How I Store Hops

If you like to brew beers with a lot of hop aroma, hop storage is crucial. Keeping them in the freezer is good enough to slow down alpha acid loss to a crawl. (Alpha acids are the main bittering compounds in hops.) However, if you don't take measures to limit oxidation, your hops are going to lose a lot of their fresh aromatic compounds, and—God forbid—may pick up cheesy or catty aromas.

If you buy your hops by the ounce in sealed, nitrogen-flushed packages—as I did until recently—you're all set, as long as you don't try to store opened packages. But if you brew a lot of beer, buying hops by the ounce is a lot more expensive than buying by the pound. And if you buy by the pound, you need a way to store leftover hops.

There are two basic approaches to avoiding oxidation: removing the air, or replacing it with something else. To remove air, one would typically use a home vacuum sealer like a Foodsaver. Homebrewers, ever the penny-pinchers, have also used automotive brake bleeder pumps for the same purpose. However, neither of these methods can pull a very strong vacuum. For that, you'd need a chamber vacuum machine, which tend to cost thousands of dollars.

Instead, you can flush the hop container with an inert gas, like nitrogen, argon, or carbon dioxide. If you keg your beer, you already have plenty of CO2 sitting around. I don't keg, so I got myself a bottle of Bloxygen, which is pure argon. It's designed to preserve half-empty cans of wood finish, but has also become popular amongst wine drinkers for preserving opened bottles. It's $13 and should be good for about 150 uses.

After I open a new bag of hops, I put the leftovers into half-pint mason jars, open the lid just enough to slip the Bloxygen tube inside, and give it a one-second burst of argon. The argon, being heavier than air, will push the air out of the jar and protect the hops from oxidation. Then I seal the jar, throw it in the freezer, and call it a day. If you already have a vacuum sealer, you can also double up on protection and vac seal the jar after flushing.

Just be warned: once you start buying hops by the pound, you're going to need a lot of freezer space!

Not All Malts Are Created Equal

When you're a homebrewer without a grain mill, recipe formulation generally involves looking through lists of malts, whether on a spreadsheet or at the homebrew store, deciding how much of each malt you want in your beer, and then buying whatever your store has in stock. The fact that homebrew recipes and software refer to malts only by type—say, Munich, 2-row, or Crystal 60—can lead a homebrewer to believe that her work is done once she's decided the types and quantities of each malt she wants in her beer.

But brewing-grade malts—particularly the specialty malts that craft brewers prize—are not commodities. One maltster's Munich is not the same as every other maltster's. So if a brewer wants to make the best possible beer, she needs to select the best of all ingredients.

Since I bought a grain mill recently, I'm buying grains in bulk now. Before I commit to buying 10 pounds of any given specialty grain, I want to make sure that it's the best I can buy. So I bought a few pounds of specialty grains I use frequently—namely Munich, crystal, and chocolate malt—from a few different maltsters. I compared Dingemans (Belgian) Munich and Global (German) Munich, Simpsons (English) medium and dark crystal, Briess (American) crystal 80, Briess organic chocolate malt, and Simpsons chocolate malt. Here's what I found.

Simpsons crystal malt is far superior to Briess. I picked Briess's Crystal 80 to compare because in previous tastings it has been my favorite of Briess's crystal malts, but Simpsons medium crystal blows it away. The medium crystal has a rich toffee-like sweetness, and lacks the coarse grainy flavor of the Briess. (Briess apparently uses 6-row barley for most of their specialty malts.) The Simpsons dark crystal was also good, but more raisiny than I like. That's just a problem I have with dark crystal malts in general—I'm sure the dark crystal would make a brilliant dubbel or old ale if that's your bag.

On the other hand, there wasn't a clear winner between the Belgian and German Munich malts. The Belgian Munich had a really nice light, honey-like maltiness, while the German Munich was richer, breadier, and more savory (in a good way). I think the Belgian Munich would work really well as an accent to an IPA or pale Belgian ale, while the German Munich would be great in a more malt-focused beer.

Since I don't much like chewing on dark-roasted grains, I made a tea out of the chocolate malts to compare them. Simpsons chocolate malt was significantly darker than the Briess, but the flavors of the two were very close. If pressed, I'd give the edge to Briess, which had a slightly rounder, sweeter flavor, but I'd be happy using either one in a dark ale. I also like the fact that the Briess is lighter, since it (presumably) means that I can make a brown ale that has a good amount of roast flavor without being black.

I think that choosing my malts more carefully is going to make a big difference in the quality of my beer. We'll see how it works out in my next batch, a smoked brown ale with rye.

IPA Yeast Trial #1 (3/8/13)

Since I'm going to be brewing a lot of IPAs, I thought it would be worth taking the time to run some split-batch trials to decide what yeast I like best for this style. For the first trial, I'm matching up the ever-popular US05 (a dry California ale yeast) with White Labs WLP007 (Dry English Ale). US05 is very neutral, while WLP007 should produce some characteristic fruity esters and fusel alcohols. We'll see whether these yeast flavors complement or detract from the hop character. The two yeasts should reach about the same level of attenuation.

This IPA is designed to be a classic grapefruit-pine hop bomb. Centennial, Amarillo, and Chinook are all hops I'm quite fond of, and I hope the combination will live up to my expectations. I'm incorporating the results of my hop stand experiment by adding a bunch of hops at 175F for 30 minutes, but I'm really focusing my hop charge on the dry hop. This will be my first time doing a double dry hop (5 oz dry hops in total). The malt character of this beer should be quite subdued, despite its 8% ABV. Besides 2-row, there's just a bit of flaked barley for body and a pound of cane sugar (added after 48 hours) to dry it out.

I got some information on my tap water and was able to do more extensive water building for this beer. The water profile is as follows:

Calcium: 84ppm
Magnesium: 0.6ppm
Sodium: 4.0ppm
Chloride: 53ppm
Sulfate: 138ppm

Vitals:

ABV: 8%
OG: 1.066
FG: 1.006/1.007
IBUs (Tinseth): 80

Mash temp: 149F
Mash time: 90 minutes
Efficiency: 71%

Yeast: US05 (4.75 grams) & WLP007 (1 vial)
Pitching temp: 65F
Max temp: 71F

Malts Mashed		Amount	%	Max Pts.
2 Row		10	83%	36.00
Barley (flaked)		1	8%	32.00

Other Fermentables		Amount	%	Max Pts.
Cane Sugar		1	8%	46.00

Hops/Additions		Amount	Time	AA%
Magnum		1	60	14.7%
Chinook		0.25	60	11.1%
Chinook		0.5	30	11.1%
Centennial		1	Hop stand	8.7%
Amarillo		1	Hop stand	9.3%
Chinook		0.25	Hop stand	11.1%

3/10/13: Added sugar
3/12/13: Added 1 oz Centennial, Amarillo
3/15/13: Added 1 oz Centennial, Amarillo, Chinook

Bottled 3/19/13:
#5 = WLP007
#6 = US05

US05 at 1.006; WLP007 at 1.007. WLP007 is noticeably maltier and more full-bodied. Next time I won't add any sugar, since I've been getting crazy levels of attenuation.

The IPAs were also affected by the cap fiasco and had to be re-capped (4/5/13).

Hop Stand Experiment (3/5/13)

Over the past decade or so, brewers have tried to find more and more places in the brewing process to add hops. The latest innovation has been adding hops to the whirlpool. A whirlpool is a container that collects sediment in the center of a circulating vortex, allowing the brewer to remove much of the hop debris and malt proteins from her wort.

The wort is at about 200F during in the whirlpool, which typically lasts 30-90 minutes. Since commercial breweries brew on such a large scale, there is not much temperature loss over that time. Adding hops at temperatures just below boiling allows the hot wort to extract different compounds than adding dry hops (which are added to the beer when it's at room temperature). Since the wort isn't boiling in the whirlpool, there is less loss of hop aroma with whirlpool hopping compared to kettle hopping.

Few homebrewers have the equipment to perform a true whirlpool, but we can emulate the effects of whirlpool hopping by doing a hop stand. To perform a hop stand, the brewer completes her boil, then adds hops and maintains the temperature of the wort for a certain length of time—say, 30 minutes. Like whirlpool hopping, a hop stand allows the hops to steep in hot—but not boiling—wort.

Homebrewers with immersion chillers have a lot more flexibility than commercial brewers, since we can chill their beer at any point in the process. Therefore, we don't have to perform a hop stand at 200F, like a commercial whirlpool. A number of homebrewers have experimented with cooler temperatures—i.e., under 180F—and have reported good results. The idea behind this variation is that lower temperatures will volatilize less of the aromatic hop oils. On the other hand, lower temperatures will also extract these hop oils less efficiently.

I decided to test the effects of different temperature hop stands by brewing a split batch of pale ale. Half the wort was subjected to a 200F (+/- 5F) hop stand for 30 minutes, mimicking a commercial whirlpool, while the other half received a 175F (+/- 5F) hop stand for 30 minutes. The hop stand was the only hop addition, with 3 oz in each (2.5 gallon) half. In addition to testing the effect of temperature on hop aroma, this experiment will also test the effect of temperature on alpha acid isomerization (i.e., production of hop bitterness), since I will be judging the difference in perceived bitterness between the two beers.

The beer itself is a fairly standard American amber ale, besides the massive hop stand. Mostly 2 row, with some Munich for malty goodness, Crystal 75 for caramel sweetness, and some flaked barley for body and head retention. The hops themselves are two of my favorites: Amarillo and Chinook. I've never used them as the only two hops in a beer before, but it is somewhat similar to the classic Amarillo/Simcoe combination that is used to great effect in beers like Alpine Duet and Ballast Point Sculpin. The sharp grapefruit/pine of Chinook enhances and balances the softer fruity/floral aroma of
Amarillo.

Results

Both beers were among the best I've ever brewed. As expected, the 200 degree hopstand produced a more bitter beer. When fresh, the 200 degree half was at a similar bitterness level as, say, Sierra Nevada Pale Ale. The 175 degree half was noticeably less bitter, and has been well received by both hopheads and those who don't normally drink hoppy beers. The 175 degree half also had stronger aromatics. As the beers aged, bitterness and hop aromatics both faded, and it became more difficult to tell the two apart.

As a result of this experiment, I now incorporate a big 175 degree hopstand in all of my hoppy beers. For IPAs, I also add a bunch of hops during the boil, while for pale and amber ales I stick with the no-hops-in-the-boil technique that worked so well in these beers.

Tasting Notes

Aroma: Pineapple, pear, jasmine, pine.

Taste: Toasted bread, sweet malt, more pear, grapefruit. Dry, but with significant malt flavor.

Mouthfeel: Light-to-medium bodied, medium-high carbonation.

Vitals:

ABV: 5.8%
OG: 1.053
FG: 1.010
IBUs: ???

Strike temp: 162
Mash in: 152
Mash time: 90 minutes
Batch sparge: 168F
Efficiency: 65%

Yeast: US05 (half packet in each half)
Pitching temp: 65F
Max temp: 70F

Malts Mashed		Amount	%	Max Pts.
2 row		8	71%	36.00
Munich		2	18%	36.00
Crystal 90		0.5	4%	34.00
Barley (flaked)		0.75	7%	32.00

Hops/Additions		Amount	Time	AA%
Amarillo		4	Hop stand	9.0%
Chinook		2	Hop stand	11.0%

This was my first time using water adjustments. The mash pH was a little high, so I added some lactic acid—unfortunately a bit too much! (My water has very low alkalinity and hence doesn't have much buffering power.) So I added 1.5 grams of chalk to balance it out, and ended up with a pH of 5.3. (Ideal mash pH is 5.3 - 5.5.)

3/8/13: The 175 beer is down to 1.010, while the the 200 beer is still at 1.014. Either the extra IBUs are having a minor inhibitive effect on the yeast, or the fact that the yeast for the 200 beer sat in the rehydration water for an extra 30 minutes slowed it down. At this point, the 175 beer is more aromatic and much less bitter (maybe 25 IBUs, versus 40 IBUs for the 200 beer). If I brewed this again, I'd roll the Munich back to 10%.

3/12/13: The 175 beer is at 1.008, and the 200 beer is at 1.009. Both taste great, but the 175 beer still has better aroma and less bitterness.

Bottled 3/16/13:
#3 = 200
#4 = 175

4/2/13: Minor disaster. Accidentally bottled with fake bottle caps (no seal). Bottle primed and re-capped.

Berliner Weisse Mark II, or You Call That a Session Ale? (3/2/13)

One of the main appeals of the Berliner Weisse is that it's a sour beer you can make in a reasonable amount of time. My last batch of Berliner Weisse is, as of yet, barely tart. It may continue to sour in the bottle, but it has already been fermenting for three months, and that's a longer time-frame than I'm looking for. So for this batch I decided to try a different souring technique.

This time, instead of adding lactic acid bacteria to the fermenter with the yeast, I used a technique known as kettle souring. I mashed the grains normally and drained them into my kettle. But instead of boiling the wort, I just raised the temperature to 180F for 5 minutes to pasteurize it, then cooled it to 100F. At this point I added the lactic acid bacteria (a vial of lactobacillus delbruckii from White Labs), and kept the temperature at ~95F with a immersion heater/temperature controller setup I put together specifically for this purpose. Because the bacteria are at their optimal growth temperature (85–105F) and don't have to deal with the toxic effects of alcohol and hops, very rapid souring takes place.

Kettle souring has several advantages over sour mashing. First, you can effectively pasteurize the wort without worrying about overextracting your grains. Second, you can apply heat directly to your kettle to maintain optimal growth temperature without worrying about scorching your grains. Third, you can be fairly sure what the composition of your wort is going to be, since you're doing a normal mash.

After 48 hours, the wort had developed a noticeable sourness. I let it go for another 24 hours, then performed a normal boil. I chose to do a 90 minute boil because I used pilsner malt and I hate hate hate DMS (the cooked corn aroma often found in pale lagers). Since I soured the beer before adding hops, I was able to use a slightly higher level of IBUs (though still quite low), which should give the beer a bit more structure. After souring, the wort had developed a significant krausen, which made the boil more interesting than usual. Before the boil the krausen collapsed a bit, but there were still lots of tan bacteria bits. I skimmed off the bacteria bits, but the foam kept on coming, until I added the hops.

Batch size: 5 gallons

ABV: 2%

OG: 1.025 (after souring)

FG: 1.010

IBUs (Tinseth): 12

Strike temp: 157

Mash in: 148

Mash time: 60 minutes

Yeast: US05
Pitching temp: 65F

Malts Mashed		Amount	%	Max Pts.
Pilsner		4	62%	36.00
White Wheat		2.5	38%	40.00

Hops/Additions		Amount	Time	AA%
Spalt		0.75	60	4.0%.

3/9/13: Gravity is at 1.010. Nice tartness, but lacking aroma. I added the dregs of a bottle from my last batch to bring some Brett into the mix.

4/5/13: Added 10 pounds of frozen blackberries from Whole Foods.

4/7/13: Gravity is 1.012. Beer is bright pink and beautiful. Pink foam is pretty great.

Bottled 4/27/13: #9

Final thoughts: 1. Next time I'll use a different strain of Brett. Brux is just too funky for this beer. 2. Blackberries are great for color, but I think I prefer the flavor of raspberries in beer. 3. I don't like the malt character of a classic Berliner weisse. Though I'll continue brewing quick sours, I won't pursue the Berliner weisse style any further (for now).

Coffee Is Not Acidic

Well, not very acidic, as far as beverages go. One of the major misconceptions about coffee is (1) that it is particularly acidic, and (2) that this acidity causes abdominal pain. As a result of these misconceptions, a cottage industry has developed around 'low-acid' coffee. Here are the facts.

The average pH of black coffee is about 5. That's the same pH as black tea. Herbal teas containing ingredients like rose hips or hibiscus can be considerably more acidic. Even beer, which is not usually thought of as an acidic beverage, has a typical pH of around 4. Most wine and fruit juice is between 3 and 4, and many sodas, due to liberal additions of phosphoric acid, are even lower—Coke is 2.5! Since pH is a logarithmic scale, a substance that is one point lower in pH actually has ten times the concentration of free hydrogen ions. So beer is actually ten times as acidic as coffee.

If coffee causes you stomach problems, don't blame the acidity—unless you also have problems with tea, beer, and fruit. Which is not to say that coffee never causes abdominal pain, just that acids are not the usual culprit. Caffeine alone often triggers abdominal pain, and it's quite possible that there are other aggravating compounds in coffee.

If you prefer the taste of low-acid coffee, fine, but don't avoid acidic-tasting coffee for medical reasons. You're cutting yourself off from a world of beautiful, complex coffees that feature fruity and floral flavors you will never taste in low-acid coffee.

Making Cider at Home

Every six months or so, I remember that I really like cider. Unfortunately, I don't drink much of it, because the cider industry is in a pretty terrible place right now, as it has been for decades. Traditional English cider (that's scrumpy, not Strongbow) is difficult to find in England, and impossible to find anywhere else. There are a few small American cideries doing good things (Alpenfire in WA, Farnum Hill in NH, and West County Cider in MA, to name a few), but they're quite expensive and have limited distribution. Basque cider is absolutely unique, but, once again, hard to find and expensive. Cider from Normandy—often considered the world's finest—is what I buy most often, but Cidre Dupont is the only kind I've been able to get my hands on.

Making cider at home can be a great alternative to the mass-produced, backsweetened swill that lines supermarket shelves. Of course, to do it properly, you need apples and a press—but I'm not that committed. So I start with juice.

Juice

During the apple harvest, many farms will sell freshly pressed juice, ideally from traditional cider apples. These varieties have higher levels of tannin and acid than eating apples, so they produce much more flavorful ciders. The rest of the year I buy cider from Whole Foods, because it comes in gallon-sized glass jugs, so you don't need another container to ferment it in. All you need is a stopper and an airlock from your local homebrew store; plus, you can re-use the jug to ferment other things. (Carlo Rossi jugs also work for this purpose.)

If you're using cloudy juice and wish to produce a clear cider, you'll want to add some powdered pectic enzyme. Add one teaspoon per gallon of juice prior to fermentation.

Fermentation

The first thing I had to do to make cider was forget everything I'd learned about making beer. When you make beer, it's important to aerate to promote yeast growth, because you want a quick, full fermentation. With cider, you want a long, slow fermentation, ideally leaving some residual sugar behind. This preserves the subtle flavors of the fruit. So when making cider, you should minimize aeration to slow the yeast down.

If your juice is unpasteurized and unsulfited, you can use the natural flora in the juice to ferment it. Otherwise, you'll want to pitch a small amount of yeast. If you're using dry yeast, I recommend 0.5 - 1 gram of yeast per gallon of juice—less than half the amount of yeast recommended for a beer of a similar strength. Fermenting at low temperatures will also help slow down the fermentation. 55˚ - 60˚F is a good target, but check the temperature range on the yeast you're using to make sure it can ferment at those temperatures.

You can use a variety of yeasts to make cider. For my first batch I used Danstar's Nottingham ale yeast, but it left strong yeasty flavors in the cider even after conditioning. Since then I've used Wyeast 3068, a German Hefeweizen yeast, and Wyeast 4766 cider yeast. Don't expect yeast to produce the same flavors in cider that they do in beer. I've used 3068 a number of times, and it produces very strong banana and clove aromas in beer, but in cider it produced neither. Both of these ciders were good, but I'd give the edge to 4766, because it enhanced the cider's acidity better. There are also a wide variety of wine yeasts that I'm planning on experimenting with.

Let the cider ferment and condition for 3-4 months before bottling. If you have a hydrometer, you can check the residual sweetness of your cider. A gravity under 1.002 qualifies as dry, 1.002 - 1.012 is off-dry, and over 1.012 is sweet. If you follow this method you won't make a sweet cider, but I have managed to produce stable off-dry ciders. My ciders have finished at 1.004 (Nottingham), 1.006 (4766), and 1.008 (3068). If you use a champagne yeast (Saccharomyces bayanus) or ferment at warmer temperatures, your cider may finish drier.

Good resources on cider making include:
http://www.cider.org.uk (and Andrew Lea's book Craft Cider Making)
http://www.lostmeadowvt.com/cider.htm