I “need” to brew a pale ale that I do on a regular basis. I don’t have the time to do it all in one day as I normally would. So I am thinking of breaking it up over two days. First day get through the sparge and hold the the wert in a couple of containers until I can do the boil. The next day or two later.
My question is, can you think of any reason this should not be done?
For some reason I need to validate the process to be sure I am not over looking something.
Thanks.
John
In the past year or so I did this by necessity. I started brewing a lager that needed a boost from some corn sugar during the boil. Since I don’t often brew with corn sugar, I didn’t have any on hand, and completely forgot it. By the time I finished sparging I realized it was too late to hit the HBS or the local bulk food store.
I sparged into the kettle and kept it sealed and covered in my cool garage overnight. I boiled away the next day and the beer came through with seemingly no problems in the long run. I am sure this isn’t advisable due to susceptibility of infection, but I didn’t really have a choice and it worked out fine.
If you don’t boil, then I would be worried about a potential infection (lacto in particular). If you can at least get your wort up to pasteurization temps for long enough (I think 180F for 15 minutes, but don’t quote me on this), then you should be OK.
I probably brewed 20+ batches with the day 1 pre-boil, day 2 boil to ferment method- out of necessity (small kids and long brew days). I did get my one and only infection this way. The wort was bubbling away in the kettle when I went to boil the next morning. This was also in the summer and ambient temps were conducive for lacto to get going. I had invested the time, so I actually went ahead, boiled and fermented…tasted awful and had to pitch. So, 95% time (or more), this methodology worked great.
If this were true then why does the grist from a mash tend to sour after a day or two? I think you’d be safer to bring the wort to a boil and then let it sti until the next day.
You might want to ramp it up to boiling quick to stop enzyme conversion and kill all the unwanted micro-organisms before brewing it the next day. Especially, if it is gonna be awhile before you get to it?
Mash temps do not kill off lacto and other nasties like (clostridium butyricum). Heating the wort up to 170F for 15 minutes is really a good idea. Also if you can keep all your wort in 1 pot and insulate it real well, you might maintain the temperature high enough (~130 F) where your beer spoilers don’t multiply. The chances of being unlucky are low, but not negligible, if you don’t heat it to 170 F.
OK. I hadn’t thought of that. I mash in a 10 gal igloo. If my start temp is 154* and I let it sit for 20-24 hours the temp will fall to an unknown. Probably room temp of 65*. What is that going to do for conversion? Kind of a reverse step mash? Does that work to go from high to low for converting?
Well, I thinking more like 8hrs, 10hrs max (basically right before you go to bed). 20-24 hrs would be a little more than “I” am comfortable with. Your mash may convert a little more than usual and the resulting beer may attenuate more than usual and end up a little thin. Also, the pH may drop a bit as lactobacillus may take over a little (which may not be a bad thing). But, (A) it never hurts to try most things once, and (B) if you are comforatble with it, go for it. And, do what Denny suggests ;D I wouldn’t worry about it converting…
I have collected the wort at night and then commenced with the boil 10-12 hours later several times. I have never had an issue with it. It has worked great and I will continue to do it without hesitation. It is the best way I have found to cut the brew day in about half. It can easily and successfully be done.
Real experience trumps theoretical concerns every time. Glad to hear it, since it takes a fair amount of time to bring wort to boil and the heating is redundant so less efficient.
Actually though, I found that after I brouoght the stuff to boil and got a hot break, once it cooled by the following evening I had a tone of protein break that had coagulated nicely and floated to the top for the most part. The wort was extra clear too. It made me wonder if this extra step of heating/cooling prior to the official boil, might not improve clarity. Of course I’ll probably never follow up on this since clarity isn’t usually an issue anyway, and its a pain to drag a brew day out that much.
I experimented with this a few years ago. Since I was making a saison I figured if the wort soured a little before the boil then it wouldn’t be an issue. I mashed, sparged, boiled for 30 minutes, added some fermcap (foam control) and put the lid on the kettle while it was still boiling (the lid was already cleaned and sanitized). I left the lid on for a few seconds and would then check to see if the foam/hot break was rising. After doing this a few times I left the lid on for about ten seconds and then stopped boiling. I let the wort sort like this for 3 days. On my final brewday I tasted the wort and it had not soured at all. Since then I’ve done this many times with all kinds of different styles and have yet to have an issue. Being that the wort is essentially sterile from boiling for 30 minutes and the lid has been cleaned, sanitized and steam sterilized from the boil then there isn’t really any way for bacteria to find it’s way into the kettle. As long as you keep the lid in place.
never done it, but I would think you would definitely want to make sure to get it above 168df before leaving it, otherwise, you’ll have some highly attenuative wort.
one of my friends used to do this as a SOP, and he constantly was getting wayy too high of attenuation (mid single digits) so he went back to full brew sessions and that problem was solved.