---

   FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
        Shawn Steele, Digest Janitor
        Thanks to Rob Gardner for making the digest happen!

Contents:
  Re: Seibolt (sic) Institute ("Robert Marshall")
  Gelatine (Rob Moline)
  brew skool,corn,wheat ((Dutch))
  RE: Fruit Beers ("Frederick L. Pauly")
  Re: What's Aeration (KennyEddy at aol.com)
  Wooden Beer Barrels ((Jim Overstreet))
  RE: HSA when decocting, Blue whale ale, Hop pellets ((George De Piro))
  Re: Indoor Propane (RUSt1d?)
  Cream Stout?? (Schwab_Bryan at CCMAIL.ncsc.navy.mil)
  Fruit Flavorings (Fred Hardy)
  Re: Blue Whale Ale (RUSt1d?)
  Propane (Scott Dornseif)
  Aeration. (Russell Mast)
  Condensation Problems? (Michael Caprara)
  Mash tun and extraction testing (Alan)
  Fruit Fresh Falsehood ((Jim Layton 952-3733))
  blue whale bitterness (M257876 at sl1001.mdc.com (bayerospace at mac))
  Aeration / a fishy story ("Dave Hinkle")
  Wheeler's Porter article (korz at pubs.ih.lucent.com)
  Aeration; Consumption; Propane; Hazelnut (Bob Waterfall)

For SUBMISSIONS to be published, send mail to:
  homebrew at aob.org
For (UN)SUBSCRIBE requests, send mail to:
  homebrew-digest-request@ aob.org
  and include only subscribe or unsubscribe in the body of the message.

Please note that if subscribed via BEER-L, you must unsubscribe by sending
  a one line e-mail to listserv at ua1vm.ua.edu that says: UNSUB BEER-L
If your address is changing, please unsubscribe from the old address and
  then subscribe from the new address.
If your account is being deleted, please be courteous and unsubscribe first.
For technical problems send e-mail to the Digest Janitor, shawn at aob.org.

OTHER HOMEBREW INFORMATION
  http://www.aob.org/aob - The AHA's web site.
  http://alpha.rollanet.org - "The Brewery" and the Cat's Meow Archives.
  info at aob.org - automated e-mail homebrewing information.

ARCHIVES:
  At ftp.stanford.edu in /pub/clubs/homebrew/beer via anonymous ftp.  Also
  http://alpha.rollanet.org on the web and at majordomo at aob.org by e-mail.


----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Robert Marshall" <robertjm at hooked.net>
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 1996 19:20:46 +0000
Subject: Re: Seibolt (sic) Institute

Jim asked: 
 
>In other questions - does anyone have the scoop on a place here 
>in Chicago called the Seibolt Institute (sp?).. 
 
Could you possibly be referring to the Siebel Institute?? 
 
If so, I found out yeasterday, that they have a WWW page at: 
 
http://www.siebel-institute.com/welcome 
 
Hope that helps. 
 
Later, 
 
Robert Marshall 
robertjm at hooked.net 
 
homepage: http://www.hooked.net/users/robertjm 
- ---------------------------------------------- 
"In Belgium, the magistrate has the dignity 
of a prince, but by Bacchus, it is true 
that the brewer is king." 
 
          Emile Verhaeren (1855-1916) 
          Flemish writer 
- ------------------------------------------------ 

Return to table of contents


From: Rob Moline <brewer at kansas.net>
Date: Wed, 24 Jul 1996 23:05:46 -0500
Subject: Gelatine

Jethro's Gelatine- 
        OK, one more piece of evidence that Jethro doesn't know .... 
Gelatine.....Andy taught me..(previous HB)..to stir gelatine into cold H2O 
for fining...and the beers were clear...after 4 months....(only during 
closed time, waiting for re-opening, at least sanitation was good)..but 
after getting on to Dry_fine...(Isinglass)...I still use gelatine in cold 
Isinglass prep, using gelatine added at the last...and just blended into 
cold I-glass prep....then added to initial beer flow into secondary.... 
        The beers are clear...to the point that one respondent to the BEER 
SURVEY CARD, said that "the bartender was mistaken, 'cos the wheat was 
clear!! Maybe he didn't know what he was pouring!!" (30 % wheat malt)... 
        To me, Isinglass is the key, but I have used gelatine cold for 2 
years and I won't stop, nor will I heat it... 
Jethro 
 
Cheers! 
Rob Moline 
Little Apple Brewing Company 
Manhattan, Kansas 
 
"The more I know about beer, the more I realize I need to know more about 
beer!"
 

Return to table of contents


From: leake.5 at osu.edu (Dutch)
Date: Thu, 25 Jul 1996 02:36:52 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: brew skool,corn,wheat

yes, yes, yes, I'm finally caught up. went on vacation for two weeks in June 
and just got caught up. 
 
Brew skool - I work for a guy that went to the brew skool in Chicago (short 
session) and apprenticed at the goose island. He said he would of learned 
more about (practical) brewing and running a brewery if he had spent his 
whole time in a brewery. He felt the skool was more for someone who wanted 
to brew for one of the big boys. He is now the brew master (brewer) for 4 or 
5 micros. 
 
corn - I want to brew using corn. The corn i want to use i may only be able 
to get as flower or whole kernel. Which would be better to brew with if I 
can't get grits or flaked corn? It is very likely i will not be able to get 
these because of the variety of corn i want to use. I want to use 1.5 - 2 # 
corn, 8# 2-row, 0.5 - 1# 20 L crystal (maybe the new 2 L German crystal my 
local store just got in) Would 1056 American work OK with this? 
 
wheat - I have read (maybe brewing lager beers) that it is best to grind 
wheat fine so the enzymes in the mash can easily get to the starch. I 
recently talked with someone who though finely milled wheat caused slow or 
stuck sparge so he had his wheat milled so that each kernel was broken into 
approximately five pieces. This seems to me to be more likely to cause a 
difficult sparge. Any thoughts? (this whole paragraph is about malted wheat) 
 
OH Gelatin - This may not be popular but why use animal products in your 
beer when most often they are not necessary. (most gelatin is derived from 
animal sources although some vegetable gelatin is available.) I know that 
swim bladders and gelatin have traditionally been used in some beer but do 
we as home brewers need them. Many things that make beer cloudy also make it 
taste (feel) good and not all beers need to be completely bright IMHO. (I do 
consume met but not every day like beer) 
 
Private e-mail is great 
I don't want to start another grind and mill thread. If these questions are 
repeats sorry. 
 
walter 
leake.5 at osu.edu 
 

Return to table of contents


From: "Frederick L. Pauly" <flp2m at galen.med.virginia.edu>
Date: Thu, 25 Jul 1996 08:18:34 -0400
Subject: RE: Fruit Beers

I've tried making a few fruit beers, using fresh fruit in primary 
or secondary fermenters. In both cases the beers had some slight 
aroma and a little tase of the fruit but there was always a 
drying finish (tannin ?). 
Recently I visted the Potomac brewery in Northern Virginia and 
had a chance to try their new Raspberry Wheat. It was very nice. 
There was a nice fruit aroma and then some fruit flavor but the 
finish was good crisp clean beer. They use fruit extract and if I 
remember right they add it to the bright tank, nothing in the 
fermenter. They use their regular ale yeast and ( I can't 
remember) maybe 40 or was it 60% wheat. The beer was light bodied 
with a nice hop balance. Probably the best micro fruit beer I've 
tried. FWIW 
Rick Pauly 
Nuc Med Tech 
Charlottesville,VA 

Return to table of contents


From: KennyEddy at aol.com
Date: Thu, 25 Jul 1996 08:30:24 -0400
Subject: Re: What's Aeration

Mike Spinelli asked about aeration of wort: 
 
> So what is it?  Am I shaking my ass off for nothing?  Does the yeast care 
what 
> method is used?  If aeration means adding more O2 than is already in the 
wort, 
> than why even shake? 
 
Aeration is the mixing of air in the *cool* (<85F) unfermented wort, to 
dissolve as much oxygen as possible.  The oxygen is used by the yeast in its 
growth phase.  Good aeration promotes faster growth (less chance of 
infection) and healthier yeast (less off-flavors, fewer stuck-ferments). 
 Much of this was debated in detail here recently by the HBD Yeast Gurus. 
 
In HBD1928, A. J. deLange (where are ya, boy?) did an experiment to determine 
the effectiveness of shaking vs aquarium-pumping with a stone vs O2 with a 
stone.  He was able to measure dissolved oxygen relative to saturation for 
each method.  Following is a brief summary: 
 
"In a recent experiment I found the following levels of dissolved oxygen 
(relative to saturation) in 2.5 gal of water in a 5 gallon carboy (1) 
shaken VERY vigorously; (2) aerated with compressed air bubbled through an 
airstone with gentle swirling and (3) pure oxygen bubbled through an 
airstone with gentle swirling: 
 
       Time             Shaking      Compressed Air      Oxygen 
        1 minute         55%             40%               85% 
        2                70              62               145 
        3                75              75                - 
        4                80              82 
        5                82              90 
        6                84              92 
        8                87              98    " 
 
He also mentioned that dissolved O2 was about 7% at the start in all three 
experiments.  Now, the question is, how much oxygen (realtive to saturation) 
is "enough"?  If 70% is good, then any of these methods is adequate.  If 100% 
is needed, obviously a different answer results. 
 
When I first "discovered" aeration, I used the splashing-siphon method.  Then 
I went to the shake-the-carboy routine, followed most recently by a "Venturi 
tube" on the fermenter fill tube from the boiler to the carboy.  I noticed a 
big difference in taste and lag time going from no aeration to 
splashing-siphon, but little difference in taste thereafter (though lag time 
is shorter still with the Venturi tube).  Either the O2 from splashing is 
adequate or my latest technique is not hugely better than the original.  But 
in any case it's a great improvement over nothing at all!! 
 
********* 
 
Ken Schwartz 
KennyEddy at aol.com 
http://users.aol.com/kennyeddy 

Return to table of contents


From: wa5dxp at worldnet.att.net (Jim Overstreet)
Date: Thu, 25 Jul 1996 13:03:48 +0000
Subject: Wooden Beer Barrels

Many years ago, I purchased two wooden barrels from a local 
cooper for making beer.  He informed me that beer barrels were 
always lined with a coating of paraffin (wax).  I saw him do 
the coat as I was there when he finished assembling my two kegs. 
He coated all interior surfaces with melted wax and a torch 
before assembling the final end piece, then poured the 
flaming melted wax in through the bung to seal 
up the end and swished it around.  I am sure there was an art to 
doing this just right, but he made it look simple.  At the time 
he showed me charred barrels he made for people who liked to 
further age their whiskey. 
 
In previous articles I have seen refrence to "brewer's pitch" coating 
the kegs holding IPA for it's long journey to India.  It was 
probably some type of pitch with the volatiles boiled out so 
the beer's flavor would not be contaminated.  Or, perhaps this pitch 
was a contributing factor to the unique East Indian IPA flavor 
some are trying to re-capture?  As paraffin is also a petroleum 
byproduct, could brewer's pitch and paraffin be the same coating? 
 
The life of these barrels was probably short-lived, as there was 
no liquid in contact with the wood to swell it up to maintain 
the hoop tension.  Or, after use, the coating could be removed 
with boiling water and used in a conventional manner. 
 
This could be an interesting subject for a budding brewmaster's 
research paper. 
 

Return to table of contents


From: George_De_Piro at berlex.com (George De Piro)
Date: Thu, 25 Jul 1996 08:54:04 -0700
Subject: RE: HSA when decocting, Blue whale ale, Hop pellets

     Mike Swan asks what Noonan means when he says that boiling the 
     decoction deaerates it. 
 
     Any air (oxygen) that may have been picked up earlier in the mash will 
     be purged by boiling because the solubility of O2 in 212F water is 
     nil.  To tell you the truth, I can't think of why this should matter; 
     if you splash around a lot when adding the decoction back to the main 
     mash, you'll pick up O2 again! 
 
     The reason you should be concerned about HSA (hot-side aeration) when 
     collecting wort from the sparge is that it will be sitting in your 
     kettle at ~160F for a while during the sparge.  This could be enough 
     time for some oxidation of the wort to occur, despite the low 
     solubility of O2 at 160F.  By the time you bring it up to a boil and 
     purge the O2, the damage is done. 
 
     In reality, pro brewers splash like mad as the grain flows into the 
     mash tun at mash-in, and they don't care about it. Just try to keep 
     aeration of the hot mash/wort to as little as reasonably possible, and 
     you'll be fine. 
 
     Duffy asks if the hop rate of Blue Whale Ale seems a bit high.  Keep 
     in mind that I am a malt-head, and firmly believe (from experience) 
     that most "beginner" homebrew is over-hopped, but that's 33 ALPHA ACID 
     UNITS for bittering a 5 gallon batch!!!  GOOD GOD!!!  If you use 
     pellets the stuff will be incredibly harsh! In fact, even with whole 
     cones, the stuff will be harsh!  On top of that, there's a very 
     substantial amount of flavoring hops, and case you still don't get it, 
     it's dry hopped to boot! 
 
     Further, those high-alpha hop varieties aren't my personal favorites 
     because they can be a bit harsh, even in more reasonable quantities. 
 
     Definitely back off on the hops, and if you use pellets, back off even 
     more because you'll get higher utilization out of them. 
 
     A question just occurred to me:  in Fix's book 
     "Vienna/Marzen?Oktoberfest he states (sorry, no page # and I'm 
     paraphrasing) that it is generally accepted that multiple additions of 
     hop pellets do not make a difference in their contribution to the 
     beer. 
 
     Who accepts this?  It is directly contrary to my experience.  I find 
     that they don't need to boil nearly as long as whole cones, but 
     boiling them for 40 minutes certainly seems to add more bitterness 
     than boiling them for 10 minutes (which adds flavor). 
 
     Have Fun! 
 
     George De Piro  (Nyack, NY) 

Return to table of contents


From: RUSt1d? <rust1d at swamp.li.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Jul 1996 10:04:24 -0400
Subject: Re: Indoor Propane

>I don't understand the paranoia here. A couple of years ago we had exploding 
>propane tanks up in the very high country where they had record snowfall and 
>the propane pressure regulators got frozen under a LOT of snow. Then they lost
>their seals and leaked a lot of propane into cabins that ended up exploding, 
>but we're just talking about small tanks inside a basement aren't we? 
> 
>I say go for it Mike. 
> 
>Charley 
> 
 
Ack! Boy that's some advice. I guess "small tanks" that leak only cause 
small explosions, which can only start small fires... 
 
I say go for it Mike. 
 
John Varady 
Boneyard Brewing 
 
Note on HBRCP: If you got it and have problems with fonts, you probably need 
to install the two fonts that came with it to windows. 
 
************************** 
** rust1d at li.com        ** 
** John Nicholas Varady ** <-- Now Engaged. 
** Eve Courtney Hoyt    ** 
************************** 
 
http://www.netaxs.com/people/vectorsys/index.html 
 

Return to table of contents


From: Schwab_Bryan at CCMAIL.ncsc.navy.mil
Date: Thu, 25 Jul 96 09:02:47 CDT
Subject: Cream Stout??

 
     Greetings, I was wondering here ( yeah I have nothing better to do 
     during Uncle Sugars time than to sit and ponder the possibilities of 
     Brewin' that better batch of beer , than to worry about his Defense 
     Systems...) on if it is possible, or even an accepted practice if and 
     when one is brewin' up a Stout to add some powdered Milk to the mash 
     bed? Or is there something more in line and accepted practice when one 
     is brewin up a Cream Stout?  I have searched the Cats Meow, as well 
     past issues of Zymurgy and BYOB with out any sucess. I am sur I hae 
     read something in one of these magazines before which gave me the idea 
     but with all that is going on with Defense Buget Cutting and Job 
     security these days my mind is a hazey shade of confusion!! 
     On another note, if anyboby gets over the Victory Brewing Company in 
     Dowingtown PA, it is wort your visit.  GREAT BREWS, Good Atmosphere ( 
     some of the waitresses need to lighten up abit though! :) ) Good pizza 
     even.  Good Job Jim!!:):):) 
 
     Bryan 
 

Return to table of contents


From: Fred Hardy <fcmbh at access.digex.net>
Date: Thu, 25 Jul 1996 10:27:46 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Fruit Flavorings

 
 
Todd Kirby asks a very good question regarding fruit flavorings found in 
HB shops. Todd, they are inexpensive and good. 
 
Purists will insist that you must use fresh or frozen fruits, and for them 
that is true. There is, however, an excellent reason to use the 
flavorings: ease of use. Many of those exponents of real fruit use malt 
extract instead of all grain for the base beer. Who is kidding who here? 
 
A neat way to try these flavorings is bottle 1/2 (or some fraction) of 
your base brew, add an appropriate amount of flavoring to the bottling 
bucket, stir, and continue to bottle. You can adjust the amount of 
flavoring next time if you aren't fully happy with the results. 
 
These flavorings are no different than real fruit when it comes to how 
much is enough? It depends on two things - the beer and the fruit. Darker 
beers usually mean more flavoring to get the aroma and flavor threshold 
above the dark malt effect. Fruits such as plums have a much less 
aggressive flavor/aroma profile than raspberries. Lower flavor profile 
usually means more fruit, but it depends on the effect you are seeking. 
 
Using the split batch approach lets you quickly (relatively speaking) 
decide if the flavorings work for you, or if you prefer to go the real 
fruit route. This weekend I will sip a mild cherry ale (English Mild 
fermented with sweet (Bing) cherries) while I bottle 1/2 of an American 
pale lager as a pale lager, add peach flavoring (2 1/2 ozs.), and bottle 
the other 1/2 as a peach lager. 
 
Some of us, you see, use both real fruit and flavorings. 
 
Cheers, Fred 
 
=========================================================================== 
We must invent the future, else it will  |          <Fred Hardy> 
happen to us and we will not like it.    | 
[Stafford Beer, "Platform for Change"]   |    email: fcmbh at access.digex.net 
 

Return to table of contents


From: RUSt1d? <rust1d at swamp.li.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Jul 1996 10:46:21 -0400
Subject: Re: Blue Whale Ale

Duff sez: 
>Hop Schedule: 
>1.25 oz Nugget (14.6%) for 90 min. 
>1.25 oz Chinook (11.8%) for 90min. 
>.75 oz Willamette (4.4%) for 20 min. 
>.75 oz Centennial (10.3%) for 20 min. 
>.5 oz Perle (6.6%) for 20 min. 
>.5 oz Chinook (11.8%) for 20 min. 
>1.75 oz Centennial (10.3%)  dryhopped in secondary 
> 
 
Duff, 
 
You did good calculating the IBU's. I ran the schedule through HBRCP and 
came out with 178.2 IBU's. That is bitter! Is it undrinkable? I don't 
know... That's a matter of what you like. Personally, the guideline I 
use for too bitter is when the IBU's exceed the specific gravity. The 
S.G. you should expect is about 1.070, If you would like to match the 
IBU's to the S.G., use this schedule (Rager's utilization numbers): 
 
Name:   Blue Whale                      O.G.:  1.070 
Style:  IPA                           I.B.U.:  71.3 
Volume:  5.0 gallons                  A.B.V.:  7.0% 
 
Grains/Fermentables        Lbs        Hops                  AAU     Oz  Min 
Alexanders's LM Extract   8.00        Nugget               14.6   0.50   90 
Crystal 40, American      1.00        Chinook              11.8   0.50   90 
Crystal 20, American      1.00        Willamette            4.4   0.30   20 
                                      Centeninal           10.3   0.30   20 
                                      Perle                 6.6   0.20   20 
                                      Chinook              11.8   0.20   20 
                                      .70 oz Centennial (10.3%)  dryhopped 
in secondary 
 
John Varady 
Boneyard Brewing Co. 
http:\\www.netaxs.com\people\vectorsys\index.html 
 
 

Return to table of contents


From: Scott Dornseif <SDORNSE at wpo.it.luc.edu>
Date: Thu, 25 Jul 1996 09:54:02 -0500
Subject: Propane

 
 cburns at spider.lloyd.com (Charley) 
Date: Wed, 24 Jul 1996 22:04:57 GMT 
writes: 
 <snip> 
> motten at fcmc.com ([Michael Otten]) asks: 
>>. ... my concern right now is safety. I have heard all the warnings about not
using
>Mike: Serious. The concern about Propane is not CO. It is the propane itself. 
<snip>
 >Guy Gregory 
>I've been using propane to heat my house and cook my food in the kitchen for 2
1/2
>years with absolutely no problem (hasn't gon e "boom" yet). Millions of people
use it in
>rural communities  <snip> 
 > I say go for it Mike. 
 > Charley 
 <snip> 
 
Take Home Point: 
Yes propane is dangerous!  Yes you can use it safely. 
Ensure ventilation during use. 
Store tanks outside. 
Test connections for leaks, every use. 
Know what you're using / doing... someone suggested talking to a professional /
dealer
 
Scott 
 

Return to table of contents


From: Russell Mast <rmast at fnbc.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Jul 1996 10:15:58 -0500
Subject: Aeration.

 
> From: paa3983 at dpsc.dla.mil (Mike Spinelli) 
> Date: Wed, 24 Jul 96 15:18:54 edt 
> Subject: What is Aeration anyway??? 
 
> Me, I shake the shit out of the carboys til I get a nice head ontop. 
 
Me, too.  I hate having any traces of shit in there. 
 
> Am I adding any more O2 than already was in the wort?  No. 
 
Yes!  You are.  The gas in the headspace, at least before fermentation starts, 
is plain old air from the room, about 20% oxygen. When you shake it like that, 
and the foam rises, the fowm is caused by gas passing through the solution, and
entering a colloidal (or maybe suspended?) state.  When the gas passes through 
the solution, some of it will dissolve. 
 
That is to say, when you shake it, you -are- dissolving some of the headspace's
O2 into the wort.  That's how it helps your fermentation go faster. 
 
- -R 

Return to table of contents


From: Michael Caprara <mcaprara at awwarf.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Jul 1996 08:13:34 -0600
Subject: Condensation Problems?

Hello brewing collective (from beginners to pros) 
 
I have a question about condensation in my keg fridge.  I have an old 60's 
model fridge that I use for serving draft homebrew.  It is the short, wide 
type with a small freezer inside.  The controller went out about a month a 
go and I bought one of those controllers with the probe and temp dial. 
When my fridge starts to get warm, it turns on, and when the desired 
temp is reached it turns off.  During the time it has the fridge running, I 
build up the slightest bit of ice in the freezer.  When the fridge is not 
running, the ice melts and collects in the bottom of the fridge.  It isn't 
much, but if I don't clean it regularly it can start to get funky in the 
bottom.
I am relaxed and not worried, but some of my friends seem a little 
hesitant to drink from the tap when there is a little beer/water/funk on the 
bottom. 
 
How (if it is possible) can I keep it from condensating and getting my 
kegs wet.  Thanks. 
 
Brewfully Deadicated 
 
MC          :{P}   <---don't want no more wet kegs! 
 
 

Return to table of contents


From: Alan <amf at ktb.net>
Date: Thu, 25 Jul 1996 09:24:14 -0700
Subject: Mash tun and extraction testing

Beer folk, 
 Most of the designs for coolers turned mash tuns that i've seen 
use slotted pipe manifolds. I use a ~54Qt rectanglular cooler 
with a false bottom made from a piece of plexiglass drilled with 
about 300 1/8" holes. Seems to work great. My question: how food 
safe is plexiglass? It shows no discoloration after ~8 batches 
and rinses easily (if i get to it within one day, yuck). 
 During extraction i test with iodine and notice the liquid 
will quickly stop showing reaction (turning dark purple from 
starch) but the crushed grains will always turn black. Should i 
expect to see no iodine starch reaction in crushed grains once 
i achieve conversion perfection? Thanks. 
al 
Beeeeerr! 
       Homer 

Return to table of contents


From: layton at sh28.dseg.ti.com (Jim Layton 952-3733)
Date: Thu, 25 Jul 1996 11:27:09 -0500
Subject: Fruit Fresh Falsehood

First, I want to thank the contributors to this digest for providing the 
wealth of information. My knowledge of brewing continues to grow. 
 
In HBD 2121, David Burley states that he, in most cases, sterilizes (?) fruit 
for brewing fruit beer using Fruit Fresh. He also states that metabisulfite 
is the active ingredient in this product. Folks, this is not correct. The 
package label lists dextrose, ascorbic acid, and silicon dioxide. That is all. 
The label specifically states that this product contains no sulfites. 
 
I know that some people avoid sulfites for health reasons and some avoid them 
for other reasons. I have used Fruit Fresh for its intended purpose, to 
prevent browning of fruit. I have no experience in using it to make beer but, 
looking at the ingredients, I doubt that it is very effective at killing 
bacteria or wild yeasts. If anyone wants to use this product in their beer but 
is concerned with sulfites, don't be concerned. If you want to sanitize fruit, 
other methods are available. 
 
I have no commercial interest in Fruit Fresh or anything else you may want to 
put in your beer. 
 
Jim Layton 
layton at antme2.dseg.ti.com 
 
 

Return to table of contents


From: M257876 at sl1001.mdc.com (bayerospace at mac)
Date: Thu, 25 Jul 1996 11:53 -0600
Subject: blue whale bitterness

collective homebrew conscience: 
 
my $.02 on the blue whale bitterness question posed by duffy toler: 
 
i have been using two conflicting methods of calculating hop bitterness for 
about a year now.  one is jackie rager's formula, found in the zymurgy 
1990 special issue (i think), and the other method is from the hoptech 
catalog. 
 
the biggest difference in these two methods is the utilization factor, which 
rager states as 30% for a 60 minute boil; hoptech says 20%.  gee, are they 
trying to get me to use more hops???? 
 
the other big difference is that hoptech's method cuts off bitterness 
contribution on a steeper ramp as the end of the boil is approached.  rager's 
formula claims more bitterness can be extracted with under 30 minutes to 
go. 
 
from the looks of the recipe duffy posted, i would say it's probably going to 
be pretty bitter.  but what's the starting gravity going to be?  that's a 
key, and it can't be underestimated (as well as the final gravity).  if the 
beer is relatively unattenuated at the end of fermentation, it can stand to 
be hopped more aggressively, and in my experience it is sometimes pretty 
dramatic how much more hops you can put in there without throwing the balance 
off. 
 
i'm not sure i've had any similar recipes to this one.  i'm normally not 
throwing in that much crystal malt for my ales.  this could tend to push 
the final gravity up, which would allow for higher hopping rates. 
 
i will make one comment regarding the use of high alpha hops for bittering: 
i've noticed a bit of a harsher flavor when using galena for bittering as 
opposed to using lower alpha hops ( for lagers, i normally use liberty to 
bitter them ).  i've seen some recent material in zymurgy that talks to 
this issue.  anybody else out there have this same idea about the high 
alpha hops?  i used to read that "alpha is alpha", but it sure doesn't 
taste like it to me.  these lager batches were virtually identical in 
every aspect, except for the bittering hops.   could it just be the 
particular hops i used in the recipe?  they were '95 galena. 
 
(i must apologize if this particular topic has been recently covered. i've 
only been getting the hbd for a few weeks now. ) 
 
hey, what about that decoction mash question i had???? 
 
brew hard, 
 
mark bayer 

Return to table of contents


From: "Dave Hinkle" <Dave.Hinkle at aexp.com>
Date: 25 Jul 1996 09:42:18 -0700
Subject: Aeration / a fishy story

Mike asks: 
" What does Aerating the wort mean?  ... Am I shaking my ass off for nothing? 
Does the yeast care what method is used? If aeration means adding more O2 than 
is already in the wort, than why even shake?" 
 
Aeration: It's simply dissolving air (hence, more O2) into the wort. Gases can 
& do dissolve into liquids.  Without an aerater / air pump in an aquarium, the 
fish will suffocate from lack of O2 after a day or two. Even blowing through a 
straw into a glass of water will aerate it (exhalation is still around 15% O2, 
the reason why rescue breathing works).  The problem with exhalation through 
wort would be the stuff you expel besides air, such as saliva.  Shaking is one 
of several ways to force more air to get dissolved in the wort.  Note that 
pumping pure O2 into the wort is actually oxygenation, not aeration.  Aeration 
puts other gases (ie. "air") in besides just O2.  I don't think the yeast care 
how the O2 gets in there, as long as it IS in there.  I've never read effects 
of other dissolved gas levels on beer yeast, but I'm sure a yeast rancher has 
studied it somewhere. 
 
Dave Hinkle 
Phoenix, AZ 
 
 

Return to table of contents


From: korz at pubs.ih.lucent.com
Date: Thu, 25 Jul 96 12:05:26 CDT
Subject: Wheeler's Porter article

Steve writes: 
>Overall, I think that Al's objections to Wheeler's porter article were too 
>harsh and generally unfounded. 
 
I have brought in my copy of Foster's Porter as well as Dr. John Harrison's 
Old British Beers and How to Make Them, the Summer 1996 issue of Zymurg 
(which contains two articles about Porter) and Wheeler/Protz's Brew Your 
Own Real Ale.  Oddly, Wheeler himself perpetuates the Harwood story on 
page 139! 
 
I was wrong about Foster contradicting Wheeler.  I've checked all the 
above sources and there are indeed many stories on how Porter came to be, 
but all the authors mention that none are definitive.  I appreciate the 
information on Rodenbach from Peter Bouckaert... this extinquishes my 
skepticism regarding the ties between Porter and Rodenbach. 
 
Steve writes: 
 
>> For the record, I personally get no acetic (vinegary) character 
>>in either of the Rodenbach beers. 
> 
>You didn't taste the right bottle :-). 
> 
>Seriously, there is extremely wide variation from oak barrel to oak barrel 
>at Rodenbach.  A member of our local homebrew club (Sarah White)had a very 
>personalized tour of Rodenbach a couple of years ago.  She walked around 
>the brewery with Peter, tasting samples from many of the 294 aging barrels. 
>Sarah reported that the variation between aging tanks was fascinating, one 
>would be lactic, another acetic, another like New England style cider. 
 
Been there, done that... well, I didn't get to taste as much at Rodenbach 
as Sarah did but I was there and have, over the years, tasted a great deal 
of both the Rodenbach and Grand Cru.  I still assert that I don't smell 
a noticeable level of acetic acid in either.  What I've gathered from my 
private tour of Rodenbach last summer as well as from reading, that only 
*selected* vats (barrel is rather a misnomer... these things are nearly 10 
feet tall and 10 or 12 feet in diameter!) become Grand Cru.  The ones that 
are in the extreme are used for blending (makes sense, no?). 
 
>Al, you also didn't fully quote Wheeler, he clearly stated that the acidity 
>of Rodenbach Grand Cru may be mellowed by extended aging - this is exactly 
>the same discussion that has been going on regarding esterification in the 
>lambic digest.  The Brett activity in the aging barrels may be enough to 
>get the acetic acid level close to or below threshold 
 
My point was that in neither product do I get a noticeable level of acetic 
character... I was not contesting the fact that the beer is acidic.  Jim 
posted data that the lactic was clearly dominant (even in the unlikely 
extremes: min lactic, max acetic), on average twice to two and a half times 
more lactic than acetic.  If you will recall, I was the *originator* of that 
thread in the Lambic digest.  I'm the one that pointed out that older 
Lambics and pLambics are less sour most likely due to esterification. 
 
My other point was that indeed there are two different types of microbiota 
contributing the two different types of acids (lactic and acetic), a point 
that Wheeler was unsure about.  He also hailed Guinness's blending-in soured 
beer as being a new revival while they have been doing it in their stouts 
for years.  There were my greatest gripes and really the only parts of my 
post that were harsh. 
 
Al. 
 
Al Korzonas, Palos Hills, IL 
korzonas at lucent.com 
Copyright 1996 Al Korzonas 

Return to table of contents


From: Bob Waterfall <waterr at albany.net>
Date: Thu, 25 Jul 1996 13:14:51 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Aeration; Consumption; Propane; Hazelnut

 
Mike Spinelli asks for a clearer definition of aeration of the wort: 
 
>Me, I shake the shit 
>out of the carboys til I get a nice head ontop.  Am I adding any more O2 than 
>already was in the wort?  No. 
 
The short answer is: Yes you are. You're not wasting your time shaking your 
carboy. 
 
The long answer is: Boiling the wort gets rid of just about all of the 
dissolved O2.  Eventually, wort in contact with air would dissolve O2 from 
the air to reach equilibrium at about 8 or 9 mg/L (I don't recall the exact 
number but it has appeared in HBD in the past).  The key word is 
*eventually*.  The yeast need the O2 pronto (during the first 8 to 24 
hours?).  Shaking the wort helps to speed up the dissolution of O2 from the 
air in the headspace.  Using an aquarium pump speeds it up even more.  Using 
an aquarium pump with an in-line air filter reduces the chances of 
infection.  Using bottled O2 speeds it up even more and almost eliminates 
the chance of infection (from this part of the process anyway). 
 
The equilibrium concentration of O2 in the wort is higher by about 5 times 
for wort in contact with pure O2.  Theoretically, you can get your wort 
dissolved oxygen (DO) level up to about 40 ppm.  I seem to recall that this 
is actually too much for the yeast, but don't quote me on that.  Assuming 
that noone is keeping the wort under a pure O2 blanket though, the DO level 
would outgas back down to the 8 or 9 ppm level *eventually* even in the 
absence of yeast or other O2-using organisms.  Someone (AJ?) published some 
experimental data on aerating/oxygenating wort several months ago in HBD. 
As I recall it showed basicallly what I described above; increasing amounts 
of DO from boiled wort->shaken wort->aquarium pump->bottled O2 given a 
reasonable amount of time in treating by each method. 
 
Of course, all this has nothing to do with hot-side aeration, which is a Bad 
Thing.  Someone on r.c.b was confused about why, if boiling gets rid of the 
DO, is HSA from sparging a problem.  The answer to that is the DO then gets 
involved in reactions with components of the wort (melanoidins??).  Once 
those reaction products are formed, boiling won't get rid of them. 
 
************ 
 
Bill Rust wonders how much beer to brew for his wedding: 
 
Congratulations.  For our wedding, we made enough to give everyone a bottle 
of homebrew (root beer for the kids and non-drinkers) with custom labels by 
yours truly and ribbons to match the color scheme instead of little bags of 
candy coated almonds or whatever.  That was less brewing but if I never have 
to tie a bow in another piece of ribbon, it will be too soon.  FWIW, this 
Memorial Day we went through 2 cornys in about 4 or 5 hours with 50 people 
(including a few kids, non drinkers, winos, and someone who left a few 
Silver Bullets behind to clutter up my beer fridge).  Some friends recently 
got married,  I think they had three cornys and about 100 people and 
finished it off well before the festivities were over. 
 
************* 
 
The basement use of outdoor propane cookers thread once again rears its ugly 
head: 
 
Yes propane is regularly used in rural communities for stoves, dryers, etc. 
You will notice that the tanks are outside to eliminate the propane pooling 
in the basement next to a water heater pilot light syndrome.  Also, gas 
lines have (we hope) been fitted by someone who knows what s/he is doing. 
Also, normal houshold appliances are rated well below the 100,000+ Btu/hr 
ratings of your typical outdoor cooker. 
 
As an air pollution engineer, I would say your biggest concerns would be 
carbon monoxide from poor combustion (throttled down hole-in-a-pipe type 
burners) and nitrogen oxides from good combustion (ring burner going full 
tilt).  Unfortunately I don't have any data for propane cookers to back this 
up.  I do have emission factors from USEPA for Liquified Petroleum Gas 
combustion in commercial boilers (generally 300,000 to 10 million Btu/Hr). 
They say you should assume NOx (as NO2) at 14 lb/1000 gal fuel and CO at 1.9 
lb/1000 gal.  The gallons are gallons of vapor, not the liquid fuel.  I 
would assume that we would produce less NOx but more CO than boilers due to 
the open flame, but I'll use those figures anyway just to get a ballpark 
figure.
 
Given a typical heating value of 91,500 Btu/gallon, let's assume we burn 1 
gallon per hour to make it easy.  That's 0.0019 lb CO and .014 lb NOx 
produced in a 1 hour boil.  If your room is about 5000 cu. ft. (about 
20'x30'x8')and has minimal ventilation, you would have concentrations of 
24.5 ppm NOx and 5 ppm CO.  Of course if you have poor ventilation the CO 
will jump way up (a factor of 500 could be considered typical IMHO).  That 
would put your CO level well over the IDLH (immediately dangerous to life or 
health) level of 1500 ppm.  On the bright side, the levels of NOx would be 
much lower than predicted when you die of CO poisoning.  The IDLH for NO2 is 
50 ppm.  The applicable workplace standards for these are 35 ppm (8 hr) and 
200 ppm (Ceiling never to be exceeded) for CO and 1 ppm (Short Term - 15 
min) for NO2. 
 
Adequate ventilation can lessen these concerns.  But adequate ventilation 
does not mean having a window open.  I'm talking about commercial kitchen 
range hoods here.  "Industrial Ventilation" (17th Ed., Amer. Conf. of Gov. 
Indust. Hygienists, 1982) recommends 125 cfm/sq ft of hood area for 
island-type hoods which is about the closest thing they have to our problem. 
The hood you would need would be about 5 sq ft or so set several feet above 
the burner.  For that size hood then we're talking about at least 625 cfm. 
That comes out to 7.5 air change-overs per hour which seems low.  I would up 
it to at least 20 changeovers per hour or 1700 cfm.  I would also go to more 
effort than these back of the envelope calculations, but you get the idea. 
 
 
After attempting to copy Longshot Hazelnut Brown (Annetmark at aol.com) Mark 
Tumarkin says: 
 
>I tried them and found the hazelnut extract 
>flavor to be overwhelming in both. To my taste they are both almost 
>undrinkable. Really a shame too, as the Porter tastes excellant otherwise. 
 
I find the Longshot to be almost undrinkable.  It seems that this whole nut 
flavored extract thing came about because of the term "Nut brown ale" which 
as we know has to do with the *color* of a certain product from Tadcaster. 
I will admit that you can find a nutty overtone to the flavor if you really 
want to, but it's subtle (as it should be IMO).  If I want sweet hazelnut 
flavors, I'll take a small glass of Frangelica or a Ferrero Rocher candy, 
thanks. 
 
 
Bob Waterfall <waterr at albany.net>, 
Troy, NY, USA 
 

Return to table of contents