Beer Forum

I frequent another board and a topic has come up recently that is intriguing to me. There have been more than a few people practicing "No Chill" brewing, whereby they boil the wort and place it immediately into a "cube" (plastic container often used for camping or whatever) and let it cool overnight or 24 hours.

The advantages include: Not needed cooling water, and shortening the brew day. Possibly others.

My concern is of course Chill Haze and DMS formation.

Obviously these are well known concerns for every experienced brewer, so you would think that if these things were happening, No Chill brewing would be a wash out immediately.

Does anyone around here have any insight?

Homercidal wrote:I frequent another board and a topic has come up recently that is intriguing to me. There have been more than a few people practicing "No Chill" brewing, whereby they boil the wort and place it immediately into a "cube" (plastic container often used for camping or whatever) and let it cool overnight or 24 hours.

The advantages include: Not needed cooling water, and shortening the brew day. Possibly others.

My concern is of course Chill Haze and DMS formation.

Obviously these are well known concerns for every experienced brewer, so you would think that if these things were happening, No Chill brewing would be a wash out immediately.

Does anyone around here have any insight?

I've heard this is popular in Oz, using jerry cans. I bet this is going to be one of those many things (see: pitching cold) that have a bunch of people saying "i never do X and my beer all comes out fine".

It's a corner that's ready to be cut, but you're not "stacking the deck in your favor"

yeah, why cut this corner?

It takes me 15 minutes to chill my wort with my cheap wort chiller

plus I would imagine with the no chill method you have to come back the next day and aerate and pitch you yeast

seams like even more work to me

Blowmax10 wrote:yeah, why cut this corner?

It takes me 15 minutes to chill my wort with my cheap wort chiller

plus I would imagine with the no chill method you have to come back the next day and aerate and pitch you yeast

seams like even more work to me

In places where water is scarce it makes sense. It would be better to chill down and then recirculate your chilling water but that would require more equipment.

Homercidal wrote:My concern is of course ...... DMS formation.

That's all that I would need to stop me.

Thirsty Boy can answer this one. There are several older threads about this kicking about somewhere.

I have done it accidentally. Like an , I hooked the same hose to my in and out of the counterflow chiller. I had to put my fermenter in my serving fridge for 6 hours until it cooled to pitching temp. And, as usually happens when I fuck up this badly, the beer turned out great! But sanitize everything and chill, and I get an infection. Right, Mylo?

BigNastyBrew wrote:

Homercidal wrote:My concern is of course ...... DMS formation.

That's all that I would need to stop me.

I agree, but the several people who have claimed to use this method also claim that DMS is not a problem.

According to the reports, DMS is mostly only noticeable in lighter styles, and especially using pilsner malt. With a proper boil, the amount of DMS potential in heavier ales is not noticeable. Sort of like HSA is a concern, but only if you are very uncareful.

Just for clarity, I would not do this unless forced to, I like my CFC. But, for those that don't have the cold water source, or who want to shorten the brew day (yes, you have to do more work the next day, but that's ok for some), it almost seems as though it's worth looking into.

I'd be curious to see some test brews, using a split batch for comparison. Half to be cooled, the other half no chill. Pitch and ferment the same and see what happens over time.