quote:
And adding brett at bottling? That seems crazy. Either the bottles will explode from runaway fermentation. Or there won't be enough fermentables to change the beer much. There's a reason wild yeast and bacteria are always used in primary and secondary fermentation, not for bottle conditioning.
I hope this doesn't come off sounding like a dick, but I really couldn't disagree more. Just off the top of my head, I'm pretty sure Orval and Prairie bottle w/ Brett, so it's definitely far from "crazy". Bottle bombs are a concern sure, but that's why they make heavier bottles and there's just about zero chance a brewery like Stone would **** something like that up THAT badly.
Also there are some definite advantages IMO, especially for a commercial brewery:
1) You mentioned secondary fermentation...well that's exactly what's happening it just happens to be in the bottle. Even better it's turning what is normally a beer spoiler (extended warm storage) into a positive since the Brett can actually remain active.
2) It's a "safer" way to handle Brett in a commercial setting since you don't have to expose as many of your tanks, hoses, etc. Brett isn't the brewery bankrupting boogeyman that some brewers make it out to be, but minimizing cross-contamination risk is always just smart practice.
Assuming proper quality control, I actually strongly prefer bottling w/ Brett over any other method. 100% Brett fermentations are fun and can create some really interesting beers, but like most things with brewing there are a bunch of ways to skin the cat.