Quick and Dirty: "Historical" Guinness hardness?, my water 291 HCO3/239 Alkalinity?

[Gadjobrinus]

Knocking off a quick batch of Guinness per my son's request with the 70:20:10 (MO:flaked barley:roast barley 550L) mash. I've seen two main houses of opinions as to water used; I'd prefer to go with the moderately hard water that was from the Grand Canal, per commentary by @cire.
Sorry, lazy request. Just looking for this older Guinness mineral content, and some suggestions as to mash and sparge water given my water. I have lots to catch up on (I mean, brewing science, even rudimentary stuff as I've forgotten everything) and wanted to get this beer going for him on a winter storm tomorrow.

Please note I won't be doing any sour-blending or the like. Just a dry stout with some qualities shared with draft Guinness.

Here's my water.

Ca: 69.8
Mg: 42.0
Na: 49.0
HCO3: 291.0
SO4: 25.0
Cl: 92.0
Alkalinity as CaCO3: 239

For the mash, I was thinking of doing nothing but adding in some gypsum to get SO4 and Cl at rough equity.

For the sparge, I was thinking of doing 50:50 my water and RO, then just using lactic 88% to get the pH down to 5.7. Any lactic "bite" would just be a bit of a cheat on the Guinness tang (don't think there would be any lactic bite, after the dilution, given the amount needed).

Thoughts?

 

[cire]

It's quite a while since I last brewed Guinness to the well accepted 70:20:10 ratio, but always have a stiff mash with alkalinity preadjusted to between 70 and 100 ppm as CaCO3 using hydrochloric acid. Mash pH usually stabilizes near 5.3 and the acid increases the chloride ion content. I prefer brewing this with a chloride:sulfate ratio of 2:1. My water comes with 135ppm SO4, so chloride will be near 300ppm after adding calcium chloride.

My sparge liquor initially has alkalinity as used for the mash, but small additions of acid are made to reduce alkalinity and stop pH of runnings rising above 5.6.

 

[Gadjobrinus]

It's quite a while since I last brewed Guinness to the well accepted 70:20:10 ratio, but always have a stiff mash with alkalinity preadjusted to between 70 and 100 ppm as CaCO3 using hydrochloric acid. Mash pH usually stabilizes near 5.3 and the acid increases the chloride ion content. I prefer brewing this with a chloride:sulfate ratio of 2:1. My water comes with 135ppm SO4, so chloride will be near 300ppm after adding calcium chloride.

My sparge liquor initially has alkalinity as used for the mash, but small additions of acid are made to reduce alkalinity and stop pH of runnings rising above 5.6.

Perfect. Thank you.

 

[mabrungard]

The water quality in the Grand Canal can vary quite a bit, depending on the weather. It was used as a conduit from the various Wicklow Mountain reservoirs to Dublin. But with that said, the water quality delivered to the St James Gate brewery is NOTHING like mentioned above. Their water is almost Pilsen like with very little ionic content and very low alkalinity. It is Wicklow Mountain reservoir water. Guinness has in-house RO systems to refine Dublin water when the City sends water to them from other parts of Dublin. The water in other parts of Dublin is like the water quality mentioned above. Guinness does not use it to brew their stouts.

Guinness developed their stout brewing process under the limitations of their low alkalinity water supply. As you should know, most stout and porter brewing uses high alkalinity water. What Guinness has done is split the mashing process into two separate streams.

The first stream is the pale malt and raw barley mash. The low alkalinity water is very well suited to produce a high quality mash pH and wort.

The second stream is the roast barley steep. The low alkalinity water steep produces a low pH, highly colored wort. If the roast barley had been mashed with the first stream, that combination would have resulted in a wort with a far too low pH that would have favored excessive proteolysis and a resulting thin and bodyless wort.

What Guinness does is blend this wort (Guinness calls it: Guinness Flavor Extract) with the wort from the first stream after both mashes are complete. Its that combined wort that is sent to the fermenters.

This method results in a wort that has both high color, high roast flavor, high acidity, and still has very high body and mouthfeel. Homebrewers can easily mimic the Guinness process by separating their streams too. I can tell you that it produces a remarkably similar product to the real thing.

 

[cire]

The water quality in the Grand Canal can vary quite a bit, depending on the weather. It was used as a conduit from the various Wicklow Mountain reservoirs to Dublin. But with that said, the water quality delivered to the St James Gate brewery is NOTHING like mentioned above. Their water is almost Pilsen like with very little ionic content and very low alkalinity. It is Wicklow Mountain reservoir water. Guinness has in-house RO systems to refine Dublin water when the City sends water to them from other parts of Dublin. The water in other parts of Dublin is like the water quality mentioned above. Guinness does not use it to brew their stouts.

Thank you for the chance to clarify my posting.
My water profile above is almost certainly not what Guinness used, but it makes a beer similar to what it was when their yeast could be used from a bottle of Guinness. That was when I first brewed this recipe and tried side by side with the original article. Today their beer can be thin enough to see through and served ice cold.

The Wicklow mountain reservoirs (Vartry) are southeast of Dublin. The Grand Canal runs west from Dublin, then south into the River Shannon, linking to the Atlantic Ocean. Canal water is supplied from reservoirs above highest points on route, the middle of that Ireland, not from the east and fed to the canal at sea level.
From a contemporaneous account by Alfred Barnard in, The Noted Breweries of Great Britain and Ireland. Vol 3.

Chapter 2, Page 9

Guinness developed their stout brewing process under the limitations of their low alkalinity water supply. As you should know, most stout and porter brewing uses high alkalinity water. What Guinness has done is split the mashing process into two separate streams.

The first stream is the pale malt and raw barley mash. The low alkalinity water is very well suited to produce a high quality mash pH and wort.

The second stream is the roast barley steep. The low alkalinity water steep produces a low pH, highly colored wort. If the roast barley had been mashed with the first stream, that combination would have resulted in a wort with a far too low pH that would have favored excessive proteolysis and a resulting thin and bodyless wort.

The above account suggests the opposite, avoiding soft water for brewing, instead using it for making steam. Guinness was made long before we had a pH scale.

What Guinness does is blend this wort (Guinness calls it: Guinness Flavor Extract) with the wort from the first stream after both mashes are complete. Its that combined wort that is sent to the fermenters.

I have no reason to doubt that your description is accurately for today. They must also supply Nigeria (possibly the worlds largest producer of Guinness) with a treated barley essence to add to beers made not from barley, but sorgum.

This method results in a wort that has both high color, high roast flavor, high acidity, and still has very high body and mouthfeel. Homebrewers can easily mimic the Guinness process by separating their streams too. I can tell you that it produces a remarkably similar product to the real thing.

I'd agree, though I've not tried it because today's Guinness is not like the Original, which they apparently also sell today in bottles. I think @Gadjobrinus wanted an "Historical" version.

 

[Gadjobrinus]

The water quality in the Grand Canal can vary quite a bit, depending on the weather. It was used as a conduit from the various Wicklow Mountain reservoirs to Dublin. But with that said, the water quality delivered to the St James Gate brewery is NOTHING like mentioned above. Their water is almost Pilsen like with very little ionic content and very low alkalinity. It is Wicklow Mountain reservoir water. Guinness has in-house RO systems to refine Dublin water when the City sends water to them from other parts of Dublin. The water in other parts of Dublin is like the water quality mentioned above. Guinness does not use it to brew their stouts.

Guinness developed their stout brewing process under the limitations of their low alkalinity water supply. As you should know, most stout and porter brewing uses high alkalinity water. What Guinness has done is split the mashing process into two separate streams.

The first stream is the pale malt and raw barley mash. The low alkalinity water is very well suited to produce a high quality mash pH and wort.

The second stream is the roast barley steep. The low alkalinity water steep produces a low pH, highly colored wort. If the roast barley had been mashed with the first stream, that combination would have resulted in a wort with a far too low pH that would have favored excessive proteolysis and a resulting thin and bodyless wort.

What Guinness does is blend this wort (Guinness calls it: Guinness Flavor Extract) with the wort from the first stream after both mashes are complete. Its that combined wort that is sent to the fermenters.

This method results in a wort that has both high color, high roast flavor, high acidity, and still has very high body and mouthfeel. Homebrewers can easily mimic the Guinness process by separating their streams too. I can tell you that it produces a remarkably similar product to the real thing.

Martin, please see my first post. I have read your comments, as well as those by @cire and others. I am well aware of the two-stream process, as well as the "last minutes of mashing" incorporating of the roasted barley, the comments from the book (mentioned below) cire kindly provided elsewhere (re harder water for brewing, softer water for boiler intake) as well as the discussion of what is apparently happening today re Nigeria, etc.

Again,

I've seen two main houses of opinions as to water used; I'd prefer to go with the moderately hard water that was from the Grand Canal, per commentary by @cire....Just looking for this older Guinness mineral content.

In other words, as cire said correctly, I'm interested in the historical viewpoint (it's the title of the thread, actually). Really not interested in its modern iteration.

Thank you by the way, cire, for your links elsewhere to the Noted Breweries of Great Britain and Ireland.

 

[Gadjobrinus]

BTW, according to my inputs (trust me, I know how little I know anymore, save my palate and outlook), this is what I have with 50:50 RO:my water, + salts.

Ca: 195
Mg: 34.1
Na: 24.5
SO4: 137.7
Cl: 275.3
HCO3: 145.5
SO:Cl: .5

Not ideal - not real happy with the Mg and NA content in particular, but hope it will turn out well. I acidified the sparge water with 88% lactic for 5.6 pH. If I understand you correctly cire, I'm intrigued by your acidifying only later sparging. I'm presuming to forestall the negative impact of final runnings pH? How do you arrive at when, and how do you calculate how much acid to use?

 

[Peebee]

Sorry to wake up this old post! But I'm just larking about with my current "water" project and the Forum software flagged this up as "Similar threads". So, I felt I had to take a look ...

The water described was an outlandish "American" water that I had been avoiding 'cos I knew it would little bearing on the project I was running in the UK. But "Avoidance" is not a good policy in the long-term, so I'll dive in:


First off, this report is a shambles! Completely mixed up and unbalanced! And how do I know this ...

Because I'm a conceited old git?

Probably. But in this case:

My city supply is hard - alkalinity (CaCO3) is 239. Coincidentally, moments ago as I was writing up this post, I just got the Ward report back:


pH 6.9
Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) Est, ppm 528
Electrical Conductivity, mmho/cm 0.88
Cations / Anions, me/L 9.5 / 9.0
ppm
Sodium, Na 49
Potassium, K 15
Calcium, Ca 69.8
Magnesium, Mg 42
Total Hardness, CaCO3 350
Nitrate, NO3-N 0.4 (SAFE)
Sulfate, SO4-S 25
Chloride, Cl 92
Carbonate, CO3 < 1.0
Bicarbonate, HCO3 291
Total Alkalinity, CaCO3 239
Total Phosphorus, P < 0.01
Total Iron, Fe < 0.01
"<" - Not Detected / Below Detection Limit

I think Mr @Gadjobrinus has been slightly inaccurate transcribing his water report into this thread.

So, I take this report, convert the SO4-S and NO3-N stuff to ions (SO4-- and NO3-), and shove it in my spreadsheet. Damn, Alkalinity isn't working out quite right ... bit of investigation in order. That reported Potassium didn't help (forces the Alkalinity measure the wrong way), need more (not many) anions. The spreadsheet works out Total Hardness even though it is not actually required: 350 reported, 347.25 calculated ... nowt wrong there! (Note: The calculation takes into account nil-Hardness "Sodium", of which there's lots in this example, so calculations may differ with other calculated examples). But that "Cations / Anions, me/L 9.5 / 9.0" confirms the problem, my spreadsheet is only calculating 9.45mEq/l anions (good!) to 4.21mEq/l anions (bad!).

Hang-on! Ward will report all anions including "bicarbonate" ions (I'm only counting "conservation" anions that are non-alkalinity contributing ... anything that's left to balance cations and ions is "Alkalinity", or in this case "bicarbonate"), so 4.18mEq/l (conservative anions) plus 5.27mEq/l as "bicarbonate" (alkalinity anions) is ... (tap, tap, tap) ... 9.45mEq/l anions. The same as cations, hardly surprising because that's how the equation driving my spreadsheet works ... Total Alkalinity = ∑conservation-cations - ∑conservation-anions ... the result is always "balanced" because that's how it works. Whereas Ward accepts a deficit of 9.5-9.0 = 0.5mEq/l. Flippin' cheats (well, okay, accepting "errors" is how most people get along). Two can play that game though:

(A snip from my "Defuddler" spreadsheet). That was called "thinking on yer feet". But I was sitting down.

Cool! I didn't know this could do that. I've added 0.5mEq/l of anonymous "conservative" anions. Now what was I going to do with this ... Hang-on, again

 

[Gadjobrinus]

Let me throw a further wrench in the works. Our city report consistently shows TA as around 300; multiple Salifert tests show TA around 300; my Hanna checker consistently shows TA around 300;

yet Ward's indicates 239. So there's that...

Wish there was a way on the home level to dependably measure Ca, SO4 and Cl...

 

[Peebee]

Let me throw a further wrench in the works. Our city report consistently shows TA as around 300; multiple Salifert tests show TA around 300; my Hanna checker consistently shows TA around 300;

yet Ward's indicates 239. So there's that...

Wish there was a way on the home level to dependably measure Ca, SO4 and Cl...

If you are flinging wrenches about, you missed me. Remember that line:

... Ward accepts a deficit of 9.5-9.0 = 0.5mEq/l. Flippin' cheats (well, okay, accepting "errors" is how most people get along).

We can easily undo that, I never knew what the anonymous 0.5mEq/l anions were, and Ward didn't appear to let on either. I could just deploy it so simply in my spreadsheet using an unused feature sitting within it. So, removing it gives ...

Takes it to about 265mg/l as CaCO3 and with no dodgy tricks (instead, I remove a dodgy trick!).

I should post the entire spreadsheet, but the documentation is still to be updated. I only picked on your (@Gadjobrinus) thread because it looked like an extream example to test on (it only gets very bland water to compare back here) and you generally don't beat me for writing weird stuff on your threads. My biggest worry is water "blended" from multiple sources which I haven't had to deal with in the UK. I'm hoping the pH stuff from @Silver_Is_Money can be deployed on that.

But that's for later.

I don't know why I seem to be "trailblazing" with this "conservation ion" stuff? Perhaps homebrewers are collectively suspicious of handing over alkalinity to calculations? Perhaps I'm going to find out with a big bump shortly? But the calculations crop up all over the place, even within the first few lines of the Wikipedia article on "Alkalinity".


[EDIT: Argg! The horrors of having screenshots of something being developed. The screenshots are taken from copies of the work-in-progress, but the last one wasn't and was (very slightly) incorrect. The "Sodium" concentration changed between the last two screenshots when it wasn't supposed to change. The last screenshot is properly up-to-date now, although you'll have to look hard to see the difference (the first screenshot was a few days out-of-date, plus the Sodium figure is wrong).]