# Killing Infections



## manticle (8/1/10)

I'm sure I can't be the first one to think of this so please someone tell me why it won't work.

I have a stout cold conditioning at the moment that is displaying undoubted signs of my first acetobacter infection.

I know sulphites are used for ciders and other beverages to stop fermentation in its tracks (ie kill yeast). Can a no rinse sanitiser (like star san or saniclean) potentially be used in the right, no rinse proportions in an infected batch of beer to halt/kill an infection?

Is this completely retarded? If it is, please tell me why.


----------



## bum (8/1/10)

I'm gonna take an ill-informed stab and suggest that since the sanitisers are designed to work on sterilised surfaces only (small "colonies" of the relevant bacterium) it'd do bugger all against full blown infections.


----------



## Bizier (9/1/10)

Firstly they are not actually meant to be consumed , whether or not it would harm is another thing. You might be OK with sodium met / campden tab. BUT the taste of infection is the byproducts thrown off by a feasting bacteria. So even if you kill the source, you will have that taste there for sure.

Perhaps pitch a pack of Wyeast Roeselare on top?


----------



## manticle (9/1/10)

Bizier said:


> Firstly they are not actually meant to be consumed , whether or not it would harm is another thing. You might be OK with sodium met / campden tab. BUT the taste of infection is the byproducts thrown off by a feasting bacteria. So even if you kill the source, you will have that taste there for sure.
> 
> Perhaps pitch a pack of Wyeast Roeselare on top?



A bit confused - what isn't meant to be consumed? The acetobacter or the no rinse? I'm talking no rinse in suggested ppm proportion so I can't imagine there's a problem there. 
In terms of taste, the aceto hasn't hit yet and my understanding is it could take a while after bottling before it does. Can it be knocked out before it does? 

Bum hit the nail on the head as far as my theorising goes but can anyone confirm? Is there a way of killing infections early or are we always doomed?


@bizier: using it for an experimental sour brew is certainly the next step on the agenda and I have 2 packs of roselare, a glass demijohn and sour beer plans. Maybe could be sorta might be see how it goes if no other option presents itself.


----------



## newguy (9/1/10)

Once a beer is infected, kiss it goodbye. If your aim is to stop all microbial activity (bacteria and yeast), either pasteurisation or really tight filtration will do so, but won't remove the byproducts of the infection (off flavours and aromas). Using chemicals naturally means that your beer will be contaminated with the chemicals in addition to the infection byproducts.


----------



## Nick JD (9/1/10)

Stout vinegar is delicious on fish and chips... :huh: 

Seriously though, why not divide it into 5 vessels and do a bit of experiementing? See if you can knock it out.


----------



## Screwtop (9/1/10)

Go outside now and run around the house three times yelling out, "I am a dickhead" 

Then use bleach in future.

:lol: :lol:

Screwy


----------



## raven19 (9/1/10)

newguy said:


> Once a beer is infected, kiss it goodbye. If your aim is to stop all microbial activity (bacteria and yeast), either pasteurisation or really tight filtration will do so, but won't remove the byproducts of the infection (off flavours and aromas). Using chemicals naturally means that your beer will be contaminated with the chemicals in addition to the infection byproducts.



This covers your question I think, and I would concur with Newguy's reasoning wholeheartedly.

If the beer is infected ditch it!

(slightly :icon_offtopic: I had a red ale that got wild yeast in it when I underpitched my starter. After leaving the keg of beer outside the fridge for over 2 months with no improvement from the good yeast trying to clear it up - it went down the drain) - :icon_vomit:


----------



## manticle (9/1/10)

Screwtop said:


> Go outside now and run around the house three times yelling out, "I am a dickhead"
> 
> Then use bleach in future.
> 
> ...




I used to use bleach for a bit but had a couple of experiences with chlorephenols. I do often run around the house yelling at myself though.

@Newguy - what you say makes sense but in this instance I'm talking about visual signs of an infection which have not yet developed off flavours (acetobacter) which was why I was wondering. My impression of aceto is that it can be kept for short amount of time before the souring takes hold.

Anyway massive cleaning and nuking time coming up.

@Nick - I might keep aside a small amount of the dubbel and dose it with brett.

Thanks for the responses. It seemed a long shot but worth asking.


----------



## crundle (9/1/10)

If the beer is infected with Acetobacter, the effects of the infection (turning beer to vinegar) can be slowed down massively by keeping the beer cold, gassed with CO2, and out of the light. If you are kegging, get it in a keg now and gas it up, keep it cold and start drinking!

I have had a few acetobacter infections now, and threw the first few on the lawn, but they were beers that needed to be stored for about 6 months to drink, such as doppelbock, so they would have been unsuitable to drink fresh. The last one I had was a light lager, and it has been in the kegerator now for 2 weeks and still drinks fine. If/when it starts getting funky I will ditch it, but I am knocking it down and have had no ill effects yet!

A bit of an experiment in the process to see how long it takes to get funky I guess, but my understanding is that aceto requires O2 to metabolise, so denying it that and giving it a high volume of CO2 (2.4 volumes) and keeping it cold to slow any activity should delay the inevitable beer to vinegar transformation.

I never thought I would drink an infected beer when it first happened, but as there is no off flavour, and after hearing others say to give it a try, I figure why not?

cheers,

Crundle


----------



## t2000kw (9/1/10)

Are you sure it's acetobacter, or could it be lactobacillus? If the latter, you can use lysozyme, which splits the bacterial cell walls apart and prevents it from spreading. It does not work on acetobacter. Lactobacillus makes things sour, like yogurt. Acetobacter, I believe, makes them "vinegary" and should be different from the former. You may not be able to get lysozyme in time, though, unless the infection is proceeding very slowly. A lacto infection ruined my first American lager beer. 

The rest of this assumes that the infection hasn't progressed to the point where you don't like the taste. It won't reverse any taste changes.

One other thing you might do (as opposed to using lysozyme), if it is acetobacter, is heat your wort up to 72 deg C for at least 20 seconds (or more-you're Pasteurizing your wort doing this). You can even boil it again if you wish. You will kill off any bacteria that should cause you problems. In the meantime, clean and use a good sanitizer on your fermenter (using an unscented chlorine bleach, Star San, iodophor (my preference), or something else). If you use chlorine, you will have to rinse, of course (preferably with hot water). 

You may lose some of the alcohol already produced, but you will also lose those nasty bacteria, as well as your yeast. You can add sugar to boost alcohol content back to where it should be, but I'm not sure how that will affect the taste. Ethanol boils at 78.4 deg C, so if you heat it quickly to 72 C, then after the 20 seconds, drop it as quickly as you can to yeast pitching temperature, you may not lose enough to care about. 

It's summer where you are (winter here in Ohio, USA). Old timers would not brew in summertime because that's when lacto bacteria are floating around in the air. It can happen no matter how careful you are with sanitation, but using a no rinse sanitizer on your fermenter and keeping the lid on until you move your cooled wort into it might help. If you brew outside, consider brewing on a rainy day. (I'm not absolutely sure it will help, but I've never had an infection when I've brewed in the rain, either.) If you want some "insurance" against this, you can use lysozyme during your summer brewing sessions. This isn't an Australian supplier, but it explains about how it's used:

<https://morebeer.com/view_product/15498>

The downside is that it's expensive. This is a cheaper US source but it's still (not counting shipping costs) about $2.65 (USD) per 19L batch. Cost is $10.50 USD for 4 oz, the cheapest I found with a quick search. I just happened to remember that Great Fermentations sells it. 

<http://70.47.98.231/Lysozyme-4-oz/productinfo/7356A/>

I hope this might be of some help. The quickest "fix" would be to reheat your wort ASAP and start over with what you have after that. 

Don


----------



## manticle (9/1/10)

I'm not sure as I've never had either aceto or lacto infection before. If it is lacto then to my my mind it would be worth turning into a sour beer of some kind. Basically little white clumps and lumps started to grow on the surface - like a cross between mould (but not furry) and bubbles. My assumption was aceto.

Potentially another silly question but is it possible to get lactobacillus infection from using lactose? It's a milk stout with 500g in there - I keep my lactose refrigerated but ???

It's a big warning to me not to get complacent with my brewing and a reminder that brewing is a huge learning process.


----------



## benny_bjc (9/1/10)

I have no idea really.... so maybe best not listening to my idea.

But could you use a cambden tablet to kill all bacteria / yeast and then mix this brew with another fresh brew???

If it was me I probably would just chuck it... but there is no harm in doing a bit of experimentation I guess!


----------



## manticle (9/1/10)

beer007 said:


> I have no idea really.... so maybe best not listening to my idea.
> 
> But could you use a cambden tablet to kill all bacteria / yeast and then mix this brew with another fresh brew???
> 
> If it was me I probably would just chuck it... but there is no harm in doing a bit of experimentation I guess!




The idea of campden being used to stop fermentation is what led to the original idea but I'd rather chuck it than have sulphites in my brew. I hate the effect of sulphites. 

One brew was given a dose of bleach (no point allowing potentially millions of wild yeast cells free access to the drain or garden right near where I brew), then tipped and the fermenter is now being soaked in sodium percarb in preparation for a massive cleaning and sanitising regime. This one was quite foul tasting.

Another which had some interesting flavours developing was given some candi sugar, malt extract and Roselare yeast. This will be racked to glass with some whisky soaked oak chips and left to age.

The milk stout will be observed and tasted over the next few days. I may try t2000kw's idea of pasteurisation and see what eventuates.

I still have 2 full fermenters which seem to be unaffected by anything - one cold conditioning and one waiting for fridge space. Then it's nuke everything and brew like crazy time to replenish the stocks I thought were taken care of.


----------



## Rodolphe01 (9/1/10)

I recently had what I thought was aceto, same surface film you just described, I bottled anyway sacrificing the top 5 litres or so when I racked out of the tap to bulk prime. It was a long shot and the infection did transfer into the bottles, it was woe - my 7 year old daughter enjoyed opening and pouring out 30 bottles for me 

I reckon the best bet would be to try and pasteurise it as already described, I think mixing in no-rinse would just taste bad... Just a guess though. You'd basically have to mix in enough sanitiser to make the entire lot of beer no rinse, i.e. if your no rinse is 1ml per litre dilution youd have to use 1ml per litre of beer, tasty I think not. Pasteurising will be difficult due to the slow time it would probably take to heat up, the whole idea if pasteurisation is rapid heating and cooling to preserve some resemblance of the original product. I think a slow temp increase to pasteurise will kill a lot of the flavour, definitely better than vinegar though. Maybe throw in some hops if you try and pasteurise :lol:
Honestly if it were mine Id either drink up quick before taste sets in or throw it out. If I had the time to experiment Id split it up and try the sanitiser method in one lot and pasteurisation in the other.


----------



## newguy (9/1/10)

The campden tablet won't kill anything - don't bother.

Number one rule of beer is that once your wort is cooled, anything going into it after that must be sterile*.
- If you add sugar, it must be boiled in some water to sterilise. By sugar, I mean that to include table sugar, dextrose, candi sugar, lactose, etc. It isn't sterile straight from the pack.
- When you put in your racking cane, hose, hydrometer, floating thermometer, etc, they must be sterile too. Best plan of attack is a soaking in no rinse sanitiser.
- If you add water to your beer for whatever reason, it must be sterile. Tap water isn't sterile, and neither is tank water. Bottled water isn't sterile either. It's only sterile if you boiled it beforehand.
- *Hops (dry hopping) are a weird exception. Hops aren't sterile and don't buy the "no beer spoilage organisms live on a hop" bs. If it's outside, exposed to all the bacteria and wild yeast in the environment, it isn't magically sterile all on its own. However, by the time dry hops are added to beer, the yeast has already created a good concentration of alcohol to inhibit the critters on the hops. The iso-alpha acids in the beer (from the hops during the boil) also inhibit bacteria. There is a large body of anecdotal evidence that dry hopping usually doesn't infect your beer, but I've seen it happen. Not often, but I've still seen it happen. Because of that, I personally soak my dry hops in a small quantity of spirits (vodka or scotch) to help sterilise them before I dump them into my fermenter.
- *Fruit is another weird exception. I know many people who claim to just dump fruit into their fermenter about a week after brewing and they haven't had issues. I'm not that trusting. I always pasteurise my fruit by bringing it to 75C, sealing the pot, and letting it cool naturally before I add it to my fermenter.

Naturally, any equipment you use to add any of the above ingredients to your beer must be sterile as well. This includes spoons, funnels, pots, etc.


----------



## manticle (9/1/10)

I'm in accordance with all of the above. The main note from this is to get your proportions of no-rinse correct which is where I have recently fallen down.


----------



## newguy (9/1/10)

For the past ~13 years or so I've been keeping about 15l premixed in a sealed plastic pail. I remix a new batch when the old one gets enough crud in it to piss me off (usually lint and cat hair but I have NFI how those things get in it in the first place). I tip the solution back into the pail when I'm done with it.

If you use star san it's critical that you use distilled or reverse osmosis water. The minerals in tap water render it useless within a day or two. Just follow the mixing directions on the package and you're good to go. That, and ensure that you follow the contact time guidelines. Star san requires 30 seconds at the right concentration but I personally go for at least 1 minute. Iodophor's contact time is 2 minutes. You can't shorten these times by increasing the concentration of sanitiser - the popular notion that more = better isn't true.


----------



## manticle (9/1/10)

I make it up with a syringe each time I need it. It was the imperial measurement on the label that threw me and led to me using the wrong concentration. It seems the most obvious cause considering I've been fairly trouble free up until now. That said, this is probably the first Summer where I've brewed a lot so that may not be helping.


----------



## dr K (9/1/10)

For goodness sake..throw it out, at first I thought this thread was some sort of a joke, I was wrong.
assuming you are correct in that you have an acetobacter infection then so long as the remaining beer is NOT exposed to oxygen it (the acetobacter) will just die. The results will not, at best you will have acetic acid, at worst ethtyl acetate. It aint going to get better no matter what you do.
I am always suspicious of homebrewers who "never get infections", what they mean, in many cases is that they do not detect infections, which, lets face it is proof that from their palate that they do not.
I have been brewing a long time and I still tip beer out on the lawn, not always because its infected, but generally yes. OK I have a reasonably trained palate and a love of great beer, many years ago someone told me 'bad beer does not get better, it just not taste as bad'

K


----------



## Nick JD (9/1/10)

For goodness sake Dr. K - it doesn't take a well-trained palate to detect an infection.


----------



## manticle (9/1/10)

dr K said:


> For goodness sake..throw it out, at first I thought this thread was some sort of a joke, I was wrong.



No-one ever learnt anything by not asking questions Dr K. I'd rather look a fool by asking than be one by keeping my mouth shut.


----------



## dr K (9/1/10)

manticle said:


> No-one ever learnt anything by not asking questions Dr K. I'd rather look a fool by asking than be one by keeping my mouth shut.





> For goodness sake Dr. K - it doesn't take a well-trained palate to detect an infection.



Being my whole point, any fool can detect a putrescant, vile vomit and vinegar like brew and correctly call it it infected. The trick and the training is to detect very low levels, now i have a number of infected beers in in my fridge at the moment, a Lindemans Faro, a Cantillion, and a Silly Saisson, these from my past tastings are quite devine and with the possible exception of the Silly far beyond my brewing ability, but these are wonderfully balanced beers and made from the outset to be so (and before anyone mentions spontaneous fermentation, go back to Mills and Boon). 
If you did not intend to brew a sour beer and you did then its wrong..chuck it.

K


----------



## Nick JD (9/1/10)

dr K said:


> The trick and the training is to detect very low levels, now i have a number of infected beers in in my fridge at the moment...



I can detect bullshit at very low levels, but beer is either infected - or not. 

How do you manage to entice bacterial colonies to multiply to your tongue-twisting detection levels and then simply fade away? Are these bacteria the elusive "only and expert can taste their shit" ones?

What do you call an "infection"? Bacterial? Or do you include undesirable errant yeasts?

Please elaborate on your exquisite abilities to detect flavours us mortals can only sit back on the couch and enjoy.

Is that thorn in the side of Dr. K's flavour profile actually a bacterial Kryptonite? One wonders...


----------



## manticle (9/1/10)

dr K said:


> Being my whole point, any fool can detect a putrescant, vile vomit and vinegar like brew and correctly call it it infected. The trick and the training is to detect very low levels, now i have a number of infected beers in in my fridge at the moment, a Lindemans Faro, a Cantillion, and a Silly Saisson, these from my past tastings are quite devine and with the possible exception of the Silly far beyond my brewing ability, but these are wonderfully balanced beers and made from the outset to be so (and before anyone mentions spontaneous fermentation, go back to Mills and Boon).
> If you did not intend to brew a sour beer and you did then its wrong..chuck it.
> 
> K



The original question (which is really what I'm interested in) was not what can I do with it or can I make a sour beer from this. Besides the one brew that I added roselare to (and it's my fermenter and my beer to do so - no-one else has to be offended), it either has been chucked or probably will be chucked. I'll work that out over the next day or so.

I'm trying to increase my knowledge and understanding so the question remains (at least as far as your answers go) as to whether there are methods of killing or slowing infections when they first take a hold. Some people seem to think yes. I'm happy for you to think no (and may even end up agreeing) but your complete dismissal of the question itself is a little patronising.


----------



## dr K (9/1/10)

> I can detect bullshit at very low levels, but beer is either infected - or not.



As, indeed can I, which of course, was the whole point of my post, viz persons indeed make infected beers, but, despite the fact that they are infected do not know. I must say though that you did rather well to detect the obvious connection in my previous post between penny dreadfulls and lambics.

K


----------



## t2000kw (10/1/10)

manticle said:


> Potentially another silly question but is it possible to get lactobacillus infection from using lactose? It's a milk stout with 500g in there - I keep my lactose refrigerated but ???



Lactose is just a sugar found in dairy products. It doesn't have the bacteria in it. The bacteria can ferment the sugar, but it can also ferment other things, like some of the fermentables in beer. I wouldn't worry about using lactose.

Don


----------



## t2000kw (10/1/10)

If the beer was already finished, you can reheat it (very briefly, only 20 seconds are needed at 75C), then taste it. If there's enough alcohol in it, don't add fermentables. You can check the FG to see if some of the alcohol evaporated (do a before and after re-heat comparison). If it still tastes good, don't worry about the alcohol loss. The only fermentables you would need would be for bottling it it tastes good. That would make it very simple and put you back where you were before you reheated it, but without microbes endangering your beer in the near future. 

As for the heating causing some flavor shift, you probably would otherwise lose your batch anyway, the way it sounds. Remember that you originally boiled it for an hour or so anyway, so I would think it wouldn't change the flavor much. You could boil it, add more water and fermentables and make it a bigger batch while you're doing this, if you have the spare grain or extract. Or add some sugar to bump the alcohol back up. But if the reheating doesn't appreciably change the amount of alcohol (using a before and after specific gravity test to see if it did), you might be fine the way it is. The taste may be a tiny bit different, but probably not objectionable. It would also make for a good experiment that we could all learn by. 

If you don't add any fermentables, you should know right after the reheating if the beer is worth bottling and won't have to waste the time bottling it since it will just taste like flat beer with no carbonation. 

You can't flash Pasteurize (do it quickly in seconds like they do with milk and some other dairy products), but you can reach Pasteurization temperatures. 

If you do this, please start a new thread and let us know how it turned out after the beer is finished. And if you do reheat it today and taste the beer (before bottling), you can let us know (in this thread) how it tastes after it has cooled. Since this is a stout, I think it should come through just fine if it doesn't already have that sour taste. 

Don


----------



## newguy (10/1/10)

t2000kw said:


> Lactose is just a sugar found in dairy products. It doesn't have the bacteria in it.



Sorry, but bullshit. Powdered lactose doesn't _seem_ to have bacteria on it because bacteria need water to do their dirty work. Don't believe me? Take sterile water, some lactose, mix together in a sterile jar and see what happens.

It does have bacteria in it. Many types.


----------



## Screwtop (10/1/10)

newguy said:


> Sorry, but bullshit. Powdered lactose doesn't _seem_ to have bacteria on it because bacteria need water to do their dirty work. Don't believe me? Take sterile water, some lactose, mix together in a sterile jar and see what happens.
> 
> It does have bacteria in it. Many types.




Correct...but if he added it prior to boil I don't think there would be any risk.

Man-tickle, think this one is going to be a learning process for you mate. Infections are unpredictable by nature and not all that controllable once they take hold. Planned infection of beer with a big pitch of a desirable brewers yeast strain can be controlled to some extent depending on pitching rate, fermentation temperature, PH, atmospheric and osmotic pressure etc . As most have pointed out there are measures you could now employ that MAY stop or slow the infection or ways that you can reduce it's effect etc. I find refrigeration to be a good way of slowing down the progress of an infection, you can keg/bottle and keep the beer at very low temps until consumed. This might be a good course for you at this stage of brewing, mowing your way through 20L of infected brew has a long lasting motivational influence on a brewers cleaning and sanitisation regime. In any case as K points out there is something to be gained from drinking/tasting infected beer and that is experience. It's likely that you may be able to detect infection in small amounts after such experience. However in the future you might not want to go to the trouble of bottling/kegging and drinking an infected brew, or having keg or bottle space taken up by beer you don't enjoy drinking, just for the expereince. There comes a point as a brewer, where you just tip it, give yourself an uppercut and move on. 

Cheers,

Screwy


----------



## manticle (10/1/10)

Captain Obvious woke me up this morning. He told me what a couple of people have already tried to mention in this thread but this time I understood what they meant.

The reason I can't use no-rinse in the correct ppm is because it's safe to consume from the vessel without rinsing AFTER it's been tipped out. If I inject it into the brew it remains in solution.

Next step would be to try what t2000kw suggested as either acetobacter could be postponed or lactobacillus could be turned to my favour. HOWEVER being eager to see if it would do much, I had previously injected the no rinse in (hell I had three infeected brews to play with) so now that one has been tipped too. Sorry t2000kw - If it happens again I'll give your method a shot as I was interested but now there's just too many variables.

I still have the one brew with the Roselare (and no DR K, I don't expect faro any more than I expect Westmalle when I make a dubbel) which I'll be playing with over the next year or so. I am prepared for the fact that it may be rubbish.

Anyway it's nothing if not a learning experience on many levels so thanks for the input.


----------



## t2000kw (10/1/10)

newguy said:


> Sorry, but bullshit. Powdered lactose doesn't _seem_ to have bacteria on it because bacteria need water to do their dirty work. Don't believe me? Take sterile water, some lactose, mix together in a sterile jar and see what happens.
> 
> It does have bacteria in it. Many types.



Of course it does . . .

. . . until you boil it in the wort. 

There's an expectation that it is thrown in the boil, as a good recipe would call out, but thanks for clearing that up for those who might not realize that. I probably should have added that disclosure, but it wasn't really the main point. 

The point I was trying to make is that it doesn't cause a lacto infection in and of itself. Unless, of course, you add it on the cold side of the process. Same for sugar and other things one could add after the boil. Once boiled in the wort, there's nothing inherent in the lactose that could cause an infection. 

But thanks for pointing that out. There are new brewers who might try adding it later in the process. 

Don


----------



## t2000kw (10/1/10)

Manticle, you owe it to yourself to go and buy some good commercial stout, whatever brand tastes good to you. Or perhaps another style of beer, maybe more than one. 

After all that work, it's not fair to enjoy some good brew, even if it's not your own. 

Don


----------



## Bizier (10/1/10)

manticle said:


> The reason I can't use no-rinse in the correct ppm is because it's safe to consume from the vessel without rinsing AFTER it's been tipped out. If I inject it into the brew it remains in solution.



:lol: 

If you think about the PPM of sanitiser in solution once the no-rinse has been tipped out, left to dry, and then you add 19-25L of beer into the vessel, it is going to be pretty damn low.



> beer is either infected - or not


FWIW I think that there are some instances where a great many people would think a beer is fine, but I can detect a very slight funk that I can not pinpoint down to a specific infection type, or whether it is something else such as introduced chemical or slightly mishandled fermentation. It might be that I am less experienced, but I think that there is a range, and many commercial beers sold (and I am talking small breweries) have an 'acceptable' level of infection.


----------



## manticle (10/1/10)

Bizier said:


> :lol:
> 
> If you think



That may have been my downfall.

Just going over my no rinse proportions again and it's doing my head in. Instructions say '1 oz sanitiser per gallon water'

I would assume it's fluid ounces (US) to liquid gallons (US) but there's UK and US, dry and liquid and all are very different measurements. It's driving me nuts and maybe worth an email to fivestar chemicals.


----------



## geoff_tewierik (10/1/10)

manticle said:


> Just going over my no rinse proportions again and it's doing my head in. Instructions say '1 oz sanitiser per gallon water'



From one of the above retailers:

1 oz/5 gallon (1.5ml/1L)


----------



## manticle (10/1/10)

geoff_tewierik said:


> From one of the above retailers:
> 
> 1 oz/5 gallon (1.5ml/1L)



If I'm not mistaken that's starsan. I'm using Saniclean.


----------



## Goofinder (10/1/10)

manticle said:


> That may have been my downfall.
> 
> Just going over my no rinse proportions again and it's doing my head in. Instructions say '1 oz sanitiser per gallon water'
> 
> I would assume it's fluid ounces (US) to liquid gallons (US) but there's UK and US, dry and liquid and all are very different measurements. It's driving me nuts and maybe worth an email to fivestar chemicals.


Google thinks it is 7.8125 mL/L, which is roughly 5 times as much as the 1.6 mL/L I use for starsan which is quoted at 1 oz/5 gal, so it passes the sanity check.


----------



## newguy (10/1/10)

t2000kw said:


> But thanks for pointing that out. There are new brewers who might try adding it later in the process.



Sorry for the bitchy tone of my earlier response. I threw my back out for the first time ever and I'm not enjoying the experience in the least. Now the drugs are making me a bit happier even though I still feel the pain.

The way I read the post was that the lactose, added dry after the boil, wouldn't cause an infection and that's what I had the issue with. Again, sorry for the bitchiness of my post.


----------



## newguy (10/1/10)

Goofinder said:


> Google thinks it is 7.8125 mL/L



^^^ Correct.


----------



## manticle (10/1/10)

Well I got 29.5mL per 3.785 L which is 7.79mL per L so being so close to the above, I'll go with that. 

I was thrown by the variety of gallon and oz types in addition to having made an initial arithmetical miscalculation. All the infected fermenters were sanitised (or not) with a 1mL per litre solution which is where I'm pretty sure my problems have stemmed from. This hot weather is not likely to be forgiving of such elementary mistakes.

I've just finished phase 2 of my nuking. Phase 3 and 4 to come, then hopefully I can get back into it.


----------



## geoff_tewierik (10/1/10)

manticle said:


> If I'm not mistaken that's starsan. I'm using Saniclean.



Yeah it was, but it gave a ratio that hopefully gave you what were looking for, i.e. approx 7.5ml/L.

Seems you've sorted out the amount required.

Cheers,

GT


----------



## ausdb (10/1/10)

Manticle, have you thought about where in your process the infection is occurring? Do you chill or no-chill, is it from a manky kettle tap or a dodgy fermenter tap or seal or possibly from yeast culturing techniques if you are making starters?

Do some research on "wort stability tests" and take some samples throughout the brew process and try to nail where it is occurring.


----------



## manticle (10/1/10)

ausdb said:


> Manticle, have you thought about where in your process the infection is occurring? Do you chill or no-chill, is it from a manky kettle tap or a dodgy fermenter tap or seal or possibly from yeast culturing techniques if you are making starters?
> 
> Do some research on "wort stability tests" and take some samples throughout the brew process and try to nail where it is occurring.



There are a lot of variables.

I've changed a few things in the brewery recently. My system was fairly half arsed before (generally infection free though)

The two most likely places are my aformentioned mismeasurement of sanitiser proportions (using almost 1/8 of what I should have been) or my chilling method. It's very possible that my lo-tech chilling method is not suited to the hotter months (bath full of ice bricks - takes about 2 hours to get to pitching temp but in this weather it's tougher and there's probably more likelihood of encountering nasties in that time).

I break apart all my taps, take out the o-ring, scrub every part of the fermenter with soft sponge and sodium percarb and hot water. The kettle used for the 'chilled in bath' brews has no tap - it's chilled and then poured. The kettle I use for no-chill has a brand new stainless steel tap and fittings and the single no chill I did from this recent batch is still ok. However I can do all the right things - if I get the basic proportion of sanitiser to water incorrect then I'm not likely to win the battle.

I have been making starters the same way for a while without issue: all heat sanitised stainless steel, boiled cooled water and covered during ferment and they tasted and smelled fine (one was recultured, the others fresh packs). It's still always a possibility but I would be blaming the glaring error in sanitiser use before I got too caught up in everything else. This seems even more likely considering there were several types of infection present (so not necessarily one source like a tap).
I'm about to embark on making myself an immersion chiller. In the mean-time I'll probably stick to no-chill.


----------



## newguy (10/1/10)

When I make beer I chill using a counterflow chiller. When I make mead or pasteurise fruit (things I don't want to put through my chiller), I put the lid on my pot and then wrap it in cling film to make it airtight. I then chill using a water bath or let it air cool. No infections because nothing can get into the pot.


----------



## manticle (10/1/10)

I always put the lid on but never thought of glad wrap. I only have one cube for no chilling at the moment so an extra option is good to know.

cheers.


----------



## t2000kw (11/1/10)

newguy said:


> Sorry for the bitchy tone of my earlier response. I threw my back out for the first time ever and I'm not enjoying the experience in the least. Now the drugs are making me a bit happier even though I still feel the pain.



Hopefully it will resolve itself in a day or so. I visit a chiropractor to help with mine but also use pain meds from a pain specialist. The pain usually has more to do with muscle spasms from a vertebra that moved a very small amount. They often move back by themselves, but I don't like to wait for it to happen. 

The pain medicine does help. Hope you're better soon!

Don


----------



## Synthetase (13/1/10)

manticle said:


> Potentially another silly question but is it possible to get lactobacillus infection from using lactose? It's a milk stout with 500g in there - I keep my lactose refrigerated but ???



Apologies if this has already been answered, I haven't had time to read the whole thread. Assuming your lactose is a powder, the answer is no. As powdered sugar is extremely dry it's impossible for vegetative (viable) cells to survive on it because the sugar draws all the water out of the cells and into the crystals, causing them to shrivel up and die. This is called a hypertonic environment. It is possible for non-vegetative spores (both bacterial and fungal) to survive crystaline sugar and germinate after dilution (this is also very common in honey which is why giving honey to babies is discouraged, but I digress). However, _Lactobacillus_ species are not spore formers, so if the sugar didn't kill them, the wort boil would have.


----------



## manticle (19/1/10)

Possibly some more silliness but silly questions/ideas hopefully lead to answers and opinions that help people learn.

Firstly in the interests of experimentation and learning. I have placed one brew (which didn't taste bad - just not as expected) in a glass demijohn with some fresh wort, whisky soaked oak chips, sour citrus fruits and WY Roselare. It can stay there for a year. The foul tasting brew and the one I added sanitiser to (no this doesn't work - tastes like sanitiser dunnit?) were emptied into a drain.

Secondly, going on advice from someone in this thread, I took a brew infected with acetobacter but tasting perfect and brought it to the boil, added 20g of amarillo and chucked it in a no-chill cube. The following day, I added a small amount of top cropped 1056 from another brew and my priming solution then bottled. Someone in another thread suggested boiling fermented wort would lead to autolysis so I'll be monitoring that. I have no idea if the brew will even carbonate but there's only one way to find out.

Thirdly, I was reading on the babblebelt forum about calcium carbonate being used to remove or lessen acetic sourness. A couple of people there report success using eggshells which apparently have been used traditionally by saison makers and the like to control the degree of sourness. Anyone else ever heard of this?

From here (about 1/2 way down): http://www.babblebelt.com/newboard/thread....tpg=1&add=1


----------



## katzke (19/1/10)

manticle said:


> If I'm not mistaken that's starsan. I'm using Saniclean.



You cleaning first?

Fermenters and Serving Tanks Once the equipment has been properly cleaned make up a final
acid anionic rinse using SANICLEAN as follows:
In every barrel of water add 11 fluid ounces, circulate for a minimum of 3 minutes at ambient
temperatures. Allow the system to completely drain and if possible air dry before filling tanks with
beer. Just prior to start up rinse equipment with potable water.

Also they recommend, Always sanitize equipment just prior to start up with a
suitable sanitizer...

I don't think I would use it as you risk the chance for infection when rinsing with water. If you are having infection problems that may be the cause.


----------



## manticle (19/1/10)

katzke said:


> You cleaning first?
> 
> Fermenters and Serving Tanks Once the equipment has been properly cleaned make up a final
> acid anionic rinse using SANICLEAN as follows:
> ...




Yeah I clean thoroughly with hot water and oxygen bleach (35% sodium percarb). There's no need to rinse saniclean in the correct proportion. I received an email confirmation from the company regarding the correct amounts to use. I was way off base and this seems the simplest explanation to me.

The rinse/sanitise instructions you mention above are for use in the food industry. There's some legal reason they need to suggest another sanitiser which I can't remember. Not necessary for HB.

'Andrew, ​Great to hear from another mate down under bringing Five Star into their great brewing! The recommended dilution of Saniclean is one ounce (liquid volume IS) per 3 gallons water (US). In some situations, such as line cleaning, a stronger dilution is recommended, however, stronger dilutions are best followed by a potable water rinse whereas the 1:3 ratio is best when wanting the Saniclean to be the FINAL rinse of your gear.​​In metrics, the dilution will be 89ml per 11.333 liter.​​Saniclean is our recommended Final Rinse when a low-foaming alternative is desired. For a sanitizer with a naturally high foaming action you can also consider Star San. The dilution on Star San is a bit different, being 1 oz (liquid US) to 5 gallons (US) (i.e. 148 ml : 19 ltr).​ *Jim Jennings
Five Star Chemicals *
*Commerce City, CO* 
*800/782-7019 *
*303/287-0186* 
http://www.fivestarchemicals.com/ 
http://www.beertown.org/apps/trade_dir/index.aspx 
All contents and attachments of this eMail are proprietary and confidential and materially relevant to the commercial well being of Five Star and its affiliates and are provided with that understanding and are intended for the sole use of the stated recipient unless stated otherwise.

*In wine there is wisdom, in beer there is strength,
in water there is bacteria.* 

*From:* andrew ***** [mailto:[email protected]****com] 
*Sent:* Saturday, January 09, 2010 6:21 PM
*To:* [email protected]
*Subject:* Saniclean: Correct proportions (metric conversion)
​Hi Jon,

Hopefully I've directed this to the right person.

I am a homebrewer who recently changed over to Fivestar Saniclean for use as a no-rinse sanitiser. I live in Australia so our measurements are metric. The instructions on the label are imperial.

I would assume that '1 oz per 1 gallon' (saniclean: water) means 1 US fluid ounce to 1 US liquid Gallon but as there's a reasonable difference between US and UK, liquid and dry, I wonder if you could confirm this for me?

Thanks for your help

Andrew'


----------



## bum (21/1/10)

manticle said:


> > Great to hear from another mate down under
> 
> 
> ​



Urgh. <_< 

If anyone is wondering "potable" water is any water suitable for drinking.


----------



## lobo (21/1/10)

thankyou very much for this thread to everyone involved. i have noticed infections in my last 5 brews. have tipped out 3 brews which were all bottled in 330ml stubbies. as you can imagine its pretty demoralising.

i chill through a plate chiller, and have been thinking it was that, as i can only gravity feed, and thought it has probly built up pockets of crud. (which it still may have, which is why im going to buy a no chill vessle this wknd.)

but i have realised i have been doing exactly the same as manticle. using my sanitiser with the wrong dilution. starsan at 1-1.5ml per litre. i should be using 8!

i now have a massive wknd ahead of me pulling eerything apart and cleaning it.

btw, the last beer i have made is an 8% stout. i might just have to keg it (it was destined to be bottled) and see how it drinks.

Cheers,

Lobo


----------



## bigbird (21/1/10)

If you are using starsan and not saniclean the dilution ratio is correct 1.5ml per litre.


----------



## dr K (21/1/10)

Rule # 1: You do not need sanitisers
Rule # 2 : Everything your wort passes through after the boil (including the tap on the kettle) needs to be absolutely clean no organic or other deposits and preferably hit with steam or boiling water or finished, if you are certain its clean with something like diluted iodophor or oxonia or even sodium percarbonate just for good luck.
Rule # 3: You do not need sanitisers.

Of course once your wort enters the fermentor its another story, but refer to Rules # 1 and #3.

K


----------



## manticle (21/1/10)

lobo said:


> thankyou very much for this thread to everyone involved. i have noticed infections in my last 5 brews. have tipped out 3 brews which were all bottled in 330ml stubbies. as you can imagine its pretty demoralising.
> 
> i chill through a plate chiller, and have been thinking it was that, as i can only gravity feed, and thought it has probly built up pockets of crud. (which it still may have, which is why im going to buy a no chill vessle this wknd.)
> 
> ...



Starsan is 1.5 per litre.

Saniclean is 8 mL per litre

Similar product, different concentration.

@drK - You say you do not need sanitisers but mention boiling water/steam and iodine which serve that exact function. I'm mildly confused.


----------



## lobo (22/1/10)

damn. i was hoping it was as simple at that. obviously its not. i will no chill this weekends brew and see how it goes. maybe its the plate chiller.

will a strong uncented bleach bath for a day or so affect the plate chiller? its a mashmaster chillout.

cheers,

Lobo


----------



## newguy (22/1/10)

I'm not familiar with that chiller. Is it SS? If so, bleach will pit and eventually eat through SS. I'd suggest caustic (sodium hydroxide - drain cleaner basically) or PBW (powdered brewery wash), both mixed with really hot water. Soak or pump/recirculate the solution through the chiller for 30 minutes, then flush with water.


----------



## sirhendo (23/1/10)

manticle said:


> I'm sure I can't be the first one to think of this so please someone tell me why it won't work.
> 
> I have a stout cold conditioning at the moment that is displaying undoubted signs of my first acetobacter infection.
> 
> ...



G'Day guys - I would like to weigh in here because I work as a vinegar maker. I work in a 20hL commercial vinegar plant.

Aceterbacter is a fickle bacteria that needs LOTS of oxygen, alcohol and some heat to ferment. Ideal conditions for aceterbacter fermentation are above 24C and up to 32C. Outside this range and it really doesn't grow at all. In fact, above 32C and the bacteria can spontaneously die right off - below 24 and it sleeps. When it dies, it forms a "mother" which are basically tens of thousands of dead cells surrounding and protecting a few live cells. It looks like and has the consistency of "i'm almost over this cold"-like snot!

Since your beer is cold conditioning, I doubt that these are ideal conditions for aceterbacter to flourish.

There are many types of "sour" flavours. Acetic Acid production from Aceterbacter smells "powdery" and has a sour flavour like vinegar from your pantry. In fact, if you want to know what aceterbacter infected beer tastes like, go and buy some malt vinegar from the superrmarket (malt vinegar is in fact aceterbacter fermented unhopped beer), water it down 1 part to say 20 and taste. Then water it down some more and (up to 1 part in 50 or 100) and as the flavour and aroma become more subtle, you'll be able to compare with your infected beer.

Aceterbacter does not make a film on the top of what it is fermenting. From my experience, this is usually a Picchia infection which will give you a "baby spew" type of sourness as opposed to a vinegary sourness.

If you're getting a "sour milk" type of sourness, this is a sign of a Lacto infection because the fermentables are being consumed by the Lacto producing Lactic Acid as the sour flavour. This is a common beer infection.

Now, if this is a Stout you're talking about with a Lacto infection, consider blending this with some good, clean Stout. I think that this is rumoured to be what Guinness do.

So, to sum up, sourness in your beer (or indeed anything) is an Acid of some sort and as you can see, there are lots of different acids - each with their own flavour and aroma characteristics. The moral of this story is that good sanitation will prevent this from occurring. Now that you have had the infection, the acid has been produced and killing the bacteria won't remove the sour notes from your beer. It's like me pissing in your beer and then keeling over and dropping dead - even though I'm dead, there's still urine in your beer.

Manticle - I'd be interested to hear your perception of what type of sourness you're getting. Sample your beer again and make an opinion with an open mind  BTW - you are not retarded.

Cheers!

Hendo


----------



## sirhendo (23/1/10)

oh wow - that was my first post....hi everyone!!


----------



## kook (23/1/10)

sirhendo said:


> oh wow - that was my first post....hi everyone!!



:icon_offtopic: 

Anthony here - Good to see you posting Hendo!


----------



## manticle (23/1/10)

sirhendo said:


> oh wow - that was my first post....hi everyone!!



Damn good post too. Thanks.

The infections were varied. The stout only had a visible infection - it still tasted fine.

Unfortunately I tried my ill thought out plan on it (no rinse sanitiser) not realising that I'd be able to taste it. Being an anionic acidic substance it tasted sour and the lot got tipped. Unfortunate as it probably was lacto and probably could have been salvaged.

Another brew (English Brown) didn't taste sour - it was just disgusting. My guess was either wild yeast or maybe the baby spew infection you mentioned. That also got tipped

A third (Belgian Dubbel) tasted like it was infected with something but it didn't taste horrible (actually some pleasant and interesting flavours) so I made a couple of litres of extra wort, boiled it up unhopped and added it to a glass carboy. I soaked some oak chips in single malt and made a blend of pomegrantes, oranges and grape fruits. Wyeast Roselare (lacto and brett blend) was added and then the infected dubbel filled right to the top. That will sit for between several months and one year.

A fourth brew (Basically an American Pale) I tried the boiling method as again it had visible infection but tasted as it should. I boiled and then no chilled, added carbonation sugar and a touch of top cropped 05 yeast then bottled it. The first thing I noticed is that it is very cloudy (had been fined and cold conditioned prior to reboiling and discovering the infection so I'm sure that's been undone). However it is also very highly hopped and some other brewers' APAs that I've tried have been a similar murkiness which I've heard (not sure) may have something to do with certain hop compounds. Anyway that's only been in the bottle for a few days. Cracked one yesterday to see if it was drinkable and to my surprise it's started to carb up nicely, holds a decent tight head and tastes like oranges and lemons (hopped with centennial and cascade) More time will tell.

My sanitation and cleaning regime has taken on extra steps so I'll have to see in a few more weeks if I've nailed it.

Now:

Clean basic scunge with soft sponge. Rinse
Soak in Oxygen Bleach overnight (including taps, o-ring, transfer tubes airlock etc)
Drain, rinse, scrub with soft sponge
Rinse well with chlorine solution and let stand 30-60 mins
Rinse
Rinse again with boiling water
Dose with sodium met and let stand
Rinse
Add CORRECT dose of no rinse
Use within 30 mins.

If bacteria or wild yeasts can find their way through that defence shield I'll be a sad brewer. Things like stainless bowl and whisk for yeasts get cleaned thorougly and given boiling water treatment
.


----------



## Steve (23/1/10)

sirhendo said:


> oh wow - that was my first post....hi everyone!!



Ive seen some shite posts.....yours is up there with them.


----------



## Nick JD (23/1/10)

manticle said:


> Now:
> 
> Clean basic scunge with soft sponge. Rinse
> Soak in Oxygen Bleach overnight (including taps, o-ring, transfer tubes airlock etc)
> ...



Holy crap! If you saw my regime you'd be frightened. 

I'd look towards your cooling equipment, not your fermenter. I think your wort is going into the fermenter with bugs in it - or it's going in too warm and is sucking in as it cools drawning in bugs before the yeast has bred up.


----------



## manticle (23/1/10)

Changed to no chill until I can build a chiller as I'm sure the extra time in the bath didn't help but stuffing up proportions of something that relies on pH to work seems pretty obvious to me. Previously cooled in abath full of ice bricks but first few AG brews were don in a 10 L and a 15 L pot and each brew was boiled and chilled twice. I recently bought a 38 litre pot and trasformed a keg into a keggle so my boils are now full volume. Combine full volume with hot days and the chill is a lot less rapid. I'm sure that didn't help (although the APA I mentioned was no chilled and was fine all the way through so something else was amiss). The one thing they all had in common was incorrect sanitiation chemical levels.

As for your cleaning regime - mate if it works for you why would you do anything else? Anyway I know you use boiling water to sanitise and I reckon that would be more effective than the wrong dilution of saniclean. 

@steve: Am I missing something? A professional from the vinegar making industry talking about acetobacter is more than welcome as far as I'm concerned.


----------



## jyo (23/1/10)

Steve said:


> Ive seen some shite posts.....yours is up there with them.



Is this a joke, Steve?


----------

