No Chill- the bad bits, what are they ?

[foxy]

Looks like an option to me. Regardless, their question was specifically about the negatives of No Chill.

As no scientific work has been carried out on 'no chill' we have to rely on anecdotal evidence, which points to as long as care is taken and the numerous brewers doing it. Obviously, breweries would not do it as they are out to make a dollar, the quicker the turn around the more money they make. On a homebrew scale if being carefully executed then astringency is/could be the most glaring factor. DMS gets scrubbed otherwise no one would be 'no chilling'. If DMS is the problem then all those carrying out hop stands are in trouble as well.
He's only wanting to make a drinkable beer not win the national homebrewing championship.

 

[jof]

From @foxy summary (and it's been mentioned in the past), we work on a homebrew scale of 20-25l, and no chill can bring that down to a sensible temperature in about 12 hours or so.
In the commercial world they deal with much higher volumes, that will have much higher thermal mass, so would take several days to cool. So I much higher chance of spoilage. Also at commercial scale they won't just waste all that heat energy & cooling water, they would use heat exchangers to recover it.

 

[MashBag]

There is no wrong or right answer.
It is not a competition. @Frisp asked for opinions.

As with all advice, those who actually do it are probably best placed to ask. You wouldn't take flying instruction, from someone who had read about it.

 

[foxy]

From @foxy summary (and it's been mentioned in the past), we work on a homebrew scale of 20-25l, and no chill can bring that down to a sensible temperature in about 12 hours or so.
In the commercial world they deal with much higher volumes, that will have much higher thermal mass, so would take several days to cool. So I much higher chance of spoilage. Also at commercial scale they won't just waste all that heat energy & cooling water, they would use heat exchangers to recover it.

Over here they fill the cube and then toss it in the swimming pool. So not even 12 hours. I agree with Sadfield but I want the maximum I can achieve so do not 'no chill anymore. But the evidence is lacking whether 'no chill' is that detrimental. I think not as bad as science makes out.

 

[Sadfield]

I agree with Sadfield but I want the maximum I can achieve so do not 'no chill anymore. But the evidence is lacking whether 'no chill' is THAT detrimental.

So you confirm there are negatives to no chill, that have stopped you from using the technique. Which is what the OP wanted to know, so they can make their own informed decision. Yet you've argued against any suggestion of possible negatives.

What is the point of you?

 

[foxy]

So you confirm there are negatives to no chill. Which is what the OP wanted to know. Yet you've argued against any suggestion of possible negatives.

What is the point of you?

No, I spoke about the 'could be negatives' early on but without evidence they are not valid.

 

[Sadfield]

Valid enough to stop you from no chilling. Not valid for others. OK.

 

[chthon]

There is no infection risk, only contamination risk :-p (yeah, pedantic, but there is a real difference between the two).

 

[The Baron]

There are negatives to any method and as I have said before it depends on which experts you believe.
I am squarely in the camp of no chill and yes there are probably negatives and that is what the OP asked.
I have never had any detrimental issues that has ever affected my beer, it's clear its no off tastes and I have done both methods so I will always do the one that suits my particular brewing best.
I think the major drawback is judging IBU's if you do not take out the hops or another maybe transferring too early to a cube/FV if you do not let the trub settle out first.
I usually transfer at 80c if doing standard hopping or @ 65c after whirlpool hopping in both cases I do a whirlpool after the hops have been removed to produce a cone so the beer is leaving everything behind.
My final answer is to the OP and that is try it and see if he finds any drawbacks for himself but do the usual sanitisation on everything that touches the wort to death.

 

[jof]

So be a bit pragmatic.
Start with no chill. If your happy with the results that's fine & you haven't invested in a chilling equipment you don't need.

If you're not happy, then by all means try chilling (in fact if there are other nearby forum members you may even persuade one to lend you chilling equipment for the day so you can see if it makes any difference)

 

[samale]

I have tried both methods, I have the equipment but prefer to chill naturally over night. This is probably do to the lack of brewing space. I brew in the kitchen and got fed up running a hose from the outside tap.
My brewing style is relaxed compared to others. I am happy enough, some of My beers score well. Won a few of the monthly competition's run by the forum.
I have also tried raw( no boil ) beers with very mixed results.

 

[Frisp]

Strewth, some worms slithered out of the can wi this one . lol

Thank you all for your input

The main reason I posed the question was based on my memory of when I was AG brewing some 12 years back.
At that that time, as I seem to remember, anyone who suggested not using an IC, FC or even better a monster plate chiller was some kinda heretic.
The collective opinion seemed to be that the closer you got to chilling wort at a rate akin to the hyper freeze from the day after tomorrow movie the better.

So when I find, 12 years on, that no chill is a "thing" it was still engrained in my mind that there must be some downsides to it, as last time I was doing this I was being told that anyone who didnt hyperchill a boil was facing some kind of appocolypse probably resulting in man bits falling off !!

Frankly id much rather not spend time and money crafting another double coil hyper IC out of 25M of 10mm tube. So I think im going down the route Jof suggests and see what happens

thanks again folks

So be a bit pragmatic.
Start with no chill. If your happy with the results that's fine & you haven't invested in a chilling equipment you don't need.

If you're not happy, then by all means try chilling (in fact if there are other nearby forum members you may even persuade one to lend you chilling equipment for the day so you can see if it makes any difference)

 

[MashBag]

You will still be a heretic.

Try another thread asking if anyone ferments in there kettle and hasn't bought a stainless fermenter yet.

 

[Cwrw666]

A good example is the hundreds of thousands of breweries worldwide that rapidly chill wort, instead of filling their FV's with boiling wort.

A hundred or so aussie homebrew shops selling fresh wort kits existing doesn't mean it's the optimal way of cooling wort.

Statistically, rapid cooling is the prefered method.

You're not comparing like with like - a five gallon brew cools at room temperature to pitching temp in a few hours whereas commercial sized brews would take many days to get down. Also their fvs are usually insulated so that wouldn't help either.

 

[Sadfield]

You're not comparing like with like - a five gallon brew cools at room temperature to pitching temp in a few hours whereas commercial sized brews would take many days to get down. Also their fvs are usually insulated so that wouldn't help either.

You missed the point.

 

[Sadfield]

So when I find, 12 years on, that no chill is a "thing" it was still engrained in my mind that there must be some downsides to it, as last time I was doing this I was being told that anyone who didnt hyperchill a boil was facing some kind of appocolypse probably resulting in man bits falling off !!

No Chill is a workaround used by Australians, with water supply issues, making plate or immersion chillers unfeasible. It's a viable solution, but not as good as using a chiller, as proven by the Australian in the thread no longer doing it themselves.

https://beerandbrewing.com/no-chill-brewing/

 

[MashBag]

It's a viable solution, but not as good as using a chiller, as proven by the Australian in the thread no longer doing it themselves.

Sorry that is not proof to support of your aspersions.

Please accept the are many ways, to achieve many things, often with no absolute. You don't have to be right or wrong.

Different strokes for different folks

 

[Brew_DD2]

No Chill is a workaround used by Australians, with water supply issues, making plate or immersion chillers unfeasible. It's a viable solution, but not as good as using a chiller, as proven by the Australian in the thread no longer doing it themselves.

https://beerandbrewing.com/no-chill-brewing/

They really struggle with it. No chill cubes were never a thing, but it's a compromise that's had to be made for the Aussies where water consumption and water temperature is an issue.


Ultimately I don't think it will make a massive difference to the quality of the finished beer, but there are additional considerations such as hop utilisation that have been covered in this thread.

 

[Sadfield]

Different strokes for different folks

Aye. Do what you want. Don't shoot the messenger, I'm reiterating what foxy said.

However, the thread was asking about negatives. There's plenty of brewing literature extolling the importance of rapid chilling. Feel free to produce some regarding No Chill for all of us to evaluate.

 

[Agentgonzo]

Strewth, some worms slithered out of the can wi this one . lol

I thought it was a pretty calm and informative thread with some good points. Then I read this post and wondered WTF had happened.

So I clicked the "show ignored posts" to see what I'd missed.

Jesus wept, wish I hadn't!!! .

Merry Christmas all!