Adding honey

Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum

Help Support Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
L

lwald

Active Member
Joined
Apr 4, 2012
Messages
44
Reaction score
0
Is it dumb to put honey in the secondary fermentor . And how much.
 
The answer to your question is no and it depends. I am going to make the following assumptions 1) your OG was ~1.050 or higher 2) your FG (predicted) = ~1.012-1.015 3) this is a 5 gal batch. I would add no more than 1# or wild flower or orange blossom depending on your taste. There shouldn’t be any problems with adding the honey to the secondary. Some people warn of infection from bacteria in the honey, others say not to worry. Your OG will go up by (~0.007 pts) and your FG will go down (~0.004). If you have the space in your carboy I would add 1# of honey (36 gravity points) to 0.75 gal water to give you a final concentration of 48 GP. Boil for 10 min, cool and add the solution to your secondary. This way your OG won’t change all that much and your FG should finish around 1.008-1.011. What I have done is split my wort in two and add two different types of honey. It really does change the flavor of the beer tremendously.
 
skydvr74 said:
Some people warn of infection from bacteria in the honey, others say not to worry
Click to expand...

Honey is incredibly antibacterial, I wouldn't worry about infection. However, it may be a good idea to dissolve it in some warm (boiled, then cooled down some) water before adding to secondary, so it doesn't just sink to the bottom. Don't boil the honey in the water, it will drive off the natural aromatics/flavors of the honey.

Like skydvr said, it will definitely affect the taste of your beer, especially because it will dry it out. If your recipe doesn't hold up well to drying out, it could come out more thin/watery than you'd like but that of course depends on your recipe.
 
ChessRockwell said:
Honey is incredibly antibacterial, I wouldn't worry about infection. However, it may be a good idea to dissolve it in some warm (boiled, then cooled down some) water before adding to secondary, so it doesn't just sink to the bottom. Don't boil the honey in the water, it will drive off the natural aromatics/flavors of the honey.
Click to expand...

It is incredibly antibacterial because very little can thrive in that concentration of sugars. But spores can and do survive in it, particularly botulinum.

I can't say for sure that botulism would survive in beer, but i still feel safer bringing my honey solution to a boil before adding it.
 
TimpanogosSlim said:
It is incredibly antibacterial because very little can thrive in that concentration of sugars. But spores can and do survive in it, particularly botulinum.

I can't say for sure that botulism would survive in beer, but i still feel safer bringing my honey solution to a boil before adding it.
Click to expand...

People make beer and even mead all the time without boiling it. I agree with the above poster, it's better not to, as it DOES destroy most of the aroma and subtleties of flavor. If you're going to boil your honey, you might as well just use sugar, IMO. This shìt's expensive! Don't encourage people to ruin it.

And being concerned about botulinum in honey is beyond absurd. Do you always cook honey before you eat it? Botulinum spores can survive in/on just about anything you eat or drink, but it requires a particular environment to thrive. Which does NOT apply to beer made and handled in a normal manner. If you're concerned about its presence in honey, you should be concerned about its presence in nearly everything. Oh, and regular boiling is actually not very effective against the spores; pressure cooking is necessary. So even if botulism was somehow a valid concern, you'd just end up with a subpar beer or mead before you die... I'd at least want my last beverage to a damn good one!

But seriously, this might be the most ridiculous case of alarmism I've ever seen on HBT - and as any long-time poster here knows, that's a hell of an accomplishment! You're free to boil honey for whatever the hell reason you want, but please don't be giving others the idea that the tradeoff for preserving its delicate flavor and aroma is the possibility of death. Sheesh...
 
biochemedic said:
Repeat after me:

Nothing. Pathologic. Can. Grow. In. Beer.
Click to expand...

Despite my comment above, I don't think this is strictly true, and it kind of irks me when it's mindlessly repeated. But there's really such a slim chance when brewing in a home environment (as there is a similarly slim chance that a thousand different dangerous things could happen to you doing anything routine), so it's not rational to be concerned about it. At least, not concerned enough about it to affect your decision-making.
 
emjay - It is actually true, nothing pathogenic can grow in beer. The low pH helps, but it is the presence of alcohol that really seals the fate of most organisms. The bacteria that can infect humans cannot survive an alcoholic environment. If you really don't believe it, feel free to find some information that proves that beer can grow pathogens.

Regarding the concerns about honey, there seems to be some confusion. Honey can be a source of botulism poisoning, but only in infants under 2 years or so. Babies that have not developed an acidic gut can actually grow the botulism bacteria in their stomach. No worries for anyone else.
 
I have also heard nothing. pathologic. can. grow. in. beer. from a commercial brewer. "The only way you can get sick on beer is by enjoying too much of it"
 
emjay said:
Despite my comment above, I don't think this is strictly true, and it kind of irks me when it's mindlessly repeated. But there's really such a slim chance when brewing in a home environment (as there is a similarly slim chance that a thousand different dangerous things could happen to you doing anything routine), so it's not rational to be concerned about it. At least, not concerned enough about it to affect your decision-making.
Click to expand...

Don't make me sic Revvy on you...:p

Seriously, though, no disease causing bacteria can survive in the fermented environment. Spoilage organisms are one thing, but they just make your beer taste nasty (or good, if you're into sours, and you get the *right* extra bugs...) You can't get a disease or become ill from drinking it (unless it's to excess, as WreckinBrewCo said...)
 
I don't know how well you guys know emjay, but he is likely scouring the interwebz for beer pathogen info, and will soon be dropping a post that will rock your world. Prepare to be educated. :D
 
I'm gonna take this in a different direction. The biggest issue will be space for secondary if you get close to 5 gals after trub loss then you won't have much space to add it and it will most likely cause the fermentation from the added sugars to spill out through your air lock. Are you looking to add honey flavor to your beer or just add alcohol? In most cases honey does not impart much flavor to the beer but it will bump the ABV as another poster stated.

As for the botulism issue I think most rational folks realize that honey is not a significant source of it. No need to worry about creating a panic in the general beer brewing or drinking population. I don't like false info anymore than the next guy but I also take everything the comes from the interwebs with a huge grain of salt and I think we all would do well by doing that.
 
bottlebomber said:
I don't know how well you guys know emjay, but he is likely scouring the interwebz for beer pathogen info, and will soon be dropping a post that will rock your world. Prepare to be educated. :D
Click to expand...

Nope. I think an all-encompassing statement such as "NO pathogen can survive" bears the burden of proof.

I like Revvy, and admire his ability to constantly put up with noobs, but "siccing" him on me wouldn't accomplish anything... I know how he feels and I've seen his thought process on the matter. Revvy is an experienced brewer, but it's a bit tiring how people parrot him and refer to him as an authority, as much as I respect him.
 
emjay said:
Revvy is an experienced brewer, but it's a bit tiring how people parrot him and refer to him as an authority, as much as I respect him.
Click to expand...

Agreed. I, for example, don't feel that beer is adequately mixed with the much denser priming solution just by racking 5 gallons of beer on top. But that's just MHO.
 
I add honey to my primary about a week to 10 days after initial fermentation. I use a secondary as well but only for dry hopping
 
biochemedic said:
Don't make me sic Revvy on you...:p

Seriously, though, no disease causing bacteria can survive in the fermented environment. Spoilage organisms are one thing, but they just make your beer taste nasty (or good, if you're into sours, and you get the *right* extra bugs...) You can't get a disease or become ill from drinking it (unless it's to excess, as WreckinBrewCo said...)
Click to expand...

seriously tho, while clostridium botulinum's growth is inhibited in acidic environments (pH < mid 4's), it certainly isn't killed by it. It's been found to thrive in/on tomatoes, and they are plenty acidic. Boiling certainly does kill it, but in this case he's adding things post fermentation.

so, to recap, disease-causing bacteria can certainly survive in a "fermented environment", whatever that means.

Personally, I wouldn't worry about it for a second. But there is a reason everyone and your mother says "don't feed infants honey!" and that reason is c. botulinum.
 
motobrewer said:
Boiling certainly does kill it
Click to expand...

That's actually untrue. The spores have no problem surviving boiling. Which means that unless you're going to pressure-cook your honey, boiling it to deal with botulinum is an exercise in futility.
 
Well as interesting as this archaic and nearly-non-existant subject is (reportedly there are 100 cases in the US per year, and 75% are infant botulism), lets get back to the OP. It is not dumb to add honey to the secondary. It will be fermented and add alcohol, and reduce FG thus drying out the beer a bit more. Also, from what I have read, there are plusses to added post fermentation. 1) the yeast doesnt get lazy from chewing on the easier to digest simple sugars as opposed to straight maltose (Usually honey isnt added in huge amounts compared to the available maltose, however it is a valid point). 2) The flavor/aroma aspect of honey seems to be driven off the longer it is boiled/heated, so adding it without any heat will certainly (theoretically) aid in retaining those desireable aspects of honey.
 
Calichusetts said:
I add honey to my primary about a week to 10 days after initial fermentation. I use a secondary as well but only for dry hopping
Click to expand...

Yes but how do you add it to primary? Poor it right in? Dilute with some water? Dilute with some fermenting beer?
 
atsorrento said:
Yes but how do you add it to primary? Poor it right in? Dilute with some water? Dilute with some fermenting beer?
Click to expand...

Depends on the state of the honey you're going to add/use. IME, simply warming it up with a warmer water bath does the trick. Get it above 90F, but under 110F and it will flow easily. No dilution needed, or wanted.

I prefer to add my honey to primary when I'm using it in a beer. Same as when I'm making a mead (when adding more honey). I also do NOT heat/cook/boil my honey solution/must EVER. You have zero need to heat the honey above 110F and you'll actually lose elements you probably want if you do heat it. It's going to be hard enough to get the honey to come through in a beer, WHY further hamstring it by heating it up and blowing away the flavors and aromas you want??

I have noticed more honey-like flavors from using honey malt in my beers. IME, honey simply cannot easily compete with the flavors present from malts, in a beer. Completely different when you're talking about mead though... Mmmmmmm mead...
 
Honey-user AND No-Chill advocate here, so I know enough about the 2 subjects to chime in.

Regarding the botulism, there is a mild concern among some in the No Chill community that botulism could grow inside a sealed No Chill tank pre-fermentation (so no alcohol and a higher pH than beer). However, there has never been a reported case of botulism from homebrew in America, Europe or Australia, so we are fairly sure that the fear is quite overblown. I personally had a tank go 'bad' and swell for 2 batches (so I chucked it). In that case, thereoretically botulism COULD have been growing inside. As I tasted a sample from the first swell and lived, I can verify that it wasn't in that one. Wasn't brave enough to taste the second one, it swoll the tank like a tick and smelled of Mild Ale and serious B.O. when I opened it up :(, so it got dumped immediately.

REGARDLESS, I wouldn't worry about botulism in honey beer at ALL since there are no reported cases that I'm aware of of the disease coming through mead. Its virtually always (1) infants eating honey, or (2) people eating swollen cans of low-acid food (green beans, peas, etc).

NOW FOR THE HONEY-BEER PART. I'm a fan of honey beers (got a decent one in the bottle at the moment) but the best one I made was a 1.040 Pale Ale (no crystal malt) that got dosed with 3lbs of pure Florida Orange Blossom honey after primary had died down. I just opened the bucket, and poured in the 3lb jar, no mixing or (heaven forbid) boiling. Fermantion started up again within about 6 hours, and took just a day or so to complete. After kegging it, I stuck my head into that empty bucket to get a whiff and it was like sticking my head up a bee's ass. Fantastic! The beer was great. It was light bodied, with a great honey kick in the taste.
 
ghpeel said:
Honey-user AND No-Chill advocate here, so I know enough about the 2 subjects to chime in.

Regarding the botulism, there is a mild concern among some in the No Chill community that botulism could grow inside a sealed No Chill tank pre-fermentation (so no alcohol and a higher pH than beer). However, there has never been a reported case of botulism from homebrew in America, Europe or Australia, so we are fairly sure that the fear is quite overblown. I personally had a tank go 'bad' and swell for 2 batches (so I chucked it). In that case, thereoretically botulism COULD have been growing inside. As I tasted a sample from the first swell and lived, I can verify that it wasn't in that one. Wasn't brave enough to taste the second one, it swoll the tank like a tick and smelled of Mild Ale and serious B.O. when I opened it up :(, so it got dumped immediately.

REGARDLESS, I wouldn't worry about botulism in honey beer at ALL since there are no reported cases that I'm aware of of the disease coming through mead. Its virtually always (1) infants eating honey, or (2) people eating swollen cans of low-acid food (green beans, peas, etc).

NOW FOR THE HONEY-BEER PART. I'm a fan of honey beers (got a decent one in the bottle at the moment) but the best one I made was a 1.040 Pale Ale (no crystal malt) that got dosed with 3lbs of pure Florida Orange Blossom honey after primary had died down. I just opened the bucket, and poured in the 3lb jar, no mixing or (heaven forbid) boiling. Fermantion started up again within about 6 hours, and took just a day or so to complete. After kegging it, I stuck my head into that empty bucket to get a whiff and it was like sticking my head up a bee's ass. Fantastic! The beer was great. It was light bodied, with a great honey kick in the taste.
Click to expand...

Ok, do I want to know how you know how you got the control for the smell of "like sticking my head up a bee's ass"??? :eek:

Also, in a pale ale with no crystal malt (or other malts I'll assume) honey has at least a chance of coming through. Since you kegged it, you also didn't need to worry about creating bottle grenades later on.

I do have my honey ale recipe on my short list of brews coming up. I might have to use some of the wildflower honey I have on hand. IF I have any left by then. :eek: Or at least get another 5 gallon bucket and use some from that. I can only seem to buy honey 5 gallons at a time now. :mug:
 
Golddiggie said:
Also, in a pale ale with no crystal malt (or other malts I'll assume) honey has at least a chance of coming through. Since you kegged it, you also didn't need to worry about creating bottle grenades later on.
Click to expand...

Why would the honey be hindered in a beer with no other strong flavor components? The honey ale I have now has some crystal in it (Honey Malt no less!) and its a little less clear where the honey aroma ends and the crystal begins. Very plain beers with a single additive (honey, fruit etc) would be the BEST vehicle to taste that additive by itself. In my first one, you could tell that 100% of the flower/honey aroma was coming from the honey itself.

I have no fear of bottling either. The version I made most recently is in the bottles, and no gushers so far. The honey ferments out super quick, so even if there were bugs trapped dormant in its sticky, fructose embrace, the beer itself wold prob keep them at bay via alcohol and pH.
 
ghpeel said:
Why would the honey be hindered in a beer with no other strong flavor components? The honey ale I have now has some crystal in it (Honey Malt no less!) and its a little less clear where the honey aroma ends and the crystal begins. Very plain beers with a single additive (honey, fruit etc) would be the BEST vehicle to taste that additive by itself. In my first one, you could tell that 100% of the flower/honey aroma was coming from the honey itself.

I have no fear of bottling either. The version I made most recently is in the bottles, and no gushers so far. The honey ferments out super quick, so even if there were bugs trapped dormant in its sticky, fructose embrace, the beer itself wold prob keep them at bay via alcohol and pH.
Click to expand...

I think you two are agreeing...
 
NuclearRich said:
I think you two are agreeing...
Click to expand...

More than likely... IME, honey malt is a better source of 'honey flavor' for beers. Unless you can get your hands on a strong flavored honey, stabilize the beer (you'll have to keg to carbonate then since the yeast will be pushing up daisies) and add the honey to the batch, you won't get all that much flavor after even a short time.

I've used honey at various points in beers before, but the flavor never had any staying power (if you didn't drink it soon enough, it was gone). Honey malt is a much better option there.

I really do like my mead batches. The majority of those are just honey, water, yeast (and nutrient additions). I let them finish above 1.004 so that you get the honey flavor/aroma to come through.
 
Agreed, honey tends not to impart honey flavor. A lot of people dont realize that when they see a honey addition in a recipe. IME the importance of honey is to add a basic sugar to increase ABV and decreace FG. Depending on the total grist weight and honey %, this can be just as wide of a variable as a different base grain (i.e. pilsner malt and MO).
 
Yeah you were right, I just poured it right in there. No issues what so ever. Like others have said, do you really pasteurize honey you purchase from the store before consuming? Not so much.
 
If you want a bunch of honey flavor add to secondary. Just did this with an Irish red
 

Similar threads

leedspointbrew
Adding Mike's Hot Honey to Porter
Replies
1
Views
328
day_trippr
day_trippr
mjb2287
Fermented honey
Replies
5
Views
511
mjb2287
mjb2287
Beer Viking
How much honey will get be a certain ABV?
Replies
4
Views
259
CKuhns
CKuhns
MightyMosin
I might have received adulterated honey
Replies
10
Views
673
OleBrewing
OleBrewing
G
Fermentation continued after adding stabaliser to mead
Replies
10
Views
367
Raptor99
Raptor99
CornyKegs 300

Latest posts

Back
Top