Commercial vs Homebrew

[Mrobson]

I recently did a tour of a commercial brewery, a good experience in my eyes.

One thing I’ve been thinking of after is how do they manage such a quick turn around production wise?

Homebrew wise it’s common practice to implement the 2-2-2 rule but they seem to ignore this and still produce good beer. How come?

 

[LeeH]

They brew the same thing many times over and control the variables very precisely.

 

[Slid]

I recently did a tour of a commercial brewery, a good experience in my eyes.

One thing I’ve been thinking of after is how do they manage such a quick turn around production wise?

Homebrew wise it’s common practice to implement the 2-2-2 rule but they seem to ignore this and still produce good beer. How come?

I think there are a number of variables here.

First and foremost is scale of production. All temperature variations are less of a factor, with a large volume of water.
Second is that Commercial beers are taxed by ABV.
This means that commercial beers are essentially weak and thus need less conditioning than most homebrews.
Third, I may contribute tomorrow, when slightly more sober.

 

[jceg316]

I think there are quite a lot of reasons at play. They make the same beer over and over again so know exactly when it's ready, and this is also helped by having precise temperature controls, as well as having a very healthy yeast pitch rate which most home brewers only dream of. Apparently conical fermenters mean a quicker fermentation as well.

I imagine taking out the yeast probably plays a big part as well.

 

[dan125]

Most commercial beers aren't bottle conditioned, so that saves a couple of weeks.

 

[Bigcol49]

Hi!
I once went on a tour of the Boddington's brewery.
It's a shame the way they treat those cats.

 

[Cwrw666]

It wasn't always the case. In the 1800s there were basically 2 types of beer - mild ales which were meant to be drunk virtually when they'd just finished fermenting, and stock ales that were stored at the brewery for months before they were right for drinking. I guess comercially it makes more sense to produce the former while the homebrewer tends to make the latter.

 

[Duxuk]

I find that a keg of 23l is ready to drink quicker than the same beer in bottles. I think the scale makes a big difference.

 

[simon12]

Cask beer goes into the cask before fermentation is finished with finings to make in clear by the time its conditioned so can be casked in under a week from mash and served a weeks later. Keg beer can be filtered and force carbed as soon as fermentation is finished so can be kegged and served in around a week.

 

[peebee]

… Homebrew wise it’s common practice to implement the 2-2-2 rule but they seem to ignore this and still produce good beer. How come?

Well you said it … "it’s common practice to implement the 2-2-2 rule". It's not a "rule", it's "recommendation" that if followed will allow most homebrewers, whatever their level of experience, to churn out palatable beer. I will follow "less than common practice" that more closely follows commercial practice and can churn out beer in one or two weeks. But I do not advise people to follow that practice because many home-brewers are not going to make drinkable beer going down that road.

 

[peebee]

… I imagine taking out the yeast probably plays a big part as well.

Heretic! I know a few CAMRA supporters that might like a word with you (in a dark alley).

 

[goodolpete]

“as well as having a very healthy yeast pitch rate which most home brewers only dream of”
There was a documentary series about Marstons brewery
over ten years ago. I seem to remember that their pitch
rate was over a Kg of yeast per gallon.

 

[Slid]

I find that a keg of 23l is ready to drink quicker than the same beer in bottles. I think the scale makes a big difference.

Good point here and this could possibly have been my "third" point from last night. Had I only been less "tired from he working week", I would have gone on to say that it is an empirical fact that beer conditions much faster in bulk.

 

[Slid]

“as well as having a very healthy yeast pitch rate which most home brewers only dream of”
There was a documentary series about Marstons brewery
over ten years ago. I seem to remember that their pitch
rate was over a Kg of yeast per gallon.

OK, so I am not denigrating your point that a fast and effective ferment will be obtained by pitching at a high yeast rate. I am, however, querying the actual numerics. 1 kg of yeast cells, plus a bit of beer is roughly what is left at the end of a 20-25L (5 gallon) batch of HB. Re-pitching on a whole cake of yeast would seem extreme to most of us and pushing that out by a factor of five would seem totally ridiculous.

The Brewery vidoes I have seen suggest that the yeast tends to be skimmed and this would not be sufficient, surely, for 1kg per gallon.

 

[jceg316]

Heretic! I know a few CAMRA supporters that might like a word with you (in a dark alley).

Next I might tell them that Deep Purple aren't that great