Why Is So Much Emphasis Placed On Water Chemistry?

[GotPushrods]

I came here because I've noticed an undue amount of attention being brought to bear upon water chemistry by novice home brewers who probably don't even have the basic techniques mastered.

If you replace "undue" with "premature" I might see where you're coming from. But even then you can KISS it enough where it doesn't have to come second to other fundamentals.

I agree it's been pretty well covered that attention to water can and will dramatically improve the end beer. Which I think answers the OP pretty simply.

 

[rpkincaid]

It's an issue when people working on the brewing equivalent of their bachelors (basic all-grain brewing) are worrying about doctoral thesis level (professional brewing) topics. Not only is it premature, but I think it threatens to introduce into the hobby the sort of pretentiousness and snobbery that makes some wine enthusiasts so unbearable.

I think getting suitable mash pH is one of the most fundamental issues in brewing.

It's important to realize that water can vary greatly from one place to another.

 

[Braufessor]

If you replace "undue" with "premature" I might see where you're coming from. But even then you can KISS it enough where it doesn't have to come second to other fundamentals.

I agree it's been pretty well covered that attention to water can and will dramatically improve the end beer. Which I think answers the OP pretty simply.

I don't think it is undue or premature for a beginner to pay attention to water - and I think you are alluding to that with what you say in regard to KISS.

As for the OP wondering "why" it is receiving increased attention - I think part of the reason it is becoming more common is that enough people are beginning to understand water well enough to give some really simple advice that will help - even at the beginner level.

I helped someone get started brewing and gave them very simple water advice - just use RO to start with (instead of your really hard/iron tasting well-water) because the extract already had minerals in it that are needed for brewing.

As people get started into all-grain there is the "primer" post or Palmer's "How to brew color chart" that will easily get you in the ball park.

Water chemistry (for most) has always been overwhelming, confusing, threatening....... Thanks to folks like palmer, martin, ajdelange, yooper, and others.....it has become easy enough, and basic enough that beginners CAN pay attention to it. Simply was not the case a few years ago. Water can, and does, make a difference in homebrew - harshness, phenolic/plastic off flavors, dullness in hops...... I have personally experienced these in my beer and the beers of others. Because it has been simplified, it now makes perfect sense to pay attention to it right off the bat - just like fermentation temperatures, or pitching more yeast.

 

[ajdelange]

It was part joke and part observation that the most sophisticated methods do not necessarily produce even mediocre beer. The Three American Horses is a reference to Bud, Coors, and Miller.

This implies that they produce mediocre or worse beer. Their beers are superb. You just don't like them nor, apparently, have the sophistication to appreciate them for what they are or are, most likely, caught up in this silly home brewer's cultural thing where the large commercial breweries are held in contempt. They can turn out a beer from one of their breweries in Main and another from one of their breweries in Hawaii. The ability to do that with a natural product represents a tremendous technical accomplishment. In order to do that they have staffs of inorganic chemists, staffs of biochemists...

I understand perfectly well the meaning of sophisticated, it's a fairly basic word in the English language and I'm very far from illiterate.

I'm sure you are but given that you do understand what it means and say that it is something to be shied away from one has to assume that you find that not being "aware of and able to interpret complex issues; subtle:" is somehow a good thing. I still think you are confused with pseudo sophistication or sophistry. It is, of course, always a good idea to question the pronouncements of the 'experts'. I've learned a great deal by doing that. But I have also encountered those who know nothing about a subject and vigorously resist attempts to inform. In fact it is all too common.

I came here because I've noticed an undue amount of attention being brought to bear upon water chemistry by novice home brewers who probably don't even have the basic techniques mastered.

Probably not. But why would one care that they are talking water before mastering fermentation and not care that they are talking hops before mastering yeast?

In every thread where the topic has come up outside this sub-forum, never once have I seen the person inquiring into the topic asked if they're absolutely positive they have every other brewing technique mastered to an adequate degree.

Again I ask: why should water be the final thing? The answer has, in the past, been because there are some nuances in the chemistry and because while it was true that one could easily increase the concentration means for decreasing methods were out of reach. Hence John Palmers 'Final Frontier' thing. That is no more.

When learning brewing most of us started with tins of extract because mashing is deemed too complicated for a novice. In those days you put the extract into whatever water you had and a)that didn't make any difference with respect to OG because all the extraction took place before you opened the tin and b) you didn't have any options. Today there is an option which is sort of the aqueous equivalent of extract and that is RO water with a tsp of calcium chloride and perhaps some gypsum in it.

It's an issue when people working on the brewing equivalent of their bachelors (basic all-grain brewing) are worrying about doctoral thesis level (professional brewing) topics.

Why is it an issue? Water chemistry is, as I noted earlier, Henderson-Hasselbalch with Debye Hückel with the latter being optional. This is freshman level stuff. Getting the water right is very much a part of basic all grain brewing and something anyone with a teaspoon, an LHBS that sells gypsum and calcium chloride, and access to RO water can do. Why would you care if people who don't fully understand something discuss it among themselves? This is part of learning.

Not only is it premature, but I think it threatens to introduce into the hobby the sort of pretentiousness and snobbery that makes some wine enthusiasts so unbearable.

If you go to brew club meeting or the AHA convention or any similar gathering you are going to find people talking about things you don't understand. There are two approaches to this. Be offended by it and turn your back or resolve to be able to understand the next time you go back.

All that said, I'm now curious enough to conduct some experiments with one gallon batches of single malt/single hop IPAs to see the end result.

..und es war Licht!

 

[Epimetheus]

I came here because I've noticed an undue amount of attention being brought to bear upon water chemistry by novice home brewers who probably don't even have the basic techniques mastered.

Guilty as charged. However, after reading much info on the water threads, it finally sunk in I should not worry so much about water until I can execute the basics consistently. Still working on that . Although a little calcium chloride helps my soft water create reasonable dark brews.

never once have I seen the person inquiring into the topic asked if they're absolutely positive they have every other brewing technique mastered to an adequate degree.

In my small experience, the members here with advanced knowledge are very considerate and gently suggest to newbies that they should, essentially, practice more and worry less. I think newbies can be identified by their posted questions, so it is not necessary to ask if they have mastered the techniques.

I do not favor either extreme of beer illiterate or PhD. I am working towards becoming a decent craftsman. In that, I greatly appreciate the advice and time of the experts, and enjoy the experiments of other members (search for brewing Ovaltine).

 

[grathan]

It would be nice to separate discussions about mash ph with those of "water profiles", but that rarely happens. It seems the latter gets attached to the importance of tannins extraction every single time.


Probably safe to assume recipes don't include water profiles because they really aren't that important.

 

[DrWill]

It's not.

Since beer is made up mostly of water, it's generally one of the first things pro and good homebrewers worry about.

However, worrying about it doesn't necessarily mean doing much about it. Some breweries are set up right where they are simply because the water is great for brewing. Few (if any) brewers adjust their water to match a certain profile- they instead may adjust their water to enhance the flavor of the beer.

Good water tends to make good beer, and knowing more about the water and mashing process interactions can make great beer. Bad water will always make bad beer.

I was waiting for someone to point out that since water is the biggest single ingredient in your beer, you might be well advised to give it some thought. And Yooper is spot on in the first line. Water profiles are important to craft brewers, just like malt analysis sheets and hop labels and yeast quality.

 

[ajdelange]

It would be nice to separate discussions about mash ph with those of "water profiles", but that rarely happens.

They are inseparable. There are two aspects to brewing water chemistry. The first is far and away more important and that is getting mash pH right. It doesn't matter how you manage part 2 (adjusting chloride and sulfate for flavor) if you haven't done part 1 correctly or if your management of part 2 has a detrimental effect on part 1.

It seems the latter gets attached to the importance of tannins extraction every single time.

Tannins will be more readily extracted if sparge water pH is high. If the sparge water has appreciable alkalinity the acids in the mash will be insufficient to overcome it and pH will rise. This is easily overcome and is quite a separate matter from mash pH.

Probably safe to assume recipes don't include water profiles because they really aren't that important.

Where a familiar style of beer is being brewed it is often, and usually quite correctly, assumed that the brewer will know the appropriate water composition. Thus there is little need to put information about water in a recipe for, e.g., Bohemian Pilsner. Now if you are writing a book or article about Bohemian Pils there should be a section on water and if you are doing an article about an unfamiliar style (e.g. Gose) then water information should and usually is given. As I am beginning to feel that home brewing has finally turned the corner on water treatment (largely beacause the tools are available to us) I am also seeing much more and much better information about water appearing in the publications, here on the net...

 

[Yooper]

Water chemistry (for most) has always been overwhelming, confusing, threatening....... Thanks to folks like palmer, martin, ajdelange, yooper, and others.....it has become easy enough, and basic enough that beginners CAN pay attention to it. Simply was not the case a few years ago. Water can, and does, make a difference in homebrew - harshness, phenolic/plastic off flavors, dullness in hops...... I have personally experienced these in my beer and the beers of others. Because it has been simplified, it now makes perfect sense to pay attention to it right off the bat - just like fermentation temperatures, or pitching more yeast.

I just have to point out that I am NOT a water expert at all, and should not be considered in the same breath as those folks. I use Palmer's, AJ's, Martin's, and Kai Troesters papers, books, spreadsheets, websites, and articles to try to glean a little bit of knowledge from their writings and experiments myself. I'm many years removed from chemistry and biochemistry, except in specific terms relating to healthcare. I haven't had an advanced chemistry class in 30 years!


A simple answer to the OP's question is just this- since beer usually has four ingredients: water, hops, malt, and yeast- then attention should be paid to all four ingredients. No one ingredient is more important than another, but water does have the ability to ruin the beer quickest oftentimes.

 

[Braufessor]

I just have to point out that I am NOT a water expert at all, and should not be considered in the same breath as those folks. I use Palmer's, AJ's, Martin's, and Kai Troesters papers, books, spreadsheets, websites, and articles to try to glean a little bit of knowledge from their writings and experiments myself.

You may not be an "expert" in the same breath as the others - but you spend a lot of time helping a lot of brewers by posting concise, easy to follow advice in the realm of water (and other areas). You also spend a lot of time directing brewers, new and old, to relevant information on the subject by others. You, and other "nonexperts" on the board have all helped to make this often "intimidating" information so much more accessible to so many more brewers than it was just a few years ago. A person does not need to be an expert to do a great job explaining expert advice to others - I think that is the roll many people play on this board - yourself included.

And, I think that is why people are so curious about water now - they can be.

 

[mchrispen]

Mindsculptor - let me add my non-scientific 2-cents.

Most of us started on old advice, old books. Papazian didn't spent a great deal of time on the importance of water in homebrewing - and I think helped to propagate the myth of good drinking water making good beer. To be fair - Palmer spends more time on water, but in the bulk of content in How to Brew - until the Water book - his focus on the Residual Alkalinity nomograph was really the only innovation (now dated) in home brewing water treatments for many years (along with budget priced pH strips and meters, and home RO filters). Also - their goal was primarily to o increase awareness of homebrewing, so water was the afterthought. While I had a basic understanding of water, it took some brutally honest judging sheets - and good advice from a friendly professional brewer - for me to focus on my brewing water. So if the focus is to make homebrewing accessible and simple (which is a great goal!) - then perhaps better advice can be given than use your tap water because it tastes good. I think the Primer is that starting point, and an intro to brewing would be well served to make those recommendations and incorporate the exceptions into example recipes. The danger, again, is that some people prefer chlorides and sulftates low - while others high - it's extremely subjective and personal - and add confusion to the recipes. People seldom follow instructions anyway. Someone mentioned earlier that water adjustments aren't important as they aren't part of recipes. I wholeheartedly disagree, however, also understand that everyone's water profile is a moving target, as is their crush, their system, utilization, fermentation capability, etc. Of course, then, any recipe will provide different results brewed by different people on different systems in different environments.

Water is absolutely a key component, as someone said earlier; water, yeast, malt and hops. AJ and I may subjectively disagree on this point - but I have had success building my RO water up to match (decarbonated) local profiles in achieving something close to my memories and notes from sampling beers overseas (particularly UK, Belgium, France and Germany) and domestically. I still absolutely respect his input, but I like a bit of sulfate it turns out in my hoppy beers. I don't blindly accept that every beer needs 50 ppm Calcium and at least 300 ppm Sulfate. I do accept that my mash pH MUST be between 5.2 and 5.6 for optimal results, and tighter for specific styles, and that malt contributes acid into the mash that must balance with alkalinity in my brewing liquor. I do not blindly believe that beard is required to brew great beer, yet I have one. I do repeatedly brew my house APA recipe with differing target profiles to dial in the right flavors (Batch #7 is pretty close).

My personal brewing changed dramatically when I embraced that my water was a significant (but not the only) issue with my brewing. This is also directly related to the improved quality of my observations and notes, and expansion and education of my taste and smell senses. I had noticed early on that my tap water, in a partial mash, created a medicinal and astringent quality in beer, and that I couldn't expect to brew light colored beers reliably. Spring water had an advantage over my tap water. When I moved to All Grain and eventually to 10 gallon batches, buying spring water was inconvenient, and I simply filtered my tap water with active charcoal, and used Campden tablets. Immediately the astringency returned, as well as terrible efficiency. I focused heavily on brewing procedures and processes, and repeated brews with the same terrible results. So I poked more into water chemistry.

I have to admit I didn't brew using the KISS Primer recommendations. I dove in, as I am apt to overcomplicate things, and looked at multiple spreadsheets and discussed with many of the local breweries. I got my water tested (it is totally unsuited for drinking BTW) and I settled on Bru'n Water (after testing in the mash) to help make the appropriate adjustments and changes to my process (adding extra salts to sparge not boil), and brewed two identical APA batches with store bought RO water using different profile recommendations. The differences were dramatic in the kettles, and I was sold before I tasted the final products. Both were good - but as I got more comfortable adding minerals - my beers improved, as well as my confidence. In the end - I spent considerable money on a high flow rated RO system and haven't looked back. My competition scores and feedback from respected colleagues has gone up... I am now comfortable enough (and take good enough notes) to experiment with additions based on the grist and hops bill... and get some pretty good results.

Here's the rub. I would not EVER have started brewing if you told me I would need to buy or manage water. I would have believed it too complicated and difficult to achieve something as simple as beer. I am very budget-minded yet I decided to spend the money on a good brewing system, and then on temperature controlled fermentation, then kegs and a kegerator, and then on a consistent water system. Would I recommend people to home brew? Absolutely. Would I tell them they need to spend the money I spent to brew good beer? Absolutely not. However, I believe they need to consider their water source as a key constituent, and the Primer is the perfect starting point.

And, I think that is why people are so curious about water now - they can be.

This really sums things up. This board (and AJ, Martin, Yooper, TH, Kaiser and many others) have made something as seemingly arcane as mash chemistry approachable and simple. While Palmer's Water book is fairly technical, it is still accessible and approachable by most of us. We can either use the knowledge or ignore it.

 

[tennesseean_87]

The audacity of some people to talk with experts who are giving them great information with such curtness is astounding. It'd be like getting coaching tips for your pee-wee team from an NFL coach and demanding anecdotal evidence of the effectiveness of a strategy.

OP, before you do 1-gallon batches, just do what AJ recommended: brew up a 5-gallon IPA as normal, and add pinches of salt (gypsum and/or CaCl) to several glasses. Pick the best profile and scale up your glass addition to total batch size.

 

[ajdelange]

AJ and I may subjectively disagree on this point - but I have had success building my RO water up to match (decarbonated) local profiles in achieving something close to my memories and notes from sampling beers overseas (particularly UK, Belgium, France and Germany) and domestically.

I don't disagree on this at all. I often points out that it isn't necessary to match a profile, that matching the bicarbonate is typically undone as soon as the water gets hot when the bicarb all falls out and that one can often improve on the beer by adjusting around the starting point e.g. I can make a better Pils by adding some extra chloride than I can get with a Pilsen profile. The best profile is the profile that gives the beer that is best by whatever your criterion of goodness is.

I still absolutely respect his input, but I like a bit of sulfate it turns out in my hoppy beers.

I personally do not like sulfate in general and despise it in beers that use noble hops. But that does not mean that I think everyone should dislike it, even with noble hops. I do warn people against it that case because I think the majority will agree with me that sulfate and noble hops are a bad mix. In other cases I think most will want some sulfate and advise that they use as much or little as is needed to give the best beer. I usually suggest starting small on the sulfate and working up until the brewer determines whether he (or his 'customers') are sulfate lovers.

 

[LuckyBeagleBrewing]

Reading this also reminds me that some people start out with great water already and don't know it. The president of a local brew club does nothing with his water and wins gold medals all the time. I think he has a water line that runs all the way to Germany.

Me, I have started delving in to water management and I have been able to achieve flavors. I never thought possible. My beer started out horrible. I patched it without knowing what I was doing, then I started reading Martin's and AJ's work. I have not taken it quite to their level but I can tell a major difference with old and new.

For competition beers I start with the region and work on getting close to that Dissolving any chalk at least a day before. I have yet to downloaded a pressure chart for pressure per gallon per gram to dissolve it. Right now I just use 5 gallons at 50 psi.

Listen, Read, Learn. Yooper will lead you to the water information and Martin and AJ will show you how to understand the water so you dont have to hold your nose when you drink your beer.

 

[ajdelange]

For competition beers I start with the region and work on getting close to that Dissolving any chalk at least a day before. I have yet to downloaded a pressure chart for pressure per gallon per gram to dissolve it. Right now I just use 5 gallons at 50 psi.

A couple of comments here. As we have noted it is not usually necessary to mimic the region's water unless your optimality criterion is, or contains, 'authentic' and keeping in mind the caveat that the profile you are trying to match may not be authentic in the sense that it does not electrically balance or, while it matches what comes into the brewery, it does not match what goes into the mash tun at the brewery whose beer you are trying to duplicate, those who strive to emulate, for example Matt a couple of posts back, emulate everything but the carbonate/bicarbonate. The reasons for this are two. First, as the pressure discussion makes clear it is a PITA and second, the bicarbonate you put in, or a large part of it, tends to precipitate out when the water is heated prior to strike. I have often commented in the past that brewing water synthesis would be vastly easier if your LHBS sold calcium bicarbonate powder. But that isn't going to happen. It only exists in solution and in a form concentrated enough to be practical, that solution would have to be under pressure. I have thought of going to a soda water manufacturer and seeing about having him do what LuckyBeagle is thinking of and distributing this to LHBSs as concentrated calcium bicarbonate solution. Never pursued it so its up for grabs and maybe someone can make a small fortune on it.

Then in the shower the other morning, where I do all my best thinking, with warm water of alkalinity 80 cascading over me I realized that I have a supply of water with alkalinity of anywhere from 80 - 200 available to me and that is in the concentrate stream from my RO unit. The concentration of everything in that stream is feed_concentration/(1 - recovery) so if I set recovery for 50% (0.5) the ions in the waste water are double what they are in the feed. This ought to qualify for the goofy idea of 2013 award.

Some considerations:

1. Obviously if you are using a under sink unit with a recovery of 20% you can only get a 12.5% boost and that isn't likely to be much help. Only the larger units with a pump and adjustable brine valve are likely to produce recoveries high enough to be of much use. But it should be possible to equip even an under sink unit with a pump and valve. Pumps are often sold as an accessory to such units to increase throughput. A restricting needle valve can be had from Home Depot etc. Be careful with pressure if you consider doing this. You should have a gauge and some flow meters to help you set recovery.

2. Not only the alkalinity goes up but everything else. For example my water which is more or less 80 alkalinity, 110 total hardness, 7 chloride, 7 sodium and 27 sulfate would become 160 alkalinity 220 total hardness, 14 chloride, 14 sodium and 54 sulfate.

3. Rather than adjusting the recovery of your RO unit to set the alkalinity you want you might want to set it high and blend your tap water or the permeate to control the amount of alkalinity in the mix.

4. Most people feed their RO units with softened water. You would want to bypass the softener here. The example numbers in item 2 assume that this has been done. With softened water the brine would have total hardness of perhaps 4 and sodium at about 50. Bypassing the softener and increasing recovery both encourage the precipitation of chalk and silica on your membranes so you wouldn't want to do this as a matter of course (unless you don't mind replacing membranes more frequently).

5. If you don't bypass the softener you are using the RO brine as a source of sodium bicarbonate. It is much easier to just add some baking soda. The beauty (if there is any) in this idea that it can be a source of calcium bicarbonate without having to fiddle with CO2 gas.

6. The concentrate may well be supersaturated with respect to CO2 or CaCO3 or both so changes in pH and precipitation of chalk may occur. It would be best, therefore, to collect this water just before use.

 

[LuckyBeagleBrewing]

A couple of comments here. As we have noted it is not usually necessary to mimic the region's water unless your optimality criterion is, or contains, 'authentic' and keeping in mind the caveat that the profile you are trying to match may not be authentic in the sense that it does not electrically balance or, while it matches what comes into the brewery, it does not match what goes into the mash tun at the brewery whose beer you are trying to duplicate, those who strive to emulate, for example Matt a couple of posts back, emulate everything but the carbonate/bicarbonate.

For competitions I always try to match the regional water as close as I can. I do understand that it may not be an exact match, I do try to get close and that has really paid off. If heating the water precipitates out the chemicals I have added, does it not do the same for water in those regions? Granted I am forcing the change but wouldn't heating the water from say Munich cause change there as well? Just trying to learn a bit more. Going off Martin's spreadsheet, there are a few water profiles he lists as boiled and they really different in the bicarbonate from their base version.

 

[ajdelange]

Yes, exactly. Thus you find a typical Munich water profile which is high in calcium bicarbonate and low in everything else, labor to get calcium carbonate dissolved, set out to brew and as soon as the water gets hot, the chalk precipitates back out. That is precisely what would happen to a Munich brewer if he heated the target water and thus, by going to all that trouble you have not duplicated what went into the braumeister's tun and have, IMO, wasted time, effort and CO2. This is why Martin offers the 'boiled' profiles. It represents his best guess as to what a Munich brewer would actually be using. This is consistent with Matt's attempt to match everything but the bicarbonate/carbonate.

 

[spenghali]

I think what the OP is looking for is basically a water chemistry primer such as:

https://sites.google.com/site/brunwater/water-knowledge

After reading that he should have basic understanding of mash pH, brewing ions, general brewing water chemistry and what they all contribute to the final product.