[Kaiser]

Tubercle, if the time to brew that experimental batch was there, sure brewing it would have been interesting.

But as far as I recall the salts were off by 10x and not just 2x.

I checked and there isn't too much hops in this recipe which limits that addidional expense. The yeast could have been reused. It does leave mostly the brewing time as the added cost. 

Kai

[tomsawyer]

I'm in the camp of those who think you did the right thing.  To me the chloride and chalk would make it taste like alka seltzer.  You'd probably also need to adjust the pH drastically with acid to even get a decent mash.

[bluesman]

If not for anything else you probably won't do that again. It's difficult to throw away money but it could've been even worse if the beer turned out bad. I think you made the right choice. My time is worth alot and wasted time is something you can never get back. Good Luck on the next batch.

[gmac]

My guess is no matter what it tasted like you'd be so critical in your judgement that you wouldn't have enjoyed it anyway.  Just knowing it wasn't what you wanted probably would have impacted your perception of the beer. 

[davidw]

I did something similar to this once, forgot to bypass the H2O softener prior to brewing an American Brown ale. I didn't realize it until the end of the brewing session. My efficiency was much lower than expected which puzzled me at the time. Went ahead and pitched the yeast, fermented and kegged. While the beer was obviously different than prior batches of the same recipe, thinner and interestingly enough not as roasty as expected, it was still drinkable and did not have any undesireable attributes. One would assume that for an ABA extremely soft water would be a bad thing. Go figure.

[mattc]

I think I made the correct decision as well. I not even sure if the mash would have converted or not. I tend to think not as well as it could have with out all of the chalk. I think the toll of the yeast would have left it cloying also....