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

[warra48]

Holy crap, batman, why try to keep reinventing the wheel when best practice, and one widely used commercially, is to us pure oxygen?
Even the worst commercial brewer doesn't wouldn't and shouldn't use some crappy ill tested theory from the WWW about some alternative unproven method.
For goodness sake, we have access to a reliable effective oxygen infusion method at, really, very little cost per batch. Why try to save $0.00002 per batch when it's pointless?
For what it's worth, I use the BrewMan system, and it works just fine for me.

 

[Batz]

Holy crap, batman, why try to keep reinventing the wheel when best practice, and one widely used commercially, is to us pure oxygen?
Even the worst commercial brewer doesn't wouldn't and shouldn't use some crappy ill tested theory from the WWW about some alternative unproven method.
For goodness sake, we have access to a reliable effective oxygen infusion method at, really, very little cost per batch. Why try to save $0.00002 per batch when it's pointless?
For what it's worth, I use the BrewMan system, and it works just fine for me.

 

[peteru]

And steam engines are all we ever needed. Why would you want to invent an internal combustion engine?

For what it's worth, I've got the Brewman kit, but I'm more than happy to give alternatives a go and compare the experiences and results. If there's a better way, you are not going to find it by resisting change or discouraging experimentation.

 

[MHB]

And steam engines are all we ever needed. Why would you want to invent an internal combustion engine?

For what it's worth, I've got the Brewman kit, but I'm more than happy to give alternatives a go and compare the experiences and results. If there's a better way, you are not going to find it by resisting change or discouraging experimentation.

Ok going to both agree and disagree, I strongly encourage experimentation and learning, there are lots of ways to achieve our goals as brewers - the BUT - within the constraints that are established by good research and brewing knowledge.
For example someone wanting to mash at 99oC wont get very far and we know why, mashing happens at well understood temperatures, pH's and at known rates. A brewer can use a fancy computer controlled system, a 3V system, BIAB even an old esky, lots of room for how you mash - same enzymes, temps, pH... still apply.
Same with wort aeration, the atmosphere is 21% Oxygen, no matter what you do you can only get a very limited amount of O2 into solution at a given temperature and pressure using air.
We know from many years experimentation that the amount is less than ideal, if you want better beer, the PDF I posted (#760) even explains the consequences of too mush/little O2.
How you get to the ideal level is going to be open to lots of discussion, the pros and cons of having the right amount isn't really negotiable.
Mark

 

[peteru]

In that case we are in agreement. Someone has done the hard work of figuring out the appropriate oxygen requirements. Those requirements are non-negotiable and are dictated by biology. And yes, physics dictates other constraints, such as how much O2 you can keep in solution. Again, this is also non-negotiable, it's just going to happen.

The interesting part is to now come up with a good method for delivery. The established method that has been adequate is to add O2 gas in one big hit right at the start fermentation. At the homebrew scale, getting the right DO level is mainly guesswork when bubbling O2 gas through a bucket of wort at around 20C with a stone 50cm under the surface. Will 90 seconds give me 8ppm or 16ppm? I don't know and I don't think that reproducibility is very high either. That extra 1/4 turn on the regulator knob could make a big difference.

I've had a few goes at the H2O2 method and found that it wasn't making a significant improvement.

I've had fewer goes with the Brewman O2 gas through the stone. It had an apparent effect on the initial stages of fermentation and the end results were good. I would not go as far as saying that adding O2 took my beer to the next level. I think switching to big active starters was that step-up. I also made the mistake of pitching on top of a yeast cake from the previous batch AND adding O2 - massive overpitch, plus extra yeast growth. I guess I learned from my mistake there!

I've had one go with the electrical oxygenator so far. In terms of practicality it's no harder (perhaps a bit easier and more convenient) to use than the Brewman O2 kit. According to the chart, I should have ended up with the equivalent of 10ppm DO over a period of three hours. That was 48 hours ago. Looking at the fermenter now, I see healthy activity on par with what I have observed with the Brewman kit. I'll observe the progress of this fermentation and then for my next batch, I'll try to do a split side-by-side fermentation with both @Brewman_ compressed O2 kit and @Lyrebird_Cycles electrical oxygenator. I've got two 10L plastic containers that should fit in my fermentation fridge. As much as I dislike bottling, I'll bottle the two test batches so that I can perform sensory testing over a period of time.

Any suggestions for a simple ale recipe that would be good at identifying fermentation faults? Something like SMaSH with Gladfield pale malt to 1.060 and Mosaic to 30 IBU? In terms of yeast, I can either do a rehydrated packet of US-05 or an active starter of WLP002.

Another variable (that I haven't researched) might be the period over which yeast (or more correctly the fermentation) will benefit from having O2 supplied and at what concentration. For example, is 1 minute at 12ppm, followed by a natural decline better than 180 minutes at 8ppm followed by a natural decline?

 

[MHB]

We are pretty much on the same page, proper use of O2 is to my mind very important to consistency and yes its hard as a home brewer to count cells and monitor yeast health.
I agree that an active starter, pitched into a healthy well aerated wort is key to faultless, fast and repeatable ferments - and results in consistent quality beer.
Although we cant measure dissolved O2 easily, I would invite you to look at the table of solubility verses temperature in the PDF above

Note the solubility in wort at 20oC is only 7.4ppm, a little less than the 10ppm ideal. If you overdo the O2 a bit, wait a few minutes before pitching the yeast, the amount of dissolved O2 will drop back to around the stated value for a given temperature pretty quickly.
It will be pretty easy to work up a procedure that will give consistent results.
How you get there isn't for me an issue, I find LC's electrolyser fascinating, an happy and confidant using a Brewman system (more correctly he is happy selling the system I put together), for years I used an industrial sized O2 bottle (because I had one) and know that we will get better results using O2.
Mark

 

[Hpal]

Been doing O2 the last few batches in conjunction with Pressure fermenting and the results are great, just industrial oxygen no problems. I aerated a starter yesterday and it was going off it’s **** after 3 hours, amazing.

 

[wide eyed and legless]

That's not true, you can oxygenate a starter to your heart's content. What you shouldn't do is oxygenate dormant cropped yeast.

Very true, just goes to show that one can't take everything they read as gospel, Mastering Homebrew Randy Mosher (hack).

Anyone interested in purchasing a DO meter, I have a feeling not knowing the dissolved oxygen of the wort may have put a negative slant on oxygenating for me, when I first tried it I couldn't see any noticeable difference from my standard aerated brews except for a RIS I made some years ago (my wake beer) But now after reading more about it I am thinking that knowing what the dissolved oxygen amount is would be beneficial.

 

[yankinoz]

A modest proposal: will everyone who posts their experiences with and without oxygenation please say whether they used dry or liquid yeasts? Manufacturers of liquid yeasts recommend aeration, preferably oxygenation. Among manufacturers of dry yeasts, Danstar and Fermentis say it isn't necessary, nor is aeration. That isn't some "crappy ill-tested theory," it's based on their extensive research and their addition of lipids to the yeast.

 

[warra48]

Only ever use liquid yeast, so yes, I oxygenate.

 

[Shadime]

For US-05 Fermentis says:
'then mix the wort using aeration or by wort addition.'

 

[Black n Tan]

A modest proposal: will everyone who posts their experiences with and without oxygenation please say whether they used dry or liquid yeasts? Manufacturers of liquid yeasts recommend aeration, preferably oxygenation. Among manufacturers of dry yeasts, Danstar and Fermentis say it isn't necessary, nor is aeration. That isn't some "crappy ill-tested theory," it's based on their extensive research and their addition of lipids to the yeast.

No but it a "crappy ill-tested" account of their advice:

Fermentis states "As the yeast is grown aerobically, the yeast is less sensitive on first pitch. Aeration is recommended to ensure full mixing of the wort and yeast." and "oxygen is required to ensure a health yeast multiplication".

So they do seem to recommend aeration. I also do not believe they add lipid to their yeast but instead grow aerobically to maximise lipid synthesis.

 

[Doctormcbrewdle]

Not sure if anyone's mentioned this yet but can you use a fish tank oxygenator? Just thinking about overhauling my technique for pale ale's especially. Thanks

 

[mtb]

Not sure if anyone's mentioned this yet but can you use a fish tank oxygenator? Just thinking about overhauling my technique for pale ale's especially. Thanks

Do you mean a fish tank aerator? They're not oxygenators.

 

[Doctormcbrewdle]

Guess so, Mr. Smartypants.

So, in all your wisdom, will this suffice?

Do you mean a fish tank aerator? They're not oxygenators.

 

[mtb]

The point I was making is that there is a fair difference between oxygenation and aeration, in this context. Maximum oxygen saturation obtained by using "room air" - ie aerating - is far lower than oxygenating with pure O2. One of the more edumacated folks here (LC or MHB probably) have already discussed it earlier in this thread.

So it'll work, but only as well as shaking the bejesus out of your wort pre-pitch. Gotta use a high oxygen source, not room air.

ed: this is a good source in regard to fish tank aerators and it points out the aforementioned difference between aeration and oxygenation. The info already in this thread is more than sufficient but sifting through the pages to find it is a pain in the arse. http://www.keepfishalive.com/oxygenation-vs-aeration.php

 

[wide eyed and legless]

Sierra Nevada aerates, I don't know if its because they use open fermenters. I suppose the big commercial breweries would have to use oxygen when turning out a high volume low cost product, to make the best of the available fermenter space they make a high gravity wort then when finished fermentation dilute it down, makes sense really. But the amount of oxygen is worked out precisely in accordance with the yeast strain, yeast viability, wort temperature and wort gravity.
So as a home brewing pleb I suppose it has to be trial and error, not enough oxygen is no good and to much is no good, can't just give the wort a big squirt up the guts and say she'll be right mate.

 

[MHB]

Commercial operations have the luxury of being able to count yeast and measure O2 quickly and accurately.
The "Ideal" amount of both is related, more yeast needs to do less reproducing in the wort to reach the right population - needs less dissolved O2. Lower pitch rate and the yeast needs to do more reproducing so requires more O2.

The amount of and the vitality of the yeast has big impacts on the finished beer, bare in mind that consistency is the byword in commercial brewing.
We want the yeast to consume some of the wort components (mainly lipids and some proteins), if the balance between pitch rate and O2 is spot on the yeast will consume all the available nutrients including O2 (that we want it to remove) and produce a high enough population of yeast to finish the ferment quickly, produce the flavours the brewer wants, without the down sides (like reducing bitterness) of overpitching.

In a big brewery it is even more complicated by the fact that the yeast is reused, so the brewer wants all the above and at the same time is trying to farm a population of yeast that is in top condition (healthy and lots of young yeast cells) for repitching.

As home brewers I think we really cant expect to be anywhere near as precise, nor are we under the same time pressures, nor expecting the same consistency standards. If we have good healthy yeast, pitch a reasonable amount into a well aerated wort - we have every reason to expect good fairly consistent results.

O2 is in effect pretty cheap, if you use a bit too much and just wait a few minutes before pitching the amount of dissolved O2 will probably be a little less than ideal - but adequate. (see solubility table above).

Mark

 

[wide eyed and legless]

So Mark do you reckon its worthwhile to get a DO meter?

 

[MHB]

No, (well yes if knowing that a decent O2 meter is $400+ it depends on how much that matters to you). Its hard enough to get people to spend less than half of that on a good O2 system.
Unless you are really madly overdoing the O2, given the solubility in a wort pretty it's pretty hard to overdo the amount of DO, just work out a procedure that works and adjust the yeast pitch to suit. remember that the solubility is a temperature dependant limit, just oxygenate the wort wait a few minutes for it to stabilise and pitch. With dry yeast, give the yeast time to hydrate (for US-05 they say 30 minuted) then use O2 to mix, probably 1-2 minutes at a steady flow - enough to cause mixing.

I would like a DO meter, more for tracing DO in packaging, so a PPB range meter - think K$ haven't got those sort of $'s kicking around.
A good O2 system and a good procedure should be more than adequate.
Mark