Lambic Discussion Thread

[Gaseous Clay]

Does anyone know around what temperature you should start becoming cautious of the bottle exploding? With summer coming, I just want to be cautious as I try my best to keep my bottles cool. I've heard that it is common for breweries to have bottles "age" in warmer rooms right after brewing, anyone familiar with what that temp range is?

Thanks!!

The ideal temperature to age your beer is between 50-65F. The microorganisms in the beer are less active at that temperature than, say 75, and certainly less active than at 85 or 95F, but active enough to allow for taste evolution over time.

The more activity you have in the bottle, the higher risk you have of a bottle blowout (such as in the case of DHVL 20th), at least to my understanding. If you have the ability to store your beer around 55-65F year round then you will be fine. I would certainly recommend checking out wine storage facilities or buying a wine fridge if a proper cellar is not an option for you (IE you’re unable to maintain cellar temps year round). The other option for storage being your fridge, but at those temperatures you’re significantly slowing down the evolution of the microorganisms, and at that point why hold it for longer than a few weeks? I’d worry about drying out the cork in the fridge as well, as the lack of humidity could pose problems, though don’t quote me on that.

 

[regularjohn]

Does anyone know around what temperature you should start becoming cautious of the bottle exploding?

If you keep them in the freezer ice will form around the bottle creating a protective shell so your bottles will never explode. You can also use it as a weapon if someone tries to steal your lambic.

 

[wuntrikpony]

If you keep them in the freezer ice will form around the bottle creating a protective shell so your bottles will never explode. You can also use it as a weapon if someone tries to steal your lambic.

Someone ****** gets it.

 

[stupac2]

The ideal temperature to age your beer is between 50-65F. The microorganisms in the beer are less active at that temperature than, say 75, and certainly less active than at 85 or 95F, but active enough to allow for taste evolution over time.

The more activity you have in the bottle, the higher risk you have of a bottle blowout (such as in the case of DHVL 20th), at least to my understanding. If you have the ability to store your beer around 55-65F year round then you will be fine. I would certainly recommend checking out wine storage facilities or buying a wine fridge if a proper cellar is not an option for you (IE you’re unable to maintain cellar temps year round). The other option for storage being your fridge, but at those temperatures you’re significantly slowing down the evolution of the microorganisms, and at that point why hold it for longer than a few weeks? I’d worry about drying out the cork in the fridge as well, as the lack of humidity could pose problems, though don’t quote me on that.

I think you're putting too much emphasis on microbial activity. duketheredeemer can chime in here as he's much more knowledgeable than I am, but as far as I can tell our current knowledge of what the microbes do in terms of aging beer is pretty incomplete. Surely they do something, but how much? At the same time we know that off flavors are produced via normal chemical reactions whose rates increase exponential once you get much above 70C, and those are the things people usually care about (trans-2-nonenol being the big one). Given the paucity of research on lambic, it's hard to say how important any given thing is, so I prefer to emphasize what we know for sure vs the more speculative (for instance, I've always suspected from general ecological principles that one reason lambic can age more gracefully than other sour beer is the diversity of the microorganisms which allows the community as a whole to be more resilient, but I've also read that studies find relatively few active species so... ¯\_(ツ)_/¯)

All that said, I'm pretty confident that increased temperatures causing extra fermentation causing bottles to explode isn't happening in lambic, it's too dry. Something with higher FG or primed with sugar for bottling (like Faro), sure. But lambic? That would be surprising. Honestly, of the 3 ways increasing temperatures can cause pressure to rise (directly from P_2 = P_1*T_2/T_1, indirectly from CO2 being less soluble in warmer solutions, and very indirectly from fermentation) I think that's the least likely to cause problems in lambic.

 

[regularjohn]

I think you're putting too much emphasis on microbial activity. duketheredeemer can chime in here as he's much more knowledgeable than I am, but as far as I can tell our current knowledge of what the microbes do in terms of aging beer is pretty incomplete. Surely they do something, but how much? At the same time we know that off flavors are produced via normal chemical reactions whose rates increase exponential once you get much above 70C, and those are the things people usually care about (trans-2-nonenol being the big one). Given the paucity of research on lambic, it's hard to say how important any given thing is, so I prefer to emphasize what we know for sure vs the more speculative (for instance, I've always suspected from general ecological principles that one reason lambic can age more gracefully than other sour beer is the diversity of the microorganisms which allows the community as a whole to be more resilient, but I've also read that studies find relatively few active species so... ¯\_(ツ)_/¯)

All that said, I'm pretty confident that increased temperatures causing extra fermentation causing bottles to explode isn't happening in lambic, it's too dry. Something with higher FG or primed with sugar for bottling (like Faro), sure. But lambic? That would be surprising. Honestly, of the 3 ways increasing temperatures can cause pressure to rise (directly from P_2 = P_1*T_2/T_1, indirectly from CO2 being less soluble in warmer solutions, and very indirectly from fermentation) I think that's the least likely to cause problems in lambic.

 

[Gaseous Clay]

I think you're putting too much emphasis on microbial activity. duketheredeemer can chime in here as he's much more knowledgeable than I am, but as far as I can tell our current knowledge of what the microbes do in terms of aging beer is pretty incomplete. Surely they do something, but how much? At the same time we know that off flavors are produced via normal chemical reactions whose rates increase exponential once you get much above 70C, and those are the things people usually care about (trans-2-nonenol being the big one). Given the paucity of research on lambic, it's hard to say how important any given thing is, so I prefer to emphasize what we know for sure vs the more speculative (for instance, I've always suspected from general ecological principles that one reason lambic can age more gracefully than other sour beer is the diversity of the microorganisms which allows the community as a whole to be more resilient, but I've also read that studies find relatively few active species so... ¯\_(ツ)_/¯)

All that said, I'm pretty confident that increased temperatures causing extra fermentation causing bottles to explode isn't happening in lambic, it's too dry. Something with higher FG or primed with sugar for bottling (like Faro), sure. But lambic? That would be surprising. Honestly, of the 3 ways increasing temperatures can cause pressure to rise (directly from P_2 = P_1*T_2/T_1, indirectly from CO2 being less soluble in warmer solutions, and very indirectly from fermentation) I think that's the least likely to cause problems in lambic.

Thanks, I’m a total novice when it comes to the science of lambic. Always nice to learn something new.

 

[ac24]

I think you're putting too much emphasis on microbial activity. duketheredeemer can chime in here as he's much more knowledgeable than I am, but as far as I can tell our current knowledge of what the microbes do in terms of aging beer is pretty incomplete. Surely they do something, but how much? At the same time we know that off flavors are produced via normal chemical reactions whose rates increase exponential once you get much above 70C, and those are the things people usually care about (trans-2-nonenol being the big one). Given the paucity of research on lambic, it's hard to say how important any given thing is, so I prefer to emphasize what we know for sure vs the more speculative (for instance, I've always suspected from general ecological principles that one reason lambic can age more gracefully than other sour beer is the diversity of the microorganisms which allows the community as a whole to be more resilient, but I've also read that studies find relatively few active species so... ¯\_(ツ)_/¯)

All that said, I'm pretty confident that increased temperatures causing extra fermentation causing bottles to explode isn't happening in lambic, it's too dry. Something with higher FG or primed with sugar for bottling (like Faro), sure. But lambic? That would be surprising. Honestly, of the 3 ways increasing temperatures can cause pressure to rise (directly from P_2 = P_1*T_2/T_1, indirectly from CO2 being less soluble in warmer solutions, and very indirectly from fermentation) I think that's the least likely to cause problems in lambic.

 

[CheapBeerBuzz]

Good times and fun to compare the seasons to the other time I had them three years ago. All holding up really well. Nothing too wild, though Winter was my least favorite.

Also, big thanks to whoever brought the Zenne. First time having any vintage of it and it was exceptional. Bummed I kinda rushed through the pour, but the baby was getting fussy.

Thanks stupac2 for sharing your beers and getting older. Good times.

 

[CheapBeerBuzz]

Anyone know if Brett Elle is still available at retail/online somewhere?

 

[rrryanc]

Anyone know if Brett Elle is still available at retail/online somewhere?

I have a bottle left that I picked up in Madrid that we can open at some point.

 

[NClambicguy]

Anyone know if Brett Elle is still available at retail/online somewhere?

https://belgiuminabox.com/shop/oude...ml?search_query=Brett&results=19#.WwjeWBYpCEc

 

[Maakun]

Shame it’s onsite only.

If it wasn't on-site only you wouldn't have been able to try it though.

 

[Compton25]

Reine des Pres. Floral nose with strong herbal notes. A mix of medicinal sweetness that somehow works beautifully. One of the more unique Lambics I’ve tried, looking forward to seeing this one develop over the years.

 

[boogercrack]

Reine des Pres. Floral nose with strong herbal notes. A mix of medicinal sweetness that somehow works beautifully. One of the more unique Lambics I’ve tried, looking forward to seeing this one develop over the years.

That glass tho

 

[boogercrack]

2013 bottling

The people's ******* champ. Maybe it is my plebe palate but for me crk is the best deal in fruited lambic. Just exquisite, cheap, available.

 

[tosh1]

Yadda, yadda, yadda. Who really cares what I think?

It was very low carb compared to fresh. Still great, glad I have more.

 

[bostonvert]

Love De Cam labels, mystery bottle

 

[bostonvert]

Mini kriek tasting with my folks and sister. The Girardin was the allround champ, very nice nose and very fruity taste. A smooth kriek, ideal for a summer evening and still accessible for non lambic drinkers, everybody liked it a lot. The Beersel was the least favorite, very boring and the color was very dark for a kriek, a bit odd.

My dad and I loved the Hanssens, super funky and super sour! Great kriek, will be stocking up on these.

 

[Marc2]

The Beersel was the least favorite, very boring and the color was very dark for a kriek, a bit odd.

Don't they use black cherries in OKV?

 

[tosh1]

Put another tick in a bottle of ‘11 still tasting fantastic.

This is ace as ****.

 

[SeaWatchman]

Don't they use black cherries in OKV?

Not that I’m aware of, unless they’ve stopped going in on cherrieswkth Boon recently. They do have their own Schaerbeekse orchard planted though.

 

[tosh1]

2013 for fun

 

[duketheredeemer]

I think you're putting too much emphasis on microbial activity. duketheredeemer can chime in here as he's much more knowledgeable than I am, but as far as I can tell our current knowledge of what the microbes do in terms of aging beer is pretty incomplete. Surely they do something, but how much? At the same time we know that off flavors are produced via normal chemical reactions whose rates increase exponential once you get much above 70C, and those are the things people usually care about (trans-2-nonenol being the big one). Given the paucity of research on lambic, it's hard to say how important any given thing is, so I prefer to emphasize what we know for sure vs the more speculative (for instance, I've always suspected from general ecological principles that one reason lambic can age more gracefully than other sour beer is the diversity of the microorganisms which allows the community as a whole to be more resilient, but I've also read that studies find relatively few active species so... ¯\_(ツ)_/¯)

All that said, I'm pretty confident that increased temperatures causing extra fermentation causing bottles to explode isn't happening in lambic, it's too dry. Something with higher FG or primed with sugar for bottling (like Faro), sure. But lambic? That would be surprising. Honestly, of the 3 ways increasing temperatures can cause pressure to rise (directly from P_2 = P_1*T_2/T_1, indirectly from CO2 being less soluble in warmer solutions, and very indirectly from fermentation) I think that's the least likely to cause problems in lambic.

While it's hard to overstate the role of microbial action, this is pretty much what I think, too.

While temperature differences can affect the rate of production of CO2, I doubt there will be a very large difference in the total amount of CO2 produced time-independent, so if your bottles won't explode after a couple years at 55F, I doubt they'll explode after a couple months at 85F *just because of an increased rate of metabolism*. It is possible that your final amount of CO2 will be slightly different at each temperature, as you will be changing the ratios of the various metabolic processes taking place in the beer, but I can't imagine it'd be so different as to take you from well below to well above the safety limits of the bottles. Also, if we get hot enough, we'll start to slow down the fermentation as we thermally stress the yeasts too much.

Good, new corks are pretty impermeable to CO2 on the timescales we're talking about, so I believe we can treat the bottles as closed systems in both the high-temperature and low-temperature cases.

We can estimate the contribution from the two other listed factors: thermal expansion of the gas in the headspace and the reduced solubility of CO2 in water at higher temperatures. I'm going to tread these things ideally, as that's probably good enough for our purposes. I'm also going to assume that the system is just pure water and CO2.

Thermal expansion:
From the ideal gas law/Stupac's post, P_2/P_1 = T_2/T_1 for a fixed volume and amount of gas. So from 55F to 85F, that's only about a 6% increase in pressure. Not a ton, but I guess enough if you're already near the structural limits of bottle.

Gas solubility/vapor pressure:
Water provides a partial pressure of about 1.5 kPa at 55F, which increases to around 4 kPa at 85F. A 2.5 kPa difference is likely not a significant contributor to the total pressure difference, as that's less than a 1% difference in pressure at the failure point for lambic bottles.

To a decent approximation, this reference implies that ratio of the partial pressure of CO2 in the headspace to the concentration of dissolved CO2 to the ratio of the concentration of dissolved CO2 increases by almost 50%. Without actually doing the algebra, I'm going to assume the headspace is small enough and that most of the pressure in the headspace at 55F is CO2 (which the vapor pressure of water presented above strongly implies) that we can treat that as the increase in pressure in the headspace directly. So if we are at a safe 600 kPa at 55F, then we'd climb to a very dangerous 900 kPa due to CO2 leaving solution.

Thus, we see that the largest contribution to the exploding bottles is likely due almost entirely to the reduction in solubility of CO2 in the beer as the temperature increases, though there are some other smaller contributions.

 

[falc0n26001]

While it's hard to overstate the role of microbial action, this is pretty much what I think, too.

While temperature differences can affect the rate of production of CO2, I doubt there will be a very large difference in the total amount of CO2 produced time-independent, so if your bottles won't explode after a couple years at 55F, I doubt they'll explode after a couple months at 85F *just because of an increased rate of metabolism*. It is possible that your final amount of CO2 will be slightly different at each temperature, as you will be changing the ratios of the various metabolic processes taking place in the beer, but I can't imagine it'd be so different as to take you from well below to well above the safety limits of the bottles. Also, if we get hot enough, we'll start to slow down the fermentation as we thermally stress the yeasts too much.

Good, new corks are pretty impermeable to CO2 on the timescales we're talking about, so I believe we can treat the bottles as closed systems in both the high-temperature and low-temperature cases.

We can estimate the contribution from the two other listed factors: thermal expansion of the gas in the headspace and the reduced solubility of CO2 in water at higher temperatures. I'm going to tread these things ideally, as that's probably good enough for our purposes. I'm also going to assume that the system is just pure water and CO2.

Thermal expansion:
From the ideal gas law/Stupac's post, P_2/P_1 = T_2/T_1 for a fixed volume and amount of gas. So from 55F to 85F, that's only about a 6% increase in pressure. Not a ton, but I guess enough if you're already near the structural limits of bottle.

Gas solubility/vapor pressure:
Water provides a partial pressure of about 1.5 kPa at 55F, which increases to around 4 kPa at 85F. A 2.5 kPa difference is likely not a significant contributor to the total pressure difference, as that's less than a 1% difference in pressure at the failure point for lambic bottles.

To a decent approximation, this reference implies that ratio of the partial pressure of CO2 in the headspace to the concentration of dissolved CO2 to the ratio of the concentration of dissolved CO2 increases by almost 50%. Without actually doing the algebra, I'm going to assume the headspace is small enough and that most of the pressure in the headspace at 55F is CO2 (which the vapor pressure of water presented above strongly implies) that we can treat that as the increase in pressure in the headspace directly. So if we are at a safe 600 kPa at 55F, then we'd climb to a very dangerous 900 kPa due to CO2 leaving solution.

Thus, we see that the largest contribution to the exploding bottles is likely due almost entirely to the reduction in solubility of CO2 in the beer as the temperature increases, though there are some other smaller contributions.

Great analysis!

Has anyone tested significantly older batches of lambic, or any beer, really, for how much yeast/bacteria is still alive? I’d be interested to see the results.

 

[duketheredeemer]

Great analysis!

Has anyone tested significantly older batches of lambic, or any beer, really, for how much yeast/bacteria is still alive? I’d be interested to see the results.

Some stuff definitely still exists. There's been a bit of research, but I'm not sure if much of it extends beyond ~36 months in the formal literature. The best data currently is probably from people plating up/pitching from old bottles of lambic in the homebrewing community. MTF probably has the only public data on it, but I'm not as up-to-date on that as I should be.

 

[Maakun]

Some stuff definitely still exists. There's been a bit of research, but I'm not sure if much of it extends beyond ~36 months in the formal literature. The best data currently is probably from people plating up/pitching from old bottles of lambic in the homebrewing community. MTF probably has the only public data on it, but I'm not as up-to-date on that as I should be.

People pitched Brett from some seriously old Berliner Weisses from long gone breweries, so at least a little bit life can still be left after longer periods.

 

[stupac2]

Some stuff definitely still exists. There's been a bit of research, but I'm not sure if much of it extends beyond ~36 months in the formal literature. The best data currently is probably from people plating up/pitching from old bottles of lambic in the homebrewing community. MTF probably has the only public data on it, but I'm not as up-to-date on that as I should be.

Even if you can manage to re-pitch from dregs of old lambic, how active would we expect the microbes to be? Seems like they'd mostly be dormant by then.

 

[JCastle1]

Great analysis!

Has anyone tested significantly older batches of lambic, or any beer, really, for how much yeast/bacteria is still alive? I’d be interested to see the results.

We successfully cultured brett and lacto from an 80 year old bottle of berliner weisse. No trace of sacch left though.

 

[FoudreGuy]

The people's ******* champ. Maybe it is my plebe palate but for me crk is the best deal in fruited lambic. Just exquisite, cheap, available.

I don't think anyone would disagree with that.

 

[SeaWatchman]

I don't think anyone would disagree with that.

Beersel kriek tho.

Just not as common sadly.