Oxygen absorbing caps and priming sugar

[BrewBuddy2]

I am planning to make a Christmas beer based on Avery's Old Jubilation Ale for next Christmas (11 months away by the time I'll bottle) so I was going to use the oxygen absorbing caps because of the long storage time. Should I adjust the amount of priming sugar I use in the 5 gal batch because of this?

I would think I should use a little more than 3/4 cup if the caps are going to absorb some or all of the oxygen in the bottles. Thanks for the help!

 

[Revvy]

uh, no..... you're overthinking this somehow.

just use the normal amount.

 

[teucer]

Fermentation is an anaerobic reaction and does not require oxygen; the stuff the caps absorb therefore doesn't affect how much CO2 is produced.

 

[helmingstay]

There actually are a number of reports from the field [1] that these caps require more priming sugar. Makes sense when you think about it -- the structure of 02 and C02 is surprisingly similar, and even the main photosynthetic enzyme in plants, RUBISCO (yes, it's an acronym), has a hard time distinguishing them [2]. So, BrewBuddy, you weren't totally off-base there...

[1] http://www.northernbrewer.com/shop/review/product/list/id/210/category/22/
[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photorespiration

 

[Revvy]

More than likely any issues of Undercabonation is like 99.99% of ALL the reports of lack of or undercarbonation, simple user impatience, masked as looking for something ELSE to blame.

Carbonation is a simple and fool proff process yeast eats sugar and farts co2. It's not going to change the process because there's caps, which take days to weeks for the full "oxygen barrier" to seal.

With proper bottling practice, filling the bottles til they overflow slightly and pulling the wand back to set the headspace AND waiting several minutes with the caps sitting loosely on top (to allow co2, both in solution and being produced with the introduction of the new sugar- Sometimes the caps even pop off, or dance a bit in place while this is occurring if you look closely) before capping, there is little if any oxygen to need to be "absorbed."

Sorry but I call bs.....did anyone take time to ask the people bitching about them the same key questions we ask every noob coming on here saying there beer's not carbed? Like the 3 most important questions, 1) What's the gravity of the beer? 2)What temperature are you attempting to carb them at? 3) How long has it been before you "delcare" that your beer isn't carbed yet.

99.9% of those folks who we ask HERE answer 1 or more of those questions in such a way that shows that there's really no carbing problem, just an "impatience" problem.

I've seen enough new brewers mis-diagnosing or simply blaming something else than the obvious (usually impatience regardless) for their issues, to doubt most of the complaints I see about stuff. ESPECIALLY when there's no supporting evidence to prove otherwise. OR when it's only a few complaints over the millions of users of said product over the decades.

If this were anything real, we homebrewers would have been discussing this for years.....but except for a few sketchy complaints, there's nothing.

And honestly there's no logical reason why a beer would require more sugar with one kind of cap over another...And if that were the case, the manufacturers would have included that in their instructions...they would know more about it, wouldn't you think?

 

[CS223]

I've used OA caps from the beginning and dextrose priming sugar at the normal priming rate. I bottle primed, as in accurately measured the priming sugar for each individual bottle on my reloading scale then added it to each bottle and filled. I didn't have any weak carbonation issues. Next time I make it by the LHBS, I'll get some plain caps and perform a comparison test.

 

[helmingstay]

Next time I make it by the LHBS, I'll get some plain caps and perform a comparison test.

+1

@Revvy If the caps are actually *absorbing*, as the thread title and label says (http://www.northernbrewer.com/shop/o2-absorbing-caps-144-ct.html), then 1. it's not unlikely that the absorbing substrate binds CO2 in addition to O2, and 2. (if 1 is true) that a non-trivial quantity of gas is absorbed (or adsorbed). Remember, a very large volume of gas can fit in a very small space when it changes to a solid form (for example, via a chemical reaction).

That said, I'm merely positing a plausible mechanism. I'll leave it to science (e.g. experiment) to determine if there's a fig of difference...

 

[DrHop]

I'm not sure how they work but they probably can only absorb a small amount. In a bottle there should be a tiny amount of oxygen and a ton of CO2. I doubt they can absorb enough CO2 to affect carbonation levels.