Overcarbed bottles ... possible "emergency" ... seeking input

[Gene Cornelius]

Hello, and sorry for the lack of introduction. Got me here an "issue". That is, the beer is issuing forth, provoked by an aggressive yeast added to "fix" an unfortunate un-carbonation problem. It worked too well.

I don't want bombs.

I did not add additional priming sugar.

This beer, an RIS, intended for longer-term bottle conditioning, has been in bottles since 22-Jun-21. It was a 6-gallon batch, up from a 5 gallon kit, (Blackwater Imperial Stout) augmented with 2lbs buckwheat honey and 1lb amber candi sugar (among other things), finished slightly above target gravity but not out of bounds, primed in-carboy (4.4 oz dextrose) after racking post a 19-May to 16-Jun "secondary", and bottled via vacuum as per my typical, into 29 12-oz capped, 15 16-oz swingtops, 2 Martinelli's bottles capped, 3 capped 22-oz bombers, and one 20-oz cider bottle, capped.

OG1.094 FG unknown .. was 1.024 then I broke my hydrometer in May. Used refractometer to assess "done ness" but in late June when bottling no changes occurred over several days.

Until last week, the carbonation has fallen flat, and I was annoyed. Flavour was very good, and adding a bit of slightly over-carbed something else made it quite yummy. Wifey sez "leave it alone" and add something carbonated. Apparently I had to mess with it.

So I added a few grains each bottle KV-1116 a few days ago (23-Sep21) and left the swingtops and 12 oz bottles in their boxes in our cozy 64 F Alaskan house. The bombers and Martinelli's bottles remain in the cellar in the basement, 4 or 5 degrees below that.

Tonight I opened one of the swingtops to check it. I observed liquid level rising, and then foam, issuing forth. I soft-closed the cap and licked. Tastes good! Too bad about the stuff that escaped my tongue. I let it settle, then re-closed, and put into the fridge inside a couple plastic containers just in case.

Problem: It's been only three days with the KV-1116. I fear bottle bombs. Moved the two boxes of swingtops and capped longnecks to the outer porch area (maybe 55F) in a tub and covered so if they explode mess is contained, but bottles lost.

Suspecting complex sugars in honey + higher gravity lead to US-05 crapping out, as well as longer "secondary" bulk aging period let yeasts fall out of suspension and not strong enough to eat priming sugar.

Plan to release Brian. No no no ... release pressure, easier in the swingtops, obviously. Will try to slow release the caps.

Considering: Somehow emptying these all into a sanitized carboy, magically without exposing to O2, and letting the KV1116 finish its work, then .. what .. repriming? Yoikes, folks! Is there even a way to do this? Will the expanding cloud of CO2 protect the beer?

Alternate: Cross fingers, hope nothing explodes, then chill near freezing to be able to open the bottles (I like to age/keep beers for years) and then allow to warm slightly (it's a stout, after all) and serve?

I'm feeling I've got to do something, and soon.

I'm looking for options here, before I go and do something stupid (again).

Thank you! (especially those of you who have read this far).

Cheers,

Gene

 

[Gene Cornelius]

I should mention, as well, that none of the capped bottles have any kind of indication, such as domed/bulging on the caps. (never seen that before, just heard about it as a potential symptom)

I have no idea how to assess the swingtops, other than releasing them a tad .... in fact, I just checked the one I had opened earlier, which I put in the fridge with protective containers, and it made a little pffft but did not fizzle up at all. Is that a good sign, or ???

 

[Zambi]

I like to see what the more clever people recommend
I would be tempted to leave them as cool as possible in a box (fridge preferably) and just drink (sorry, check) one every week and assess

 

[Minbari]

I like to see what the more clever people recommend
I would be tempted to leave them as cool as possible in a box (fridge preferably) and just drink (sorry, check) one every week and assess

I would just cover them to reduce the risk of flying debris should they explode.

I have never added yeast to finished bottles. If you under primed them, maybe add a little more sugar oe just wait longer. If the sugar is there to eat, the residual yeast will eat it eventually.

 

[HighVoltageMan!]

Did you taste the beer to check for carbonation? You may have a bottle bomb, but I doubt the yeast was able to carbonate the beer that quickly, especially if it was at room temperature. The swing bottles are you canary in the mine. Wait a week or two, place a bottle in the refrigerator and let it set for 48 hours. That will allow the beer to equalize between the head space and the beer and keep it from going ape $h1+ when you open it. If it's at a decent carbonation, then refrigerate the rest. I firmly believe that all beer for keeping should be kept cold anyway.

 

[Gene Cornelius]

Here's me wishing it were colder outside already. Fridge is full of well, food. (It's harvest season!) So far so good with not exploding. Will try a few in fridge to be sure over the next week. Definitely want to know they are stable before aging them for the two years I had planned! Hard to do if I drink them : )

I like to see what the more clever people recommend
I would be tempted to leave them as cool as possible in a box (fridge preferably) and just drink (sorry, check) one every week and assess

 

[Gene Cornelius]

I've been having this problem recently as I'd been bulk aging beers in a secondary carboy for longer than a couple weeks .. I don't cold crash, but the aging room is "slightly cold" as in I struggle to keep it below 60F. I prefer undercarbed to overcarbed, but the tendency is for the yeast to be weak in these longer-aged, more flocculated beers. I just bottled another beer that I turned around from start to bottling in 10 days which is about as fast as I've ever done. I used the same calcs for my priming, so it will be interesting to see if there is a marked difference.

I would just cover them to reduce the risk of flying debris should they explode.

I have never added yeast to finished bottles. If you under primed them, maybe add a little more sugar oe just wait longer. If the sugar is there to eat, the residual yeast will eat it eventually.

 

[Gene Cornelius]

I have been tasting the beer over the last two months, and carbonation was lacking. As in I could pour from 12" or more into a glass and get no action. The same yeast did actually kick off a mead (I had used half a packet for the beers priming, and the other half for my mead, on the same day) so I would not at all be surprised that it's active and fermenting.

In retrospect what I should have done with this higher gravity beer, was to hit it with the KV1116 for a week BEFORE I bottled, as a true secondary fermentation.

My beers aged in my 55-60F cellar are wonderful after 2+ years. I save a lot of beer, so I'd need my own walk-in to chill further. Not gonna happen!

I'll go ahead and do what you suggest though. Why do you say the swingtops are the canary in the coal mine? Are they weaker? (the other bottles are re-used Deschutes bottles, mostly) Or will the caps let off pressure? Many of them have those solid silicone "high pressure" seals, by the way.

Did you taste the beer to check for carbonation? You may have a bottle bomb, but I doubt the yeast was able to carbonate the beer that quickly, especially if it was at room temperature. The swing bottles are you canary in the mine. Wait a week or two, place a bottle in the refrigerator and let it set for 48 hours. That will allow the beer to equalize between the head space and the beer and keep it from going ape $h1+ when you open it. If it's at a decent carbonation, then refrigerate the rest. I firmly believe that all beer for keeping should be kept cold anyway.

 

[Gene Cornelius]

Oh, I did want to say also I had a similar issue last summer (I went away for longer than expected and bottled when I came back, and the beer never carbed) and in the situation last year I used the same yeast (US-05) and it came out perfect. In this case the aggressive KV1116 might be chewing on sugars that were not meant to be eaten (in a beer) and since I didn't have a hydrometer I can't know what the gravity was before I bottled, only that testing with refractometer indicated no fermentation over several days prior.

I'm going to move these beers out to the shed where they will be in the 40's (at least until it starts to freeze, in which case I'll reassess)

I would just cover them to reduce the risk of flying debris should they explode.

I have never added yeast to finished bottles. If you under primed them, maybe add a little more sugar oe just wait longer. If the sugar is there to eat, the residual yeast will eat it eventually.

 

[Donoroto]

Explode is a relative term. A cardboard box will easily contain any 'shrapnel', so the biggest worry is the liquid.

To slow or stop fermentation, cold (34F) is your friend. Unable? Get as close as you can.

Sometimes the imagination is worse than the reality. Contain the shrapnel and liquid just in case, but wait and see what happens.

 

[Gene Cornelius]

I've had few losses due to overpressure. One was super clean .. just the bottom of a bomber separated .. I did not know until I was rotating the bottles and found it much lighter than the others. Another was a brew that was tending to overcarbed left on my boat, in a short bottle type I no longer use (weighs less than the Deschutes, and have broken several .. they are weaker!) .. that one did shatter, and left razor bits of glass everywhere in that cubby. I was not there to see or hear it, and the beer went into the bilge.

The shed outside is 46. About as close as I can get to 34 at the moment. The boxes are heavy cardboard, with cardboard dividers I made, but the tops poke up. They are in an old fridge that does not work. No worries on shrapnel, but would be super sad to lose my swingtops, and of course, the beer!

Explode is a relative term. A cardboard box will easily contain any 'shrapnel', so the biggest worry is the liquid.

To slow or stop fermentation, cold (34F) is your friend. Unable? Get as close as you can.

Sometimes the imagination is worse than the reality. Contain the shrapnel and liquid just in case, but wait and see what happens.

 

[Gene Cornelius]

Now drinking the bottle that was so fizzy yesterday. Now it's nearly flat. I noticed two things: 1. It's maybe more opaque than before ... like not seeing through it and 2. It tastes much drier (whereas before it had a sweetness and is reminiscent of black licorice).

So I got the brilliant idea to toss it in the flask and use the hydrometer. 1.013 (temp corrected). This result in Brewer's Friend abv calculator telling me I have an 11.55% beer. (alternate calc)

Zounds!

I like it but hope it survives this time of trouble so it can do the aging magic thing. It's a little "hot". : )

I'll put another in the fridge and try it in a few days or so ....

 

[Craigerrr]

How much US-05 did you originally pitch?
(for a beer that big I would think 2 packages minimum)

Why is it that you think you might be getting bottle bombs?
If I understand correctly, you added more yeast to an under carbonated beer that had been bottled many weeks ago, is this correct?
It doesn't sound like you have added any sugar, is this correct?
If you added the correct amount of sugar in the first place, and the US-05 has not consumed it for some reason, I would think that the newly introduced yeast should only consume the existing sugar.

 

[Gene Cornelius]

Responses below question/comments:

How much US-05 did you originally pitch?
(for a beer that big I would think 2 packages minimum)

I pitched two packages, dry. (I have messed with starters and after nearly 3 years brewing I prefer the quick action of dry pitch and attain my target FG more often than not)

Why is it that you think you might be getting bottle bombs?

I worry about it as I've never ever seen this sort of action ... I've had gushers before, but they didn't develop in 3 days. This went from nearly flat to gusher in three days. My other answers expound on the other reasons I worry.

If I understand correctly, you added more yeast to an under carbonated beer that had been bottled many weeks ago, is this correct?

Yes, I added KV-1116, a wine yeast, to a beer that had been in-bottle for about 2 months.

It doesn't sound like you have added any sugar, is this correct?

I added no additional sugar when I added the yeast. Only the priming sugar added when I originally bottled.

If you added the correct amount of sugar in the first place, and the US-05 has not consumed it for some reason, I would think that the newly introduced yeast should only consume the existing sugar.

Yes, "but" ... the newly added yeast has two factors adding to the complexity of the issue. 1. Much higher alcohol tolerance (around 18% vs the US-05's theoretical 11%) and 2. KV-1116 is a wine yeast, which, as I understand it, as opposed to an ale yeast (or strain, rather) is capable of quickly finishing off long chain polysaccharides (?) whereas US-05 fumbles with these, which is why an ale typically finishes off slightly sweet, and a wine can have more than 100% apparent attenuation. (clarification welcome)

Also please remember that having had a bottle of this same beer (shared with Wifey) three days prior to finding the gusher and becoming alarmed, I distinctly recall that it still tasted sweet, and when consuming the gusher yesterday, noting it distinctly tasted much drier, having lost that sweetness. Now, 4.4oz of dextrose in 6 gallons of beer is not going to account for a noticeably sweet taste, so I am postulating that the KV-1116 metabolized more than the priming sugar and essentially "finished off" the beer in the bottle as a secondary fermentation.

For my next big beer, I PLAN to finish it off with KV-1116 or EC-1118 before bottling, should my FG not be where I want it. Also, I now use a plastic hydrometer (no more inconvenient shattering). Also, I plan to start taking notes so I can rely on my refractometer as well. (it matches before fermentation but not during/after). These details will help, along with this experience, to better understand and prevent this from happening again.

 

[BarbarianBrewer]

Wow, what an adventure! Seems like the US-05 pooped out too soon and the KV-1116 picked up the slack and them some!
I think checking the swing-top bottles is a good idea because you can instantly reseal them if the pressure is fine. But if you find they blast out a ton of pressure then you might want to recap all the bottles. If you do it quickly you should be able to minimize the oxidation risk. But, even so, a slightly oxidized beer is better than a bottle bomb.

I've brewed a Scottish Wee Heavy a few times now. I bulk age (in secondary carboy) for 6+ months before bottling. The forums seemed split on whether to re-yeast when bottling beers of this type so I decided to try it without once. 90% of the bottles had virtually no carbonation . When I would come across one that did have halfway decent carbonation I felt like I hit the lottery! . So for the Wee Heavy I bottled last month, after 8 months in secondary, I added a (rehydrated) packet of EC-1118 to the bottling bucket. They are now nicely carbonated. Since I had some of my 2017 severely under-carbonated Wee Heavies left, I took 5 ml of the new beer out of the bottling bucket and added that to each old bottle. I totally guessed on that amount. I think I'll pop open one of the 2017 beers this weekend and check it out.

 

[Gene Cornelius]

Aye, that's what I was thinking. About the oxygenation danger: If the pressure is CO2, and I re-capped really quick, would that not nearly eliminate it? No breakage or swelling yet. I'll test pressure on a swingtop again in a few days.

I too have heard mixed opinions regarding bottle-condition carbonating after lagering or bulk aging, and also with highly flocculant yeasts, such as Voss Kveik, which, if I remember correctly (that's what brew logs are for but I'm too lazy right now) I did NOT have an issue with. I think from now on, when in doubt, add yeast. Be interested to hear your result.

I'm also curious about the Brewer's Friend priming calculator, which is what I use. The main thing I'm curious about is the beer temperature. I have read, and re-read the note. I still feel like I am guessing, and it does make a big difference in the calculations.

As I get lazier I'm no longer wanting to have my schedule dictated by my fermentation's ideas of when they need attention. But bulk aging 6+ months for me is no good, not having excess carboys to commit to such. Plus, I like to taste the beer as it ages, which gives me ideas of what I like and don't. Now you've got me curious about a Wee Heavy though. A few days ago I bottled a Smoked Scottish Strong (which I augmented and messed with now it's a Smoked Scottish Stronger : ) ... I do that with kits ... alternating between kits for trying stuff out and all-grain for when I want to "invent" beers).

Wow, what an adventure! Seems like the US-05 pooped out too soon and the KV-1116 picked up the slack and them some!
I think checking the swing-top bottles is a good idea because you can instantly reseal them if the pressure is fine. But if you find they blast out a ton of pressure then you might want to recap all the bottles. If you do it quickly you should be able to minimize the oxidation risk. But, even so, a slightly oxidized beer is better than a bottle bomb.

I've brewed a Scottish Wee Heavy a few times now. I bulk age (in secondary carboy) for 6+ months before bottling. The forums seemed split on whether to re-yeast when bottling beers of this type so I decided to try it without once. 90% of the bottles had virtually no carbonation . When I would come across one that did have halfway decent carbonation I felt like I hit the lottery! . So for the Wee Heavy I bottled last month, after 8 months in secondary, I added a (rehydrated) packet of EC-1118 to the bottling bucket. They are now nicely carbonated. Since I had some of my 2017 severely under-carbonated Wee Heavies left, I took 5 ml of the new beer out of the bottling bucket and added that to each old bottle. I totally guessed on that amount. I think I'll pop open one of the 2017 beers this weekend and check it out.

 

[BarbarianBrewer]

I'm also curious about the Brewer's Friend priming calculator, which is what I use. The main thing I'm curious about is the beer temperature. I have read, and re-read the note. I still feel like I am guessing, and it does make a big difference in the calculations.

I like the way BF Priming calculator explains what temperature to use. Other sites simply tell you to use the current temperature. When I used to current temperature my carbonation level varied considerably mainly dependent on whether I cold-crashed before bottling. Now that I plug max fermentation temperature into any of the calculators, I get predictable carbonation. I think the confusing part comes in with cold-crashing and a diacetyl rest. If those are short (a day or two?) then you don't need to factor them. But, if you do either for a long time (a week or three???) then the CO2 level in the beer would have changed and therefore the amount of priming sugar would change.

 

[BarbarianBrewer]

If the pressure is CO2, and I re-capped really quick, would that not nearly eliminate it?

That was my thinking when I recapped. Plus in my case they did not taste good without carbonation.

For my Wee Heavy, I use this recipe pretty much unchanged. It's based on a Traquair House Ale clone by Skotrat. Another heavy I really like is this wootStout recipe.

 

[Gene Cornelius]

Ah, thanks. For me it seemed the more I tried to pay attention, the more variance in results I ended up with. The explanation of the DURATION of the highest temp makes sense ... I guess another way to put it might be "The highest temperature the beer was at for the longest period" SO that means if a diacetyl rest was two days but the fermentation temp was consistent for 5 days, then use the fermentation temp.

I like the way BF Priming calculator explains what temperature to use. Other sites simply tell you to use the current temperature. When I used to current temperature my carbonation level varied considerably mainly dependent on whether I cold-crashed before bottling. Now that I plug max fermentation temperature into any of the calculators, I get predictable carbonation. I think the confusing part comes in with cold-crashing and a diacetyl rest. If those are short (a day or two?) then you don't need to factor them. But, if you do either for a long time (a week or three???) then the CO2 level in the beer would have changed and therefore the amount of priming sugar would change.

 

[Gene Cornelius]

Thank you, I will take inspiration from these. Interesting indeed about the 2 hour boil + the first runnings reduction. Toasted pecans? Neato!

That was my thinking when I recapped. Plus in my case they did taste good without carbonation.

For my Wee Heavy, I use this recipe pretty much unchanged. It's based on a Traquair House Ale clone by Skotrat. Another heavy I really like is this wootStout recipe.