[pyrite]

Has anyone every attempted a double brew to make a single beer?  Is this article saying that they mash the second batch of grain with hopped wort?

http://beerpulse.com/2012/02/green-flash-palate-wrecker-bottles-coming-in-march/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+beerpulse+%28Beerpulse.com%3A+%231+beer+news+website+in+the+world%29


The Technical Process:
Because of the volume of hops (6 lbs. per barrel) and the complicated special processes utilized, is a exciting challenge for the Green Flash brewing team. Ironlically, it was originally brewed during the 2008 hop crisis as a special release in honor of San Diego’s beloved craft beer-focused tavern, Hamilton’s, in celebration of their 2nd Anniversary. Chuck Silva came up with a new method to make intensely hoppy IPA by performing a double brew to make a single beer. First, there is a single infusion mash and subsequent boil at 65 IBU with Columbus and Centennial hops. Then a second, duplicate mash using the 65 IBU wort instead of water and another 65 IBU boil using the same hop schedule. The result is a higher gravity beer with kettle caramelizing in place of crystal malts, an elevated hop flavor and bitterness that could not be achieved in a single brew.

[morticaixavier]

sounds like it. double mashing is not new but using hopped boiled wort I have not heard of before. double mashing is used when your mash tun does not allow for the gravity you want. so by mashing a second batch of grain with the wort from the first you effectively double your max gravity.

I would think hopping the wort before remashing would certainly add more bitterness. But I don't see that you would get anything really different than doing a double mash and then hopping at 130IBU and doing a very long boil for kettle caramelization.

[erockrph]

I would think hopping the wort before remashing would certainly add more bitterness. But I don't see that you would get anything really different than doing a double mash and then hopping at 130IBU and doing a very long boil for kettle caramelization.

Maybe they were shooting for better hop extraction from the first boil? Or maybe it was the sheer volume of hops they were using. I'm having a hard time imagining the scale of 6 pounds of hops to 1 barrel, but if it was whole-leaf hops they may have run into space limitations. 6 pounds per barrel is the equivalent of using 1 pound in a 6-gallon batch, right? That sounds like a whole crapload of hops.

[morticaixavier]

I would think hopping the wort before remashing would certainly add more bitterness. But I don't see that you would get anything really different than doing a double mash and then hopping at 130IBU and doing a very long boil for kettle caramelization.

Maybe they were shooting for better hop extraction from the first boil? Or maybe it was the sheer volume of hops they were using. I'm having a hard time imagining the scale of 6 pounds of hops to 1 barrel, but if it was whole-leaf hops they may have run into space limitations. 6 pounds per barrel is the equivalent of using 1 pound in a 6-gallon batch, right? That sounds like a whole crapload of hops.

could be an issue of hop volume in the kettle I suppose. I have used close to 1 lb of hops to a 5 gallon batch in the past, and that was in a 1.032 beer at that. all late hops in that case. I assume they filter out the hops from the first boil so further extraction wouldn't be the goal. it would futher isomerize but that would be the same with adding hops as soon as the boil starts and boiling for 120 or more minutes.

[erockrph]

I assume they filter out the hops from the first boil so further extraction wouldn't be the goal. it would futher isomerize but that would be the same with adding hops as soon as the boil starts and boiling for 120 or more minutes.

If your first boil is essentially a half-gravity wort, wouldn't you get quite a bit better hop utilization the first time through?

[morticaixavier]

I assume they filter out the hops from the first boil so further extraction wouldn't be the goal. it would futher isomerize but that would be the same with adding hops as soon as the boil starts and boiling for 120 or more minutes.

If your first boil is essentially a half-gravity wort, wouldn't you get quite a bit better hop utilization the first time through?

yeah I suppose you would. good point.

[tygo]

There's a limit though to the solubility of alpha acids in wort.  Let's say that limit is around 100 IBU's, a figure I've heard quoted before.  Going through this process isn't going to allow you to go above that level, is it?

Also, I've heard it said that at a certain point the alpha acids start breaking down.  So, assuming that is true, if you boil your hops for say, 120 minutes, you start to lose AA.  Isn't that going to happen in the second boil to the isomerized AA's already in solution?

[morticaixavier]

There's a limit though to the solubility of alpha acids in wort.  Let's say that limit is around 100 IBU's, a figure I've heard quoted before.  Going through this process isn't going to allow you to go above that level, is it?

Also, I've heard it said that at a certain point the alpha acids start breaking down.  So, assuming that is true, if you boil your hops for say, 120 minutes, you start to lose AA.  Isn't that going to happen in the second boil to the isomerized AA's already in solution?

I've heard the 100IBU limit as well. that being said I tried the mikkeller 1000IBU and it was more bitter than any beer I have ever had. Don't know if that means it's over 100IBU or not but damn it was bitter. and grassy and vegetal as well.

I boil hops for 120 minutes on my barley wine and it seems to make it more bitter than a 60 minute boil I don't know if there is a point where it will start getting less bitter but if there is I would say it's longer than 120 minutes.

[tygo]

Yeah, I threw those numbers out for example purpose.  I don't know what the actual values are either.  I'm just wondering if it's worth the trouble to do a mash with wort or if there's a limiting factor that makes it more of a gimmick. 

[morticaixavier]

Yeah, I threw those numbers out for example purpose.  I don't know what the actual values are either.  I'm just wondering if it's worth the trouble to do a mash with wort or if there's a limiting factor that makes it more of a gimmick.

I feel like doing the second mash with hopped boiled wort is a little gimmecky but the double mash is a great way to sqeeze out those really big beers when you don't have the mash tun size for the batch size you are after. With my system I can just barely sqeeze out 5 gallons of 1.100ish barley wine and 5 gallons of small beer. If I wanted to do a 10 gallon barley wine I would have to do two mashes or double mash.

[dbeechum]

The time I could swear I remember from Matt Brynildson is post-90 minutes you start breaking down.

[hopfenundmalz]

After 90 minutes you pretty much have used up the Alpha that will turn to Iso-AA.  After 90 minutes the ISO-AA degrades.  IIRC some of that is pretty harsh tasting. 

Some of the recent research has stated that it is not the sugar concentration that inhibits the utilization, but the break material.  More grain = more break material, so the models (Tinseth, Gaeretz, etc)  still hold.  If you boil and leave the break behind, could that give more utilization in the second boil, as it would have less break material? 

I have though of making a beer where the wort is boiled with no hops, chilled, and transfered to second kettle.  Then boiled again with the hops added to see if the utilization or bitterness would be higher.  Due to the fact that I am retired, I just can't seem to find the time motivation to do that lengthy process.

[Thirsty_Monk]

I have though of making a beer where the wort is boiled with no hops, chilled, and transfered to second kettle.  Then boiled again with the hops added to see if the utilization or bitterness would be higher.

We have beers that are triple hopped.
We also have beers that are triple filtered.
Now are are getting closer to triple boiled