Can I Carbonate my beer using Dry yeast?

[Boribatt]

Can I Carbonate with dry yeast?
Normally brewers make yeast starter before bottling with liquid yeast.
But I don't have DME to feed yeast and even If I make the starter, I should carry yeast bottle to the brewing place(I don't brew in my house.)

So I just want to use dry yeast simply distributing yeast in my bottle and add priming sugar and beer.
Is this safe way to carbonate?
I want to listen to some tips, too.

 

[AlexKay]

There are almost always enough yeast still active in your beer after fermentation, and adding only priming sugar at bottling is all you need to do.

Beer that is cold crashed aggressively, filtered, or very high alcohol can sometimes benefit from additional yeast at bottling. Dry yeast is used for this; I have never heard of anyone using liquid (or especially making a starter for said liquid), though there’s no reason you couldn’t.

Lallemand’s dry yeast specifically recommended for bottling is called CBC-1. Other companies have their own versions. There’s no reason you can’t use other beer yeast, though a robust strain is a good idea, as beer is a less friendly environment for yeast than wort. One thing to avoid: don’t use a yeast strain for bottling that metabolizes more sugars than the strain you used for fermentation. If your main yeast doesn’t ferment maltotriose, for instance, neither should your bottling yeast. And certainly avoid diastaticus strains when bottling. (If that all sounds overly technical, just use the same yeast you used for fermentation, or use a bottling yeast like CBC-1.)

But again, it’s rarely necessary to add additional yeast.

 

[worlddivides]

The only times I've ever added yeast for bottling is for extremely long secondaries or tertiaries. In other words, where bottling is something like 6 or 12 months after brew day. If you're bottling 2 or 3 weeks after you brewed the beer, there should be no need to add yeast.

 

[corkybstewart]

a friend used to do that. the problem was there wasn't enough residual sugar so the yeast went dormant after producing the carbonation and dropping out. But when he served the beer those pesky little yeasties woke up in our guts and created incredible flatulence. After encountering this problem several times I asked about his process. There may be another explanation but after we convinced him not to add dry yeast with the priming sugar his beer and our lives were greatly improved.

 

[BrewnWKopperKat]

So I just want to use dry yeast simply distributing yeast in my bottle and add priming sugar and beer.

Is this safe way to carbonate?

No. If you do this with beer yeast, there is a real possibility of gushers (or worse).

Strains of yeast intended for bottle conditioning (e.g. CBC-1) are selected because they
1) only ferment simple sugars,
2) have a very neutral flavor profile, and
3) often are "killer" strains (they will kill other yeast in the bottle).

Some wine yeast strains (e.g. EC-1118) have similar characteristics.

 

[fluketamer]

welcome tot he forum.

Can I Carbonate with dry yeast?
Normally brewers make yeast starter before bottling with liquid yeast.
But I don't have DME to feed yeast and even If I make the starter, I should carry yeast bottle to the brewing place(I don't brew in my house.)

So I just want to use dry yeast simply distributing yeast in my bottle and add priming sugar and beer.
Is this safe way to carbonate?
I want to listen to some tips, too.

"Normally brewers make yeast starter before bottling with liquid yeast."

this is not true at all.

brewers make yeast starters when pitching live liquid yeast for lagers or higher gravity beers to increase the cell count of the liquid yeast pack. as opposed to just sprinkling 1 or 2 packs of dry yeast in the fermenting vessel.

the only reason to add dry yeast to bottles ( sometimes referred to as bottlign or condionting yeast) is if the yeast cell count is too low in your bottles. a condition a new beginner brewer is unlikely to encounter.

palmers how to brew is free and a very enjoyable read and i am sure covers bottling/conditioning yeast. it is full of great brewing tips and process.

https://books.google.com/books?id=o...ce=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false


good luck

 

[BrewnWKopperKat]

https://books.google.com/books?id=o...ce=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false

What you posted is a link to a preview of the book.

 

[fluketamer]

What you posted is a link to a preview of the book.

View attachment 852288

thanks i see it appears it is no longer free online.

 

[BrewnWKopperKat]

the only reason to add dry yeast to bottles ( sometimes referred to as bottlign or condionting yeast) is if the yeast cell count is too low in your bottles. a condition a new beginner brewer is unlikely to encounter.

Faster (and perhaps more consistent) carbonation may be another reason.

When I add fresh bottle conditioning yeast (e.g. CBC-1, EC-1118) and bottle condition at about 75F, I see that carbonation is complete in about 3 to 5 days. Some styles are better with some additional time for conditioning.

It may be that bottle conditioning warm (75F) without adding additional yeast also works (kvek yeast discussion here (link)). But that's a scenario I'm not interested in.

 

[hotbeer]

No. If you do this with beer yeast, there is a real possibility of gushers (or worse).

Curious why you say this. Why should one expect gushers?

Whether there is a too little, enough or too many cells of yeast, there isn't going to be any more sugar available to make CO2.

Or you thinking this some how encourages infection or the excess yeast will have proteins that stay in the beer to encourage excess foaming.

Just asking. I certainly can't say it wouldn't. But am a little lacking on seeing why it would make a gusher.

The only downfall I see in adding dry beer yeast straight to the bottle is it'll be too much and there'll be more loose sediment in the bottom of the bottle.

 

[BrewnWKopperKat]

Why should one expect gushers?

Whether there is a too little, enough or too many cells of yeast, there isn't going to be any more sugar available to make CO2.

Maltotriose.

CBC-1 is priced about the same as most other beer yeast strains. If cost is a primary consideration, EC-1118 is about $0.75 / 5 oz sachet (plus shipping) from some online stores.

 

[hotbeer]

Maltotriose.

While different beer yeast digest maltotriose to varying degrees, I expect that it wouldn't be so different between whatever yeast the OP fermented with and the regular dry beer yeast to be enough to digest and make gushers.

Perhaps my only concern would be to not use one for bottle carbonating that is diastatic/STA1 positive... unless the fermenting yeast was also.

However the CBC-1 is a better choice if one knows ahead of time that they'll want to use additional yeast at bottling time.

IMO, The real plus for CBC-1 is for those making big beers where the ABV is already at the alcohol tolerance level for the yeast used to ferment it.

 

[BrewnWKopperKat]

I expect that it wouldn't be so different between whatever yeast the OP fermented with and the regular dry beer yeast to be enough to digest and make gushers.

If you follow /r/homebrewing on regular basis, you may have seen the math wrt how much CO2 is produced per 1* drop in FG. I won't repeat it here (as it's more of a "beer science" thing, rather than a "beginning beer brewing" thing).

Simply using CBC-1 (or EC-1118) "poka-yokes" (aka error proofs) the bottling process. Consistent carbonation in about a week + time for conditioning.

Simpler yet is using the existing yeast already in the beer. No yeast to add (or stock). Generally 2 weeks for carbonation + time for condition.

Two options. Both simple, safe, and effective.

 

[mac_1103]

While different beer yeast digest maltotriose to varying degrees, I expect that it wouldn't be so different between whatever yeast the OP fermented with and the regular dry beer yeast to be enough to digest and make gushers.

I think there are a couple of beer yeast strains that don't utilize maltotriose at all. Fermenting with one of those and then conditioning with a strain that does could be quite problematic.

 

[BrewnWKopperKat]

A related concern would be an incomplete or stalled fermentation.

Bottle conditioning yeast products are intended to ferment just the simple sugars, and, as mentioned earlier have an additional "safety" feature:

LalBrew CBC-1™ is a killer yeast, meaning it will secrete a toxic protein that can inhibit killer
sensitive strains (most brewing strains are killer sensitive). While this is a positive yeast trait
when conducting a pure fermentation/refermentation with LalBrew CBC-1™, extra care should
be taken to ensure proper cleaning procedures are in place to avoid any cross-contamination
with other brews.

 

[hotbeer]

If you follow /r/homebrewing on regular basis, you may have seen the math wrt how much CO2 is produced per 1* drop in FG. I won't repeat it here (as it's more of a "beer science" thing, rather than a "beginning beer brewing" thing).

I still question the expectation of gushers. You'd have to ferment almost the entire unfermentable sugars in the beer to get a 12 fl oz bottle of beer up to 5 of more vols that a gusher probably is.

I do agree that your advice is perhaps the safer option. But there is no local shop for me to get CBC-1 at the last moment when I need it now. So if I knew that I wanted to add beer yeast I would add what ever I had at hand.

The only thing about other yeast than what it is fermented with is that they will change the ratio of maltotriose. And that affects the sensory part of beer for our taste. So it'll be further from what was intended.

Though as long as the OP's beer is < 9% ABV, I'd just rely on the yeast that are still in the beer. And wait 2 to 3 weeks, maybe sneaking one or two early just to sample.

 

[mac_1103]

You'd have to ferment almost the entire unfermentable sugars in the beer to get a 12 fl oz bottle of beer up to 5 of more vols that a gusher probably is.

If you carbonate to 5 volumes in 12 oz long necks, gushers will be the least of your concerns.

 

[hotbeer]

If you carbonate to 5 volumes in 12 oz long necks, gushers will be the least of your concerns.

True, but still just a chance IMO. Bottles ratings are lower than what they'll actually handle. But what one will hold another might not.

So like much of a lot of things we do in beer it's just risk mitigation and what levels of risk you tolerate for what events.

I've carb'd beer to foolishly high levels and had no issues back when I didn't know any better. 3.5 to almost 4.0 vols and no gushers. Just good beer.

 

[BrewnWKopperKat]

I do agree that your advice is perhaps the safer option. But there is no local shop for me to get CBC-1 at the last moment when I need it now. So if I knew that I wanted to add beer yeast I would add what ever I had at hand.

stop. making. excuses.

If you truly need it (bottle conditioning yeast), then keep a couple of un-opened sachets on hand. When you open the 3rd/2nd/last remaining sachet, order more. Or bottle condition without it.

So like much of a lot of things we do in beer it's just risk mitigation and what levels of risk you tolerate for what events.

As an alternative, take a "poka-yoke" (error proofing) approach to home brewing.

Same beer.

100% fewer visits to the ER.

 

[mac_1103]

take a "poka-yoke" (error proofing) approach to home brewing

I have to admit that my brewing is not exactly a six sigma effort.

 

[BrewnWKopperKat]

I have to admit that my brewing is not exactly a six sigma effort.

Fortunately, poka-yoke is not six sigma (although, IIRC, both have a late 80s / early 90s Japanese influence).

A poka-yoke is any mechanism in a process that helps an equipment operator avoid mistakes and defects by preventing, correcting, or drawing attention to human errors as they occur

For example: steeping grains in OG 20 wort prevents accidentally extracting tannins (see HowToBrew, 4e chapter 1).

Another example: bottle conditioning yeast. As discussed above, it has characteristics that both enable faster bottle conditioning and prevent accidental over carbonation (gushers or worse).

 

[hotbeer]

stop. making. excuses.

I'm not making excuses. I'm just questioning the gusher part of your reasons for not using anything else but CBC-1.

What's the best way to proceed is not anything to do with the discussion of what I ask you about.

 

[mac_1103]

Fortunately, poka-yoke is not six sigma (although, IIRC, both have a late 80s / early 90s Japanese influence).

True, six sigma is about reducing defects, so I guess the two are only related in the sense that errors are likely to lead to defects. The always reliable wikipedia says that the six sigma concept was actually introduced by an American engineer.

 

[BrewnWKopperKat]

I'm not making excuses. I'm just questioning the gusher part of your reasons for not using anything else but CBC-1.

If it's not obvious, by now, that I purposely structure my bottling process to avoid the possibility of bottle bombs, there is nothing else that I can add to make it more obvious.

Oh. wait.

There is something I've mentioned elsewhere that I can add here.

• I re-use commercial craft beer bottles.
• I scan each bottle for new defects / blemishes / hairline cracks
  • after the initial cleaning and
  • before I use them.
• I have never thrown away a bottle after initial cleaning
• I throw away, on average, a bottle or two a month when they are "re-scanned"

YMMV.

 

[BrewnWKopperKat]

The always reliable wikipedia says that the six sigma concept was actually introduced by an American engineer.

You are correct. I was thinking of Demming in the Crosby -> Deming -> six sigma chain of process improvement methods that worked it's way through corporate America the early to mid 80s. Fun times trying to usefully apply the techniques to 20 year (at the time) 500K LOC mainframe apps written mostly in assembly language.

 

[BrewnWKopperKat]

with the discussion of what I ask you about.

If the discussion is "what are the possible consequences of bottle conditioning with beer yeast", that has been discussed.

I'm not going to repeat myself in this topic.

---

Honestly, I am starting see why published articles don't talk about CBC-1 or other well thought out 'advanced' bottling techniques.

While using CBC-1 (or EC-1118) is both safe and effective, ...

... it seems to also lead to "hold my beer ...." scenarios ...

... and then the author promoting bottle conditioning yeast has to defend

... why one shouldn't do that "hold my beer ..." thing.

 

[Kris.J]

Bottling is 100% a pain in my ass. So I keg all my beer.

 

[BrewnWKopperKat]

Bottling is 100% a pain in my ass. So I keg all my beer.

On behalf of those who care about keeping topics and forums on track.

• We're in the "Beginners Beer Brewing Forum".
• The question was about bottle conditioning.

In the future, please respect the topic and the forum.

 

[Kris.J]

On behalf of those who care about keeping topics and forums on track.

• We're in the "Beginners Beer Brewing Forum".
• The question was about bottle conditioning.

In the future, please respect the topic and the forum.

Oops, I apologize. I'll have to see if I can exclude such forums from my feed.

 

[BrewnWKopperKat]

I'll have to see if I can exclude such forums from my feed.

https://www.homebrewtalk.com/forums/beginners-beer-brewing-forum.39/

then click the ignore button

 

[Kris.J]

https://www.homebrewtalk.com/forums/beginners-beer-brewing-forum.39/

then click the ignore button

View attachment 852507

I already figured all that out myself, but thank you for the meticulous tutorial. I'm sure there are beginners who will appreciate it.

 

[BrewnWKopperKat]

thank you for

You're welcome.

And a "pro tip": rants that bottling sucks, "extract" sucks, dry yeast sucks, etc are rarely appreciated in the 2020s (in probably all previous decades).

 

[Kris.J]

You're welcome.

And a "pro tip": rants that bottling sucks, "extract" sucks, dry yeast sucks, etc are rarely appreciated in the 2020s (in probably all previous decades).

It was not a rant, so stop classifying it as such. Saying X sucks is a generalization; and that is NOT what I said. I did not rant, nor generalize as you insist upon stating.

I stated that bottling is a pain in MY ass. Which is very specific, does not generalize, does not rant.

I very specifically stated MY feelings on the matter, without putting anyone else down or generalizing a process as "it sucks".

 

[BrewnWKopperKat]

Feel free to express you "pain in the ass" topics here ...

eta: and, it needs to be noted that

neither

• Bottling is a PITA

nor

• Bottling is 100% a pain in my ass.

does absolutely nothing to 1) help others or 2) move packaging of home brewed beer forward.

 

[mac_1103]

Some people seem to feel that they are contractually obligated to tell every beginner with a bottle conditioning question that bottling sucks. Others feel that they must defend the noobs against the unrelenting onslaught of such posts. Present company excluded of course.

Personally, I think we can do without the meta-argument.

 

[BrewnWKopperKat]

Going forward, let's agree to

• focus on question and be aware of the forum (context), and ...
• for everything else, there's "Drunken Ranblings ..."

This topic went "off the rails" around reply #10. It may have been better to move some of the "advanced" questions to the bottling / kegging forum or tje brewing science forum. But, whatever.

 

[mac_1103]

This topic went "off the rails" around reply #10.

And everything that the OP really needed to know was in the first reply.

 

[AlexKay]

Chiming in to add this, as I hadn’t seen it yet:

EZ-Cap bottles have much thicker walls than commercial glass in the US. They are rated to 100 psi. They’re pricy, and achieving a good seal can sometimes be fiddly after a few uses, but if you’re bottling a Belgian or a Berliner Weisse or a Grodziskie, they’re probably the safest bet out there.

 

[Kickass]

This has become spirited, I hope it doesn’t start looking like one of those /r/ word forums here at HBT.

@Boribatt, as others have said, if your ABV is below about 10%, or you haven’t done a very long aging, adding yeast isn’t necessary. There’s likely lots of yeast left to carbonate. I no longer bottle but when I did (7+ years of bottling experience), I never added yeast when bottling and I never had a batch fail to carbonate.

I suppose you run a very small risk of over carbonation if you were to add yeast at bottling. That said, if it’s the same strain or a yeast that attenuates less than the original, I’d be comfortable accepting that risk. Additionally, I just don’t seem to read about bottle bombs based on this scenario. In fact I can’t recall ever reading about that. Admittedly, I might not be looking.

At the end of the day, we all make our own risk assessment and implement mitigation. Hopefully you have some valuable info to do that. Cheers and welcome to HBT!

 

[BrewnWKopperKat]

I hope it doesn’t start looking like one of those /r/ word forums here at HBT.

I no longer bottle but

FWIW, /r/homebrewing has a number of active, experienced brewers who bottle condition. Their consensus opinion seems to be roughly: avoid risk, even if it's a small risk - as the consequence can be big.

---

And, for me, adding fresh bottle conditioning yeast, in combination with bottle conditioning at 75F, speeds up the carbonation portion of bottle conditioning (by about a week).

Sometimes ya gotta change more than one thing at a time to get better results.

---

A tip on lurking for best results in /r/homebrewing:

• Every couple of days, "bookmark" topics of interest from the new topics list. Do not read them at this time.
• About two weeks later (after the topic has finished), review the topic. Make a note of interesting responses and personas that wrote those responses.
• Over time, and about once a month, review the comments made by those "interesting personas"