PH Level of Star San

The place to discuss all things about brewing hygiene!
User avatar
MashBag
Even further under the Table
Posts: 2140
Joined: Wed Oct 23, 2013 7:13 am

Re: PH Level of Star San

Post by MashBag » Tue Aug 17, 2021 11:09 am

Of course it does.

Binkie Huckaback
Piss Artist
Posts: 216
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2018 8:13 pm

Re: PH Level of Star San

Post by Binkie Huckaback » Tue Aug 17, 2021 1:16 pm

MashBag wrote:
Tue Aug 17, 2021 10:34 am
Do not get me wrong, we need to understand the level on cleanliness required. My point is many homebrewers imo are 'bleach queen's', to use common parlance. Over cleanliness imo is just as bad as under. For environmental and human health reasons.

I do not sanitise the kettle. It is throughly washed and dried before storage.

There is a boil and the end off mashing and then the mash is then fermented, which in parts is a cleaning process too.

I use alcohol for all other vessels and tools.... Never have 1/2 a bottle of vodka get infected 😂😂
No-one has suggested sanitising hot side equipment. Why would you spend money on vodka for sanitising when there are cheaper, better sanitisers? If you're going to use alcohol for sanitising, it needs to be at least (from memory) 70% ethanol. Vodka contains 40 - 50%.

User avatar
MashBag
Even further under the Table
Posts: 2140
Joined: Wed Oct 23, 2013 7:13 am

Re: PH Level of Star San

Post by MashBag » Tue Aug 17, 2021 6:46 pm

Have you had 1/2 a bottle of vodka get infected?

Binkie Huckaback
Piss Artist
Posts: 216
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2018 8:13 pm

Re: PH Level of Star San

Post by Binkie Huckaback » Tue Aug 17, 2021 7:37 pm

MashBag wrote:
Tue Aug 17, 2021 6:46 pm
Have you had 1/2 a bottle of vodka get infected?
But that's not how it works. Things can't grow in it, but it won't necessarily kill on contact.

If covid 19 has taught us anything, it's the fact alcohol must contain more ethanol than vodka. If you can find any evidence that vodka contains sufficient ethanol to be used as an effective sanitiser, then please, post it here.

Carnot
Piss Artist
Posts: 162
Joined: Wed Sep 13, 2017 8:32 pm

Re: PH Level of Star San

Post by Carnot » Tue Aug 17, 2021 9:41 pm

It's tin hat time again.

I am going to agree with much of Masbag's methodology. My processes are remarkably similar insomuch I wash out the equipement with water and a nylon scrub and then trat with an alkaline surfactant cleaner.

I would also agree with Mashbag on potable water. The water delivered to our properties as potable water must by law be free of harmful bacteria, viruses and other undesirables. It has to be fit to drink without any after-treatment. That stops as soon as the water enters another tank, such as the cold water tank in the roof. It also results in water supplies on trains and aeroplanes is not fit for human consumption. There must be no break in the supply. In the event that the water supply is contaiminated the water company is legally abliged to notify you.

Infection is normally controlled by chlorine addition and in some areas by chloramines, the latter will stink whereas the former is not normally noticeable. Water companies aim for a residual 0.1 mg/L free chlorine.

Interestingly bottled water is not always a better option than mains water in terms of bacteria. Which did a survey some years ago and the results of bottle water were generally worse than mains water.

On the subject of alcohol sanitisers here is an interesting paper. Draw you own conclusions but it is far from clear that more is better. Vodka on it own would kill any infection. On the surface of a vessel it is anyone's guess. Very much will depend on the contact time.



I shall retreat to my bunker and await the barrage.

Carnot
Piss Artist
Posts: 162
Joined: Wed Sep 13, 2017 8:32 pm

Re: PH Level of Star San

Post by Carnot » Tue Aug 17, 2021 10:30 pm

Sorry, I goofed. The link did not attach - finger trouble.

https://www.researchgate.net/post/Why_i ... king_areas

Binkie Huckaback
Piss Artist
Posts: 216
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2018 8:13 pm

Re: PH Level of Star San

Post by Binkie Huckaback » Wed Aug 18, 2021 12:09 am

Carnot wrote:
Tue Aug 17, 2021 9:41 pm
It's tin hat time again.

I am going to agree with much of Masbag's methodology. My processes are remarkably similar insomuch I wash out the equipement with water and a nylon scrub and then trat with an alkaline surfactant cleaner.

I would also agree with Mashbag on potable water. The water delivered to our properties as potable water must by law be free of harmful bacteria, viruses and other undesirables. It has to be fit to drink without any after-treatment. That stops as soon as the water enters another tank, such as the cold water tank in the roof. It also results in water supplies on trains and aeroplanes is not fit for human consumption. There must be no break in the supply. In the event that the water supply is contaiminated the water company is legally abliged to notify you.

Infection is normally controlled by chlorine addition and in some areas by chloramines, the latter will stink whereas the former is not normally noticeable. Water companies aim for a residual 0.1 mg/L free chlorine.

Interestingly bottled water is not always a better option than mains water in terms of bacteria. Which did a survey some years ago and the results of bottle water were generally worse than mains water.

On the subject of alcohol sanitisers here is an interesting paper. Draw you own conclusions but it is far from clear that more is better. Vodka on it own would kill any infection. On the surface of a vessel it is anyone's guess. Very much will depend on the contact time.



I shall retreat to my bunker and await the barrage.
But why is it 'tin hat time again'? Everything you said about potable water is true. Although I take my water from the kitchen tap which doesn't come from a tank. In fact, I think legally, it can't .

But on the subject of vodka being a sanitiser, nowhere on that webpage does vodka get a mention. 70% ethanol does. Vodka doesn't contain 70% ethanol though. And let's face it, why would you use vodka as a sanitiser even if you could? Even cheap vodka is expensive when compared to iodophor or Star Sar. If you're that obsessed with vodka, buy a no rinse sanitser and spend what you save on a decent vodka to drink.

User avatar
MashBag
Even further under the Table
Posts: 2140
Joined: Wed Oct 23, 2013 7:13 am

Re: PH Level of Star San

Post by MashBag » Wed Aug 18, 2021 7:23 am

"Tin hat time"
I am reasonably sure reflects the "my way is the only way" attitude that comes from a few members here. Thinly vailed personal attacks delivered with an air of superiority.

There are many ways. Individuals still have the right to choose what they make, why & how.

I choose to use ethanol at various strengths because I can. I have researched it, and am happy with the proven results. It is the original no rinse sanitizer. Easily available. Better for the environment in many ways and it reduces my water useage. The list could go on...

It is also sanitizer of choice on the bottling lines in polish vodka factories.

Next time you have a nip, consider what is 'triple distilled premium vodka' was previously 'sanitizer'!

Forums should be a place for helping others, sharing ideas, even developing new processes, practices and equipment. Learning and sharing.

I do not share views and practices which I cannot demonstrate work or can be proved. They may be different, that does not make them wrong.
If they promote good healthy conversation - even better.

If members just want to 'have a go' I am going to actively ignore it, so they are wasting there own time replying. If everyone does it, perhaps we can turn the tide.

Binkie Huckaback
Piss Artist
Posts: 216
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2018 8:13 pm

Re: PH Level of Star San

Post by Binkie Huckaback » Wed Aug 18, 2021 8:22 am

MashBag wrote:
Wed Aug 18, 2021 7:23 am

I choose to use ethanol at various strengths because I can. I have researched it, and am happy with the proven results. It is the original no rinse sanitizer. Easily available. Better for the environment in many ways and it reduces my water useage. The list could go on...

It is also sanitizer of choice on the bottling lines in polish vodka factories.

Next time you have a nip, consider what is 'triple distilled premium vodka' was previously 'sanitizer'!

Forums should be a place for helping others, sharing ideas, even developing new processes, practices and equipment. Learning and sharing.

I do not share views and practices which I cannot demonstrate work or can be proved. They may be different, that does not make them wrong.
If they promote good healthy conversation - even better.

If members just want to 'have a go' I am going to actively ignore it, so they are wasting there own time replying. If everyone does it, perhaps we can turn the tide.
You use ethanol at various strengths? Which strengths? Why not mention that before? Yesterday it was only vodka.

Reducing water usage is admirable, but have you considered how much was used to make vodka?

You're right about forums being the place for learnjng and sharing. Here's your chance to demonstrate your assertion that vodka is an effective sanitiser. Can you offer any scientific evidence that vodka is an effective a sanitiser as any of the products sold to homebrewers as sanitisers or even tell us which Polish vodka distilleries use vodka as a sanitiser and cite your sources?

McMullan

Re: PH Level of Star San

Post by McMullan » Wed Aug 18, 2021 9:09 am

Blurting a phrase like “It's tin hat time again” to attack what are very well documented properties of 70% ethanol (as one of the safest, quickest and most effective disinfectants) suggests you’d group well with rightwing climate deniers and antivaxxers. Your cherry-picked link cracked me up. There are very good reasons why microbiology labs run by competent scientists routinely use 70% ethanol. What some mediocre postdoc from Uzbekistan or a fund-raising prof with time on his hands think online (based on poor experimental design or just plain lack of knowledge) is totally irrelevant. Yet you cherry picked it (answers to an online question) then coughed it up as ‘evidence’ to support your own ignorance? See how ignorance propagates? It’s true that lower ethanol concentrations are effective at slowing microbial metabolism to varying degrees, but it doesn’t necessarily kill the bugs. Often it just promotes dormancy, like boiling wort. Nor am I aware of any data suggesting vodka’s an alternative, how much longer contact time might be required, or whether it’s as effective as sanitisers commonly used by home brewers, e.g. bleach, iodophor and starsan. I think I could make up about 1282L of effective no-rinse sanitiser with my little bottle of iodophor. That’s going to last me years. And it kills yeast, my primary target organisms, wild and from the previous fermentation. If you hit yeast your procedure is likely hitting most other things. The problem with ineffective sanitation procedures, apart from being unvalidated and based on superstitious lore, is the target bugs threaten to become metabolically active once you’ve offered them sweet wort. If you’ve cut corners to promote any ‘lag’ in fermentation it’s likely to present itself in the end product, as predicable ‘home brew’ character. I usually find it amusing how the tenacity of stubbornness allows ignorance to conspire against itself. You can lead a horse to water, but you can’t make him drink.

User avatar
MashBag
Even further under the Table
Posts: 2140
Joined: Wed Oct 23, 2013 7:13 am

Re: PH Level of Star San

Post by MashBag » Wed Aug 18, 2021 9:32 am

There was very little water used making the ethanol. Ethanol is an effective way of keeping your bottles vessels, hoses, tools & implements clean & safe.

If you fancy a roadtrip, you can come and audit for yourself. My empty bottles (& kegs) are sealed with a splash in each. You can dip them and test the %alc will be between 40 & 50%. As you can my 50/200 & 300 litre stainless tanks.

I have a colleague who is a trusted source, who has made a career and accrued a significant amount of air miles (remember them 🙄) speeding up spirit bottling lines in spirit plants. It was his off the cuff comment years ago that started it.

He is reasonably local too, so I may be able to organise a meeting. My brewing records are also available for examination but they don't mention that I have been doing since 2006 - a significant field trial. They do show it has suffered no failures.

In the interests of full disclosure, I have had one beer trial, that I have struggled to drink. It was a copy of BrewDogs "quench quake". brrrr. To me (and a few mates) it proved to be a sound copy, but none of us liked it or the original. Lol.

I have never had to dump a batch or a bottle.

Like I've said. There is no one way.

McMullan

Re: PH Level of Star San

Post by McMullan » Wed Aug 18, 2021 9:49 am

"Like I've said. There is no one way." That's what the all say, whilst failing to offer any meaningful comparison. It's called superstitious lore :lol:

Carnot
Piss Artist
Posts: 162
Joined: Wed Sep 13, 2017 8:32 pm

Re: PH Level of Star San

Post by Carnot » Wed Aug 18, 2021 10:16 am

I will add few comments to the discussion.

Firstly, it is a legal requirement that any tap used for drinking (potable) water should be connectd directly to the supply. That is the law/ building code but it is anyone guess if it is always adhered to.

Ethanol as a preserver. This is more complex. Ethanol is known to impact microbiological activity and has been used as a food preservative and as a preservative in some preparations ( creams/ lotions to name a few).You might like to consider the disgusting, in my opinion, drink Baileys, or the nearly as disgusting (again in my opinion, Advocaat(egg nog). How much ethanol do these preparations contain - well Baileys contains 17% alcohol which gives us a clue. This appears to be suffcient alcohol to avoid spoiling during distribution.

Here is an interesting paper on alchol(ethanol) as a preservative https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.10 ... 30042-9_10

This paper makes a signifcant point in that alcohol controls microbiological activity during fermentation - effectively stalling fermentation at high alcohol content (14-17%). Yeasts will tolerate a higher alchol content but rarely greater than 17%. As a mead maker I have seen this effect many times as to achieve a sweet mead, which most patrons prefer, I have to produce a high alcohol mead which then stalls fermentation. Back sweetenting is a more difficult process as the yeast must be killed prior to backsweetening and it is affects the final flavour.

So perhaps those who consider that alcohol below 70% is not a sanitiser might like to reconsider. The 70% for hand sanitisers is not the same as the surfaces of brewing equipment. The contact time of the alcohol on skin is short and it quickly evaporates.

In many situations there is more than one solution to the problem, and some might prefer one method over another. Whether or not one is superior over another is far more complex, and some routes might have a greater or lesser environmental impact.

On the latter point, irrrespective of what method is used, all methods/ routes will involve the consumption of fossil fuels, and raw materials produced by the oil and gas companies and the chemical industry. Some might deem these companies as evil and requiring special measures, and anyone working for such companies, directly or indirectly, is equally evil by association. If you choose Starsan, for instance you will be using a petroleum derived surfactant and a phospate bearing rock produced by these very same evil companies. The surfactant will biograde- some faster than others - but the phosphoric acid will end up in the oceans, effectively lost forever as it precipitates and is lost to the ocean floor. We are dependent on these companies to survive and thrive, today, and in the future. Without these companies the world could not maintain a population of 7.8 billion and rapidly rising.


Time to retreat to the bunker.

User avatar
MashBag
Even further under the Table
Posts: 2140
Joined: Wed Oct 23, 2013 7:13 am

Re: PH Level of Star San

Post by MashBag » Wed Aug 18, 2021 10:26 am

I like your point about Baileys.

Indeed many wines survive @ lower %. And before you scream "sulphites" as a trained oenologist, I know that is primarily an antioxidising agent.

Is there room for me Carrot? 👍

McMullan

Re: PH Level of Star San

Post by McMullan » Wed Aug 18, 2021 10:44 am

Yeah, ethanol has many uses. I'm not sure how its preservative properties are of any relevance here, though. Do you plan to preserve PeePee? =D> Maybe stick to its sanitising properties at 70%? As a sanitiser it's generally accepted as being most effective at about 70%. Hands down. Regardless what publication you cherry pick. That's why it's used in microbiology labs. You do realise individual publications are invariably biased, right? We don't generally rely on individual studies for very much at all. Think back to the bit about bias :D Yeah, those evil oil companies make the vast majority (>70%) of their filthy blood money from fuels specifically sold to be combusted, polluting the air we breathe and promoting climate change. Impacts they've known about since the 1970s. Profiteering from wilful crimes against humanity. Fact. They make a relatively tiny amount from useful chemicals and materials like plastic. What, you didn't know that either? Muchly biased, aren't you? And far too selective to be taken seriously. Next you'll be trying scare tactics about the 'lights going out'. But the only lights going out are the oil industry's :D

Edit: Anyone claiming to be a chemist working for said oil companies (and for so long) isn't the same as anyone working for them generally, i.e. those not expected to understand sufficiently to make an informed choice. Most employees, that is, in reality. Although I'm reliably informed HR departments in oil firms are struggling desperately to recruit these days :D It was you who typed 'anyone' to hide behind. Merely a reflection of your wider personality and how your mind misfires. I guess that's why they kept you on, aye?
Last edited by McMullan on Wed Aug 18, 2021 1:54 pm, edited 3 times in total.

Post Reply