I want I carbed ale

....because I am English. Everything I read talks of carbonating and frany I do not like fizzy beer. My question is simple - do i have to carbonate at all? Can I still bottle condition with adding any sugar to the bottle?

Tried searching for an answer but no joy.

I am looking to bottle an IPA in the next few days that was made with a partial mash and dry hopping.

Cheers

MD

Excuse spelling I am using a phone. The title meant to read NON Carbed beer

Sure, if you want to drink your beer flat that's fine. Some people like "cask style" ales, with a very low level of carb (like 1-1.8 volumes of co2) and will only add enough priming sugar to reach that carb level. If you want no carbonation at all, then bottling without any priming sugar would be the way to go.

Certainly....as long as it's done fermenting before bottling, and you're SURE it's done, then you'll have the non-carbed beer you wish when you pop one open

The only potential problem I see is that bottle conditioning protects the beer from oxidation in the bottle. If there isn't any CO2 being produced, then the bottle will have beer plus air in it. This will oxidize the beer sooner or later. I think you'll have to figure out a way to purge the bottle with CO2 prior to filling it like the commercial breweries have to do.

I think I would go with Yoopers suggestion and carb at a lower level. Have you ever drank completely uncarbonated beer? I have, from a batch I made recently, and it's not good, to my tastes. I guess what I'm trying to say is there is a line from flat to fizzy, with a lot of other options in between. But in the end, it's your beer, so make it the way you want to drink it. If you bottle a batch flat, and you don't like it, you can always open them up and add a little sugar, then recap and let them condition some more. I'm doing that very thing tonight to a batch I made that didn't carbonate properly.

The English ales I've drunk in England all had at least little bit of carbonation. There are calculators available that will let you add the amount of priming sugar appropriate to a particular style. There's one here:

http://www.northernbrewer.com/priming-sugar-calculator/

If you pick a British Bitter or ESB style it will recommend a smaller amount of priming sugar than what you'd use in a "fizzy" beer.

Thanks for all the replies. Now I on a proper keyboard and may be able to spell properly...

Coming from the 'english tradition' I am too used to ales from the cask (Used to manage cellars years ago). Non of the beers I poured were ever carbonated. I will try a mix of all the above:

I will straight bottle a few and bottle a few with maybe a quarter of a carbonisation drop and see how I go.

My gut feeling is to go with a very small amount of carb. The great thing is though - nothing goes to waste. Worst case scenario is I make another batch!

Thanks for the replies

Cheers

Matt

I have a feeling you are going to have trouble duplicating your previous cask ale experiences with bottled and completely uncarbonated home brew. I was curious as to what you were trying to achieve, so I did a little research. Came up with the following very interesting article. This author seems to disagree with you that British cask ale is not carbonated at all.

http://allaboutbeer.com/article/cask-ale/

I would try a pint straight out of the fermenter before bottling. Chill it to your preferred serving temperature and see what completely uncarbed beer tastes and feels like.

If that's really what you want, then just bottle and serve before it oxygenates. If you're not sure you can drink it fast enough and you can't purge each bottle with CO2, try filling the bottles closer to the top or compromising with a very low-pressure carbonation (maybe 1 oz of priming sugar for a 5 gallon batch) to stave off oxygenation.

dkevinb said:

The English ales I've drunk in England all had at least little bit of carbonation.

Click to expand...

Yes^^ I'm no native, but I remember very fondly my time in England, and my first exposure to "real ale." Loved the clarity, loved the mouthfeel and flavor, but I remember noticing that the level of carbonation was significantly lower. But it wasn't absent. This is because, as I learned, the cask is where the yeast finish the last little chores of fermentation. It is akin to a secondary fermentor for us homebrewers. Nearly all of the work is finished, but some carbon dioxide is still produced (and apparently some breweries add a small amount of priming sugar, but not what we'd add for "normal" carbonation), leaving the beer not really bubbly, but not completely flat either. This info was all happily supplied by a bar owner in the Lake District when I became curious about the beer I had in my hand.

EDIT: Forgot to mention that he also showed me the cask in the back. He said that they are smaller than a normal keg (visibly so!) because they try to sell through the whole volume of the cask in a matter of a couple days to avoid oxidization and spoilage (it is unpasteurized).

I made an all-malt extract ESB over Christmas, attempting to clone Boddingtons, one of my favourite beers. I knew the head would be impossible to replicate as I don't keg and therefore can't pour with nitrogen. However I don't drink a beer for the head it has, I drink a beer because I like it.

So, just prior to bottling I checked using a priming calculator how much priming sugar I should use. The calculation came out at NEGATIVE .26oz. So, nervously, I added no priming sugar to this batch (first time ever doing that) and it is BY FAR the best beer I have ever made. It is flat by intention, has a great tight head of its own, and the most incredible lacing, it's smooth drinking, tasty, clear as crystal, and I will absolutely repeat this brew. I have been drinking it for about 3 weeks now and have not noticed any oxidation yet, I will monitor it to see how it goes but, if you want to make a beer that's flat go for it.

I know most of the world just can't fathom why us Brits like flat beer, don't get me wrong I don't like all flat beer nor do I drink flat beer all the time, but it has it's place, a very special place, and I would highly recommend anybody who has never tried it to give it a go, find someone who sells Boddingtons or Fullers ESB or London Pride and give one a whirl. It's a revelation.

As for my clone attempt, it came out slightly darker than the real deal, and with a slightly different flavour, but since it was my first attempt at making my own recipe, and I made no attempt to modify my water chemistry, it's a damn good go and has made a great beer. One which I get to drink all of since none of my Canadian friends will touch flat beer! Hahaha

Hfx

Hfxhomebrewer said:

I made an all-malt extract ESB over Christmas, attempting to clone Boddingtons, one of my favourite beers. I knew the head would be impossible to replicate as I don't keg and therefore can't pour with nitrogen. However I don't drink a beer for the head it has, I drink a beer because I like it.

So, just prior to bottling I checked using a priming calculator how much priming sugar I should use. The calculation came out at NEGATIVE .26oz. So, nervously, I added no priming sugar to this batch (first time ever doing that) and it is BY FAR the best beer I have ever made. It is flat by intention, has a great tight head of its own, and the most incredible lacing, it's smooth drinking, tasty, clear as crystal, and I will absolutely repeat this brew. I have been drinking it for about 3 weeks now and have not noticed any oxidation yet, I will monitor it to see how it goes but, if you want to make a beer that's flat go for it.



Hfx

Click to expand...

I can't see any location for you, so I'll take your word that your British...
However, cask beer (Real Ale) is NOT flat!!! It has far less carbonation than most of us are used to, world 'round, but there is carbonation there.
There is the joke that cask beer is "warm and flat" but it really is neither; served at cellar temp, and low, natural carbonation, caused by either sugar or unfermented wort added to the firkin when it's kegged.
Anyways, I would guess that there was still a bit of fermentation going on, because beer will not have any head at all if it's not carbonated to some degree.

Hfxhomebrewer said:

So, nervously, I added no priming sugar to this batch (first time ever doing that) and it is BY FAR the best beer I have ever made. It is flat by intention, has a great tight head of its own, and the most incredible lacing...

Hfx

Click to expand...

I'm confused by this statement. How can it have a tight head, and lacing with NO carbonation. There must have been a few fermentable sugars left in the beer when you bottled. Head has to come from somewhere. The beer that I made recently that was flat made a few bubbles when I poured it, but they went away quickly and there was no lacing. More importantly, there was no aroma or mouth feel that I have had from cask beer. It was literally undrinkable.

I'm thinking that maybe there's some confusion on this thread about what carbonation actually is. Carbonation is, strictly, ANY quantity of carbon dioxide (CO2) dissolved in a liquid (obviously in our case, beer). This does NOT necessarily require adding priming sugar or force carbing in a keg. It can happen very naturally to a beer that is post-primary fermentation without any additional input from the brewer. It simply won't happen in great quantity (assuming normal fermentation conditions and attenuation). But truly flat beer is something of an anomaly, really, in that there has to be no residual carbon dioxide in the liquid and absolutely zero yeast activity (remember that yeast can still be plenty active even after the krausen falls and you cease to observe activity). It seems, based on some of the comments that have come up, that some folks enjoy beers with very low carbonation, but let's be clear: real/cask ale is carbonated, if only lightly. To get a flat beer, pour a bottle into a glass and leave it out for 24 hours. If you come back to that and still enjoy it (genuinely), then you like flat beer. If you like beer that you've had on tap that didn't fizz up, you likely just prefer lower carbonation. That's fine, everyone's tastes are different, but carbonation (even slight) makes a big difference in aroma and flavor perception, and it's more likely that if you were ever served a truly flat beer, you would send it straight back.

jrgtr42 said:

I can't see any location for you, so I'll take your word that your British...
However, cask beer (Real Ale) is NOT flat!!! It has far less carbonation than most of us are used to, world 'round, but there is carbonation there.
There is the joke that cask beer is "warm and flat" but it really is neither; served at cellar temp, and low, natural carbonation, caused by either sugar or unfermented wort added to the firkin when it's kegged.
Anyways, I would guess that there was still a bit of fermentation going on, because beer will not have any head at all if it's not carbonated to some degree.

Click to expand...

TxBigHops said:

I'm confused by this statement. How can it have a tight head, and lacing with NO carbonation. There must have been a few fermentable sugars left in the beer when you bottled. Head has to come from somewhere. The beer that I made recently that was flat made a few bubbles when I poured it, but they went away quickly and there was no lacing. More importantly, there was no aroma or mouth feel that I have had from cask beer. It was literally undrinkable.

Click to expand...

Why is it people feel the need to doubt? If you met me you'd know I was English. If you drank this ESB you'd know it has head, lacing, mouthfeel, aroma, taste. Since neither is possible I guess I have to leave it at that. If anyone wants the recipe and method to try the beer themselves let me know, I'm happy to share. There's no more I can do than that.

Good luck to the OP in making your beer as you want to.

Any fermented beverage will have SOME residual carbonation as a result of the fermentation. Its why wine is "degassed". And why beer temps are added into carbonation calculators. So even if you didn't add any priming sugar, you may still have some low level of carbonation.

I haven't tried it myself, but it would seem strange to get head on a beer if there was no carbonation in the beer at all. Maybe it's carbed really low, like 1.2-1.3 vols or something. You wouldn't notice bubbles forming in the glass at that low level, but it would still taste noticably different than completely flat beer.

If the OP is looking to protect the bottled beer some against oxidation, I would recommend adding 1.5-2 oz of priming sugar. Add 1 oz if you want it really low carbonation.

Hfxhomebrewer said:

Why is it people feel the need to doubt? If you met me you'd know I was English. If you drank this ESB you'd know it has head, lacing, mouthfeel, aroma, taste. Since neither is possible I guess I have to leave it at that. If anyone wants the recipe and method to try the beer themselves let me know, I'm happy to share. There's no more I can do than that.

Click to expand...

I'm not having any trouble believing that you're English, or that your beer has head, lacing, mouthfeel, aroma, and taste. What I'm baffled by is that you have posted a picture of that beer and are insisting that it is flat. You can reread my last post, just a few posts up, but I will say it again here. The head you have on your beer is impossible from a truly flat beer. Head/foam is the result of dissolved gases separating from the liquid and rising to the surface. Due to the surface tension of the liquid, the gas becomes at least temporarily trapped at the top of the glass, forming a bubble. Lots of little (or big) bubbles form, and this is what is called the "head."

Now, since "flat" means that there is no dissolved gas in your liquid, what exactly do you believe to have created that lovely head on your beer?

I will repeat what I said earlier. Having a low level of carbonation (which one might refer to as being "flatter" than normal beer) is NOT the same thing as actually having a flat beer.

EDIT: To clarify, when I say flat=no dissolved gas, that's not a strict zero, as a tiny amount of gas will always remain. But it is negligible, approaching zero, and certainly not enough to form foam.

To the OP, sorry we've taken your thread off into our own debate. Despite what we say, I encourage you to try what you think you'll like. Most beer, at bottling time, still has a bit of leftover sugar, probably enough to form just the slightest amount of carbonation. My guess is that's roughly what you're after. I'd suggest you try bottling have "as is," and bottle the other half with just a tiny amount of priming sugar added (try Yooper's suggested volume). See what the difference is, and if you like one more than the other. Both will be very low-carbonation, so you won't have to fret about any fizziness or burn from the bubbly! Then maybe post your results/notes here?

You're splitting the tiniest of hairs to make a moot point. That amounts to a waste of my time.

Brew on!

Espressomattic said:

Thanks for all the replies. Now I on a proper keyboard and may be able to spell properly...

Coming from the 'english tradition' I am too used to ales from the cask (Used to manage cellars years ago). Non of the beers I poured were ever carbonated. I will try a mix of all the above:

I will straight bottle a few and bottle a few with maybe a quarter of a carbonisation drop and see how I go.

My gut feeling is to go with a very small amount of carb. The great thing is though - nothing goes to waste. Worst case scenario is I make another batch!

Thanks for the replies

Cheers

Matt

Click to expand...

I think the best way to achieve consistency in the long run would be to use pressure fermentation/spunding. You can precisely control the degree of carbonation through the pressure relief valve and achieve that low carbonation level you like without fear of oxidizing, the beer never sees the light of day.

Hfxhomebrewer said:

I made an all-malt extract ESB over Christmas, attempting to clone Boddingtons, one of my favourite beers. I knew the head would be impossible to replicate as I don't keg and therefore can't pour with nitrogen. However I don't drink a beer for the head it has, I drink a beer because I like it.

So, just prior to bottling I checked using a priming calculator how much priming sugar I should use. The calculation came out at NEGATIVE .26oz. So, nervously, I added no priming sugar to this batch (first time ever doing that) and it is BY FAR the best beer I have ever made. It is flat by intention, has a great tight head of its own, and the most incredible lacing, it's smooth drinking, tasty, clear as crystal, and I will absolutely repeat this brew. I have been drinking it for about 3 weeks now and have not noticed any oxidation yet, I will monitor it to see how it goes but, if you want to make a beer that's flat go for it.

I know most of the world just can't fathom why us Brits like flat beer, don't get me wrong I don't like all flat beer nor do I drink flat beer all the time, but it has it's place, a very special place, and I would highly recommend anybody who has never tried it to give it a go, find someone who sells Boddingtons or Fullers ESB or London Pride and give one a whirl. It's a revelation.

As for my clone attempt, it came out slightly darker than the real deal, and with a slightly different flavour, but since it was my first attempt at making my own recipe, and I made no attempt to modify my water chemistry, it's a damn good go and has made a great beer. One which I get to drink all of since none of my Canadian friends will touch flat beer! Hahaha

Hfx

Click to expand...

Common sense prevails! If you dig into some of the english forums like http://www.jimsbeerkit.co.uk/ or http://www.brewuk.co.uk/, you'll find a number of people who use ZERO priming sugar.

Hfxhomebrewer said:

You're splitting the tiniest of hairs to make a moot point. That amounts to a waste of my time.

Brew on!

Click to expand...

I really do not think anyone here is splitting hairs. Several of us have defined flat as having no carbonation, and you are defining it differently. That is certainly your prerogative, but it makes communication difficult. Possibly all of us are wrong and you are right. Since one major purpose of this forum is education, then helping us to understand your definition is not a waste of time.

The beer in your photo most certainly has carbonation. And as a beer drinker who enjoys a good ESB, I would be very interested in your brewing process of making a beer that looks like that without adding priming sugar. I am betting the OP would as well, since that was the entire purpose of his original post.

So don't withdraw from the conversation just because of a disagreement over the use of a term. As you did, I will also provide a picture. This is the beer I made that is, to my understanding, flat. The bubbles in the glass were formed from splashing with a very fast pour, and are not an indication of a head, or of any carbonation. They disappeared within a minute or two. The beer was in primary and secondary for a total of 24 days and pretty clearly fully fermented, leaving no sugars in the beer to form carbonation. I had made numerous mistakes with this beer, and apparently made another when adding my priming sugar. Some of it made it into some of the bottles, and they carbonated perfectly, while others ended up as this one did - flat, with no aroma, character or mouth feel. To me, undrinkable.

progmac said:

Common sense prevails! If you dig into some of the english forums like http://www.jimsbeerkit.co.uk/ or http://www.brewuk.co.uk/, you'll find a number of people who use ZERO priming sugar.

Click to expand...

I'm interested to take a look!

At the same time, one of the points I've been trying to make is that depending on the levels of residual CO2 and sugars, and yeast health (all of which is unique to each individual fermentation), you can create very low carbonation without adding any priming solution. Granted, this carbonation will be noticeably lower than a primed beer, and it seems that this is where we've been having a little contention over terminology, but that little bit still makes a difference.

I'm very curious to see what I'll find on those forums that you provided. Thanks for the links!

JordanKnudson said:

I'm interested to take a look!

At the same time, one of the points I've been trying to make is that depending on the levels of residual CO2 and sugars, and yeast health (all of which is unique to each individual fermentation), you can create very low carbonation without adding any priming solution. Granted, this carbonation will be noticeably lower than a primed beer, and it seems that this is where we've been having a little contention over terminology, but that little bit still makes a difference.

I'm very curious to see what I'll find on those forums that you provided. Thanks for the links!

Click to expand...

Yes! My own experience in the matter is two batches that I purposely bottled apx. 3-4 points over FG. So no priming sugar, but some fermentable sugars left. They are smooth as hell and lightly carbonated after about 2 weeks. After about 2 months, the carb starts to be too much. I try to have them in the fridge or gone by this point.

This is a decent process, but involves some guesswork and is definitely different than just bottling finished beer w/out priming sugar.

progmac said:

Yes! My own experience in the matter is two batches that I purposely bottled apx. 3 points over FG. So no priming sugar, but some fermentable sugars left. They are smooth as hell and lightly carbonated after about 2 weeks. I then pop them in the fridge when the carbonation level is to my liking. This is a decent process, but involves some guesswork and is definitely different than just bottling finished beer w/out priming sugar.

Click to expand...

That's a clever way of doing it. I would imagine that it shaves a little time off of your turnaround for the batch, too. If you could really nail the numbers (obviously that's the hard part; you don't want underattentuated beer or bottle bombs), it seems like this method would make priming an extraneous step. Did you notice any weird or different effects on the final product from this, or was it pretty much the same as if you'd used priming sugar on a finished beer?

JordanKnudson said:

That's a clever way of doing it. I would imagine that it shaves a little time off of your turnaround for the batch, too. If you could really nail the numbers (obviously that's the hard part; you don't want underattentuated beer or bottle bombs), it seems like this method would make priming an extraneous step. Did you notice any weird or different effects on the final product from this, or was it pretty much the same as if you'd used priming sugar on a finished beer?

Click to expand...

It's so hard to say if it is any different than using priming sugar as far as taste. Someday maybe I'll arrange an experiment. I feel like the final product is smoother and has no bottle shock flavors, but who knows.

I have done this by drawing off a sample of actively fermenting wort and putting it on a stirplate or someplace warm. I use this sample, which finishes fermenting before the main batch to give an actual FG.

My experience is the carb builds up slowly. But this has been with english yeasts. With something like 1056 that tends to hang around, it might happen faster. So at one week there is barely any carb, at two there is low carb, at three or four weeks moderate carb, and then by eight weeks probably a little too much carb. Of course this depends on at what gravity you bottle.

I'm not convinced it is worth the hassle, but I think it is fun and makes sense for English beers where you may want to actually drink them with a bit of unfermented sugars left, as would happen if you drank within about two or three weeks of bottling, or if you popped them in the fridge at this point.

TxBigHops said:

The beer in your photo most certainly has carbonation. And as a beer drinker who enjoys a good ESB, I would be very interested in your brewing process of making a beer that looks like that without adding priming sugar. I am betting the OP would as well, since that was the entire purpose of his original post.

Click to expand...

The attached three photos are of the same beer, poured last night from one bottle. I still don't know if the photo of the head really shows the texture but this is just the phone camera and it's not the best for close-ups. Again the aggressive pour produced the head, and the lacing in the empty glass is, in my opinion, excellent.

To make this I used the following ingredients;
5lb light malt extract syrup
1lb dark malt extract syrup
0.5lb molasses
1oz Northern Brewer pellets (marked as 4.8% AA by the LHBS)
1oz Fuggles pellets (marked as 7.2% AA by the LHBS)
1 pkg Windsor yeast

OG 1.044 - measured
FG 1.012 - measured
IBU 24 - estimated by the brew calculator
ABV 4.4% - estimated by the brew calculator
SRM 11 - estimated by the brew calculator
Brewed to 5 gallons
I use OxyClean to clean my brewing equipment and StarSan to sanitise it.

I boiled the hops on the stove in 1.5 litres of water, the Northern Brewer for 20 minutes and the Fuggles for 15 minutes. I made a last-minute filter using a sanitised steel strainer and paper coffee filters to filter out most of the hop matter as I poured the 'hop tea' into the fermenter (didn't plan on doing this but the pellets gave me little choice, I wasn't comfortable dumping that into the fermenter, maybe next time I will). To the hop tea I added the malt extracts, molasses, and a mix of boiled and cold water to bring the volume up to 5 gallons and achieve a temp of 70f. I pitched the yeast dry on to the aerated wort and maintained the temp at 70f throughout fermentation. I did not seal the fermenter completely, I left the lid on but not snapped down. After fermentation stopped (confirmed with gravity readings) I unplugged my heat source and let the beer cool to ambient temp, which was around 55f for the remainder of it's time in primary.

This beer stayed in primary for 3 weeks, but 2 days before bottling I added gelatin finings to improve the clarity, it worked very well (first time using gelatin). I bottled in 500ml brown glass bottles without using any priming sugar whatsoever, and left the beer in the bottles for 3 further weeks before drinking the first. From the outset it was smooth drinking, very sessionable, clear and very tasty (to my tastes). There are no off smells, no off flavours, I haven't noticed any oxidation yet. The hop aroma comes through well, very mild bittering which is what I was aiming for.

I am a new brewer, this is only my sixth batch, I don't pretend to know it all but I do know what good beer tastes like, and this batch is good beer. This was the first batch I ever made using a recipe I came up with using a brew calculator, my first time using hops, and my first time using gelatin (though that wasn't part of the original plan). I learned A LOT from this batch and the results far exceeded my expectations. To a lot of people I am sure I did things in making this batch you would swear up and down was the absolute wrong thing to do (no yeast starter, no seal on the fermenter, filtering out the hop matter etc), to that I say try it yourself and see.

Hfx

I would trust what this guy says...http://youtu.be/D-IF4xx2QkI?t=4m29s

Hfx, thanks for jumping back in. I appreciate your post and your recipe. I'm a pretty new brewer too, so I don't understand, but I'm glad you came back and shared.

Great post Hfx, and very handsome beer. Did you take gravity readings? From your description and the photos my guess is that your yeast wasn't totally done fermenting and it created a little carbonation with residual sugars in the bottle.

Also, your ambient temp indoors is 55f? And I thought I was tough for keeping it in the low 60s!

Hfxhomebrewer said:

You're splitting the tiniest of hairs to make a moot point. That amounts to a waste of my time.



Brew on!

Click to expand...

Nice attitude...not.


Sent from my iPhone using Home Brew

Wingedcoyote, I brew in my basement and its been hovering between 50 and 55 all winter down there. Chilly stuff.

I took gravity readings, FG was 1.012. It was at that level for 4 consecutive days so I deemed it finished, turned off the heat source and let it cool down.

Hfxhomebrewer said:

I boiled the hops on the stove in 1.5 litres of water, the Northern Brewer for 20 minutes and the Fuggles for 15 minutes. I made a last-minute filter using a sanitised steel strainer and paper coffee filters to filter out most of the hop matter as I poured the 'hop tea' into the fermenter (didn't plan on doing this but the pellets gave me little choice, I wasn't comfortable dumping that into the fermenter, maybe next time I will). To the hop tea I added the malt extracts, molasses, and a mix of boiled and cold water to bring the volume up to 5 gallons and achieve a temp of 70f. I pitched the yeast dry on to the aerated wort and maintained the temp at 70f throughout fermentation. I did not seal the fermenter completely, I left the lid on but not snapped down. After fermentation stopped (confirmed with gravity readings) I unplugged my heat source and let the beer cool to ambient temp, which was around 55f for the remainder of it's time in primary.

This beer stayed in primary for 3 weeks, but 2 days before bottling I added gelatin finings to improve the clarity, it worked very well (first time using gelatin). I bottled in 500ml brown glass bottles without using any priming sugar whatsoever, and left the beer in the bottles for 3 further weeks before drinking the first. From the outset it was smooth drinking, very sessionable, clear and very tasty (to my tastes). There are no off smells, no off flavours, I haven't noticed any oxidation yet. The hop aroma comes through well, very mild bittering which is what I was aiming for.

I am a new brewer, this is only my sixth batch, I don't pretend to know it all but I do know what good beer tastes like, and this batch is good beer. This was the first batch I ever made using a recipe I came up with using a brew calculator, my first time using hops, and my first time using gelatin (though that wasn't part of the original plan). I learned A LOT from this batch and the results far exceeded my expectations. To a lot of people I am sure I did things in making this batch you would swear up and down was the absolute wrong thing to do (no yeast starter, no seal on the fermenter, filtering out the hop matter etc), to that I say try it yourself and see.

Hfx

Click to expand...

Wow, this is a very unusual method! If I'm understanding correctly, you are not boiling the wort at all; instead you are just mixing it directly in the fermentor using 70 degree water, and adding a hop tea, then pitching the yeast?

I'm curious about one other thing. You mention that this was your 6th batch, and your first time using hops. What kinds of beer did you brew prior to this batch? Did you really not have any hops in there at all? Or did you mean that you were using pre-hopped extract, and thus you didn't need to add any more hops yourself?

Yup, pre-hopped, canned extract kits and one Festa Brew kit were all I had brewed prior to this batch, so I hadn't needed to worry about using hops myself.

And you are correct, I did not boil the wort at all. I warmed the containers of the malt extract in hot water to make them easier to pour, but I literally poured the LME into about 4l of boiled water (including the 1.5l hop tea), thoroughly mixed it and brought it to 20l using cold water, then used a mix of boiled and cold water to get to 70f and 23l volume. Dry yeast sprinkled on top of the foam generated via aeration, and you're off to the races.

Like I said, the method goes against what a lot of brewers trust, but why not give it a try? All you have to lose is whatever the ingredients cost and about an hour of your time to put the batch together. The ingredient list I posted cost me about $25 here in Nova Scotia, you may be able to get them for less, and literally an hour including sanitising and boiling the hops.

Interesting. I guess you don't really need to boil the wort if you don't want to when using extract...the DMS is supposedly taken care of in the production of the extract, so the only other major factors in boiling (aside from non-essentials like Maillard reactions) would be sterilization of the extract and hop utilization. Since you made the hop tea, that's one down. And really, I think boiling extract to sterilize is mainly a precaution. It seems to be packaged pretty clean.

I can see the appeal of doing it that way for sure, it would be a major time saver. On the other hand, I brew AG (where you can't get away with not boiling) and I'm obsessed with all of the little details of the mash, water treatment, brewing chemistry, etc, so I don't mind spending the extra few hours playing around on brew day!

LovesIPA said:

The only potential problem I see is that bottle conditioning protects the beer from oxidation in the bottle. If there isn't any CO2 being produced, then the bottle will have beer plus air in it. This will oxidize the beer sooner or later. I think you'll have to figure out a way to purge the bottle with CO2 prior to filling it like the commercial breweries have to do.

Click to expand...

I could be wrong, but I don't think the CO2 produced after the bottle is capped helps prevent oxidation. The CO2 in solution when you bottle the beer helps by allowing you to cap on foam, but any CO2 producted later provides no oxidation benefit.
By this I mean that if you mix priming sugar into your beer, fill the bottle carefully so that you have no foam but only beer and empty (filled with air) head space, then cap that beer, I don't think the CO2 that develops over the next few weeks is going to protect your beer. The O2 that was in the head space will not be pushed out, it will remain. As the pressure builds it's volume will decrease, but the same amount of molecules remain to do their dastardly work.

When you go to bottle your beer there is usually CO2 left in solution. The act of transferring the beer to bottles releases some of this CO2 which forms a foam. This CO2 filled foam displaces the air in the head space. This is why capping on foam is so important, and I imagine this is what you were talking about.

Setesh said:

I could be wrong, but I don't think the CO2 produced after the bottle is capped helps prevent oxidation. The CO2 in solution when you bottle the beer helps by allowing you to cap on foam, but any CO2 producted later provides no oxidation benefit.
By this I mean that if you mix priming sugar into your beer, fill the bottle carefully so that you have no foam but only beer and empty (filled with air) head space, then cap that beer, I don't think the CO2 that develops over the next few weeks is going to protect your beer. The O2 that was in the head space will not be pushed out, it will remain. As the pressure builds it's volume will decrease, but the same amount of molecules remain to do their dastardly work.

When you go to bottle your beer there is usually CO2 left in solution. The act of transferring the beer to bottles releases some of this CO2 which forms a foam. This CO2 filled foam displaces the air in the head space. This is why capping on foam is so important, and I imagine this is what you were talking about.

Click to expand...

I feel like I've always heard that yeast will consume oxygen left in the bottles in the process of bottle carbing. As for capping on foam... I've heard of that as an important practice in bottling from a keg, but not in bottling from a bottling bucket. At least I hope it isn't that important, because when I bottle beer with a wand from my bottling bucket it doesn't really foam at all.

wingedcoyote said:

I've heard of that as an important practice in bottling from a keg, but not in bottling from a bottling bucket. At least I hope it isn't that important, because when I bottle beer with a wand from my bottling bucket it doesn't really foam at all.

Click to expand...

Yep! When you bottle straight out of the fermentor, you don't want any bubbling. You'd be oxygenating the finished beer at that point, which of course is no good.

Some great reies. Like the. Offer forums I am on you can have three people with six opinions

When I used to work in real ale pubs I used to keep pedigree. I had two. Us timers who insisted on no sparkler. The beer poured flat. No carb, nothing. And it really enhanced the true taste.

Now I tried a bottles at night with zero carbonation and it was ok. I could actually see where a small amount would enhance it. However it lacked enough body for a car less beer. Something gulletsondon pride has a lot of body which makes up the lack of carb.

I brewed a partial mash last night with 2 kg pale ale malts, 500g of dark roasts malt and a pale ale extract. Used fuggles and goldings in the boil with goldings as a late addition

I th k this will have more body to carry zero carbonation (or what I define as zero anyway)

Being new to brewing all the replies have been really beneficial so thanks!