Baking Soda and Lactic Acid in Same Mash

[str1p3s]

Trying to hit this profile for a Bell's Two Hearted clone:

Water Profile: Ca 130 | Mg 1 | Na 43 | SO4 209 | Cl 75

Using Bru'n water, the only way I can see to get the numbers to balance is to use gypsum and CaCl2 to get the calcium, sulfate, and chloride in the right range and use baking soda to get sodium in there without messing with the other numbers. The baking soda drives the pH up, so I counter it with some lactic acid. Is baking soda and lactic in the same mash frowned upon since they do opposite things?

If not this way, how would you get this profile?

Side question, is 1ppm of Mg worth the attention or can I ignore it?

Some background:
The reason I'm shooting for this profile is after reading the latest brulosophy article:
http://brulosophy.com/2019/03/25/ho...t-vs-standard-centennial-exbeeriment-results/

My IPAs have been meh and I'm trying to figure out why and wanted to use a known water profile to possibly eliminate that as the issue.

 

[RPh_Guy]

how would you get this profile?

Easy:
Add NaCl to hit target sodium.
Add CaSO4 to hit target sulfate.
Add CaCl2 to hit target chloride (whatever remains after adding the NaCl).
Use acid or base to hit mash pH. Never both.

Ignore the calcium and magnesium.

Cheers

 

[cire]

Trying to hit this profile for a Bell's Two Hearted clone:

Water Profile: Ca 130 | Mg 1 | Na 43 | SO4 209 | Cl 75

Using Bru'n water, the only way I can see to get the numbers to balance is to use gypsum and CaCl2 to get the calcium, sulfate, and chloride in the right range and use baking soda to get sodium in there without messing with the other numbers. The baking soda drives the pH up, so I counter it with some lactic acid. Is baking soda and lactic in the same mash frowned upon since they do opposite things?

If not this way, how would you get this profile?

Side question, is 1ppm of Mg worth the attention or can I ignore it?

Some background:
The reason I'm shooting for this profile is after reading the latest brulosophy article:
http://brulosophy.com/2019/03/25/ho...t-vs-standard-centennial-exbeeriment-results/

My IPAs have been meh and I'm trying to figure out why and wanted to use a known water profile to possibly eliminate that as the issue.

There is no figure given for alkalinity and to balance the liquor it would be 100 ppm as CaCO3, which as you have found, results in too high a mash pH. I'd suggest you ignor the figure given for sodium and add the amount of baking soda (without acid) that would likely produce a suitable mash pH. At a guess that would have about 10 ppm sodium and like you, I can't see how they can get that profile.

 

[Silver_Is_Money]

In 7.5 gallons of distilled water, the following comes quite close without adding any alkalinity:

10.5 g. Gypsum
1.0 g. CaCl2 (as the dihydrate)
0.3 g. Epsom Salt
3.0 g. Table Salt

@RPh_Guy pegged it.

 

[cire]

In 7.5 gallons of distilled water, the following comes quite close without adding any alkalinity:

10.5 g. Gypsum
1.0 g. CaCl2 (as the dihydrate)
0.3 g. Epsom Salt
3.0 g. Table Salt

@RPh_Guy pegged it.

95 and 130 quite close. I've long since known that 45 mg/L calcium makes a significant difference to a beer, or is it insignificant when decreased and significant when increased?

 

[str1p3s]

thanks for the input!

 

[Silver_Is_Money]

95 and 130 quite close. I've long since known that 45 mg/L calcium makes a significant difference to a beer, or is it insignificant when decreased and significant when increased?

At 130 ppm calcium is purported to be verging upon becoming detectable as a certain undesirable minerallyness (SP?). I would rather go with 95 ppm here.

 

[cire]

At 130 ppm calcium is purported to be verging upon becoming detectable as a certain undesirable minerallyness (SP?). I would rather go with 95 ppm here.

@str1p3s, could you avise what profile produced IPAs that were a bit meh. I've heard that applied to IPAs brewed with low levels of calcium.

I'd never hear minerallyness or like word until recent times, originating from outside Europe. From the Handbook of brewing.....................

Ions of Ca2+ are essentially flavor neutral at the levels found in beer, other than for a slight moderating influence on the sour flavor produced by high levels of Mg2+

Ions of Mg2+ can contribute a bitter and sour flavor,16,20 which increases with levels above 70 mg/L. These flavor effects appear to depend on a balance between the Mg2+ and Ca2+ ions.

The water chapter in the Handbook of Brewing was recently available amongst the online Google Books and I've linked to it previously, but now that chapter is excluded from their selection. It advises a calcium levels of no less than 100 mg/L and up to 200 mg/L.

If the 35 mg/L of missing calcium was supplied as alkalinity, calcium bicarbonate, as commonly found in natural water, it would match what @str1p3s found in the first place to raise this thread. I'm doubtful that level of alkalinity would help to produce the looked-for beer, but me thinks meh might not describe the newer version.

 

[bierhaus15]

Don't know where this disdain for Ca comes from - especially in lager fermentation - but SN and Bells both target Ca levels >100 ppm, for good reason. Given the importance and low flavor impact of Ca in beer, I'd argue most home brewers are not adding enough Ca to their mash/boil!

 

[str1p3s]

I had been trying to stick with the guidelines at the end of this article:

https://www.homebrewtalk.com/importance-brewing-water.html

I've had anywhere from 30 to 115 ppm of calcium with varying levels of "meh"ness, for lack of a better term. The finish of most of my IPAs have a harsh finish. I've experimented with the levels of all the different minerals and don't seem to have found the issue. So now I want a solid standard profile to test my current hypothesis that the problem is related to dry hopping and oxidization. The more dry hops, the worse the sharpness it seems. I'm wondering if it's oxidation and it gets worse with the more dry hops.

To test this, I'm going to dry hop towards the end of fermentation to hopefully have the yeast take in any oxygen that goes in and I also overhauled my racking method. I'm going to purge the keg and do a closed transfer.

I probably just derailed this thread completely if it even continues

 

[bierhaus15]

How does the beer taste before dry hopping? Are you acidifying your sparge water? Mash pH good? If the flavor is not present before the DH, I would bet it is from polyphenols/over extraction of the DH.

Per the profile, I would definitely keep Ca levels above 100 ppm and just use CaS04 and CaCl2 to hit the targets. Na is not really important here.

 

[str1p3s]

Thanks for the input! I don't have a pH meter. I use bru'n water and trust that it's close. Starting with distilled, I treat the full volume in the kettle, with the exception of anything that raises the pH (mash only), and then pump out the sparge water.

It seems like most of my beers are overly bitter right out of the fermenter and then smooth out as it clears up, with the exception of IPAs. They seem overly bitter, probably more so since it's an IPA, but never smooths out like the others.

 

[ajdelange]

In the first place, you shouldn't really concern yourself with hitting a particular ion profile for a beer or beer style. Within 50% for any ion content will do in general though fine tweaking based on taste tests, not deviation from a published profile, may prove beneficial.

If you want to raise sodium and don't mind lactate just use sodium lactate.

 

[RPh_Guy]

If you want to raise sodium and don't mind lactate just use sodium lactate.

Wow, that's way off the beaten path.
Pretty sure most people don't want lactate. I would not recommend this.

Don't know where this disdain for Ca comes from - especially in lager fermentation - but SN and Bells both target Ca levels >100 ppm, for good reason. Given the importance and low flavor impact of Ca in beer, I'd argue most home brewers are not adding enough Ca to their mash/boil!

I don't know why people get so worked up about calcium. I understand that it has beneficial effects, but what's really the advantage to pushing levels above 30-40ppm?
My guess is that people advocating higher levels are using water with alkalinity. The calcium precipitates with the carbonate during the boil, reducing the level of calcium going into the fermenter. People like me using RO water don't have this issue so we are fine using lower levels.

Do you know of any side-by-side comparisons to help determine whether the effect of higher vs lower calcium is actually noticeable?

We need controlled comparisons in the homebrew world to answer these types of questions.
http://brulosophy.com/2017/05/01/wa...d-when-ratio-is-the-same-exbeeriment-results/ (35ppm vs 138ppm Ca2+)

 

[ajdelange]

Home brewers accept lactate all the time. Lactic acid is doubtless the most popular way to deal with water alkalinity.

More to the point here is the situation where a brewer wants more of some cation but doesn’t want more chloride or sulfate. In that case he must accept some other counter ion such as citrate, lactate, tartrate etc. and he can do that in one of two ways:
1)Add a base containing the desired cation and neutralize with the acid of the counter ion (what OP proposes to do)
2)Add the salt

I have never found it necessary to do either as I don’t slavishly follow profiles but some wish to.

It occurred to me in thinking about this that Ringer’s lactate might be useful for this kind of adjustment. It’s USP, available over the counter and the ion concentrations are listed in the Wikipedia article on it.

 

[ScrewyBrewer]

It seems like most of my beers are overly bitter right out of the fermenter and then smooth out as it clears up, with the exception of IPAs.

Just a thought. Sometimes 'yeast bite' can be associated with bitterness.

 

[SanPancho]

Hi ca along with high chlorides does seem to give some folks a minerally character in the beer. Seen most often in neipa type beers. Ive had it once or twice, although both sulfate and chlorides were high.

 

[bierhaus15]

I don't know why people get so worked up about calcium. I understand that it has beneficial effects, but what's really the advantage to pushing levels above 30-40ppm?

Can you provide evidence for benefits for Ca levels below 30-40?

This is from the Siebel course material on importance of Calcium:

Precipitates phosphates
Increases a amino nitrogen
Precipitates oxalate
Limits color formation
Facilitates hot and cold break formation
Influences pH
Induces saccharification - protects a amylase from thermal degradation
Induces proteolysis - increases total soluble nitrogen
Reduces buffering capacity of mash and wort
Slows extraction of hop soft resins
Slows extraction of polyphenols
Improves BME
Essential for normal yeast flocculation
Flavor neutral

Recommended
40-70 ppm Ca+2 in Cereal cooker
>50 ppm in mashing
80-100 ppm at end of boil
60-80 ppm in beer

If you take into account the data on calcium carryover in the brewing process we know that about 30% of calcium is carried over from the mash to boil and fermentation. Suddenly, 40-50 ppm in the mash/sparge isn't a whole lot. Malt contributes its own Ca, but it is variable and typically does not provide enough to both provide for mash pH drop and carryover through the mashing process.

Not sure if this is still the case, but Miller targeted 100-200 ppm Ca for both mash and sparge, providing enough Ca to prevent pH increase during the run off and adequate wort pH drop post boil. It significantly reduces polyphenol extraction. Ca is also needed to counter the effects of high Mg, often coming from malt. And Ca also has a major effect on yeast flocculation and beer flavor via yeast removal and maturation. Lager breweries like Ca as it helps yeast drop out of solution before lagering.

 

[str1p3s]

Just a thought. Sometimes 'yeast bite' can be associated with bitterness.

I cold crash and fine with gelatin so I assume all the yeast drop out.

 

[Silver_Is_Money]

I cold crash and fine with gelatin so I assume all the yeast drop out.

I've cleared a few recalcitrant beers that wouldn't clear on their own with gelatin, followed by cold crashing, and then I've racked, added priming sugar, and bottled, and without any thought of adding any additional yeast, I've had the beers carbonate properly. Perhaps I just lucked out?

 

[ScrewyBrewer]

I cold crash and fine with gelatin so I assume all the yeast drop out.

That may explain why your beer seems less bitter/smoother after it clears. Again just a thought.

 

[BitterSweetBrews]

Can CaCl contribute to a metallic taste in the beer?

 

[str1p3s]

I've cleared a few recalcitrant beers that wouldn't clear on their own with gelatin, followed by cold crashing, and then I've racked, added priming sugar, and bottled, and without any thought of adding any additional yeast, I've had the beers carbonate properly. Perhaps I just lucked out?

I've never done this, but I've read that enough yeast remain to naturally carb after CC. I'm assuming the amount of yeast left is below the threshold needed to contribute to "yeast bite". My point was that I cold crash and fine with gelatin all of my beers and IPAs are the only ones that don't eventually smooth out.

 

[str1p3s]

I have never found it necessary to do either as I don’t slavishly follow profiles but some wish to.

This is my normal approach and I'm glad that it is yours also. Reaffirms that my problem is probably not water related. I'll go with the what @RPh_Guy suggested initially. That puts me at close to 100ppm calcium.

 

[RPh_Guy]

Home brewers accept lactate all the time. Lactic acid is doubtless the most popular way to deal with water alkalinity.

Exactly. The average taste threshold is fairly low and adding more lactate certainly wouldn't help. People don't like the flavor of it, except in sour beer and certain other styles where it's acceptable.
Most people who have tried phosphoric acid (or even acetic acid, which boils away) prefer it to lactic acid. Many of us switch to RO water to avoid excessive acid additions because they contribute unwanted flavor.

here is the situation where a brewer wants more of some cation but doesn’t want more chloride or sulfate.

Not really, he can easily achieve the sodium with sodium chloride. Without exceeding the chloride level, which I believe is pretty much always the case.
Or are you talking about calcium? I suggested to ignore calcium since it's above the minimum level generally required for mashing.

Can you provide evidence for benefits for Ca levels below 30-40?

No, I'm just asking questions trying to figure this out. If you're just pulling these numbers from a book that's fine, but I'm trying to understand the chemistry principles behind it because they matter greatly.

If you take into account the data on calcium carryover in the brewing process we know that about 30% of calcium is carried over from the mash to boil and fermentation.

This is what I'm wondering about. Carryover is dependent on the water composition, right? (Specifically the alkalinity; much of the calcium in most water is considered temporary hardness) How much of MY calcium carrys over since I'm using RO water? If I'm understanding the basics of temporary hardness correctly, I believe it's much higher than 30%, possibly greater than 100%, counting the contribution from the malt.

 

[ajdelange]

Not really, he can easily achieve the sodium with sodium chloride. Without exceeding the chloride level, which I believe is pretty much always the case.

How can you make that statement without knowing what his chloride level is or what he want's it to be? Note that i am not limiting the discussion to OP here but any brewer who thinks he's topped out on sulfate and chloride but wants more of some cation for whatever reason. To get that cation he must add an anion. It is up to him to decide whether he is more dismayed by the prospect of more sulfate or chloride or succinate or lactatate or fumarate ir citrate... and decide which acid or salt family to add. Or he can decide to forego the additional cation he thinks he wants.

I am really trying to emphasize the point that a brewer who adds NaHCO3 to his liquor to get more sodium and then adds lactic acid to neutralize the alkalinity is effectively adding sodium lactate. He needs to be aware of this. I'm also pointing out that as most brewers seem to find lactate unobjectionable to fairly high levels this may be a viable technique.

 

[RPh_Guy]

How can you make that statement without knowing what his chloride level is or what he want's it to be?

His first post?
I assume he's starting with negligible minerals, otherwise trying to build a profile like this would be ... ill advised.

Note that i am not limiting the discussion to OP here but any brewer who thinks he's topped out on sulfate and chloride but wants more of some cation for whatever reason. To get that cation he must add an anion. It is up to him to decide whether he is more dismayed by the prospect of more sulfate or chloride or succinate or lactatate or fumarate ir citrate... and decide which acid or salt family to add.

I'm pretty much arguing against this practice, and believe you are too.

As far as cations go:
It's easy to achieve the minimum amount of calcium while maintaining low sulfate and chloride.
High sodium and high magnesium generally aren't desirable unless you're making an intentionally minerally beer.

Is baking soda and lactic in the same mash frowned upon since they do opposite things?

So my answer to this question is obvious yes, it's frowned upon because lactate doesn't taste good in clean beers.

most brewers seem to find lactate unobjectionable to fairly high levels

I'm not so sure about that, but perhaps.
I know I don't like it and I've seen plenty of others that also don't.

 

[cire]

This is what I'm wondering about. Carryover is dependent on the water composition, right? (Specifically the alkalinity; much of the calcium in most water is considered temporary hardness) How much of MY calcium carrys over since I'm using RO water? If I'm understanding the basics of temporary hardness correctly, I believe it's much higher than 30%, possibly greater than 100%, counting the contribution from the malt.

Brewed a hoppy pale ale a week ago today with 151 mg/L calcium and alkalinity 25 mg/L, so about 1 part in 15 is temporary. It was open fermented with a top-working yeast, regularly roused reaching FG in 5 days, i.e. Wednesday. The yeast was skimmed for the next brew and the fermented wort covered and slowly cooled over 24 hours to about ~50F. It is now almost clear and will be casked tomorrow without finings, but with a small amount of priming sugar and hopefully will be ready for drinking in a further week.

With lower calcium the beer would not ferment as fully or quickly, the yeast struggling due to insufficient free ammino nitrogen produced during the mash aided by calcium. It would not clear in the same way or at the same rate, a haze from oxalates and other matters that would be deposited in the mash with calcium as well as yeast in suspension that cannot readily flocculate due to lack of calcium in their cell walls. I've never used gelatine and only need to chill lagers with bottom fermenting yeasts below 50F.

 

[RPh_Guy]

With lower calcium the beer would not ferment as fully or quickly, the yeast struggling due to insufficient free ammino nitrogen produced during the mash aided by calcium. It would not clear in the same way or at the same rate, a haze from oxalates and other matters that would be deposited in the mash with calcium as well as yeast in suspension that cannot readily flocculate due to lack of calcium in their cell walls.

Does this mean you've brewed the same beer & same process with lower calcium?

I'm willing to give it a try and see whether I find a difference.

 

[bierhaus15]

This is what I'm wondering about. Carryover is dependent on the water composition, right? (Specifically the alkalinity; much of the calcium in most water is considered temporary hardness) How much of MY calcium carrys over since I'm using RO water? If I'm understanding the basics of temporary hardness correctly, I believe it's much higher than 30%, possibly greater than 100%, counting the contribution from the malt.

This is not the case. The calcium that is not used by phosphate and oxalate precipitation, ect, is still mostly lost in process via trub/hot-cold break and sparge/boil. Trial brews produced from deionized water show this as well. The same is also true for chlorides and sulfates (to an extent).