A Stubborn Old Brewer?

[Strangebird]

I think your friend needs to read a brewing book. Having a degree in biology dosen't make somebody a brewer anymore than having a degree in geology makes you a stone mason.

I can actually attest to this. I have a geology degree and sucked at helping my friends to build a stone wall around their garden.

This guy sounds like he learned some incorrect methods and is unwittingly propagating them on to you. Body is the result of unfermentable sugars. No matter how long you wait in the primary that isn't going to change.

 

[damnyankee]

Oxygenating fermented beer has a number of flavor components. If your beer is particularly hoppy it will accelerate oxidation of the hop oils which will make your beer taste cheesy/vomity over time. Oxygen also oxidizes the beer, which lends to a cardboard taste. Also, adding oxygen to fermented beer increases exposure to wild, oxidative yeast like candida and brett which can infect the beer and increase the cardboard taste (in the case of candida) or funky/barnyard flavors (in the case of brett).

I don't really see the upside there.

If we can think beyond the Medieval methods of brewing for one moment, here's the hypothetical upside:

As yeast prefer aerobic environments:

yeast use (6) O2 + C6H12O6 (glucose) to produce (6) CO2 + (6) H20. There are no other byproducts (good or bad) or metabolites in that chemical reaction.

A carefully controlled infusion of a 6:1 ratio of O2 & glucose (priming sugar) into the wort just prior to bottling SHOULD (on paper) theoretically speed up bottle conditioning 6-fold. And since CO2 is a weak acid and it's loaded up quickly right after bottling, the CO2 should help "mellow" the beer sooner.

On paper, this means you could be drinking your fine brew in mere days instead of weeks.

Again: the key to aerobic fermentation is to ensure there is ample sugar with the oxygen for the yeast to munch on. If sugar is used up before the partial pressure of O2 in the wort, then the game is over: the O2 will be broken down and oxidized in the wort.

On paper, it works. Man, if I only had access to a chemistry lab with a pressurized system to keep O2 & CO2 in solution to see if Mother Nature behaves as predicted on paper...

DY

 

[iron_city_ap]

On paper, it works. Man, if I only had access to a chemistry lab with a pressurized system to keep O2 & CO2 in solution to see if Mother Nature behaves as predicted on paper...

and that, right there, is probably why you don't hear of this in the homebrew community. Possible in theory doesn't equal practical or actual. The other thing that confuses me, is the talk of 6:1 ratios and chemistry labs and whatnot, yet "Now, I don't go nuts and aerate as I do with the original wort prior to fermentation, but I do give a several whirls with my boat motor after I've added my priming sugar.
. Your theory and what you actually do seem far apart.

Its like the old 'measure it with a micrometer, mark it with a grease pen, and cut it with an axe' adage.

If you can prove the theory works and can find a way to make it practical and affordable for the rest of us, by all means, go for it.

 

[ReverseApacheMaster]

If we can think beyond the Medieval methods of brewing for one moment, here's the hypothetical upside:

As yeast prefer aerobic environments:

yeast use (6) O2 + C6H12O6 (glucose) to produce (6) CO2 + (6) H20. There are no other byproducts (good or bad) or metabolites in that chemical reaction.

Unless you are mixing in pure O2 you are also introducing whatever is kicking it in the air around you, which includes bacteria, mold spores, oxidative yeast, etc. which also will make their home in the beer. Even assuming the O2 is consumed before it can oxidize the beer and make it taste like cardboard over time the other critters you have invited into your beer over time can break down unfermentable sugars and develop other off flavors.

A carefully controlled infusion of a 6:1 ratio of O2 & glucose (priming sugar) into the wort just prior to bottling SHOULD (on paper) theoretically speed up bottle conditioning 6-fold. And since CO2 is a weak acid and it's loaded up quickly right after bottling, the CO2 should help "mellow" the beer sooner.

On paper, this means you could be drinking your fine brew in mere days instead of weeks.

The CO2 doesn't mellow the beer nearly as much as the yeast doing their clean up work affects cleaning up the green beer flavors. Granted, people force carb beer and drink it within days, I bet the beer still tastes better after weeks rather than days. Additionally, even without the contribution of oxygen beer can carbonate within days through the normal bottle conditioning process. It will still taste green.

Again: the key to aerobic fermentation is to ensure there is ample sugar with the oxygen for the yeast to munch on. If sugar is used up before the partial pressure of O2 in the wort, then the game is over: the O2 will be broken down and oxidized in the wort.

On paper, it works. Man, if I only had access to a chemistry lab with a pressurized system to keep O2 & CO2 in solution to see if Mother Nature behaves as predicted on paper...

DY

And like iron city said, that theory and what you do in practice are totally different...

 

[TheDom]

If we can think beyond the Medieval methods of brewing for one moment, here's the hypothetical upside:

As yeast prefer aerobic environments:

yeast use (6) O2 + C6H12O6 (glucose) to produce (6) CO2 + (6) H20. There are no other byproducts (good or bad) or metabolites in that chemical reaction.

While all that is true, you're focusing on one tree in an entire forest of chemical reactions that make up cellular respiration in the yeast. It seems like you're trying to say that in an aerobic environment yeast produce nothing but CO2 and H20, which is certainly not the case. If you're not saying that, my bad.

Again: the key to aerobic respiration is to ensure there is ample sugar with the oxygen for the yeast to munch on. If sugar is used up before the partial pressure of O2 in the wort, then the game is over: the O2 will be broken down and oxidized in the wort.

Fixed that for ya. There is no such thing as aerobic fermentation. Fermentation implies anaerobic conditions.

 

[damnyankee]

Aerobic fermentation and aerobic respiration are two different processes. Aerobic fermentation was demonstrated over 50+ years ago. I guess metaphorically there's no sense of saying the world is round when it's flat - despite evidence to the contrary:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20958338

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1472-765X.2010.02941.x/abstract <--cut/paste the URL to your browser

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2195284/

Since aerobic fermentation - particularly of yeast - doesn't exist, we should inform all the scientists who are slaving in their labs right now to stop their research in their respective fields - including Medicine and cancer research. Even though I earned a dual major chemistry and biology degree with a minor in Microbiology before entering medical school, I thought I had a solid command of these basic terms and their concepts but obviously I don't.

Since world is still flat, let's go back to our medieval way of brewing beer and stop talking about all this silly Mother Nature nonsense of speeding up bottle conditioning, shall we?

 

[TheDom]

Wow, learn something new every day I guess. I'm calling UF's microbio department and asking for some of my money back. Although in their defense they were huge on anaerobes at the time, especially methanogens.

Maybe a new thread in the Brew Science section is in order? This whole thing has gotten a bit off topic methinks.

 

[damnyankee]

It's all good. I think we stayed on topic...the "SOB" was being dissed a bit for aerating at priming sugar time; he has a valid a scientific rationale (paper-wise) supporting the procedure. I calc'ed out the maximum amount of O2 in grams which can be dissolved in wort solution with 4 ounces of priming sugar and that total is 123 grams (using 100% O2) per 5 gallon carboy.

This is explains why wort can withstand an occasional popping of the lid to check SG's, some stirring, and a little aeration at priming sugar time to maximize carbonization without oxidizing the wort. So ease your oxidizing fears when you do your SG checks.

Now, let's get back to our cauldrons, shall we?

 

[Justibone]

There is more going on in secondary (bottling) fermentation than just the production of CO2. I'm not convinced that oxygen dosing would enable all the flavor-enhancing processes to complete in only two days. It's too bad you went to med school instead of UCSF's (or wherever that is in CA) brewing PhD course.

Of course brewers are a very traditional lot by nature, so even if you did discover a different/faster way to do it, don't expect to be embraced.

 

[damnyankee]

See, that's the thing: noone knows. It's not just oxygen dosing, it's about using yeast in their preferred environment (aerobic fermentation) so they can produce massive amounts of CO2 (an acid) right away so that acid would start breaking down/maturing/age (whatever you want to call it) the wort right away instead of a period of days/weeks.

This is heresy in here to say but aerobic fermentation DOES happen in your primary BEFORE anaerobic fermentation occurs...all I'm postulating is there may be a way to manipulate the aerobic fermentation to our advantage.

I digress and am signing off the topic!

Cheers!

 

[str8wire]

Does any one really know what wet cardboard tastes like? I mean...honestly...whom amongst us has actually tried it? It might be tasty
A little goat cheese and some local honey, paired with a nice....

 

[damnyankee]

Ok...last post - HONEST.

I tried this method with my blue moon clone. I didn't give it a two minute aeration with my boat motor as I do before pitching yeast but I aerated the top of the wort with several whirls from my boat motor after the priming sugar went in.

Last night (Day #10 from bottle day), I checked on my Blue Moon clone bottles. The bottle bottoms have over 1/8" of yeast on the bottom of each bottle. After popping the tops (SPLISH!), there was LOTS of foam during pouring and there were lots of bubbles rising to the surface. Full flavored with a pleasant orangy aftertaste. Wifey tasted it and stated it was the best beer she ever had. I can see why this is a summertime favorite.

However,this was the first time I've made a witbier. Maybe witbiers are ready to drink in 10 days after bottling. If not, maybe I was lucky introducing additional aeration with the priming sugar. Maybe aerobic fermentation only works on certain beers. Maybe this aerobic fermentation with wort is all nonsense. Noone knows - but on paper, it should work. What I do know is, I have a procedure that works for my Blue Moon clone and after day 10, it's in my fridge ready to drink.

 

[Justibone]

A lot of beers can be fully carbonated and delicious in 10 days.

If you did 2 days, you'd have something!

Seriously, after you gather enough data to get alpha =< 0.05 for signficantly reduced carb time (you could do a one-tailed T test) then you'll have something to shout about! I think that yeast mass in the bottle will also be a significant variable, so if you start measuring stuff make sure and measure that too.

 

[tallybrewer]

Are these techniques that have changed drastically since he started brewing?

My personal experience backs up the advice that Revvy offers. Note that some of this info is a direct contradiction to what the (very experienced and locally respected) proprietors at my LHBS advise (who, btw, make some fine beer). Therefore, I do what works for me & consider the theories interesting fodder for discussion and worthy topics for pondering over multiple homebrews. But that doesn't mean that I declare a concept to be "the right way" unless I have tested it myself.

You just never know for sure until you try a new method. So keep an open mind and when you experiment, just be sure to try to isolate the variables so you can make a true comparison against a control batch.

Short of not cleaning/sanitizing, I'm willing to try any new technique, laziness notwithstanding.

Salud!

 

[greenfrog5]

Wow, this thread took-off in ways I'd never imagined - I'll try to respond to multiples here:

I think my first batch of beer is good (for a 1st batch), but I have some specific critiques too. I think it is too malty/sweet/syrupy which is why the low-body comment was surprising (?). I thought the carbonation bubbles were large (like cheap seltzer), and they stack up and taste like nothing, instead of frothy/creamy small-bubbles. (maybe champagne-like? cheap champagne?)

More likely the beer just needs to age a bit and finish carbonating. If you aren't satisfied with the body and mouthfeel then, adding 4-8 oz of maltodextrin is the best method for an extract brewer.

The batch was also somewhat over-primed, using the recipe supplied sugar in what turned out to be only 37 12oz bottles. Is this why the bubbles were so large and froth-less? I thought body was more thickness? (carbonation alters perception?)

If you haven't been to the Oak Barrel, you should visit them. They were very helpful when I started brewing.

Yes, used to live ~1/4 mile from them, and they are still my main LHBS.

To the OP: the old guy's stuck in old ways and doesn't want to learn new tricks.

I'm happy to know I can safely reiterate my suggestions, and that he might have some science-like theoretical basis, though widely doubted

It's all good. I think we stayed on topic...the "SOB"...

I have had low-responses on previous posts (beginner questions with boring-sounding subject lines). I chose this title to ensure views, but I swear I hadn't even noticed the pun/acronym, nor imagined the response it might spark.

I'll reiterate to him that he might try some new things, and hopefully he notices improvement. I haven't particularly like his beer (could be cardboard, I'll have to taste it again). He admittedly strives for cheap/drinkable/repeatable beer, not great beer.

Thanks for the interesting exploration in conversation.

Aaron