Mel
This e-mail, and any attachment, is confidential. If you have received
it in error, please delete it from your system, do not use or disclose
the information in any way, and notify me immediately. The contents of
this message may contain personal views which are not the views of the
Company, unless specifically stated. You should not copy, forward or
otherwise disclose the contents of this e-mail or any of its attachments
without express consent
I assume you mean plastic pop type bottles which should take some pressure ?
A friend of mine uses these for all his wines, ciders etc without problems.
One factor is if they do burst they arn't as dangerous as flying glass.
I don't tend to use them as I don't drink pop at all. But once tried
elderflower champagne in some I was given, they deformed badly but I never
got a burst either. However, I know there is a product Oz tops designed for
fermenting in bottles they come in three types with different pressure
release calibration. Not very useful in a commercial situation, but maybe
some use in smaller volumes. Might be of interest to you.
Not so. I have seen PET bottles explode. The result is not so likely to
be damaging to life and limb but can still make a mess. Their working
design pressure AFAIK is around 50 psi (3 bar) though they may take
around 100 psi (6 bar) before they burst. That means in practice you
should not have more than 10 g/l of priming sugar in the bottle. Double
it at your own risk!
> Pressure is not my problem - excessive dregs at the bottom from premature bottling is.
Dries has provided some possible alternatives. Your problem is probably
not helped by using PET bottles which are oxygen permeable and therefore
support more yeast growth than glass does. In addition, though there
will not be a direct relationship, I think a larger inoculum and hence
faster secondary fermentation will lead to more yeast biomass -
conversely a smaller inoculum will give a slower fermentation and a
lower biomass at completion (I believe this is true, though I am not
100% sure). But I can tell you anecdotally that when I have inoculated
with e.g. champagne yeast I have had much heavier yeast dregs (within
just weeks) than when i have allowed natural conditioning to take place
with just a few cells of stressed fermenting yeast that carry over. In
that case it often takes months (even years) to develop sparkle and
'condition'. Unless you can measure the yeast count in some way and
regulate it e.g. in a laboratory you are stuck with 'seat of pants'
solutions. Also, you have little control over unknown variables such as
yeast nutrient factors and overall viability in such a situation.
Counting yeast is one thing, counting *live* yeast is another (though
there are ways you can do it in a lab eg by fluorescence microscopy).
You might ask yourself why there are virtually no bottle conditioned
ciders on the commercial market apart from those that are disgorged, or
those made by keeving and long experience with weak wild yeasts
(France). The answer is because it's too damned difficult as a reliable
21st century commercial proposition. Equally problematic for the
amateur. Sorry but that's how it is.
Andrew
--
Wittenham Hill Cider Page
http://www.cider.org.uk
A few years ago I had some juice in an ex fizzy drink bottle, IIRC it was
pear juice. It got left and was found after a few weeks. The bottle had
not yet exploded but had increased from 2 litres to about 6 litres with
the head space of CO2 above the "juice". The plastic was quite thin and
would have probably split if left much longer!
Michael Cobb
Personally I think that is for the best, even though it may take many
months to accomplish! If there were anything more quantifiable and
reliable, people would already be shouting about it!