• Welcome to the new forum! We upgraded our forum software with a host of new boards, capabilities and features. It is also more secure.
    Jump in and join the conversation! You can learn more about the upgrade and new features here.

What is bad about long wort cooling off period?

I see that CoolDood  has -1 karma. I disagree with his evaluation of the risk of using unsterilized water or ice, but to penalize him - even with something as trivial as karma points - for disagreeing with the majority opinion stifles the free exchange of ideas. We benefit from open discussion. We suffer when everyone is pressured to agree with the party line. Columbus had the stupid idea that he could reach the far East by sailing West.

Please, let's express our opinions and suggest ways to confirm or refute those opinions. Then lets relax and have a homebrew while we let the discussion continue.

Dan
 
I will make you a deal use the ice method and if you get a bad batch I will pay for it  and buy you a beer.

Cooldood, I tried your method on an Eisbock.  It didnt work.  You owe me 50 bucks.  And when I do drink beer I prefer Dos Equis. 

Not really, make it a Pilsner Urquell.
 
Stop on over I have a wicked good stout that is about 4 months in the bottle right now. 

I was trying to be respectful when I proposed the question, and did not want to come across as bullheaded but I obviously I failed.
Now I have to go  sacrifice a keg to the beer gods to get my Karma back.  :(

I do a lot of process engineering in my job and you would be surprised how many times I hear " that's the way we have always done it"
they have no idea why and when tested sometimes you find out they are right but sometimes you also find out what they are doing is not adding benefit and only cost money.

It is easy to quote data but quoting REAL WORLD data from actual REAL WORLD experience is not so easy.  I am not going to get rich or gain fame by being the guy that got rid of wort chillers. I am just asking the question

HB has changed  A LOT over the last 10 years and it has all come from real world experimentation.  Many myths such as using a secondary to clear beer, table sugar for priming tastes like cider, have been dispelled and we as a community are all better for it. 
John Palmer said in his last book that he has changed his opinion on such things so if you are still reading V1 you are still doing things the "old way". 

Maybe we we should start a thread on HB myths and get some volunteers to test them? 
Or we could do a poll asking how many people boil/not boil their make up water?  ( The same water they would make ice with)




 
I am with you on the myths...there are plenty.  I do some things in my process that I would probably get blasted for.  If you listen to Gordon Strongs recent podcasts and read his work he seems to be challenging some of them.  He has a pretty good track record. 
 
The very first two batches of beer I ever made (12 years ago) used the ice method. Both were so badly infected they were undrinkable.  I almost gave up brewing.  I read how to brew (v1), and decided to try again, but without ice, doing a full boil instead.  The batch came out great.

Since you are a process Engineer you should know the difference between scientific data and anecdotal information (I refuse to call it data).  Your so called "real world data"  is nothing more than anecdotal.  Very few Homebrewers know how to do a properly designed controlled experiment. 

There is a method for letting the wort chill naturally.  It's called "no chill".  This method transfers the boiling wort to a heat proof container, and seals it while still near boiling temperature.  The wort is sterile, it's hot enough to sanitize the container, so infection risk is low. It's not low enough for me, unless you use a sterile air filter to allow the container to breath as it cools. Otherwise, it draws in unsanitary air and those yeasts and bacteria get lots of time to multiply once the wort drops below 150 or so.... Many, many hours before it reaches pitching temp.


 
Hit, submit too soon. The "myths"  you refer to aren't really myths, but are outdated information that came from a time when ingredients were different.  As ingredients have improved, they have made the process steps that were in place to compensate unnecessary. 

Besides, chilling rapidly has benefits for the beer, regardless of sanitation concerns.  Halting Hops isomerization being a big one. Halting volatilization of hop oils, as well. 
 
cooldood said:
I guess we can agree to disagree because all of this is anecdotal You are probably right about your driving data but that only supports my position. If 65 % will get in a car wreck and we average 50,000 trips in our lives that means on average 1 out of every 77,0000 trips I will get in an accident. 

Your math is wrong, you know.  It assumes that everyone only gets in one accident.  In order to do the math you just did you need average number of accidents per person that gets in an accident in their lifetime. 

In addition, it assumes that accidents are a purely random phenomenon.  But, we all know the area not. The driver has substantial control over their specific probability.  We don't have total control, though.

It is much the same in brewing.  I can't sterilize everything, and I can't ensure a 100 pct sterile process. So, I use every practical process steps that I can to minimize my risks. 

Yeast do NOT sterilize beer. They decrease the ph down to about 4.1. That is low enough to be inhospitable to most life threatening organisms, but not to many off flavor producers. Lactobacillus, pediococcus, acetobacter, and all manner of wild yeasts are quite happy in beer, as are many others whose flavors aren't so popular.  Even still, I don't want Brett flavors in my stout.

So, if you are going to present yourself as a process Engineer with a "deep" knowledge of microbiology, you owe it to the reading population to ensure your facts are correct.  If you just want to be one of the masses spouting an opinion, then keep you credentials to yourself. 


 
durrettd said:
I see that CoolDood  has -1 karma. I disagree with his evaluation of the risk of using unsterilized water or ice, but to penalize him - even with something as trivial as karma points - for disagreeing with the majority opinion stifles the free exchange of ideas. We benefit from open discussion. We suffer when everyone is pressured to agree with the party line. Columbus had the stupid idea that he could reach the far East by sailing West.

Please, let's express our opinions and suggest ways to confirm or refute those opinions. Then lets relax and have a homebrew while we let the discussion continue.

Dan

True. But, he never succeeded in making it to Asia either.  In fact, he was eventually arrested and spent a large part of the remainder of his life in litigation.  :p

All in all, the karma smite seems more in line.  :-D

 
I work in a food processing plant and yes I deal with micro everyday.  I did not mean for this to become a technical paper. And quite frankly I am not going to put that kind of effort into it.  My math is obviously flawed I was just trying to make a general point about risk.  There is no real sterile food nor perfectly sterile environment.  I am a clean freak and I am sure I go over board.  I am sure people here run the gammet of trying to create a hospital operating room to working in the shed.  I am sure somewhere inbetween is the right answer. 

I find it amusing watching YouTube of HB and pros both "sanitizing" the heck out of things for fear of infection yet I have never seen
a hair net, beard net, color coded utensils,proper garb (not the same clothes they mowed the lawn in), hand washing, gloves (seldom).  I have seen many many times people taste the wort from the stirring spoon.  Take gravity samples and dump them back in. 
I personally would correct most if not all of those before I would worry about ice.  (The same ice I eat without fear of food poisoning).

I am not telling anyone how to run their brew that is their choice.  Bust since I can see this is not the place to have an open exchange of ideas I will not be back.
 
Cooldood=

There is a difference between "open exchange" and agreement.  Several of your basic facts and claims are wrong.  "open exchange"  doesn't mean the prohibition from point pointing out inaccuracies. 

Having had two batches,in a row, go bad due to using infected ice, I would put ice on par with other basic sanitation practices.  Perhaps your local ice supply IS bacteria and wild yeast free. But without plating it out, I wouldn't bet on it and risk a batch of beer to it.


 
cooldood said:
I have seen many many times people taste the wort from the stirring spoon.  Take gravity samples and dump them back in. 

Guilty and guilty (back into boiling wort that is).  But I am not worried about mouth bacteria (See Mythbusters on Double Dipping).  I prefer to mitigate risks of spoilage.  I have tasted hundreds of homebrew working in competitions and being in clubs.  If you question infections, you should participate in both.  Did they come from slowly cooled wort?  Dunno.  Can I mitigate risk?  Yes. Rapidly cooling wort is one.  I am happy to take this one on faith.  I encourage you to take your own path and do your own experiments. 

Occasionally someone posts an intriguing question like this.    So, I often start investigating academic and industry research.  I am interested to see if there is really anything out there.  This subject is pretty well covered though I lost interest before digging up specifics about experiments.  The biology was convincing enough.

Thanks for the interesting subject to investigate.
 
Although new to all of this, the cost of a wort cooler ($50 on the lowish end) more than pays for itself if it even saves 2 batches over the course of a lifetime of brewing.
 
tom_hampton said:
Transferring to secondary will not improve clarity.

Clarity is improved by 3 things :

1. Time settle still without being disturbed. 
2. Fining agents
3. Filtering
We find this statement contrary to itself..."Clarity is improved by 1. Time settle still without being disturbed" Now I'm sorry but our process includes a Secondary for every beer we make, even the No-Boil Munton's MexiCAN Cerveza instructions say '1 week and bottle', We moved it off the yeast for a week of "Time settle still without being disturbed" and it is by far clearer than what was in the Primary. This works for light colored, darks, ALL BEER is clarified if moved to Secondary, Period. Even the process of 'racking' actually does #3 as well. We use a 'Whirlfloc' Tab to cover #2. The ONLY risk is that your sanitizing regimen will fall short and ruin your beer. As the thread has shown us it is an ever present threat, Infection, We have yet to have any issues in around 100 gallons brewed.

www.facebook.com/CandSBrewery
 
Shannon said:
tom_hampton said:
Transferring to secondary will not improve clarity.

Clarity is improved by 3 things :

1. Time settle still without being disturbed. 
2. Fining agents
3. Filtering
We find this statement contrary to itself..."Clarity is improved by 1. Time settle still without being disturbed" Now I'm sorry but our process includes a Secondary for every beer we make, even the No-Boil Munton's MexiCAN Cerveza instructions say '1 week and bottle', We moved it off the yeast for a week of "Time settle still without being disturbed" and it is by far clearer than what was in the Primary. This works for light colored, darks, ALL BEER is clarified if moved to Secondary, Period. Even the process of 'racking' actually does #3 as well. We use a 'Whirlfloc' Tab to cover #2. The ONLY risk is that your sanitizing regimen will fall short and ruin your beer. As the thread has shown us it is an ever present threat, Infection, We have yet to have any issues in around 100 gallons brewed.

www.facebook.com/CandSBrewery

Actually, it is not contradictory. 

Moving beer to secondary does NOT clarify anything.  All moving the beer does is stir it up again. 

Beer sitting in a container clarifies by the action of gravity pulling the suspended particles to the bottom of the container.  Gravity must overcome the forces of the currents within the beer.  These currents work to hold the particles in suspension.  The smaller the particles, the more influence these currents have on keeping them in suspension.  These currents are created by the fermentation action of the yeast.  Once the fermentation has completed, it takes a couple more days for the micro-currents to die down to a level sufficient for the yeast and other particles to be able to start settling. 

When you move a beer you stir it up, and you restart that clock for the currents to die down. 

Second, when you move a beer you introduce additional oxygen into the beer.  This is true no matter how careful you are.  New oxygen can restart some yeast metabolism, and can result in some additional fermentation.  any new action like this will again introduce micro-currents which will have to die down before the beer will begin to clarify. 

I'm sory, but racking is not filtering in any way.  Filtering is a process where particles IN SUSPENSION are removed from a fluid.  Racking removes the beer from on top of the trub, but doesn't remove ANYTHING that is suspended in the fluid.  Filtering works by forcing the fluid through a fine material of some kind with very small pores (measured in microns..genreally between 0.5 to 30 microns).  Some people use the canister style that you can get at box stores...others use the plate style that you can by from your LHBS.

Whirlfloc helps to coagulate some protiens during the boil...essentially increasing the amount of break material in the kettle.  I like to leave that behind in the kettle.  Yes, whirlfloc is kiind of a fining agent...but, its a kettle fining agent.  Its action is as a coagulant.  Finings like gelatin, bentonite, and isingglass work very differently.  They work by attracting particles of certain electric charges into larger clumps.  When these particles stick together into larger clumps they impove the ability of gravity to act on the larger clump (reducing the influence of micro-currents). 

When using finings like these, this is the only time that transferring to another vessel helps.  But, that is only because all finings must be stirred into the liquid to evenly distribute them throughout the fluid.  If I do that in the primary I've stirred up the trub---not helping.  However, I do not transfer to a secondary.  I transfer to my keg and add my finings directly to the keg.  Some homebrewers use a keg that has a shortened dip tube---called a bright tank.  After the bere has cleared they will move the beer to a standard keg for serving.  How useful that is...depends on your production volume, and how often you use finings.  If you use fine more often then every two weeks, a bright tank makes sense.  Also, because my keg has setiment on the bottom, I can't move my keg without stirring it up and makeing a few cloudy pints.

I want to pose an experiment for you to consider, but it can be a bit tricky to control the variables of influence.  Make a batch of beer that is large enough to fill two fermenters.  it could be two, 3 gallon carboys...or two 5 gallon carboys...doesn't matter.  The important point is that you make ONE batch of beer and split it into two vessels.  Pitch the same amount of the exact same yeast (one vial, one packet, one smack-pack...whatever).  Let them both ferment out, and then transfer ONE beer to a secondary as normal (1 week, two weeks whenever).  Leave the other in the primary.  use a wine thief to draw samples from each, once per week.  Compare in identical light, in identical glasses.  See which one becomes completely clear sooner. 

I bet you will find that the primary beer clarifies first, and the secondary will be several days (at least) behind. 

I've done this experiment.  I don't secondary, and I don't filter. I sometimes use gelatin for low floculant strains like Kolsch, and some belgians...if I want a brilliantly clear beer. 

I don't normally bother with putting my resume up for review.  The facts speak for themselves mostly.  I encourage people to do their own READING and controlled experiments, as above.  You can read all of this in most any brewing text (How to brew, etc).  But, you've only made 100 gallons.  That's great, but I made more than that just last year.  I've been making beer for 13 years now. I have a full fermentation room, where I can ferment up to 8 beers simultaneously.  I routinely have 4 going.  I currently have a belgian specialty, a Kolsch, an English Btter, and I just brewed an English Barleywine yesterday.  I also have a flanders red, a german apfelwein, Milk Stout, and a Belgian Blonde in kegs.  I think that's 40 gallons in various states of readiness...all that has been brewed since November. 

You may have one or two things left to learn about ways to make better beer.  I know I do, and I've lost count of how much beer I've made. 

 
MY PERSONAL OPEN ION INVEST in a Wort Chiller....and they are perfect....here in the Portland Area...they cost about 40 Bucks...for one that will do a 5 gal..batch in about 5 min....I live in The Dalles Area ...and i Brew 3 or 4 Batches a week and
never have had a problem....WHEN THE WORT CHILLER IS WORKING take your Sanitized spoon and stir the Wort ever Minute or so and READ THE TEMP ON YOUR THERMOMETER....and i bring mine down from 212 deg to about 100 or 90 deg depending on what Temp. i have to Pitch the Yeast at....and then i just put the Wort Chiller in my Utility Sink and Rinse and sanitize real quick....and then transfer the wort to the PLASTIC FERMENTER.....NOT GLASS CARBOY....i use the glass carboy for Secondary....i have 3 of them....
then i read the Temp on the Plastic Fermemter and add water to the 5 Gal.. mark and WALLLLLA YOU THERE...
i hope this helps....
Ron 
 
I also saw you Mention about Coopers  Kits......I HAVE 2 COOPERS FERMENTERS FOR SALE TO...CHEAP...
1 of them is Brand new in the box...with all the bottles...SO IF YOU ARE INTERESTED...let me know at ron22250@gmail.com
Ron
 
Back
Top