50ppm Ca minimum? What about Pilsen?

[FourSeasonAngler]

So, admittedly I'm having a tough time trying to adapt the water out of my tap for lighter (color) beers. If anyone is interested in seeing my numbers here is a link: https://www.homebrewtalk.com/showthread.php?t=372370

Also, if anything I'm typing here seems out of whack, please let me know. I'm no water wizard, and its entirely possible that I'm making errors.

Last 1/2 dozen batches I've been using slaked lime to decarbonate. I've had to add Gypsum and Calcium Chloride before adding lime in order to get my ppm Calcium up high enough to aid in the diminishing of bicarbonates.

"Cleanest" (lowest mineral content) profile I've been able to achieve is:
(expressed as mg/l)
Ca: 1.0
Mg: 22
Na: 35
Cl: 45
SO⁴: 58
HCO: 0.2

This is achieved by adding 1g Gypsum, 2g CaCl², and 6g Lime per 7.75 gallons (my typical treated liquor volume for 5 gallon batches)

I have read in countless instances that a level of at least 50ppm Ca is required for good yeast health and to aid in yeast flocculation. Is this not the case in all beer styles (Pilsen?)

Most of my mineral tinkering has been to aid in mash efficiency and to lower bicarbonates in order to bring my mash pH into optimal range without the need for massive Lactic Acid additions to the mash. As it is, a typical pale ale recipe with decarbed water and small salt additions, I would need between 5 and 6 ml of 88% Lactic Acid for my mash and another 1 to 2 ml in my sparge water. However, this leaves me with between 5 and 7 percent lactic acid as equivalent acidulated malt in my grist. Seems kinda high, but still under taste thresholds I believe.

Should I be adding gypsum and CaCl² to get near 50ppm Ca? Wouldn't this cause me to require much more lactic acid in really light beers?

If upping the Ca content in my wort post mash is a better solution will this result in improper or high kettle or fermentation pH?

I should also add I am doing all of these calculations using Brewers Friend and the slaked lime decarbonating was first tinkered with while using the Kaiser Water Calculator.

 

[JonGrafto]

Try EZ Water Calculator 3.0 - Seems to work great for me.

Make sure you know your numbers (which it looks like you do) and get the recipe ready to input. It will give you what you need to add, how much to cut with RO water if needed and the corresponding outputs.

Here is the link:
http://www.ezwatercalculator.com/

 

[stpug]

I have read in countless instances that a level of at least 50ppm Ca is required for good yeast health and to aid in yeast flocculation. Is this not the case in all beer styles (Pilsen?)

I believe it's Martin Brungard (of Bru'N Water Spreadsheet) @mabrungard that has recently been reporting that calcium is not a requirement of yeast health, but that it can aid in yeast flocculation. Additionally, if I recall correctly, he has posted that using specific strains of yeast (lager, in particular) that keeping your calcium ppm below 40ppm actually increases flocculation and that values above 50ppm may impede flocculation - this is very counter-intuitive and opposite of most yeast strain behavior. I suspect that the czech pilsner lager yeast strain is one that benefits from the low calcium ppm. Hopefully he'll chime in here and correct any of my misquotes

 

[ajdelange]

Last 1/2 dozen batches I've been using slaked lime to decarbonate. I've had to add Gypsum and Calcium Chloride before adding lime in order to get my ppm Calcium up high enough to aid in the diminishing of bicarbonates.

"Cleanest" (lowest mineral content) profile I've been able to achieve is:
(expressed as mg/l)
Ca: 1.0
Mg: 22
Na: 35
Cl: 45
SO⁴: 58
HCO: 0.2

It is extremely unlikely that you got calcium down to 1 mg/L or bicarbonate to 0.2. As you started with an alkalinity of 275/50 =5.5 mEq/L and calcium hardness of 3 you would probably only be able to get to hardness of 1 and alkalinity of 3.5 unless you added 2.5 mEq/L Calcium (total 5.5) in which case you could expect to get down to 1 mEq/L of each i.e. 50 ppm alkalinity and 20 mg/L calcium. If you add even more calcium then you may be able to get a bit below 1 mEq/L each.

This is achieved by adding 1g Gypsum, 2g CaCl², and 6g Lime per 7.75 gallons (my typical treated liquor volume for 5 gallon batches)

In a Pilsen style Pilsner you do not want to add sulfate as it will ruin the Saaz.

Assuming you augment calcium (with the chloride) to 5.5 mEq/L and expect to drop 4.5 mEq/L (alkalinity and hardness) you will need 2.25 mmol/L lime or 167 mg/L which for 29.3 L is about 4.9 g but keep in mind that this is a rough number. The actual depends on the pH of the water and even so one cannot be certain of how much lime to use. The best method would be to add about 5 grams to say 4 gallons of water (be sure to stir in some chalk first), measure the pH and then 'titrate' with additional tap water until you get the pH back down to 8 or so. Then it is important to measure the amount of decarbonation and softening you have achieved as results aren't always what you expect.

I have read in countless instances that a level of at least 50ppm Ca is required for good yeast health and to aid in yeast flocculation. Is this not the case in all beer styles (Pilsen?)

This is not the case for many, many beers which are made with fairly soft water. In fact there seems to be definite trend in this direction but it certainly took me a long time to get the home brewing community to accept this. Yes, calcium is sort of the 'chicken soup' of brewing water (it can't hurt unless you want soft water qualities and is beneficial for enzyme protection, runoff brightness, flocullation...) but then again it isn't really necessary in most cases either especially in lagered beers where we don't really care if they take a bit longer to clear as they are going to be lagered for a long period of time anyway.

Most of my mineral tinkering has been to aid in mash efficiency and to lower bicarbonates in order to bring my mash pH into optimal range without the need for massive Lactic Acid additions to the mash.

You certainly have a lot of bicarbonate to deal with. As a Pilsner is a soft water beer your water is not a good candidate for lime softening treatment (which would be fine for ales) and massive acid additions to neutralize it aren't very appealing in terms of the spirit of Pils. RO is a much more attractive alternative in this case.

As it is, a typical pale ale recipe with decarbed water and small salt additions, I would need between 5 and 6 ml of 88% Lactic Acid for my mash and another 1 to 2 ml in my sparge water. However, this leaves me with between 5 and 7 percent lactic acid as equivalent acidulated malt in my grist. Seems kinda high, but still under taste thresholds I believe.

If you can decarbonate down to 1 mEq/L then you should only need 1 mEq/L acid for the water plus whatever else you need for the grains. That should not be above about 4% sauermalz.

Should I be adding gypsum and CaCl² to get near 50ppm Ca?

No. Using RO you would, IMO, add enough CaCl2 (no gypsum) to get to about 25 mg/L calcium not because you want the calcium but because you want the chloride that goes with it. Note that this is considerably more calcium, and chloride, than in beers like PU and Budvar.

Wouldn't this cause me to require much more lactic acid in really light beers?

Just the opposite. Calcium actually releases a little acid when it reacts with malt phosphates thus slightly reducing the need for addded acid.

If upping the Ca content in my wort post mash is a better solution will this result in improper or high kettle or fermentation pH?

No. Again calcium in the kettle tends to lower pH via the same reaction and through the formation of complexes with protein.

I should also add I am doing all of these calculations using Brewers Friend and the slaked lime decarbonating was first tinkered with while using the Kaiser Water Calculator.

Kai knows what he is talking about. Just be sure you understand what these tools are telling you.

 

[mabrungard]

Additionally, if I recall correctly, he has posted that using specific strains of yeast (lager, in particular) that keeping your calcium ppm below 40ppm actually increases flocculation and that values above 50ppm may impede flocculation - this is very counter-intuitive and opposite of most yeast strain behavior. I suspect that the czech pilsner lager yeast strain is one that benefits from the low calcium ppm.

No, I hope I haven't stated somewhere that higher calcium content can impede flocculation. That effect is fairly consistent. Throw in a bunch of calcium salt and the beer will clear faster.

What you may have confused is that elevated calcium content and its interaction with lager yeast can negatively upset the metabolism of the yeast. I wouldn't be too surprised if the Czech Pils yeast is one that can be susceptible to that effect. I have my own anecdotal evidence that its true, but not definitive. There is evidence that yeast can be acclimated to differing water conditions, but I expect that it also alters the character of their fermentation. For that reason, I do recommend that brewers explore lower calcium content in their brewing water when using strains like Czech Pils lager yeast.

 

[FourSeasonAngler]

Thanks AJ.

I guess it's the differences between BF & Kai's spreadsheet that gut me confused as hell.

Forgive me a moment, but for the sake of simplicity, what would be a rational explanation for the variances in the two applications?

Punching in the same numbers for kettle salt additions, lime softening, lactic acid acidification, grist information and water amounts leaves me with two very different outcomes in each application.

Kai's calculator gives me:

resulting water profile

120.3 Ca mg/l
22.0 Mg mg/l
35.0 Na mg/l
72.6 SO4 mg/l
92.0 Cl mg/l
239.2 HCO3 mg/l
196.0 as CaCO3
RA 97.21 as CaCO3 (mash only)

For an overall water profile of:

16.84 Ca dH 6.01 mEq/l Ca
5.08 Mg dH 1.81 mEq/l Mg
4.27 Na dH
4.25 SO4 dH
7.29 Cl dH

11.20 alkalinity dH 3.92 mEq/l
5.55 dH 1.94 mEq/l

estimated mash pH 5.7

Brewer's Friend calculator gives me:

Ca+2 13.1 mg/l
Mg+2 22.0 mg/l
Na+ 35.0 mg/l
Cl- 92.1 mg/l
SO4-2 72.7 mg/l
Alkalinity -21.9 ppm as CaCO3
ResidualAlkalinity -44.1 ppm as CaCO3

 

[ajdelange]

There is always the possibility that one program is wrong in some aspect while the other isn't but even if that is not the case it is impossible to predict exactly what will happen when one adds lime to hard carbonaceous water. The 1 mEq/L rule is a rule of thumb - an approximation. DeClerck recommends calculation of the required amount of lime and then three tests with that amount of lime for one and the other two with ±10%. After the tests the treated samples are measured and the dose that most successfully decarbonated the water used for the full volume.

Since Kai did the Brewer's Friend calculator differences between the two are not because of different outlooks by two different guys but perhaps are due to evolving understanding on Kai's part. I note that some of the numbers listed for comparison in #6 are in dH and mEq/L and some in mg/L. Are you getting confused by the distinction between those units?

When it comes to pH prediction that is a whole different quagmire of uncertainty. Some of the programs try to predict the effects of malt buffering based on the malts color, some on empirical observations of mash pH, some on measurements or varying quality and some on combinations of these. Little wonder then that the results vary from calculator to calculator.

 

[FourSeasonAngler]

I note that some of the numbers listed for comparison in #6 are in dH and mEq/L and some in mg/L. Are you getting confused by the distinction between those units?

I had done the conversions months ago and now I'm wondering if I maintained equivalent units in further comparisons. (So, probably yes :cross

I have no way of testing my water for the effect of lime treatment other than to brew with it.

A pH meter is on my wish list. So is an RO system. However, in my current economic condition they are likely to remain on that list a very long time.

 

[stpug]

No, I hope I haven't stated somewhere that higher calcium content can impede flocculation. That effect is fairly consistent. Throw in a bunch of calcium salt and the beer will clear faster.

What you may have confused is that elevated calcium content and its interaction with lager yeast can negatively upset the metabolism of the yeast. I wouldn't be too surprised if the Czech Pils yeast is one that can be susceptible to that effect. I have my own anecdotal evidence that its true, but not definitive. There is evidence that yeast can be acclimated to differing water conditions, but I expect that it also alters the character of their fermentation. For that reason, I do recommend that brewers explore lower calcium content in their brewing water when using strains like Czech Pils lager yeast.

Of course, you are correct. I was working off of faulty memory. What I was recalling was this post at AHA forums:

https://www.homebrewersassociation.org/forum/index.php?topic=18056.msg228556#msg228556

 

[D-Train]

I have no way of testing my water for the effect of lime treatment other than to brew with it.

You should consider getting the GH&KH test kit that Kai reccomends. Actually his calculator won't even give the resulting post-lime treatment water profile without inputing the post-treatment GH&KH, so I'm surprised that you appear to be getting those numbers. My water is very similar to yours. I was able to knock hardness down to 11 from 15 and alkalinity to 2 from 14 with lime treatment. I have yet to brew with the water but will be this week. I have a German Pils on deck and I'll still probably cut with 25% RO just to soften it up a bit and use a few ounces of acid malt in the mash. Bohemian Pils should be even softer than that and would require even more RO dilution. Like you I found that alkalinity reduction comes at a price, in a sense that the extra calcium needed forces you to increase the chloride and sulfate to fairly high levels, especially to keep final calcium above the oft recommended levels. Still, it seems like a nice way to stop paying for RO water at the store.

 

[ajdelange]

I was able to knock hardness down to 11 from 15 and alkalinity to 2 from 14 with lime treatment.

Is that really what you mean to say? Alkalinity and hardness should both go down by the same amount.

 

[D-Train]

Is that really what you mean to say? Alkalinity and hardness should both go down by the same amount.

Yes, though now you have me questioning if something is wrong with my calcs because you've probably forgotten more than I'll ever know on the subject.

I tested my water at 15 GH and 14 KH. I assumed pH of 7.2 because that's what my city publishes. I assumed 60/40 Ca to Mg because I found lab reports from people in cities surrounding me and they all seemed to contain similar levels of hardness as me in roughly 60/40 proportions. That gives me 9 Ca and 6 Mg. I boosted Ca to 15.6 dH using CaSO4 and CaCl2, although that's an estimate based on Kai's spreadsheet because I don't have a high-precision scale (mine only measures whole grams). Let's round the hardness up and that makes my pre-lime treatment water GH=22 (15.6 Ca + 6 Mg) and KH=14. Post-lime treatment measured GH=11 and KH=3. Both GH and KH were reduced by 11 so it looks like they did go down by the same amount, no? Any suggestions on the validity of my approach would be much appreciated. I'll concede that the lack of a high-precision scale and lack of pH meter sort of makes this a crap shoot, but at least the KH reduction from 14->3 seems to support that it worked. Again, suggestions or critique appreciated.

 

[ajdelange]

That all makes a lot more sense.

Only suggestion I would have is to get a kit that measures in mEq/L (or ppm as CaCO3 which is 50 times mEq/L) and use those units rather than KH (which isn't harndess at all) and GH a unit of each which is worth 2*10/56.07 = .357 mEq. Of course if you are comfortable with those units why not?

 

[FourSeasonAngler]

You should consider getting the GH&KH test kit that Kai reccomends. Actually his calculator won't even give the resulting post-lime treatment water profile without inputing the post-treatment GH&KH, so I'm surprised that you appear to be getting those numbers.

Great advice, I'll have to look into one of these kits.

Still, it seems like a nice way to stop paying for RO water at the store.

I was having distilled water delivered to my home in 5 gallon jugs by the Hinkley man @ $8/pop +$4 jug deposit. It got expensive fast especially considering I was doing 10 gallon batches and using nearly 15 gallons of water per batch and treating each batch with salts and acid as needed.

I'm going to stick with tap water and really fine tune my water treatments before I delve into blending water. I'd really like to get to the point where I have a firm grasp on water chemistry as it relates to brewing.