HOMEBREW Digest #2308 Tuesday, January 14 1997

Digest #2307 Digest #2309
		(formerly Volume 02 : Number 028)


To send a message to the digest, send it to <homebrew at aob.org>
To subscribe to the digest, send a message to <majordomo at aob.org>
   with the text "subscribe homebrew-digest" in the body.
To unsubscribe from the digest, send a message to <majordomo at aob.org>
   with the text "unsubscribe homebrew-digest <your email address>"
   in the body.
If you are having difficulty unsubscribing, send a message to
   <majordomo at aob.org> with the text "who homebrew-digest" in the
   body.  This will return a list of all subscribers.  Search this
   list for your email address, and include it, exactly as it appears
   (including any other text) in your unsubscribe message.
If you are still having difficulty, send a message to <admin at softsolut.com>
   with a description of your message, and we shall attempt to resolve
   the problem.

  Heating mash - scorching
  Re: Filtering wort- Sipnonstarter 
  Brew Your Own Magazine
  No-sparge data, planispiral chiller
  inline filters
  Painted Labels
  too much honey?
  Boiling Wort, a reply and a question (George De Piro)
  Stout, Irish and Dry
  RE: Tannins and husk (Steve Alexander)
  Big Head follow-up
  Re:Using kegs as sparage water containers
  mash thickness and mouthfeel
  Inexpensive Mini-Keg Taps
  sucrose and head/German Lager yeasts/hazy, flat beer
  LM34 temperature sensor/RIMS
  lowering pH of canned wort? (Sandy C.)
  re:flames  (humor)
  fear of protein rest
  RIMS heater
  Re:Carrying beer onto planes
  Re:Carrying beer onto planes
  Dry Stout Recipes anyone?
  RE: Sunbeam hops (WD Knudson)
  RIMS water
  Mini-keg composition (Alex Santic)
  Plastic Boilers

---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 09:57:36 -0500 From: Bill Rucker <brewzer at peanut.mv.com> Subject: Heating mash - scorching Hey folks, I have a question pertaining to the design of my brewery. I have thought about using the opposite of an immersion chiller to heat the mash in my new three vessel brewery. What I am thinking is along the lines of an electrically heated RIMS only using a copper coil submersed in hot water and pumping the wort through the coil and back onto the mash bed. I have received a question to this on how hot the water would have to be to prevent scorching or at least denaturing the enzymes as the wort travels through the coil. Not being one of the engineering heavyweights I can't answer the question. I plan on doing some testing to see what I get for temp raises using water and adjusting for the increased viscosity in the wort to avoid problems associated with over heating the mash. Do any of the RIMS inclined folks have any comments as to what their electric heated systems induce on the wort as it passes over the heating element? I realize that I will have more liquid in contact with heat for a longer period of time, depending on what temp the hot water is set for. Can anyone comment on the effect this will have on the wort as it is recirculated through this coil. Some more specifics on design. Using 1/2 barrel sankey kegs with 3/8" copper tubing from mash tun to pump and then flexible (read: vinyl) tubing from pump to heating coil inlet. 20' of copper total for the coil assembly and then 2' of flexible tubing back to the reciculating unit in the mash tun. As I stated before I am not sure what temp to set the Hot Water Tank to yet, but if anyone would care to make a fair calculation or even an educated guess at a place to start from I would appreciate it. Thanks and cheers, Bill Bill Rucker Seabrook Station - Computer Engineering ruckewg at naesco.com Home - brewzer at peanut.mv.com Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 10:27:30 -0500 From: Mark Montminy <markm at dma.isg.mot.com> Subject: Re: Filtering wort- Sipnonstarter On Fri, 10 Jan 1997 08:35:51 EST, Jim Martin writes: >There is a new product out that will start the siphon flow, strain the >hops ( pellet or whole ) and leave just enough wort in the thing to >pour off into a hydrometer jar for a reading. It's called the >"Siphontap" It's easy to use and cheap ! ($ 9.95) Available through >your local homebrew supply store. However, it was conveniently designed to be too large for use with carboys. A glance at the manual explains that you can eliminate the need for racking from a secondary by using a FermenTap. Biting my tongue and assuming this wasn't done to try to get people to buy the Fermentap, it's still a useless product for the many people who primary in glass. I don't think we'll be re-ording any more for our store. Most customer's 2nd remarks have been "how do I get this in my carboy". Once I point out the statement on the back leading them to the Fermentap, they place it back on the shelf in disgust. A good idea poorly executed. - -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Motorola ISG Cable Data Products Group Email: markm at dma.isg.mot.com ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ A Law of Computer Programming: Make it possible for programmers to write in English and you will find the programmers cannot write in English. Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 10:02:13 -0600 (CST) From: Frosty <frosty at cstar.ac.com> Subject: Brew Your Own Magazine Fellow Brewers! Just wondering if anyone had any opinions on the magazine Brew Your Own "The How-To Homebrew Beer Magazine". Zymurgry is pretty good, but since it only comes out 4 times a year (+ the special) I get anxious for more. I got this mailer in my mail (imagine that) a few days ago and thought I would see what folks thought about it before I subscribe. Thanks and hoppy brewing, Frosty - ----------------------------------------------------------- Michael Fross Network Systems Engineer frosty at tp.ac.com Andersen Consulting - ----------------------------------------------------------- Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 11:16:53 -0500 From: "Debolt, Bruce" <bdebolt at dow.com> Subject: No-sparge data, planispiral chiller Another data point for no-sparge brewing. Both batches in a 10 gallon Gott with slotted copper manifold on bottom. Single temp. mashing with no mash-out. Grain crushed with a 2 roller mill at the homebrew store. I reported the results from my first attempt earlier, but to review (Batch 1): - - 3 gallon recipe - -12 lbs of grain mashed with 4 gallons of water (1.33 qt/lb) at 154-150F for 90 minutes - - Collected 2.5 gallons of 1.075 wort, diluted with water to just over 4 gallons at 1.051 SG - - Left 1.5 gallons of liquid in the tun, or 0.5 qt per lb of grain. Batch 2 (new data) - - 5 gallon recipe - - Mashed 19.3 lb malt in 6.5 gallons of water (1.33 qt/lb) at 156F for 60 minutes - - Collected 4.1 gallons of 1.075 SG wort - - Diluted to 6.2 gallons of 1.052 SG wort and boiled as normal - - Again I left 0.5 qt of liquid per lb of grain in the tun Now I can plan for higher and lower gravity brews for my system, since the results appear consistent. Batch 1 has been in the bottle for one week now and tastes great. I typically use Shrier 2 row as the primary base malt. I can't comment on the maltiness of this technique from Batch 1 because I used Marris Otter pale malt for the first time. Batch 2 was made with Shrier, I'll post the subjective tasting comments after bottling. I re-worked my old 1/4" copper immersion chiller into a planispiral chiller this weekend. It worked very well, no agitation to get a uniformly cooled wort. I wish I had done this in '93 when it was first posted. As mentioned in an earlier post I "weaved" 18 gauge copper wire in four radial lines through the coils to keep them from drooping too much when suspended in the wort. If anyone is thinking of doing this many hardware stores sell the tubing (1/4" or 3/8") already in a planispiral shape, all you have to do is bend the ends fo the tubing (inlet and outlet) so that you can run them over the top of the kettle. Give it a spin. Bruce DeBolt bdebolt at dow.com Houston, TX Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 11:28:15 EST From: faymi at earlham.edu Subject: inline filters I've found an aquarium pump and thought I'd try that method of aeration. I sure you've all read this a coupla times before, but where in the hell can I find a .2 micron air filter? Particularly in small town IN? Thanks Michael Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 97 12:03:13 EST From: Kirk Harralson <kwh at smtpgwy.roadnet.ups.com> Subject: Chocolates In December, I brewed a chocolate amber using Hershey cocoa powder that really turned out well. The other day, I saw Hershey's "European Style" cocoa powder at the store and wondered what the difference could be. Can anyone enlighten me on this? Also, I remember reading a few years back about a microbrew that used white chocolate. Has anyone had any experience (good or bad) with white chocolate, brewing or otherwise? What exactly are the flavor differences between this and regular chocolate? Kirk Harralson Bel Air, Maryland Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 12:36:10 EST From: jeffrey C Lawrence <brewmaker1 at juno.com> Subject: Painted Labels Does anyone have a way to remove painted labels from Corona and the 22 oz. versions of Rolling Rock bottles? I have tried single edge razor blades and paint remover as well as turpentine and mineral spirits. I like the clear bottles for part of my batches so I can see the clarity of the brew. The large bottles speak for themselves. Either post replies to HBD or e-mail ma direct at Brewmaker1 at Juno.com. Thanks! Jeff "It's not 'What doesn't kill us makes us stronger,' but 'What doesn't kill us drives us insane.'" Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 12:43:18 -0500 From: kathy <kbooth at scnc.waverly.k12.mi.us> Subject: too much honey? I know this is a mead question on a beer format but...... I started a 4+g of SG 1.103 mead with 1 t yeast nutrients and 2.5 oz acid blend and 2 tablets vit B1 and a cup of champaigne yeast slurry from a second racking of my 25g of ciderand a temp of 65F. Four days later....nada. I bot a packet of dry wine yeast and placed it in a starter at 110F of water and the must. 6 hrs later it was exploding so I pitched it. Two days later....nada. Is the SG of 1.105 just too much honey for yeasts? How much should I dilute? Private email is fine. cheers and TIA jim booth, lansing,mi Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 12:59:33 -0800 From: George De Piro <George_De_Piro at berlex.com> Subject: Boiling Wort, a reply and a question (George De Piro) Hi all! In the last digest somebody from down under asked if boiling is necessary, or if it is enough to just heat the wort to near boiling. From my experience, you can achieve a good hot break by holding the wort at around 200F for several hours without ever boiling. I don't know what kind of hop utilization you would get, though. I also don't think that most people would want to wait several hours to achieve a hot break. Several of you may now be wondering why on earth I know that you can achieve a hot break without boiling. This segues nicely to my question: Can anybody think of some reasons that it would harm the wort to heat it to ~200F, then let it sit overnight before continuing the brewing process (T ~140F the next morning)? I have had to do this because of scheduling conflicts and/or longer than expected pre-boil brew days. I have done this on three or four occasions, with no apparent ill effects (a Weizen I made this way actually won a blue ribbon!), but then again there was no "control" batch to compare it to. Any opinions? To continue my reply about boiling, the poster mentioned that he can achieve a rolling boil if he keeps the lid on, but has heard that you should keep the lid off. The reasons to keep the lid off are to allow evaporation of water and to allow evaporation of DMS (Dimethyl sulfide). DMS, in excess, will make beer taste like a can of creamed corn. It boils at 35C (95F). I think you may find that you can keep the boil going by either keeping the lid partially on (so that gasses escape, but some heat stays in), or by leaving the lid on and occasionally removing it (a pain in the butt). Have fun! George De Piro (Nyack, NY) Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 10:15:10 -0800 (PST) From: Steven Ketcham <ketcham at earthlink.net> Subject: Stout, Irish and Dry Hello! I received this recipe with an Irish Stout kit for x-mas. It fits neatly into a one gallon spring water container from the grocery store: One gallon spring water (minus one pint to be used at priming) 1 lb. Dry Malt Extract (DME) 3 oz.s of roasted barley 2 1/2 oz.s of brown sugar (my addition - I tried a couple of variations and this one I liked) 1/4 oz. of northern brewer hop pellets 1 oz. priming sugar mixed with the one pint remaining water. The basic directions were: run the grains through the coffee machine with eight cups of spring water then add to the DME with the rest of the water and hop pellets. Cook for one hour. Ferment in the original gallon jug. Mix in the priming sugar and final pint of water after fermantation is finished and bottle. I want to convert it to a 5 gallon batch. Here is my guesstimate: Recipe Makes : 5.0 gallons Color (srm) : 94.9 Hop IBUs : 27.5 7.00 lb. Pale Ale 1.00 lb. Flaked Barley 1.00 lb. Roast Barley 1.00 lb. Brown Sugar 1.00 oz. Northern Brewer 7.5% 60 min Questions: 1.) The flaked barley adds head retention but from what I've read so far a protein rest is not needed because the haze normally found won't be visible. Is this true? 2.) In the partial mash recipe the grain is briefly steeped in the coffee maker - how will the taste and color differ if it is mashed full cycle in the whole grain recipe? 3.) I have never had a stout or porter that I liked comercially (never tried guinness) but the kit I liked. Any recomendations or improvements will be gratefully accepted. Thanks. Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 13:53:24 -0500 From: Steve Alexander <stevea at clv.mcd.mot.com> Subject: RE: Tannins and husk (Steve Alexander) John Wilkinson asks ... >My question is, if the non-husk beer has 91% of the tannins of the husk beer >and hops contribute only 33%, where does the rest come from? Am I >misinterpreting Bill's statement? Are the husks sieved off after they have >already contributed most of their tannins or is there another source? The husk fraction was sieved off before brewing in the M&B Sci reference. Grist minus the husk fraction is the source of most of the 'missing' phenols. Steve Alexander Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 11:43:10 -0800 From: smurman at best.com Subject: Big Head follow-up Thanks to everyone who provided suggestions on improving my head size. Here's a summary. If brewing a high-gravity beer, such as Belgian abbey's, add fresh yeast when priming. I guess this would be called a "finisher" as opposed to a starter. The quantity of priming sugar that will provide a big head is larger than I thought. Checking an article at The Brewery site (http://alpha.rollanet.org/library/YPrimerMH.html), and advice from Dave Burley, both point to using 8-10 oz. of corn sugar for styles such as wheat beers that maintain big head. The 5 oz. that I used for these styles seems paltry in comparison. The last point, which was made by several people, was the importance of protein, not only for head retention but also head formation. The most common suggestions were to either add some wheat malt to your grist, or skip the protein rest altogether. Thanks for the help, SM Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 12:26:07 -0800 From: Mack Huntress <mack at deltanet.com> Subject: Re:Using kegs as sparage water containers - - Does anyone see any potential problems with using a corny keg to hold my sparage water (with a towel wrapped around it for insulation) and delivering the water under pressure to my sparage arm? I had planned to install an inline valve in the line from the keg to the sparage arm to control the flow. Right now, with about 5psi and no valve, it makes the arm spin around so fast I think it's going to take off. - - I've been using a keg for sparge water for the past 2 batches and love it. You don't have to worry about having a height difference and the sparge rate is MUCH more controllable. With a gravity system you lose a lot of head pressure towards the end of the sparge but with a pressurized keg you can keep the flow rate constant or adjust it to whatever you want. The heated air in the keg actually helps because you end up using less Co2 to pump the water. I learned this from my local HB shop, who also suggested that I solder (lead-free) copper end caps on the sparge arm to replace the plastic ones that are likely to pop out because of the pressure. Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 14:33:53 -0600 (CST) From: korz at xnet.com Subject: mash thickness and mouthfeel Jean-Sebastien writes: >I'm wondering what effect mash thickness (1qt/lbs vs 1.1qt/lbs) has on >body. I seem to remember that a thicker mash tends to promote enzyme >activity and lower extraction rates. Is this correct? If so, does a >0.1qt/lbs difference affect mouth feel at all, or is it simply a matter of >conversion speed/efficiency? I believe that such a small difference in thickness would not be noticeable in the finished beer. Thicker mashes don't necessarily promote *all* enzyme activity because for some enzymatic reactions the products of the reactions slow the reaction (and a thicker mash would mean a higher concentration of the products). What you may be thinking of is that thicker mashes protect more heat-labile beta-amylse from being denatured as quickly and therefore thicker mashes tend to favour the production of maltose (along with a reduction in dextin levels) over the level created in a thinner mash at the same temperature. I do know that between alpha amylase (less heat-labile) and beta amylase (more heat-labile), thicker mashes tend to make for a more fermentable wort (i.e. the heat-labile beta amylase *lasted longer* in the mash and cut up more of the dextins into maltose). A similar grouping of the proteolytic enzymes exists: peptidases and proteases. The peptidases break medium-sized proteins into amino acids and is more heat-labile than the proteases which break big proteins into medium-sized proteins. The medium-sized proteins contribute very strongly to mouthfeel and head retention. Furthermore, dextrins contribute to mouthfeel too. [SPECULATION MODE ON] It would seem logical that if a thicker mash protects beta amylase, it would also protect the peptidases too, no? Therefore it seems that a thicker mash would have TWO reasons for having less mouthfeel than a thinner mash *at the same temperature*. [SPECULATION MODE OFF] The difference in thickness to cause a noticeable amount of difference is much greater (I don't have my copy of MBS or Fix here, but I'm sure that "thin" would be at least 50% more water than "thick"). Al. Al Korzonas, Palos Hills, IL korz at xnet.com Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 15:37:28 -0500 (EST) From: Eugene Sonn <eugene at dreamscape.com> Subject: Inexpensive Mini-Keg Taps Hello Beer Brewers I've been very happy with my mini-keg set up (2 years now). I have a tap which allows me to switch mid-keg from CO2 to a hand pump which lets me save those CO2 cartridges. But for parties, it would be nice to have a second, inexpensive, hand-pump tap. Does anyone have experience with these types of taps? How well do they work? How expensive are they? This information would be very helpful. I'm probably going to brew several batches of beer for a friend's wedding and knowing whether I should put the beer into mini-kegs is important for planning purposes. Thanks in advance, I would be happy to post findings to the Homebrew Digest, so private e-mail is preferred. Eugene Sonn eugene at nova.dreamscape.com Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 15:16:49 -0600 (CST) From: korz at xnet.com Subject: sucrose and head/German Lager yeasts/hazy, flat beer Jeff writes: >I believe there is a direct >connection between the use of sucrose and the "mousse" head in >the Belgian beers. Note, as a cross-reference, the mousse head >on a glass of Cooper's Ale, which also uses sucrose in the kettle. We must be careful to not jump to the wrong causal relationship (remember the relationship between aluminum and Alzheimers?). I find it very hard to believe that a 100% fermentable sugar, made of little other than a molecule of dextrose and a molecule of fructose could increase head retention. Presumably, the "moussyness" of the head would have to be affected by the only other factor in the equation and that is the extracellular enzyme invertase that the yeast produce to allow them to ferment sucrose. I'm still very skeptical. What about the moussy head in Bavarian Weizens (certainly not made with sucrose)? Let's not forget that head is a combination of head formation (increased with high carbonation) and head retention (primarily increased by increasing the level of medium-sized proteins) are not the same. If you don't have enough protein, increasing the carbonation will not give you better head, it will give you more carbonation (like Pepsi). *** Jerry writes: >I'm going to try my first true lager soon, and I need a recommendation on >yeast. I'm planning on a German pils following closely by a doppelbock, >using the same yeast. The old Wyeast spec sheet recommends these strains: > >- --- >German Pilsner: Light to medium body. Dry. Bitter. Medium to high hop >flavor and aroma. Very low diacetyl OK. Nofruitiness/esters. Wyeast 2007, >2124, 2308. > >Bock/Doppelbock: Full body. Malty. Low bitterness. Low diacetyl OK. No >fruitiness/esters. Medium to high alcohol. Wyeast 2124, 2278, 2007. >- --- > >So, I was thinking of using one of these strains: > >2007 Pilsen lager yeast A classic American pilsner strain, sturdy and >simple to use. Ferments dry and crisp. Flocculation -medium; apparent >attenuation - 71-75%. (48-56F) I'd reccommend against it. Rumour has it that this strain is the A-B yeast and the level of acetaldehyde it produces backs up that assertion. This is a great yeast for cloning Bud, but will give you too much acetaldehyde for a German Pils or Bock. >2308 Munich lager yeast A demanding strain, but capable of producing some >of the finest lagers made. Very smooth, well-rounded and full-bodied. >Flocculation - medium; apparent attenuation - 73-77%. (48-56F) Yes, this yeast has a tendency to create some byproducts that take months to lager away. I made a Bock with it that smelled like home perm solution for four months of lagering (at 40F), but then the smell went away and the beer won several ribbons. >2124 Bohemian lager yeast A pilsner yeast from the Czech Republic. Ferments >clean and malty, with rich residual sugarin full gravity pilsners. >Flocculation >- - medium; apparent attenuation - 69-73%. (46-54F) I've heard that this is the Weihenstephan 34/70 yeast. If so, it is one of the most popular yeasts in Germany. I would suggest either this yeast or the Wyeast #2206 Bavarian Lager. That's another very clean and popular yeast in Germany. I made my last two bocks with the #2124 and #2206. The #2206 is still in the primary, so there's no data yet, but the #2124 batch is very nice. I used it also for a Doppelbock, but it got a little fruity. I believe that I had the fridge set to 60F for the first 8 hours and when the yeast took off, it raised the temp up even more. I should have started at 55F or even 50F. *** Suzanne writes: >Being the pioneer brewpub in this province is exciting but not without >frustration. We lack sources for discussion locally, and therefore the >learning process can at times be hindered. We kegged our first brew two >weeks ago (a top fermented amber ale using extracts). We poured yesterday >and two problems ensued. First, the brew is extremely cloudy and has >excessive sediment, despite having been filtered. Second, the brew is flat >(we use a CO2/Nitrogen, 70/30 carbonation system which has been effective >for all imported kegged beer). We didn't clarify the beer. Could this be >what has caused the cloudiness, and if yes, will it help if we clarify now? >And then the problem of carbonation remains. We'd like to salvage this >first brew because ... well it's our "maiden brew" ... and because despite >these two unfavorable characteristics, the brew imparts a rather pleasant >flavor. What can we do about it now, or what should we look to change in >future brews? Suggestions/advice would be greatly appreciated. When you write "clarified" I presume you mean "fined." As for why your "filtered" beer is cloudy, I cannot say. Either your filter's pore size was too big and all of whatever is clouding your beer didn't get filtered out or you used too high a pressure and forced it through the fitlter. You didn't give the recipe, but if you used grains that need to be mashed (like Pilsner, Pale Ale, Biscuit, Munich, and Aromatic malts, for example) and you didn't mash and laeuter them properly, then you have starch haze and you are stuck with it (well, you could use some amylase enzyme, but I recommend against it). If you did use a very large pore size (say, larger than 5 microns), lots of yeast could have still gotten through and now if you are drawing off the bottom of the tank, you could be just getting the little bit of yeast that did make it through. If this is the case, the beer should start running clear after you run off a handful of pints. Do you have an outlet higher up in the serving tank? If so, you can check the clarity at the higher outlet to see if it's just settled yeast at the bottom. Note that if your yeast happens to be a slow flocculator, you could get a clear sample higher up and still have a bbl or two of cloudy beer. If this is the case, you can help settle the yeast faster with isinglass or gelatin. Why it's flat is easy... since it's an ale, I'm assuming that you have it at ale serving temperatures (55F or so). At this temperature, to get between 2.0 and 2.5 volumes of CO2 in the beer, you want it to see 15 to 20 psi of CO2. But you are using 70/30 CO2/Nitrogen (usually the 70% is N2 and the 30% is CO2...) so you need to increase the pressure the beer sees of this mixed gas. If indeed it's 70% CO2, then divide the 15 to 20 psi by 0.7 to get the pressure to use (21.43 to 28.57psi). If it is 30% CO2, then you need to divide by 0.3 and use 50 to 66.67 psi. The reason it works for the imports is because they are pre-carbonated. Incidentally, you want to add the finings before you carbonate or you will have a huge gusher on your hands when you add the finings. Al. Al Korzonas, Palos Hills, IL korz at xnet.com Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 14:30:17 -0700 (MST) From: Ian Smith <rela!isrs at netcom.com> Subject: LM34 temperature sensor/RIMS Does anyone know how to get a LM34 to talk to a computer board ? What is the accuracy ? Can it be calibrated ? Is there a LM34 package that can be made immersible or into a water proof probe for using in hot water/wort ? The only LM34's I've seen have 3 legs and are in a plastic package that would not work in fluids ? Any help would be much appreciated. Cheers Ian Smith isrs at rela.uucp.netcom.com Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 21:28:19 +0000 (GMT) From: SANDY COCKERHAM <COCKERHAM_SANDRA_L at LILLY.COM> Subject: lowering pH of canned wort? (Sandy C.) Hi all, I am hoping to can a dozen quarts of sterile wort this coming weekend. I have previously done so with the boiling water method as I have no pressure cooker. I often read that this is a potential health hazard from botulism. My 1st question to the collective is - can I add acid blend or something else to lower the pH of the wort to around 4.0 so that I am in the range of "acid foods" like you always hear about for the boiling water method? Question #2, will this cause any problems with my yeast? I don't think it will, but before I make up 3 gallons of this I wanted to check with you all. Thanks! Sandy C. (cockerham at lilly.com) Return to table of contents
Date: Sun, 12 Jan 1997 13:43:47 -0500 From: Nightcrawler <shane at cais.cais.com> Subject: re:flames (humor) I got this off one of the other lists I'm on. Sorry if its off topic <---- Begin Forwarded Message ----> Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 20:58:22 -0500 Reply-To: timujinn at ismi.net Sender: owner-solo at listproc.bgsu.edu From: tim <timujinn at ismi.net> To: For the Solitary Practitioner <solo at listproc.bgsu.edu> Subject: re:flames (humor) MM, I know that most of us have some problem with the occasional disagreement s and flames which happen from time to time. Last month Jeremy posted a humors rules for flame wars. I found this and thought it was a bit more humorous. By the time someone reads it to check things off they should be laughing not angry have fun, BB, Tim NETIQUETTE 101: THE FLAME FORM LETTER Dear [ ] sir [ ] clueless one [ ] twit [ ] great man on campus [ ] madam [ ] dweeb [ ] twerp [ ] comrade [ ] Elvis [ ] moon beam [ ] boor [ ] Obergruppenfuehrer [ ] citoyen [ ] Geek [ ] grad student [ ] cur You are being gently flamed because: [ ] you continued a boring useless stupid thread [ ] you repeatedly posted to the same thread that you just posted to [ ] you repeatedly initiated incoherent, flaky, and mindless threads [ ] you posted a piece riddled with profanities [ ] you advocated Net censorship [ ] you SCREAMED! (used all caps) [ ] you posted some sort of crap that doesn't belong in this group [ ] you posted the inanely stupid 'Make Money Fast' article [ ] you threatened others with physical harm [ ] you made a bigoted statement(s) [ ] you repeatedly assumed unwarranted moral or intellectual superiority [ ] you are under the misapprehension that this group is your preserve [ ] you repeatedly showed lack of humor [ ] you are apparently under compulsion to post to every thread [ ] you are posting an anonymous attack Thank you for the time you have taken to read this. Live n' Learn. <---- End Forwarded Message ----> Shane Saylor, Eccentric Bard Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 16:27 -0600 From: BAYEROSPACE <M257876 at sl1001.mdc.com> Subject: fear of protein rest collective homebrew conscience: regarding leaving your "rest mash" in the protein rest temperature range for a longer than desirable time when decoction mashing: doesn't the fact that you have the vast majority of the starch grits in the decoction vessel minimize this danger to a great degree? i mean, i realize there are proteases and peptidases in the rest mash, but there's not really much protein in the rest mash for them to break down, is there? it's in the decoction vessel, isn't it? brew hard, mark bayer Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 15:15:55 -0700 (MST) From: Ian Smith <rela!isrs at netcom.com> Subject: RIMS heater I am looking for a 6000 W 240 Volt inconel heater element for my RIMS system. Anybody know of a source ? Cheers Ian Smith isrs at rela.uucp.netcom.com Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 15:38:52 -0800 From: "Brander Roullett (Volt Computer)" <a-branro at MICROSOFT.com> Subject: Molasses? Have many of you used Molasses in beer before? i would love to hear from people who had used it and how it turned out. I was reading Papazians NCJHB, and was thinking of trying molasses in a Stout. badger Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 16:23:42 -0800 From: Mack Huntress <mack at deltanet.com> Subject: Re:Carrying beer onto planes I too have carried my homebrew onto planes before. The only problem I've ever had was with some that I had put in an unlabelled PET bottle. The security agent didn't understand when I told him what it was and when he opened it he got a little surprise. The agitation and warmth caused it to spew and managed to get him pretty sticky. He quickly capped it and handed it back to me without saying a word. Needless to say he was a bit embarrassed. Anyway, since then I've heard that as the bottles have labels and 'look' to be a commercial product they won't hassle you. - -Mack Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 16:23:42 -0800 From: Mack Huntress <mack at deltanet.com> Subject: Re:Carrying beer onto planes I too have carried my homebrew onto planes before. The only problem I've ever had was with some that I had put in an unlabelled PET bottle. The security agent didn't understand when I told him what it was and when he opened it he got a little surprise. The agitation and warmth caused it to spew and managed to get him pretty sticky. He quickly capped it and handed it back to me without saying a word. Needless to say he was a bit embarrassed. Anyway, since then I've heard that as the bottles have labels and 'look' to be a commercial product they won't hassle you. - -Mack Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 20:16:29 EST From: Jim Hilliard <jhilliard at juno.com> Subject: Dry Stout Recipes anyone? I'm looking for a good dry stout recipe (extract please, I'm not yet ready to make the plunge). The recipe in my brewing book (_Brewing the World's Greatest Beers_, Miller) has a recipebut it calls for no finishing hops. Is this normal for dry stout? It just doesn't seem right! It's time to get away from Guiness for St. Patty's day, and go with my own *real* Irish brew... :) Thanks in advance. Jim James & Christine Hilliard jhilliard at juno.com http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/1933 - ------------------------------ Borg? Sounds Swedish! - --Lilly in Star Trek, First Contact Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 19:29:30 -0500 From: "William D. Knudson" <71764.203 at compuserve.com> Subject: RE: Sunbeam hops (WD Knudson) Glenn asked about Sunbeam hops. Glenn, I bought a rizome from freshops in Oregon a couple of years ago. This was one of the strains that I bought. * I planted in spring of 1995. The yield was not great for the first harvest, but I understand that to be normal. I did not brew with them. I did however have a pretty nice yield this last fall. I did not brew with them. I'm an all grainer, and I just can't see brewing up a batch based on 'guesstimates of alpha acid', plus going through the hassle of drying etc. I've got too many hops in the fridge as it is. Besides the hops did not have much aroma, which doesn't hit the profile 'Northern European Pilners' very well. It was a strain that from what I can tell, has not taken off **. I probably would have made a test extract batch had the things given an aroma. (I sample aroma from green to all the way to brown - nothing.) If you are interested in growing hops, and you should be*** , its early to order yet, but look through the brew mags for Freshops or one of the other growers, and call for a list. By the way the Sunbeam was a Saaz hybrid. Hope this helps. Bill * The other 2, I gave to a friend who has a greenhouse and presumably a green thumb: he killed them. ** Like the other recent 'Noble' hybrids: 'Liberty', 'Crystal' and 'Ultra' . *** Look you're a brewer, you won't believe the clout you'll get when your friends and neighbors see your cultivation of hops and they don't look half bad in the yard. Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 17:35:33 -0800 From: The Holders <zymie at sprynet.com> Subject: Flannel In HBD V2 #25, Pat said: >Not a good idea, Cliffy! Most flannel shirts are plaid... ;-) I've found some flannel marked "99% plaid free". Is this safe to use on my fermenter? :^O Wayne Holder CEO Zymico, "The folks that brought you the Toob" - -- "contrary to my own opinions, I'm NOT always correct.... at least that's what I think..." Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 21:18:17 +0000 From: Bob Bullard <rbullard at datasync.com> Subject: RIMS water I am in the process of building a brew system ala Marty Tippin etal and have a question regarding water quantities during the mash with a recirculating system. To date I have used a Gott cooler to mash in starting with an original strike water addition at a calculated temp for the first step at +/- 1qt water/# mash. Subsequent temp steps were attained by adding calculated amounts of boiling water. The mash out step was ignored. I will now be mashing in a kettle with fire under it. The question is: should the mash water be added all at once and then temperature step increases attained by heating the mash kettle, or is it better to start with a thicker mash and add water in subsequent stages? Another question is about flow rate for recirculating the mash. Is 1 gpm a reasonable rate? Thanks in advance for any assistance. Bob Bullard Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 02:58:08 -0500 (EST) From: Alex Santic <alex at salley.com> Subject: Mini-keg composition (Alex Santic) I noticed upon re-reading that I referred to mini-kegs as being made of stainless. I meant to say steel, not stainless steel. Some other posts indicate that these cans are made of aluminum. Not having been so fortunate as to never see them rust, I think I can confirm that they are made of steel, not aluminum. Even with the plastic linig intact, they have a few vulnerable areas. They are prone to rust along the top and bottom rims if left on a wet surface. They will also rust around the edge of the bung-hole if left filled with liquid for a protracted period. Cheers. - -- Alex Santic - alex at salley.com Silicon Alley Connections, LLC 527 Third Avenue #419 - NYC 10016 - 212-213-2666 - Fax 212-447-9107 http://www.salley.com Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 10:13:33 -0000 From: Graham Stone <gstone at dtuk.demon.co.uk> Subject: Plastic Boilers Marshall Muller wrote re: "Do you really NEED to boil the wort?" >G'day, >After several successful partial mashes (and noticiably improved beer) >.I'm setting up a plastic electric all grain brewery to give it a go. >I already had a 2400W element and a 45 l (11 gal) container so I thought I'd >give it a go as a kettle. >The first test boil of 26 l (7 gal) basically produced a result I expected would >happened - it couldnt maintain a rolling boil without a lid. With the lid >sealed it boiled violently, however without it the temp could only reach 98 C (208F) >Is it really necessary to have a rolling boil or will 98 C be OK if I stirred >it frequently. I've heard you must boil with the lid off. Is this correct or >can I simply leave the lid on to maintain the boil? >Secondly, I haven't insulated the container yet. Has anybody else has this problem >and solved it by isulation or should I just increase the element power? Morning Marshall (and thanks for rescuing our Sailors!). I've recently made a 13 gal boiler from a plastic bin which is fitted with 2x2.75 KWatt kettle elements. Uninsulated, with both element on it will boil in about 1 hr. 10 mins. However, by insulating it with green house bubble wrap this time can be shortened by up to 15 mins. Once the liquid is boiling, it will maintain a reasonably vigor boil with just one element on. If it should be necessary to get the boil more vigorous (e.g. to reduce volume quickly), the other element can be switched on again. Since I haven't tested the difference in the final beer between boiling with 1 or 2 elements, I'll stick to using 1 for an long as I can purely on grounds of economy. BTW, each element is plugged into different sockets on my ring main. Hope this helps! Dr. Graham Stone - ------------------------------------------------------ Dunstan Thomas (UK) Ltd web: http://www.demon.co.uk/dtuk/ email: gstone at dtuk.demon.co.uk phone: +44-1705-822254 fax: +44-1705-823999 - ------------------------------------------------------ Return to table of contents
End of HOMEBREW Digest #2308