Natural, washed, honey, pulped natural, wet hulled, carbonic maceration, supernatural, orange peel process, natural yeast, barrique fermentation, polyjuice process—it seems like every week there’s a new coffee processing technique I see on the shelf at my favorite local roasteries. Some of them I love, others I really dislike. Suffice it to say, as someone who has spent significant time on the farm, as well as in the roastery, I have some thoughts. But first, for my friends who are not professionals and not so nerdy about coffee, let's do a quick and dirty crash course on coffee processing. Those in the know, feel free to skip.
Coffee Processing
Coffee is an interesting commodity in that we don’t (for the most part) consume the fruit—I hope we’re all aware by now that coffee is a fruit. The skin is turned into tea in some places, but in most coffee-producing countries, it’s discarded. The only other fruit I can think of where we primarily harvest the seed is cacao.
The coffee fruit is made up of five components: the skin, pulp, silver skin, parchment, and the seed (bean). Coffee processing, in essence, is the method by which we extract the coffee seed from everything else. So, how do we do that? Well, there are two primary methods:
Washed Process:
Also known as wet process, involves removing the coffee cherry’s outer skin and pulp before the beans are dried. This method uses water to separate the fruit from the seeds and is then laid to rest (ferment) and then dried. This method is favored for its ability to produce a clean, consistent flavor profile that is repeatable harvest to harvest.
Natural Process:
Natural process, or dry process, is the oldest method of coffee processing. For naturals, the whole of the coffee cherries are spread out in the sun to dry. Once the cherries are dried to the desired level, the hardened husks are mechanically removed. Natural processing is known for producing coffees with more body and a sweeter, fruitier flavor profile, as the beans have more contact with the sweet mucilage during drying.
Flavor:
Every single component at work in the formation of coffee’s flavor has an impact; origin, elevation, varietal/cultivar, roast. But processing—in my opinion and by a decent margin—has the most to say when it comes to the flavor of the coffee in the cup. This is assuming all of the essentials are done correctly (picking, pruning, storing, etc.) to maintain basic quality standards. That said, as a general principle, natural coffees will always assume more of the flavor of the fruit. This means, well, fruitier tasting coffee. Is this desirable? We’ll get into that later.
Until relatively recently, all coffee would have been processed via one of the two methods illustrated above. But in the last few decades, we’ve seen a bunch of new ones emerge and in the last ten years especially, we’ve seen an explosion of new techniques.
So, let's get into those…
New Kids on the Block
The first of these new processes I remember seeing is called honey process. It’s sort of the in-between of the two we’ve talked about. So, washed coffees are de-pulped, washed, then left to dry. Naturals are dried with the whole fruit and neither de-pulped nor washed. Honey process is where they depulp without washing and allow the coffee to dry with some of the fruit residue still on the seed. The resulting flavor has pretty much the expected result. It’s not as ‘clean’ as the washed coffee and not as fruity as the natural. It’s somewhere in the middle.
Now things start to get interesting. The rest of the newer processes are nearly all, in essence, an attempt to highlight or push to the limit the kinds of flavor profiles natural process coffees produce. And more, give the producer/processor more control over how the coffees will taste.
The first of them to mention is anaerobic. Anaerobic is a fancy way of saying “without oxygen.” What that means for coffee is actually less complicated than you may think. Basically, the entire ripe coffee fruit is placed with water in a sealed tank and allowed to ferment for a period of time (typically 48-72 hours but it can be longer) before it then undergoes the rest of the natural process method. The result? VERY. FRUITY. COFFEE.
Following that, we have carbonic maceration. This is where, again, the coffee is sealed in an oxygen-less tank, but this time without water, then CO2 is pumped into the tank. This method has its roots in wine and perhaps unsurprisingly produces coffee flavor profiles that are often described as “winey”.
What’s actually happening in both of these chemically is beyond the scope of this article and would likely put most of us to sleep, so I won’t get into that.
We’ve experimented with both of these on my own farms and have also practiced indigenous yeast collection, which I won’t bore you with the details of. I will say that we’ve had mixed results. Most great, some… not great.
Now, the next stop on the processing train route, and the subsequent 20-30 stops are pretty much all in goofy town, confusing-ville, WTF-is-Thatistan, and Is-this-even-still-coffee-opolis. Let's discuss those…
Cutting Edge?
Ok, so I exaggerated a tad in the last sentence, it was for comedic effect. There are some really cool methods I’ve tasted that I’d put in this cutting-edge category. Lactic fermentation, thermal shock, indigenous yeast inoculation (which, as mentioned before, I’ve tried on my own farms). But for every one that’s really interesting, there appears to be two or three that are just nonsense. I want to avoid specifically naming them, but I will say this; every one of these oddly named and novel processing techniques I’ve taken the time to investigate and ask the roaster/producer about, I’ve gotten either very opaque descriptions of or found out quickly that it was just an anaerobic coffee that they repackaged as “supercalifragilistic process”.
Then there’s what I’d term ‘the fails’. These are coffees that are so over the top in their flavor profile that to me they just no longer taste like coffee. They rarely taste ‘good’ but almost always taste interesting. Whenever one of my coffee nerd friends excitedly serves me one of these coffees, I have the same thought. “Okay, it’s different, it’s novel for sure, but would I drink this every day.” If the answer is no, I think it’s likely a fad that will disappear. To be brutally honest, all of the coffees that are fermented with dried fruit, or fruit peels, or the like fall into this category for me. Yes, it’s interesting, it’s novel, it’s probably worth trying once. Do I truly like it? No.
So what does this all mean? Well…
Lovers and Haters
Let me say at the outset that I am pretty much in the lovers category here. Working primarily in a country (Yemen) where it’s very difficult—not to mention wildly irresponsible—to attempt to produce a washed coffee, I’m a natural lover. So any process that’s attempting to push those kinds of profiles to their limit, whether the result is good or bad, I am in principle in favor of. That said, I understand and empathize with the criticisms. Also, there are some real negative consequences we’re seeing as many farmers rush to adopt some of these methods.
For most of specialty coffee’s history, washed coffees have been preferred, and for good reason. They’re clean, consistent, work well on their own or with milk, are disaster-proof (in terms of the potential for mold) and above all, they’re predictable. Pretty much every year if it’s the same farm and it’s a washed coffee, it’s going to taste the same. But at some point, I’m not sure when, naturals started to slowly insert themselves into the conversation.
Newer roasters began to develop a taste for coffees that were bold, fruity, and unique. Profiles that didn’t require a refined palate to appreciate the complexity of. They wanted something that would blow away their customers. Lots of natural process coffees began to crop up (pun intended) all over the place and there was significant critique/hesitation within the industry toward them. In competitions, sometimes without even tasting them, naturals would be automatically disqualified. Influential people in the industry began warning of the dangers of naturals and their potential negative economic impact on coffee farmers. Some of these were valid concerns, others I have my suspicions about.
The response from natural lovers during this time was simple; “if we like them, and our customers like them, why not?” Also, the critique regarding a theoretical future economic impact was a difficult one to make when the negative enviromental impact of washed coffees was/remains a present reality.
So, as naturals began to grow in popularity in North America, with some roasters seemingly offering them almost exclusively, another movement was percolating across the globe. In Asia and the Middle East, premium roasters began serving coffees with experimental processing techniques (anaerobic and carbonic maceration primarily) and these coffees were not only growing in popularity but breaking records in terms of what people were willing to pay for them. These processing methods eventually made their way into North American cafes which brings us to the present paradigm.
Most specialty roasters in the US now will have at least one of these kinds of offerings. And they’re certainly not for everyone. But for people like myself and many of my friends, these are often our favorite coffees to drink. That’s not to say I don’t love a good clean washed AA Kenya, but I also love an anaerobic double fermentation Colombia. Both, to me, have their place.
One of the main criticisms I hear about these experimental process coffees is “all I can taste is the process”. This was the same critique I heard for years about naturals. And this criticism, without exception, always comes from roasters and I’m not sure how to feel about it. Couldn’t you also say “all I can taste is the roast” in reference to a washed coffee? Why is the roasting somehow seen as this sort of neutral hand of God that only ‘reveals’ the coffee’s nature, while processing is seen as a foreign entity uninvitedly inserting itself? I’m not sure the argument holds up. Maybe roasters are feeling a bit territorial and don’t want to share the spotlight with producers? Maybe they feel threatened by some other artist forming the flavor profile of their coffee other than them? I don’t know.
Regardless, whatever breaking bad brewing technique, flux capacitor grinder, or newfangled roasting software you develop—I’m sorry this is just the reality—is incremental in comparison to the ocean of possibilities in what we can do on the farm to impact flavor.
I would actually argue that producers, regardless of process, are owed the lion’s share of the credit in terms of forming flavor… but I guess I’m biased. That said, in the case of these new processes, it’s simply undeniable that the biggest formation of the profile is happening before roast, on the farm. And some people, for some reason, don’t like that.
Unforeseen Consequences
Keeping all of the above in mind, the negative consequences have also begun to rear their ugly heads. While these new methods have introduced exciting possibilities for farmers, especially economically, there is a significant gap in the scientific understanding compared to wine fermentation which much of this is attempting to replicate. This has led to inconsistent results. In fact, we found on our own farms that about 20% of our experimental batches failed and tasted way over the top. Our farms are structured in a way, and I did these experiments in a very small capacity, so as not to cause any serious negative impact, but, I’m sorry to say that I know of some farms that weren’t as fortunate and caused themselves serious and unnecessary financial strain. Also, some people have actually gotten sick from some of these fermentation experiments.
I'm 110% in favor of anything that will get farmers paid more. And these innovative processes can enhance all kinds of coffees, especially coffees grown at lower elevations, allowing them to achieve flavor profiles that command higher prices. That said, these definitely need to be approached with a degree of caution. If you're a farmer reading this and thinking about adopting some of these methods, please make sure you're in contact with farmers who have experience doing them and can guide you and plan for/around the mistakes which can happen, local universities can also be a great resource. I know stories of farmers who were pressured by roasters to jump on the fermentation bandwagon and when their coffees didn’t cup well, they were abandoned by those roasters and left to fend for themselves with an unsellable harvest. Point being, DO NOT, under any circumstance, make any sweeping changes that could mean disaster should something go wrong.
The Future
I think, at the very least, anaerobic and carbonic maceration coffees are here to stay. There are way too many people that like them, love them, seek them out. For the first time in the history of coffee, we are seeing people seek out producers rather than roasters. People will hunt, regardless of roastery, for a Mauricio Shattah, a Finca El Paraiso, or an Elida coffee. The farmer has the ability now to be center stage and this shifts the paradigm in a massive and I think very positive way. The over the top coffees we’re seeing a lot of now I’m not sure are probably also here to stay, I’ve personally started to grow away from those and I think many will have a similar experience.
I know several prominent coffee professionals who have never visited a coffee farm, it’s unbelievable. What we’re seeing now, and what I’m hoping will be a growing trend, is roasters really spending time on farms. Because of these movements in processing, a lot of roasters now feel incredibly motivated to get involved on the farm and that’s something to celebrate. We’ve spent too long in this industry ordering giant faceless sixty-kilo sacks of green beans from massive warehouses stacked to the ceiling.
Colombia, Finca Amora, 1900 masl, Pink Bourbon, Lot 20; okay great, it’s traceable, I know where it’s from. It’s better than just a big bag labeled “Colombia”. But who picked it? Who manages the farm? What’s their favorite movie? What are their children's names, and who did they name them after? Let's start putting faces to the names, and people to the origins. Let’s all work together throughout our value chain to take coffee to the next level, and the level after that… and the level after that.
Comments