Honey in Beer: Sanitation

Honey has been money for me, when added straight to the fermenter.

 

I like adding honey in the last 15min of the boil.

 

I have done a couple of honey beers. My practice has been to add to the fermenter 24-48 hours after pitching yeast. No problems.

 

One of two accidentally infected beers I've brewed had honey added to the fermenter. I've switched to adding honey at flameout.

 

I have brewed with honey many times. I added it at flameout.

Cheers!

 

I have only once made a honey beer, which I called a braggot but doing so could cause this thread to self-destruct. I added the honey when the wort temperature was down to 100 F. The warmth facilitated mixing but I figured it would not cost me any honey volatiles. Probably will do something similar the next time I play with honey.

 

I've made a lot of beer that I've added honey to at high krausen without any infections. However, I do have 2 containers that are opened that I would have to add at flameout just for peace of mind.

 

Never had a problem, I add honey late in the boil though

 

I have made a honey "beer" with no malt in it in the past, without heating or sulfiting the "wort"...... and it ended up tasting like vomit. Contamination is a very real thing from the raw honey. Everyone will tell you that it's not, but after having to dump 5 gallons, I don't believe them. I always pasteurize my honey at 170 F for 15 minutes. Haven't had a problem since.

 

I'm on your side, man.

 

You are a contender for the most infected homebrews of all time award, so you can't really blame it on the honey.

 

I always add honey at flameout. It keeps most of the delicate flavors and aromas while eliminating the risk of ruining my beer, but, then again, I always proceed more cautiously than most when it comes to potential infection.

 

I recall reading a blind taste test of three honey beers evaluated by a group of so called honey beer connoisseurs. The variables were honey not boiled, honey pasteurized at 170F and honey boiled. The winner was pasteurized at 170F. None were infected.

YMMV

 

Correction: "award-winning infected homebrews".

 

Yes, that too. You win twice!

It also says a lot about the "quality" of BJCP judges in WI.

 

Oh, I dunno.... the BJCP judges in Illinois seem to enjoy "infected" beers where no yeast was pitched.

http://knaves.org/DMC/victor/VICTORS2008.htm

Coincidentally, this was a beer with a ton of honey in it. No yeast or critters 'cept from the dates and honey.

So, it's possible for wild ferments to come out okay. However, I'd typically advise folks to pasteurize everything.

 

Did any of your infected beers place at the National competition where they have competent BJCP judges?

No. I rest my case.

 

Hard to place at National if you never entered it.

 

Many people brew with unpasteurized honey every time they brew and claim they haven't had an infection over a period of many years. Of course, homebrewers have been known to make unsubstantiated claims on the internet.

I'll agree with you for once. Using some form of honey pasteurization isn't a bad practice for a honey beer.