Water Report Questions

Hey guys! I was wondering if anyone would be willing to point out anything interesting about my local water! I don't plan on getting into modifying my water just yet, but I was just wondering if anything could be said for current water?

PH----------------------7.5
Na----------------------10
Ca----------------------19
Mg----------------------6
Cl-----------------------13
SO4---------------------24
CO3---------------------78
Alkalinity----------------64
Hardness----------------73
Fluoride------------------1.16
Fe------------------------~0
Nitrate ------------------.5
Total Dissolved Solids--149

That water is...really nice. Use a simple spreadsheet like Bru'N Water. I was resistant to it too, but it's very easy. You won't need to modify much.

I just took a look at the spread sheet that you recommended, it seems like a really great tool! I am curious though, what makes the water I described nice? Is it nice in that it can be easily modified, or does it have some stuff in it already that is beneficial?

jlangfo5 said:

I just took a look at the spread sheet that you recommended, it seems like a really great tool! I am curious though, what makes the water I described nice? Is it nice in that it can be easily modified, or does it have some stuff in it already that is beneficial?

Click to expand...

Really balanced, easily modified. For example, if you were going to make a pale ale, just a smidge of calcium chloride and you're good to go. Does your municipality use chlorine or chloramine?

I am not sure to be honest which they use actually. This is good news though it seems, I am not quite at the point yet where I am ready to start playing with my water chemistry, still need to nail down my mash efficiency issues, but i found this report today and wanted to know what I was already working with! Thanks for the information!

jlangfo5 said:

I am not sure to be honest which they use actually. This is good news though it seems, I am not quite at the point yet where I am ready to start playing with my water chemistry, still need to nail down my mash efficiency issues, but i found this report today and wanted to know what I was already working with! Thanks for the information!

Click to expand...

The chlorine/chloramine thing is important to know. Chlorine will just boil off during your brew day. However, chloramine is harder to get rid of. I just use Campden tablets and that's super easy. I know it's tempting to leave water for after mash efficiency is worked out, but I'd caution against that. I was having mash efficiency problems BECAUSE of my water. I had low calcium in my water and that is a necessary cofactor for the amylase enzymes. Yours is pretty low too (not as low as mine was) so it's something as simple as adding a teaspoon of Calcium chloride would go a long way. It would potentially help your efficiency and it will help your hops "pop" more.

I did some quick research and we actually use chlorine dioxide to treat our water here. In my last brew, I only had around 55% efficency from my single infusion mash using a batch sparge, so I might experiment with adding some CaCl to my water. Where do you get your food grade CaCl from?

pabloj13 said:

The chlorine/chloramine thing is important to know. Chlorine will just boil off during your brew day. However, chloramine is harder to get rid of. I just use Campden tablets and that's super easy. I know it's tempting to leave water for after mash efficiency is worked out, but I'd caution against that. I was having mash efficiency problems BECAUSE of my water. I had low calcium in my water and that is a necessary cofactor for the amylase enzymes. Yours is pretty low too (not as low as mine was) so it's something as simple as adding a teaspoon of Calcium chloride would go a long way. It would potentially help your efficiency and it will help your hops "pop" more.

Click to expand...

Chlorine should be treated before using too. Chlorine will boil off, but you're not boiling it before you're mashing with it (or at least I know most breweries don't boil their water before mashing..that I know of).

I do run my water through a Breta filter before it goes into the mash and it is advertised to remove 99% of chlorine, I do wonder what else it could be removing too...

Edit!

It appears that water filtration through activated carbon such as a Brita filter removes an average of 90% of the calcium in the water, that could be a problem!

jlangfo5 said:

I did some quick research and we actually use chlorine dioxide to treat our water here. In my last brew, I only had around 55% efficency from my single infusion mash using a batch sparge, so I might experiment with adding some CaCl to my water. Where do you get your food grade CaCl from?

Click to expand...

I just got mine from my LHBS. I think Whole Foods carries it too.

jlangfo5 said:

Edit!

It appears that water filtration through activated carbon such as a Brita filter removes an average of 90% of the calcium in the water, that could be a problem!

Click to expand...

I rather doubt that's true...otherwise, why would people bother getting water softeners (which remove calcium) instead of just large activated carbon filters?

afr0byte said:

I rather doubt that's true...otherwise, why would people bother getting water softeners (which remove calcium) instead of just large activated carbon filters?

Click to expand...

It is true but it isn't the GAC component of the Brita Pitcher which does it. It is an ion exchange resin which is also part of this product.

ajdelange said:

It is true but it isn't the GAC component of the Brita Pitcher which does it. It is an ion exchange resin which is also part of this product.

Click to expand...

Huh, I didn't know a Brita had exchange resins. That makes a little more sense then.

Yeah, I think I am going to skip using the water filter in my beer and start boiling my water before I mash with it. Here is a question, it was mentioned before that low calcium can affect mash efficency, how low is to low, and how big of a difference does it make? I had a really bad effiency in my last brew "55%" ! 0.0. I am wondering if my water was a significant factor.

Grind, pH, time, and temperature are much more important from an efficiency standpoint. There are other good reasons to try and keep Ca over 30-40 ppm, but you don't need it for efficiency. Maybe so far as Ca relates to pH, but you could get great efficiency using 0ppm Ca and acid.

GotPushrods said:

Grind, pH, time, and temperature are much more important from an efficiency standpoint. There are other good reasons to try and keep Ca over 30-40 ppm, but you don't need it for efficiency. Maybe so far as Ca relates to pH, but you could get great efficiency using 0ppm Ca and acid.

Click to expand...

Not only does alpha amylase requires calcium to function, but it also stabilizes the enzyme at mash temperatures so that it is not rapidly degraded. I don't know why people insist the other parameters are "more important". I had a consistent grind (even run through twice), pH checked by a meter, temperature checked with a Thermapen (and others) and mashed for 75 minutes and had both wildly variable and bad efficiencies ranging from 69 to 53%. Added in a little calcium (my city water is only 4PPM) while changing nothing else and jumped to 75%. Since then I have been at 75, 75, 76, 75 and 74% with the 74% being a high gravity beer. Adjusting your water is so, so easy it just seems silly to not do it.

jlangfo5 said:

...low calcium can affect mash efficency, how low is to low, and how big of a difference does it make?

Click to expand...

When we calculate efficiency we compare the amount of extract we pull out of the grain in our mash tun to the amount pulled out in a Congress mash. The Congress mash is done with distilled water. As none of us ever gets as much extract as the Congress mass produces (which would be 100% by the way home brewers reckon it) even when we supplement calcium I guess we can conclude that 0 is not too low i.e. that other factors, such as the fineness of the grind, (look at coarse/fine difference in a malt spec sheet) are more significant.

I think what most people overlook is that malt contains lots of minerals including quite a bit of calcium.

Speaking more practically some very fine beers are made with water that is very low in mineral content (think Budvar, Pilsner Urquell...). Absence of any mineral flavor at all is a major feature in the flavor profile of these beers. I generally brew my beers with very low mineral content water. Were I to supplement calcium my efficiency might go up 0.1% but I don't really care. I'll keep the efficiency where it is and drink 12.9 °P beer instead of 13. I tune for the flavors I like - not efficiency.

pabloj13 said:

I don't know why people insist the other parameters are "more important".

Click to expand...

ajdelange said:

Were I to supplement calcium my efficiency might go up 0.1% but I don't really care.

Click to expand...

This is my experience as well... I can get 75% with RO water and acid. I don't because there are other reasons to want more calcium (than the malt provides), but it has not affected me when using almost pure RO water for a light lager and phosphoric acid for pH. Still 75%.

Kai actually did a test specifically about Ca and efficiency. It made very little difference when other variables were controlled. Efficiency was 2% higher at 350 ppm!! Negligible differences under 100 ppm.

http://braukaiser.com/wiki/index.ph...efficiency_in_single_infusion_mashing#Calcium


I'm not saying it didn't happen, you should keep doing what works for you. But it's probably more the exception than the rule.

I'd like everyone to learn more about water chemistry because it's not as hard and it might first appear. But when someone specifically asks about an efficiency problem, I'd point them in several other directions first.