HOMEBREW Digest #1201 Wed 11 August 1993

Digest #1200 Digest #1202


	FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
		Rob Gardner, Digest Coordinator


Contents:
  RE: I need a new factor! (Bob Regent)
  irish moss/ barley water (Ed Hitchcock)
  Wheat beer yeast (Lee=A.=Menegoni)
  Prescription Beer (Tim Anderson)
  RE: moldy dishes, wet milling, weizen yeast (James Dipalma)
  Re: Irish Moss Question (David Resch)
  Re: A Draft Chili Beer? (wegeng.XKeys)
  Testing yeast viability and cell density ("Bob Jones")
  Bottled Water ("Walker John")
  Water and carbonation (blazo)
  Second batch of beer ("Michael Barre"                            )
  OKC brew stores (Paul Biron)
  New Sanitizing Agent ? (Richard Childers)
  Re: Dry Hopping Belgians & Irish Moss NOT (Jeff Frane)
  banned brews (RBSWEENEY)
  New Factor ("Manning, Martin P")
  RE: Yeast contaminant: Irish moss: Barley water (John Mare)
  Rye ale/"New" Formula/dryhopping/moldy plates (korz)
  Weddings and homebrew (""Robert C. Santore"")
  Mini Keg System (Alan Belke)
  Weihenstephan #68 & T. Delbrukki (Jim Busch)
  Irish Moss (arne thormodsen)
  Bottling Kegged Beer (Robert Pulliam)
  Sanitizing swing-top bottles (David Turner)
  Subject: A Draft Chili Beer? (Jim Vahsen)
  water filter (J. Michael Burgeson)
  Suggestions/Thoughts/Recipes for Plum beers/meads? ("KEVIN SCHUTZ, X-1738, M/S 10125")

Send articles for __publication_only__ to homebrew at hpfcmi.fc.hp.com (Articles are published in the order they are received.) Send UNSUBSCRIBE and all other requests, ie, address change, etc., to homebrew-request@ hpfcmi.fc.hp.com, BUT PLEASE NOTE that if you subscribed via the BITNET listserver (BEER-L at UA1VM.UA.EDU), then you MUST unsubscribe the same way! If your account is being deleted, please be courteous and unsubscribe first. Archives are available via anonymous ftp from sierra.stanford.edu. (Those without ftp access may retrieve files via mail from listserv at sierra.stanford.edu. Send HELP as the body of a message to that address to receive listserver instructions.) Please don't send me requests for back issues - you will be silently ignored. For "Cat's Meow" information, send mail to lutzen at novell.physics.umr.edu
---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 9 Aug 93 20:47:54 PDT From: Bob Regent <b_regent at holonet.net> Subject: RE: I need a new factor! Steve Casselman asked about the ratio of weight of grains vs the weight of dissolved extract. This is typically known as the extaction potential (%). This is the way that the data is presented from the maltster, they dont represent the data way that most homebrewers are used to. (pts/lbs/gallon) My program, Brewer's Calculator, comes with the extraction potentials for most malts using both the extraction percentage and pt/lb/gallon methods. It also allows you to enter your own data using either technique, and automatically converts the other. (cheap plug, sorry) To convert from one to the other is easy. Extract X .461 = pt/lb/gallon - 1 For example, if your grain has an extract potential of 76%, then 76 X .461 = 35 or (1.035) This may or may not be usefull in recreating grain recipes using extracts. You must remember that Syrup extracts contain only about 76% solids and DME is 97.6 so you would have to take that into considerations when formulating. - --bob Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 10 Aug 1993 09:38:06 -0300 From: Ed Hitchcock <ECH at ac.dal.ca> Subject: irish moss/ barley water Steve Lichtenberg writes: >Second-- >I purchased some plugs of Irish moss from a garden supply store about >a year ago. These are incredible growers; going from <1" plugs when >originally planted to > 18" clusters in just 1 year. They make a great >ground cover with a thick compact mass of growth about 1 1/2" tall. A neat >addition to the landscape. Now on to the question-- Anyone have any >experience using fresh IM for brewing? Do I need to dry it or can it >be used right from the ground? Any precautions to prevent contamination? I've got bad news. The irish moss you have is not the irish moss used in brewing. The irish moss clarifying agent is from a marine alga (seaweed). >Third-- >While watching "Mary Poppins" for the ten thousandth time (can you say >parent of a three year old? ;-)), I noticed a line that goes "and >doesn't smell like barley water". My first thought was that this must >be an objectionable perfume but after thinking about it for a few minutes >I realized that this must be a reference to some type of alcoholic >beverage. Anyone knowledgeable in early 20th century London slang >have any idea as to whether this refers to our favorite malt beverage >or the other venerable potion made from barley malt (for those that >can not figure out the obscure reference, I am talking about 'the good >stuff' Scotch whiskey).. One possibility: Malted barley infused with warm water was used as a tonic. With all those wonderful enzymes coursing through it, it's sure to cure what ails you. I can try asking my dad, since his dad published the books in the first place. ____________ Ed Hitchcock/Dept of Anatomy & Neurobiology/Dalhousie University/Halifax NS ech at ac.dal.ca +-----------------------------------------+ | Never trust a statement that begins: | | "I'm not racist, but..." | +-----------------------------------------+ Diversity in all things. Especially beer. Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 10 Aug 93 08:47:47 EDT From: Lee=A.=Menegoni at nectech.com Subject: Wheat beer yeast Re: Wheat beer yeast. The strain of yeast DOES matter to the end product. This summer HBD contributer Jim DiPalma has brewed some good wheat beers using a strain of Weinstephen yeast but they lacked the clovey character. He then got the "correct" yeast and his brews were excellent with clovey and fruity tones. Given his meticulous brewing technique and similarity in recipe the differences were cleary the product of the yeast used. RE: Presription beer. My high school Spanish teacher told us they would feed their young child beer, which they had warmed to remove alcohol and CO2, while traveling in South America since the water supply was unreliable. The beer was rich in carbohydrates too. I have heard that another reason to "prescribe" alcohol was to circumvent prohibition. Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 10 Aug 93 08:01:15 PDT From: tima at wv.MENTORG.COM (Tim Anderson) Subject: Prescription Beer My grandmother loves to tell me the story of how Grandpa's homebrew saved my uncle's life. She always tells it in a conspiratorial tone, when my parents aren't around. Which is pretty cute, since I'm in my mid forties. My grandparents were Nebraska farmers during prohibition, and like lots of folks during that time, they were brewers of the best kind of of beer: available. Their third child, Charles, had serious digestive problems as an infant. He was unable to keep anything down, including his mother's milk. He was dangerously thin and his parents were resigned to losing him. One day as Grandpa was walking him around the room trying to give some comfort, he took a drink of beer. Baby Charles smacked his lips, apparently in response to the smell of the beer. Grandpa dipped his finger and put it into the baby's mouth. He sucked eagerly. The expected reaction didn't occur, so he got a little more. After several serious dips from the ol' beer stein he nursed and didn't lose it. He binged for a couple of weeks, was fat and healthy and they took him off the beer without ill effect. I offer no theories, I just tell 'em the way I hear 'em. I'd love to add that Uncle Chuck continues to have his beer with a milk chaser, but it just ain't so, and I've resolved to keep my stories mostly honest. But I have noticed that whenever he's drinking beer, he tends to get awfully friendly with his wife, and she tends to give him those "drop dead" kinds of looks. tim "I said 'mostly', OK?" Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 10 Aug 93 11:10:01 EDT From: dipalma at banshee.sw.stratus.com (James Dipalma) Subject: RE: moldy dishes, wet milling, weizen yeast Hi All, In HBD#1200, Steve Lichtenberg wrote: >I was going to start a batch of yeast in anticipation of brewing later >in the week. When I went to get my petri dish with the culture on it >out of the fridge, I noticed that the entire surface of the dish was >covered with a green growth of mold >Anyone have any >suggestions on how to improve my techniques in handling cultures so that >this type of contamination does not happen again. I'm not sure your techniques are to blame, I've never had any success with long-term storage of cultures on petri dishes. The top and bottom halves do not form an airtight seal. After streaking the plates, I seal them with electrician's tape, and store them in a warm place. Two or three days later, the colonies are sufficiently grown to harvest them, I then innoculate several slants. After one or two days at room temperature, I store the slants in the refridgerator, they're good for several months. I have noticed that even when I reseal the plates with the tape, within a week or so fuzzy growths appear that look like mold. From this, I concluded that long term storage on petri dishes was not a good idea, and have been using the above procedure with good results. Disclaimer: I'm a software engineer, not a microbiologist (hence the use of the decidely non-technical term "fuzzy growths"), so would welcome comments by others more knowledgable. *************************************************************** Also in HBD#1200, Thomas G. Moore writes: >In Eric Warner's German Wheat Beer book he mentions milling >malted barley wet as to keep the husks intact. This will help com- >bat stuck run-offs during lautering. Has anyone used this method >with wheat beer decoctions? I tried this exactly once, the first batch of weizen I brewed after reading Warner's book. I sprinkled the barley gently with water, and kept turning it until it was all lightly moistened. I ran it through an adjustable Maltmill, which does an excellent job of keeping husks intact in any event. This procedure *does* work, at least in terms of minimizing husk damage. It appeared as though each kernel had been gently opened - the water definitely helped reduce tearing of husks. The problem was cleaning the mill afterwards - the grooves in the rollers filled with the "paste" that resulted from flour and water, which dried quickly and became rock-hard. It was a major chore to clean up the rollers afterward, so I never tried this again. I get a good quality crush with the MM, and use a staggered protein rest and decoction mashing when brewing weizens, so I haven't had any problems with cloudy or stuck runoffs. If you use a corona, I think this would be worth a try. It does reduce husk damage, which is one of the corona's biggest drawbacks, and cleanup shouldn't be a problem with a mill that doesn't have grooved rollers. *************************************************************** Also in HBD#1200, Al Korz writes: >One piece of data from me in Eric's defense: the Troubleshooting Issue of >Zymurgy lists wheat malt as a source for phenolic (clove-like) character. >Perhaps this is the true source of the clove-like character in German >Weizens or maybe it's a combination of this and the yeast. Working from memory here, don't have Warner's book in front of me, but he writes that an important precursor to the 4-vinyl guaiacol phenolic, which is responsible for the clove-like flavor, is free ferulic acid. He goes on to state that ester bonds bind ferulic acid to pentasanes in the grain (can't recall if he meant wheat or barley), and recommends an acid rest at 110F to produce ferulic acid in it's free form. That said, I've had an interesting time brewing weizens this summer. I obtained a Weihenstephan #68 culture early in May, and brewed a couple of batches, dutifully following Warner's procedures. While the beers were OK, neither had the desired clove character. I did some investigation, as it turned out, the strain I had obtained was quite old. I found out that the strain was the original 1991 vintage, which apparently "pooped out". Commercial weizen brewers have experienced the same problem with this strain. It was quietly replaced in 1992 by those who distribute this yeast with a strain that has displayed considerably longer staying power. Since then, I have brewed three other batches of weizen, two dunkels and a pale, with the 1992 vintage, same recipes, same procedures. These brews are *wonderful*, hit-me-over-the-head clovey, well balanced with banana, with hints of vanilla, nutmeg, cinnamon - everything I love about weizens. So, the moral is: IT'S THE YEAST. Cheers, Jim Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 10 Aug 93 09:10:57 MDT From: resch at craycos.com (David Resch) Subject: Re: Irish Moss Question Steve Lichtenberg writes: >I purchased some plugs of Irish moss from a garden supply store about >a year ago. These are incredible growers; going from <1" plugs when >originally planted to > 18" clusters in just 1 year. They make a great >ground cover with a thick compact mass of growth about 1 1/2" tall. A neat >addition to the landscape. Now on to the question-- Anyone have any >experience using fresh IM for brewing? Do I need to dry it or can it >be used right from the ground? Any precautions to prevent contamination? The "Irish Moss" you bought at a garden supply store is not the same as the Irish Moss used as a kettle coagulant in home brewing. The Irish Moss that we use is actually a marine red algae (Chondrus Crispus, if I am remembering correctly from my marine biology days). Dave Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 10 Aug 1993 06:02:04 PDT From: wegeng.XKeys at xerox.com Subject: Re: A Draft Chili Beer? >However, I prefer >to (Cornelius) keg my beers, and I'm wondering a bit about just >how much of what variet(ies) of peppers to use! >[...] >What about a chili extract in alcohol? Have you considered using hot pepper sauce? A couple years ago someone on the HBD suggested using Tabasco Sauce (any hot sauce based only on peppers would do, so experiment to determine which varieties you like best). You can determine the amount to add by adding one drop at a time to a pint of beer, stiring and tasting after each addition, until you determine how many drops/pint give you the desired degree of hotness. Then multiply this by the number of pints of beer that you want to make to determine how many drops to add to your keg (perhaps subtracting 10% to be safe). I haven`t tried this, but it would seem to be more predictable than adding whole peppers (and more repeatable, too). /Don wegeng.xkeys at xerox.com Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 10 Aug 1993 08:32:17 -0700 (PDT) From: "Bob Jones" <bjones at novax.llnl.gov> Subject: Testing yeast viability and cell density How does one test yeast viability? Do you stain, then dilute, then estimate at the fraction of the yeast that are stained (the bad ones) while viewing at low magnification? Please, someone explain this technique to me in detail. I am also interested in the techniques used to determine the quantity of yeast in a starter for proper pitching ratios. Bob Jones It was one whole day before I had a beer after returning from Portland! The best beer I had in Portland was a beer called "Mirror Pond" from Deschutes. What a great ale, big hops, great malt character and incredible depth and complexity. All the beers were good and the Portland people seem to be very serious about their beer. Return to table of contents
Date: 10 Aug 1993 11:29:03 U From: "Walker John" <jwalker at msmac.prc.hq.nasa.gov> Subject: Bottled Water Does anyone have any comments or experiences using bottled spring water for brewing. How does it compare and are there any obvious advantages or disadvantages (other than cost). John Walker jwalker at prc.hq.nasa.gov Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 10 Aug 93 11:41:34 EDT From: blazo at aol.com Subject: Water and carbonation In HBD 11999, Guy DeRose (DEROSEGA%ML%WPAFB at MLGATE.ML.WPAFB.AF.MIL) writes: >A batch of stout I made in February (extract + specialty grains) started out by having "perfect" carbonation and head retention, but after aging in the bottles it became overcarbonated...The beer tastes fine, so infection does not seem to be the culprit... Is there a relation between high mineral content of water and increased carbonation as a function of time? Could the "yuck" in my water erve as nucleation sites for bubbles?< I think that the most salient question is: what was the starting and finishing gravity of the brew in question? Ofttimes, "gushing" is caused by incomplete fermentation or infection (which you feel you have ruled out), which is not always detectable via tasting. What is the mineral content of your water? All the Burton-on-Trent brews (Double Diamond and Bass, to name a couple) are made with extremely high mineral content water. Write back to us about the O.G. & F.G. & exact recipe, including priming agent & dosage. Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 10 Aug 93 10:49 CDT From: "Michael Barre" <MBARRE at NOMVS.LSUMC.EDU> Subject: Second batch of beer Thanks to the advice given by Mark, Al, and Tom over this forum, my second batch of beer is good! I made a Pale Ale using Northwestern Gold extract, Wyeast (American Ale), Cluster hop pellets (the homebrew store's suggestion), and Ozone spring water. Hot break: After the water/malt had heated for 25 minutes, it began changing from very cloudy to egg-drop-soupy. After 45 mintues it reached a fast boil and I then added 3/4'ths (1.5 oz.) of the hops. Aroma hops: After another 30 minutes, I added the last 0.5 oz. and removed the pot to the ice-water-filled-sink. Cold break: After 45 mintues I poured the wort into a settling bucket (w/out straining), leaving 1/8'th inch of hop residue in the pot. A couple of minutes later I poured the wort into the carboy with 3 gallons of jug-aerated water, leaving behind more residue. Liquid Yeast: It smelled good. Rehydrated dried yeast does not. I pitched the yeast into the 75F wort. 12 hours later no yeast activity was apparent. After 24 hours, the beer was swimming and foaming like crazy. Fermantation continued for 5 days. I then racked to a secondary, losing the siphon once because I didn't realize that the curve of the siphon tube in the carboy put the racking tip almost 4 inches up off the bottom. Irish Moss: I rehydrated about 2 teaspoons of I.M. and added it to the secondary before racking, resulting in globs-of-goop all in the beer, which congregated at the top and bottom after 4 days. Racking tip: I then siphoned the beer into the bottling bucket using the racking tip in the trub and discarding the first cup or two of beer. Bottled Beer: Clear and tasty! Thanks. Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 10 Aug 93 10:48:45 CDT From: paulb%mist at juliet.ll.mit.edu (Paul Biron) Subject: OKC brew stores Does anyone know of any H.B. supply stores in the Oklahoma City/Mustang/Yukon area. We're moving there in October and I need to know if I should stock up in Ft. Worth before the move. Paul Biron MIT/Lincoln Laboratory Dallas, TX Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 10 Aug 93 09:01:14 -0700 From: pascal at netcom.com (Richard Childers) Subject: New Sanitizing Agent ? Has anyone experimented with hydrogen peroxide as a sanitation agent ? I'm not clear on the mechanics of the substance, but, besides reacting with organic matter, it also super-oxidizes the solution it is added to. I have heard of hydrogen peroxide being used as a food additive, also. The theory is that the environment humans evolved in was far more rich with oxygen than it is now, especially in city environments - and that this subtle but detectable oxygen deprivation leads to anaerobic bac- -teria populations increasing within one's body ... resulting in more opportunities for infection, lethargy, et caet. Specific infections I've heard it mentioned in connection with include herpes and warts ( both anaerobic viruses ), as well as AIDS. I'm not saying that it's a panacaea, just noting that there is research on this topic here in the Bay Area. ( I've been trying this - neither hydrogen nor oxygen are poisonous, and hydrogen peroxide is recommended by dentists after oral surgery, as a dilute mouth rinse - and a wart on one finger *does* appear to be in remission. Just a data point. I'm using three droppers-full, twice a day, in a glass of Tang, each time. ) In connection with brewing, could it not also be used to oxygenate the wort ? Just a wild idea, but it makes intuitive sense to me ... Further experimentation is indicated ... - -- richard | | | "A cloak is no longer a cloak if it does not keep one warm." | | | | richard childers pascal at netcom.com | Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 10 Aug 1993 09:07:49 -0700 (PDT) From: gummitch at techbook.com (Jeff Frane) Subject: Re: Dry Hopping Belgians & Irish Moss NOT > From: "Robert K. Toutkoushian" <TOUTKOUS at vx.cis.umn.edu> > Subject: Question about dry hopping > > Hello there: > > I have a question concerning dry hopping. This is my first shot at > this, so please bear with me: > > I am in the process of making a Belgian Ale (just pitched it this > morning :-) ), and the recipe calls for dry hopping w/2 oz. Fuggles hops. > I understand that dry hopping involves adding hops to the wort after > transferring it to a secondary fermenter. > First of all, this is a bizarre recipe, given that Belgian Ales (in all their utter complexity and diversity) are known for a near-total lack of hop aroma. So, forget it this time. > My problem is that I have a limited amount of brewing equipment, > and no $$$ to expand right now. I have been using a primary fermenter, and > then once the SG has stabilized, transferred to a second carboy that has a > spicket attached to the bottom for bottling (this carboy does not have a > lid). > A carboy by definition, I should think, has some sort of lid, doesn't it? At any rate, what is generally referred to as a carboy is a glass bottle (usually 5-7 gallons); there are things I mightcall a "carboy" in a pinch that are made out of plastic. Are you referring to a plastic bucket? If you can spend the limited $$ necessary to pick up a glass carboy (around $10-12 max.) you would be doing yourself a service -- unless you have a very sterile area to keep your open secondary in. An open primary, maybe, with very vigorous yeast growth, but a secondary is pretty scary. Assuming that you have something safe to put your beer in for a secondary, simply place loose hops in a cheesecloth bag, tie it closed and stuff it in the secondary. For simplicity's sake, don't bother sterilizing rocks or marbles and stuffing them in the bag -- an utter waste of time, in my book. If you want a real hoppy flavor, use very aromatic hops, use lots of them and leave them in for weeks. When you bottle, simply rack over into that dubious secondary with the spigot; the hops will stay in the bag. Putting hops in for a couple of hours is likely a waste of time and effort; for that result you could simply add hops at the end of the boil, or run the hot wort over fresh hops on the way to the fermenter. But for now, leave them out! > From: steve at Pentagon-EMH6.army.mil (Steve Lichtenberg x79300) > > Second-- > I purchased some plugs of Irish moss from a garden supply store about > a year ago. These are incredible growers; going from <1" plugs when > originally planted to > 18" clusters in just 1 year. They make a great > ground cover with a thick compact mass of growth about 1 1/2" tall. A neat > addition to the landscape. Now on to the question-- Anyone have any > experience using fresh IM for brewing? Do I need to dry it or can it > be used right from the ground? Any precautions to prevent contamination? > AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAaaHHHHHH!!!! Stop! Irish moss is NOT MOSS! The stuff used in brewing is produced from seaweed (kelp, probably). It's also not from Ireland. Leave your moss on the ground and keep it out of the beer! Speaking (as you were) of kids' movies, we watched Darby O'Gill and the Little People the other night. Those old guys could really suck down the Guinness. (Not the little people; they drank whiskey -- just goes to show what distilled beverages will do to you.) - --Jeff Frane Return to table of contents
Date: 09 Aug 1993 22:06:45 -0600 (CST) From: RBSWEENEY at msuvx2.memst.edu Subject: banned brews A small article in Monday's USA Today caught my attention. Montpelier, Vermont: "The state is cracking down on strong beers, banning restaurants and stores from buying more, Dept. of Liquor Control officials say. Included are malt beverages with higher than 6% alcohol by volume - such as Sierra Nevada or Anchor." I was wondering if any of the digest subscribers in VT could throw some light on this situation. Have there been incidents of rowdy Bigfoot Barley Wine drinkers getting out of control? Or is this just another example of government of the people, government of the people, government of the people? Just curious, Bob Sweeney Department of Management Information Systems Memphis State University RBSWEENEY at MEMST.MSUVX2.EDU Return to table of contents
Date: 11 Aug 1993 00:58:04 -0600 From: "Manning, Martin P" <manning#m#_martin_p at mcst.ae.ge.com> Subject: New Factor The "new factor" Steve Casselman is looking for is the weight-percent yield of extract. It is the fraction of the weight of a mash or kettle ingredient which appears as extract in the wort. A 100% yield will give 46.3 points/lb/gal at 60F, so some typical examples of %-yield are: Dry Malt Extract at 45 pt/lb/gal = 45.0/46.3 = 0.97 (97%) 2-Row Malted Barley at 34 pt/lb/gal = 34.0/46.3 = 0.734 (73.4%) The tables published in Dave Miller's book and in Zymurgy can be converted to %-yield using this factor. Noonan's "Brewing Lager Beer" has good table of %-yield from a number of extract sources, which can be converted to pt/lb/gal, if desired. Professionals generally use %-yield, and the typical lab analysis of a sample of malt or other grain will give extract figures in this form. So, to make 5 gallons of beer of SG 1.048, with an expected yield of 73.4%, the amount of grain needed is (48 x 5) / (0.734 x 46.3) = 7.06 lb. To convert this weight to an equivalent amount of dry malt extract, you need 7.06 x (0.734 / 0.97) = 5.34 lb. Martin Manning Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 10 Aug 1993 10:18:48 -0600 (CST) From: John Mare <cjohnm at ccit.arizona.edu> Subject: RE: Yeast contaminant: Irish moss: Barley water Steve asks about yeast culturing techniques, growing Irish moss, and drinking barley water. About your agar contamination problem: It is hard to comment not being familiar with your technique. A few comments may be helpful. Work in a still (draught-free) place, use a flame (eg. propane torch) and a platinum loop (ex microbiology kit at a hobby shop). Start from a clean liquid culture and after flaming the loop streak the surface of your agar quickly and replace lid. Keep at room temperature for a few days until colonies are visible, place in plastic bag (eg. sandwich bag) and refrigerate. When making starters pick individual colonies with a sterile but cooled loop (dip into clear area of agar plate). DON'T flood agar plate as has been suggested recently. This is a sure way to pick up the odd contaminant which may find its way into you surface culture. "Irish moss" as used in fining during the boil is carageenan, a seaweed found among other places off the coast of Ireland Scotland and Wales. The weed is harvested, dried and flaked or pelleted for use as a fining agent. The "Irish moss" you are growing is another creature unless you have a spot of ocean at your disposal! One of the bane's of my early years growing up in the "British Way" was having to endure "barley water" which my mother prepared because "it was good for you!" This was simply a mild barley broth, strained, and served cold when we were well, and hot with added "Marmite" (yeast extract) when we were ailing! In the Mary Poppins context which you quote there may be a another more spirituous dimension! John Mar!, John's Alehouse, Tucson. Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 10 Aug 93 13:16 CDT From: korz at iepubj.att.com Subject: Rye ale/"New" Formula/dryhopping/moldy plates Kari writes: >Comments: There are some things I'll change when I brew my >next rye ale. First, I'll do a temperature controlled mash >with starch conversion at about 150-155 deg F. I won't use >more than 3-4 ounces rye malt, because the rye malt I use is >very dark and quite bitter, so 7 ounces is simply too much. Interesting. Red Hook Brewing Company is currently making a Summer Rye, which is quite pale. It's an interesting beer and although I was at the brewery and got a tour of the new, *automated* kegging line, I did not get to talk to the brewmaster. So, I did not get the percentage of rye in this beer or what the other base malts might be. Judging from the flavor, I would say that there may be a considerable percentage of wheat in this beer. Could someone from Seattle look into this? Domenick? Darryl? **************************** Subject: I want a new formula Alas, I've lost the original poster's name, and Kieran did post sort-of a formula for what the poster wanted, but I feel that just a couple of number is all that they really needed, so I'm posting my suggestions. For substituting syrup for pale/pils malt, I recommend multiplying by 0.74 and for substituting dry malt extract for pale/pils malt, multiply by 0.67. I used 28 pts/lb/gal for the grain, 38 pts/lb/gal for the malt extract syrup and 42 pts/lb/gal for the dried malt extract. Actually, everything is dependent on the efficiency of the extraction that the author of the recipe achieved and on the brand of syrup/DME you use. A much more accurate way to duplicate all-grain recipes using extract is to look at the OG of the recipe and figure out how much extract you need to hit this target. What I do is use the crystal and roasted malts/grains as they are listed in the recipe and then subtract their contribution from the OG. Here's an example: 5 gallons of Pale Ale with an OG of 1055 that contains 3/4 lb of light crystal malt. 1. subtract away the water (1.000) leaving 0.055 2. let's say you know that you get 0.022 per pound per gallon from your crystal malt, so you do the math: 0.022pts * 0.75lbs / 5 gallons = 0.0033pts 3. subtract the 0.0033 from the 0.055 target and you get about 0.057 4. let's say you know you get 0.040 per pound per gallon from Northwestern Gold Extract, so you decide you will use 6lbs in the 5 gallon batch and make up the difference with dry extract, so again you do the math: 0.040pts * 6lbs / 5 gallons = 0.048pts 5. subtract the 0.048 from the 0.057 and you're left with 0.009pts 6. let's say you know you get 0.044 per pound per gallon from M&F DME, so you do the math: 0.009pts * 5gallons / 0.044pts = 1.02lbs So you use 3/4 lb of crystal malt, 6 lbs of NW Gold and 1 lb of M&F DME. ******************************** Rob writes: > I am in the process of making a Belgian Ale (just pitched it this >morning :-) ), and the recipe calls for dry hopping w/2 oz. Fuggles hops. >I understand that dry hopping involves adding hops to the wort after >transferring it to a secondary fermenter. > > My problem is that I have a limited amount of brewing equipment, >and no $$$ to expand right now. I have been using a primary fermenter, and >then once the SG has stabilized, transferred to a second carboy that has a >spicket attached to the bottom for bottling (this carboy does not have a >lid). If you have the room, add whole Fuggles (they float, so it will be easier to siphon out from under them) to your primary. Let them sit for 7 to 10 days and then bottle as usual. If you don't have the room, you can siphon the beer into your bottling bucket, rinse and re-sanitize your primary and siphon the beer back onto the hops in the primary. *********************** --S (sorry, lost your whole name) writes: >I was going to start a batch of yeast in anticipation of brewing later >in the week. When I went to get my petri dish with the culture on it >out of the fridge, I noticed that the entire surface of the dish was >covered with a green growth of mold :-(. I had to start from a new slant >with a different strain than I had intended to ues. Anyone have any >suggestions on how to improve my techniques in handling cultures so that >this type of contamination does not happen again. Molds are aerobic. Luckily, yeasts are anerobic. You can put your petri dish in a "Tupperware" container and then purge the container with CO2. If you don't have a tank of CO2 handy, you can pour a cup of beer into a pitcher, loosely cover the top and agitate (cheap beer will work for this) briskly. The agitation will cause the CO2 in the beer to come out of solution and you can then pour-off the CO2 (remember, it's heavier than air) into the "Tupperware" container. Work slowly, in a room with still air (turn off the a/c and let the air settle down) and you'll have enough CO2 left in the bottom of the container to displace the air that the molds are breathing. Just picture the CO2 as an invisible liquid, like the fog from a fog machine. Hey, if you have some dry ice available, you can just plop a piece of it next to the petri dish in the tupperware (leave the top open a crack till the dry ice disappears or drill a hole and put in an airlock so the top doesn't blow off). Don't do this work in a damp basement where there's more molds in the air. Al. Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 10 Aug 93 14:37:45 -0400 From: ""Robert C. Santore"" <rsantore at mailbox.syr.edu> Subject: Weddings and homebrew JC Ferguson writes: > I'm getting married in late october of this year and i'd like to supply > at least some if not all of the beer at my wedding. With this in mind, > I have a few questions: > > 1) In today's sue-your-neighbor environment, what kind of legal issues, > Well, I don't see any difference between serving homebrew or commercial brew - unless it is unusually potent or something like that - but you never what what they'll dream up to stick you with. > 2) If it isn't much a legal hassle/worry, I'd like to think about brewing > some stuff up now. I'd like to brew one heavier brew, appropriate for > I am getting married this Saturday and I'll have six kegs of homebrew at the wedding. I brewed two kegs of weizen and two of a bitter that I planned on serving during the day time. Both of those brews were on the light side (O.G. 1.042 or so) so that people won't get schnockered on two glasses. I also plan on having one keg of commercial light beer (which, as my brew- partner is fond of saying, is for those who don't like beer) and one case of non-alcoholic beer. Although that sounds like a lot of beer we have 260 people coming. That averages about 1 pint (or two 8 oz glasses) per person which I think is a sane amount. Of course, there is no guaruntee that one person won't get drunk and I can't police 260 people. So as an added level of control we have hired a bartender to police the kegs and keep an eye on things. It's not a perfect system but we hoped it would be a nice compromise between people having responsible fun and not letting it get out of hand. Estimating that only half the people coming will actually drink beer, that still comes out to two pints per person. Consuming that much beer over a four hour period and in addition to a meal should be within reason. The extra two kegs are a heavier pale ale (still not too heavy though, maybe 1.050? I can't remember off hand). But I am only going to serve that beer in the evening for people staying overnight - one keg at the rehersal and one the day of the wedding. There should be about 40 people for each of those nights and, again, I think that is a sane amount. Good luck on your event! I certainly would recommend getting a head start on it. It's not so far away that you should be worrying about stability problems. I may have more insight into the wisdom of serving homebrew at an event like that when I come back from our honeymoon. - Bob Santore rsantore at mailbox.syr.edu Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 10 Aug 93 11:03 CDT From: akcs.rab at vpnet.chi.il.us (Alan Belke) Subject: Mini Keg System This is my first posting to HBD so please be gentle. First I have an observation and then a question. Since I have been receiving HBD I have noticed many times that a question doesn't seem to get answered. Then all of a sudden there is a post from the person who asked the question saying thanks for the help. What is the protocol here? Are answers supposed to be e-mailed or posted back to the digest? Since I am interested in the digest as a learning tool I, obviously, would prefer the dialog be done in the digest. Now the question: Has anyone seen, used, or done anything with the mini keg system advertised by Brew Ha Ha. It looks very attractive to me since I brew fairly infrequently (4 times a year or less) and it would be nice to get out from under bottles. Thanks, Al Belke Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 10 Aug 93 16:51:01 EDT From: Jim Busch <busch at daacdev1.stx.com> Subject: Weihenstephan #68 & T. Delbrukki In the last digest, <From: Tom.Weicht at arrc.ncsu.edu (respond to deb_neher at ncsu.edu) <Subject: S. delbrukii or S. cerevisiae? <I am a recent arrival to HBD. Welcome! <Saccharomyces delbrukii or S. cerevisiae?? I personally <believe both are technically incorrect. From the best that I have <been able to find in the mycological taxonomy literature, the true <name of this organism is Torulospora delbrukii, this is how the <American Type Culture Collection lists it which sparked my interest <and pursuit of this subject. An incorrect but often used synonym is <Saccharomyces. <AS BREWERS SMALL OR LARGE OUR CONCERN IS THE BIOCHEMISTRY OF <THE YEAST AS IT PERTAINS TO THE FINAL PRODUCT. DON'T let the <taxonomy get you down, but don't slam somebody elses taxonomy when <basing an opinion from a single source either. I am not claiming to be an expert on yeast taxonomy, but I do have some sources. I also do not intend to provoke a flame fest, but here goes.. In the ATCC, S. delbrukki is listed as a valid synonym for T. Delbrukki, but appears to have been isolated from sources other than beer, ie wine and tree sap. So , unless other references are available that I am unaware of, it appears that this organisim is not involved in wort fermentation. Referring to the Weihenstephan catalog , an english translation of the catalog, calls the yeast a top fermenting S. cerevisiae. No doubt that T. Del exists but unless further evidence is found, I will stick with the designation from the Weihenstephan laboratories. Tom's comments regarding the importance of the biochemical properties of the strains in our beer production over the importance of the taxonomy is quite true. I am merely attempting to clarify what I have found to be a confusing aspect of the homebrewing literature. Good brewing, Jim Busch Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 10 Aug 93 14:27:06 -0700 From: arne thormodsen <arnet at kaibutsu.cup.hp.com> Subject: Irish Moss >------------------------------ > >Date: Mon, 9 Aug 93 09:57:45 -0400 >From: steve at Pentagon-EMH6.army.mil (Steve Lichtenberg x79300) >Subject: questions > > Greetings All: > > While setting up a brew session this past weekend, I came up with a few > questions that I was hoping the good people of the net would help me with. > : : >Second-- >I purchased some plugs of Irish moss from a garden supply store about >a year ago. These are incredible growers; going from <1" plugs when >originally planted to > 18" clusters in just 1 year. They make a great >ground cover with a thick compact mass of growth about 1 1/2" tall. A neat >addition to the landscape. Now on to the question-- Anyone have any >experience using fresh IM for brewing? Do I need to dry it or can it >be used right from the ground? Any precautions to prevent contamination? "Irish Moss" for beer is a kind of seaweed. I don't know what kind if "Irish Moss" you are growing, but it sounds like something entirely different. Does the plant grow in solid masses and have a single really small round leaf at the end of each "blade"? I've seen a groundcover like this called "Irish Moss". - --arne : : > >Thanks for the help--- > Keep brewing- > --S >------------------------------ Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 10 Aug 93 14:50:53 PDT From: Robert Pulliam <Robert_Pulliam at rand.org> Subject: Bottling Kegged Beer Greetings, Just another quickie... How does one go about bottling some of his/ her brew that has been kegged? Will I lose my fizz? How/what does a counterpressure filler work/do? Can I build my own? Inquiring minds. Robert J. Pulliam |+|all thoughts, statements, and opinions,|+| Los Angeles, CA. |+|demented or not, should be my own; and |+| pulliam at monty.rand.org |+|I'm certainly not associated . . . . . |+| Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 10 Aug 93 18:16:52 EDT From: dturner at sca.com (David Turner) Subject: Sanitizing swing-top bottles Greetings, I am preparing to bottle my third batch of HB, using swing-top ("Grolsch") bottles for the second time. The first time I used them, I replaced all the rubber gaskets, as they were several years old and suspect. I boiled them at bottling time, i.e., I sanitized them seperately from the bottles. For this round of bottling, I know the bottles are clean (of grunge), and don't plan a TSP bath. A good washing, then a chlorine soak, then bottle. My question: can I leave the rubber gaskets on the bottles during the chlorine soak? Will they absorb chlorine odor/taste? Will they deteriorate? Must I remove them first, and boil them seperately, as I did the first time? Was that more than one question? Thanks for any/all advice...later...DT - ----- David Turner dturner at sca.com Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 10 Aug 93 09:22:07 MST From: vlsiphx!karoshi!vahsen_j at enuucp.eas.asu.edu (Jim Vahsen) Subject: Subject: A Draft Chili Beer? On Dave's question about chili beer, Try using some habanaro(sp) pepper extract, a little dab'le do ya... Hot stuff. Don't think I'd actually throw them in the keg, but the extract would be OK. Be aware that these are considerably hotter than your average chili pepper... BigJim vlsiphx!vahsen_j at asuvax.eas.asu.edu Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 10 Aug 1993 15:34:04 -0700 From: Michael.Burgeson at Eng.Sun.COM (J. Michael Burgeson) Subject: water filter I was in the plumbing supply store yesterday, and saw filter housings and cartridges on sale. I thought this would be the perfect opportunity to add a water filter to my brewery. I intend to removing chlorine and particulate matter from my brewing water, so I was looking at activated carbon filter cartridges. But one carbon filter caught my eye because it also claimed to filter at the 0.5 micron level. Isn't 0.5 microns fine enough to remove most bacteria and micro-flora? Would someone who is microbiologically literate please comment? Assuming the output side of the filter was sanitary, wouldn't water filtered at this level be safe to rinse sanitized brewing equipment, without worrying about introducing a contaminant? Or are there contaminants that would pass through this filter? The rinse/don't rinse debate has gone on here for a long time, but I never heard of anyone using filtered water to rinse. It seems this would be a great time savings over pre-boiling rinse water, and you have the added benefit of being able to filter your brewing water. I hope I'm right 0.5 microns being fine enought to remove bacteria. BTW, there were 2 different 0.5 micron, activated carbon cartridges on the shelf, and were priced at $24 and $40. - --mik Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 10 Aug 1993 16:12:24 MDT From: "KEVIN SCHUTZ, X-1738, M/S 10125" <kschutz at atmel.com> Subject: Suggestions/Thoughts/Recipes for Plum beers/meads? Hi, I was recently at a local Farmer's Market, and noticed that this year's crops of Plums are looking pretty good and at fairly decent prices. I was wondering if anyone has any good comments, thoughts, and/or recipes for some Plum beers or Meads. I'm interested in both beers and meads. Also, my favorite Plums are the dark purple varieties. I've seen them labeled as "Western Purple" Plums. I'm not sure if that's a real variety or not. We also have access to some red and green (when ripe) plums. Thanks in advance, Kevin Return to table of contents
End of HOMEBREW Digest #1201, 08/11/93

[Back] Back up a level. Converted, by HBD2HTML written by K.F.L.