Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
Cider Digest #1377
Subject: Cider Digest #1377, 1 April 2007
From: cider-request@talisman.com
Cider Digest #1377 1 April 2007
Forum for Discussion of Cider Issues
Dick Dunn, Digest Janitor
Contents:
Force Carbonization ("Timothy")
carbonATION, please (Dick Dunn)
Re: Force Carbonization ("Gary Smith")
"back to basics" for English cidermakers? (Dick Dunn)
Send ONLY articles for the digest to cider@talisman.com.
Use cider-request@talisman.com for subscribe/unsubscribe/admin requests.
When subscribing, please include your name and a good address in the
message body unless you're sure your mailer generates them.
Archives of the Digest are available at www.talisman.com/cider
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Force Carbonization
From: "Timothy" <tboger111@earthlink.net>
Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2007 13:52:43 -0400
Gary
Let me see if I understand your comments on carbonization correctly. I
am now as I write, cooling down my chest freezer to the warmest setting
(not sure what that will be yet.) I plan to reduce the Pepsi tank
pressures from 30 down to 10. You didn't come out and say 30 psi was too
much, but I understood 10 to be more ideal.
Next, I plan to place the kegs in the freezer to let them cool to
something that doesn't freeze, then take them out and roll them on the
floor to agitate the cider with the CO2. Will this give a stronger
carbonization?
At the moment the 5 gallon kegs are full, sitting in my cellar with
30psi at 55 to 60 degrees F. Since I started pressurizing 2 weeks ago,
I've gotten only small carbonization in the beverage.
Tim Boger
ORIGINAL MESSAGE:
Subject: Re: Force Carbonation
From: "Gary Smith" <Gary@doctorgary.net>
Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2007 06:54:07 -0400
> > As a first time cider maker, I decided to force carbonate using 5
> > gallon stainless Pepsi kegs and a CO2 tank. I'm pressurizing the
> > tanks to 30psi for a week or two in hopes of seeing
>> carbonization, then reducing to 10psi to dispense. Are these
>> pressures too high or> low?
>
<snip>
Andrew replied;
> I have to say though I'm not entirely clear whether the operating
> parameters you give will actually result in that value. If you've
> already pressurised to 30 psi and allowed the system to attain
> equilibrium, you will have 3.5 vol (7 grams per litre) of CO2
>> actually in solution - a good bit fizzier! Do you vent off the
>> excess gas and allow it to leave the liquid for a good while
>> before dispense?
Having done this many times in beer making, there are many ways to
skin the cat effectively; one example which wastes some C02 but is
effective is to use on the inlet side of the Pepsi keg a relief
valve/gauge which attaches to the gas fitting. it will vent all but
the desired pressure.
The rate of natural diffusion of C02 depends on the temperature and
pressure. In warmer settings it will take longer and in colder
conditions will be more rapid.
One way to accelerate the diffusion is to pressurize the pepsi keg
and then agitate it by rolling it vigorously for a few moments. you
will discover the pressure reading from the secondary gauge on your
C02 regulator will read low, reflecting the C02 that has diffused. If
too low then repeat. If too high then vent.
A common trick to make things more predictable is to have a chest
freezer with at remote thermostat in line with the temperature probe
at the bottom of the freezer. This keeps your "freezer" at a stable
temperature. your desired 10 psi will be simple to maintain in this
environment.
A critical thing though is to use the proper length outflow tube for
the inner diameter of that tube. I've had mine so long I don't recall
the ratio but a quick browse of homebrew beer equipment suppliers
will get you that information and they can sell you the proper length
tubing with attached fittings on both ends.
I personally prefer cellar temperature and just leave the "Pepsi"
kegs in the cellar throughout the year (I have a 3 gallon one in a
fridge for my less "tasteful" friends to enjoy) they get it cold when
I share.
You will find at first the CO2 will need to be replaced frequently as
the cider is removed. As the head space increases in the Pepsi keg
you will need to touch up the pressure far less to maintain the 10
pound equilibrium.
After using the system for a few weeks it will be old hat to maintain
properly and you will love the ease and practicality.
Gary
------------------------------
Subject: carbonATION, please
From: Dick Dunn <rcd@talisman.com>
Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2007 20:29:46 -0600
please, it's "carbonation", not "carbonization" nor "carbonizing".
to "carbonate" is to put CO2 into a beverage
to "carbonize" is to reduce to carbon--like the last burger that got left
on the back of the grill while everybody was drinking good cider
a small point perhaps, but it'll keep the scientists among us from grinding
their teeth as they read
- --
Dick Dunn rcd@talisman.com Hygiene, Colorado USA
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Force Carbonization
From: "Gary Smith" <Gary@doctorgary.net>
Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2007 21:42:45 -0400
Hi Tim,
> Gary
>
> Let me see if I understand your comments on carbonization correctly. I
> am now as I write, cooling down my chest freezer to the warmest
> setting (not sure what that will be yet.)
That depends on you as to temp, (in beer making Lagers need cooler
temps. I only make ales & my preferred temp is around 48). You don't
want of course freezing temps.
I plan to reduce the Pepsi
> tank pressures from 30 down to 10. You didn't come out and say 30 psi
> was too much, but I understood 10 to be more ideal.
30 is too much.
You can use higher pressures to accellerate carbonation but then you'll
have to bleed off pressure to get it back to around 10 psi, Some would
suggest less than that.
As I mentioned, the length of outlet pressure hose & its internal diameter
is critical. You can get proper length hose with connectors and dispensor
valve pre-made at a homebrew supply.
Different hose ID & length & your pressure will need to be adjusted
accordingly.
> Next, I plan to place the kegs in the freezer to let them cool to
> something that doesn't freeze, then take them out and roll them on the
> floor to agitate the cider with the CO2. Will this give a stronger
> carbonization?
Back to the same premise again. Rolling them on the floor will drive the
CO2 into saturation. Shaking them will do the same. If you fill to a given
pressure (lets say 40 psi) & shut off the CO2 main valve but leave the
hose connected to the corny keg, you'll see 40 psi. Then if you shake the
corny you will see the secondary gauge drop to a much lower number. That's
because that agitation permitted a greater diffusion.
So yes, rolling them on the floor will help but regardless, you really don't
want more than the right psi so around 10 should be OK. So a "stronger
carbonization" yes but too high is not what you want. Once you get it
carbonated to the right pressure, leave it at that pressure and touch up the
pressure when you use it. Let your secondary guage on your regulator be set
at the right pressure & then it's just a quick connection of CO2 to the keg
& when you hear the gas stop flowing, you've got it ready for the next time.
Once you're working your way down toward the bottom of the corny, the
pressure will be pretty constant & you won't have to repressurize as
often. You'll find out the particulars with a little experience, it's
pretty obvious really, by no means complicated or overly precise...
> At the moment the 5 gallon kegs are full, sitting in my cellar with
> 30psi at 55 to 60 degrees F. Since I started pressurizing 2 weeks ago,
> I've gotten only small carbonization in the beverage.
Bet cha haven't agitated it when cold (or even at room temp) yet.
:)
Gary
------------------------------
Subject: "back to basics" for English cidermakers?
From: Dick Dunn <rcd@talisman.com>
Date: Sun, 1 Apr 2007 16:44:35 -0600
Could England's major cidermakers go back to making real cider--made up
from apples rather than mostly sugar and water? I'm not talking about
the smaller craft cidermakers, who are already by-and-large doing a bang-up
job of it. As I've written here now and then, we've made multiple trips to
the UK over the years, driven in no small part by wanting to drink the
likes of Burrow Hill, Hecks, Oliver's, Perry's, Sheppy's, Dunkerton, and
a dozen more. No, the question here more involves the "big two"--Bulmer,
Matthew Clark...OK, and maybe Aston Manor.
There are several reasons it could happen. One reason, perhaps lesser
but notable, is that they seemed to feel stung by a government agency
report a few years back indicating in passing that their products are on
average less than 1/3 juice, and in some cases down in single-digit
percentages of juice. It's not so much that this surprised anyone in the
industry, as that the big players didn't care to have attention called to
this point.
Seems there's some indication that the punters in the pubs expected cider
to be made from apples, and found the glucose-wine aspect off-putting
when finally they learned of it.
It's hard to know--from this distance--what's serious and what's just
rumo[u]r-mongering. Was the UK's NACM really bruiting about a proposal
to the EU for a "malic glucose wine" category, or was that merely the
French trying to set them up? But I digress...
Perhaps the biggest cause for considering a return to making cider from
apples is the (failed) profit motive. Bulmer led the way here, pushing
market share upward by some techniques that eventually got them into deep
financial trouble. Insiders tell that their sales executives heard the
old American saw, "We lose a little on each sale but we make it up in
volume" but failed to realise that it was a cynical remark, so pursued it
in earnest. Bulmer were acquired by brewing giant Scottish and Newcastle
in 2003, at a time when a reliable source claimed that Bulmer were looking
into replacing the black toner cartridges with red in the printers in
their accounting department.
Inside Bulmer there was the usual tension between the bean-counters and
marketroids vs the boffins and anoraks. It came to a head as the former
alliance lost the game, and the latter appear now to be given a chance.
One of the technical folks, who absolutely refused to be identified,
pointed out, "Well, they made us have a go at making a profit, but no
matter how much we cut the costs and quality, that was right out. So we
put forth that as long as we weren't going to make money at it, we might
as well make a decent half-pint, you know? Have something worth drinking
if you must drown your sorrows." And so they might. Fuel costs rise,
and the appeal of imported glucose syrup and Chinese apple concentrate
has dimmed somewhat.
The wheels are apparently turning inside Matthew Clark as well. US
cider aficionados have noted that MC's flagship cider, "K", proclaims
on its US label that it "contains 30% juice", as if that were noteworthy
(in some non-negative sense, that is). But MC have gotten wind of Bulmer's
experiment. Being more conservative, they're attuned to the possibility
that it could be a diversion, a trick. I heard from one of the line
employees who is attentive to the rumour mill, that MC think it is outright
radical to make cider without malic acid and sugar syrups. Yet they don't
dare ignore what they hear about Bulmer. "They're experimenting, and they
have found that the result of using only fermented apple juice gives a
product with a deep colour and rather too much flavour. So the white-coats
are looking into how to strip out some of that excess." Reportedly, one
alternative on the colour problem--given the opaque covering on the K
bottle--is a marketing campaign to glorify swigging the cider directly
from the bottle, so that the excessive colour is never seen.
I mentioned Aston Manor as the third big player, but tentatively, because
I think they're not up with this new game. After some of their higher-ups
were caught and prosecuted for trying to infiltrate Bulmer's plant and
adulterate products with a sick-making addition, they (the un-prosecuted
ones, that is) have had to rethink their competitive strategy...and they're
not doing so well with it. It seems one of their more recent failed ideas
had built on the received wisdom that you don't want to make cider-drinkers
sick on cider, even if it's on your competitor's product.
So somebody had hit on a benign addition: sneaking in to the competitors'
plants and adding a food-grade colouring to deepen the colour of the
competition's ciders. You see, then they could raise the marketing issue
of how a drink the colour of autumn leaves can measure up to the purity of
a "white cider"? But soon the comment from one AM mid-level was "Bloody
hell! The competition is colouring it up before we can get to them--and
they look like making it into a feature!"
Then of course there's the more recent Magner's phenomenon--they've given
it another quarter-turn by deliberately colouring up their pale cider, and
in the process walked right past the big two. Now, this might seem like a
step in the wrong direction, with the -appearance- of Magner's being more
that of a full-juice cider (unless you happen to notice the odd pinkish
tinge) than the -reality- is. But nevertheless they're building the idea
that a cider should have some real colour. And...give it time! Magners
is a fad; they're now desperately buying all the apples they can get to
supply their demand. When fad turns to fade and demand drops just as it
has risen, they'll have all the apples (and grower contracts) they can
manage, and they may end up making a full-juice cider perforce and really
confuse the mass-market UK cider industry.
Still, I might see it differently on the other 364 days of the year.
- --
Dick Dunn rcd@talisman.com Hygiene, Colorado USA
------------------------------
End of Cider Digest #1377
*************************
