Here's a way to save you money...

[eclipse]

Tried this a few times to save on gas/ electricity and it seems to work fine.

Take about 20% of your pre boil wort and put into t separate boiler (big pan maybe), put all your hops into this one. It will boil for the full 90 mins (or 60, or 45), adding hops as you would normally. This is you satellite boiler.

With the rest, boil as normal, but as soon as you get a rolling boil, add your irish moss (or whatever else you use) leave for 10 mins and your done.

Add the hopped wort into the main boiler, cool and you're done!

Saves you a heap of gas. Some will argue that such a short boil doesnt allow proteins to form but so far I havent noticed enough difference to warrant wasting all the gas on heating and boiling the full 23 litres (or whatever amount you are doing)

[Beer O'Clock]

DMS ? Hop utilisation ? Hot break ? So many questions, so few answers

[eclipse]

Good questions: DMS shouldn't occur because there will be a rolling boil for 20 mins killing and bacteria, hop utilisation: I use a lot of hops so it hasn't been a problem for me, hot break: This happens lol. Honestly give this a go, I doubt you'll notice the difference.

[micromaniac]

this can only save on gas .if you boil using a fixed element boiler as i do your still boiling for the same amount of time using the same 3kilo watts.i dont mean to say this will not give you good rsults as i had my boiler bust 5 mins into boil and had to use a back up boiler and only did several 30 min boils and to honest it didnt seerm to make that much diff but i still went back to 60min boil...old habits

[darkonnis]

I was under the impression that the boil helped to break down residual complex sugars into fermentable ones, which is why you have such a long boil for somethings and shorter ones if you want a bit mroe body.... i could of course be talking out my bum.
There must be a reason why the standard is 60mins+, heating a few thousand gallons of liquid takes a lot of power and these big breweries wouldnt do it for 60/90mins if there was no point. If you can't tell the difference, i would maybe think maybe theres something going on in the background not to do with the flavour.

http://brianbeer.blogspot.co.uk/2008/03 ... -boil.html
Perhaps you're right after all, if these larger companies are only going for 8% losses, then i imagine you probably achieve about the same thing after 30minutes on a smaller scale, after all boiling 30L down to 23 is nearly 25% in losses, much higher than 8%. I have some stuff i brewed before that i boiled for 25mins or so when i did my first BiaB, i still have it, just hasnt calmed down enough to drink so i suppose i could check this shortly myself

[eclipse]

That's a good article. I have only tried this method twice but it seemed to work fine. But I wouldnt have thought boiling makes unfermentable sugars fermentable because bottle conditioning doesnt always involve boiling the priming sugar..... Someone who knows better might be able to tell me Im wrong though!

[darkonnis]

White sugar is readily fermentable though isnt it. I use it in my yeast starters absolutely no problem. Perhaps not everything that comes out the grain is ready to roll after the mash.... If it works fine i'll give it a go... need to convince swmbo to go on another brewery tour so i can collar somebody and ask!

[Bribie]

Interesting thread. I don't know if you have such things in the UK but in Australia (and I believe your Transatlantic colonies as well ) they have "brew for you" places where non home brewers can go along and get a batch brewed for a lot less than going to the pub or supermarket. http://www.ubrewit.com.au/vic-keilor-park

Technically the establishment is selling you the malt and hops, not alcohol, and you have to then do a little bit of the work like pitching the yeast or attending on bottling day to cap the bottles, or flick the switch on the canning machine, hence the excise "loophole". Most of them are extract breweries but there is an all grain one in Brisbane who produce award winning beers (they not only do your own brew for you but they also supply to the general trade, as they are licensed) and I hear that they only do a 30 minute boil. I've tried their brews and nowt wrong.

[roonikins]

well never tried this myself but i think its fair to say that not all commercial brewing practice is good practice

[mark4newman]

Hi

The problem is that your main boil isn't long enough to denatured proteins, and so cause the hot break.

Without this, you will get problems like a short shelf life for your beers, and chill haze.

For me I now always boil for 90mins, because I notice the difference in quality of the beer between this and a 60mins boil.

[gregorach]

I was under the impression that the boil helped to break down residual complex sugars into fermentable ones, which is why you have such a long boil for somethings and shorter ones if you want a bit mroe body.... i could of course be talking out my bum.

Nope, breaking the sugars down is an enzymatic process, and the enzymes involved are denatured once you get above ~75 C. Bringing the wort to the boil stops any further breakdown of long-chain carbohydrates.

White sugar is readily fermentable though isnt it. I use it in my yeast starters absolutely no problem.

You shouldn't, really. Brewer's yeast is prone to losing the ability to ferment maltose and maltotriose when cultured in a pure sucrose / glucose medium.

[Mitchamitri1]

I think it's a good idea - although the extra time it takes bringing a full 100 pints up to boiling point is a valuable extra few minutes from SWMBO!