place/local/ingredients/sensory

Dank. Dankitydankdankdank

Sierra Nevada Dank Little Thing
The subject line on an email from Sierra Nevada Brewing about the newest edition to its hazy IPA series reads, “Say high to our new Dank IPA.” Not “hello,” not “hi.”

And the headline atop the message within reads, “Stop & smell the hops. Wait, is that . . .”

Here is the entire message, with a couple more winks and nods, “For the latest Limited Edition in our Hazy IPA Series, we rolled up a mix of sticky, floral, and tropical hops into a Dank Little Thing. Amarillo, Chinook, and CTZ varieties help pack that resinous flavor, while botanical terpenes spark an aroma that fills a room. Stash it while you can because Dank Little Thing is only here through February 2024.”

Oh, those terpenes. Consider what Kate Bernot wrote about Seventh Son Pineapple Express in Craft Beer and Brewing. “Once you get a whiff of this beer, you understand why the brewery has to say explicitly that it contains no THC. This pineapple sour is brewed with cannabis terpenes that are, yes, pungent, but they’re also thoughtfully integrated with the fruit and acidity. There’s a pineapple-core earthiness that passes the baton directly to the minty terpenes before the two elements dance back and forth across the tongue. I’ve never tasted a beer like it.”

Humulus lupulus (hops) and cannabis are part of the larger Cannabaceae family. Many of the same botanical terpenes are found in both, as well as many others plants (for instance, basil and lavender, a few of many profiled in “Brewing Local”). That’s a topic for another Wednesday.

Right now, consider the name Sierra Nevada chose for this release. Not everybody agrees that “dank” is a proper hop aroma descriptor. But who doesn’t understand what it implies?

Dank has been part of the hop sensory lexicon at Yakima Chief Hops for years, explained YCH sensory and brewing research manager Tessa Schilaty.

“We define it as smelling like cannabis, which is on the ASBC lexicon under herbaceous. We wanted to avoid having the word cannabis appear on our product descriptions, as we do a lot of work internationally with countries where cannabis is both frowned upon and very illegal,” she wrote in an email.

“People use the word dank to describe a variety of aromas, but most of them appear elsewhere on our ballot, for example musty (which we have under earthy) or onion/garlic (which is its own category). It therefor made sense for us to use the word dank to define something which was not elsewhere represented on our ballot, and which is one of the common uses of the term by brewers.”

In contrast, there is the American Society of Brewing Chemistry list of terms to describe the aroma of hops. Included are 107 words. As Schilaty points out, cannabis is filed under herbaceous. Dank is not to be found.

That did not limit the team at Sierra Nevada in charge of new beer names.

A Better Burden: Forest & Farm, indeed

Narrow Path Brewing beer menu

The description of A Better Burden on the menu at Narrow Path Brewing outside of Cincinnati lists the ingredients, then two words: Forest & Farm.

“Those words are my attempt to help the ones tasting the beer to envision and place themselves within a setting,” Narrow Path owner/brewer Chad Powers explained. “That description is a hopeful reminder to folks that this beer has true origins in our natural world and that the resulting liquid is as much an offering from the land as it is from the brewer.”

A Better Burden is on my “Best in 2023” list in the current issue of Craft Beer & Brewing magazine. I expect you understand that means it was one of the beers I enjoyed most from a universe of choices I had not tasted previously. Otherwise, the “best” list would be scattered with well known, and deserving, beers such at Rochefort 8. Nine of the 10 beers described were new to me; the exception being Urban Chestnut Stammtisch. (The collection of contributors’ lists is also available in podcast form.)

I’m writing about A Better Burden because 70 words in the magazine did not seem like enough about this combination of smoke and cedar that I find sublime, and many other people may not. A Better Burden is a collaboration between Narrow Path and Nine Giant Brewing, and Powers and Mike Albarella have brewed it together at Narrow Path the past three years.

They had both read ”Historical Brewing Techniques” by Lars Marius Garshol right when the book became available. They wrote the initial recipe together and have subtly changed it each year. The base malt and the alder wood smoked malt come from Sugar Creek Malt Co. in Indiana. “We knew that Caleb (Michalke) had built a Såinnhus, and we wanted to use ingredients that were as local as possible and that were produced as traditionally as possible,” Powers said.

They chose his Stjørdal malt knowing it would be the most polarizing ingredient in the grain bill. Smoke is particularly assertive in this batch.

Finding cedar for Narrow Path Brewing A Better Burden

Powers harvests the cedar every year from the same hillside across the river in Kentucky. “A good friend of mine is an ecologist at Eastern Kentucky University, and he oversees several conservancies across the state,” Powers said. The friend plants seeds while Powers cuts off the ends of branches. “I like to do it when the weather is cool and brisk but also when there’s enough sun to feel some warmth on my face.”

The first year they fermented the beer with a commercially available Voss kveik strain. The last two years we’ve used strains that were not, until recently, commercially available. Caleb Ochs-Naderer, now the program chair of the brewing science program at Cincinnati State, was brewing at Nine Giant when they brewed the beer the second and third time.

He has been a long-time kveik fan/evangelist, and traveled to a homebrew gathering in Norway several years ago. He brought back a catalog of dried kveik that he stored in his freezer. “We selected a strain called Stalljen because it was described as saison-like without any phenolic notes. We rehydrated the yeast from their dried flaked state and fermented in the upper 80s to low 90s,” Powers said.

Cedar for A Better Burden arriving at Narrow Path Brewing“I think the thing I love most about the beer is that it certainly makes me feel something, often several things. The time and effort spent harvesting the cedar with my friend realigns my heart to a deeper connection and purpose in brewing.

“I can feel the sun on my face as I’m reaching to trim a branch in the cool autumn air. I can feel the wind on my face as I give thanks to the grove of trees that play such an important part in the entire experience. Something in me awakens each time I sip.”

(Nine Giant often takes names of beers from song lyrics. Powers was looking through Nordic and Viking poems/chants and found a translation of Hávamál that had the phrase “a better burden” in it. “That idea and the specific turn of phrase resonated with me.”)

Why wouldn’t you drink a genetically modified beer?

Albert Einstein as a brewer

Earlier this week, the BBC posted a story asking a provocative question, “Would you drink genetically modified beer?” That set a different tone for the story than would a headline that reads, “Why wouldn’t you drink a genetically modified beer?” That’s because GMO (genetically modified organism) is a topic perfectly suited for not so well thought out, screaming at the top of our voices, exchanges on X.

And it introduces a question about why more attention has not been paid to the use “thiolized” (a term that Chicago-based Omega Yeast has trademarked) yeast strains play in creating tropical flavors such as guava and passion fruit that have played such an important role in the popularity of IPAs.

~~~~~

Backing up for a moment, it was only two decades ago that a scientist in Japan established that sulfur compounds in hops, known as thiols, contribute to unique aromas found in then new cultivars such as Simcoe and Citra. The race was on to find more varieties that would do the same and to understand what was happening.

And it was less than a decade ago that scientists in France and Belgium published research showing barley malt also contains thiols precursors. Unlike some of the thiols in some hop varieties, those thiols are “bound.” In fact, many hop varieties also contain bound thiols.

Most yeast strains are not particularly good at freeing bound thiols—that is, making them flavor active—in grain or hops, if they do at all. Modified strains from Berkeley Yeast and Omega Yeast are.

It is not really that simple, but I don’t want to bury you in science or turn this into a long read. Thiols are complicated. Genetic modification is complicated. Some of your homework, in this case related to thiols, is behind a paywall at Brewing Industry Guide, but here is a free-to-read primer from 2018. Likewise, The New York Times reported on what Charles Denby was up to in 2018.

And both Omega and Berkeley provide excellent explanations on their website about how they engineer their strains. I recommend this page at Omega or this one.

~~~~~

Miskatonic Brewing in suburban Chicago first used Cosmic Punch before Omega gave it a name. Founder and brewer Josh Mowry had a pretty good idea of how CRISPR/Cas9 gene editing technology works. “We pretty quickly did some dives into what the concerns are. What are the known unknowns,” he said. He shared what he learned with customers. “We’ve only had a couple people raise (doubts), say that it feels unnatural.”

Nonetheless, it seems relevant to remember that not long ago breweries that would call their products craft hesitated to use enzymes. Jack McAuliffe took a stand early. When Frank Prial of the New York Times visited New Albion Brewing in 1979, he wrote, “McAuliffe boasts that his beer is a completely natural product. ‘We use malt, hops, water and yeast,’ he said. ‘There are no enzymes.’”

If high gravity beers didn’t establish that has changed, Brut IPAs certainly did.

Plenty of brewers embraced modified yeast strains just as quickly. Have they all gone out of their way to inform consumers that the strain in this beer may be different than the strain in that beer? Of course not.

Quite honestly, I’m not sure they think it is important. In a conversation with a brewer last Friday, after he mentioned the Berkeley strain in the beer I was drinking the discussion did not then turn to genetics. Instead, we talked about what portion of the thiols might have come from barley malt and what portion from hops. (Yep, you did not want to be there for that.)

However, members of the brewing industry understand this is an important topic. Last year, four authors examined the terminology, science and regulation of genetically engineered yeast across seven pages in MBAA Technical Quarterly. Trust me, it was technical. The authors examine the topic from multiple views, acknowledging the “positives of genetic engineering are not without rigorous debate on innovation and safety concerns.”

However . . . “The world, and indeed the whole of the brewing industry, is now catching up to the environmental reality that agricultural producers have been facing for the past several decades. With the rapid increase in the global population and the rising challenges of climate change, biotechnology offers significant advantages that may be crucial to sustainability.”

The year before, in another TQ issue (Vol. 58, no. 2), White Labs founder Chris White wrote about both sides of the genetic engineering debate. He concluded by focusing on transparency:

“The rise of plant-based meat products is a good example of how truth in labeling operates for much of the food and beverage industry. There are currently lawsuits from manufacturers over what they have to put on the label. They are fighting over the use of the word “meat,” the font size, and more. The brewing industry is much more transparent with what they put on the label.

“If you use GMO yeast, should you tell the consumer on the label or description? I would say ‘yes,’ that we should stay on the side of transparency.

“It is not about whether it is right or wrong, or if it is good or bad for us. It is about communicating our passion and pride to the consumer—not what labeling laws say we have to do. That can be what the rest of the food and beverage industry focuses on.”

Oh, no, not another pumpkin beer (really, it is not)

Piney River BrewingPiney River Brewing in the early days (before expansion)

As I wrote Thursday, the recipes I’ve posted while thinking about Learn to Homebrew Day might look a little scary to a beginner. I would not call the recipe for Sweet Potato Ale that Piney River Brewing in Missouri contributed to “Brewing Local” easy, but it is so inviting it seduces you into think it might be.

Piney River Brewing first brewed Sweet Potato Ale in 2012. “We were looking for a fall seasonal beer to brew that was not another pumpkin beer. “People in the Ozarks are well known for taking something from the field or forest and transforming it into something more,” co-founder Brian Devine said. Garden plots are common in the Ozarks, and sweet potatoes often end up at the Thanksgiving table in the form of a casserole or a pie. “We used sweet potato pie as our inspiration for this beer because it is our preferred field pie in the fall,” he said.

The sweet potatoes are roasted with skin on, then peeled and mashed before they are added to the mash. Devine does not expect them to increase the gravity of the wort. “After the roasting process, we normally cool the potatoes overnight and allow the sugars and the juices to continue running out of the potatoes,” he said. “The sugars in the potatoes vary drastically every year, so I try to leave the juices out as much as possible to maintain consistency. This process leaves me with roasted sweet potato flavor and color the sweet potatoes add to the beer.”

Original Gravity: 1.056 (13.5°P)
Final Gravity: 1.010 (2.5°P)
IBU: 20-22
ABV: 6%

Into the mash:
95% Domestic 2-row pale ale malt
5% Caramunich 1
10 pounds of Roasted Sweet Potato per barrel

Mash at 152°F (67°C).

Hops: Bravo, 15% AA, 60 minutes (20-22 IBU)
Other additions: Add nutmeg, cinnamon and vanilla at flameout at a 2:1:1 ratio.
Yeast: Fermentis SO4.
Fermentation: Ferment at 66-68°F (19-20°C)

Not all hoppy beers need be IPAs

Open fermentation at G. Schneider & Sohn in Kelheim, Germany.

Today’s recipe for Learn to Homebrew Day comes from “For the Love of Hops.” I picked it to remind readers that IPAs are not the only beers that may showcase hops. An added bonus is that I get to include a photo of open fermentation at G. Schneider & Sohn in Kelheim, Germany.

When Schneider released Mein Nelson Sauvin in 2011, brewmaster Hans-Peter Drexel called it the culmination of more than 10 years of brewing experiences.

“I had a crucial experience in the year 2000 when I visited the U.S. for the first time. I found pale ales and IPAs with funky and refreshing notes of citrus and grapefruit,” he said. American brewers explained Cascade hops contributed those aroma and flavors, and shortly thereafter Drexler began experiments using imported Cascade hops and Schneider’s yeast.

He remembered a story brewery owner Georg Schneider VI (who, like his ancestors, is a diploma brewer) told about a special Oktoberfest wheat beer style brewed with a large amount of hops at the Schneider Weisse brewery between 1920 and 1930. The story was, they brewed it at the end of the wheat beer brewing season in April or May. To keep the beer in good condition and safe from infection they used all the hops that remained in their cellars. That beer was called Wiesen Edel Weisse.

Drexler’s experiments with Cascade culminated in Georg Schneider’s Wiesen Edel Weisse, a new version of the wheat beer of the 1920s, with 14 °P, 6.2% ABV, and between 25 and 30 IBU. He described it as “a small revolution on the wheat beer market,” because it had about twice as many bitterness units as any other wheat beer.

“The second step of inspiration happened few years later in 2007 … (when) Garrett Oliver from the Brooklyn Brewery and I launched Hopfenweisse,” he said. “I am sure it was definitely the first dry-hopped wheat beer in Germany, with 40 to 50 IBU.” They used Saphir, at the time quite new, for dry hopping.

Drexler next tweaked the recipes for two standards at Schneider. “The idea was to get more freshness and drinkability to these beers. They should taste funky and balanced. It is not only the hops which works in that way. The malty character and the spiciness or fruitiness show the direction to a balanced and funky taste.”

He replaced Hallertau Tradition and Magnum in Blonde Weisse with 100 percent Saphir and added a bit of Cascade (late hop addition) to Kristall. “The results were amazing,” he said.

That set the stage for Mein Nelson Sauvin. “The idea was to build a bridge from characteristic traditional wheat beer flavors to the wine aroma. (For that) I found Nelson Sauvin hops from New Zealand and yeast from Belgium combined with local wheat and barley malt,” he said. It was the first time Schneider used any yeast other than its own.

“In Germany we have a saying: Tradition does not mean keeping the ashes but carrying on the fire,” Drexler said. “In that sense hops could help to continue the Bavarian tradition of brewing wheat beer.”

Previously: A wit beer recipe ~ A Belgian-style dubbel recipe

Mein Nelson Sauvin

Original gravity: 1.069 (16.8 °P)
Final gravity: 1.013 (3.3 °P)
IBU: 29
ABV: 7.3%

Grain bill:
60% local variety Hermann (6 EBC) wheat malt
20% local variety Marthe (6 EBC) barley malt
20% Urmalz (Munich-style 25 EBC) barley malt

Mashing:
One decoction, targeting high attenuation

Hops:
Hallertau Tradition, 50 minutes (8 IBU)
Nelson Sauvin, 15 minutes (15 IBU)
Nelson Sauvin, 0 minutes (6 IBU)

Boiling: 60 minutes

Yeast: 3 L/hL Schneider yeast from propagation tank. 0.5 L/hL Belgian yeast

Fermentation: 7 days, beginning at 16°C (61°F), allow to rise to 22°C (72°F), reduce to 12°C (54° F)

Bottling: Refermentation in the bottle, using speise (unfermented wort). 3.3 volumes CO2 (6.5 g/L)