Glass or Plastic?

I use glass for long secondary aging and plastic for short 2-3 week secondary aging.

Having used both, the answer is yes.

What about PBW or Star-San or other such products? Will they harm the plastic?[/quote]

No.

Unless you are doing something pretty exotic, the difference in thermal conductivity between glass carboys and plastic buckets shouldn’t make any difference. If you cool the wort before putting it in the fermentor, any temperature change you are going to do after that is going to be slow anyways, and the mass of the beer is going to act as more of a time-limiting factor than the heat transfer resistance of the container.

Simple answer: You shouldn’t worry about this.

What about PBW or Star-San or other such products? Will they harm the plastic?[/quote]

Nope, not at all.[/quote]

It actually talks specifically about PBW in here: (from their website under washing)

Washing - Easy Does It

Reasonably hot water and an effective detergent will do an excellent job of washing carboys and fittings. Never use stiff brushes, abrasive scouring pads, or cleansers - they are unnecessary! The fact that BetterBottle carboys are light weight, clear, and their surfaces hydrophobic makes them easier to wash and inspect than carboys made of glass or other types of plastic. BetterBottle fittings are also hydrophobic and they are easily disassembled and reassembled, so thorough cleaning and inspection is extremely convenient. Best practice procedures for washing fermentation equipment will depend on many factors; however, the end result must be equipment that looks clean on close inspection, because scum or biofilm can protect microorganisms from sanitizing agents.1, 2, 3

BetterBottle has tested mild, enzyme-enhanced, environmentally friendly detergents (Seventh Generation Free and Clear Natural 2X4 & Super Pro-zyme Enzymatic Cleaner 5 ), and found them to be very effective and essentially harmless to most equipment, even with weeks of exposure (see Introduction, above, for a link to the detailed article).

BetterBottle carboys are resistant, but not immune, to attack by very aggressive detergents, which were originally created for use with commercial, stainless steel brewing equipment. As noted in the Material Specs section (see left side of page), strong caustics will damage PET. They also damage other plastics, glass and metals. Manufacturers of laboratory glassware warn against soaking glassware, especially large items made of soft glass (soda lime glass), in caustic solutions.6, 7,8
Use only brand-name detergents that have a good track record. [size=200] It is terribly important that caustic detergents are diluted according to the manufacturer’s recommendations for routine cleaning (i.e., <1% by weight for Five Star PBW*)[/size] and contact times should be minimized. Instead of soaking carboys and fittings in high concentrations of detergent for hours and hours, use lower concentrations, smaller volumes of detergent solution, and agitation (it’s easy with BetterBottle carboys and fittings). Also, replace fouled detergent solution frequently in order to maintain maximum cleaning efficiency.

  • [size=200]A 0.5% solution of Five Star PBW detergent can be made by mixing 5 grams per liter of water or 0.67 oz (19 grams or about a level table spoon) per gallon-US (3.78 liters) of water. Note that a 0.5% solution of PBW will have a pH approaching 12, whch is quite caustic.[/size]

With the exception of essentially pH neutral, enzyme-enhanced detergents, avoid pouring detergent powders or concentrated liquid detergents into your BetterBottle carboys and then, adding the diluting water as a second step. Also, do not pour caustic detergent powder into a carboy filled with diluting water or into a pot containing BetterBottle fittings. The extremely high concentrations of the detergent close to undisolved powder can cause damage to the PET. Dilute the powders in a bucket and then add the solution to carboys or use it to wash the fittings.
Important: Rinse equipment immediately after washing and do not leave equipment standing in spilled detergent solution. As water evaporates, the residual detergent solution will become extraordinarily concentrated, which is a worst case situation for damaging equipment.

Sloshing BetterBottle Carboy

Carboys - The most effective way to wash the interior of BetterBottle carboys is to slosh a reasonably hot solution of detergent. There should be no need to fill carboys more than 1/4 full with the detergent solution. The easiest way to slosh a 5 or 6 gallon BetterBottle carboy is to place it sideways on a soft surface and rock it back and forth at a frequency that results in maximum agitation. Three gallon BetterBottle carboys are so light when filled only about 1/4 full that they can be easily shaken in both hands. Placing a small, thick rag, such as a face cloth or an piece of an old bath towel, inside a BetterBottle carboy and refreshing the detergent solution, when it becomes contaminated, will speed the removal of stubborn debris much more effectively than using a brush, which might scratch the surface. As the hot solution cools, be sure to release the vacuum at frequent intervals.

Fittings - BetterBottle fittings should be disassembled, because disassembly and reassembly is so quick and easy and it will insure effective washing. A soft tooth brush and a small test tube brush or pipe cleaner will help to quickly remove stubborn debris from the surfaces of BetterBottle fittings. Use caution not to scratch the precision, conical, sealing surface of DryTrap air locks or the smooth sealing surfaces of Carboy and Pail Adapters or SimpleFlo valves. Soaking fittings in detergents, particularly caustic detergents is not an effective way to wash the fittings and is not recommended. Also, Remove metal parts when cleaning or sanitizing, to avoid possible corrosion.

Tubing - PET-lined tubing can be washed by partially filling it with detergent solution and, with both ends of the tubing sealed, pouring the solution back and forth from one end of the tubing to the other for a few minutes.

Conclusion: BetterBottle recommends using enzyme-enhanced neutral detergents for washing BetterBottle carboys and fittings. If you use other types of washing agents, be sure to dilute them in a bucket to the concentrations recommended by their manufacturers for routine cleaning and minimize the exposure of your equipment. Higher concentrations and long contact times should not be necessary and will likely shorten the useful life of your equipment.

And it’s this that has made me choose to ferment in kegs. It’s the best of all worlds and I can do a closed transfer to the serving keg. When I bottle, I close-transfer to another keg with priming sugar already mixed in and push the beer into bottles with a picnic tap/bottling wand with 5 PSI of co2.
That’s why the expense of getting more kegs isn’t a bad thing for me if it’s a lifetime investment. Plus, I brew 4 gallon batches anyway, so their size isn’t much of a hindrance.

[quote=“Beersk”][quote=“GHawk”]
If you are going to stay with this great hobby think about the long term.
[/quote]
And it’s this that has made me choose to ferment in kegs. It’s the best of all worlds and I can do a closed transfer to the serving keg. When I bottle, I close-transfer to another keg with priming sugar already mixed in and push the beer into bottles with a picnic tap/bottling wand with 5 PSI of co2.
That’s why the expense of getting more kegs isn’t a bad thing for me if it’s a lifetime investment. Plus, I brew 4 gallon batches anyway, so their size isn’t much of a hindrance.[/quote]

gonna hafta look into this - i like

Fermenting anything more than 4 gallons, unless it’s a lager, is not idea, however. So keep that in mind. But I’m pretty much the only drinker in my house, so 4 gallon batches is about perfect. A keg lasts 3-5 weeks, typically.

[quote=“Beersk”]And it’s this that has made me choose to ferment in kegs. It’s the best of all worlds and I can do a closed transfer to the serving keg. When I bottle, I close-transfer to another keg with priming sugar already mixed in and push the beer into bottles with a picnic tap/bottling wand with 5 PSI of co2.
That’s why the expense of getting more kegs isn’t a bad thing for me if it’s a lifetime investment. Plus, I brew 4 gallon batches anyway, so their size isn’t much of a hindrance.[/quote]

There are supposed downsides to beer flavor from fermenting in kegs due to their geometry. It may be one pf those things that are more theoretical than actual on a homebrewing level. But when doing research for the book, we found a fair bit of info about it.

Interesting. Perhaps it’s bias, but I haven’t noticed anything different about fermenting in the kegs. But commercial conicals are tall and narrow, much like fermenting 4 gallons in a cornie keg, are they not? I don’t see how it would be different enough to affect flavor that much. At least, I’m finding that it’s not negatively affecting the flavor of the beers. I just love being able to perform a closed transfer to the serving keg.

Well, it just so happens that we outline an experiment in the book so you can determine if it’s bull or not! Yeah, conicals aren’t quite as narrow as kegs, but part of the background on the issue comes from breweries using conicals who thought it affected beer flavor. Personally, I’ve never noticed a problem, either, but I’ve never done a test.

Well, hmm, not sure how I’d do the test now. I sold all my carboys a few weeks ago and own only kegs now. Ah well, I’ll have the kegs for the rest of my brewing hobby life, so I’m not worried. I suppose the real test will show when I do a hefe, maybe the esters will be too subdued? How is fermenting in kegs shown to negatively affect the beer? Less ester formation or what? There was debate about yeast performance for a while, with under attenuation because of ferment geometry, but that hasn’t been an issue for me.

Here’s an excerpt from the book that talks about it…

Well, yes. There’s a notion called “fermenter geometry”. If you’ve walked into a few commercial breweries – you’ll notice that the tanks seem very similar to each other. Tall, yes, but also fairly wide. As the volume goes up, the width increases more rapidly than the height. The design of these modern tanks comes from a Swiss brewery chemist, Nathan Leopold, who patented the first true modern cylindroconical fermenters in the early 20th century. His design was adopted and in a modified form is still used today. His innovations reduced the time to produce lager from months to days. Though largely forgotten, his impact on modern lager brewing can’t be underestimated.

But notice that little word: “lager”? British brewers, who traditionally used open fermenters, resisted the lure of the CCV tank for years with the claim that a proper ale couldn’t possibly be brewed in a closed tank. Eventually most of the larger brewers were convinced of the advantages of a closed tank. Even today, stalwarts hold out on the notion of proper brewing tanks.

This, of course, loops back to our discussion of 5 gallon tanks. The Nathan system works in part by encouraging the formation of circulation pools in the tank. There are multiple zones in which the yeast cycle in vertical whirlpools. The circulation insures complete yeast to wort contact, sugar consumption and fermentation cleanup.

The argument against using a 5 gallon keg for fermentation starts with the realization that you’re only going to yield 4 gallons from the ferment due to the lack of headspace. It ends on an argument about the geometry being less than ideal – too tall, not wide enough. Together, these factors, 5-gallon detractors say, will cause the beer to be under attenuated and full of esters and phenols due to circulation issues. Supporters, who don’t care about total volume, argue that the increased hydrostatic pressure (pressure induced by the height of the liquid column above the yeast) suppresses ester and phenol formation like it does in the larger commercial tanks. (see page 0000 for more information on open fermentation)

So who’s right? Do you smell what we smell? That’s right! Experiment time. We can say by the way that pretty much every “fermenter” out there follows the notion that there should be more width than height – except the corny keg. This points us in the favor of saying – yeah, geometry totally matters. . In the trials we’ve done – the beers done in a corny keg consistently land at higher terminal gravities and convey more yeast stress characters like high esters and phenols.

Huh, interesting. Well, I’m going to keep rockin’ the kegs for fermentation. My recent helles finished at 1.010. Happy with that. Perhaps the way to experiment is to brew an 8 gallon batch, ferment 4 gallons in a keg and 4 gallons in a bucket or carboy, with the same yeast.
But the beers you did were 5 gallon batches, not 4, right?

[quote=“Beersk”]Huh, interesting. Well, I’m going to keep rockin’ the kegs for fermentation. My recent helles finished at 1.010. Happy with that. Perhaps the way to experiment is to brew an 8 gallon batch, ferment 4 gallons in a keg and 4 gallons in a bucket or carboy, with the same yeast.
But the beers you did were 5 gallon batches, not 4, right?[/quote]

Nope, 4 gal. And you’ve got the right idea for an experiment. Then you do a blind triangle tasting.

Dang it, and I was happy with my process!

Well, look on the bright side. Now you can pick a style that you’ll want 8 gallons of, and brew it up. I suggest a Scottish 70 shilling. But maybe that’s not the best style to evaluate phenols and esters. Just a tasty beer to brew 8 gallons of…

What do you all think would be a good style for a comparison like this?

Hmm, hefeweizen? Problem is, I don’t have the capacity for 8 gallons. I’d have to borrow my friend’s brew pot (which I sold to him) and burner, and probably even his mash tun. Not sure I could mash an 8 gallon batch worth of grains for a hefe in my 5 gallon cooler.

I am toying with the idea of fermenting in my kettle. I could wrap seran over the opening and set the lid on top. Thoughts?

Sorry, OP, I kind of hijacked your thread!

Maybe you could go in with your buddy on the batch, and eventually split the two batches. Just a thought.

Michael Dawson does an open fermentation in his kettle in one of the early Brewing TV Episodes. Here it is.

IIRC, he tests it out with Patersbier. That might be a good recipe to test, since it uses a yeast strain (WY3787 Trappish High Gravity) that will develop a lot of character or ferment fairly clean, depending on conditions.

That’s true, him and I could do that.

What would be the difference between fermenting right in my kettle, wrapping the opening with seran and setting the lid on top versus fermenting in a sealed bucket? It’d still be fine for 10-14 days, would it not? So I guess it wouldn’t be truly open.
Wouldn’t you think this would be fine for normal ales and lagers?