Keeping an infected batch for mixing.

I have what I think to be an lacto infected batch. I am keeping it around in a keg thinking I might have a use for it. For example, Guiness uses about 3% sour beer in their stout. This is what I read in charlie p's book anyway.

Anyone ever do some mixing or find a good use for a soured batch? It's a pale ale that I have soured. the DFH 60 clone.

oh and BTW. FIRST TO POST IN THIS FORUM!!!!!

I like the idea but wont you have to pasteurize it in someway to keep the lactobacillus from refermenting in the other beer?
You could maybe use it to add bitterness and adjust mash Ph (sour mashing)? but you would lose all the alcohol and a lot of other flavors during boil.

hadn't thought of that but, yes you would have to kill the lacto in some way.

I have a carboy of lacto'd pilsner that I've been needing to do something with. I'm thinking of mixing my infected ruby clone into it to make some kind of weird ass muta-lambic.

How about campden guys?

That's my plan with my infected dry stout. I'll probably use more than 3% in a blend because it is not that sour (you can drink it just fine on it's own).

https://www.homebrewtalk.com/f14/should-i-blend-new-stout-my-sour-stout-97477/

I dunno, sometimes the beer itself can be a pleasant surprise if you are into that kind of thing.

I'd be very careful with blending. realize that lacto can quickly take over an entire brewhouse, and doesn't always come clean with what you put it in. If you ever go from a keg with lacto in it to a normal beer, you have to replace all your seals and give it some extra care because the stuff is tough to kill.

Go ahead and see if you can find some way of blending it, but be careful.

Also, you'll want to make sure that if you're at a happy place with the sourness of that beer that no more oxygen gets to it. Lacto will turn into vinegar pretty quick if you let it.

carnevoodoo said:

I'd be very careful with blending. realize that lacto can quickly take over an entire brewhouse, and doesn't always come clean with what you put it in. If you ever go from a keg with lacto in it to a normal beer, you have to replace all your seals and give it some extra care because the stuff is tough to kill.

Click to expand...

hmmm...I'm starting to regret kegging my string of infected brews!

carnevoodoo said:

I'd be very careful with blending. realize that lacto can quickly take over an entire brewhouse, and doesn't always come clean with what you put it in. If you ever go from a keg with lacto in it to a normal beer, you have to replace all your seals and give it some extra care because the stuff is tough to kill.

Go ahead and see if you can find some way of blending it, but be careful.

Click to expand...

So how do people make lambics and things purposely? Do you have to bomb out the fermentor and bottles after you get done making and drinking the beer?

adamjab19 said:

So how do people make lambics and things purposely? Do you have to bomb out the fermentor and bottles after you get done making and drinking the beer?

Click to expand...

Look at breweries like Deschutes who made Dissident. They used a different bottling line and housed the infected barrels in an entirely different warehouse. Locally, Ballast Point has a gueuze they make, and the barrel for that is in the owner's backyard.

I have a separate carboy (soon to be two) for bacteria infected beer, and all my racking equipment will be different as well. It isn't worth the cross contamination risk.

Cross contamination is a more difficult problem in a production brewery. No so much in a careful homebrewer situation.

olllllo said:

Cross contamination is a more difficult problem in a production brewery. No so much in a careful homebrewer situation.

Click to expand...

I would have to agree. I have used carboys, better bottles even after the infected batch was fermented in there.

Nothing an oxyclean soak and sanitize couldn't completely destroy.

It didn't seem like lacto was hard to get rid of at all. This is the same cleaning process I use on a normal basis. Didn't have to do anything special.

It's because home breweries don't have the hard piping and CIP equipment like the commercials do.

Yeah you essentially have to dedicate a fermenter and some equipment. That's really the easiest way. I will debunk the idea that infections are easily spread via air. I have one part of my basement where stuff goes to secondary. It is old, 1873 old. Stone. Cobwebs. I have made Sauerkraut in there. I have vinegar being made in there. I have put countless batches of beer in there to secondary or primary lager. I have had black mold grow on airlocks. I have had fruit flies die in airlocks. You know what? Never had an 'infected' batch I didn't intend. Contamination comes most of the time from direct contact. And most of the time you need to want it. It usually happens when people get sloppy on their sanitization.

So long and short. Don't mix known infected equipment with beer you want to keep uninfected. Get a separate fermenter, etc.

olllllo said:

It's because home breweries don't have the hard piping and CIP equipment like the commercials do.

Click to expand...

+1 to this. Not too many nooks and crannies in homebrew equipment for bugs to hide; commercial equipment is another thing entirely.

zoebisch01 said:

Yeah you essentially have to dedicate a fermenter and some equipment. That's really the easiest way.

Click to expand...

I haven't had to.

Having made many batches of different styles of Belgians, I DO suggest a totally different setup for such brews. Those wilder organisms and yeasts can be a bugger to totally kill between brews...considering so many points of entry...not just the vessels and tubing, but everything used to stir, measure, take temps, etc.. Of course, if you LIKE all of your ales to have a touch of twang...no problem. My first lesson, it takes FAR less of the cardomom, coriander and orange peel than I would have thought...and I only used a touch.