Wort Aeration

SSBrew - 728
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.
Brulosopher said:
I bet the hell outta my wort with a paint stirrer

Just sayin' ;)
Click to expand...

Agreed, this seems to be somewhat theoretical. The loss of aroma is probably the bigger risk.

BTW, I'm digging all the different glassware! And you've made me thirsty.
 
Hamsterbite said:
Agreed, this seems to be somewhat theoretical. The loss of aroma is probably the bigger risk.

BTW, I'm digging all the different glassware! And you've made me thirsty.
Click to expand...

Haha, I didn't even realize all of those photos have different glass. I prefer the small 5 oz glasses myself.
 
I am fairly new to brewing and have started listening to basic brewing radio. BBR interviewed a home brewer in 2005 who compared oxygenation of water via aquarium pump/stone and shaking. He had the same question as the OP and decided to buy an o2 meter on ebay to find the answer.

You can read his results here: http://www.brewangels.com/Beerformation/AerationMethods.pdf

He found that you could reach 90% saturation by shaking the bucket/carboy in less than 5 minutes. Aquarium pumps at various pressures took longer.
 
traviswalken said:
I am fairly new to brewing and have started listening to basic brewing radio. BBR interviewed a home brewer in 2005 who compared oxygenation of water via aquarium pump/stone and shaking. He had the same question as the OP and decided to buy an o2 meter on ebay to find the answer.

You can read his results here: http://www.brewangels.com/Beerformation/AerationMethods.pdf

He found that you could reach 90% saturation by shaking the bucket/carboy in less than 5 minutes. Aquarium pumps at various pressures took longer.
Click to expand...

Good article although I wish they would have added pure O2 injection as another test form to compare. I'm not surprised shaking worked better than an aquarium pump at all. But I would be willing to bet O2 with a stone would significantly out perform all other methods in much less time with more calculated results.
 
You probably don't want more anecdotal info but...
I brewed a cream ale that took an honorable mention in a BJCP event earlier this year. I re-brewed this beer making one change for another BJCP competition this december. The change... Pure O2 using a diffusing stone and HD welding Bottle. I bled O2 for 1.5 min and swirled just after pitching with the starter.
My scores were horrible and the taste notes are all the same... Astringent. Most commented on yeast notes say it was in pirimary too long or to watch my fermentation temps.
I brewed another Cream Ale at the same time and an ESB. The ESB had the same astringent taste comments and the other cream ale (I did not enter this one) is BeirMuncher's CO3C and it is more astringent and estery in a bad way than any other time I've brewed it.
Guess what my next competition brew change is?

Btw, these were 1.056-1.062 OG brews and all were ones I've brewed before and I never had taste issues like this before.

Too much of a good thing?
 
Brewskii said:
You probably don't want more anecdotal info but...
I brewed a cream ale that took an honorable mention in a BJCP event earlier this year. I re-brewed this beer making one change for another BJCP competition this december. The change... Pure O2 using a diffusing stone and HD welding Bottle. I bled O2 for 1.5 min and swirled just after pitching with the starter.
My scores were horrible and the taste notes are all the same... Astringent. Most commented on yeast notes say it was in pirimary too long or to watch my fermentation temps.
I brewed another Cream Ale at the same time and an ESB. The ESB had the same astringent taste comments and the other cream ale (I did not enter this one) is BeirMuncher's CO3C and it is more astringent and estery in a bad way than any other time I've brewed it.
Guess what my next competition brew change is?

Btw, these were 1.056-1.062 OG brews and all were ones I've brewed before and I never had taste issues like this before.

Too much of a good thing?
Click to expand...

Interesting...I agree too much of a good thing can be bad but I would recommend adding O2 prior to pitching yeast. Are you using a regulator or a flow meter? Without a flow meter the volume of O2 introduced is a guessing game. When I brew small batches and add O2 in the bucket the head space will limit the amount of O2 I can add due to the foam. I usually add 1.5ppm for 1.5-2 min max on 6 gallons depending on the gravity. With a straight regulator you only control pressure not volume and you could be adding way more O2 than you think. 1.5ppm will barely come out and if you were to hold the hose to your face you would barely feel the O2 coming out. Just saying based on my experiences. Anecdotal at best but consistent.
Anyone recommend an inexpensive dissolve O2 meter? I am thinking about doing some testing myself.
 
Brewskii said:
You probably don't want more anecdotal info but...
I brewed a cream ale that took an honorable mention in a BJCP event earlier this year. I re-brewed this beer making one change for another BJCP competition this december. The change... Pure O2 using a diffusing stone and HD welding Bottle. I bled O2 for 1.5 min and swirled just after pitching with the starter.
My scores were horrible and the taste notes are all the same... Astringent. Most commented on yeast notes say it was in pirimary too long or to watch my fermentation temps.
I brewed another Cream Ale at the same time and an ESB. The ESB had the same astringent taste comments and the other cream ale (I did not enter this one) is BeirMuncher's CO3C and it is more astringent and estery in a bad way than any other time I've brewed it.
Guess what my next competition brew change is?

Btw, these were 1.056-1.062 OG brews and all were ones I've brewed before and I never had taste issues like this before.

Too much of a good thing?
Click to expand...

Interesting, I've had the exact opposite in my beers. This was going from a fish tank air pump to oxygen (hard to shake 15 gallons). I wonder if it was some other process in the brew that caused the off flavors. So many variables its hard to pinpoint one step of the process. What flow rate and times were you using?
 
Brewskii said:
You probably don't want more anecdotal info but...
I brewed a cream ale that took an honorable mention in a BJCP event earlier this year. I re-brewed this beer making one change for another BJCP competition this december. The change... Pure O2 using a diffusing stone and HD welding Bottle. I bled O2 for 1.5 min and swirled just after pitching with the starter.
My scores were horrible and the taste notes are all the same... Astringent. Most commented on yeast notes say it was in pirimary too long or to watch my fermentation temps.
I brewed another Cream Ale at the same time and an ESB. The ESB had the same astringent taste comments and the other cream ale (I did not enter this one) is BeirMuncher's CO3C and it is more astringent and estery in a bad way than any other time I've brewed it.
Guess what my next competition brew change is?

Btw, these were 1.056-1.062 OG brews and all were ones I've brewed before and I never had taste issues like this before.

Too much of a good thing?
Click to expand...

Perhaps some favorable esters from lack of oxygen covered up or blended the astrigency flavor in the pervious beer?
 
traviswalken said:
I am fairly new to brewing and have started listening to basic brewing radio. BBR interviewed a home brewer in 2005 who compared oxygenation of water via aquarium pump/stone and shaking. He had the same question as the OP and decided to buy an o2 meter on ebay to find the answer.

You can read his results here: http://www.brewangels.com/Beerformation/AerationMethods.pdf

He found that you could reach 90% saturation by shaking the bucket/carboy in less than 5 minutes. Aquarium pumps at various pressures took longer.
Click to expand...

interesting, I too would like to have seen pure 02 results.

Do you think the starting point of %43 was because the water was only boiled for 6 minutes?

Be interesting to hear of any further testing done on an actual beer.
 
traviswalken said:
I am fairly new to brewing and have started listening to basic brewing radio. BBR interviewed a home brewer in 2005 who compared oxygenation of water via aquarium pump/stone and shaking. He had the same question as the OP and decided to buy an o2 meter on ebay to find the answer.

You can read his results here: http://www.brewangels.com/Beerformation/AerationMethods.pdf

He found that you could reach 90% saturation by shaking the bucket/carboy in less than 5 minutes. Aquarium pumps at various pressures took longer.
Click to expand...
This study is referenced in this thread a few times. They did not use PPM nor did they provide Oxygen comparison. We need to have a test using PPM to be accurate.
 
yeah you dont really need exact numbers on this. It's one of those things where as long as it's aerated your good to go. going for an exact ppm of air in your wort, while interesting is completely unnecessary.

There are three common methods that I know of. One is to attach an Aerating stick on to a drill and sticking it in the wort and giving it a good slosh. another is to use a food safe oxygen stone (like in fish tanks). The last i just recently saw on HBT, you pour your wort in a bottling bucket and set it on the counter. put your primary fermenter under the spigot and pour away. the fall and impact will aerate your wort sufficiently.

The only time i could see needing more accuracy with this is with very high gravity brews, but again not completely necessary
 
Just a quick Googling and I ran across this article http://www.waterontheweb.org/under/waterquality/oxygen.html that contains a nomograph for determining saturation % of O2 in fresh water based on known ppm or mg/l vs. temperature.
What jumps out at me is the fact that 10ppm of O2 & 68F should not even be possible according to the graph. It would max out at between 8-9 ppm at that temp in fresh water.
Everything I've heard and have been reading from the homebrew community says we should be shooting for 8-10ppm, and Palmer recommends up to 16ppm for hg beers.

Am I reading this wrong, or does wort have a higher saturation point than fresh water? How would I find out what that point is, and is it going to be a moving target with different wort compositions/gravity etc?
 
Had a chat with a pro brewer friend today. O2 in his eyes cannot be overdone, only limited by the physical saturation of the wort itself. Off notes from over aeration would, in his eyes, be attributable to vigorous fermentation/ yeast health exposing something that was obscured prior.

Btw... This brewer uses sterile air...not oxygen... And you have had his beer before.
 
Hamsterbite said:
Just a quick Googling and I ran across this article http://www.waterontheweb.org/under/waterquality/oxygen.html that contains a nomograph for determining saturation % of O2 in fresh water based on known ppm or mg/l vs. temperature.
What jumps out at me is the fact that 10ppm of O2 & 68F should not even be possible according to the graph. It would max out at between 8-9 ppm at that temp in fresh water.
Everything I've heard and have been reading from the homebrew community says we should be shooting for 8-10ppm, and Palmer recommends up to 16ppm for hg beers.

Am I reading this wrong, or does wort have a higher saturation point than fresh water? How would I find out what that point is, and is it going to be a moving target with different wort compositions/gravity etc?
Click to expand...

Yes, wort is very different than water. The higher the concentration of sugar the less dissolvable oxygen is. Read the earlier posts.
 
Brewskii said:
Had a chat with a pro brewer friend today. O2 in his eyes cannot be overdone, only limited by the physical saturation of the wort itself. Off notes from over aeration would, in his eyes, be attributable to vigorous fermentation/ yeast health exposing something that was obscured prior.

Btw... This brewer uses sterile air...not oxygen... And you have had his beer before.
Click to expand...

The simple answer is he probably uses sterile air because it's free and less dangerous to have round a brewery than pure O2. Not necessarily because it's better than pure O2. Fact is air is made up of an average of 20% O2 and if injected 5 times longer than pure O2 at the same volume you will have similar results. In a commercial environment controlling risks & cost's can make the difference between success and failure.
 
photolimo said:
Yes, wort is very different than water. The higher the concentration of sugar the less dissolvable oxygen is. Read the earlier posts.
Click to expand...

I've been subscribed all along, and I've reread just in case I missed the answers to my questions above. Nope. The question remains, but I'll rephrase if that's helpful.

I would like to know how to find the saturation point of O2 in different worts that I may brew.

The inconsistency I found between max saturation points between water and what we commonly feel is achievable in wort intrigues me. Either wort has a higher SP for DO than water (which seems counter intuitive to me), or our we have been wrongly assuming that 10+ppm is even possible.

Thank you captain obvious for pointing out that wort is different than water. If you intended to be condescending, I'll just find another thread.
I'll give you the benefit of the doubt this time.
 
My understanding is that: 8-10 ppm is the maximum dissolved oxygen when using air. Air is 80% nitrogen so if you use pure O2 you have five times as much oxygen in the "air". So the limit would five times that or 40-50ppm
 
WoodlandBrew said:
My understanding is that: 8-10 ppm is the maximum dissolved oxygen when using air. Air is 80% nitrogen so if you use pure O2 you have five times as much oxygen in the "air". So the limit would five times that or 40-50ppm
Click to expand...

Ahah. So maybe the chart I ran across assumes equilibrium based solely on air as opposed to the possibility of pure O2?

That makes sense.
 
sweetcell said:
i'm pretty sure that's not right.

can we get a chemist in here to set up straight?
Click to expand...

I don't know the limit, but I do know there is a law of diminishing returns, a limit to O2 solubility and you can't just multiply by 5.
 
sweetcell said:
i'm pretty sure that's not right.

can we get a chemist in here to set up straight?
Click to expand...

I would like to understand this better as well. I found these references:
http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/air-solubility-water-d_639.html
And
http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/gases-solubility-water-d_1148.html

This site shows the following maximum saturations at 20 degrees C.

pure O2 = 44ppm
air = 8.75ppm.

These are a factor of five apart, so it looks like rudimentary understanding lead to the correct conclusion. The site explains it much more eloquently than I can:

Note that for gases in combination with other gases - like oxygen in air - the partial pressure of the gas must be used. Ex. in air with normal composition oxygen counts for aprox. 20% of the total pressure.
Click to expand...

Also see the explination of "Henry's Law"

However, this is all for a 1.000 wort which nobody uses. I wonder if partial pressure would follow to dissolved sugars? If the wort was 10% saturated with sugar, would that leave 90% of saturation possible with oxygen? That would mean about 8ppm with air and 40ppm with pure O2.
 
sweetcell said:
this is incorrect. yeast, whether from dry or liquid, need to reproduce to achieve an adequate population, and O2 is required for reproduction.
Click to expand...

I definitely agree about the dry yeast. I would also point out, though, that since, as Sweetcell notes, O2 is required for cell reproduction but not for fermentation, a lot of concerns about oxygenation can be solved by simply making a large starter and pitching a much higher number of healthy, oxygenated yeast cells from the start. To me this is much more important than what technique you use to oxygenate your wort.

I've never used O2 and have taken down beers from over 1.1 to under 1.03, never missing an FG target. I do use an aquarium pump and stone for beers over OG 1.07 or so, but I really think the most important thing you can do to ensure healthy fermentation, aside from maintaining good fermentation temps, is to make starters and pitch lots of healthy yeast from the get-go.
 
jerrodm said:
I definitely agree about the dry yeast. I would also point out, though, that since, as Sweetcell notes, O2 is required for cell reproduction but not for fermentation, a lot of concerns about oxygenation can be solved by simply making a large starter and pitching a much higher number of healthy, oxygenated yeast cells from the start. To me this is much more important than what technique you use to oxygenate your wort.
Click to expand...

originally i was replying to someone who stated that "dry yeast doesn't need oxygenation" - and that person was in fact correct, in certain circumstances. if you pitch 2 packets of yeast as recommended by the manufacturers, you do no need to oxygenate because you are adding the full population of yeast (~1 billion cells if fresh and rehydrated). reproduction is not needed.
 
sweetcell said:
originally i was replying to someone who stated that "dry yeast doesn't need oxygenation" - and that person was in fact correct, in certain circumstances. if you pitch 2 packets of yeast as recommended by the manufacturers, you do no need to oxygenate because you are adding the full population of yeast (~1 billion cells if fresh and rehydrated). reproduction is not needed.
Click to expand...

Definitely agree with this--if pitching dry, pitch plenty (two packs is cheap!)...if pitching wet (and who doesn't like wet?!), make a big starter. You're much better off starting with more yeast than less, and betting on aeration/oxygenation to compensate for underpitching is not a great strategy IMO.
 
It's during cell growth that much of the ester profile is synthesized, so I wouldn't recommend trying to pitch the entire population.

The typical pitch rate of 8.9 billion cells per litter allows for a growth of five times the initial population. One 11.5 gram packet of yeast contains about 200 billion cells. A 5 gallon 1.036 wort requires only about half a pack of yeast for an adequate pitch. If you wanted to pitch enough cells so that division was minimized(2.5 packs for this example) then the ester profile will be diminished.

Dry yeast has more sterol reserves than liquid yeast. It's not because you are over pitching that less oxygen is required with dry yeast, but because of the large sterol reserve.
 
Yes, I know the ester profile thing is true, and there's the rub. Depending on the beer style, you might want pronounced esters, or you might want a clean, ester-free profile. I know that some people purposely under-pitch certain styles (like Saisons and Hefes, for instance) in order to generate stronger ester profiles. But for most brewers brewing most styles, I think underpitching is more of a problem than overpitching, so I stress pitching lots of healthy yeast for the most part. Then, if you are looking for a particular flavor profile and use less yeast to get it, more power to ya!
 
WoodlandBrew said:
It's during cell growth that much of the ester profile is synthesized, so I wouldn't recommend trying to pitch the entire population.
Click to expand...
yeah, that's my concern with dry - no ester production. if you're looking for a clean fermentation with no yeast character, 2 packs of dry is the way to go.

WoodlandBrew said:
The typical pitch rate of 8.9 billion cells per litter allows for a growth of five times the initial population. One 11.5 gram packet of yeast contains about 200 billion cells. A 5 gallon 1.036 wort requires only about half a pack of yeast for an adequate pitch. If you wanted to pitch enough cells so that division was minimized(2.5 packs for this example) then the ester profile will be diminished.
Click to expand...

according to the manufacturers, a 11.5gm packet contains 500 to 600 billion cells (ex: http://www.fermentis.com/fo/pdf/HB/EN/Safale_US-05_HB.pdf, http://www.danstaryeast.com/sites/default/files/nottingham_datasheet.pdf).

5-fold multiplication is also what i've read. rounding off numbers, in a typical 5 gallon batch you want to pitch about 200 billion cells and you will end up with about a trillion by the end of fermentation.

so adding 2 packets, rehydrated, is pitching a trillion cells. bingo, no growth needed.

if the stories are true that half of the cells die when dry yeast is direct pitched on to the wort (i.e not rehydrated), then direct pitching a single pack will still yield 250-300 viable cells. since they have built-in sterol supplies (plus those of their dead compatriots - yeast cells are happily cannibalistic), aeration isn't needed.

dry yeast is pretty amazing product. it almost makes brewing fool-proof :rockin:
 
So I imagine pitching directly after aerating is required to ensure that the most O2 comes in contact with your yeast starter? You could aerate for 30 minutes, but if you let it sit for 24 hours, obviously your hard work was for naught.

Is this correct?
 
itsernst said:
So I imagine pitching directly after aerating is required to ensure that the most O2 comes in contact with your yeast starter? You could aerate for 30 minutes, but if you let it sit for 24 hours, obviously your hard work was for naught.

Is this correct?
Click to expand...

That's a good question. My gut says there wouldn't be any significant loss in 24 hours.

We know that if you boil water/wort for an hour, you've essentially taken all of the oxygen out of solution. If you were to leave that open to the air, because of the law of equilibrium, oxygen will eventually get back into it. To what degree of saturation depends on temperature, time, surface area, and movement of the water itself. If you expose it to pure O2, the point of equilibrium is even higher.
I think if you keep your fermenter covered when applying O2, the blanket of O2 that forms on top will tend to saturate faster than if left open to air which contains 80% less O2. This is one reason the OP is trying to get some real controlled data from those with the ability to measure saturation in PPM.
Aeration at the Homebrewing level involves a lot of guesswork and variables.
It seems to me that if you are not using pure O2, but you make some kind of attempt to aerate whether it be with aquarium pumps, paint stirrers or shake, you're probably going to end up in a safe ballpark as you will be maxing out at under 10ppm. But if you are using pure O2, there's a real danger of going too far with it. Without the ability to measure the outcome of one's proccess, it could be all over the place, and how are you supposed to get repeatability without knowing this cruscial bit of information?
 
Hamsterbite said:
That's a good question. My gut says there wouldn't be any significant loss in 24 hours.

We know that if you boil water/wort for an hour, you've essentially taken all of the oxygen out of solution. If you were to leave that open to the air, because of the law of equilibrium, oxygen will eventually get back into it. To what degree of saturation depends on temperature, time, surface area, and movement of the water itself. If you expose it to pure O2, the point of equilibrium is even higher.
I think if you keep your fermenter covered when applying O2, the blanket of O2 that forms on top will tend to saturate faster than if left open to air which contains 80% less O2. This is one reason the OP is trying to get some real controlled data from those with the ability to measure saturation in PPM.
Aeration at the Homebrewing level involves a lot of guesswork and variables.
It seems to me that if you are not using pure O2, but you make some kind of attempt to aerate whether it be with aquarium pumps, paint stirrers or shake, you're probably going to end up in a safe ballpark as you will be maxing out at under 10ppm. But if you are using pure O2, there's a real danger of going too far with it. Without the ability to measure the outcome of one's proccess, it could be all over the place, and how are you supposed to get repeatability without knowing this cruscial bit of information?
Click to expand...

Thanks for the info. Obviously it would not be an ideal situation to let it sit for 24 hours, but I am just wondering as to if their is a contact time that is ideal after said amount of aeration is achieved. Even further, if you see an increase in fermentation if you are able to pitch in x amount of time.
 
Something else that troubles me about the conventional wisdom these days...

Why do some insist that high gravity beers need artificially high O2 levels (upwards of 20ppm) when that is a condition that cannot possibly exist in nature? That is not what these organisms have evolved to do.

I have a hard time believeing the yeast want/or need more oxygen than nature can provide. I do not argue that artificially high O2 levels can lead to more vigourous fermentations with higher levels of apparent attenuation, but I've gotta think that that there are side affects we aren't considing. At the very least, I would imagine a re-pitch would result in significant mutations. I suppose that's to be expected with all HG ferementations though.
 
photolimo said:
This study is referenced in this thread a few times. They did not use PPM nor did they provide Oxygen comparison. We need to have a test using PPM to be accurate.
Click to expand...

If you listen to the BBR interview, the guy seemed pretty compitent. He talked about oxygen saturation in water. I believe he said 100% saturation was about 8.4 PPM. He used a more precise decimal, but I think was about 8.4.

You can back into PPM. If he measured 90% saturation, it would be 90% of 8.4 PPM.

I don't think his study answers all questions about wort aeration, but his conclusions make sense to me. Based on his study, I won't purchase an aquarium pump. I will probably rock my buckets until I get tired of it and buy an O2 setup.
 
grathan said:
interesting, I too would like to have seen pure 02 results.

Do you think the starting point of %43 was because the water was only boiled for 6 minutes?

Be interesting to hear of any further testing done on an actual beer.
Click to expand...

That is a good observation about the starting point of the oxygen. In the original BBR interview he attributed this oxygenation to splashing of the water during transfer to carboy/bucket.

However, in the next BBR show, he called to apologize. His O2 meter was giving false high readings at low oxygen levels. He tested his meter at low and high oxygen levels and determined it was accurate at higher levels. He felt that is conclusions comparing aeration methods were still reasonable.
 
My father and I have been arguing about this over the past couple of days and he told me that since he started introducing o2 via a wort aeration that his brews have never been better. I may try it just to see if I see any difference in activity though.
 
Hamsterbite said:
Why do some insist that high gravity beers need artificially high O2 levels (upwards of 20ppm) when that is a condition that cannot possibly exist in nature? That is not what these organisms have evolved to do.
Click to expand...
yeast didn't evolve to ferment 1.090 gravity solutions. fruit juice, the sugariest substance they would come across, is typically in the 1.040.

so we're stretching the yeast way out of their natural comfort zone - hence the need for un-natural conditions.
 
Hamsterbite said:
That's a good question. My gut says there wouldn't be any significant loss in 24 hours.
Click to expand...

Oxygen quickly comes out of solution. My last brew day was a beer with OG 1.090+ with 20+ppm O2. Pitched yeast 30 minutes after reading. By three hours later O2 sat was down to 16ppm.

For the past few years I have hit my desired oxygen level then pulled my dissolved oxygen meter out. Past few brews I have been leaving it in to see just how quickly the oxygen comes out of solution. Much quicker than I even anticipated. That is why for big beers extra doses of oxygen are recommended in the first 24 hours.

Some brewers will add large quantity of yeast and less oxygen, others will add less yeast more oxygen. Both methods do work. It all depends upon your yeast. If you are using 1056 and want a very clean profile then pitch lots of yeast - doesn't matter. However, if you are brewing Belgian style with 540 and high OG the beer is very dependent upon yeast flavor - then less yeast and more oxygen. Most yeast flavors are derived in the first 72 hours with abundant yeast growth.

These are just my personal observations from brewing Belgian beers for many years. Your brewing techniques can significantly change many of these variables.
 

Similar threads

B
Do you need to aerate your wort if you pitch a yeast starter in it?
2
Replies
63
Views
4K
cmac62
cmac62
D
Aerating Wort via Fly Sparge?
Replies
6
Views
556
DonT
DonT
Gadjobrinus
Festbier - first lager back in.
Replies
17
Views
1K
Brooothru
Brooothru
micraftbeer
Wort Aeration for Fermentation- Test Results
Replies
14
Views
2K
McMullan
McMullan
Gadjobrinus
3 potential new - Best, Strong Bitter, Imperial Stout
Replies
14
Views
1K
Gadjobrinus
Gadjobrinus
Yakima 300

Latest posts

Back
Top