Mariah has been at the shop for 5 years, which is almost its entire life. Through those years she has quietly and graciously taken whatever task I gave and done it as perfectly as possible.  Wake up five mornings a week and pull shot after shot? Yes. Organize the backroom? Yes. Keep the shop clean? Yes. Most daunting of all, keep me organized and on track? Yes.

Many regulars have had a constant every morning, being able to wake up to a sassy joke and a delicious beverage. Judging by the gifts and cards, I know they realize this.

And this of course is the real meaning of a cup of coffee. Not the hints of lemon, or the perfect extraction, but the relationships we develop while sipping.

Mariah is moving on to other things, and of course we wish her luck (although she barely needs it) in all she accomplishes. Of course, a part of us wants one more morning, but what we really want is to say thank you for all the cups we’ve already had.

Thank you, Mariah.

First off, it’s important to remember that there are few things simpler that making coffee – “just add water”.  Basically, one adds hot water to extract a certain amount of of the soluble material; depending on how much you extract, you get a variety of flavors. Every machine, not matter how space-age looking, is simply accomplishing (to varying degrees) the same thing.

Starting from this basic understanding I decided I wanted a process that brewed coffee that met three requirements:

1.) Has the ability to extract a proper amount of soluble material, in a reasonable amount of time

2.) Simple to use to create the extraction one desires.

3.) Easy process to repeat.

Let’s take these one at a time:

The ability to extract the proper amount of soluble material, in a reasonable amount of time. There are three major factors when it comes to extraction in coffee: time, temperature, and grind size. Longer contact time, higher brew temperatures, and finer grinds increase extraction, which means the brew system needs to have the ability to hold the coffee in an insulated environment. Also, these variables play on each others, because it’s really difficult to hold the brew temp above 195º F (crucial for proper brewing) for much longer than 3:30 minutes, which means that the grind size needs to be fine enough to allow for a shorter time. If we allow all of these variables space to be what they are, we end of with a coffee brew that has a finer grind, shorter steep time, and insulated.

A simplicity of use in creating the extraction one desires. To make things simple is is often easier to break them into pieces.  In brewing coffee there are basically two major component: extraction and filtration. With the more common drip brew bar methods these components are combined, which has always made it difficult for me to find the extraction I’m looking for.  To me it became essential to have a steeping followed by a definite and speedy filtration.

Ease of repeatable results. Perhaps this is more important to me in a café setting, however, I think it’s important to have a process that can be repeated so that it doesn’t feel like you’re constantly reinventing the wheel. I appreciate that no two cups are exactly the same, but I also think if the same method produces wildly different results, you may want to check the method.

With these requirements as my starting point, we have come up with a method that works not only for the café, but can easily be done at home.  Using a double-wall glass tea infuser for our brewing vessel we accomplish the insulation factor. By grinding finer and steeping for shorter times, we achieve proper extraction within a minute. And lastly, we use a filter only for cleaning up the finer particles so the final brew is completely clean.

I’m really excited about this new brewing method and hope everyone will enjoy it on our new bar. For those interested in supporting us and learning more about brewing I suggest checking out our fundraiser.  There you can donate and receive a brew kit (infuser, filter pot, and grinder) with a lesson.

In Italy, the price of an espresso is most often – and I believe is actually fixed by the government – at under 1 Euro (approx $1.40). The conversation was about why the higher end shops around town are charging over $2.00 for espresso (we charge $2.50) and whether the higher price discouraged a café culture from forming here.

While no on knows for certain what causes things, my experience living in Oslo, Norway leads me to believe that café culture is created by much more than simply a lower price.  In Norway espresso is also at the higher price point (close to $3.00); however, the café scene thrives. Why? I think it’s good to step back and look at the two shots (one from Minnesota, the other from Europe) in their context; which means considering the societies at large.

Italian and Norwegian cultures revolve much more around small interactions outside the home. This means that the average European is going to the coffee shop 3-4 times a day.  This works because most European cities are not designed around the car but rather walking and public transit, so a café is always within walking distance.

Contrast this with the Twin Cities culture in which most people drive to get most places and our community is stretched geographically. This means the average person stops at a coffee shop once a day and consumes a larger beverage that they take to go in a paper cup.

The typical coffee shop interaction in the Twin Cites has a higher overhead cost, due to less frequency. The lower frequency also creates different expectations. Twin Cities consumers have much more invested in each cup because they are much more likely to have gone “out of their way” to get it. This means that doing the same thing over and over again becomes boring and the business feels the need to keep things changing and interesting, which would never occur to an Italian espresso bar.

Yes, the layout of our cities affects the way we consume, which affects the way businesses must charge to survive. This in turn affects the way in which we spend.  Changing culture is a much more difficult task than a simple pricing plan.  We need create a space to live in that reflects what we value.

Gretchen, Mike, Audrey (baby), and Fletcher (dog) were awesome hosts. We had such a great time walking amongst all varieties and trying different ones.  I was super suprised by the sweetness and complexity of Chestnut Crab (this week’s cider) and the subtle notes of Ginger Gold (in next week’s cider).

More than anything it reminded me of the how much more important it is to have relationships rather than just suppliers, because it’s the  connections that are ultimately what’s important.

It is through our connection to Ames Honey Farm that I learned this year has been a rough year on the local bee population and so we won’t be able to have Ames Honey this winter.  Rather than think of this as a simply supply issue and just buy another honey, we’re working with this reality and looking at a selection of small artisan maple syrups for our sweetened latte. We look forward to keeping a relationship with Ames through this rough time and look forward to buying honey again from them come Springtime hopefully.

This is all well and good, I suppose, but one quote from the article struck me.  The owner of Surly’s described the ventures as “something people are going to travel to… It’s not like it’s just a neighborhood tavern.” What is so disconcerting about this statement is the lack of interest in place, as if being part of a neighborhood somehow degrades a product. And seems to imply that location is just another asset to be assessed be the numbers people.

Kopplin’s itself is in the process of moving, however, I would like to think that we were careful to take place into consideration. We wanted to look not only for a space that was bigger (though that was a major consideration) but also took a hard look at who we were and looked for a neighborhood that in which we could reside and give something back to.

The new location at Cleveland and Marshall does a lot to this end. It strengthens relationships we already have by bringing us closer to both Izzy’s and Sweets Bakeshop as well as put us in proximity to other businesses with similar values like Trotters and Choo-Choo Bob’s.  Merriam Park has shown an embrace of using alternatives to cars through public transit and biking which is a value Kopplin’s shares.  Additionally, the being close to a library branch is something Kopplin’s is very excited about as this kind of public investment in community is very important to us.

All these things, make the move, while difficult, seem good.  It also explains why there wasn’t a consideration of having two shops.  Once you exist in two places, you in essence cease to exist in any place.  Kopplin’s is intent on being from somewhere and sharing that with others. While we acknowledge and appreciate that many people travel a great distance to be with us, we strive to create a distinct “place” (not a “brand”) for those people to enjoy.

All this to say that Kopplin’s moving is more about searching for a place to put down roots than a search for expansion and assets.

While I enjoyed the entire article, one phrase really stuck in my head.  He described a wine as “an easy-to-swallow lesson in how wine could be both pleasurable and thought-provoking, while performing its basic function of making food taste better.” (italics mine).

It became one of those “aha” moments. Of course wine was made to go with food.  This is in fact one of the major handicaps for New World wines as they strive for terroir.

We in the New World seem to think of terroir as a purely physical thing (the land produces differences in flavor, thus we have terroir); however, it’s much more than that, it’s about producing something – in this case a wine – that comes from a place, which has land, people, cuisine, traditions, etc. This is the context in which wine has terroir, somebody in a certain place, at a certain time, with a certain culture made it and thus is fits in their story… it comes from somewhere.

With this tangent in mind, I got thinking about the coffee I was sipping while reading the article, does it have terroir?  For what purpose was it made? From where did it come? Was it made to go with something (like food)? If so, what? It seems to me that various brewing processes (espresso and the Ethiopian coffee ceremony) could be said to have terroir, but could the same be said of various origins?

Specialty Coffee has really come of age in a global culture, where technology has meant less limitations and isolation, which were the driving forces behind local culture in past. In a time where distances are quickly shrinking, are we also losing the ability to create things with terroir?

More than simply globalization leading to homogenization can a product produced essentially by the Third World for the First World really be said to rise to the level of having a sense of place (unless that place is the market)?

Old World wines were originally made for the local populations and then shared with the wider world. But many coffee farmers have never even tasted their final product, let alone producing coffee for their local region with a local culture.

It seems to me terroir is a concept that asks much more from us than simply tasting coffee from various regions; it’s about going deeper not broader.

The History

I love the press pot for it’s simplicity. Water + Coffee, filter, drink. Yum.  However, there are some issues with press pot brewing method that can compromise the final brew: non-complete filtering and heat loss which affects extraction yield.

In order to address these negatives, I came up with the following process:

1.)Weigh out 28 grams of coffee and grind it a bit finer than you would for a paper drip filter; the finer grind will allow for a short steep time, and thus the brew temperature will stay within a proper range.

2.) Add 500 mL (or 500 grams) of water at 204ºF (just off the boil) and stir.

3.)Cover the press pot (in this case a tea cosy) to insulate and prevent heat loss, then steep the coffee for between 3-4 minutes depending on taste.

4.) Press

5.) Pour through pre-wetted paper filter.

6.) And serve!

7.) Enjoy!

All this got me thinking about the ways in which we both allow and deny people access to our space and lives.
As creatures that are both social and personal, this tug of war seems to be something with which we are always contending, and the coffee shop can seem like a laboratory of sorts where this plays out.

The reasons we go to public spots like cafés are many and varied, however, it stands to reason that one is to be around others. That said, many times we wish to sit by ourself once we’re there. The space can at once feel both like a community center and our own private oasis.

In a way this is much what I – as the owner – feel every day. I took many years of my life planning, drawing, and dreaming up the place now called “Kopplin’s”, and, now that it’s open, it has a life of it’s own and draws inspiration from others as well.

As with the shop, allowing others into our lives to leave their mark, is both difficult and ultimately rewarding. It requires us to let go of the results we had in mind and instead fully engage in the present process. Expectations need to be put aside so that they don’t interfere with the possibilities.

This is a lesson I continue to learn over the years. When we cede total control over the “spaces” in our lives and allow others to affect us, the result is magical. It’s the kind of feeling one gets when sipping on a wine or coffee that is drenched in terroir, or drinking milk that is so close to the land that you can the experience cow’s relationship with the weather and land, or of course walking into an art show in which the artist isn’t just lying there waiting to be noticed, but is actually trying to interact.

It’s a worthy challenge to seek out more experiences of connection and not just those of passivity that leave us comfortable but empty.

Today I started training for my latest employee to work the espresso bar, which is an awesome time to reflect on what I’ve learned about espresso and coffee thus far in my life.

I have realized over time that it is the first day of training that is so crucial to the whole endeavor. This is when we talk about the concepts and philosophy that will ultimately affect the rest of the process. I am self-admittedly not a very systematic person, and find articles like James Hoffman’s a great and challenging read; however, focusing too much on the skill and knowledge components leave something out of the process, something resembling the “soul” of what is happening.

The first thing a potential barista and I discuss is leaving the ego at home. Too often espresso is thought of in a Hemmingway-esque style of Man vs Nature, with the barista single-handedly creating the shot, but this is just not accurate. The relationship between barista and creation is much more nuance, because the espresso has a life of its own. As a barista we set the conditions for each shot to develop, and then we observe. This may seem like semantics, but it’s a crucial difference. Too often I’ve had espresso that is overpowered by a barista that is actively manipulating the shot to pull out some flavor. The result is interesting, but ultimately unbalanced and rarely delicious.

Espresso is at once simple and complex. I abide by three simple word: sweet, clean, balanced. It is within this framework that all the nuance and complexity emerge. But it only when the barista cedes control of the complexity (and focuses instead on the simple) that the espresso is allowed to truly express itself.

The approach of leaving the ego behind is important, because it means that the barista is truly capable of making the best out of whatever they are given, and open to possibilities that emerge. Only with this understanding does it make sense to move on to the more mundane aspect of skill building.

Within the sustainability movement, there is an excessive focus on method; it seems the main critique of business and society at large is not the things we do, but rather the way in which we do them. In this version, a sustainable business is one that adheres practices that have been deemed so. What this ignores is a more substantial criticism about the structure of production. If we allow ourselves to imagine a world in which things are produced in a fundamentally different way, then we have to ask whether or not the very concept of Starbucks – with over 16,000 stores worldwide, proposing beverages with as much as 20 oz of milk as a single serving, and purchasing coffee in such large quantities – is a sustainable model.

In nature, each organism has its own natural limits, and ecosystems work best when things exist within a certain balance. This is not something that could be said of our current systems of production and consumption. We tend to think in “economies of scale”, but what this really means is producing more and more for cheaper and cheaper (which thus entices us to consume more and more).

Enough theory. What am I really talking about? Let’s take my café as a for instance. While Starbucks is pushing for regulations that make it easier for a large multi-national company (such as itself) to act sustainably, we have chosen to purchase our milk from a small-scale farm that uses returnable glass bottles. What we do is a impossibility for a company the size of Starbucks. When we buy from a local farmer we’re not only buying milk that tastes better (it does), but we’re making a statement about being from somewhere. Starbucks competitive advantage is exactly that it doesn’t come from anywhere; a Starbucks in Omaha is just like one in San Fransisco.  To accomplish this they need products that are part of the same system; they need milk that comes from anywhere, USA and is produced on such a scale.

I have no qualms about the way Starbucks does business (for a large corporation it does an impressive job), however, is supporting businesses of this size sustainable? Is our economic ecosystem truly balanced when we consider businesses like Starbucks “natural”?

Every business, like every individual consumer, its definition of happiness. Too often – without this question answered – business grows for the sake of growth and we consume because it exists; this is hardly a recipe for balance, as our world tells reflects back to us on a constant basis.

Starbucks is truly an admirable business for the way in which it conducts itself, but are we as consumers willing to be challenged on our habits? Instead of asking for compost-able paper cups, will we slow down and enjoy things in ceramic? Instead of demanding 20 oz or more, will we ask for better quality at 8 oz? And instead of accepting the distribution of goods through large corporate chains, will we ask for a relationship with those who provide it?