HOMEBREW Digest #2315 Friday, January 17 1997

Digest #2314 Digest #2316
		(formerly Volume 02 : Number 035)


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.

  continous fermentation
  Stainless, Protein Rests, 1
  Air Filters
  What's in a starter?
  lagering question
  Re: White Labs yeast (Paul Edwards)
  Pitching Quantity vs O2 (Michael Gerholdt)
  p-lambic advice
  No plastic
  Re:5 litre mini-keg taps
  Re: U.P.S. and its official policy on shipping beer.
  aeration infection
  Re: Yeast re-pitching (Alex Santic) 
  Re: Storing Flaked Barley
  re: Flat lager / 8 days to ale  (George De Piro)
  Re: Molasses
  Air Filtration (Steve Potter)

---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 10:56:04 -0500 From: Keith Hazen <105063.2531 at compuserve.com> Subject: continous fermentation Dave Burley writes: >Unfortunately, many before you have thought about continuous fermentation and tried it with all the brewing and engineering skills of the big brewers. No one does it commercially, despite millions spent on pilot plants for many decades on several continents.< As an industrial training consultant, I've recently had the opportunity to tour an operation where they make alcohol (rubbing and gasohol, not beer). I was intially expecting that they did batch fermentations, but low and behold they have a continuous flow set-up with 5 open-top,wooden fermenters cascading from one to the other via gravity. Total fermentation time is 24 hours and they make about 60,000 gallons/day (don't quoute me on the numbers). Since they distill this brew (made from the by-products of the wood pulping process), they don't have to worry about contamination. Another thing I thought was pretty cool is that they control O.G. by running the liquour through an evaporator and boiling off the water.I only got a tour, but may end up documenting the whole process eventually, so I could post more in the future if anyone's interested. Dave, I really enjoy your posts. Keep em' coming. Keith Hazen Bremerton, Wa Return to table of contents
Date: 17 Jan 1997 10:05:48 -0600 From: Craig Rode <craig.rode at sdrc.com> Subject: Stainless, Protein Rests, 1 Howdy folks. I have a 10 gallon stainless steel brewpot from Vollrath and I am considering, based on some of your experiences, adding an Easymasher (tm) to it so I can toss in whole hops and use them to filter the wort. However, it brings up several questions. Can I drill the stainless without impacting the material, or will the heat and friction change the molecular structure like the welding that was discussed (mr palmer, are you out there?) Also, if I mix whole and pellets, at what ratio will I start seeing unacceptable clogging? I've been trying a 25 minute protein rest lately for my ales, and I'm not convinced the benefits (clearer beer) outweigh the cost (more time, less head retention). Should I blow off the protein rest and instead add irish moss? What is with Wyeast American II 1272? I can't get the stuff to sink into the beer after primary fermentation. I racked my beer into a 5 gal secondary after 7 days, and I still got a airlock full of gunk when it started fermenting again and formed an evil layer of foam rubber on top of my beer. Is there a secret to using this stuff? Yesterday, the wind chill was -50 here in Wisconsin, which got me to thinking about air cooling the beer. What would be the formula for calculating cool time for 5.5 gallons of wort from 212F to 70F in a cylindrical kettle with a wind chill if -50? My immersion chiller's hoses freeze at this temp, unless I run it into the house, which means cracking a window in the bathroom, which means....well, if your married, you can figure out the rest. As always, TIA. Craig Rode in Milwaukee, WI Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 10:14:11 -0600 From: rlabor at lsumc.edu (LaBorde, Ronald) Subject: Air Filters >From: Kevin Sinn <skinner at MNSi.Net> >Subject: Air Filters >I use a filter to keep out dust and eliminate (as best as possible) odours. >The cotton I use in the filter will hopefully trap any dust particles, >while the activated carbon should filter out any unwanted kitchen odours, >as well as the possible rubber odour from the air pump's bladder. >Sanitizing the air was never a concern when I built this filter. I realize >that it may be possible, but IMHO it's not a practical endeavour. >Comments would be appreciated. Yep, you got it Kevin, I never once attempted to sanitize the air. I filter the air. How can anyone sanitize air?. I certainly am no biologist, but my overall mental concept of air is that air may carry dust, germs, whatever, as particles suspended about - but air itself cannot be unsanitized. It's just the scuzz in the air we want to remove and we do that with a filter. Now a simple analogy. Some people say they do not filter the air and their beers never get infections. Well and good but consider this: I always clean my windshield before driving on the highway at nite. I haven't had an accident, but I still use my seatbelt anyway. I had a few beers at the monthly club meeting, drove home and never had an accident, but now I have my wife drive me as a precautionary measure. I never got run over crossing the street but I still look anyhow. So if anyone chooses not to filter the pumped air, fine. Hey, I really do not mind. It's cool, man, but I do. Happy Brewing Ron Ronald J. La Borde "Never wrestle with a pig. You'll both Metairie, LA get dirty, and the pig enjoys it." Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 16:06:15 -0000 From: Graham Stone <gstone at dtuk.demon.co.uk> Subject: What's in a starter? Further to my earlier posting about collecting live yeast from 2-3 day old krausen rather than the bottom of the fermenter, it started me thinking about the contents of a starter bottle. If the starter bottle is a miniature fermentation tank, where are the most live yeast cells and how should they be harvested in order to maximize the growth of the yeast and hence the number of live cells that are eventually pitched? My guess would be in the krausen (if there is one) and in suspension - good cells rising, bad ones sedimenting. If this is so, is there any point in pitching the stuff which settles to the bottom? Please forgive me if the answers to all this are well known to you'll. If they are, can someone put me out of my misery and point me to the literature. 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
Date: 17 Jan 1997 10:43:17 -0500 From: Greg Thompson <gregt at visix.com> Subject: lagering question i'm hoping to venture into lagers sometime soon, but i've got some concerns about flocculation. the last ale i did sat in secondary for longer than i'd expected (didn't have time to bottle it), and it seems that more yeast had fallen out than in previous batches. the beer has taken a VERY long time to carbonate in the bottle. my concern about a lager is that if it sits in secondary for 3 months or so, will so much yeast fall out that i'll have a similar, or even worse problem with the beer being really slow to carbonate in the bottle? now, one interesting suggestion i got from the owner of a local brewpub was to bottle the beer shortly after primary fermentation is done, and keep the bottles cold for the 3 months or so of lagering. ie: let the secondary fermentation and conditioning happen in the bottles. now, obviously i don't want two cases of exploded bottles, so i guess i'd need to time the bottling really accurrately. seems like it's almost too risky. another thought i had was to re-pitch some fresh lager yeast when i prime the beer for bottling, then store the bottles cold while that yeast ferments away the priming sugar to carbonate the beers. seems more reasonable. so, am i just needlessly worrying myself about too much yeast dropping out during the lagering? if not, what have others done to solve the problem of there not being enough yeast left for bottling? thanks. - -- -greg the world beneath you wonders why your wings never touch the ground no matter how sunken they seem -hum Return to table of contents
Date: 17 Jan 1997 08:23:09 -0800 From: Dion Hollenbeck <hollen at axel.vigra.com> Subject: Re: White Labs yeast (Paul Edwards) >> P Edwards writes: PE> One of the local HB suppliers is touting a new product - White PE> Labs Yeast. NOT a new product, this yeast has been supplied locally in San Diego for at least three years. PE> The info sheet says some things that got me scratching my head, so I PE> thought I'd troll for information. You trolled in the right place. Chris White is here in San Diego and I have been using his yeast vials on and off for about two years now. I culture my own yeast now, so I only buy his when I screw up and forget to start my yeast until too close to brewing day. Sorry, but I cannot address technical details about cell count. PE> Next, the info sheet claims you can pitch the contents of the vial PE> into 5 gallons of wort w/o making a starter. While, you are PE> undoubtedly getting more viable yeast than w/ a swelled pack of PE> Wyeast, I can't believe that the amount of slurry in that vial is PE> equivalent to the cup or so of thick slurry I'm used to pitching. PE> One person claims that pitching right out of the vial netted him PE> an eight hour lag period. Better than the 24-36 hours one might PE> get from Wyeast, for sure, but when I pitch a cup of slurry I get PE> about a 2-4 hour lag before visible signs of active fermentation. With proper oxygenation I get a 2-4 hour lag time with a vial of White Labs Yeast. PE> Using the widely accepted pitching rate of 5 x 10^6 cells/ml of PE> wort for middling gravity ales, if the White Labs vial did indeed PE> have 300 x 10^9 cells, then there'd be enough yeast for about 15 PE> gallons of wort (at 100 percent viability), So, why an 8 hour lag PE> time? Improper oxygenation. PE> Lastly, the info sheet says that for best results, the yeast PE> should be used within fours weeks of packaging. Yet, the package PE> isn't dated. So I'm at the mercy of a HB retailer who may or may PE> not have my best interests in getting a fresh product in mind when PE> he sees dollars slipping away with every passing day the product PE> sits in his fridge. YUP, this is a down side. However, here in San Diego, the yeast goes out of the shops so fast that you have to make sure that they have it in stock. In other areas, the lack of a date may be a problem. PE> I'm skeptical. Have any of you used White Labs Yeast w/ or w/o a PE> starter? What are your experiences? What do you yeast guru's PE> think? I am not a yeast guru by any stretch of the imagination, but have had excellent results with Chris's product. The fact that it is so well accepted by brewers here in the San Diego area is evident in that they have a hard time keeping stock. Chris does an excellent job and if you want to contact him, I am sure he would be more than happy to answer any of your questions. He is a microbiologist by profession and not a marketeer, so I am quite sure that any claims he makes are accurate. All I do is to take the vial out of the fridge at 8am and pitch it into properly oxygenated wort at about 3pm and by 5pm or 7pm at the latest, I have bubbling out of my blowoff hose. I am extremely happy with the product and am among hundreds (if not more) of very satisfied brewers here in San Diego using White Labs Yeast. Chris is not a Johnny-come-lately out to make a buck, but has been providing a very limited distribution of his fine product locally to only two shops (that his brother owns) until within the last year the clamor for more wide distribution prompted Chris to branch out to other local shops and then more wide distribution. Not someone out to make a fast buck, but someone drawn into the market because of demand for a high quality product. BTW, as much as I like Chris and have gotten to know him personally through the local brewing community, I used his yeast for a year before ever meeting him and was extremely satisfied as strictly an anonymous customer. dion - -- Dion Hollenbeck (619)597-7080x164 Email: hollen at vigra.com http://www.vigra.com/~hollen Sr. Software Engineer - Vigra Div. of Visicom Labs San Diego, California Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 97 12:12:44 -0500 From: Michael Gerholdt <gerholdt at ait.fredonia.edu> Subject: Pitching Quantity vs O2 (Michael Gerholdt) - -- [ From: Michael Gerholdt * EMC.Ver #2.5.02 ] -- Dion Hollenbeck wrote: >Yes, thanks Keith, pitching adequate quantities of healthy yeast into >properly oxygenated wort is probably the best thing one can do to >avoid contamination, given that one's sanitation procedures are >reasonable already. I think it would be helpful to make a distinction between the "actual" truth and a "practical" truth here. Actual truth: If you pitch 'adequate quantities of healthy yeast' there is no need whatsoever to oxygenate the wort. Practical truth: A 'work-around' of sorts to pitching adequate quantities of healthy yeast is oxygenating the wort, which compensates for inadequate amounts of yeast. Since most homebrewers do not pitch adequate quantities of healthy yeast, oxygenating is in order. But I find something mildly oxymoronic about the concept of 'pitching adequate quantities of healthy yeast into properly oxygenated wort.' Oxygenating becomes necessary because we're pitching *inadequate* quantities of yeast. If one pitches adequate amounts of yeast, the 'proper' level of oxygenation is either none, or whatever helps a homebrewer relax. Perhaps I'm picking a nit here, since the practical reality for most of us is that it's generally helpful to oxygenate, and it's generally a pain to step up the yeast like we really should. But practical truth has a way of replacing actual truth in practice, and I'm not quite comfortable with that. Perhaps I'm the only reader who felt, upon reading Keith's observations on the anal retentive ways of many homebrewers, that his comments were unwelcome and unnecessary. We're learning, and we each have our own ways, and different things are important to different people. If we read or are taught certain things that a more experienced brewer has learned aren't really so important, and then repeat them, does that make us AR, or just novices? Why is Keith so AR about my AR ways? No attacks or flames intended here; nothing personal, Keith or Dion. Just speaking my little old AR mind. Stop by for a brew, Michael - -- Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 11:10:11 -0500 From: "Alan P. Van Dyke" <alan at mail.utexas.edu> Subject: p-lambic advice Howdy, I've been tossing around the idea of making a p-lambic recently, & would like some advice. First, how does the HBD collective feel about WYeast Belgian Lambic? Are there any tricks to using it? What temps does it like best? Second, how long does it usually take to ferment & age a p-lambic? Third, hops. Some of you may remember that Boston Beer Marketers, er, Company gave a bunch of hops away some time back. Well, I have some, & they've been sitting in my freezer. They're 1994 crop East Kent Goldings. I know that traditional lambics use old, stale hops that have been sitting out for a couple of years, & I was wondering if what I have will work, & if I need to do anything to them, or if I need something completely different. Fourth, & last, when is the best stage to add any fruit, if I decide to? Thanks a bunch for y'all's help. Alan Van Dyke alan at mail.utexas.edu Austin, TX Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 12:09:41 -0500 From: "Houseman, David L" <David.Houseman at unisys.com> Subject: UPS Ken Smith's email back from UPS was interesting if not definitive in UPS' willingness to handle beer. Last year or so I had a similar experience at my local UPS and went through several levels of management before their headquarters stated that it was NOT against policy to ship beer if sent to a commercial address such as a homebrew store but that when sent to a residential address it must be signed for by an adult. It seems to me that UPS does in fact ship lots of beer: Beer of the month clubs for example that are NOT in the states mentioned in Ken's note shipped interstate to states NOT on the list as well the potentially THOUSANDS of homebrew entries each year. But why be "honest" and claim the contents as beer? Any other euphamism for "food samples for analysis" will work and avoid confrontations and the spector of what's allowable or not. If asked, "just say no." Dave Houseman Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 12:31:23 -0500 From: Rust1d <rust1d at li.com> Subject: No plastic Brewer Skilborn writes: >I'm interested in doing a series of batches, about one every other week. I >want to lager as long as I can, but can't afford so many glass carboys tied >up for two or three months each. Other than contamination concerns, what >is the downside of using food grade plastic fermenters for secondaries? I hate to discourage you, but I would spend the extra money for the glass. A batch of extract costs more than a carboy. Dump one batch and you'll wish you had spent the money on a good fermenter. It all works out in the end. John John Varady http://www.netaxs.com/~vectorsys/varady/index.html Boneyard Brewing Co. "The HomeBrew Recipe Calculating Program" "Ale today, Gone tomorrow." Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 13:04:57 -0500 From: "Kevin R. Sinn" <skinner at MNSi.Net> Subject: Re:5 litre mini-keg taps Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 17:47:09 -0500 From: Tom Neary <thomas.neary at peri.com> Subject: 5 litre mini keg taps Tom Neary writes: >While on the subject of 5 litre mini kegs. I've had a party king tap by >Fass Frisch (the plastic CO2 type) for about a year now. I've used it to tap >12-16 mini kegs. Just recently the CO2 cartridges have begun to drain >overnight when not in use. Everything seemed to be screwed in tight. This >happened on the last three kegs tapped. Every night the CO2 cartridge would >drain empty. >Does anybody know what can be causing this phenomona? I've got the same tap for my mini-kegs, and have been told that the CO2 may eventually start to drain as Tom describes. The dealer where I purchased the tap suggests wrapping teflon tape around the end of the CO2 cartridge, giving it a snug fit into the tap. Hope this helps. - -KRS Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 13:11:25 -0500 (EST) From: Larry M Matthews <lmatt at ipass.net> Subject: Re: U.P.S. and its official policy on shipping beer. Ken and Mark, I understood that this policy was in effect for commercial beer because of laws governing interstate movement where alcohol taxes/licenses had not been met. This has been a major headache for the brew of the month clubs. However, you as a homebrewer do not have to abide by these same regulations because you may share your homebrew with any guest (read friend in another state) that you may desire. Being a private company, UPS certainly has the right to refuse business from individuals for all legitimate legal reasons. Homebrew is not a legitimate legal reason. In fact, I may ship a beer of 8%, 10%, 12% to a friend in a state that has a 6% alcohol limit (like NC) and the federal government has no control over it as long as I don't receive money for it, produce less than 200 gal each year (2 in household), and ship to someone at least 21. Would the UPS refuse to ship me my Aunt Bea's famous Rum Cake at Christmas because it has alcohol in it. I don't think so! I also ran into this problem once at a local UPS site but once I explained that this package was not commercial beer and thus not subject to federal regulations on the shipment of beer to another state, I was allowed to ship the package. I did note that they required the adult signature label on the package. I have absolutely no problem with this requirement. It meets the law that ATF places on homebrewers (at least age 21). The reason that the four states listed have an allowance for shipping is because these states have established reciprocal agreements on the licenses/taxes. There is a mechanism to handle this interchange in these state only for commercial beers. Again, homebrewed beer is NOT affected. Mark, I don't mean to be nasty but I noted that you did not place a full name nor title on your response to Mr. Ken Smith. I would ask that you please respond in a private email with this information and a telephone number and a convenient time when you may be contacted to discuss this problem more fully. Sincerely, Larry Matthews Raleigh, NC (919) 233-9215 At 03:30 PM 1/15/97 EST, Ken G Smith wrote: > >Well, here you go kids... After having trouble shipping beer to The >War of the Worts in Pennsylvania, I decided I would contact U.P.S. >and find out their official stand on the matter. I guess I have to >send a copy of this to Brew Your Own as well as all the other brewing >related rags in the U.S. > >Date sent: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 22:55:31 -0700 >From: Chara <customer.service at ups.com> >To: Ken Smith <ksmith at industryone.net> >Subject: Re: rules reguarding sending beer via ups > >Ken Smith wrote: >> >> Hello, >> >> I would like to have a clarification on your rules on sending >> home-brewed beer via ups to contests. I recently (within the past >couple >> days) read an article in a major home-brewing magazine about this very >> subject. In the article they mention NOT to ship beer via U.S. Mail >> because it is against the law. However, they went on to state that >U.P.S >> and FedEx would gladly accept the shipments. However, last Tuesday, I >> took a box to my local (Grand Rapids, MI) U.P.S. terminal with >'Fragile' >> stickers on the box. The counter person inquired as to the content of >> the box and I was truthful and told her it contained beer. She >> imediately got an attitude and told me she could NOT accept the >package. >> I asked her why and she said it was against the rules. When I asked her >> who's rules, she said U.P.S. Well, needless to say, I was turned away >> with the only option of going to FedEx and shipping it thru them. They >> were glad to accept the package and also glad to take your business >from >> you. >> >> Please, clarify the rule. I will send a copy of this to the magazine >> that published the article, so they can make a clarification on the >> matter and publish a correction if necessary. >> >> Thanks >> >> Ken Smith >> ksmith at industryone.net > >-- > >Dear Mr. Smith: > >Thank you for your inquiry. Please note the following UPS restrictions >on shipping >beer: > >-Special licensing is required for transporting alcoholic beverages >-All UPS service levels (air and ground) are available >-Interstate transportation is not allowed >-Intrastate transportation is allowed within the following states only: > California > Illinois > Michigan > New York >-Shipping requires a UPS "Adult Signature Required" sticker for each >package. > >We hope this information proves useful. If we can be of further help, >please let us >know. > >Thank you for using UPS Internet Services. > >Mark >01/14/97 S-3 Larry M Matthews lmatt at ipass.net Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 13:11 -0600 From: BAYEROSPACE <M257876 at sl1001.mdc.com> Subject: aeration infection collective homebrew conscience: i indadvertently included a large part of a previous hbd in my last post. sorry. now, the aeration/infection "lively" discussion. we have a range of opinions, from al k, myself, kevin sinn, keith royster, and eric peters. from myself: >absolutely true. but i would say based on my own experience that >the amount of bacteria etc. in the headspace of a 7 gallon fermenter with 5 >gallons of beer in it is negligible, under normal homebrewing conditions<snip> al k's response: >Whoa... I have to disagree. There are probably several hundred thousand >wild yeasts and bacteria in 2 gallons of air in even the cleanest house. >The question is: do any of those wild yeasts and bacteria multiply fast >enough and make nasty-enough byproducts (like phenolic aromas) to ruin >your beer? I know that, in the summertime, in my house, they most certainly >do. from keith r: >Sorry if I'm sounding a bit harsh here, but the anal-retentive >beliefs regarding sanitation that abound in the homebrewing community >frustrate me. It seems we focus on more elaborate (and silly, IMHO) >methods to keep contaminates out when if we'd spend just half that >effort on general house keeping and pitching an adequate quantity of >yeast we'd actually be better off (same result, less effort). The >air that you are wanting to pump into your carboy with a fish >aeration pump is the same freakin' air you were formerly shaking into >your carboy manually. Why do you suddently feel the need to filter >it? I've been using my aeration pump sans filter for a dozen >batches now and have had zero contamination problems. eric peters: >Keith, I couldn't agree with you more. >The battle against infections >must always be fought on two fronts; reasonable (not anal) cleanliness >and healthy pitching. Especially the latter, which can't be overstated, >but seems to get overlooked in this forum and others. >Pitch well, practice *reasonable* cleanliness, and come brew day forget about >your rubber gloves, HEPA filters, laser beams, etc. kevin sinn: >I agree with Keith Roysters' comments about air filters and sanitized air. >I use an aquarium pump and air filter to aerate my wort. My filter uses >cotton and activated carbon. I'm not attempting to sanitize the air by >using this filter, as I agree with Keiths' comment that whether the air is >going through an air pump and filter, or it's already in your carboy when >you shake it, it's the same air. <snip> Sanitizing the air was never a concern when I built this filter. I >realize that it may be possible, but IMHO it's not a practical endeavour. >Comments would be appreciated. okay, here are my comments: most of you guys who pump air through your wort without using an air filter are probably pumping a heck of a lot more than 2 gallons of air through it. your wort effectively becomes a "filter" through which you pump gallons and gallons of air, containing vast quantities of microbes and bacteria, according to al. my two gallons of headspace air contain "two gallons of air"'s worth of microbes and bacteria. if two gallons of headspace air contains more than enough contaminants to spoil a batch of al k's beer in the summertime, how are you guys keeping your beer un-infected? al, how much yeast are you pitching? this is going to be quite a lively debate, i can tell already. brew hard, mark bayer Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 97 13:13:06 CST From: John Wilkinson <jwilkins at imtn.tpd.dsccc.com> Subject: Oxygen In HBD V2 #32 Dion Hollenbeck mentioned using welding oxygen to oxygenate his wort. I have been looking into this and wondered if anyone had any estimates of how much oxygen would be used to adequately oxygenate a starter and ~10 gal. of wort? The disposable tanks hold 1.4oz. of oygen, I think, and are claimed to be good for up to 20 batches (presumably 5 gal.). I am trying to justify buying an oxygen tank and regulator instead of the disposable type but wondered about the break even point. Something about buying tiny tanks and disposing of them bothers me. I am no "save the trash dump" freak but like the idea of a refillable tank if I can rationalize it. I may just do that by getting an oxy-acetylene outfit as I have wanted one anyway. I have only priced a tank and regulator at one place and came up with ~$175 including some hose and fittings. Where is a good place to look for this? - -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Dave Burley writes of krausening with 1-2 tbsp. malt extract plus 4 oz. corn sugar with yeast from the secondary plus a little of the beer. Why not just prime with the corn sugar? I can't see that the small amount of malt extract adds anything and the yeast would seem to be unnecessary. Also he spoke of adding CO2 if the carbonation was not sufficient as he was priming kegs. Why prime a keg at all. Forced carbonation should be sufficient and undetectable from primed carbonation. All that krausening sounds like a lot of effort for nothing in this case. There was also some discussion of beer line length and ID. I have found 3/16" I.D. line to result in excess (to me) carbonation with 2-3 feet of line for a decent serving rate. I have replaced my 3/16" lines with 1/4" line and am much happier with the results. My lines are all within the refigerator so no warming occurs there to cause foaming. John Wilkinson - Grapevine, Texas - jwilkins at imtn.dsccc.com Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 11:34:14 -0800 From: Scott Murman <smurman at best.com> Subject: Re: Yeast re-pitching (Alex Santic) On Fri, 17 Jan 1997 03:28:13 -0500 (EST) Alex Santic wrote: > > I wonder if anybody has more information about the technique described by > Noonan, or some other technique to suggest. Excellent idea Alex. The first thought I had was storing a large amount of yeast in sterile water. I'm currently moving my yeast bank to sterile water storage, and it seems to work very well. The basic idea is to add a small amount of yeast to a vial of sterile water w/o adding any nutrients. The yeast go dormant and remain viable for long periods of time (how long depends on who you listen to, at least 6 months). I wonder how much yeast per volume can be stored this way. The main problem would probably be removing all of the nutrients from your yeast cake to insure that the yeast go dormant. Any more experienced yeast ranchers with thoughts on this speculation? SM Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 12:32:36 -0800 From: Alan Edwards <ale at cisco.com> Subject: Re: Storing Flaked Barley Tim Dugan wrote: | . . . Anyway the recipe called for a half-pound of flaked barley, = | but my home-brew store only sells flaked barley in one pound bags. | | Now, this weekend (exactly 21 days from my last brew day) I am brewing = | another recipe that calls for a half-pound of flaked barley and I want = | to know if I can use the barley left over from three weeks ago. | | Dave Miller says it is not a good idea to store flakes as they readily = | pick up moisture. On one hand, I've stored the flaked barley in doubled = | zip-locked bags and it being winter my house is quite dry. On the other = | hand, a one pound bag only costs $1.79...not going to break me. | | I know this question can not really be answered, but would you use them? = | How can I tell if they contain too much moisture to be effective? Don't worry. I put 1/2 lb. of flaked barley in EVERY batch and keep the stuff around for months in a jar with no other preparation. I don't think moisture does anything negative to it at all. I've kept the stuff around for almost a year and it still tastes great (sometimes I eat it like oatmeal). The reason I put it in every batch is that I've found that it increases head retention in my beers (all grain) and doean't affect the flavor. Got head problems? Give flaked barley a try. By the way, the only other standard ingredient of mine is to always include 1 lb of malted wheat in every batch to aid in trub formation. There are more glutens or proteins (whatever) that help the trub glom together and fall out of solution during the cooling phase. I then rack off of the trub immediately prior to pitching the yeast. I've found that this improves the flavor of the beer (to remove the trub prior to fermentation). Have fun, - -Alan Alan Edwards (ale at cisco.com) H3CO.____ O CH3 Systems Administrator / / \ || | Chile-Head / Homebrewer HO-< >-C-N-C-(CH2)4-C=C-C-CH3 Cisco Systems Inc 408-526-5283 \____/ H2 H H H H Capsaicin Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 15:58:38 -0800 From: George De Piro <George_De_Piro at berlex.com> Subject: re: Flat lager / 8 days to ale (George De Piro) Hi all, Lou asks why his lager didn't carbonate. Al K. and I were discussing this very problem here last month. Lou lagered his beer for 6 weeks at 34F (1.1C). My guess would be that the yeast is quite happily sleeping because of the cold storage. I would also guess that if he racked carefully there isn't a lot of yeast in the beer. If you warm the bottles to around 50F (10C) it might carbonate, but because of the reduced number of active cells it may take a while. It is best to either kraeusen lagers, or force carbonate them (or spund your unitank; you know who you are). ------------------- Dr. Stone speaks of a local brewer that serves ale in as little as 8 days. Some beers can be drunk that young, but many will improve if aged longer than that. [RANT ON] Many small brewers are more concerned with $$$ than quality, and will serve green beer as long as people will drink it. This is a plague I find all too common in many of the NY area brewpubs. Certain manufacturers of brewing equipment even tell prospective customers, "10 days to ale, 21 to lager" (referring to the time from brew day to serving). This is generally ridiculous. Unfortunately, the owners of brewpubs are told this, and predict capacity using these figures, and don't want to tie up tanks longer than they think is necessary (lest they hurt the bottom line). I have made ales that are passable in 2 weeks, but bottles that I have aged longer are invariably MUCH better. I have yet to brew a beer that has peaked in 10 days! Lager in 21 days? Yeah, right. There is a big difference between "fresh" and "green." Just my opinion. [RANT OFF] As homebrewers, we can usually afford to be more patient and allow our beer to mature to its full potential. Patience is the key. Have fun! George De Piro (Nyack, NY) Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 15:51:03 -0600 From: Mark Peacock <peacock at webspun.com> Subject: Re: 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've had very good luck using molasses. A few years ago, I brewed up a Christmas ale that was based on a Cat's Meow recipe, but to which I added a significant shot of molasses (sorry for the qualitative measurement, but my log book is at home). The flavor notes from the molasses melded quite well with the light spicing that I added. Since I didn't want anything getting in the way of the molasses and spices, I used minimal finishing hops and used the Wyeast #1056 yeast. The one caveat to this is that I like molasses. Indeed, in the winter, I'm as likely to put molasses on my oatmeal as I am maple syrup -- but that's what you get from spending some formative years in Memphis. Regards, Mark Peacock Hinsdale, Illinois peacock at webspun.com Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 16:07:47 -0600 From: Steve Potter <spotter at Meriter.com> Subject: Air Filtration (Steve Potter) My $.10 on the continuing aeration/filteration saga- I have been reading with amusement the thread on air filtration. It seems to me that most folks feel about sanitization the way they feel about sex- if anyone is doing it differently than you, there has to be something wrong with them. 8^) There _is_ a practical (and easy) way to filter air as Ron mentioned. It is a syringe filter that can be put into the air line with luer locks. To purchase them retail costs about $3.50, but if you know how to shop they can be had for less than $.50 each in quantity. Some people feel that you should change the filters after about 10 batches, other people use one per batch. In either case, I think it is cheap insurance. As to why one would want to use one- it all relates Keith's original point about pitching an adequate supply of yeast. We both believe that pitching enough yeast is critical for producing good beer. This belief leads me to culture yeast through multiple step-ups. The quantity of yeast produced is in large part a function of adequate aeration of the starter. It is in this step up process that the use of air filters is most important. I get downright anal-retentive (gee, does anal-retentive have a hyphen? 8^) about all aspects of sanitization when yeast culturing (can you say laminar flow hood? I knew that you could ;^).) It doesn't take much contamination at this stage to cause problems later. It really does not matter how much yeast you pitch if it is already contaminated. I do not believe that filtering pure O2 is a worthwhile activity and have refrained from doing so since I switched from pumps to tanks. Pure O2 from a tank and air pumped from the environment are fundamentally different. There are no beer spoiling bacteria that I know of that can survive long in pure O2. Oh would that that were true of air. (In any case, some regulators have a filter built into them where they attach to the tank.) The necessity of filteration may also relate to where you live. I live about two hours up I90 from Al. Here in Wisconsin our summers are hot and humid. That, combined with the fact that I live 1/4 mile from a vineyard, makes for air contaminated with wild yeast and assorted other beasties. As usual YMMV. ========================================================== Steve Potter Madison, Wisconsin Wisconsin- come smell our dairy air ========================================================== Return to table of contents
End of HOMEBREW Digest #2315