thegerm
Well-Known Member
Professional breweries cannot drop their wort from 212 to pitching temp in 15 minutes the way homebrewers can. They also need to separate solids from the hot wort. An extra 30 minutes of wort at 195 means an extra 30 minutes of alpha acid isomerization as well as resin dissolution. This is arguably the source of the "zero minute hop addition," as a practice.
This topic was recently discussed by Mike "Tasty" Mcdole on the brewing network. He clones pro beers by simulating their processes via a hot whirlpool. So his zero minute hops are actually 30 minute hot whirlpool hops. He claims that if you cannot whirlpool that you could achieve the same results by simply moving these 0 minute hops up 20 minutes in the boil.
I have a pump, and I whirlpool, but I start 15 minutes before flame out, so it's a boiling whirlpool... mostly for the sanitizing effect the boiling wort has on the pump and tubing.
My question is... if you are a homebrewer that CAN chill fast, why would you bother with the extended hot stand or hot whirlpool? Is there some other benefit to a nonboiling isomerization and/or nonboiling hot hop oil dissolution?
Tasty's reasoning for using a hot whirlpool is pretty simple: "I do it this way, because they do it this way." and while that may simplify the issue when your goal is pure cloning, I'm curious for the purpose of more broad homebrewing technique. For example, I want to create a hop bursted IPA recipe and I need to choose whether to hot-whirlpool for 30 mins and throw in hops at flameout, waiting to start the chiller till the end of the hot whirlpool, or start the chiller at flameout and throw in those hops at 20 minutes previous to flameout + chiller.
I appreciate your thoughts.
This topic was recently discussed by Mike "Tasty" Mcdole on the brewing network. He clones pro beers by simulating their processes via a hot whirlpool. So his zero minute hops are actually 30 minute hot whirlpool hops. He claims that if you cannot whirlpool that you could achieve the same results by simply moving these 0 minute hops up 20 minutes in the boil.
I have a pump, and I whirlpool, but I start 15 minutes before flame out, so it's a boiling whirlpool... mostly for the sanitizing effect the boiling wort has on the pump and tubing.
My question is... if you are a homebrewer that CAN chill fast, why would you bother with the extended hot stand or hot whirlpool? Is there some other benefit to a nonboiling isomerization and/or nonboiling hot hop oil dissolution?
Tasty's reasoning for using a hot whirlpool is pretty simple: "I do it this way, because they do it this way." and while that may simplify the issue when your goal is pure cloning, I'm curious for the purpose of more broad homebrewing technique. For example, I want to create a hop bursted IPA recipe and I need to choose whether to hot-whirlpool for 30 mins and throw in hops at flameout, waiting to start the chiller till the end of the hot whirlpool, or start the chiller at flameout and throw in those hops at 20 minutes previous to flameout + chiller.
I appreciate your thoughts.