What the hell did I do to deserve this head?

[user 141939]

I'm not a scientist or a master brewer; maybe I'm all wet on why or how it makes a difference. But I know what my personal experience has been. I've run out of homebrew that's been in my fridge for two or three days and dipped into the ones I started chilling for the first time the night before, and gotten noticeably more foam when I poured them.

Of course I don't store homebrew for months, either; it never lasts that long. Maybe that makes a difference....

Right on. I could be mistaken too. I definitely get the foam thing happening when a batch is fresh. But it seems like towards the end I just chill them down as I need them and they are usually perfect.


Sent from my iPhone using Home Brew

 

[BreezyBrew]

... Pulls out the popcorn...

 

[Agate]

Right on. I could be mistaken too. I definitely get the foam thing happening when a batch is fresh. But it seems like towards the end I just chill them down as I need them and they are usually perfect.


Sent from my iPhone using Home Brew

Someone mentioned it earlier but it may have been lost in the fray. When you chill a newly bottled and carbed beer for a few days, you're also dropping out particles that may have been stirred up during bottling. These can act as nucleation points and cause it to appear more carbed than it really is (yeast nutrient in the mead trick, doh!) They also drop out in storage, which may be why a stored beer doesn't need to be chilled for a few days-- just a few hours works. This may be contributing to the effect as well, so something to consider.

For the record, I secondary and am as careful as possible to only transfer clear beer to my bottling bucket, and I don't see much if any change between a day and a week in chilling. My anecdotal 2 cents...

<runs for cover>

 

[jbaysurfer]

This is incorrect. The solubility of gas in a liquid is dependent on temperature and pressure. You are ignoring the pressure component above. Lower temperatures allow more CO2 to be dissolved, but higher pressures also allow more CO2 to be dissolved (this is why you can carbonate a keg at room temperature by simply increasing the pressure). When the yeast consume the priming sugar, all of the CO2 that is going to be in the beer is in the closed system of the bottle. This puts the beer at a high pressure, allowing it to have 2.5 volumes of CO2 dissolved in it at room temperature. When you chill it down, the decrease in temperature makes the beer want to release CO2. But as soon as it releases CO2 into the headspace, the pressure in the system increases causing the beer to be able to hold more CO2. It's at equilibrium. So the beer contains the same amount of dissolved CO2 no matter what temperature it's at.

Based on your reasoning you're saying there is 1.5 volumes of CO2 in the headspace when the beer is at room temperature. Assuming about 1 oz of headspace that would mean that 18 oz of CO2 are compressed into a 1 oz space. This would require the headspace to be at about 265 psi, which is of course impossible.

If you want a real world example of this, just open a beer at room temperature. It will absolutely not be at 1 volume of CO2 carbonation.

Remember what I said about the era of pendaticism and the probability that something I said was technically incorrect?

LOL..so it's not dependent on temperature by virtue of the fact it's dependent on temperature AND pressure? Brilliant. Yes. I agree. Thanks for the blunt "This is wrong" Pete. I love the graceful social interactions the internet exposes us too. LOL!!!

 

[jbaysurfer]

I'm already familiar with all the points in the article. I understand the relationship between dissolved CO2, temperature, and pressure. The part of your post that deals with what I said ...

"The liquid absorbs much of this headspace CO2 in a chilled environment and retains it unless heated and (broadly speaking) agitated."

My point was, I don't believe that once you cool a beer once that the extra CO2 that goes into solution magically stays their even if the beer is brought back to room temp. Since you said it retains it unless heated, I guess you agree with me.

That experiment is terribly BTW.

I wasn't contesting anything you said. And yes, I agree the C02 that gets dissolved into solution doesn't "magically" stay there.

 

[peterj]

Remember what I said about the era of pendaticism and the probability that something I said was technically incorrect?

LOL..so it's not dependent on temperature by virtue of the fact it's dependent on temperature AND pressure? Brilliant. Yes. I agree. Thanks for the blunt "This is wrong" Pete. I love the graceful social interactions the internet exposes us too. LOL!!!

I'm not being pedantic or trying to win an argument on technicalities or anything. It wasn't just that parts of your post were "technically incorrect". It was that the main point and conclusion you were stating was incorrect.

Also, I never said it wasn't dependent on temperature. I just pointed out that you omitted the pressure component which resulted in your conclusion being incorrect.

I'm sorry if you thought the way I worded my response was too blunt. I'm not trying to offend anyone here, I'm just trying to correct misinformation. But, frankly, I don't think my response was inflammatory at all. And if you don't have a thick enough skin to take a little bit of criticism and opposing views, then maybe internet forums are not the place for you. If anyone is being pedantic here, it is you.

 

[jbaysurfer]

I'm not being pedantic or trying to win an argument on technicalities or anything. It wasn't just that parts of your post were "technically incorrect". It was that the main point and conclusion you were stating was incorrect.

Also, I never said it wasn't dependent on temperature. I just pointed out that you omitted the pressure component which resulted in your conclusion being incorrect.

I'm sorry if you thought the way I worded my response was too blunt. I'm not trying to offend anyone here, I'm just trying to correct misinformation. But, frankly, I don't think my response was inflammatory at all. And if you don't have a thick enough skin to take a little bit of criticism and opposing views, then maybe internet forums are not the place for you. If anyone is being pedantic here, it is you.

I see this place as a practical homebrewing forum. From a practical standpoint I judge the merit of posts based on: Does this information HELP anyone make better beer? and Does this information damage anyone's beer. I gave practical advice, as I understood it, and if followed it's certainly not going to hurt anyone's beer.

I'm not a scientist, and this isn't a peer review site. But I'm a damn good brewer (please come try my BSD at GABF this year!) and I was doing my best to help.

I know something just less then "it all". Thanks for filling in the rest.

 

[unionrdr]

To set the record straight I never mentioned the pressure component ( closed system,ie- bottle), assuming the reader understands that aspect of it. But, of course you all know hat happens when yo assume anything...you make an a$$ out of U & ME! I'll have to remember the closed system pressure bit from now on...

 

[mmlipps]

Awesome advice on this post. I wasn't expecting this much response. In a day or 2 I'll be cracking anothing bottle open to see if chilling for a few days has made a difference. I'll post my findings here.

Also @jbaysurfer I just noticed your signature and damn, I wish I had time to brew that much beer! Being a submariner my work schedule gets pretty intense sometimes so between that and underways I'm on batch number 9 in a little under a year time frame.

 

[jbaysurfer]

Awesome advice on this post. I wasn't expecting this much response. In a day or 2 I'll be cracking anothing bottle open to see if chilling for a few days has made a difference. I'll post my findings here.

Also @jbaysurfer I just noticed your signature and damn, I wish I had time to brew that much beer! Being a submariner my work schedule gets pretty intense sometimes so between that and underways I'm on batch number 9 in a little under a year time frame.

Yeah, I'm a jump in with both feet kinda guy. Part of what has kept me motivated is my brewclub does a brewer of the year competition with monthly beer contests based on specific styles. It's forced me to learn a lot about lots of different styles, and kept the brewing process interesting for me. It's come at a cost. I don't surf, snowboard or Mountain Bike nearly as much as I used too....lol...luckily doing it at home and in the garage means I can still be a husband and father on brewdays.

 

[peterj]

I see this place as a practical homebrewing forum. From a practical standpoint I judge the merit of posts based on: Does this information HELP anyone make better beer? and Does this information damage anyone's beer. I gave practical advice, as I understood it, and if followed it's certainly not going to hurt anyone's beer.

I'm not a scientist, and this isn't a peer review site. But I'm a damn good brewer (please come try my BSD at GABF this year!) and I was doing my best to help.

I know something just less then "it all". Thanks for filling in the rest.

I'm not trying to be a "know it all" or show anyone up. Again, I'm sorry if it came off that way. I've just heard a lot of people quote that you have to chill beers for a few days to let the liquid absorb the CO2 and I wanted to correct this misinformation.

I see one of the functions of this forum as being a resource for learning information about homebrewing. I use it for information all the time, and I know many other people do too. As a member of this community I feel like it's important for the information on this forum to be as correct and accurate as possible. Inaccurate information should still be corrected regardless of whether it will damage someone's beer or not.

The great thing about this site (and other internet forums) is that it's the most basic and democratic form of peer review. We are all peers here, and anyone can review, comment, and correct anyone else's posts.

Again, I apologize if my post seemed a little harsh. I guess I could have smoothed it out and been a little more tactful, but saying the right thing has never really been a strong suit for me!

 

[jbaysurfer]

I'm not trying to be a "know it all" or show anyone up. Again, I'm sorry if it came off that way. I've just heard a lot of people quote that you have to chill beers for a few days to let the liquid absorb the CO2 and I wanted to correct this misinformation.

I see one of the functions of this forum as being a resource for learning information about homebrewing. I use it for information all the time, and I know many other people do too. As a member of this community I feel like it's important for the information on this forum to be as correct and accurate as possible. Inaccurate information should still be corrected regardless of whether it will damage someone's beer or not.

The great thing about this site (and other internet forums) is that it's the most basic and democratic form of peer review. We are all peers here, and anyone can review, comment, and correct anyone else's posts.

Again, I apologize if my post seemed a little harsh. I guess I could have smoothed it out and been a little more tactful, but saying the right thing has never really been a strong suit for me!

No worries man. Sorry for implying you're a "know it all". Been accused of that myself plenty of times.

 

[mmlipps]

UPDATE:

Alright, so chilling it helped...I can now pour 75% of the beer into the glass before the foam hits the top and overflows. So based on all the advice given im thinking 2 possibilities.

#1 I didn't cold crash long enough... Therefore a all the dry hop particles are causing extra foaming action... I know I am using poor terminology here. I cold crashed this beer for 48 hours prior to bottling.

#2 I have a wild yeast... Honestly I am leaning toward this. Should I be concerned with exploding bottles?



Sent from my iPhone using Home Brew

 

[user 141939]

Just section them off. Maybe wear some safety goggles when you drink them.



Sent from my iPhone using Home Brew