Who uses chalk (CaCo3) to control mash pH?

[PeeBee]

I'm not sure what that means, because I don't care that much about water, remember? ...

What it meant was: I messed up my "analysis" of your water (by a fly's fart of an error but because we're talking water with little in it anyway, it magnified greatly) which I'd banded about as a key proof (wasn't a soul proof) that what you were saying was wrong. 'Cos it's "Far too dry and opinionated for you" you'd missed that opportunity too dismantle my arguments and put an end to my griping. (I'd have been left to shut up and go sit in a corner to lick me wounds).

As it is, I'd found my "fly's fart" reading glasses, suspected I was making too much of a perceived error, before Eric strides in and points at an error I made.

And I'm still waiting for Wally to turn up and give me a proper beating up for casting crap dispersions on his work.

Get it? But don't gloat, remember it was only a side show attached to our argument, and we ("I" at least) don't want to kick that off again!

Meanwhile, as penance, I'll look at how I can incorporate "chalk" into the work I'm doing (I won't be recommending it, only recognising it as an alternative, and only if it doesn't increase complexity!). "Increase complexity"? You're recommending a pH meter ... that's complexity in the work I'm doing (I've "reformed" in the last few months, turning my back on complexity!).

The following is a "proper" update of your Water Analysis. You won't be interested 'cos it's "Far too dry and opinionated for you". But it might lighten the beating I'm going to get off Wally. I've buried Eric's addition to Sodium" as "Potassium" which isn't displayed in the clip. But it all "balances" now. The remarkable bit is the "possible coincidence" in my earlier erroneous analysis was a "coincidence"! I've changed the text in the Alkalinity/Bicarbonate box to make it more obvious what it is:

Defuddler (snip).jpg (139.29 KiB) Viewed 992 times

[Eric]

Well done PeeBee. I hope you have survived the bad weather. Here we awoke to total calm after a damp night, but the wind is increasing as the day advances.

As you say, chalk cannot be used with certainty in brewing, but has some impact on alkalinity. It can act as a crutch to those not comprehending the reasons why.

The third paragraph of Graham Wheeler's Note 9 to his calculator gives explanation to how it might be made to work, and is replicated here.

Calcium carbonate should be added to the mash; it will not work by adding it to the water because of its poor solubility. In this case the quantity employed must be proportioned to the mash liquor, not the total liquor. The easiest way of doing this is to temporarily set the "Volume to be Treated" box to your mash liquor volume, make a note of the calcium carbonate figure, and ignore the other figures. Then, when your "Volume to be Treated" box is reset to total volume for the rest of the water treatment, ignore the calcium carbonate figure.

Graham visited many breweries and I'm inclined to think, not always invited. It's likely a minority had soft water, some of whom would use chalk. I'm quite confident that those using chalk don't know its true effect, and more controllable ways of adding alkalinity do not involve chalk.

[nallum]

This is pretty much what I do, only treat the mash liquor with CaCO3. For a big imperial dark ale, with lots of roasted malt, I’ll even add a little more CaCO3 than calculated, to raise mash pH to about 5.6. Last one was slightly lower in the second mash, but will I notice any difference? Not in my experience, no.

IMG_0512.jpeg (3.49 MiB) Viewed 970 times

I suspect much of the potentially higher resolution (control) assumed possible with alternatives to chalk is redundant for brewers. That’s not to say water treatment isn’t important, it clearly is generally.

[PeeBee]

Well done PeeBee. I hope you have survived the bad weather. Here we awoke to total calm after a damp night, but the wind is increasing as the day advances. ...

I suspect the "well done" is for me acting like an a***, but taking the flak resulting from it on the chin instead of trying to defensive? But it's only because this modified head I find myself with is totally cwap at being a bigoted liar like I used to be. But the "modifications" are not often in my best interests.

Rain not as bad as a few weeks ago so river remains firmly at the bottom of garden, but the driving wind reawakened the leak in me kitchen ceiling ... gawd knows where it's coming from. And I've lost the upstairs electricity ring somehow.

But ... Chalk.

I'll work on it. I can't make it go away, so I'll figure out how to merge it into my work and let others decide if using it or not. Kai Troester seems to think its effectiveness is predictable (50%) so I'll go with that. You've quoted Graham saying, "the quantity employed must be proportioned to the mash liquor, not the total liquor", though I figured that myself using sodium bicarb, and I reckon it's bound to apply to any alkalinity additive.

Chucking out the other "brewing salts" to the sparge or boil rather than the mash has been another good trick. Maintain a minimum considered necessary in the mash, rest in the boil. Obviously, this won't help the 95% with high TDS water (like yourself), but it's a start. As many high TDS water users are turning to "Reverse Osmosis" water, quite a percentage of "voluntary converts" to low TDS waters are appearing anyway. So, I've been crash coursing on RO waters too. It's quite surprising how far "RO" has developed over the last 20 years. It's also surprising how little appreciation of the different "types" of "RO water" there is ... in particular the "remineralisation" that's performed on many (not UK "Spotless Water", but you wouldn't want that in your copper pipes, or to drink ... but it can be fine for brewing beer). "Stages" in "RO" production I also find confusing: It means something completely different in domestic units than in commercial kit, yet most (any I've been able to find) brewers don't seem to discuss the difference.

Anyway, less of that. Calcium! Has as much effect lowering pH as "alkalinity" salts have raising it. Or, it certainly seems so. Along with my reluctance to put in quite as much bicarbonate as the calculators suggest, I ended up brewing with mashes <pH5.0. Having most salts added after the mash makes sense (to me). Water proportions is another variable that can go for the sake of simplicity. I full-boil-volume-mash anyway, having just two other quantities (half volume and two-third volume) should cover most eventualities. And I'm ignoring the bleatings of those that believe grain-to-water ratios are vitally important ... see, I can be as "bad" as "nallum". I hope he's enjoying all this outpouring (along with the promise to include "chalk" in my rabbiting) or at least been able to "mine" it for something useful. I've never enjoyed this amount of waffling on one of my own threads since Graham W. left it all to us (not that he'd have kind words to say about me ). Humm ... actually some of McMullan's would come close (an' I think he'd still like to knock me block off).

I'm counting on making things so "simplified" I wont need to check "pH" except for the occasional "maintenance". I've learnt how excruciatingly difficult pH prediction is (there is no linear correlation to depend on, despite those "residual alkalinity" fantasies you see hawked around at times). So I'm working on simplifying as many variables as possible and leaving something that can be matched up more "empirically" like. I.E. Completely without the manic calcultion (to microscopic decimal-space accuracies) often employed these days. I don't think "nallum" expects me to think like this, I suspect you (Eric) think i've had another bang on the head. Whereas I worry that I'm just manifesting the lunacy sparked off by the first bang on the head



Oop, it's gone 6PM. Bedtime.

Peebee

[nallum]

Odd, I find expected mash pH so predictable that I stopped measuring it most of the time. Unless I'm doing something different, it's not going to change enough for me to give a shit. Honestly, it's only beer, ffs.