Ward Labs Mineral Analysis of Tree House Julius

[kaz4121]

Inspired by the @carvetop Heady Topper thread (https://www.homebrewtalk.com/forum/threads/heady-topper-results-from-ward-labs.481031/) and Mike Tonsmeire (@Oldsock) Sept 17 BYO article, I decided to have Julius tested by Ward Labs.

I did a full write up on my blog (http://thirdleapbrew.com/technical/ward-labs-mineral-analysis-of-tree-house-julius/), but here is the TL;DR version:

Ward Labs W-5A Brewer’s Test for Tree House Julius

Tree House Julius canned 3/19/2019 14:41:23. Shipped to Ward Labs on 3/25/2019. Analyzed by Ward Labs on 3/29/2019.

Mineral Amount
pH 4.6
Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) Est, ppm 1593
Electrical Conductivity, mmho/cm 2.65
Cations / Anions, me/L 48.5 / 21.8
Sodium (Na), ppm 32
Potassium (K), ppm 1111
Calcium (Ca), ppm 64
Magnesium (Mg), ppm 185
Total Hardness (CaCO3), ppm 931
Nitrate (NO3-N), ppm 8.6
*Sulfate (SO4), ppm 474
Chloride (Cl), ppm 299
Carbonate (CO3), ppm < 1.0
Bicarbonate (HCO3), ppm 172
Total Alkalinity (CaCO3), ppm 141
Total Phosphorus (P), ppm 361.80
Total Iron (Fe), ppm < 0.01

I know it's not incredibly helpful, but I think the key takeaway from it is aim for around 50 ppm calcium, 150 ppm sulfate, 150 ppm chloride starting water profile. Also, Julius finishes with a pH of 4.6.

 

[IslandLizard]

Yowsers! No wonder it's 'thick.'

The Potassium at 1111 ppm is perhaps the most surprising element of presence.
Ca is darn low, less than half of the Mg.
Where is all that Phosphorus coming from? Hops?

 

[McKnuckle]

The mineral content is dramatically affected by the ingredients that made the beer - the malt in particular. So these results are not indicative in the least of the starting water profile.

Also remember that even if it was plain water, it is concentrated by evaporation during the boil. Two gallons of water with 50 ppm Ca becomes one gallon of water with 100 ppm Ca after an hour long boil.

 

[GoeHaarden]

The mineral content is dramatically affected by the ingredients that made the beer - the malt in particular.

This was my first thought about this...

 

[ccous]

I know it's not incredibly helpful, but I think the key takeaway from it is aim for 30 - 50 ppm calcium, 350 - 400 ppm sulfate, 300 - 400 ppm chloride starting water profile. Also, Julius finishes with a pH of 4.6.

First of all, thanks a lot for doing this. This will spark some great discussion. These numbers, though, shouldn’t be your starting point for building water. Malt will add about 50-100 sulfate and 200-300 ppm chloride, as well as 25 ppm calcium. Of course these numbers vary (probably widely) depending on a host of factors. Furthermore, fermentation uses up some sulfate (how much??). So, the finished beer numbers and the approximate contributions for malt and subtraction during fermentation can be used to build a staring profile.

 

[kaz4121]

First of all, thanks a lot for doing this. This will spark some great discussion. These numbers, though, shouldn’t be your starting point for building water. Malt will add about 50-100 sulfate and 200-300 ppm chloride, as well as 25 ppm calcium. Of course these numbers vary (probably widely) depending on a host of factors. Furthermore, fermentation uses up some sulfate (how much??). So, the finished beer numbers and the approximate contributions for malt and subtraction during fermentation can be used to build a staring profile.

Good catch. I copied over the wrong sentence, updated my original post.

It’s not exact science, but I think it just helps reinforce what people were seeing subjectively. Obviously different ingredients and processes will yield different results (it’s not a linear relationship with water and beer minerals) but still interesting to me to look at how drastically different they are and think about all those variables.

 

[kaz4121]

The mineral content is dramatically affected by the ingredients that made the beer - the malt in particular. So these results are not indicative in the least of the starting water profile.

Also remember that even if it was plain water, it is concentrated by evaporation during the boil. Two gallons of water with 50 ppm Ca becomes one gallon of water with 100 ppm Ca after an hour long boil.

Yes, the final beer mineral content is a combination of many variables. Tonsmeire talks about that in the BYO article he wrote and I referenced in my blog. But I do think you can use finished water profile to help you tailor your starting water profile to get you in the ballpark of commercial examples. I mean, Tosmeire did it himself in his experiment!

 

[HopsAreGood]

Posted this in the other thread but I'll put it here too:


If you really want to dig deeper into this you can. If we take the one example that is given (a pretty standard NEIPA in terms of grains, hops, yeast) that we have lab analysis for...we get the following results for the starting water and the finished water.

Calcium: 36.2 % decrease
Magnesium: 3175% increase
Sodium: 321% increase
Sulfate: 353% increase
Chloride: 170% increase

They give us the lab results for the finished beer in a can of treehouse Julius:

Calcium: 64 ppm
Magnesium: 185 ppm
Sodium: 32 ppm
Sulfate: 474 ppm
Chloride: 299 ppm

So if we used the above percentages and reverse engineer them, we'd end up with the STARTING water to target for Julius: (Assuming these percentages remained true)

Calcium: 100ppm (36.2% decrease) 63.8
Magnesium: 6ppm (3175% increase) 190.5
Sodium: 10ppm (321% increase) 32.1
Sulfate: 135ppm (353% increase) 476.5
Chloride: 175ppm (170% increase) 297.5

These numbers will vary based on the Malt, hops, and yeast contributions but it's definitely a great starting point if you're trying to emulate the water profile of Julius.

 

[WBCo]

Yowsers! No wonder it's 'thick.'

The Potassium at 1111 ppm is perhaps the most surprising element of presence.
Ca is darn low, less than half of the Mg.
Where is all that Phosphorus coming from? Hops?

I dose KCl in my NE inspired IPAs, but I would love to know how much K I'm getting from the malt so I could compare my figures to these

 

[CascadesBrewer]

So if we used the above percentages and reverse engineer them, we'd end up with the STARTING water to target for Julius

Calcium: 100ppm (36.2% decrease) 63.8
Magnesium: 6ppm (3175% increase) 190.5
Sodium: 10ppm (321% increase) 32.1
Sulfate: 135ppm (353% increase) 476.5
Chloride: 175ppm (170% increase) 297.5

These numbers seem more reasonable. I cannot imagine they are starting in the 300-400 range for both Sulfate and Chloride. I have played around with doctoring beers, and Sulfate in the 300 range is very noticable, and Chloride in that range is very unpleasant and minerally.

 

[kaz4121]

Just wanted to let everyone know that I followed up the mineral analysis with beverage analytics here: http://thirdleapbrew.com/technical/beverage-analytics-of-tree-house-julius/

Analysis Method Results Units

Color ASBC Beer 10-A 10.8 SRM

pH ASBC Beer 9 4.60 –

Turbidity ASBC Beer 27-B 1821 NTU

Protein Discrete Analyzer 8.1 g/L

ABV ASBC Beer 4 7.10 % v/v

Density ASBC Beer 4 1.01346 g/mL

Specific Gravity ASBC Beer 4 1.01454 –

Apparent Extract ASBC Beer 4 3.72 % w/w

Real Extract ASBC Beer 4 6.18 % w/w

Attenuation ASBC Beer 4 64.7 %

CO2 ASBC Beer 4 4.6 g/L

DO ASBC Beer 4 0.004 mg/L

Bitterness ASBC Beer 23 121 IBU

 

[Lefou]

Low calcium? So Arnold WAS right.

 

[kaz4121]

Just wanted to let everyone know I followed up the Ward Labs mineral analysis with a second on a 2020 can of Julius and found some differences!
http://thirdleapbrew.com/technical/ward-labs-mineral-analysis-of-tree-house-julius-again/

 

[VikeMan]

If someone is serious about reproducing Julius' mineral profile in their finished beer, isn't the solution kind of obvious? Presented in pseudo-code...

10 Start with a water profile that's as informed as possible (a semi-SWAG to start).
20 Brew a Julius-like beer
30 Get the Julius-like beer analyzed
40 Compare the analysis of the Julius-like beer to the analysis of real Julius
50 If Julius-like equals (or nearly equals) Julius, END
60 GOTO 10

Now you have a starting water profile as close as anyone is going to get, short of industrial espionage.