Charcoal burning out

Frogsters9 · July 2015

We are new to BGE cooking. Just did our first long cook - 10lb brisket. It was delicious but could have probably used another hour. However it burned through all the charcoal after about 11.5 hours. From what I've read online I thought it should last much longer.

We have a large BGE and this was the second time we used it. The first was ribs which cooked for about 4 hours. We added enough fresh coals on top of the used coals to fill the ring before cooking the brisket. Any tips to keep this from happening? Should we have replaced the used coals?

theyolksonyou · July 2015

If you fill all the way up to the top of the fire ring, you should be able to run at least twice that at low temps. note: fire ring, not bowl. You can't really over fill unless you a) can't get your indirect piece in or b) pack it in and restrict airflow.

I missed used the ribs part. Still if you filed all the way up you should be fine for that time.

What temp did you run and what brand lump?

Welcome to the forum.

Jeepster47 · July 2015

Welcome to the forum. Two things everyone does early on in their cooking is run out of lump and let the temps get away from them ... you're half way done with your opps curve.

Fill the egg with lump until it is touching (or at least almost touching) the bottom of the plate setter. Since unburned lump is reusable, for low-n-slow cooks beyond six hours, you should always fill to the bottom of the plate setter.

Did you shake/stir out all the ash from the first cook? That might have hindered the time.

Dondgc · July 2015

What the others said. Running out of fuel shouldn't be a consideration even at times long past 11 hours.

henapple · July 2015

Welcome

RRP · July 2015

What ^^ said, but for kicks and giggles I'd check the calibration of your dome thermometer as well - just because it's new doesn't mean it is accurate!

jtcBoynton · July 2015

With a large, at low and slow temps, you should easily get 20 hours. More than enough time to complete a cook. Higher temps will last for shorter times, but the cooks will not take as long. Only reason to run out of fire before the food is done is not enough lump was added.

biggreenrob · July 2015

RRP said:

What ^^ said, but for kicks and giggles I'd check the calibration of your dome thermometer as well - just because it's new doesn't mean it is accurate!

+1 - What he said

RAC · July 2015

Welcome!

HoustonEgger · July 2015

I would just add that in addition to making sure you've filled the lump to the fire ring - i would also take into consideration the size of the lump. You want an even mix of large, medium and some small pieces. Too many large pieces and you'll have a lot of empty space - which leads to more airflow and hotter/faster burns

Frogsters9 · July 2015

Wow, this forum is awesome. Thanks for all the great tips. We did not fill enough coal based on all your feedback. Also temp got a bit high in first couple hours but we got that in check. Definitely not enough coal. Thanks everyone. Next up - whole chicken. YUM

BYS1981 · July 2015

I pour lump until it almost touches where the platesetter sits. Note pour - no need to build extravagant lump charcoal structure.

nolaegghead · July 2015

Sometimes my plate setter is literally sitting on a pile of lump, maybe with one leg touching the fire ring. I can get about 10-12 pounds of lump in my large. If you need that much, you can do it.

dieseldare · July 2015

One point I think everyone one is missing out on... This was a long cook and he added more coals to half burnt ones from cooking the ribs.

Using left over coals is fine for short cooks, but for long ones you always want to take out all the old stuff and reload. As others have mentioned, make sure you fill the fire box full.

Another variable is lump. Some burn hotter and or longer than others. Nakedwiz has a great site with reviews on different brands. Personally, I found it was just easier to buy a different brand each time I went to the store to figure out which one I liked.

buzd504 · July 2015

^^ yep. If you're planning on a really long cook, use unburned lump.

jtcBoynton · July 2015

dieseldare said:

One point I think everyone one is missing out on... This was a long cook and he added more coals to half burnt ones from cooking the ribs.

Using left over coals is fine for short cooks, but for long ones you always want to take out all the old stuff and reload. ...

Why? Isn't unburnt carbon unburnt carbon? Other than possible ash build up blocking air flow (solved by shaking or stirring up the lump) why not use the unburnt charcoal?

buzd504 · July 2015

jtcBoynton said:

Why? Isn't unburnt carbon unburnt carbon? Other than possible ash build up blocking air flow (solved by shaking or stirring up the lump) why not use the unburnt charcoal?

There's no problem with using used lump, but if you are going for a long cook, used lump will burn up much faster than "fresh" lump. So, by volume, you will get much less burn time out of used lump.

For shorter cooks where running out of lump isn't an issue, it's absolutely OK to use used lump.

theyolksonyou · July 2015

jtcBoynton said:

dieseldare said:

One point I think everyone one is missing out on... This was a long cook and he added more coals to half burnt ones from cooking the ribs.

Using left over coals is fine for short cooks, but for long ones you always want to take out all the old stuff and reload. ...

Why? Isn't unburnt carbon unburnt carbon? Other than possible ash build up blocking air flow (solved by shaking or stirring up the lump) why not use the unburnt charcoal?

Depends on the ratio of used to new. I don't clean out old lump when it's not a lot of volume. Even at 3/4 new, in a large you should get way more than 11 hrs.

Ladeback69 · July 2015

dieseldare said:

One point I think everyone one is missing out on... This was a long cook and he added more coals to half burnt ones from cooking the ribs.

Using left over coals is fine for short cooks, but for long ones you always want to take out all the old stuff and reload. As others have mentioned, make sure you fill the fire box full.

Another variable is lump. Some burn hotter and or longer than others. Nakedwiz has a great site with reviews on different brands. Personally, I found it was just easier to buy a different brand each time I went to the store to figure out which one I liked.

If I have lump left over and am going to do a long cook, I clean out the old lump, clean out the ash, put fresh lump in, but leave room to put the old stuff on top to use up. There is no reason to not use the old stuff. Now if my XL is pretty full of old lump and I am doing ribs, I just add a little more new lump and go for it.

jtcBoynton · July 2015

buzd504 said:

jtcBoynton said:

Why? Isn't unburnt carbon unburnt carbon? Other than possible ash build up blocking air flow (solved by shaking or stirring up the lump) why not use the unburnt charcoal?

There's no problem with using used lump, but if you are going for a long cook, used lump will burn up much faster than "fresh" lump. So, by volume, you will get much less burn time out of used lump.

For shorter cooks where running out of lump isn't an issue, it's absolutely OK to use used lump.

I don't understand why it would burn much faster. How did the composition of the charcoal change by being exposed to the heat of a previous low and slow burn?

Jeepster47 · July 2015

Where's @stlcharcoal when you need him?

Here's part of an answer I got from Jonathan when I asked him the same question offline:

"... unless it's some really dense stuff or a briquette. It's so porous that it's all burning if ripping hot. That's why it's so much easier to light half used lump than new."

Thus, although the outer volume might be there, the energy density isn't ...

nolaegghead · July 2015

jtcBoynton said:

buzd504 said:

jtcBoynton said:

Why? Isn't unburnt carbon unburnt carbon? Other than possible ash build up blocking air flow (solved by shaking or stirring up the lump) why not use the unburnt charcoal?

There's no problem with using used lump, but if you are going for a long cook, used lump will burn up much faster than "fresh" lump. So, by volume, you will get much less burn time out of used lump.

For shorter cooks where running out of lump isn't an issue, it's absolutely OK to use used lump.

I don't understand why it would burn much faster. How did the composition of the charcoal change by being exposed to the heat of a previous low and slow burn?

Look at each lump as a cute little gas can. Except half the gas is burned. The can takes up the same volume but the lawnmower runs out of fuel faster.

Jeepster47 · July 2015

nolaegghead said:

Look at each lump as a cute little gas can. Except half the gas is burned. The can takes up the same volume but the lawnmower runs out of fuel faster.

Some things can't be unlearned ... will never look at lump the same again.

jtcBoynton · July 2015

nolaegghead said:

...

Look at each lump as a cute little gas can. Except half the gas is burned. The can takes up the same volume but the lawnmower runs out of fuel faster.

Follow that for an individual piece that was burning and then put out. However, the vast majority of the lump was not burning (this discussion was about reusing after lower temp cooks and not after a full out all lump burning cook). Most pieces sat in the firebox waiting their turn to burn, but never did. The pieces did get warmed up by the few pieces that did burn, but I think these little gas cans are still full.

nolaegghead · July 2015

Yes, those little gas cans are still full. Just heat isn't going to deplete their 87 octane 10% ethanol reserves. They have to be burning.

Raymont · July 2015

Note that advice for filling lump up into fire ring/up to platesetter is generally for low and slow. I don't fill it up that high for standard short/fast cooks, where you generally want more air flow (less lump).

Charcoal burning out

Comments

Categories