excellence? George exemplifies someone using intelligence and passion in that quest; someone who is willing to question common practice to create more "wow" in the cup. Thanks, Jim, for providing a transparent window into George's world and for provoke my thinking.

altoCalgary wrote:One of my favorite books is On Writing Well, 2nd. Edition, by William Zinsser: clarity of thought and uncluttered writing. Cupping with George has these qualities for me. It addresses a fundamental issue: What are practices that lead to improvements in coffee cup excellence? George exemplifies someone using intelligence and passion in that quest; someone who is willing to question common practice to create more "wow" in the cup. Thanks, Jim, for providing a transparent window into George's world and for provoke my thinking. I need some time to think about what I have learned, but I'll be back.

Thanks. I try to Strunk&White my webpages, with varying success. Since George Howell is very consistent, it was easy this time.