| |
Main
Date: 22 Jun 2006 10:50:48
From: Dave Smith
Subject: measuring and adjusting ph
|
I've been reading about water ph and it's effect on the mashing process
and have some questions:
1. It seems a ph of approx 5 is considered ideal. Is this measurement
the water going into the mash tun or the water after it has sat with the
grain for awhile?
2. Will running water thru a carbon filter change it's ph level?
3. If I find that my ph is high, what is the best way to adjust it down?
Thanks,
Dave
|
|
| |
Date: 22 Jun 2006 20:15:09
From: David M. Taylor
Subject: Re: measuring and adjusting ph
|
"Dave Smith" <dave@nowhere.com > wrote in message
news:dave-9458C6.10504622062006@nntp.charter.net...
> I've been reading about water ph and it's effect on the mashing process
> and have some questions:
>
> 1. It seems a ph of approx 5 is considered ideal. Is this measurement
> the water going into the mash tun or the water after it has sat with the
> grain for awhile?
Ideal pH is 5.3, that's in the mash (after the water sits in the grain for a
while).
> 2. Will running water thru a carbon filter change it's ph level?
Possibly, but I wouldn't expect huge effect.
> 3. If I find that my ph is high, what is the best way to adjust it down?
Calcium chloride is my first choice, second choice is gypsum, or you can use
small amounts of lactic acid or other relatively neutral tasting acids.
--
Dave
"Just a drink, a little drink, and I'll be feeling GOOooOOooOOooD!" --
Genesis, 1973-ish
|
| | |
Date: 28 Jun 2006 22:25:17
From: Martin Brungard
Subject: Re: measuring and adjusting ph
|
Buffering can also be quantified as the Alkalinity of the water.
Shaggy is correct that if the alkalinity is high, the grist may not have
enough milliequivalents of acid to drop the mash pH into a desirable range.
The starting pH of the source water can have little to do with the success
of the mash and resulting pH. Alkalinity and its buffering effect is a
primary component in the success of dropping the mash pH into the preferred
range. Understanding and using the concept of Kohlbach's Residual
Alkalinity formula is an important facet of brewing.
Stoutman may have mis-interpreted something along the line. The buffering
(alkalinity) of tap water is primarily a function of the raw water source.
Alkalinity may be added to very soft water since that water can be corrosive
to pipes. Conversely, alkalinity may be removed from harder water to help
reduce the buildup of lime deposits in piping. It is not accurate to say
that all tap water is un-buffered.
I have to disagree with Shaggy regarding the need to "fix" water. Rarely
does a single water source produce good results for both pale and dark
beers. Understanding a water source and how to fix it IS the way to produce
better beer.
As was pointed out by other posts, it is important to ALWAYS drop the pH of
your sparge water. I recommend reducing it to about 5.7.
Martin Brungard
Tallahassee, FL
|
| | | |
Date: 29 Jun 2006 03:03:15
From: Stoutman
Subject: Re: measuring and adjusting ph
|
"Martin Brungard" <mabrungard@comcast.net > wrote in message
news:Z6adnZv3y9uWpz7ZnZ2dnUVZ_qqdnZ2d@comcast.com...
> Buffering can also be quantified as the Alkalinity of the water.
>
> Shaggy is correct that if the alkalinity is high, the grist may not have
> enough milliequivalents of acid to drop the mash pH into a desirable
> range.
Shaggy does not think it is possible to buffer water (that is either high or
low in starting pH) to a specific pH by adding the same buffering
components. In this regard he is way off.
> The starting pH of the source water can have little to do with the success
> of the mash and resulting pH. Alkalinity and its buffering effect is a
> primary component in the success of dropping the mash pH into the
> preferred range. Understanding and using the concept of Kohlbach's
> Residual Alkalinity formula is an important facet of brewing.
>
> Stoutman may have mis-interpreted something along the line. The buffering
> (alkalinity) of tap water is primarily a function of the raw water source.
Buffering and alkalinity are not synonymous and can NOT be used
interchangeably as most seem to believe.
> Alkalinity may be added to very soft water since that water can be
> corrosive to pipes. Conversely, alkalinity may be removed from harder
> water to help reduce the buildup of lime deposits in piping. It is not
> accurate to say that all tap water is un-buffered.
I think you are confusing alkalinity and what a buffer is. Tap water that
is hight in alkalinity does not mean it is buffered. If I have a glass of
distilled water and add sodium carbonate, I will make the solution more
alkaline (increase the alkalinity), but it will NOT be a buffer. A buffer
will resist sharp changes in pH.
Water that is high in alkalinity will have a high pH, that does not mean it
is buffered at any pH. As acid is added the pH will fall.
The key to a buffer is that it is made from a weak acid and the conjugate
base of that same acid. When the pH = pKa of the weak acid the solution is
at the peak buffering ability. As acid is added to a solution that is
buffered, and the pKa of the weak acid is near the pH of the solution, the
pH will fall at a very slow rate.
So, when I say that tap water is "usually" not buffered at any pH, I am not
saying tap water can not be high in alkalinity.
>
> I have to disagree with Shaggy regarding the need to "fix" water. Rarely
> does a single water source produce good results for both pale and dark
> beers. Understanding a water source and how to fix it IS the way to
> produce better beer.
Agreed. Water is MAIN ingredient in beer!
>
> As was pointed out by other posts, it is important to ALWAYS drop the pH
> of your sparge water. I recommend reducing it to about 5.7.
>
> Martin Brungard
> Tallahassee, FL
>
|
| | | | |
Date: 30 Jun 2006 14:39:09
From: John 'Shaggy' Kolesar
Subject: Re: measuring and adjusting ph
|
On Thu, 29 Jun 2006 03:03:15 GMT, <.@. > wrote:
> Shaggy does not think it is possible to buffer water (that is either high or
> low in starting pH) to a specific pH by adding the same buffering
> components. In this regard he is way off.
No, that is not at all what I think. Clearly you do not understand what my
argument is on this topic, which probably explains why our discussion
never went anywhere.
John.
|
| | | | | |
Date: 30 Jun 2006 16:16:16
From: Stoutman
Subject: Re: measuring and adjusting ph
|
"John 'Shaggy' Kolesar" <spam@shagg.net > wrote in message
news:slrneaadvs.vlb.spam@weizen.shagg.net...
> On Thu, 29 Jun 2006 03:03:15 GMT, <.@.> wrote:
>> Shaggy does not think it is possible to buffer water (that is either high
>> or
>> low in starting pH) to a specific pH by adding the same buffering
>> components. In this regard he is way off.
>
> No, that is not at all what I think. Clearly you do not understand what
> my
> argument is on this topic, which probably explains why our discussion
> never went anywhere.
>
Really? Do you have amnesia? Do you remember writing this:
>There is no possible way that the same chemical "5.2 stabilizer" can fix
>both of those water conditions since they require completely opposite
>solutions.
I dont even think YOU understand YOUR argument on this topic.
>
> John.
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 30 Jun 2006 18:58:11
From: John 'Shaggy' Kolesar
Subject: Re: measuring and adjusting ph
|
On Fri, 30 Jun 2006 16:16:16 GMT, <.@. > wrote:
> I dont even think YOU understand YOUR argument on this topic.
My argument, consistent from the beginning, is that you cannot make the
claim that this product will adjust the pH to 5.2 for any starting water
condition. Note, I do not say anything about the starting pH of the
water, which does not matter (even though you keep focusing on this).
If the water starts out with no significant buffering to speak of, then
I completely agree that no matter what it's starting pH, you can adjust it
to a certain level. That's what the buffer does. I believe that in one of
my early posts I mispoke and said that the pH mattered when the water was
not buffered, but that was a mistake. I think you've sunk your teeth into
that mistake and have been ignoring everything else I've said on the topic
either before or since then. Whether that is on purpose or not, I do not
know.
However, I have been making the following point from the beginning, which
you seem to be ignoring...
If the water starts out as already being highly buffered to some pH other
than our desired pH, then you absolutely cannot correct it using the
exact same amount of the exact same product as you would use for the water
in the previous example.
Granted, in most cases typical tap water is not going to start out highly
buffered. However, the company does not claim that their product will
work on "typical tap water" they claim that it will work on "any water".
That is obviously an exageration, which has been my argument from the
beginning. You have to make some basic assumptions about the water, but
that is different than claiming "any" water.
Here's why that difference matters... *if* we can make some basic
assumptions about the starting water so that their product will work
as advertised (namely that it is not significantly buffered to begin with),
then in the majority of cases you don't really need to make any adjustments
to the water at all. As long as the water is not buffered, then in most
cases the grains will correct the pH value on their own, which makes their
product pointless.
For the majority of brewers, a pH 5.2 stabilizer product is at best just
peace of mind, and not really necessary at all. For the cases that you
really do need to make water adjustments in order to perform the mash, then
only *some* of them can be corrected by adding the 5.2 stabilizer product.
There definitely is a small subset of brewers who have peculiar water
conditions that would benefit from using such a stabilizer. But I suspect
that many people who are not part of that subset either are making water
additions or else have been convinced that they need to.
Personally, I think a lot of brewers mistake their starting water pH with
the target mash pH (or sparge pH), and think that because their water comes
out of the tap at pH 8 then it is "wrong". They are probably the ones that
are most likely to buy something like this that will "fix" their imaginary
problem. Using exagerated claims like "Now you have the ability to control
the pH of your brewing water under any conditions" suggests to me that this
is being marketed towards people who don't understand their water and just
want something to throw in that will automatically fix *anything* that is
wrong with it. Most of them probably don't need to fix anything to begin
with.
It's the same thing with sparge water. The pH of the tap water that you
are using for the sparge does not really matter for the same reasons as
in the mash. Most of the time you are not going to run into any pH issues
no matter what it starts out at since the grains will correct the pH.
Eventually the pH of the sparge will start to rise towards the end, but
generally it will not get high enough to be a real problem. Making
adjustments to your water in order to lock it into a certain pH without even
knowing what your grain bed pH is actually doing during the sparge is
usually just a peace of mind thing, and in most cases is not necessary.
One instance though, where the pH does tend to be a problem during the
sparge is when working with a low OG recipe. The reason, as others have
already explained, is that low OG beers have less grains in the tun, which
means that they have less capability to correct the pH of the starting water.
In that case you either need to address it by making water adjustments
(usually by just lowering the pH, you shouldn't need a buffering
"stabilizer"), or else (IMO, more easily) monitor and adjust the volume of
runnings that you collect in your kettle. In most cases, the pH will rise
too high at the point in the low OG batch that you have already rinsed most
of the sugars out of the grains and are just running additional water through
the tun in order to collect your target volume. You can just as easily stop
the sparge at that point and top up the kettle with water. That will solve
the oversparging issue as well, and not cost you very much in efficiency.
It's also a lot easier for most people since they don't even need to
measure pH in order to do it.
John.
|
| |
Date: 23 Jun 2006 01:04:13
From: Stoutman
Subject: Re: measuring and adjusting ph
|
> 1. It seems a ph of approx 5 is considered ideal. Is this measurement
> the water going into the mash tun or the water after it has sat with the
> grain for awhile?
Measure mash pH after it has been sitting with the grain. A pH of around 5
is considered optimum (5.3-5.4). The rate that the grain enzymes (alpha and
beta amylase) convert starches to smaller sugars is pH dependent. At a pH
of arond 5 the rate is optimized.
I usually do not adjust the water I am using in my mash. If your mash pH is
low yo can bring it up with CaCO3 (a basic salt), if it is high you can
lower it with CaCl2 (an acidic salt). I adjust my sparge water to arond 5
with phosphoric acid (this has the added advantage of being a yeast nutrient
as well). It only takes a couple drops per gallon for me.
>
> 2. Will running water thru a carbon filter change it's ph level?
No.
>
> 3. If I find that my ph is high, what is the best way to adjust it down?
I se CaCl2 to lower mash pH and phosphoric acid (if you can get it) to lower
sparge water pH.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Dave
|
| |
Date: 22 Jun 2006 12:28:19
From: Greg LaPolla
Subject: Re: measuring and adjusting ph
|
Dave Smith wrote:
> I've been reading about water ph and it's effect on the mashing process
> and have some questions:
>
> 1. It seems a ph of approx 5 is considered ideal. Is this measurement
> the water going into the mash tun or the water after it has sat with the
> grain for awhile?
>
> 2. Will running water thru a carbon filter change it's ph level?
>
Not much if any . . Short answer No!
> 3. If I find that my ph is high, what is the best way to adjust it down?
>
My Water PH is around 7.2. Most of the time (when I rember) I use
something Called 5.2 ph Stabilizer
You can get it at http://morebeer.com/product.html?product_id=19873 It
will make your mash water 5.2 (or pretty close) no matter what.
> Thanks,
>
> Dave
Depending on the style of beer this may help out. Rule of thumb . . .
I you can drink the water, it will make good beer. Unless you are
after an exact replica of a beer, I wouldnt worry to much about it.
Greg
|
| | |
Date: 22 Jun 2006 21:19:08
From: John 'Shaggy' Kolesar
Subject: Re: measuring and adjusting ph
|
On 22 Jun 2006 12:28:19 -0700, <glapolla@gmail.com > wrote:
> You can get it at http://morebeer.com/product.html?product_id=19873 It
> will make your mash water 5.2 (or pretty close) no matter what.
That's what their marketing department says. I'm sure it works assuming
that your water starts out within a certain parameter range. Having
one product that will adjust absolutely any starting water chemistry to
one pH would be impossible.
John.
|
| | | |
Date: 23 Jun 2006 01:22:09
From: Stoutman
Subject: Re: measuring and adjusting ph
|
> That's what their marketing department says. I'm sure it works assuming
> that your water starts out within a certain parameter range. Having
> one product that will adjust absolutely any starting water chemistry to
> one pH would be impossible.
Wrong. Look into what a buffer is/does.
>
>
> John.
|
| | | | |
Date: 23 Jun 2006 02:06:10
From: John 'Shaggy' Kolesar
Subject: Re: measuring and adjusting ph
|
On Fri, 23 Jun 2006 01:22:09 GMT, <.@. > wrote:
>> That's what their marketing department says. I'm sure it works assuming
>> that your water starts out within a certain parameter range. Having
>> one product that will adjust absolutely any starting water chemistry to
>> one pH would be impossible.
>
> Wrong. Look into what a buffer is/does.
I understand what a buffer is/does, but there is still no way that one
chemical addition will correct any possible water chemistry. It will
probably correct the most common water types, but to claim in their
sales pitch that it will fix your water "no matter what" is being a little
silly.
John.
|
| | | | | |
Date: 23 Jun 2006 04:20:11
From: QD Steve
Subject: Re: measuring and adjusting ph
|
"John 'Shaggy' Kolesar" <spam@shagg.net > wrote in message
news:slrne9mj7k.1df.spam@weizen.shagg.net...
> On Fri, 23 Jun 2006 01:22:09 GMT, <.@.> wrote:
>>> That's what their marketing department says. I'm sure it works assuming
>>> that your water starts out within a certain parameter range. Having
>>> one product that will adjust absolutely any starting water chemistry to
>>> one pH would be impossible.
>>
>> Wrong. Look into what a buffer is/does.
>
> I understand what a buffer is/does, but there is still no way that one
> chemical addition will correct any possible water chemistry. It will
> probably correct the most common water types, but to claim in their
> sales pitch that it will fix your water "no matter what" is being a little
> silly.
>
>
> John.
I ain't no chemist but I do recall a few years back when I added too much
buffer to my pool water. The pH was wrong but no matter what I added, I
could not change it - had to toss out 15,000 litres of water and re-fill
(and I live in the supposed 'driest state in the driest continent' if you
believe such BS)
Steve W (in Aus)
|
| | | |
Date: 22 Jun 2006 22:03:49
From: Dick Adams
Subject: Re: measuring and adjusting ph
|
John 'Shaggy' Kolesar <spam@shagg.net > wrote:
> <glapolla@gmail.com> wrote:
>> You can get it at http://morebeer.com/product.html?product_id=19873 It
>> will make your mash water 5.2 (or pretty close) no matter what.
> That's what their marketing department says. I'm sure it works assuming
> that your water starts out within a certain parameter range. Having
> one product that will adjust absolutely any starting water chemistry to
> one pH would be impossible.
I too am more than skeptical of "One tablespoon of 5.2 per 5 gallon
batch and your water is instantly adjusted to the perfect ph of 5.2,
no matter what your starting ph was." Plus the claim that "5.2
optimizes the enzymatic activity of your malt, helps to clarify the
wort, and may even help to raise your starting gravities."
They forgot to add that on tablespoon mixed into a pound of straw
will help turn the straw into gold.
Dick
|
| | | | |
Date: 23 Jun 2006 01:26:23
From: Stoutman
Subject: Re: measuring and adjusting ph
|
> I too am more than skeptical of "One tablespoon of 5.2 per 5 gallon
> batch and your water is instantly adjusted to the perfect ph of 5.2,
> no matter what your starting ph was.">
No need to be skeptical. It's not magic or witch craft. read into "pH
buffers" and "buffering capacity"
> Plus the claim that "5.2 optimizes the enzymatic activity of your malt,
> helps to clarify the
> wort, and may even help to raise your starting gravities."
At pH 5.2 the amylase enzymes are considered optimized with regard to
enzymatic activity (rate).
> They forgot to add that on tablespoon mixed into a pound of straw
> will help turn the straw into gold.
I need to try that. :)
>
> Dick
|
| | | | | |
Date: 23 Jun 2006 02:18:00
From: John 'Shaggy' Kolesar
Subject: Re: measuring and adjusting ph
|
On Fri, 23 Jun 2006 01:26:23 GMT, <.@. > wrote:
>> I too am more than skeptical of "One tablespoon of 5.2 per 5 gallon
>> batch and your water is instantly adjusted to the perfect ph of 5.2,
>> no matter what your starting ph was.">
>
> No need to be skeptical. It's not magic or witch craft. read into "pH
> buffers" and "buffering capacity"
Lets say that the buffering (kH) of your water is initially too low and
the pH will have wild swings so that the pH will be way too low when
added to grains. OK, I can buy that a chemical can be added that will
increase the buffering to the point where the water pH will stabilize in
the correct range when added to grain. Now lets assume that you have the
opposite problem and the buffering of your water is way too high which
means that it takes a lot more acid to alter the actual pH, IE the mash
will end up with too high of a pH. In that case you need to reduce the
buffering of the water in order to have it end up in the correct range when
added to grain.
There is no possible way that the same chemical "5.2 stabilizer" can fix
both of those water conditions since they require completely opposite
solutions.
Lets take another example and assume that the buffering of the water is
already good, but the pH of your tap water is 3. I realize that's a little
silly, but their marketing slogan did claim that it could fix your water
problems "no matter what".
John.
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 23 Jun 2006 02:44:02
From: Stoutman
Subject: Re: measuring and adjusting ph
|
> Lets say that the buffering (kH) of your water is initially too low and
> the pH will have wild swings so that the pH will be way too low when
> added to grains.
>OK, I can buy that a chemical can be added that will
> increase the buffering to the point where the water pH will stabilize in
> the correct range when added to grain.
The 'buffering agent' that you are adding will increase (if your initial pH
is low) or decrease (if your initial pH is high) your water pH to the target
'buffer pH'. The buffer will have limitations that are a property the
buffering capacity. The more buffer that is added, the greater the
buffering capacity. The buffering capacity is the amount of acid or base
that the buffer can 'consume' and still maintain pH. As you increase the
concentration of the buffering components, you increase the buffering
capacity.
>Now lets assume that you have the
> opposite problem and the buffering of your water is way too high which
> means that it takes a lot more acid to alter the actual pH, IE the mash
> will end up with too high of a pH.
Your tap water will most likely not be buffered at any pH. It will simply
have a low or high or 'in range' pH.
> In that case you need to reduce the
> buffering of the water in order to have it end up in the correct range
> when
> added to grain.
No. The buffering agent that you add will shift your tap water pH into the
buffer pH (determined by the components of the buffer). This is independent
of your starting tap water pH (with in reason, more buffering agent will
need to be added if the pH is at high or low extreme).
>
> There is no possible way that the same chemical "5.2 stabilizer" can fix
> both of those water conditions since they require completely opposite
> solutions.
Wrong. Low or High pH, does not matter. That is the nature of a buffer.
>
> Lets take another example and assume that the buffering of the water is
> already good, but the pH of your tap water is 3. I realize that's a
> little
> silly, but their marketing slogan did claim that it could fix your water
> problems "no matter what".
It will buffer the pH 3 water into range, but it might require more
buffering agent than if the starting pH was closer to the target pH. The
initial buffering is added will be consumed by the extremely low pH, but as
you add more, the pH will hit the target buffer pH (determined by the
components of the buffer).
>
>
> John.
|
| | | | |
Date: 22 Jun 2006 15:25:02
From: Dave Smith
Subject: Re: measuring and adjusting ph
|
I called the water company and found that my ph is "around 8". Pretty
high. Thanks for the link,
Dave
|
| | | | | |
Date: 23 Jun 2006 00:07:01
From: John 'Shaggy' Kolesar
Subject: Re: measuring and adjusting ph
|
On Thu, 22 Jun 2006 15:25:02 -0700, <dave@nowhere.com > wrote:
> I called the water company and found that my ph is "around 8". Pretty
> high. Thanks for the link,
FWIW, tap water pH around 8 is pretty normal.
John.
|
| | | | | |
Date: 22 Jun 2006 16:06:51
From: bregent
Subject: Re: measuring and adjusting ph
|
In article <dave-EF6E13.15250122062006@nntp.charter.net >, Dave Smith says...
>
>I called the water company and found that my ph is "around 8". Pretty
>high. Thanks for the link,
Don't worry about it. My water pH is 9.1. My mash pH is 5.2.
Don't treat your hot liquor unless your mash pH is too high.
|
| |
Date: 22 Jun 2006 18:56:11
From: John 'Shaggy' Kolesar
Subject: Re: measuring and adjusting ph
|
On Thu, 22 Jun 2006 10:50:48 -0700, <dave@nowhere.com > wrote:
> I've been reading about water ph and it's effect on the mashing process
> and have some questions:
Don't take this the wrong way, but my first advice on water chemistry is
to avoid over thinking it. IMO, many people tend to want to "fix" their
water when there was nothing wrong with it in the first place. Are you
noticing problems with your beer using your current water, or are you
just trying to match what a book says is the "correct" water chemistry
to use. The best advice I can give is "If it ain't broke, don't fix it".
> 1. It seems a ph of approx 5 is considered ideal. Is this measurement
> the water going into the mash tun or the water after it has sat with the
> grain for awhile?
Definitely after it has sat with the grains. The pH that matters is the
pH of the grain bed during the mash. The pH of tap water will always be
much higher than 5 (unless you have some really weird tap water). In
reality, the starting pH of your tap water doesn't really have a lot to
do with what the pH of your mash will be. There are other parts of
your original water chemistry that will effect the final mash pH more
than the actual starting pH.
Same thing with sparge water pH. The pH of the water before you sparge
with it doesn't really matter. The important part is the pH of the grain
bed during the sparge. They will not be the same.
I've seen a lot of brewers waste a lot of time trying to fix pH problems
that didn't really exist. Grain wants to be beer (who wouldn't). In rare
cases it will need a little help, but if you try to monkey around with it too
much you'll probably just be getting in it's way.
John.
|
| | |
Date: 23 Jun 2006 01:18:16
From: Stoutman
Subject: Re: measuring and adjusting ph
|
<SNIP >
> Same thing with sparge water pH. The pH of the water before you sparge
> with it doesn't really matter.
The pH of the sparge water will influence the pH of the grain bed. Right?
If I sparge a grain bed that it is at pH 5 with water that is at pH 8 won't
the pH of the grain bed rise? At high pH levels (above 5) tannin extraction
will rise.
>The important part is the pH of the grain
> bed during the sparge. They will not be the same.
Won't the pH of the sparge water influence the pH of the grain bed?
>
> I've seen a lot of brewers waste a lot of time trying to fix pH problems
> that didn't really exist. Grain wants to be beer (who wouldn't). In rare
> cases it will need a little help, but if you try to monkey around with it
> too
> much you'll probably just be getting in it's way.
>
>
> John.
|
| | | |
Date: 23 Jun 2006 02:03:20
From: John 'Shaggy' Kolesar
Subject: Re: measuring and adjusting ph
|
On Fri, 23 Jun 2006 01:18:16 GMT, <.@. > wrote:
><SNIP>
>> Same thing with sparge water pH. The pH of the water before you sparge
>> with it doesn't really matter.
>
> The pH of the sparge water will influence the pH of the grain bed. Right?
> If I sparge a grain bed that it is at pH 5 with water that is at pH 8 won't
> the pH of the grain bed rise? At high pH levels (above 5) tannin extraction
> will rise.
Of course it will influence it, but if it never rises high enough to
be a problem then you don't need to adjust anything. Just because the
pH of tap water is 8 doesn't mean that you have to lower it in order
to do a successfull sparge. It's the sparge pH you need to monitor, not
the starting water. In my experience, the grains still have plenty of
capacity to keep the pH in the correct range during the sparge unless you
are making a very low OG batch (IE relatively low grain:water ratio).
Also, the pH requirements for the sparge are less stringent than for
the mash. During the mash the pH needs to be low enough to promote
enzyme activity, during the sparge you just need to keep it low enough
to prevent tannin extraction, which tends to be a little more
forgiving range.
John.
|
| |
Date: 29 Jun 2006 10:03:47
From: miker
Subject: Re: measuring and adjusting ph
|
Just a practical note on the Fivestar 5.2 product, although I haven't
had a need for it myself. I've seen dozens of posts on this product
from other beer discussion boards and the product does seem to work for
most people who tried it. There were a few who said it didn't work for
them or that it gave their beer a salty character at the rates they had
to use to bring mash pH into the proper range. IIRC, those it didn't
work for didn't say what their exact water conditions were. A little
searching will probably bring up some of those discussions if anyone
cares to read them.
|
| | |
Date: 29 Jun 2006 17:20:35
From: John 'Shaggy' Kolesar
Subject: Re: measuring and adjusting ph
|
On 29 Jun 2006 10:03:47 -0700, <mlracette@aol.com > wrote:
> Just a practical note on the Fivestar 5.2 product, although I haven't
> had a need for it myself. I've seen dozens of posts on this product
> from other beer discussion boards and the product does seem to work for
> most people who tried it.
I wonder, of the group of people that this has worked for, how many of them
actually needed it?
John.
|
| | | |
Date: 29 Jun 2006 13:52:51
From: Jim Stansell
Subject: Re: measuring and adjusting ph
|
On 29 Jun 2006 17:20:35 GMT, John 'Shaggy' Kolesar <spam@shagg.net >
wrote:
>On 29 Jun 2006 10:03:47 -0700, <mlracette@aol.com> wrote:
>> Just a practical note on the Fivestar 5.2 product, although I haven't
>> had a need for it myself. I've seen dozens of posts on this product
>> from other beer discussion boards and the product does seem to work for
>> most people who tried it.
>
>I wonder, of the group of people that this has worked for, how many of them
>actually needed it?
I checked my mash pH from time to time, and when brewing lighter beers
it was often in the 5.7 to 5.8 range. Darker beers were OK, but I
always had to play around with the mash chemistry on pilsners and the
like.
So, I started using the 5.2 stuff and have had decent success with it.
Whenever I've used it, it seems to work as advertised. Dump it in, and
the mash pH settles right at 5.2. To me, the advantage is that it's a
mindless correction instead of fiddling around every time.
I don't really notice a salty taste, but then I typically don't use a
full tablespoon per batch. Also, since I batch sparge, I think that
tends to dilute it a bit as well.
I don't know if it works for every possible combination of grains and
water chemistries, and I'm not trying to assert that it does. However,
I've gotten to the point where I automatically just toss it in for
anything lighter than a porter....it's probably a bit of overkill, but
the stuff seems to work for me.
|
| | | | |
Date: 29 Jun 2006 18:10:39
From: John 'Shaggy' Kolesar
Subject: Re: measuring and adjusting ph
|
On Thu, 29 Jun 2006 13:52:51 -0400, <jim.stansell@comcast.net > wrote:
> I checked my mash pH from time to time, and when brewing lighter beers
> it was often in the 5.7 to 5.8 range. Darker beers were OK, but I
> always had to play around with the mash chemistry on pilsners and the
> like.
I've seen many sources say that a pH of 5.1 - 5.5 is "optimal" but that
up to 5.7 or 5.8 is "fine". Did you actually notice problems with the
mash with your lighter beers that were caused by the pH?
John.
|
| | | | | |
Date: 29 Jun 2006 14:40:14
From: Jim Stansell
Subject: Re: measuring and adjusting ph
|
On 29 Jun 2006 18:10:39 GMT, John 'Shaggy' Kolesar <spam@shagg.net >
wrote:
>On Thu, 29 Jun 2006 13:52:51 -0400, <jim.stansell@comcast.net> wrote:
>> I checked my mash pH from time to time, and when brewing lighter beers
>> it was often in the 5.7 to 5.8 range. Darker beers were OK, but I
>> always had to play around with the mash chemistry on pilsners and the
>> like.
>
>I've seen many sources say that a pH of 5.1 - 5.5 is "optimal" but that
>up to 5.7 or 5.8 is "fine". Did you actually notice problems with the
>mash with your lighter beers that were caused by the pH?
Problems? No, because when I measured a pH of 5.8 I tried to bring it
down. I guess I always bought in to the "optimal" range theory and
never let a mash just rip through with a pH of 5.8.
Maybe it doesn't make a difference, but at least from my experience it
doesn't do any harm. Plus, if I can assure myself of being "optimal"
instead of just "fine" for about $0.25 per batch, it's cheap
insurance.
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 30 Jun 2006 00:14:32
From: QD Steve
Subject: Re: measuring and adjusting ph
|
"Jim Stansell" <jim.stansell@comcast.net > wrote in message
news:kb68a2h8u1koavcqt6p1bbsb8uvpqqs5pa@4ax.com...
> On 29 Jun 2006 18:10:39 GMT, John 'Shaggy' Kolesar <spam@shagg.net>
> wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 29 Jun 2006 13:52:51 -0400, <jim.stansell@comcast.net> wrote:
>>> I checked my mash pH from time to time, and when brewing lighter beers
>>> it was often in the 5.7 to 5.8 range. Darker beers were OK, but I
>>> always had to play around with the mash chemistry on pilsners and the
>>> like.
>>
>>I've seen many sources say that a pH of 5.1 - 5.5 is "optimal" but that
>>up to 5.7 or 5.8 is "fine". Did you actually notice problems with the
>>mash with your lighter beers that were caused by the pH?
>
FWIW, I have experienced a noticable difference in my light lager/pilsner
beers when I started adding small amounts of phosphoric acid to the sparge
water. I don't bother with this with darker beers (ales or lagers), only the
ones where I use 100% or nearly 100% pils malt making the lightest possible
beer styles. (I use 100% RO water which may have something to do with it)
Steve W (in Aus)
|
| | | | | | | |
Date: 30 Jun 2006 00:20:04
From: John 'Shaggy' Kolesar
Subject: Re: measuring and adjusting ph
|
On Fri, 30 Jun 2006 00:14:32 GMT, <adlab@bigponddotnetdotau.trashthisbit > wrote:
> FWIW, I have experienced a noticable difference in my light lager/pilsner
> beers when I started adding small amounts of phosphoric acid to the sparge
> water. I don't bother with this with darker beers (ales or lagers), only the
> ones where I use 100% or nearly 100% pils malt making the lightest possible
> beer styles. (I use 100% RO water which may have something to do with it)
I would also guess that your light lager/pilsner beers tend to be on the
lower end of the OG scale compared to your other beers? Low OG beers also
tend to be easier to oversparge, which is another factor related to pH.
John.
|
| | | | | | | | |
Date: 30 Jun 2006 01:07:42
From: Stoutman
Subject: Re: measuring and adjusting ph
|
>Low OG beers also tend to be easier to oversparge, which is another factor
>related to pH.
Huh???
>
>
> John.
|
| | | | | | | | | |
Date: 30 Jun 2006 05:21:50
From: Scott Sellers
Subject: Re: measuring and adjusting ph
|
Stoutman <.@. >:
>>Low OG beers also tend to be easier to oversparge, which is
>>another factor related to pH.
>Huh???
Huh???
--
Scott Sellers
|
| |
Date: 29 Jun 2006 23:25:23
From: Droopy
Subject: Re: measuring and adjusting ph
|
It is not that hard to believe. You have to understand how buffers work
first.
A tbsp/ 5 gal is about 1.5 g/l which is 1500 ppm. Even very hard water
only has like 300 ppm of bicarbonate.
the real kicker is that phosphate is a rotten bufffer at 5.2, I am
guess that the phosphate is acting in unison with somethign like
citrate, acetate, malate, succinate or some other natually occuring
organic acid.
Of course, bicarbonate is a rotten buffer at 7.5 as well. Its optimal
pH is around 6.3 anyway.
Even someone with a unusually high ph say 10, that is only 10-4
equilivants of OH to neutralize. 0.0004 is not all that much, espically
when you are adding an order of magnitude of acid to it.
John 'Shaggy' Kolesar wrote:
> On 22 Jun 2006 12:28:19 -0700, <glapolla@gmail.com> wrote:
> > You can get it at http://morebeer.com/product.html?product_id=19873 It
> > will make your mash water 5.2 (or pretty close) no matter what.
>
> That's what their marketing department says. I'm sure it works assuming
> that your water starts out within a certain parameter range. Having
> one product that will adjust absolutely any starting water chemistry to
> one pH would be impossible.
>
>
> John.
|
| |
Date: 29 Jun 2006 22:13:56
From: Droopy
Subject: Re: measuring and adjusting ph
|
When you oversparge, the pH of the wort goes up, because there is no
more malt acidity to balance out the carbonate in the water.
If you have a lower OG beer, which uses less grain, itis easy to over
sparge. Chances are you will rinse all of the available sugar out of
the grainbed long before you have enough wort for the boil.
Stoutman wrote:
> >Low OG beers also tend to be easier to oversparge, which is another factor
> >related to pH.
>
> Huh???
>
>
> >
> >
> > John.
|
| | |
Date: 30 Jun 2006 12:08:10
From: Stoutman
Subject: Re: measuring and adjusting ph
|
"Droopy" <Droopy68516@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:1151644436.856869.216560@x69g2000cwx.googlegroups.com...
> When you oversparge, the pH of the wort goes up, because there is no
> more malt acidity to balance out the carbonate in the water.
>
Why would the pH go up if I sparge with water that is buffered (uh,
oh...there is that tricky word again) at pH 5.2?
This is the crux of this entire thread...
> If you have a lower OG beer, which uses less grain, itis easy to over
> sparge. Chances are you will rinse all of the available sugar out of
> the grainbed long before you have enough wort for the boil.
>
>
> Stoutman wrote:
>> >Low OG beers also tend to be easier to oversparge, which is another
>> >factor
>> >related to pH.
>>
>> Huh???
>>
>>
>> >
>> >
>> > John.
>
|
| | | |
Date: 30 Jun 2006 14:40:39
From: John 'Shaggy' Kolesar
Subject: Re: measuring and adjusting ph
|
On Fri, 30 Jun 2006 12:08:10 GMT, <.@. > wrote:
> This is the crux of this entire thread...
No, the real crux of this thread is that we are discussing water issues
with someone who may understand chemistry, but obviously has a very weak
understanding of how it applies to brewing.
John.
|
| | | | |
Date: 30 Jun 2006 16:29:16
From: Stoutman
Subject: Re: measuring and adjusting ph
|
"John 'Shaggy' Kolesar" <spam@shagg.net > wrote in message
news:slrneaae2l.vlb.spam@weizen.shagg.net...
> On Fri, 30 Jun 2006 12:08:10 GMT, <.@.> wrote:
>> This is the crux of this entire thread...
>
> No, the real crux of this thread is that we are discussing water issues
> with someone who may understand chemistry, but obviously has a very weak
> understanding of how it applies to brewing.
Really? You might know a lot about brewing, but your chemistry knowledge is
mediocre at best.
>
>
> John.
|
| | | |
Date: 30 Jun 2006 12:11:54
From: Stoutman
Subject: Re: measuring and adjusting ph
|
Crap, it doesn't even need to be buffered.
Just drop the pH of the sparge water to 5.2 with phosphoric acid.
Are we going in circles here?
|
| | | | |
Date: 30 Jun 2006 14:43:25
From: John 'Shaggy' Kolesar
Subject: Re: measuring and adjusting ph
|
On Fri, 30 Jun 2006 12:11:54 GMT, <.@. > wrote:
> Crap, it doesn't even need to be buffered.
>
> Just drop the pH of the sparge water to 5.2 with phosphoric acid.
Which is exactly what was said. What are you arguing with?
> Are we going in circles here?
The question is, how much of it is intentional?
John.
|
| | | | | |
Date: 30 Jun 2006 16:22:49
From: Stoutman
Subject: Re: measuring and adjusting ph
|
"John 'Shaggy' Kolesar" <spam@shagg.net > wrote in message
news:slrneaae7s.vlb.spam@weizen.shagg.net...
> On Fri, 30 Jun 2006 12:11:54 GMT, <.@.> wrote:
>> Crap, it doesn't even need to be buffered.
>>
>> Just drop the pH of the sparge water to 5.2 with phosphoric acid.
>
> Which is exactly what was said. What are you arguing with?
Boy, you really do have amnesia. First you say we dont need to lower
sparge water pH, now you agree we do? Do you remember writing this:
<SHAGGY QUOTE >
>Of course it will influence it, but if it never rises high enough to
>be a problem then you don't need to adjust anything. Just because the
>pH of tap water is 8 doesn't mean that you have to lower it in order
>to do a successfull sparge.
>> Are we going in circles here?
>
> The question is, how much of it is intentional?
YOU are talking in circles. Is it intentional?
>
>
> John.
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 30 Jun 2006 17:54:00
From: John 'Shaggy' Kolesar
Subject: Re: measuring and adjusting ph
|
On Fri, 30 Jun 2006 16:22:49 GMT, <.@. > wrote:
> Boy, you really do have amnesia. First you say we dont need to lower
> sparge water pH, now you agree we do? Do you remember writing this:
>
><SHAGGY QUOTE>
>>Of course it will influence it, but if it never rises high enough to
>>be a problem then you don't need to adjust anything. Just because the
>>pH of tap water is 8 doesn't mean that you have to lower it in order
>>to do a successfull sparge.
Regarding this quote, the specific case of sparging a low OG beer is one
time when the pH may actually rise high enough to be a problem, so you
would need to adjust the water. There is no contradiction between that
earlier quote and what I'm saying now.
John.
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 30 Jun 2006 17:50:51
From: John 'Shaggy' Kolesar
Subject: Re: measuring and adjusting ph
|
On Fri, 30 Jun 2006 16:22:49 GMT, <.@. > wrote:
>
> "John 'Shaggy' Kolesar" <spam@shagg.net> wrote in message
> news:slrneaae7s.vlb.spam@weizen.shagg.net...
>> On Fri, 30 Jun 2006 12:11:54 GMT, <.@.> wrote:
>>> Crap, it doesn't even need to be buffered.
>>>
>>> Just drop the pH of the sparge water to 5.2 with phosphoric acid.
>>
>> Which is exactly what was said. What are you arguing with?
>
> Boy, you really do have amnesia. First you say we dont need to lower
> sparge water pH, now you agree we do? Do you remember writing this:
This recent part of the thread, taken in context, was that someone was
having pH issues with their light pilsner/lager beers and that they found
that adjusting their sparge water on just those types of beers was
necessary. I responded that perhaps it was due to oversparging issues, which
are also related to pH. I believe your response was "huh?".
In the case of low OG beers, it may be necessary to adjust the pH of your
water because low OG beers are more prone to oversparging. In most beers
it will likely not be necessary.
John.
|
| | |
Date: 30 Jun 2006 05:26:51
From: Scott Sellers
Subject: Re: measuring and adjusting ph
|
Droopy <Droopy68516@yahoo.com >:
>When you oversparge, the pH of the wort goes up, because there
>is no more malt acidity to balance out the carbonate in the
>water.
>If you have a lower OG beer, which uses less grain, itis easy to
>over sparge. Chances are you will rinse all of the available
>sugar out of the grainbed long before you have enough wort for
>the boil.
Right. Which would be mitigated by the OPs acid addition to his
sparge water. Which was all made clear in the context Stoutman
snipped from his post.
Scott S
--
Scott Sellers
|
| |
Date: 30 Jun 2006 21:37:40
From: Droopy
Subject: Re: measuring and adjusting ph
|
At this point I am going to have to assume that english is not your
native language.
WHEN IT COMES TO WATER ANALYSIS....
Don't you understand that qualifier?
Stoutman wrote:
> "Droopy" <Droopy68516@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1151724514.160258.104060@h44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> > Well it is awfully convienient to read half a sentence isn't it?
> >
> > Again, my statement verbattim
> > "I am going to have to point out that with water analysis, akalinity is
> >
> > synonymous with buffering capacity. Akalinity when it comes to water
> > (municipal or otherwise) refers to the amount of
> > bicarbonate/bicarbonate hardness. "
> >
>
> Again,
> My dispute is with your statement: "akalinity is synonymous with
> buffering capacity." <---NOT TRUE
>
> See my other post for equations.
>
> Tell me how TA = B
>
>
>
>
> > Stoutman wrote:
> >> > On water reports alkalinity is a measurement of carbonate/bicarbonate
> >> > concentration.
> >>
> >>
> >> No argument there.
> >>
> >> My dispute is with your previous statement: "akalinity is synonymous with
> >> buffering capacity." <---NOT TRUE
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> >
> >> > Stoutman wrote:
> >> >> "Droopy" <Droopy68516@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> >> >> news:1151721355.058230.259980@75g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Stoutman wrote:
> >> >> >> Buffering and alkalinity are not synonymous and can NOT be used
> >> >> >> interchangeably as most seem to believe.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> > I am going to have to point out that with water analysis, akalinity
> >> >> > is
> >> >> > synonymous with buffering capacity.
> >> >>
> >> >> They are not the same. Do some more reading.
> >> >>
> >> >> I am done with this discussion.
> >> >>
> >> >> >Akalinity when it comes to water
> >> >> > (municipal or otherwise) refers to the amount of
> >> >> > bicarbonate/bicarbonate hardness.
> >> >> >
> >> >
> >
|
| | |
Date: 01 Jul 2006 04:44:51
From: Stoutman
Subject: Re: measuring and adjusting ph
|
"Droopy" <Droopy68516@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:1151728660.582191.54650@v61g2000cwv.googlegroups.com...
> At this point I am going to have to assume that english is not your
> native language.
>
>
> WHEN IT COMES TO WATER ANALYSIS....
>
> Don't you understand that qualifier?
The fact remains that akalinity is NOT synonymous with buffering capacity,
regardless of your qualifier.
At this point I am going to assume that chemistry is NOT your area of
expertise.
>
> Stoutman wrote:
>> "Droopy" <Droopy68516@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:1151724514.160258.104060@h44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>> > Well it is awfully convienient to read half a sentence isn't it?
>> >
>> > Again, my statement verbattim
>> > "I am going to have to point out that with water analysis, akalinity is
>> >
>> > synonymous with buffering capacity. Akalinity when it comes to water
>> > (municipal or otherwise) refers to the amount of
>> > bicarbonate/bicarbonate hardness. "
>> >
>>
>> Again,
>> My dispute is with your statement: "akalinity is synonymous with
>> buffering capacity." <---NOT TRUE
>>
>> See my other post for equations.
>>
>> Tell me how TA = B
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > Stoutman wrote:
>> >> > On water reports alkalinity is a measurement of
>> >> > carbonate/bicarbonate
>> >> > concentration.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> No argument there.
>> >>
>> >> My dispute is with your previous statement: "akalinity is synonymous
>> >> with
>> >> buffering capacity." <---NOT TRUE
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> >
>> >> > Stoutman wrote:
>> >> >> "Droopy" <Droopy68516@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> >> >> news:1151721355.058230.259980@75g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Stoutman wrote:
>> >> >> >> Buffering and alkalinity are not synonymous and can NOT be used
>> >> >> >> interchangeably as most seem to believe.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > I am going to have to point out that with water analysis,
>> >> >> > akalinity
>> >> >> > is
>> >> >> > synonymous with buffering capacity.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> They are not the same. Do some more reading.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> I am done with this discussion.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> >Akalinity when it comes to water
>> >> >> > (municipal or otherwise) refers to the amount of
>> >> >> > bicarbonate/bicarbonate hardness.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >
>> >
>
|
| |
Date: 30 Jun 2006 21:35:25
From: Droopy
Subject: Re: measuring and adjusting ph
|
John 'Shaggy' Kolesar wrote:
> On Fri, 30 Jun 2006 16:16:16 GMT, <.@.> wrote:
> > I dont even think YOU understand YOUR argument on this topic.
>
> My argument, consistent from the beginning, is that you cannot make the
> claim that this product will adjust the pH to 5.2 for any starting water
> condition. Note, I do not say anything about the starting pH of the
> water, which does not matter (even though you keep focusing on this).
To be fair, the product says that it will adjust the pH to 5.2 no
matter what the pH of "your water" is.
To make that claim they could (and should) have tested their product
against a range of water conditions that are normally found naturally.
I am sure if you spike your water with some lye then the stuff will not
work properly. But if your water has a naturaly alkalinity of anywhere
upwards of 300 ppm of bicarbonate it will work fine.
Of course, when it comes down to it I think it is completely unecessary
as you do. if you want to make hard water softer for brewing light
lagers it is just as easy to add some calcium chloride, or some other
calcium salt to precipitate out the bicarbonate. it would be a lot
cheaper in the long run as well.
|
| |
Date: 30 Jun 2006 21:24:08
From: Droopy
Subject: Re: measuring and adjusting ph
|
Why are you intentionally nitpicking posts?
I first called it the bicarbonate system, I think it is abundantly
clear by now that everyone is refering to the carbonate/bicarbonate
buffering system that is normally around 7.5 in tap water.
I was shorthanding everything to bicarbonate becasue it is the most
prevalent species found in most water. At pH < 8 you will have very
little carbonate, which is why I say that at 7.5 the
carbonate/bicarbonate buffer system sucks, you are already near the
bottom of the titration curve. So it really does not matter how much
bicarbonate you have in the water, if your pH is below 7.5 you really
do not have a high buffering capacity.
The buffering capacity of the bicarbonate/carbonate system really comes
into play at around 8.6 That is about where it is at its max for
changes in both directions. As one posted said he had a water pH of 9
something. now either he has a TON of hydroxide in his water and a
high carbonate content, or he has very weakly buffered water.
And that is where Johns point came in, what if someone has a high pH
and a high buffering capacity due to carbonate/bicarbonate. Will the
magic powder still bring the pH down?
I say yes. there coudl be some sort of bicarbonate.carbonate scavenger
in there....but I do not think so. I think there is just a LOT of
buffer salt. A high amount of bicarbonate in water is like 300 ppm.
That is only 5 milliequilivants of bicarbonate. If the salt you were
adding was monobasic potassium phosphate you would get 11
milliequilivants added. I am also betting that there is some
polyphosphoric acid salt in that stuff which would give it an even
greater buffering capacity (since there is no counter ion to mess
with).
now I said it before, phosphate is a terrible buffer at pH 5.2.
Phosphate has its strongest buffering points at about 2, 7 and 13.
Stoutman wrote:
> >
> > I still think that you would add enough buffer salt anyway to
> > outcompete the bicarbonate system anyway. Like i said, bicarbonate is
> > pretty rotten buffer system, espically at 7.5. It is not all that
> > strong.
>
> How is bicarbonate by itself a "buffer system"? And how would you define a
> "buffer system"?
>
>
> >
> >
> >
> > John 'Shaggy' Kolesar wrote:
> >> On 22 Jun 2006 12:28:19 -0700, <glapolla@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > You can get it at http://morebeer.com/product.html?product_id=19873 It
> >> > will make your mash water 5.2 (or pretty close) no matter what.
> >>
> >> That's what their marketing department says. I'm sure it works assuming
> >> that your water starts out within a certain parameter range. Having
> >> one product that will adjust absolutely any starting water chemistry to
> >> one pH would be impossible.
> >>
> >>
> >> John.
> >
|
| | |
Date: 01 Jul 2006 05:06:11
From: Stoutman
Subject: Re: measuring and adjusting ph
|
> The buffering capacity of the bicarbonate/carbonate system really comes
> into play at around 8.6 That is about where it is at its max for
> changes in both directions. As one posted said he had a water pH of 9
> something. now either he has a TON of hydroxide in his water and a
> high carbonate content, or he has very weakly buffered water.
If he has a pH of 9 don't we know how much hydroxide ion is present? I
think it can be calculated from the pH "or something" (1X10-5 M).
Why would a pH of 9 indicate "weakly buffered water"? It doesn't
>
> And that is where Johns point came in, what if someone has a high pH
> and a high buffering capacity due to carbonate/bicarbonate. Will the
> magic powder still bring the pH down?
>
> I say yes. there coudl be some sort of bicarbonate.carbonate scavenger
> in there....but I do not think so.
Can you think of a bicarbonate.carbonate scavenger that would be possible
for this application?
>I think there is just a LOT of buffer salt. A high amount of bicarbonate
>in water is like 300 ppm.
> That is only 5 milliequilivants of bicarbonate. If the salt you were
> adding was monobasic potassium phosphate you would get 11
> milliequilivants added. I am also betting that there is some
> polyphosphoric acid salt in that stuff which would give it an even
> greater buffering capacity (since there is no counter ion to mess
> with).
>
> now I said it before, phosphate is a terrible buffer at pH 5.2.
> Phosphate has its strongest buffering points at about 2, 7 and 13.
>
> Stoutman wrote:
>> >
>> > I still think that you would add enough buffer salt anyway to
>> > outcompete the bicarbonate system anyway. Like i said, bicarbonate is
>> > pretty rotten buffer system, espically at 7.5. It is not all that
>> > strong.
>>
>> How is bicarbonate by itself a "buffer system"? And how would you
>> define a
>> "buffer system"?
>>
>>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > John 'Shaggy' Kolesar wrote:
>> >> On 22 Jun 2006 12:28:19 -0700, <glapolla@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> > You can get it at http://morebeer.com/product.html?product_id=19873
>> >> > It
>> >> > will make your mash water 5.2 (or pretty close) no matter what.
>> >>
>> >> That's what their marketing department says. I'm sure it works
>> >> assuming
>> >> that your water starts out within a certain parameter range. Having
>> >> one product that will adjust absolutely any starting water chemistry
>> >> to
>> >> one pH would be impossible.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> John.
>> >
>
|
| |
Date: 30 Jun 2006 20:28:34
From: Droopy
Subject: Re: measuring and adjusting ph
|
Well it is awfully convienient to read half a sentence isn't it?
Again, my statement verbattim
"I am going to have to point out that with water analysis, akalinity is
synonymous with buffering capacity. Akalinity when it comes to water
(municipal or otherwise) refers to the amount of
bicarbonate/bicarbonate hardness. "
Stoutman wrote:
> > On water reports alkalinity is a measurement of carbonate/bicarbonate
> > concentration.
>
>
> No argument there.
>
> My dispute is with your previous statement: "akalinity is synonymous with
> buffering capacity." <---NOT TRUE
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >
> > Stoutman wrote:
> >> "Droopy" <Droopy68516@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> >> news:1151721355.058230.259980@75g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> >> >
> >> > Stoutman wrote:
> >> >> Buffering and alkalinity are not synonymous and can NOT be used
> >> >> interchangeably as most seem to believe.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > I am going to have to point out that with water analysis, akalinity is
> >> > synonymous with buffering capacity.
> >>
> >> They are not the same. Do some more reading.
> >>
> >> I am done with this discussion.
> >>
> >> >Akalinity when it comes to water
> >> > (municipal or otherwise) refers to the amount of
> >> > bicarbonate/bicarbonate hardness.
> >> >
> >
|
| | |
Date: 01 Jul 2006 03:32:58
From: Stoutman
Subject: Re: measuring and adjusting ph
|
"Droopy" <Droopy68516@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:1151724514.160258.104060@h44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> Well it is awfully convienient to read half a sentence isn't it?
>
> Again, my statement verbattim
> "I am going to have to point out that with water analysis, akalinity is
>
> synonymous with buffering capacity. Akalinity when it comes to water
> (municipal or otherwise) refers to the amount of
> bicarbonate/bicarbonate hardness. "
>
Again,
My dispute is with your statement: "akalinity is synonymous with
buffering capacity." <---NOT TRUE
See my other post for equations.
Tell me how TA = B
> Stoutman wrote:
>> > On water reports alkalinity is a measurement of carbonate/bicarbonate
>> > concentration.
>>
>>
>> No argument there.
>>
>> My dispute is with your previous statement: "akalinity is synonymous with
>> buffering capacity." <---NOT TRUE
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> >
>> > Stoutman wrote:
>> >> "Droopy" <Droopy68516@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> >> news:1151721355.058230.259980@75g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>> >> >
>> >> > Stoutman wrote:
>> >> >> Buffering and alkalinity are not synonymous and can NOT be used
>> >> >> interchangeably as most seem to believe.
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > I am going to have to point out that with water analysis, akalinity
>> >> > is
>> >> > synonymous with buffering capacity.
>> >>
>> >> They are not the same. Do some more reading.
>> >>
>> >> I am done with this discussion.
>> >>
>> >> >Akalinity when it comes to water
>> >> > (municipal or otherwise) refers to the amount of
>> >> > bicarbonate/bicarbonate hardness.
>> >> >
>> >
>
|
| | |
Date: 01 Jul 2006 03:37:13
From: Stoutman
Subject: Re: measuring and adjusting ph
|
"Droopy" <Droopy68516@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:1151724514.160258.104060@h44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> Well it is awfully convienient to read half a sentence isn't it?
>
> Again, my statement verbattim
> "I am going to have to point out that with water analysis, akalinity is
>
> synonymous with buffering capacity. Akalinity when it comes to water
> (municipal or otherwise) refers to the amount of
> bicarbonate/bicarbonate hardness. "
Again,
My dispute is with your statement: "akalinity is synonymous with
buffering capacity." <---NOT TRUE
See my other post for equations.
Tell me how TA (total alkalinity) = B (buffering capacity)
>
> Stoutman wrote:
>> > On water reports alkalinity is a measurement of carbonate/bicarbonate
>> > concentration.
>>
>>
>> No argument there.
>>
>> My dispute is with your previous statement: "akalinity is synonymous with
>> buffering capacity." <---NOT TRUE
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> >
>> > Stoutman wrote:
>> >> "Droopy" <Droopy68516@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> >> news:1151721355.058230.259980@75g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>> >> >
>> >> > Stoutman wrote:
>> >> >> Buffering and alkalinity are not synonymous and can NOT be used
>> >> >> interchangeably as most seem to believe.
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > I am going to have to point out that with water analysis, akalinity
>> >> > is
>> >> > synonymous with buffering capacity.
>> >>
>> >> They are not the same. Do some more reading.
>> >>
>> >> I am done with this discussion.
>> >>
>> >> >Akalinity when it comes to water
>> >> > (municipal or otherwise) refers to the amount of
>> >> > bicarbonate/bicarbonate hardness.
>> >> >
>> >
>
|
| |
Date: 30 Jun 2006 20:06:13
From: Droopy
Subject: Re: measuring and adjusting ph
|
On further thought, there is one easy way to make this happen. Remove
the bicarbonate so there is nothing to compete with the phosphate
buffer system.
At first I was thinking of calcium salts to reduce bicarbonate, but
that will not work because calcium will also precipitate phosphate.
Then I thought about the distilled water system at work. they use a
tertiary amine to pretreat water to remove bicarbonate (as well as
silicates and sulfates( I think... I could be wrong on teh last one).
You can also add some other nitrogen compound....I can't remember what
it is.
I still think that you would add enough buffer salt anyway to
outcompete the bicarbonate system anyway. Like i said, bicarbonate is
pretty rotten buffer system, espically at 7.5. It is not all that
strong.
John 'Shaggy' Kolesar wrote:
> On 22 Jun 2006 12:28:19 -0700, <glapolla@gmail.com> wrote:
> > You can get it at http://morebeer.com/product.html?product_id=19873 It
> > will make your mash water 5.2 (or pretty close) no matter what.
>
> That's what their marketing department says. I'm sure it works assuming
> that your water starts out within a certain parameter range. Having
> one product that will adjust absolutely any starting water chemistry to
> one pH would be impossible.
>
>
> John.
|
| | |
Date: 01 Jul 2006 03:24:31
From: Stoutman
Subject: Re: measuring and adjusting ph
|
>
> I still think that you would add enough buffer salt anyway to
> outcompete the bicarbonate system anyway. Like i said, bicarbonate is
> pretty rotten buffer system, espically at 7.5. It is not all that
> strong.
How is bicarbonate by itself a "buffer system"? And how would you define a
"buffer system"?
>
>
>
> John 'Shaggy' Kolesar wrote:
>> On 22 Jun 2006 12:28:19 -0700, <glapolla@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > You can get it at http://morebeer.com/product.html?product_id=19873 It
>> > will make your mash water 5.2 (or pretty close) no matter what.
>>
>> That's what their marketing department says. I'm sure it works assuming
>> that your water starts out within a certain parameter range. Having
>> one product that will adjust absolutely any starting water chemistry to
>> one pH would be impossible.
>>
>>
>> John.
>
|
| |
Date: 30 Jun 2006 20:01:15
From: Droopy
Subject: Re: measuring and adjusting ph
|
You know, i am a chemist.
Alakinity to a chemist is must different than akalinity to a water
scientist.
Maybe you need to do a bit more reading..
http://www.howtobrew.com/section3/chapter15-1.html
http://www.ces.ncsu.edu/depts/hort/hil/hil-558.html
http://www.ashchem.com/ascc/drewmar/pdfs/PHAlkalinity.pdf
On water reports alkalinity is a measurement of carbonate/bicarbonate
concentration.
Stoutman wrote:
> "Droopy" <Droopy68516@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1151721355.058230.259980@75g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> >
> > Stoutman wrote:
> >> Buffering and alkalinity are not synonymous and can NOT be used
> >> interchangeably as most seem to believe.
> >
> >
> > I am going to have to point out that with water analysis, akalinity is
> > synonymous with buffering capacity.
>
> They are not the same. Do some more reading.
>
> I am done with this discussion.
>
> >Akalinity when it comes to water
> > (municipal or otherwise) refers to the amount of
> > bicarbonate/bicarbonate hardness.
> >
|
| | |
Date: 01 Jul 2006 03:21:53
From: Stoutman
Subject: Re: measuring and adjusting ph
|
Alkalinity = TA = [HCO3-] + 2[CO3--] + [B(OH)4-] + [OH-] + [Si(OH)3O-] +
[MgOH+] + [HPO4--] + 2[PO4---] - [H+]
Alkalinity is the total concentration of alkaline components in solution.
The buffering capacity of water is the ability to resist sharp changes in pH
as acid or base is added. Composed of a weak acid and the conjugate base
of the weak acid.
defined by: B (Buffering Capacity) = dCb / dpH
See: http://www.utmem.edu/physpharm/.015.html
|
| | |
Date: 01 Jul 2006 03:12:30
From: Stoutman
Subject: Re: measuring and adjusting ph
|
> On water reports alkalinity is a measurement of carbonate/bicarbonate
> concentration.
No argument there.
My dispute is with your previous statement: "akalinity is synonymous with
buffering capacity." <---NOT TRUE
>
> Stoutman wrote:
>> "Droopy" <Droopy68516@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:1151721355.058230.259980@75g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>> >
>> > Stoutman wrote:
>> >> Buffering and alkalinity are not synonymous and can NOT be used
>> >> interchangeably as most seem to believe.
>> >
>> >
>> > I am going to have to point out that with water analysis, akalinity is
>> > synonymous with buffering capacity.
>>
>> They are not the same. Do some more reading.
>>
>> I am done with this discussion.
>>
>> >Akalinity when it comes to water
>> > (municipal or otherwise) refers to the amount of
>> > bicarbonate/bicarbonate hardness.
>> >
>
|
| |
Date: 30 Jun 2006 19:37:59
From: Droopy
Subject: Re: measuring and adjusting ph
|
I did not see that. Here is the post I replied to verbatim
From: Stoutman - view profile
Date: Thurs, Jun 29 2006 8:07 pm
Email: "Stoutman" <.@. >
Groups: rec.crafts.brewing
Not yet ratedRating:
show options
Reply
|
| |
Date: 30 Jun 2006 19:35:55
From: Droopy
Subject: Re: measuring and adjusting ph
|
Stoutman wrote:
> Buffering and alkalinity are not synonymous and can NOT be used
> interchangeably as most seem to believe.
I am going to have to point out that with water analysis, akalinity is
synonymous with buffering capacity. Akalinity when it comes to water
(municipal or otherwise) refers to the amount of
bicarbonate/bicarbonate hardness.
|
| | |
Date: 01 Jul 2006 02:42:00
From: Stoutman
Subject: Re: measuring and adjusting ph
|
"Droopy" <Droopy68516@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:1151721355.058230.259980@75g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>
> Stoutman wrote:
>> Buffering and alkalinity are not synonymous and can NOT be used
>> interchangeably as most seem to believe.
>
>
> I am going to have to point out that with water analysis, akalinity is
> synonymous with buffering capacity.
They are not the same. Do some more reading.
I am done with this discussion.
>Akalinity when it comes to water
> (municipal or otherwise) refers to the amount of
> bicarbonate/bicarbonate hardness.
>
|
| | |
Date: 02 Jul 2006 05:28:16
From: John 'Shaggy' Kolesar
Subject: Re: measuring and adjusting ph
|
On 30 Jun 2006 19:35:55 -0700, <Droopy68516@yahoo.com > wrote:
>
> Stoutman wrote:
>> Buffering and alkalinity are not synonymous and can NOT be used
>> interchangeably as most seem to believe.
>
>
> I am going to have to point out that with water analysis, akalinity is
> synonymous with buffering capacity. Akalinity when it comes to water
> (municipal or otherwise) refers to the amount of
> bicarbonate/bicarbonate hardness.
Stoutman is just trolling. He knows perfectly well what the difference
is between buffering and alkalinity, and that in the context of beer
brewing all we really care about is acid buffering, which is essentially
what alkalinity does. At this point, because he has absolutely no useful
contribution to make to the group (did he ever?), he is just arguing
semantics in order to keep trolling.
John.
|
| | | |
Date: 02 Jul 2006 15:16:40
From: Stoutman
Subject: Re: measuring and adjusting ph
|
"John 'Shaggy' Kolesar" <spam@shagg.net > wrote in message
news:slrneaemf1.2o0.spam@weizen.shagg.net...
> On 30 Jun 2006 19:35:55 -0700, <Droopy68516@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>> Stoutman wrote:
>>> Buffering and alkalinity are not synonymous and can NOT be used
>>> interchangeably as most seem to believe.
>>
>>
>> I am going to have to point out that with water analysis, akalinity is
>> synonymous with buffering capacity. Akalinity when it comes to water
>> (municipal or otherwise) refers to the amount of
>> bicarbonate/bicarbonate hardness.
>
> Stoutman is just trolling. He knows perfectly well what the difference
> is between buffering and alkalinity,
(I separated your run-on sentence for simplicity)
That's just it 'I' know what the difference is. 'YOU' think they are
synonymous. They are not. I am not sure how else to dumb this down for
you.
Alkalinity = TA = [HCO3-] + 2[CO3--] + [B(OH)4-] + [OH-] + [Si(OH)3O-] +
[MgOH+] + [HPO4--] + 2[PO4---] - [H+]
Alkalinity is the total concentration of alkaline components in solution.
The BUFFERING CAPACITY of water is the ability to resist sharp changes in pH
as acid or base is added. Composed of a weak acid and the conjugate base
of the weak acid.
defined by: B (Buffering Capacity) = dn / dpH
Where n is number of equivalents of strong base or strong acid added. dpH
is the change in pH
TELL ME HOW B = TA ???????? You seem to have blinders on when it comes
to these equations.
It's unfortinate, but if you knew even the basics of chemistry you would
realize I am not trolling.
You DON'T understand, therefore 'I' am a Troll.
|
| |
Date: 02 Jul 2006 19:47:27
From: Droopy
Subject: Re: measuring and adjusting ph
|
I do work in the analytical department. But even there when it is not
significant it is not significant and we do not fart with it.
But this is not the pharmaceutical group. This is the beer brewing
group.
And the only thing in water that really matters to brewing chemisty in
this context is bicarbonate/carbonate, even hydroxide is insignificant
in brewing. I pointed out that even though there are otehr components
that affect the alkalinity of water they can be and are pretty much
ignored in brewing and drinking water analysis.
I am sorry that it is not more complex than that. I am sorry that
people do not need a PhD to brew beer and I am sorry that this is going
to be the end of the circus. You can continue to post all you want.
You already said that you were done with this topic once and then kept
posting. And you were the one that asked if any other chemists wanted
to weigh in. Maybe next time you should ask for a rubber stamp
instead.
Stoutman wrote:
> "Droopy" <Droopy68516@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1151891748.710850.93830@h44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> >I am perfectly aware of all of that.
>
> OK, forgive me, I need a clarifier here. You are perfectly aware of what?
>
>
> >
> > But ALL ALKALINE COMPONENTS are irrelevant as i pointed out several
> > times.
> >
> > the contribution of silicates, hydroxides, phosphates and the like
> > really do not matter when compared to the concentration of
> > bicarbonates.
>
> Just because you think "they don't matter" doesn't make TA = BC.
>
> >
> > Maybe you have heard of significance? Maybe you should stop ignoring
> > it.
>
> Even if you regard the other alkaline components as less significant this
> still DOES NOT make TA = BC.
>
> >
> > Now why don't you think of another half dozen insults to show us all
> > how smart you are.
>
> So when are you going to tell me you work in the analytical department at
> the pharmaceutical company?
>
>
> >
> > Stoutman wrote:
> >> Here they are again Mr. Chemist:
> >>
> >> Alkalinity = TA = [HCO3-] + 2[CO3--] + [B(OH)4-] + [OH-] + - [H+]
> >>
> >> Alkalinity is the total concentration of alkaline components in solution
> >> (Not Just the ones that are in the greatest concentration, ALL ALKALINE
> >> COMPONENTS).
> >>
> >> The buffering capacity of water is the ability to resist sharp changes in
> >> pH
> >> as acid or base is added. Composed of a weak acid and the conjugate
> >> base
> >> of the weak acid.
> >>
> >> BC (Buffering Capacity) = dn / dpH
> >>
> >> Where n is number of equivalents of strong base or strong acid added.
> >> dpH
> >> is the change in pH
> >>
> >>
> >> How does BC = TA.
> >
|
| | |
Date: 03 Jul 2006 03:15:09
From: Stoutman
Subject: Re: measuring and adjusting ph
|
"Droopy" <Droopy68516@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:1151894847.339342.271700@a14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>I do work in the analytical department. But even there when it is not
> significant it is not significant and we do not fart with it.
>
> But this is not the pharmaceutical group. This is the beer brewing
> group.
>
Science is Science. Alkalinity is Alkalinity and Buffering Capacity is
Buffering Capacity. This applies to brewing beer, making wine, marine
science or anything that has to do with water.
> And the only thing in water that really matters to brewing chemisty in
> this context is bicarbonate/carbonate, even hydroxide is insignificant
> in brewing.
Here is where you keep screwing up. What do you think happens to the
hydroxide ion concentration when you add carbonate to water? It goes UP.
Therefore it DOES matter.
CO3-- + H2O ----- > HCO3- + OH-
How does hydroxide NOT matter. You are really confused.
> I pointed out that even though there are otehr components
> that affect the alkalinity of water they can be and are pretty much
> ignored in brewing and drinking water analysis.
You still can NOT say that BC = TA.
If I have a glass of water (distilled) and add NaOH. I will increase the
alkalinity of the solution (pH will go up).
Do I have a buffer? Do I have any buffering capacity? NO and NO.
Buffering capacity and Alkalinity are NOT synonymous PERIOD. In brewing, in
wine making in marine science, in archery.
You have FAILED miserably to support your claim that TA = BC. You'r a
chemist??
When you said you were a chemist early in the thread I pictured you as a
little guy standning on a chair in front of a large group of people twirling
his long handle bar mustache.
Next time bring your A-game.
> I am sorry that it is not more complex than that.
I'm sorry I was unable to help you (not really).
> I am sorry that
> people do not need a PhD to brew beer and I am sorry that this is going
> to be the end of the circus. You can continue to post all you want.
> You already said that you were done with this topic once and then kept
> posting. And you were the one that asked if any other chemists wanted
> to weigh in. Maybe next time you should ask for a rubber stamp
> instead.
I wanted the input of INTELLIGENT chemists. Sorry, you don't apply.
|
| |
Date: 02 Jul 2006 18:55:48
From: Droopy
Subject: Re: measuring and adjusting ph
|
I am perfectly aware of all of that.
But ALL ALKALINE COMPONENTS are irrelevant as i pointed out several
times.
the contribution of silicates, hydroxides, phosphates and the like
really do not matter when compared to the concentration of
bicarbonates.
Maybe you have heard of significance? Maybe you should stop ignoring
it.
Now why don't you think of another half dozen insults to show us all
how smart you are.
Stoutman wrote:
> Here they are again Mr. Chemist:
>
> Alkalinity = TA = [HCO3-] + 2[CO3--] + [B(OH)4-] + [OH-] + - [H+]
>
> Alkalinity is the total concentration of alkaline components in solution
> (Not Just the ones that are in the greatest concentration, ALL ALKALINE
> COMPONENTS).
>
> The buffering capacity of water is the ability to resist sharp changes in pH
> as acid or base is added. Composed of a weak acid and the conjugate base
> of the weak acid.
>
> BC (Buffering Capacity) = dn / dpH
>
> Where n is number of equivalents of strong base or strong acid added. dpH
> is the change in pH
>
>
> How does BC = TA.
|
| | |
Date: 03 Jul 2006 02:09:13
From: Stoutman
Subject: Re: measuring and adjusting ph
|
"Droopy" <Droopy68516@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:1151891748.710850.93830@h44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>I am perfectly aware of all of that.
OK, forgive me, I need a clarifier here. You are perfectly aware of what?
>
> But ALL ALKALINE COMPONENTS are irrelevant as i pointed out several
> times.
>
> the contribution of silicates, hydroxides, phosphates and the like
> really do not matter when compared to the concentration of
> bicarbonates.
Just because you think "they don't matter" doesn't make TA = BC.
>
> Maybe you have heard of significance? Maybe you should stop ignoring
> it.
Even if you regard the other alkaline components as less significant this
still DOES NOT make TA = BC.
>
> Now why don't you think of another half dozen insults to show us all
> how smart you are.
So when are you going to tell me you work in the analytical department at
the pharmaceutical company?
>
> Stoutman wrote:
>> Here they are again Mr. Chemist:
>>
>> Alkalinity = TA = [HCO3-] + 2[CO3--] + [B(OH)4-] + [OH-] + - [H+]
>>
>> Alkalinity is the total concentration of alkaline components in solution
>> (Not Just the ones that are in the greatest concentration, ALL ALKALINE
>> COMPONENTS).
>>
>> The buffering capacity of water is the ability to resist sharp changes in
>> pH
>> as acid or base is added. Composed of a weak acid and the conjugate
>> base
>> of the weak acid.
>>
>> BC (Buffering Capacity) = dn / dpH
>>
>> Where n is number of equivalents of strong base or strong acid added.
>> dpH
>> is the change in pH
>>
>>
>> How does BC = TA.
>
|
| |
Date: 02 Jul 2006 17:49:34
From: Droopy
Subject: Re: measuring and adjusting ph
|
Stoutman wrote:
> "Droopy" <Droopy68516@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1151865122.623161.284360@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com...
> This is exactly what YOU did. You started off by telling me you were a
> CHEMIST. 'YOU' were the one that set yourself up as the authority and then
> slowly started to realize you were in over your head.
>
> Do you remember shouting "You know, i am a chemist. Alakinity to a chemist
> is must different ..."?
>
> So Mr. Chemist, POT KETTLE BLACK!!!
Well on June 30 at 11:29 am you told John that his chemisty knowledge
was terrible, I responded at 10:00 pm that I was a chemist and agreed
with John that you were being a idiot.
Then you came back and said that I also did not know anything about
chemisty.
Well I obviously know enough that they let me make pharmaceuticals.
> > >with ad hominem attacts (the claims that
> > nobody understands chemisty but you) and then you top it off with a red
> > herring, by switching the subject from brewing (tap) water chemistry to
> > analytical water chemisty, which has its place, but 5 decimal place
> > accuracy is not all that important to brewing chemistry.
>
> Thank you Straw Man.
>
> Hey Straw Man. Why don't you stop grasping at straws and remove your
> blinders and re-read my previous post.
>
> Come back again and tell me how "buffering capacity" is synonymous with
> "alkalinity". This time come back using science, not anecdotes of variuos
> water reports you have seen.
Why don't you just call me Hitler and get it over with.
|
| | |
Date: 03 Jul 2006 01:15:02
From: Stoutman
Subject: Re: measuring and adjusting ph
|
>> So Mr. Chemist, POT KETTLE BLACK!!!
>
>
> Well on June 30 at 11:29 am you told John that his chemisty knowledge
> was terrible, I responded at 10:00 pm that I was a chemist and agreed
> with John that you were being a idiot.
You are still the Pot calling the Kettle Black, and now you sound like a
10-year old.
> Then you came back and said that I also did not know anything about
> chemisty.
> Well I obviously know enough that they let me make pharmaceuticals.
Really? They let YOU in a lab, around dangerous solvents and chemicals.
Uggg scary. I also work in a lab making pharmaceuticals (Ph.D.) and we can
play who has the bigger round bottom flask all day long, but ...
When you go back in the lab on Wed, look up in Beilstein or SciFinder how to
make holoperidol. Start the synthesis and when you are finished start self
medicating asap.
Why don't you just end this. If you really are the great chemist you say
you are then, use some SCIENCE and tell me how TA = BC. Use equations and
LOGIC.
Try and convince me using SCIENCE. You won't convince me because they are
NOT equivalent, but you can amuse me nonetheless.
Why do you continue to ignore the equations I showed for BC and TA?
|
| | | |
Date: 03 Jul 2006 01:37:53
From: Stoutman
Subject: Re: measuring and adjusting ph
|
Here they are again Mr. Chemist:
Alkalinity = TA = [HCO3-] + 2[CO3--] + [B(OH)4-] + [OH-] + - [H+]
Alkalinity is the total concentration of alkaline components in solution
(Not Just the ones that are in the greatest concentration, ALL ALKALINE
COMPONENTS).
The buffering capacity of water is the ability to resist sharp changes in pH
as acid or base is added. Composed of a weak acid and the conjugate base
of the weak acid.
BC (Buffering Capacity) = dn / dpH
Where n is number of equivalents of strong base or strong acid added. dpH
is the change in pH
How does BC = TA.
|
| |
Date: 02 Jul 2006 11:32:02
From: Droopy
Subject: Re: measuring and adjusting ph
|
Yes, but NONE of that is taken into account when it comes to water
analysis or brewing chemisty.
There, just like it is written on every water report akalinity is
equilivant to the bicarbonate ppm.
The reason for that is that the contributions of siicates, hydroxides
and phosphates in drinking water are minor in comparison to that of
bicarbonates.
See what you are doing is called an "appeal to authority" where you set
yourself up as the authority with ad hominem attacts (the claims that
nobody understands chemisty but you) and then you top it off with a red
herring, by switching the subject from brewing (tap) water chemistry to
analytical water chemisty, which has its place, but 5 decimal place
accuracy is not all that important to brewing chemistry.
Stoutman wrote:
> "John 'Shaggy' Kolesar" <spam@shagg.net> wrote in message
> news:slrneaemf1.2o0.spam@weizen.shagg.net...
> > On 30 Jun 2006 19:35:55 -0700, <Droopy68516@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Stoutman wrote:
> >>> Buffering and alkalinity are not synonymous and can NOT be used
> >>> interchangeably as most seem to believe.
> >>
> >>
> >> I am going to have to point out that with water analysis, akalinity is
> >> synonymous with buffering capacity. Akalinity when it comes to water
> >> (municipal or otherwise) refers to the amount of
> >> bicarbonate/bicarbonate hardness.
> >
> > Stoutman is just trolling. He knows perfectly well what the difference
> > is between buffering and alkalinity,
>
> (I separated your run-on sentence for simplicity)
>
> That's just it 'I' know what the difference is. 'YOU' think they are
> synonymous. They are not. I am not sure how else to dumb this down for
> you.
>
> Alkalinity = TA = [HCO3-] + 2[CO3--] + [B(OH)4-] + [OH-] + [Si(OH)3O-] +
> [MgOH+] + [HPO4--] + 2[PO4---] - [H+]
>
> Alkalinity is the total concentration of alkaline components in solution.
>
> The BUFFERING CAPACITY of water is the ability to resist sharp changes in pH
> as acid or base is added. Composed of a weak acid and the conjugate base
> of the weak acid.
> defined by: B (Buffering Capacity) = dn / dpH
> Where n is number of equivalents of strong base or strong acid added. dpH
> is the change in pH
>
> TELL ME HOW B = TA ???????? You seem to have blinders on when it comes
> to these equations.
>
> It's unfortinate, but if you knew even the basics of chemistry you would
> realize I am not trolling.
>
> You DON'T understand, therefore 'I' am a Troll.
|
| | |
Date: 02 Jul 2006 20:49:37
From: Stoutman
Subject: Re: measuring and adjusting ph
|
"Droopy" <Droopy68516@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:1151865122.623161.284360@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com...
> Yes, but NONE of that is taken into account when it comes to water
> analysis or brewing chemisty.
>
> There, just like it is written on every water report akalinity is
> equilivant to the bicarbonate ppm.
>
EVERY water report?? Really? Are you sure about that? Have you personally
seen EVERY water report? You are a busy man.
> The reason for that is that the contributions of siicates, hydroxides
> and phosphates in drinking water are minor in comparison to that of
> bicarbonates.
For your water in your city? What about my water? or Joe's water or Fred's
water?
>
> See what you are doing is called an "appeal to authority" where you set
> yourself up as the authority
This is exactly what YOU did. You started off by telling me you were a
CHEMIST. 'YOU' were the one that set yourself up as the authority and then
slowly started to realize you were in over your head.
Do you remember shouting "You know, i am a chemist. Alakinity to a chemist
is must different ..."?
So Mr. Chemist, POT KETTLE BLACK!!!
>with ad hominem attacts (the claims that
> nobody understands chemisty but you) and then you top it off with a red
> herring, by switching the subject from brewing (tap) water chemistry to
> analytical water chemisty, which has its place, but 5 decimal place
> accuracy is not all that important to brewing chemistry.
Thank you Straw Man.
Hey Straw Man. Why don't you stop grasping at straws and remove your
blinders and re-read my previous post.
Come back again and tell me how "buffering capacity" is synonymous with
"alkalinity". This time come back using science, not anecdotes of variuos
water reports you have seen.
|
|
