Using Olive oil instead of Oxygen

[maltbarleyhops]

pass

 

[monock]

Olive oil contains unsaturated fatty acids as does many yeast nutrient packages. There may be some scientific basis for the olive oil addition. I say give it a try.

 

[Nightbiker]

this much was said in the BYO article on the subject -they also said that at the average homebrewers' level of production it would be tough to notice any benefits -as well as the idea that the amount to use would be so small as to be impractical.
As I see it, it really fits the "may be helpful, probably not harmful" category.

Personally, aside from aerating, I always add a dose of yeast nutrient at the end of the boil as well. The stuff isn't expensive and certainly can't hurt!

 

[broadbill]

Olive oil contains unsaturated fatty acids as does many yeast nutrient packages. There may be some scientific basis for the olive oil addition. I say give it a try.

I don't refute the scientific basis of either yeast nutrient or olive oil. The science makes sense. What I question is if there is an observable effect of their addition, particularly at the home-brew scale?.

I certainly understand the "It couldn't hurt!" theory....but there is any number of things you could add under based on this theory. Where do you draw the line?

 

[agenthucky]

I really surprises me that this olive oil idea has as much traction as it does. Grady Hull's thesis is scientifically flawed and inconclusive, the maltose falcon's experiments conclude that there really is no effect of olive oil, other than it only decreases head retention "a little bit", and the best we can get is a bunch of anonymous posters on the web forum that claim it has an effect when they use it.

Can't we put this one to bed? Leave the olive oil for cooking and if you want to oxygenate your wort, use a oxygen setup from your home brew shop.

Then what is with all the people who tried it with success. Just because you are uncomfortable doesn't mean you need to make up excuses to invalidate it. There is no scientific evidence that says it effects the beer and there are people who have tried it with success. Since when does science play bias?

 

[agenthucky]

Why has no one mentioned the elephant in the room...Bareleywine. You can only get so much O2 by shaking.

 

[Pappers_]

Why has no one mentioned the elephant in the room...

 

[Denny]

Then what is with all the people who tried it with success. Just because you are uncomfortable doesn't mean you need to make up excuses to invalidate it. There is no scientific evidence that says it effects the beer and there are people who have tried it with success. Since when does science play bias?

I have seen only one credible experiment with olive oil on the homebrew level. The results were that the beer without olive oil was preferred by tasters. Even the company that originally did the research doesn't use it. What does that say?

 

[agenthucky]

I have seen only one credible experiment with olive oil on the homebrew level. The results were that the beer without olive oil was preferred by tasters. Even the company that originally did the research doesn't use it. What does that say?

http://www.maltosefalcons.com/tech/...estroy-head-formation-and-retention-your-beer

"There was no significant difference between either sample by subjective flavor comparison."

"I should add the footnote that when we did the side-by-side head comparison test at our monthly meeting using polystyrene glasses, there was absolutely no difference between the two. Perhaps there was some contaminant on the glass I used for the olive oil sample in the photos above."

1-1. I still don't see any reason to say this doesn't work, regardless of who uses it.

 

[Denny]

Nor do I see any reason to say it does.

Ah, here's the experiment....

http://hbd.org/discus/messages/43688/45581.html

 

[seabass07]

Whether it works or not? It seems that they both work since they both ferment. My take from reading about the new belgium experiment and reading the one that Denny posted is that it does effect the flavors but does not significantly effect head retention. More triangle tests would be great with different styles.

From what I remember in the new belgium test, the OO was preferred due to the increased esters. If more esters will help a certain style than the OO may be beneficial. But that same effect in other styles would be negative.

I personally don't see this debate as black and white. It seems that using OO will get you the same attenuation as O2 but change flavors. So it seems to me that OO would be a nice addition to certain beers. I'll be doing my own personal tests for my own personal benefit using OO in beers that could use more esters but where I'd prefer to keep temps lower due to other off flavors. Whether it will give the effects that I want, I don't know, but if it's drinkable with both methods, I see nothing to lose by trying.

My take away is that OO is not a substitute for O2. It is a different method to assist in yeast reproduction that will yield different flavors that will be suitable for some beers but not for others.

 

[Denny]

Keep in mind that what happens in a commercial brewery situation may not apply to homebrewers due to differences of scale.

 

[agenthucky]

I would be interested to see someone do an experiment making starters and counting the cell growth. The increased esters won't make a difference. The multiple generations can benefit from the extra oil left over that doesn't get used. It might even prime the cell walls for the growth inside the wort. This would need to be a highly controlled experiment with accurate measurements involved. I wonder where Wyeast stands on this?

 

[beerman1957]

Conducting a truly scientific experiment with OO would prove difficult because you are dealing with organic compounds that are subject to all kinds of variables. It is pretty clear that the amount of OO used doesn't cause significant effects on head retention. It is also pretty clear that for most Homebrewers, it probably isn't worth the risk or trouble.

Most tests I have read about don't use a control wort, so the results of fermentation may have just happened by natural causes. To be sure, one may have to run GC tests and have a significant amount of testing with controllable variables and some control methods. This is definitely something that a large brewery may want to consider, but I sure wouldn't want to risk my business model on a mostly untested methodology.
Fermentation is a very easy process to produce. Controlling every aspect of it can be tricky and never fail-safe. However, mother nature has pretty much got this down.

To me, it probably doesn't make enough difference to keep doing it. It kinda takes the "fun" out of brewing. Heck, I don't even inject O2 or even ambient air because I use a very strong starter. I see the current trend of using yeast nutrients as a potential oxygen reducing method. Servomyces (tm) is used frequently around the brewing world. I have yet to use it.

This all being said, I am planning a Oktoberfest brew very soon and I think I may take a few gallons out into another fermentation chamber and inject 1-2 mils of OO into it. Just to be safe, I will also just use the shake-method of injecting AA (Ambient Air).

If I do this, I for sure will come back with my results.
Brew Strong!

 

[aaronbeach]

The thread seems to strayed away from the primary goal of the paper. The reason for adding oleic acid (and avoid aeration) was to reduce oxidative effects in aging (hence the progressive experiments with longer warm stored beers) i.e. a more stable flavor profile.

Any tests evaluating the value of olive oil (oleic acid) additions to avoid aeration for the purpose of reducing oxidative effects in aging should evaluate the flavor profile at different ages under varying storage conditions. The discussion in this tread seems to be focused on whether or not the beer comes out tasting alright and retains its head, which while related, are not the primary point of the paper.

Has anybody evaluated flavor stability over a long period of time?

 

[Denny]

Has anybody evaluated flavor stability over a long period of time?

I believe New Belgium did and the results were not good. Hence their decision to not continue with the process.

 

[aaronbeach]

it would seem that using a 3/10cc half unit diabetic syringe to measure olive oil for 10 gallon batches becomes pretty practical. A unit on diabetic syringe is 1/100 of ml - the half-unit syringes have markings every half (i.e. every .005 ml). Using a pitch rate of 1 million cells x milliliters of wort x (.75 for ale, 1.5 for lager) x degrees plato and using Hull's third experiment amount (1mg OO / 25 billion cells) and that 1mg of olive oil is .0011 ml volume

a 1.048 (12 plato) ale would need 360 billion cell pitch size which means 0.01584ml of olive oil, which is 1.584 (~1.5) units on the insulin syringe (which has half unit markings). So for different size beers everything should be reasonably precisely supported by a 3/10cc half-unit diabetic syringe from little 1.016SG ales (half unit) up to big 1.1SG lagers (6 units)

 

[headbanger]

Conducting a truly scientific experiment with OO would prove difficult because you are dealing with organic compounds that are subject to all kinds of variables. It is pretty clear that the amount of OO used doesn't cause significant effects on head retention. It is also pretty clear that for most Homebrewers, it probably isn't worth the risk or trouble.

Most tests I have read about don't use a control wort, so the results of fermentation may have just happened by natural causes. To be sure, one may have to run GC tests and have a significant amount of testing with controllable variables and some control methods. This is definitely something that a large brewery may want to consider, but I sure wouldn't want to risk my business model on a mostly untested methodology.
Fermentation is a very easy process to produce. Controlling every aspect of it can be tricky and never fail-safe. However, mother nature has pretty much got this down.

To me, it probably doesn't make enough difference to keep doing it. It kinda takes the "fun" out of brewing. Heck, I don't even inject O2 or even ambient air because I use a very strong starter. I see the current trend of using yeast nutrients as a potential oxygen reducing method. Servomyces (tm) is used frequently around the brewing world. I have yet to use it.

This all being said, I am planning a Oktoberfest brew very soon and I think I may take a few gallons out into another fermentation chamber and inject 1-2 mils of OO into it. Just to be safe, I will also just use the shake-method of injecting AA (Ambient Air).

If I do this, I for sure will come back with my results.
Brew Strong!

Any results yet?

 

[beerman1957]

Any results yet?

Hi, I haven't done it yet... but I think I may try this on the next batch I have which would be a Heffeweisen I have ready to make. Since Heff is a lighter brew, I probably will go with a 1 mil infusion of OO. Now, let me tell you that 1 mil is next to nothing, in my book. I happen to have diabetic syringes all over the place as our cat is diabetic and he gets about 5. to 1 mil per day.
As a control, I will draw out 1 liter of wort into a separate container and ferment in the same environment to see what takes place naturally.

To make sure I get a good beer, I am going to do my usual routine of splashing the wort around out of the kettle into the fermentation stage.

I am still not sure how to quantify how this would work. I mean, how do you really determine yeast growth using this method? Duplicating the test would be a very challenging event in a home environment with so many variables.

I just can NOT believe that adding such a small portion would halt head retention. Last time I did this, there really was not a difference in the beer as far as taste, longevity, head retention... whatever.

 

[agenthucky]

Hi, I haven't done it yet... but I think I may try this on the next batch I have which would be a Heffeweisen I have ready to make. Since Heff is a lighter brew, I probably will go with a 1 mil infusion of OO. Now, let me tell you that 1 mil is next to nothing, in my book. I happen to have diabetic syringes all over the place as our cat is diabetic and he gets about 5. to 1 mil per day.
As a control, I will draw out 1 liter of wort into a separate container and ferment in the same environment to see what takes place naturally.

To make sure I get a good beer, I am going to do my usual routine of splashing the wort around out of the kettle into the fermentation stage.

I am still not sure how to quantify how this would work. I mean, how do you really determine yeast growth using this method? Duplicating the test would be a very challenging event in a home environment with so many variables.

I just can NOT believe that adding such a small portion would halt head retention. Last time I did this, there really was not a difference in the beer as far as taste, longevity, head retention... whatever.

A hefeweizen in its own right should have plenty of proteins for head retention, this may not be the best beer to test that out on.

Also, I can only imagine to really test this, you don't want to introduce ANY oxygen to the system, the point of using OO. Splashing it in the carboy gives it a good amount of the O2 it needs normally. I would siphon if you want to really compare.

 

[agenthucky]

The thread seems to strayed away from the primary goal of the paper. The reason for adding oleic acid (and avoid aeration) was to reduce oxidative effects in aging (hence the progressive experiments with longer warm stored beers) i.e. a more stable flavor profile.

Any tests evaluating the value of olive oil (oleic acid) additions to avoid aeration for the purpose of reducing oxidative effects in aging should evaluate the flavor profile at different ages under varying storage conditions. The discussion in this tread seems to be focused on whether or not the beer comes out tasting alright and retains its head, which while related, are not the primary point of the paper.


Has anybody evaluated flavor stability over a long period of time?

I just used a small drop of olive oil in the fermenter for a barleywine that I wanted to get a lot of alcohol out of. I used the olive oil in addition to the aeration to strengthen the yeast against the high alcohol. I got an American Ale to produce 12% alcohol, over a percent past it's expected level. Seemed to do the job, and the beer tastes great. It is undergoing it's conditioning cycles, and will be tasting it again in 3 months. I will be tasting this over the next couple years, and will update this post, but I did not do it as a replacement of aeration, rather as additional nutrients for the yeast to last the long journey.

 

[Denny]

But you didn't have a control to check it against. It possibly/likely would have done the same thing without OO.

 

[agenthucky]

But you didn't have a control to check it against. It possibly/likely would have done the same thing without OO.

I did not do it as an experiment, I did it to get better results than I have in the past. Not only is the beer 12%, I am adding whiskey to bring it up another 1-1.5%. I am going to give a chance to the yeast with the added olive oil to try and carbonate the beer, rather than having to add a belgian or champagne yeast like in the past.

 

[aaronbeach]

In this case (using oleic acid to increase yeast resistence/health in high ethanol environment) the research is already done (hence we don't really need to conduct our own research)

read "High-Gravity Brewing: Effects of Nutrition on Yeast Composition, Fermentative Ability, and Alcohol Production" in which oleic acid, ergosterol, and a nitrogenized source are used to supplement anaerobic and semi-anaerobic fermentations. While the paper finds success with this approach it also finds that consecutive aeration on days 1,2 and 3 with O2 can also achieve about the same results...

interesting quote from the paper for those planning to use oleic acid supplementation:

"Analysis of the levels of FAN before and after fermentation illustrates that in the presence of added lipids, usable nitrogen is, indeed, growth limiting and that the simultaneous presence of preformed lipids or oxygen is required for full utilization of such nitrogenous constituents"

Bottom line, use yeast extract (servomyces would work) along with oleic acid for proper results and if possible get an ergosterol supplement - however be careful it's hazmat!

Suggested amounts were .8% yeast extract (just use suggested servomyces amount), 24 ppm ergosterol and .24% (vol/vol) Tween 80 (their oleic acid source)

their test examples were repeatedly (repitched yeast) producing 16.2% alcohol in about 4 or 5 days of fermentation (anaerobically or semi-anaerobically) at 14 degrees celcius w/ lager yeast (in the 1980's - i.e. regular molson lager yeast)

 

[agenthucky]

In this case (using oleic acid to increase yeast resistence/health in high ethanol environment) the research is already done (hence we don't really need to conduct our own research)

read "High-Gravity Brewing: Effects of Nutrition on Yeast Composition, Fermentative Ability, and Alcohol Production" in which oleic acid, ergosterol, and a nitrogenized source are used to supplement anaerobic and semi-anaerobic fermentations. While the paper finds success with this approach it also finds that consecutive aeration on days 1,2 and 3 with O2 can also achieve about the same results...

interesting quote from the paper for those planning to use oleic acid supplementation:

"Analysis of the levels of FAN before and after fermentation illustrates that in the presence of added lipids, usable nitrogen is, indeed, growth limiting and that the simultaneous presence of preformed lipids or oxygen is required for full utilization of such nitrogenous constituents"

Bottom line, use yeast extract (servomyces would work) along with oleic acid for proper results and if possible get an ergosterol supplement - however be careful it's hazmat!

Suggested amounts were .8% yeast extract (just use suggested servomyces amount), 24 ppm ergosterol and .24% (vol/vol) Tween 80 (their oleic acid source)

their test examples were repeatedly (repitched yeast) producing 16.2% alcohol in about 4 or 5 days of fermentation (anaerobically or semi-anaerobically) at 14 degrees celcius w/ lager yeast (in the 1980's - i.e. regular molson lager yeast)

Wow, great reference, this is what I was asking for weeks back. It seemed combining the O2, OO, and a little yeast nutrient (nitrogens) seemed to do the trick.

 

[Fletch78]

To measure .083mL (assuming that correction is accurate) we'll round up to 0.1mL

1 US teaspoon is 4.92 mL. Let's round that up to 5mL in a teaspoon (because you'll lose a little bit that sticks on your measuring spoon, compensates for rounding up from .083 to .1 in the previous paragraph)

Mix 1 teaspoon in a gallon of water. Use a little lemon juice to emulsify. Pour out half the gallon, top back up with water and emulsify again. Now you have 2.5 mL.

Repeat, and you've got 1.25 mL.

Pour out one cup and you've got about .083

Make yeast starter.

No sophisticated scientific instruments required.

 

[scottland]

I've been using this method for a little while now, and I've had very health ferments.

As people said before, the math was wrong in the brewcast:

"For the volume of wort we normally ferment, we would pitch about 4500L of yeast, and to that we would add around 300mL of olive oil.

The typical 5 gal batch needs around 100-500ml of yeast slurry.

300ml divided by 4500L yeast is 0.067. Therefore we need 0.067ml Olive Oil per liter of yeast. That's acutally not that hard to get right. One drop from a medical dropper is 0.051ml for reference.

So for a 1L starter(100ml of yeast) you'd need around 0.0067ml of oil olive. the smallest drop you can get on a toothpick should be plenty close.

 

[lastsecondapex]

I am interested in this to see if, like o2, this will aid attenuation. I am going to make a 1.200 starter with dme and olive oil and toss in some WLP099 and see how far it can go with no aeration.

 

[outside92129]

Has anyone used ergosterol? It's not water soluble and pricey ($58 for 5 grams from sigma). I've ran the idea past many chemists, unfortunately i only know pharma chemists and no plant specialists.

http://www.sigmaaldrich.com/catalog...O|BRAND_KEY&N4=E6510|SIGMA&N25=0&QS=ON&F=SPEC

 

[hrangil]

I'd like to point out that there's one really practical reason for using olive oil instead of aerating, besides the theoretical issue re: oxydization -- namely, it's a convenience tool for the lazy, cheap and/or forgetful brewer. More than once I've pitched my yeast and realized at 2:00 a.m. that I forgot to aerate. My aeration method is the paint-stirrer-and-electric-drill method -- i.e., it's cheap and simple, but also kind of time consuming, and annoying and noisy. If I can avoid that trouble with one eensy-weensy drop of olive oil, why not? Or if I were thinking about spending money on an oxygen injection setup, why wouldn't I save that money if using a tiny amount of olive oil would produce reasonably comparable results?

Now, before anyone points it out, I am aware that the theory says that olive oil would need to be in contact with the yeast for some hours before pitching. This makes sense to me, as much as any of the other theory around it.

But the really important question, it seems to me, is whether olive-oiled beer comes out reasonably close to being as good as traditionally aerated beer. My experience is that it does. I've used olive oil when making a starter, I've used it when pitching the yeast, and I've added it directly to the wort some time after I pitched the yeast (i.e., the 2 a.m. scenario). In every instance the results were, for all practical purposes, equally as good as any other batch I've made.

Can I _prove_ that olive oil works as well as a fancy aeration system? No I can't, but for that matter, I haven't done any scientific studies to document whether my regular aeration method produces results superior to not aerating at all. I'm really just following the theory and advice of others with more knowledge and experience than I have. But I can tell you this for sure: I and everyone else who drinks my homebrew thinks it's consistently great, whether paint-stirred or olive-oiled, and that's evidence enough for me that olive oil is a worthwhile tool in the lazy/cheap/hurried/forgetful brewer's toolkit.

Just my 2 cents ... YMMV. I'm not trying to refute the very good arguments made against using olive oil. Rather I'm trying as always to relax more and worry less, and if olive oil serves that purpose then I'm all for it.