calcium PPM and pilsners
#1
Posted 13 January 2010 - 11:52 AM
#2
Posted 13 January 2010 - 12:22 PM
I believe that if you do not have enough calcium naturally occuring in your water, and you are not mashing enough dark malts to lower the pH sufficiently, then you should add enough calcium to the mash to acheive the optimum mash pH. If you are brewing a Pilsener, with only light base malts, and you have sub-50ppm water, then you will not be able to get the pH low enough, and adding calcium in the form of gypsum or calcium chloride is your best bet. The more traditional way of lowering the pH in very light mashes with very soft water was to do an acid mash to allow a naturally occuring enzyme to lower the mash pH without mineral additions.Can anyone enlighten me as to why the generally accepted minimum calcium PPM for yeast health is 50, but pilsners are brewed with super soft water with calcium concentrations in the single digit PPM? To me, this is one of the best styles. How can such a great beer be brewed with so much lower concentrations of calcium than is the generally accepted minimum?This makes me question the things that are being accepted as gospel. Am I alone in questioning this apparent discrepancy?
Edited by stellarbrew, 13 January 2010 - 12:24 PM.
#3
Posted 13 January 2010 - 12:24 PM
I would agree with that for pH, however the 50PPM minimum was for yeast health not for the pH.I believe that if you do not have enough calcium naturally occuring in your water, and you are not mashing enough dark malts to lower the pH sufficiently, then you should add enough calcium to the mash to acheive the optimum mash pH. If you are brewing a Pilsener, with only light base malts, and you have sub-50ppm water, then you will not be able to acheive get the pH down enough, and adding calcium in the form of gypsum or calcium chloride is your best bet. The more traditional way of lowering the pH in very light mashes with very soft water was to do a acid mash to allow a naturally occuring enzyme to lower the mash pH without mineral additions.
#4
Posted 13 January 2010 - 12:26 PM
The way an acid mash works is to lower the pH by breaking away calcium that is naturally bound up in the malt. Thus, the needed calcium for yeast nutrition should also be supplied this way.I would agree with that for pH, however the 50PPM minimum was for yeast health not for the pH.
#5
Posted 13 January 2010 - 12:28 PM
Interesting angle. Thanks stellar. Any literature you can think of that you would point me towards to get a better idea of how much calcium acid rests strip from the malts?The way an acid mash works is to lower the pH by breaking away calcium that is naturally bound up in the malt. Thus, the needed calcium for yeast nutrition should also be supplied this way.
#6
Posted 13 January 2010 - 12:31 PM
The way I found out about the acid rest was by reading Palmer's "How to Brew". I don't recall how much he delves into the issue in that book, but I believe he supplies references that you consult more a more in-depth study of the issue.Interesting angle. Thanks stellar. Any literature you can think of that you would point me towards to get a better idea of how much calcium acid rests strip from the malts?
Edited by stellarbrew, 13 January 2010 - 12:32 PM.
#7
Posted 13 January 2010 - 12:35 PM
#8
Posted 13 January 2010 - 01:08 PM
But then that calcium would be used to lower the pH and wouldn't be available for the yeast, right?The way an acid mash works is to lower the pH by breaking away calcium that is naturally bound up in the malt. Thus, the needed calcium for yeast nutrition should also be supplied this way.
#9
Posted 13 January 2010 - 01:20 PM
I assumed that the calcium would remain free and available for yeast consumption, but I am certainly not an expert in this matter. My knowledege of organic chemistry is far too limited to make an argument one way or another. When the calcium lowers the pH, does it bind it in such a way as to make it unavailable?But then that calcium would be used to lower the pH and wouldn't be available for the yeast, right?
#10
Posted 13 January 2010 - 04:10 PM
I would presume so since Ca++ ions alone will not lower pH. There must be some sort of reaction or else nothing would change. I'll also confess to almost total ignorance of the 50 ppm requirement for yeast. I know that JP recommends that level and that's good enough for me. But I don't know if it needs to be ionic Ca or if it can be in a compound of some kind or even why the yeast need it.I assumed that the calcium would remain free and available for yeast consumption, but I am certainly not an expert in this matter. My knowledege of organic chemistry is far too limited to make an argument one way or another. When the calcium lowers the pH, does it bind it in such a way as to make it unavailable?
#11
Posted 18 January 2010 - 09:18 AM
In the Brew Strong episode on clarity, Dr Bamforth also cited the importance of having 50ppm calcium in your brewing water. He said you need it for clarity as well. I think between Dr Bamforth and John Palmer, I'll just do it and not worry.Also, to the OP, bear in mind that just because the water is Pilsen is that soft, it doesn't mean that they aren't treating it at the brewery.I would presume so since Ca++ ions alone will not lower pH. There must be some sort of reaction or else nothing would change. I'll also confess to almost total ignorance of the 50 ppm requirement for yeast. I know that JP recommends that level and that's good enough for me. But I don't know if it needs to be ionic Ca or if it can be in a compound of some kind or even why the yeast need it.
#12
Posted 18 January 2010 - 09:32 AM
back in the day brewers treated the water by using grains that made good beer. that's why certain styles developed in certain locations.Also, to the OP, bear in mind that just because the water is Pilsen is that soft, it doesn't mean that they aren't treating it at the brewery.
#13
Posted 18 January 2010 - 09:34 AM
Yes, I realize that. However, that doesn't mean that is still how they do it today.Dan Gordon says that Pils Urquell doesn't even use Saaz hops anymore. . .back in the day brewers treated the water by using grains that made good beer. that's why certain styles developed in certain locations.
#14
Posted 18 January 2010 - 09:36 AM
I'd think using soft water would still make things seem more "authentic" but who knows. No saaz????Yes, I realize that. However, that doesn't mean that is still how they do it today.Dan Gordon says that Pils Urquell doesn't even use Saaz hops anymore. . .
#15
Posted 18 January 2010 - 09:45 AM
Yeah, he said on one of the episodes of the Session that the Czech government controls the hops and makes much more money off of selling the hops abroad. I think he said Urquell uses a blend of other stuff.I'd think using soft water would still make things seem more "authentic" but who knows. No saaz????
#16
Posted 18 January 2010 - 10:09 AM
#17
Posted 18 January 2010 - 10:36 AM
Here's a link to palmer that gives estimates for grams per teaspoons and how many PPM of each per gram.Not to veer off course here, but my Ward Labs report shows my calcium number at 34. On almost all beers, I add either calcium chloride or gypsum to my mash (depending on style) and I only add a small amount, like say 1 tsp or so. Where can I find the info for how many ppms of calcium I'm adding by using 1 tsp of calcium chloride? This is the part of homebrewing that makes my teeth itch.
#19
Posted 28 January 2010 - 06:09 PM
#20
Posted 09 February 2010 - 05:08 PM
*BUMP*I emailed Jamil right around when this topic came up to ask him his take on it. It came up on the latest brew strong episode an hour into "The Boil". Palmer stated that all of the brewing chemists he knows consider the mash and boil to be a box and whatever calcium goes in stays in solution. Long short of it anyway.But then that calcium would be used to lower the pH and wouldn't be available for the yeast, right?
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users