check out my water

[Bruce G]

I get my water from my own well, which I test regularly for water quality parameters (coliforms and nitrate). Last time through I added some brewing ions and was a bit surprised (all concentrations in mg/l):

Chloride ND (method reporting limit 20 mg/l)

Sulfate 15

Sodium 6.7

Hardness (CaCO3) 140

Alkalinity (as CaCO3) 100

Calcium 36

Magnesium 13

I was a little bit surprised to find no chloride at all.

The nomograph in How to Brew suggests a mash pH in the high 5 range, favoring a darker range of beer styles than I have on my initial brewing wish list. It sounds like I should be prepared to adjust mash pH to brew pales and ambers. If I adjust with lactic or hydrochloric acid in accordance with the guidelines in How to Brew (p. 163) am I headed the right direction? Or am I worrying about it too much for a beginning all grain brewer?

Also most of the beers on my wish list tend to the malty end of the spectrum. How to Brew and Ray Daniels book Designing Great Beers suggest that some chloride is a good thing in malty styles like scottish ales, marzen, and helles bock, all of which are on my wish list. Should I consider chloride additions or just give it a whirl without adjustments and see how it goes?

I don't want to make it more complicated than it has to be, just thinking...

Thanks for any tips.

Bruce g

[ajdelange]

I get my water from my own well, which I test regularly for water quality parameters (coliforms and nitrate). Last time through I added some brewing ions and was a bit surprised (all concentrations in mg/l):

Does this mean you do the tests yourself? If not are they done by Ward Labs? The reason for asking this is that Ward Labs reports sulfate "as Sulfur" which results in a number 1/3 that of the usual reporting method. This is significant here because if I plug in 0 chloride and 15 mg/L sulfate I get a badly unbalanced profile. If I treble the sulfate to 45 then the profile balances much better. OTOH if I supply 30 mg/L chloride with the sulfate at 15 the balance is decent. So tell us more about the testing. Without that about all I can say is that your residual alkalinity is 67 with 50 generally being considered the limit above which some action should be taken. This level (67) suggests that a mash done with this water will have a pH 0.11 points higher than that of a distilled water mash. Assuming 5.75 for DI you might expect 5.86 with this water but these offsetts cannot be considered universally applicable.

The high RA doesn't limit you to darker beers though one of the ways to combat it is to use high kilned (especially roasted) malt. But you can also combat it with sauermalz which doesn't result in much color development. Or you can add mineral or organic acid. Or dilute the water with RO water or use a combination of these techniques.

If the chloride is indeed 0 then yes, the addition of some calcium chloride will doubtless improve the quality of the beers you brew. But the fact that you found it necessary to mention the method reporting limit makes me suspect that this is a test you are doing yourself and as these tests often have pretty course resolution, wonder if you aren't getting a reading of ND with a test that has a resolution of 10 or 20 mg/L in which case you might read nothing though a nominal amount fo chloride might still be present. Please clarify on the chloride test.

[dstar26t]

The reason for asking this is that Ward Labs reports sulfate "as Sulfur" which results in a number 1/3 that of the usual reporting method.

This is the first I've heard of this. I get my water tested seasonally by them and they show "Sulfate, SO4-S" on the report. Is it really necessary to triple this number for brewing?

[ajdelange]

This is the first I've heard of this. I get my water tested seasonally by them and they show "Sulfate, SO4-S" on the report. Is it really necessary to triple this number for brewing?

No. It's just necessary to multiply the SO4-S (read "Sulfate as sulfur") number by 3 to convert it to SO4 ("Sulfate as Sulfate" or "Sulfate as the ion") before using it in any calculations involving sulfate i.e before using it in any of the spreadsheets that abound.

Ward Labs reports "as Sulfur" (I'm guessing) because their background is in support of agriculture where people are interested in the amount of sulfur or the amount of nitrogen or the amount of phosphorous applied per acre, for example, irrespective of the salt it is carried in. You will notice that your Ward lab report also lists NO3-N, read "Nitrate as Nitrogen". The number there needs to be multiplied by 4.43 to convert it to the weight of actual nitrate ions.

As an example: If you are using one of the spreadsheets to build a profile with 100 mg/L SO4 and your Ward Labs report says your sulfate is 20 and you put that into the spreadsheet it will conclude that you are 100 - 20 = 80 mg/L shy on sufate and calculate enough gypsum or epsom salts to produce 80 mg/L more. But the sulfate ion weight in the water is actually 60mg/L (20 of which are sulfur and 40 of which are oxygen) so you will now have 60 + 80 = 140 mg/L sulfate.

[dstar26t]

Wow, good to know. Thanks AJ.

[thatguy314]

Aj, you always talk about "balanced" water. How do you balance it the numbers. Are you just adding up all the charges of the cations and anions?

[ajdelange]

Yep. They should be equal. Balance (or lack thereof) was what got me looking for an explanation as to why the balance I'd calculate from Ward Labs reports never agreed with the balance they put at the top of every report. I never noticed the -S because most guys who type in their reports' numbers just type SO4. Then I saw a post where a guy had copied and pasted from an e-mail report and there it was, big as life -S and the light came on.

[LoganO]

That is really nice to know! I have been entering the 15 for sulfates as the report listed when making water adjustments.