Get into O2 guys, if you're serious about nicer beer

[klangers]

It does feel a little wrong, I must admit. I've never seen H2O2 used in commercial breweries*; logic tells me that if it were superior they'd be onto it in a heartbeat.

EDIT: * For wort oxygenation

 

[Adr_0]

It does feel a little wrong, I must admit. I've never seen H2O2 used in commercial breweries*; logic tells me that if it were superior they'd be onto it in a heartbeat.

EDIT: * For wort oxygenation

There is still actually a dosing requirement. O2 would be considered a plant utility, readily available - so it can be injected as required in the feed to the fermenter.

That's not to say H2O2 can't as well, but I think it would be harder to mix. We're taking 5-10L in a 40,000L batch (12%) or 1L in 40000L at 100%, for example. Something like that, you need to be fairly dilute so that you don't get over-exposure in some wort. Definitely possible but perhaps they are just set up better for traditional oxygenation.

Storage and handling might be annoying too, as H2O2 reduces in concentration as it weathers. So although hazards are similar, they may just find it more predictable to use O2 gas from a tank.

 

[Jack of all biers]

Firstly sorry for using quotes to answer quotes, but I reckon this method may need it's own thread - Peteru, Adro and Technobabble should take the credit for giving us all this info.

Peroxide is hardly safe.

Hydrogen peroxide is an oxidant which reacts with anything organic (in a chemistry sense). It is very often the cause of fires. If it spills onto (eg) your garage floor, it will react violently with any oil or other organic compounds.

Not saying your technique doesn't work, but I'd be cautious on the grand claims.

Pure oxygen is also often the cause of fires and explosions when handled poorly too. Squirt some oxygen at some oil or petrol and see what happens. An unhealthy dose of Carbon monoxide would be the most minor of the problems that could be caused. But, brewers on this forum use it all the time. My point being I doubt H2O2 is any more dangerous that pressurized oxygen. Both should be handled appropriately.

I would be a little wary adding hydrogen peroxide post-pitch. Sounds like a really good way of reducing yeast numbers, considering that peroxide is used as a disinfectant.

Read the link on Adro's post (quoted below) from mid-way through this thread. I think the small amount of H2O2 in solution would not reduce the yeast count significantly or at all, but sure does add oxygen.

EDIT - some research on another yeast (Candida) show that high concentrations of H2O2 are needed to kill it off. https://candidahub.com/Home-Remedy/Using-Hydrogen-Peroxide-for-Yeast-Infections Whilst not brewers yeast, it gives you an idea of the quantity of H2O2 needed to kill off various strains of yeast. 15% to 30% concentrations to kill it.
"A study, published in Infectious Diseases in Obstetrics and Gynecology [3.2 (1995): 73-78], sought to see how effective hydrogen peroxide would be at inhibiting Candida strains and sought to see how catalase modified this effect. Catalase, as you know, is an enzyme that breaks down hydrogen peroxide; thus, its presence can limit the inhibiting power of hydrogen peroxide. And, all the strains of Candida investigated by this study possessed catalase. "

"The major finding of the study, how much H2O2 is needed to stop Candida growth, revealed that all of the 38 strains tested were successfully inhibited by approximately 149.6 mg / L up to 2993.3 mg / L. Again, non-albicans strains, on average, required a higher concentration to inhibit."

Just on H2O2, I'm getting a bit more comfortable using it and will do a with/without split batch with dry yeast.

https://www.google.com.au/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://folk.ntnu.no/audunfor/5.%2520semester/Felles%2520lab/Report%2520-%2520yeast%2520fermentation%2520-%2520B19.pdf&ved=0ahUKEwiRqqDypYzQAhXCEpQKHVHtABEQFgg5MAM&usg=AFQjCNEitaYCnf-8yfs-3GfZ8jY6SE_pFA&sig2=RRRzHXlaVeGzJWQIC495sQ

Assuming 8-20g of H2O2 (6% or 3%) to get 10ppm in 23L this takes 20-25min to fully decompose at 11g/23L, vs just under 20 min for 22g (two packs) and 6-7min at 50-55g/23L.

I think the food grade bit is important but seems like the free radicals only come up with certain metal catalysts.

It seems like a couple of things point to adding yeast to the wort, THEN adding H2O2 - not only is the yeast critical to catalyse the decomposition, but as mentioned previously, having highish DO hanging around without yeast can possibly stale the wort somewhat. So if yeast is there already then it in hopefully going to yeast growth instead of just oxidising wort.

After hearing back from the chemists at Gold Cross, I'm happy enough to use their 6% hydrogen peroxide for my brews. The main stabiliser ingredient that they use is phosphoric acid. I bet I get more of that from the starsan than from the H2O2.

I've done several brews now with 10-12mL of H2O2 into 20-23L batches. All were done with US-05 and fermented in the 17-19C range. I'm happy with the fermentation results in a number of aspects: lag, time to FG, attenuation and flavour profile. The introduction of O2 is a relatively minor optimisation when compared to exercising proper temperature control, but it does give you that final 20% improvement.

I'm glad that others are giving my technique a go. It's the simplest and safest method for increasing O2 concentrations in your wort at home brewing scale.

Peteru, Did they give you a list of the other stabilizers they use? I'm just thinking to Adro's answer to an earlier post I made to some of the common stabilizers being either irritants or one being potentially pretty bad for the liver (yes so is alcohol everyone - Dave70 )

You are probably right, it just feels a bit wrong after using H202 to kill microbes rather than feed them! I would be interested if anyone has access to a dissolved oxygen meter and a microscope to compare peroxide with direct oxygen. Even if the methods were the same, I would be happy to ditch the oxygen wand.

I bet you didn't wait for DO meter to get your O2 equipment or test just how much is actually absorbing into solution though. I'd be happy to use this method given some of what I've read and the feedback from the guys that have posted their results (I haven't so far as I spent the best part of 2 months either out of the country or starting a new job so brewing has taken a back seat),.

Adro's post below from earlier in the thread tells us fairly accurately how much O2 could be released into solution. If accuracy is the thing one's after, then I'd trust the below calculations over a casual bubble the O2 until the bubbles hit the surface method. I'm not knocking that method, as if I had an O2 set up I'd do the same, but pointing out the accuracy of such methods wouldn't give entirely accurate levels of O2. Not wrong, just not accurate.

I went 10mg/L x 23L = 0.23g.
O2 is 32g/mol, so that means 0.007mol of O2 for 10ppm in 23L.
0.007mol, by the 2H202 > 2H2O + O2, means 2 x 0.007mol of H2O2, ie 0.014mol, and at 34g/mol, is 0.48g of H202.
3wt% >> 16g
6wt% >> 8g

I'm pretty sure the solutions you get are vol%, but it would be pretty close.

My concerns with the H2O2 method, would be the potential for oxidation of the wort (although I'm feeling that this would be so minor if yeast is pitched first) and secondly, the unknown of what chemical stabilizers are in the non-food grade H2O2 (easily overcome if I bite the bullet and just find and buy some of the expensive stuff).

Thanks again to the pioneers of this method. I love simple solutions as they are often the best with the least overall risk. I will be trying it on a brew in the near future.

 

[GalBrew]

I bet you didn't wait for DO meter to get your O2 equipment or test just how much is actually absorbing into solution though. I'd be happy to use this method given some of what I've read and the feedback from the guys that have posted their results (I haven't so far as I spent the best part of 2 months either out of the country or starting a new job so brewing has taken a back seat),.

No I didn't, because the work had already been done. In the Yeast book there is a table on page 81 with the DO info supplied.

 

[RobB]

Probably a silly idea, but if you don't ask, you don't learn. So...........

If the yeast consumes all available oxygen within a couple of hours, what would happen if you you used an aquarium pump but put it on a timer switch for three hours? In other words, could you use an imperfect source of oxygen if you replaced the O2 as fast as it could be consumed?

If foam and aroma scrubbing make this approach undesirable, most timer switchers can be programmed to come on for a few minutes each hour rather than running non-stop.

 

[MHB]

Lots of breweries use peroxide or peroxide based sterilisers (i.e. proxitane) and dispensing corrosive/reactive liquids is a piece of cake these days, dosing pumps are cheap and easily available.
Got to admit that I have some concerns about adding H2O2 to a wort, mainly relating to yeast mutations, damage to cell nutrient transport mechanisms and the reactions between peroxide and lipids.

Lots of breweries use peroxide as a steriliser, cant find any reference to peroxide being used to "aerate" wort tho, other than here and a couple of other home brew forums.
Mark

 

[Jack of all biers]

No I didn't, because the work had already been done. In the Yeast book there is a table on page 81 with the DO info supplied.

Fair enough, but I wouldn't use that commercial example for comparison to home brew. The equipment used, volumes and time scales are very different in the HB environment.

Got to admit that I have some concerns about adding H2O2 to a wort, mainly relating to yeast mutations, damage to cell nutrient transport mechanisms and the reactions between peroxide and lipids.

This is a good point. Commercially it would not be a good idea to use H2O2 and that may be one main reason they don't. I would say though that if HB'ers were reusing yeast for a large number of generations then you would be right, mutation would become a concern. But because of other factors in the HB environment, such as less than perfect sanitation, mutations from other less than perfect conditions, we tend not to use yeast for as many generations, but purchase new yeast stock every few brews.

But just because it's not been heard of doesn't mean it shouldn't be tried and experimented with. It may turn out to be a bad idea, but until it's tested thoroughly, I will be holding my judgement. All I say is the theory is good, now the hypothesis needs thorough examination.

 

[Jack of all biers]

Probably a silly idea, but if you don't ask, you don't learn. So...........

If the yeast consumes all available oxygen within a couple of hours, what would happen if you you used an aquarium pump but put it on a timer switch for three hours? In other words, could you use an imperfect source of oxygen if you replaced the O2 as fast as it could be consumed?

If foam and aroma scrubbing make this approach undesirable, most timer switchers can be programmed to come on for a few minutes each hour rather than running non-stop.

Not a silly idea and I think some commercial breweries used to do something similar. I guess if you had some way to ensure good sanitation in not having your fermenter open the whole time or too much foam blow out, this may well work reasonably well.

 

[Feldon]

Probably a silly idea, but if you don't ask, you don't learn. So...........

If the yeast consumes all available oxygen within a couple of hours, what would happen if you you used an aquarium pump but put it on a timer switch for three hours? In other words, could you use an imperfect source of oxygen if you replaced the O2 as fast as it could be consumed?

If foam and aroma scrubbing make this approach undesirable, most timer switchers can be programmed to come on for a few minutes each hour rather than running non-stop.

Not so silly. This news story from an English newspaper in 1899 describes a way to keep oxygen levels up in the fermenting beer by using a vacuum pump to remove the CO2 and replace it with filtered air. I think the idea is that the oxygen in the filtered air will dissolve into the fermenting beer “rousing” the yeast.

Seems to be the opposite of fermenting under pressure in a sealed fermentor.

(Note, in the article CO2 is referred to as “carbonic acid gas).


The Sheffield & Rotherham Independent, Sat. 21 Oct 1899. p.5

 

[MHB]

FFS - We might have learned a bit about yeast and brewing since 1899.
Once yeast is pitched and has adapted to the environment, taken up all the nutrients it needs (including Oxygen) and started reproducing - about the worst thing you could do would be to add more Oxygen!
Mark

 

[Adr_0]

Probably a silly idea, but if you don't ask, you don't learn. So...........

If the yeast consumes all available oxygen within a couple of hours, what would happen if you you used an aquarium pump but put it on a timer switch for three hours? In other words, could you use an imperfect source of oxygen if you replaced the O2 as fast as it could be consumed?

If foam and aroma scrubbing make this approach undesirable, most timer switchers can be programmed to come on for a few minutes each hour rather than running non-stop.

You really don't want to replace it as fast as it's consumed - you want to have a finite amount there, and ideally end up having it all taken up by the yeast cells.

After this point, O2 added to the beer sends the beer downhill very quickly and very thoroughly.

 

[Feldon]

FFS - We might have learned a bit about yeast and brewing since 1899.
Once yeast is pitched and has adapted to the environment, taken up all the nutrients it needs (including Oxygen) and started reproducing - about the worst thing you could do would be to add more Oxygen!
Mark

Come on, you can't be serious. Never heard of Double Dropping?

 

[MHB]

Yes and I know what it does to your diacetyl levels and why.
Also seen some evidence that the amount of "aeration" is much less than people thought, the young wort is fully saturated with CO2 by the time the beer is dropped and gasses off enough to displace most of the Oxygen in the tank. I tend to think of it as a novel way to do a trub cone drop in a brewery without CCV's.

At best it rouses the yeast, and leaves early trub in the first fermenter
Mark.

 

[Adr_0]

Come on, you can't be serious. Never heard of Double Dropping?

Yes and I know what it does to your diacetyl levels and why.
Also seen some evidence that the amount of "aeration" is much less than people thought, the young wort is fully saturated with CO2 by the time the beer is dropped and gasses off enough to displace most of the Oxygen in the tank. I tend to think of it as a novel way to do a trub cone drop in a brewery without CCV's.

At best it rouses the yeast, and leaves early trub in the first fermenter
Mark.

But I would hazard they are the same yeast cells, which have taken up O2 or have not - I wouldn't expect much/any more growing from this. So O2-ing again would just oxidise the beer I would think.

 

[Bribie G]

DD is usually done within about 24 hours so would have the effect of topping up O2 levels during the lag phase in the days before O2 became feasible.
Fullers did it till recently.

Dropping was common in Australia as well, into squares or in the case of Coopers into Jarrah tuns.

 

[Jack of all biers]

DD aside, isn't the method that Malty Cultural is asking about/proposing, not too dissimilar from the stir plate vitality method as per Mardoo's post, but just different? In other words, vitalize the yeast in the fermenter for 3 hours instead of in a starter for 4. For those that don't have stir plates or oxygen set ups (nor money to get them) this may be a valid way of doing it.

If the yeast consumes all available oxygen within a couple of hours, what would happen if you you used an aquarium pump but put it on a timer switch for three hours? In other words, could you use an imperfect source of oxygen if you replaced the O2 as fast as it could be consumed?

Just to add another option, "vitality starters". Putting your single-batch pitch on the stirplate with 500ml of fresh wort, and spinning the hell out of it for 4-6 hours. ....
...I've done a few of them now and, anecdotally speaking, I can't tell the difference between batches of the same wort done on the same yeast, one with the vitality starter and the other with more typical oxygenation. I'm seeing krausen within 8 hours using the vitality starters....

...It's an interesting notion that's holding out in my fermentations, at least according to flavour and storage duration. I wouldn't say it's making better beer than any other means of getting O2 to the yeast, but it certainly seems at least equal to the others.

Malty Cultural, it's over to you to experiment on a batch if you have an air pump set up.

EDIT - I honestly can't see a 3hr air pump aeration, instead of 30mins or up to 1hr that some brewers use, as being detrimental to the yeast or flavours they produce. It may well be worth aerating for 30 min, before adding the yeast if conducting such a method though. I would think that even oxidation would be a minimal risk if the yeast haven't converted to their anaerobic phase, which they wouldn't if there was a constant aeration to the wort. (on this last point I must defer to more knowledgeable people such as MHB though).

 

[Bribie G]

Returning to the Allsopps lager brewing.
Rather than fill the thread up with massive cut and pastes, you can google Encyclopaedia Britannica 1911, Brewing, Operations and you'll see that they were using the CO2 out, air in method a decade after that newspaper clipping in a previous post.
According to Ron Pattinson this brewery, one of the biggest at Burton, was at on stage up till the mid 1940s switched over mainly to lager brewing and would no doubt have continued to use that lager equipment.

They had been taken over by Ind Coope in the 1930s but continued producing under their own name till the 50s. Interestingly that old promo film posted on another thread shows Ind Coope's new state of the art facilities built in the 50s, so it's conceivable that the air in gas out method was in use for half a century up to that point.

I'm going to email Ron and see what he can dig up,it could be worth a whirl at the Home Brew scale.

 

[MHB]

This is starting to verge on the ridiculous.
What we are really talking about is racking early to get rid of trub (both hot and cold break, any hop debris and dead yeast) to get rid of unwanted crap that if left in makes for lower quality beer. Cant argue with that, personally I think its a really good idea - that said there has over the years been plenty of discussion here about racking being unnecessary extra work, someone even did some experiments on reducing cold break to see what happened...

These days most breweries use CCV's and just dump the crud out of the cone when ever it needs doing. The number of breweries still double drop is negligible and declining and no one is building new ones, which tell the tale of the benefits of DD compared to CCV's

The one remaining question would be the benefits of Oxygenating the wort after the start of fermentation. Remember that at the time this process was developed bottled oxygen was not available and aeration was achieved during wort cooling in cool ships or towers, which we all know will never achieve optimum dissolved oxygen levels that we can do easily now.
Double dropping may have had some advantages a long time ago, but that time has passed.

Mark

 

[manticle]

Has anyone ever heard of getting a small oxygen cylinder, maybe a reg and some line/tube and actually blowing actual oxygen actually into the wort?
Might sound silly but could be an option.......

 

[Adr_0]

Has anyone ever heard of getting a small oxygen cylinder, maybe a reg and some line/tube and actually blowing actual oxygen actually into the wort?
Might sound silly but could be an option.......

I'll have you know pragmatism is not welcome here...