Eric wrote:What's the thinking on
this advice for cooling?
I probably agree that the cooling rate shouldn't be too rapid, if the yeast are to be maintained in optimum health for subsequent maturation and conditioning (rather than being rudely shocked), although the suggested rate seems quite slow to me. The web-page also advises cooling only to cellar-like temperatures with no mention of an intervening heavily chilled stage, it appears their aim is to manage the cell count, rather than to drop out as many as possible, although they don't say what the target count is.
There may be something to it, I find beer that hasn't been heavily chilled does seem to mature somewhat more quickly. If one doesn't chill the beer further for serving, chill haze isn't something that especially needs to be addressed either, so it works for me these days; at least with reasonably flocculant yeast, they will still settle out at cellar temperatures within the time I typically already allow for maturing. I now only try to chill heavily if the beer is likely to be served colder than usual for some reason, otherwise there doesn't seem much to be gained by it.
But.. in the past even after many days of chilling well below Murphy's recommended temperatures I can't claim to have had any actual problems with insufficient yeast. The beer has still matured and primed perfectly well. I believe that it is also not uncommon commercially to chill to near-freezing (which may be slightly below zero C) for maximum precipitation of chill-haze proteins and fastest clearing rate, shortly before FG - and yet fully expect the yeast to be able to resume work again later in the cask for carbonating etc. I can see turn-around would be important there though, so maybe they're limiting settling time rather than temperature to keep enough cells in suspension - whatever 'enough' is considered to be, anyway?
EDIT: I wouldn't have thought normal amounts of heavy chilling could drop out enough yeast to be a CAMRA-related issue, rather than a real/practical one?