I completely underestimated role of oxygen

bctdi · Apr 24, 2011

So on the one hand we have Chris White of White labs and Jamil Z who both basically eat sleep and breath yeast who say 8 ppm of O2 isn't optimum for yeast health and on the other side we have some home brewers who say my beer is fine with shaking.....Tough one , but I'm going with Chris White on this one....I bought the kit las week.

This was great info and pushed me over the edge to go ahead and spend a few bucks on this. Besides , the stone / wand are a 1 time expenditure and the o2 costs like 33 pennies per batch , so why the hell not?
This would be a good sticky.Can we stick this thread?Lots of good info in here. :mug:

jfowler1 · Apr 24, 2011

scadieux said:
I made the same recipe (oatmeal stout) with and without oxygen.

Day and night result.

Took less time to ferment, reached FG and much better taste. Drier and more grain flavor coming through.

Thanks for sharing your findings. This is exactly what I was looking for. I also felt like the results were day and night, but it is nice to hear someone put a batch head to head and confirmed my thoughts.

Joe

scadieux · Apr 24, 2011

Fact is beer is fine with shaking... I was making my oatmeal stout without oxygen and I thought it was good. It is just *better* with oxygen...

Oxygen is like you don't know what you've been missing until you try it.

TTB-J · Apr 24, 2011

All I'm saying is that you guys just aren't shaking hard and long enough. When I'm done shaking my carboy, it's nothing but a pile of glass and fear. I have caused foundation problems in my house I have shaken that thing so hard. The carboy is just a shadow of its former self now, I have shaken all that is good and noble out of it. Until they make an oxygen tank that will put the fear of God in my carboy, then I'm sticking with shaking.

But that's just anecdotal so YMMV.

simtel20 · Apr 24, 2011

TTB-J said:
All I'm saying is that you guys just aren't shaking hard and long enough. When I'm done shaking my carboy, it's nothing but a pile of glass and fear. I have caused foundation problems in my house I have shaken that thing so hard. The carboy is just a shadow of its former self now, I have shaken all that is good and noble out of it. Until they make an oxygen tank that will put the fear of God in my carboy, then I'm sticking with shaking.

But that's just anecdotal so YMMV.

Your carboy shaker was made by nicola tesla, then?

Rundownhouse · Apr 24, 2011

Just finished knocking out 11g of an all-Chinook Amber. Knocked out 5.5g of 1.052 wort into two carboys. One carboy got my usual aeration treatment, which is 60s of a mix stir driven by a drill. 20s one way, 20s the other way, and then 20s back the first direction. I always get a good vortex and tons of splashing, leaving a bunch of foam on top when I'm done. The other carboy got 60s of pure O2, courtesy of my little set up with 1.4oz O2 tank and regulator.

There's a bit of a learning curve to the O2 set up. First, I don't know what type of stone I've got on there, since my girlfriend bought it as a gift and can't remember where. So it could be a 2 micron, it could be a .5 micron. Those seem like the two most common sizes. Second, it came with a regulator with a barbed output, over which was a really small diameter hose, which was then hand-fit into a hose with an ID the same as the OD of the small hose, which then went through what I assume is a sanitary air filter and down to the stone. Of course, when I started to hit the carboy with O2, I felt/heard it leaking, and traced the leak to where the hose off the barb was hand fit into the larger hose. I tried pinching it off as best as I could, but clearly all the O2 leaving the tank didn't make it to the stone. I'll have to get a clamp or something on there to make a real, secure fitting between the hoses.

At the end of the day, the mix-stir carboy had a bunch more foam on it than the O2. But hopefully what O2 foam there was was 100% O2, so it doesn't need as much.

Both carboys got pitched at 1:30 central with a bit under 1.5L of an intermittent-shaking starter of WY1026, British Cask Ale. They're sitting in a controlled chest freezer with a sp of 67 and diff of 1. I'll keep an eye on how they do and let everyone know the progress.

Steve973 · Apr 24, 2011

+1 on pure oxygenation. I use an inline oxygenator, and its positive effects are undeniable. If you don't want to oxygenate, then don't; home brewing means making your own beer your own way. You will not hurt my feelings either way, I promise.

ayoungrad · Apr 24, 2011

What is an inline oxygenator? Where do you get one?

GuldTuborg · Apr 24, 2011

So my oxygenation kit arrived last week as well. Do you guys sanitize the inside of the gas line (from the regulator to the stone) or just the stone and outside of the tubing?

It would seem a real hassle to sanitize the inside part of the tubing, and part of me is hoping nothing nasty would go through the stone, either due to size or the O2 concentration inside the line. But I'll admit, I don't really know what could and couldn't live in a pure O2 environment for how long. Any takers?

Also, I may be trying a split batch sometime soon as well, if I can find the time and carboy space. I'll post back here with any differences.

scadieux · Apr 24, 2011

Nothing survives in pure O2. I only sanitize the exterior tubing + stone (put in boiling water for 5 min).

Gargon · Apr 24, 2011

+1 on the "yeast" book this book will give light on the mysteries of fermention!

EricCSU · Apr 24, 2011

jfowler1 said:
Lets slow down a minute here.

The fact that pure O2 is a really good/better method for aeration is not up for debate any longer. Why, because I'm the OP and I can say whatever I want. Can we agree it is a pretty good method? I think we can. You think shaking things around is just as good - okay. I know I fell into this trap for a few posts too, but maybe we just need to agree to disagree about the science here. Some people think humans rode around on dinosaurs. Who am I to say they didn't? After all, I haven't conducted any experiments to prove my point.

Now that that is out of the way.

First of all, no, I will not be conducting any sort of experiments for comparing a beer with O2 to a beer without O2. I've got a little hunch the beer with the O2 will be better (because I made 24 batches without, and 1 batch with, and the "with" wins - coincidence?). And since I only get to brew about once a month, I am not going to start undercutting my beer quality for the sake of "experiment" to appease some doubting Tom. Buy a kit and see for yourself, or don't. It is not effecting me.

Second, experimentation about dissolved oxygen concentrations has already been done. How can you possibly say you read the entire thread and didn't see anything concrete to that effect? As I am typing this, I am on my couch, and kind of shrugging in disbelief. Even I feel confused. Personally, I quoted and referenced experiments done by Wyeast and White Labs. I offered page numbers and links. But whatever, if that is not enough for you - fine. It is not effecting me.

Finally, I do not have any desire to "convince" anyone who was not already thinking seriously about making this process tweak. The truth is, if you don't want to start doing it, I just don't care. I will never have to drink your beer, so if you are happy with it, then I am happy you are happy. Just brew, shake that carboy up really well, and enjoy. Okay? It is not effecting me.

So in summary, if anyone has been on the fence, and wants to take my "anecdotal" findings at face value - great. I have a feeling you will be happy with your "anecdotally" improved results. For those that responded to my post about finding great improvements with O2 by saying "I disagree!"; that's okay too.

I have no agenda, and I do not want to become the "O2 guy", but for anyone already on the fence, don't let "I disagree!" keep you from making better beer. "I disagree" can stick to what has worked for them for so long now. They obviously know what they are doing, and their beer has no room for improvement. It was ridiculous for me to suggest such a thing.

In fact, I could have been wrong from the start. After all, I have nothing to offer but some anecdotal evidence of one great batch of beer. It was probably dumb luck. And maybe my taste buds aren't even that good. I still haven't drank my beer back to back with some poorly handled Guinness; so how can I compare it? You're right, this whole thread was probably just a waste of everyone's time. So I apologize to anyone who has contributed.

Now excuse me, I have a stout to go choke down.

Joe

Fantastic response.

remilard · Apr 24, 2011

nfazz said:
I'm not going to come on here and brag about my credentials, but I have more degrees and have done more research than the rest of the people on this board, I assure you.

Excellent! The effects of oxygen on fermentation including the downstream impacts on beer flavor and tasting panel reaction are discussed ad naseum in the professional and academic literature. A scholar and gentleman such as yourself will have no problem finding this literature.

The kinds of homebrewer kitchen science experiments you propose have also been performed. In fact I read about several each year. You should have no trouble finding write-ups on these as well.

If you want the reader's digest version what you will find is that in terms of tasting panel preference, optimal oxygen levels vary by yeast strain. For many ale strains the ~8 ppm that is possible (but not likely achievable unless you have a mix-stir or an aquarium pump and a lot of patience) via saturation with air is close enough to optimal. For most lager strains it is not. For wheat beer strains, counter-intuitively higher oxygen suppresses ester and phenol production but tasting panels prefer that. Very high gravity beers may have optimal oxygen levels higher than those of their standard gravity counterparts.

jfowler1 · Apr 24, 2011

Thanks Eric.

And as an aside, thanks so much for all the work you do cataloging all the CYBI recipes. You have no idea how many times I have run a google search to find a recipe I know you posted somewhere. That is awesome work.

I have another anecdote for anyone still interested.

My wife and I went to my parents house for dinner. I brought a few of my stouts to have with my dad.

I poured, we drank, and his exact words were, "Wow, this tastes like a real beer." My mom kind of snickered, so he followed with, "No, I mean, like it came from a real craft brewery." I thought of this thread right away.

My dad has tried every beer I ever made. That is roughly 24 batches. This is the first time he said that it tasted like a "real" beer. Again, coincidence?

Kind of backs up the earlier comment I made where I tried to contrast between a great homebrew and a great beer.

Happy Easter,
Joe

EricCSU · Apr 25, 2011

jfowler1 said:
Thanks Eric.

And as an aside, thanks so much for all the work you do cataloging all the CYBI recipes. You have no idea how many times I have run a google search to find a recipe I know you posted somewhere. That is awesome work.

I have another anecdote for anyone still interested.

My wife and I went to my parents house for dinner. I brought a few of my stouts to have with my dad.

I poured, we drank, and his exact words were, "Wow, this tastes like a real beer." My mom kind of snickered, so he followed with, "No, I mean, like it came from a real craft brewery." I thought of this thread right away.

My dad has tried every beer I ever made. That is roughly 24 batches. This is the first time he said that it tasted like a "real" beer. Again, coincidence?

Kind of backs up the earlier comment I made where I tried to contrast between a great homebrew and a great beer.

Happy Easter,
Joe

You are welcome. It is my pleasure, I have learned so much.

Eric.

GuldTuborg · Apr 25, 2011

scadieux said:
Nothing survives in pure O2. I only sanitize the exterior tubing + stone (put in boiling water for 5 min).

That's what I figured, but I wanted some confirmation before I infected 5 gallons of beer. Thanks!

Rundownhouse · Apr 25, 2011

After about 24 hours, its hard to tell any difference between the carboy that got agitation and the one that got O2. Both at the same gravity, 1.033, and both about the same krausen. The agitation carboy may have a bit of a thicker krausen, but its hard to tell.

emjay · Apr 25, 2011

ayoungrad said:
What is an inline oxygenator? Where do you get one?

An inline oxygenator is a bit more expensive but definitely the most elegant solution, and without a doubt the best method overall. I know MoreBeer sells at least two versions (though one is crazy expensive), but I'm not sure of anywhere else.

Basically, it places the oxygenation stone directly inline (as in, right in the flow of the wort), generally right after the chiller, but obviously before it reaches the fermentor.

I basically made mine with some stainless steel fittings and a polycarbonate sight glass in order to be able to see the bubbling to let better gauge the flow of oxygen. It connects directly to the wort outlet of my plate chiller, and with a quick disconnect fitting at the other end to connect the hose that goes to the fermentor. The assembly also houses a thermometer in the flow of wort, immediately after it comes out of the chiller but before it gets oxygenated, although if I decided to measure the temp post-oxygenation, I'd basically just have to switch the quick disconnect to the other side.

emjay · Apr 25, 2011

Rundownhouse said:
After about 24 hours, its hard to tell any difference between the carboy that got agitation and the one that got O2. Both at the same gravity, 1.033, and both about the same krausen. The agitation carboy may have a bit of a thicker krausen, but its hard to tell.

On average, an insufficiently oxygenated fermentation should finish attenuating about 1-2 gravity points higher, according to Chris White. And if you harvest the yeast, continuing to under-oxygenate it will result in increasing attenuation problems with each successive generation.

But something like an average of 1-2 points means that comparing a single batch might not even show a difference. That's not to say that if you end up showing no difference, that your results should be dismissed. It's still a data point, which is useful, because a 1-2 point average difference may only become obvious when looked at statistically (though the problem I have with household experiments like these are that controls are almost impossible to keep adequately rigorous). Similarly, if you DO find a 1-2 point difference - or possibly even greater - the results from a single (or even a few) such batches are insufficient to be conclusive. It's even possible that the yeast you're using simply has low oxygen requirements, although it's conceivable that the oxygen requirements could be extremely high with British Cask Ale yeast, even if it shows no difference (though I've never used it before, so I won't even speculate).

Not that it ultimately matters though, since all the science, conducted far more rigorously than would ever be possible inside the household, demonstrates the positive difference that sufficient oxygenation makes - both in terms of attenuation AND taste - conclusively enough to result in a STRONG consensus among professionals and academics alike. The only group which significantly debates the fact at all is the homebrewing community, who unsurprisingly are the only ones largely WITHOUT the capabilities to conduct sufficiently controlled experiments with enough samples/data points to be even remotely useful.

So, I applaud your willingness to contribute to the body of knowledge available to homebrewers, and it's not my intention to minimize that contribution, although it's probably more useful as an exercise in seeing-for-yourself. I love charting new territory and conducting my own experiments to figure out information I am otherwise unable of attaining to my satisfaction. But as far as figuring out whether using oxygen is helpful at all, I'd probably consider it just a waste of beer - though if I ended up with the same volume of beer I was going to make anyways, it's not like the less-oxygenated half is going to taste bad (unless the well-oxygenated one is also bad, or if it gets infected I suppose), in which case it's really not much of a sacrifice. Either way, I wouldn't mind hearing your final results.

Golddiggie · Apr 25, 2011

I've used the Williams Brewing O2 kit in the past two brews I've made. I've already noticed much faster fermentation starts. With the batch I brewed on Sunday, it was fully active in under 18 hours. I only gave it about 45 seconds of O2, turned up just enough so that I could see it on the top of the wort (put the wand in as deep as I could/dared)... Even if that's the larges difference between the methods, besides happier yeast, I think it's worth it. If I can get better brew out of it too, then even better.

IMO, the setup from Williams Brewing is very elegant, and very easy to use. Connect the wand to the vinyl tubing and the regulator (after putting the regulator onto the O2 tank). Have the wand already sanitized and insert it into the wort. Turn on the gas until it's bubbling to the top, wait X seconds and then turn off, unscrew the regulator, rinse off the wand and put it all away until next time. Takes all of 2-3 minutes MAX to use. Less time than you would spend shaking the primary to try to oxygenate. Doesn't use any electricity, like the pump method does (I know, not enough juice to talk about, it's the principle) and you don't need to worry about any cords getting messed up... If I can use one tank and oxygenate 10-15 batches, I'll be very happy. I say 10-15 because I'm using ~45 seconds per batch. I do have a barley wine on deck that will probably get 1-2 minutes of O2 before the yeast gets pitched. The OG there is ~1.110, so a big one...

emjay · Apr 25, 2011

Golddiggie said:
I've used the Williams Brewing O2 kit in the past two brews I've made. I've already noticed much faster fermentation starts. With the batch I brewed on Sunday, it was fully active in under 18 hours. I only gave it about 45 seconds of O2, turned up just enough so that I could see it on the top of the wort (put the wand in as deep as I could/dared)... Even if that's the larges difference between the methods, besides happier yeast, I think it's worth it. If I can get better brew out of it too, then even better.

IMO, the setup from Williams Brewing is very elegant, and very easy to use. Connect the wand to the vinyl tubing and the regulator (after putting the regulator onto the O2 tank). Have the wand already sanitized and insert it into the wort. Turn on the gas until it's bubbling to the top, wait X seconds and then turn off, unscrew the regulator, rinse off the wand and put it all away until next time. Takes all of 2-3 minutes MAX to use. Less time than you would spend shaking the primary to try to oxygenate. Doesn't use any electricity, like the pump method does (I know, not enough juice to talk about, it's the principle) and you don't need to worry about any cords getting messed up... If I can use one tank and oxygenate 10-15 batches, I'll be very happy. I say 10-15 because I'm using ~45 seconds per batch. I do have a barley wine on deck that will probably get 1-2 minutes of O2 before the yeast gets pitched. The OG there is ~1.110, so a big one...

Chris White also recommends hitting it with oxygen again about 12 hours after pitching.

Golddiggie · Apr 25, 2011

IF I can do that, I will. Issue is with my ******* LL, the batch will probably be fermenting in my brew-buddy's basement (a pretty stable 66F year round)... If we brew on a Saturday, I might be able to get back there on Sunday to hit it with more O2. Otherwise, it will need to go with just the initial hit... Still, far more than I would have done if I had brewed the batch earlier... I do plan on doing a stepped starter for that batch, so that I have close to the proper amount of yeast needed. I'll probably do a couple of 1/2 gallon starters, then a final 3qt starter for it. Unless I can get my hands on a solid gallon jar to use.

Of course, I'll hit the starter with some O2 too. :rockin:

GuldTuborg · Apr 26, 2011

Golddiggie said:
Unless I can get my hands on a solid gallon jar to use. Of course, I'll hit the starter with some O2 too. :rockin:

For maybe a dollar more than the cost of an empty gallon jug, I bought a few gallons of fancy apple juice from a local mart and made some EdWort's Apfelwein. The empty jugs (which appear to be the same as the ones I can buy empty at my LHBS) make for excellent containers for starters, experimental batches, etc. Very much worth the minor expense.

lschiavo · Apr 26, 2011

Golddiggie said:
IF I can do that, I will. Issue is with my ******* LL, the batch will probably be fermenting in my brew-buddy's basement (a pretty stable 66F year round)... If we brew on a Saturday, I might be able to get back there on Sunday to hit it with more O2. Otherwise, it will need to go with just the initial hit... Still, far more than I would have done if I had brewed the batch earlier... I do plan on doing a stepped starter for that batch, so that I have close to the proper amount of yeast needed. I'll probably do a couple of 1/2 gallon starters, then a final 3qt starter for it. Unless I can get my hands on a solid gallon jar to use. Of course, I'll hit the starter with some O2 too. :rockin:

Can't your brew buddy hit it with some O2? Or does he just drink the beer like some of mine?

meadowstream · Apr 26, 2011

This thread has added a lot of content over the past week! I haven't read everything, so hopefully this note will not be repetitive.

Oxygen is important because of its role in getting glycogen concentrations ramped up, and glycogen is vital for sterol synthesis. Glycogen contributes to yeast membrane function - and sterol-depleted yeast do not process sugars well or maybe at all. After fermentation, cells with healthy glycogen levels are safer from autolysis (according to people who say they know what they are talking about.) This is from "Brewing Yeast and Fermentation" page 91.

So...the upshot is that the customary way for homebrewers to ensure healthy yeast membranes is to give yeast adequate oxygen. Some brewers have added olive oil, too, and achieved the same results (just a drop) because olive oil results in strong glycogen levels in beer, too.

Best to all!

ayoungrad · Apr 26, 2011

Sounds like the glycogen accounts for why dry yeast is said to need less oxygen than liquid yeast.

Although earlier someone mentioned sterols as the reason?

TTB-J · Apr 26, 2011

meadowstream said:
This thread has added a lot of content over the past week! I haven't read everything, so hopefully this note will not be repetitive.

Oxygen is important because of its role in getting glycogen concentrations ramped up, and glycogen is vital for sterol synthesis. Glycogen contributes to yeast membrane function - and sterol-depleted yeast do not process sugars well or maybe at all. After fermentation, cells with healthy glycogen levels are safer from autolysis (according to people who say they know what they are talking about.) This is from "Brewing Yeast and Fermentation" page 91.

So...the upshot is that the customary way for homebrewers to ensure healthy yeast membranes is to give yeast adequate oxygen. Some brewers have added olive oil, too, and achieved the same results (just a drop) because olive oil results in strong glycogen levels in beer, too.

Best to all!

Hmmm, for those adding olive oil, do they simply put a drop in the carboy right before pitching? I suppose the risk of contamination is pretty low, but would you get the same benefits if you put it in at flameout?

emjay · Apr 26, 2011

ayoungrad said:
Sounds like the glycogen accounts for why dry yeast is said to need less oxygen than liquid yeast.

Although earlier someone mentioned sterols as the reason?

So did he, if you read closely.

Rundownhouse · Apr 26, 2011

emjay said:
That's not to say that if you end up showing no difference, that your results should be dismissed. It's still a data point

That's all I'm doing, just providing some data to the thread. I'm fully on the O2 side, believe me.

In general I hate messing with my beers more than necessary, so I'm not going to take any measurements today, but I'll probably do so again tomorrow, and then again maybe on day 7.

My beers have generally been good or better in the past using my mix-stir method of aeration, so I don't mind going a couple more batches where one carboy gets O2 and one gets mix-stir. When I start on a chain of lagers though, its O2 all the way, baby!

coypoo · Apr 26, 2011

Rundownhouse said:
That's all I'm doing, just providing some data to the thread. I'm fully on the O2 side, believe me.

In general I hate messing with my beers more than necessary, so I'm not going to take any measurements today, but I'll probably do so again tomorrow, and then again maybe on day 7.

My beers have generally been good or better in the past using my mix-stir method of aeration, so I don't mind going a couple more batches where one carboy gets O2 and one gets mix-stir. When I start on a chain of lagers though, its O2 all the way, baby!

I dont know that we need to "write off" his results. I for 1 am interested b/c it is what the OP is trying to persuade people to do all along. Try O2 and see if it makes a difference in your beer. I understand him getting upset w/ people saying "splashing has worked for me." How do they know when thye havent compared it to pure O2. If the experiment doesnt work out for this person, and there isnt any taste difference, then that is one pt for the "no diff" side compared to points for the other side of the argument. But a 1-2 pt diffence in attenuation, while likely not statistically significant, is still of relevance.

I completely underestimated role of oxygen

Help Support Homebrew Talk:

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Supporting Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Supporting Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Supporting Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Supporting Member

This space for rent.

Supporting Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Similar threads