[ScallyWag]

LOL, thanks Dave, I was supremely puzzled by the original explanation.

That said, I recall reading a post by Martin many years ago (2016) explaining that the metabisulfite from the campden converts to sulfate, adding a few ppm of sulfate to your water.  That's where I was going with that... unless Martin mistyped sulfate/sulfite in that chloramine-related thread.

I do not think he did. His spreadsheet clearly quantifies the amount of Sulfate contributed by SM additions.  For that to be incorrect means that he and every other person who's ever used that, to include peer review, over 6 years time didn't notice that was wrong. Highly unlikely.

I concur.  I was confident that Martin was correct, hence my original question... which may have gotten misunderstood by Denny.  "I'm just a guy whose intentions are good..."  I probably should have linked to that 2016 thread in my preface, to make my question more clear.

So, to reiterate: does doubling my campden in the pre-strike water for a hop-forward beer -- thereby adding sulfate -- carry any danger of damaging it in other ways?  Or is the sulfate contribution essentially trivial & meaningless at those ppm?

[CounterPressure]

I concur.  I was confident that Martin was correct, hence my original question... which may have gotten misunderstood by Denny.  "I'm just a guy whose intentions are good..."  I probably should have linked to that 2016 thread in my preface, to make my question more clear.

So, to reiterate: does doubling my campden in the pre-strike water for a hop-forward beer -- thereby adding sulfate -- carry any danger of damaging it in other ways?  Or is the sulfate contribution essentially trivial & meaningless at those ppm?

Let me preface this by saying I'm the last person you would want to ask. But I have read a lot of other people's opinions and I'll just reiterate some of the stuff I've read.


I think you're getting no response because nobody wants to comment on this topic because it is so controversial. That is also just my bleacher seats opinion. Just fwiw, which may not be much.


A lot of people who tried the low oxygen Mash eventually gave up on it and many of them gave up on the Camden tablets early on. There was a fair bit of consensus that it was above the taste threshold in the beer and the benefit was unproven. I have never tried it and I prefer to leave things like that out of my beer, but I would say if you go take a look at many of the low oxygen mashing threads, you will see all sorts of varied opinions on that.


BrunWater does have an adjustment for it however. 

[denny]

LOL, thanks Dave, I was supremely puzzled by the original explanation.

That said, I recall reading a post by Martin many years ago (2016) explaining that the metabisulfite from the campden converts to sulfate, adding a few ppm of sulfate to your water.  That's where I was going with that... unless Martin mistyped sulfate/sulfite in that chloramine-related thread.

I do not think he did. His spreadsheet clearly quantifies the amount of Sulfate contributed by SM additions.  For that to be incorrect means that he and every other person who's ever used that, to include peer review, over 6 years time didn't notice that was wrong. Highly unlikely.

I concur.  I was confident that Martin was correct, hence my original question... which may have gotten misunderstood by Denny.  "I'm just a guy whose intentions are good..."  I probably should have linked to that 2016 thread in my preface, to make my question more clear.

So, to reiterate: does doubling my campden in the pre-strike water for a hop-forward beer -- thereby adding sulfate -- carry any danger of damaging it in other ways?  Or is the sulfate contribution essentially trivial & meaningless at those ppm?

You get so little sulfate that way, why wouldn't you just add more sulfate?

[ScallyWag]

Thanks for the explanation, CounterPressure.  I can see now where/how that could go off the rails.

You get so little sulfate that way, why wouldn't you just add more sulfate?

Well, because I don't have any sulfate, and I'm too lazy to bother with water chemistry (beyond the cheap and idiot-proof usage of campden tabs to guard against chloramines). 

I'm interested in keeping this hobby super-cheap & super-easy & enjoyable (to me); I certainly don't have the motivation to be "an expert" at this hobby. 
Even at my neandertal-level of brewing effort & cheapass equipment, if it were any more involved/challenging than it is now, I would just drop it and quit doing it.  The kind of effort-level and expertise that most of you [seemingly] put into homebrewing, I reserve for my other hobbies that are much more important to me. I'm just not that beer-driven.  But I "get it" and respect it when you guys make that effort -- I'm that way too with other pastimes.

I guess I'll just forget about it if the sulfate bump is trivial/imperceptible.  My hoppy beers already taste great [to me] without any chemistry adjustment, so if it aint broke...

Carry on.

[CounterPressure]

Well you have to understand we're not talking about a cost issue here. It's a matter of trying to understand cause and effect, and by all means don't think I'm trying to say I understand because it's been clearly shown that I don't. But you can learn an awful lot and spend virtually $0. I purchased all the things I needed to adjust Brewing water 15 years ago and I just spent $3 on some Epsom salt and that's the first thing I've purchased in those 15 years. So we're not talking about some major investment. And I can tell you I have enough calcium chloride for the rest of my life. Lol. And it didn't cost anything either.

People are reluctant to say something which is their opinion because it inevitably starts an internet flame War. That's because there are so few carved in stone accurate answers.

You may have taken note if you read this thread, that it started because I had a fundamental misunderstanding about how all this works. And I've been doing it for over a decade. My preconception was that what I'm supposed to be controlling is the calcium content, but in fact, what I'm really trying to do is control the content of the things which ride along with the calcium, depending upon what type of calcium I add. And that is why I couldn't get consistent and intuitive results from what I was doing. It was fine for most beers but not so fine for some. There's just more to it than what meets the eye. It doesn't become a question of cost unless you're like me and you're willing to throw $100 batches of beer down the drain because you know damn well it should have been better. I probably wouldn't do that if I had no other beer around, I would drink the terrible swill. But when I have a ton of other stuff that's really good, why would I drink this crap that I know I don't like? And much as it pains me to flush money down the drain, it really isn't going to change my lifestyle to throw away a batch of beer that sucks.

There's only six items you need to add, and I would say that for the most part there's really only four. I don't think any one of them costs more than $3 for enough to last you a decade if you brew more than the legal limit in this country. Not that I would do that. I'm just speculating there. Go to any one of the sites and look up gypsum, calcium chloride, Epsom salt, chalk, pickling lime is available at the grocery store for $0, canning salt is damn near free, it's not a matter of cost here.

I will tell you this, when you get a batch right, (and it doesn't take a hell of a lot to get a batch right), there is such a profound Improvement in the beer you won't believe it. Just watch the brulosophy podcasts on beersmith and that guy will tell you there is nothing more profound and noticeable than fixing your water chemistry. Even he didn't want to believe it at first but, it's true.

[denny]

Re: your mineral supply. I believe I recall Martin saying that after a while CaCl will absorb moisture which will reduce it's efficacy. Hopefully he'll see this and correct me if I'm wrong.

[CounterPressure]

If it's exposed to moisture it can absorb it and then that changes the weight, so your scale may not be telling you the truth. It's still the same thing, you just have to dry it out in the oven occasionally. But it doesn't go bad.

[Richard]

There's only six items you need to add, and I would say that for the most part there's really only four.

I think for the most part there are only 2. Gypsum and Calcium Chloride are the most important, and you can often get the calcium, sulfate and chloride you want with just those.

[BrewBama]

I think for the most part there are only 2. Gypsum and Calcium Chloride are the most important, and you can often get the calcium, sulfate and chloride you want with just those.

One day, you’ll wake up and there won’t be anymore time to do the things you’ve always wanted to do. Don’t wait. Do it now.

[fredthecat]

i've had poorly stored CaCL visibly degrade and get mushy and i believe a little liquid colelcted at the bottom.

[ScallyWag]

Thanks guys, I appreciate you walking me through it (and your patience with me).

I apologize for sidetracking from the larger point(s) of the thread.

[CounterPressure]

I think for the most part there are only 2. Gypsum and Calcium Chloride are the most important, and you can often get the calcium, sulfate and chloride you want with just those.

If you have water like mine with a sodium content of zero, likelihood is you should probably have a tiny bit of salt around. Not that that's going to be the difference in anybody's budget, but between that and a little bit of baking soda that pretty much everybody has in the cupboard, I'm going to go with four items. LOL
And let's not forget Epsom salt. I probably use that 10:1 more than I do baking soda.

[chinaski]

Well you have to understand we're not talking about a cost issue here. It's a matter of trying to understand cause and effect, and by all means don't think I'm trying to say I understand because it's been clearly shown that I don't. But you can learn an awful lot and spend virtually $0. I purchased all the things I needed to adjust Brewing water 15 years ago and I just spent $3 on some Epsom salt and that's the first thing I've purchased in those 15 years. So we're not talking about some major investment. And I can tell you I have enough calcium chloride for the rest of my life. Lol. And it didn't cost anything either.

People are reluctant to say something which is their opinion because it inevitably starts an internet flame War. That's because there are so few carved in stone accurate answers.

You may have taken note if you read this thread, that it started because I had a fundamental misunderstanding about how all this works. And I've been doing it for over a decade. My preconception was that what I'm supposed to be controlling is the calcium content, but in fact, what I'm really trying to do is control the content of the things which ride along with the calcium, depending upon what type of calcium I add. And that is why I couldn't get consistent and intuitive results from what I was doing. It was fine for most beers but not so fine for some. There's just more to it than what meets the eye. It doesn't become a question of cost unless you're like me and you're willing to throw $100 batches of beer down the drain because you know damn well it should have been better. I probably wouldn't do that if I had no other beer around, I would drink the terrible swill. But when I have a ton of other stuff that's really good, why would I drink this crap that I know I don't like? And much as it pains me to flush money down the drain, it really isn't going to change my lifestyle to throw away a batch of beer that sucks.

There's only six items you need to add, and I would say that for the most part there's really only four. I don't think any one of them costs more than $3 for enough to last you a decade if you brew more than the legal limit in this country. Not that I would do that. I'm just speculating there. Go to any one of the sites and look up gypsum, calcium chloride, Epsom salt, chalk, pickling lime is available at the grocery store for $0, canning salt is damn near free, it's not a matter of cost here.

I will tell you this, when you get a batch right, (and it doesn't take a hell of a lot to get a batch right), there is such a profound Improvement in the beer you won't believe it. Just watch the brulosophy podcasts on beersmith and that guy will tell you there is nothing more profound and noticeable than fixing your water chemistry. Even he didn't want to believe it at first but, it's true.

Time is a cost- which can add up quickly when trying to figure something out like water chemistry when you aren't particularly motivated to do so.  Different strokes for different folks...

[Brew.Drink.Repeat.]

In lagers, zero calcium is allowable since yeast flocculation can be accommodated in the lagering period. Keeping the calcium well below 50 ppm helps to keep the ferment from ending prematurely. If your lagers won't attenuate to the degree that the yeast report says it should, its probably because your water has too much calcium in it.

Wow, I never knew this. I have always been under the assumption that all fermentations benefitted from at least 50 PPM. Was I wrong, or is this a recent discovery?

I'd really be interested to learn more about this... any good resources? (If it's covered in the new Lager book, I just got it and am only a few pages into it so far...)

[BrewBama]

I believe all mashes should have at least 50 ppm calcium as a cofactor for healthy enzyme activity. ~40% of the calcium will make it to the kettle.


One day, you’ll wake up and there won’t be anymore time to do the things you’ve always wanted to do. Don’t wait. Do it now.