HOMEBREW Digest #2486 Mon 18 August 1997

[Prev HBD] [Index] [Next HBD] [Back]

		Digest Janitor: janitor@hbd.org
		Many thanks to the Observer & Eccentric Newspapers of 
		Livonia, Michigan for sponsoring the Homebrew Digest.
				URL: http://www.oeonline.com

  Plate Coolers/My RIMS/LP Burners/Flow Meters/Denver/CO2 Leaks (Darrell)
  Malt Extract Stains ("Robert D. Dittmar")
  Danstar brand dry yeast (GuyG4)
  Whole Hop Weight (Bob Falcon)
  Rising Gravity (Evan Dembskey)
  Leaking Corny Kegs (Mark_Snyder)
  Bud Beer School (Dave Williams)
  re: Fermentors for 10+ gallon batches (Rick Seibt)
  Northwest Micros (Mark Rancourt)
  Mint Question (Gordon & Cindy Camp)
  Summer fruit brewing (MGadd24)
  Summer fruit brewing (MGadd24)
  Extraction Efficiency (John Gilman)
  Re: Extraction Efficiencies (Rob Kienle)
  hops, caveat emptor (Jim Liddil)
  My hopback URL (the right one) ("Alan McKay")
  NW Micros (Mark Rancourt)
  Re: Can I save my brew?? (Apparent Stuck Fermentation) ("BRIAN F. THUMM")
  Malta (John Wilkinson)
  Minty, Hoppy,Efficiency, I did not! {8^) ("David R. Burley")
  Pumpkin Ale (Full Mash) ("Alan McKay")
  A New Way To Remove Chloramines ("Tim M. Dugan")
  Efficiency of Propane vs Nat gas vs Electrical ("Thor")
  Starter method: better AND easier? (Robert Parker)
  Re: Extraction Efficiencies (brian_dixon)
  Plato/SG (John Wilkinson)
  Apologies to Pike Place Pale Ale / Cleaning Cornies (George De Piro)
  Mead lovers digest (haafbrau1)

NOTE NEW HOMEBREW ADDRESS: hbd.org Send articles for __publication_only__ to homebrew at hbd.org (Articles are published in the order they are received.) If your e-mail account is being deleted, please unsubscribe first!! To SUBSCRIBE or UNSUBSCRIBE send an e-mail message with the word "subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to homebrew-request@hbd.org. **SUBSCRIBE AND UNSUBSCRIBE REQUESTS MUST BE SENT FROM THE E-MAIL **ACCOUNT YOU WISH TO HAVE SUBSCRIBED OR UNSUBSCRIBED!!! IF YOU HAVE SPAM-PROOFED your e-mail address, the autoresponder and the SUBSCRIBE/UNSUBSCRIBE commands will fail! For "Cat's Meow" information, send mail to brewery at realbeer.com Homebrew Digest Information on the Web: http://hbd.org Requests for back issues will be ignored. Back issues are available via: Anonymous ftp from... hbd.org /pub/hbd ftp.stanford.edu /pub/clubs/homebrew/beer E-mail... ftpmail at gatekeeper.dec.com (send a one-line e-mail message with the word help for instructions.) AFS users can find it under... /afs/ir.stanford.edu/ftp/pub/clubs/homebrew/beer JANITORS on duty: Pat Babcock and Karl Lutzen (janitor@hbd.org)
---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 13 Aug 1997 17:43:14 -0600 From: Darrell <SdarrellP at Amontrose.netM> Subject: Plate Coolers/My RIMS/LP Burners/Flow Meters/Denver/CO2 Leaks Ray Kruse in #2478 asks about Plate Coolers. Try Foxx Equipment in Denver 800 525-2484 and Kansas City 800 821-2254, or try Rapids 800 472-7431. Both companies stock them in various sizes and configurations. No affiliation, blah blah blah.... - -------------------------------- My RIMS idea: There have been a number of comments on my counterflow heat exchanger idea between my RIMS and sparge tank. Thank you all very much. Some of the commentors suggested a simple immersion type with the coils in the sparge tank. From what I have read on wort coolers, without agitation, the efficiency of a counterflow heat exchanger exceeds immersion by a factor of 12x. Is that not so? Also, diverting the flow when no heat is required would also require additional control equipment. I'm thinking my idea is still the simplest. Anyway, thanks to all for the help! - ----------------------- Mike Hoag in #2480 asked about LP regulators and burners. The question of tying 3 LP burners together using 1 regulator depends on your regulator's flow. Regulators are rated for pressure ranges and flow rates. I have a Cajun Cooker, and added a Tee to another burner off of the same line (lame experiment to have a high and low burner on the same cooker), and the regulator flowed plenty of gas to run both burners at "full speed". In my lame experiment, the orifice size was too large, and I wound up with the second burner producing higher BTU's than the original. So, I don't think you would have a problem running all three burners on a standard LP regulator, but that will depend on the flow rate of your regulator. To answer your specific questions, I would not use a high pressure regulator with restricted plumbing size. Depending on the hose and connections you use, they may not be rated for the pressure you're asking them to maintain. Also, (part of previously stated lame experiment) high pressure makes it difficult to control the flame. I set the regulator on high, then used a valve to regulate flame level, and wasn't able to gain as much control as using the regulator. The relationship of pressure/flow/BTU is that if your regulator cannot flow as much gas as your collective orifice size(s), your pressure will drop as you open up successive burners. Since you will not be flowing as much gas, your BTU's will also fall off (each burner, that is. Max. BTU's will still, collectively, be the same). Higher pressure might seem to be the answer, but if you have a high pressure regulator with low flow, you will wind up in the same situation, and flame control will be more difficult. Therefore, a low pressure regulator with high flow is the best answer - IMHO. - -------------------------------- Eric Fouch in #2481 asked about gas flow (imagine that...!) Eric, There are a number of different types of flow meters. Depending upon your application, what you thought was flow may not necessarily be flow. Some flow meters work well for in-line applications (usually more expensive, "positive displacement" models), while others must be vented to atmosphere for proper metering. Whatever the case, measured flow is a function of pressure. 13 l/m at 10 psi is NOT the same as 13 l/m at 100 psi. A desired flow rate must be accompanied by the corresponding pressure, or the number is meaningless. So, to take a stab at your questions: 1. What is the best configuration of the regulator and flow meter? That depends on your flow meter. If your meter is designed to be vented to atmosphere, neither of the configurations you described will work. If it is an in-line flow meter, both will work the same, but you will have to take into account the pressure at the point of measurement. I am very surprised by your observation that the flame seems to be higher with the regulator between the flow meter and the tank. Presumably, if you measure 13 l/m of regulated flow (10 psi), it should be *less* than 13 l/m of unregulated (100 psi?) flow. 13 liters of gas at 100 psi will expand to fill a volume much greater than 13 liters if it is allowed to expand until it reaches 10 psi. So, the 13 l/m that you measured before the regulator should have given you a bigger flame than the 13 l/m that you measured after the regulator. (Unless, of course, your flow meter includes a pressure/flow correction gradient, in which case, this entire dissertation is superfluous!) So, if your flow meter does have the correction lines on it, maybe it is not properly calibrated. 2. Is pressure drop in the line a major factor? In a static state, there will be no pressure drop. The line will reach equilibrium if you turn a valve off at the end of the line. However, as soon as you open the valve, line length and tubing I.D. will play a major factor in how much gas you can pass through the line. Your corrected flow measurements should be the same at both ends of the line, but you will find that you have to maintain a higher pressure in the 50' line than you would in the 20' line to push the same amount of flow. If your tubing I.D. is large enough (i.e., less restriction), you may find this difference immeasurable. - -------------------------- Mike Frank in #2483 asks about bottles on airplanes: Mike, no problem taking bottles as carry on, or checking them in your baggage. Make sure they are well padded if you check them!!! I have taken bottles in my checked baggage to Europe with no problems. I'm not sure about Denver, but we've been getting pounded by afternoon monsoon rains for the past month here on the Western Slope. Good luck! - ---------------------------- Keith Royster in #2483 asks about CO2 leakage. Take your bathroom scale down to the garage and put the cylinder on it. Maybe you're just getting stronger in your old age!! ;-) You'll need to know the tare weight (should be stamped on cylinder shoulder), the difference tells you how much CO2 is left. As for leaks; Take some soapy water solution and spray it all around your valve and where the valve threads into the cylinder. Then get your finger real wet with the stuff and run the edge of your finger across the outlet of the valve, drawing a soap bubble across the outlet. If any bubbles grow, you have a leak. It is also possible for the cylinder itself to develop a pin hole leak through the side wall, but then you will usually see a small patch of frost on the cylinder at the leak. As for testing; Your cylinder is required to be hydrostatically tested every 5 years, or you can't get it filled. Keith said, "I assume they pressure tested it when they last filled it recently". Nope, they don't just do this, they charge you for it. Although there is some degree of checking for leakers, it is not at all uncommon for cylinders (especially CO2) to come back with leaks after just being filled. - ------------------------ Brew on!! - -- Darrell Garton Montrose, CO Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 13 Aug 1997 11:57:00 +0000 From: "Robert D. Dittmar" <Robert.D.Dittmar at STLS.frb.org> Subject: Malt Extract Stains Collective: I am still extract brewing: boiling around 2 gallons of water and adding DME and malt extract syrup. I have a 4 gallon stainless steel stock pot that I have been using for the boil, and some stains have developed on the bottom of the pot from carmelized and burned extract. Detergent and elbow grease have proven incapable of removing them. Does anyone know of any household chemicals that would remove them, or are they now a permanent addition to the stock pot. Rob Dittmar dittmar at stls.frb.org Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 13 Aug 1997 20:43:55 -0400 (EDT) From: GuyG4 at aol.com Subject: Danstar brand dry yeast Greetings, collective. I've been using liquid yeast cultures, chiefly wyeast brand, for several years. I seem to lose a starter now and then, and going back through my brewnotes I noticed I lost them to infection largely in the late spring/summer months. I was noting this to my local brewshop provider, who suggested using Danstar brand yeast. My last three batches have employed this kind of yeast, and I have had good results. I use two packs...In two I mixed "nottingham" and "windsor" varieties in a light simple pale ale, the other I used "london" variety in an IPA. I've been very impressed by the performance and flavor, and I don't miss the uncertainties with liquid yeasts in the summer. Is anyone else out there is using it? My impression is this is a high quality product, but perhaps someone has some criticism. No, I have no interest in any yeast company, etc.etc.... Heck, if my good fortune with this stuff continues, I may just abandon liquids for ales altogether. Any feedback would be appreciated. GuyG4 at aol.com Guy Gregory Lightning Creek Home Brewery Spokane, WA Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 14 Aug 1997 00:19:34 -0400 From: Bob Falcon <bfalcon at erols.com> Subject: Whole Hop Weight I have a recipe calling for 6 (six) Chinook whole hops to be dry hopped. I'd prefer to use pellets for simplicity. How much does a whole hop weigh?? Bob Falcon Voorhees, NJ bfalcon at erols.com Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 14 Aug 1997 09:52:09 +0200 From: Evan Dembskey <evyn at global.co.za> Subject: Rising Gravity Hi there. I am new to both this list and to brewing in general. I have one puzzling problem. I made my second ale a couple of weeks ago. When I check the SG it seems to be rising, not falling. It started out at about 1100, and is now 1300. What now? Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 14 Aug 1997 08:13:18 -0500 From: Mark_Snyder at wastemanagement.com Subject: Leaking Corny Kegs Mark Snyder 08-14-97 08:13 AM Chris Ragaisis writes that his corny keg just won't seal. A possible solution (assuming the leak is at the lid seal and not with either the poppet or relief valves) is to try an O-ring sold by Williams Brewing. These o-rings are softer and larger diameter to better seal slightly damaged kegs. Something to try before chunking the thing out. BTW Chris, if you do decide to throw the thing out, let me know, I'll send you postage and a label to put on the keg to send it to me :-). Mark Snyder (Oh yeah, no affiliation ... yada, yada, yada...) Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 14 Aug 1997 08:28:37 -0400 From: rdavis at gator.net (Dave Williams) Subject: Bud Beer School Arnold J. Neitzke went to the Budweiser Beer school. So did I. I went to the one at Bush Gardens in Tampa. I was *not* impressed with the guy who gave the presentation. It was apparent to me that he was a marketing type rather than a brewing type and hadn't done his homework. In describing the brewing process, he had starch conversion occuring during malting and the amount of fermentable vs unfermentable sugars controlled by the proportion of rice in the brew. After explaining the difference between ales and lagers, he made a big deal about how proud AB is of their yeast and that they use the same yeast strain for all of their beers. During the question/answer session at the end of the presentation I asked if Michelob Pale Ale is fermented with ale or lager yeast. He sidestepped with something like,"It's dry hopped, that's a different process", and quickly took the next question. He also mentioned that AB can't sell Bud in The Chech Republic under the name Budweiser because sombody else over there was already using the name. He was righteously indignant over this even though he mentioned that it was part of the agreement when AB licensed the name from the Chech Budweiser in the first place. "We can't even use our own name!", he fumed. Oh yeah, also Michelob uses only 2 row malt and Bud has some 6 row. But who can tell with all those bubbles. I can't drink the stuff. Gives me the hiccups. If you're currious about how they (AB) make that stuff and you don't care about the cheesey certificate, you can find all of the information (without the righteous indignation) on Bud's web page. www.Budweiser.com, I think. Cheers Dave W. Whiskey's too rough Champagne cost too much And vodka puts my mouth in gear This little refrain should help me explain As a matter of fact , I like beer -Tom T. Hall- Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 14 Aug 1997 09:24:34 -0700 From: Rick Seibt <rseibt at apk.net> Subject: re: Fermentors for 10+ gallon batches In HBD #2483 BBrowne at golder.com (Barry Browne) wrote: >The Sankey seems to be a decent option (durability etc.). I'd appreciate hearing from folks about their experiences, good or bad, with these vessels (or any others) as fermentors. Barry, I've been hooked on Sankey kegs as fermentors since I tasted my first beer from them. I don't know if I just got lucky, or the keg really had something to do with it, but as I continued to ferment (primary only) in them, I became very happy with the results. That said, my last 3 batches have been fermented in glass because of a nasty yeast ring I haven't been able to get rid of. I use 1/4 bbl for 5 gal batches and 1/2 bbl for 10 gal batches. I just take the spear out, and ferment using a #11 stopper & ferm. lock. Here's some things to consider: Activity is tough to judge, you can only go by the bubbling of the fermentation lock (or lack thereof). The #11 stopper fits, but because of the notch in the top of the keg, you need to make sure its snugly in there. Cleaning can be a bitch. I soak w/tsp or dishwasher detergent asap after racking or you get a yeast ring like I got. I plan on using NaOH to get rid of it as soon as I find some. To inspect the inside of the keg, I use a night light (w/o shade, just bare bulb), attached to an extension cord, and lower it into the keg and then use a telescopic mirror (Sears tool section - like a dental mirror) and use the mirror to inspect the keg. IT WORKS. Just make sure the keg is dry and I also plug into an GFCI outlet to be safe otherwise electrocution is possible. Racking is easier and harder. You need to find a way of holding the racking cane vertical, but you can rack straight down the center of the keg due to the concave bottom and get most of the good stuff and leaving the lees and residue behind. Overall the work load is increased, but the results are worth it. IMO Rick Seibt Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 14 Aug 1997 07:01:11 -0700 From: Mark Rancourt <rancourt at nelson.ca.boeing.com> Subject: Northwest Micros This is in reaction to that NY guy from HBD 2482 that more or less stated that micros from around here are one dimensional, out of balance, and generally overhopped. Consider this your pee-pee being slapped. I happen to think the majority of the brews around here are great. There are some of the MOST AWSOME brews to be found almost in my back yard. This includes but not lilited to: Leavenworth Brewery (Thank you Florida, good taste!) PS. Ever tried DANTE'S ? Winthrop Brewing Diamond Knot (Best damn IPA on God's planet) Hale's Captian City Skagit River (Yellow Jacket Bitter, yummy stuff, New Yorkers stay away) Elysian Brewing Big Time Pike Place This list could go on for days... I most certianly will not go to NY in search of brew. There are a few not so good brews here also. A few that come to mind: Redhook Aviator Pyramid My veiws as a NW hophead, other opinions may vary... Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 14 Aug 1997 10:07:16 -0400 From: Gordon & Cindy Camp <revcamp at epix.net> Subject: Mint Question John Asks about brewing with fresh mint, which I grow and occasionaly have tossed into a brew or two. So here are my suggestions based on my few excursions: 1. On cleaning the mint leaves, wash them well in water. then soak in a cheap vodka for a few minutes. 2. Dry verses fresh leaves? Always fresh. Mint unlike hops loses much of its flovor and aroma when you drie them. 3. Ive used them in the secondary, more alcohol to retard botulism/BATF growth. But I've also used them at the end of the boil. The former yeilds better aroma and less flavor, while the later produces taste and fading aroma. So, why not try some of each, you add hops at different times for different results right? 4. 4oz of undried mint will give you alot of mint flavor, depending on your beer recipie I would recommend 1oz at the end of the boil and 3oz for secondary. But experiment and have fun. Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 14 Aug 1997 10:01:01 -0400 (EDT) From: MGadd24 at aol.com Subject: Summer fruit brewing Homebrewer looking for a "Peach Cream Ale" recipe. Would prefer a extract recipe. Trying to take advantage of the summer fruit coming in. Thanks. Send recipes to: MGadd24 at aol.com Clumbsy Dog Brews Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 14 Aug 1997 10:02:05 -0400 (EDT) From: MGadd24 at aol.com Subject: Summer fruit brewing Homebrewer looking for a "Peach Cream Ale" recipe. Would prefer a extract recipe. Trying to take advantage of the summer fruit coming in. Thanks. Send recipes to: MGadd24 at aol.com Clumbsy Dog Brews Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 14 Aug 1997 09:37:31 -0500 From: John Gilman <gilmanj at mindspring.com> Subject: Extraction Efficiency > I am looking for suggestions to increase my extraction efficiency. I have > never gotten over 70%. I think my problems lie in temperature control at the > end of the mash and sparging. > > > Should I raise the temerature of the mash (do a mash-out) before I begin > recirculating the mash to get a clear run-off? > Should my sparge water temperature be different? > How long should the sparge last for a typical 5 gallon batch? (i.e. 10 lbs of > grain and an initial boil volume of 6 to 6.5 gallons). > What should the temperature be of my run-off from the mash-tun to the brew > pot? I recently got my efficiency up to 31.5pts/lb from 28pts/lb without changing my EasyMasher System. For me it was a matter of finally putting all the pieces together, i.e. mash-out, hour long sparge, acid adjustment etc. The thing that I think made the most difference, however, was stirring the grain bed twice during the sparge. Twice I stopped sparging and completely stirred the grain bed. With the EasyMasher this isn't a problem because run-off runs clear in about two cups. I don't know how long this would take with your system. John Gilman Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 14 Aug 1997 09:56:55 -0500 From: Rob Kienle <rkienle at interaccess.com> Subject: Re: Extraction Efficiencies > Alan McKay responds to my post on extract efficiencies and system overhauls: > > Rob, you can't change your entire brewing system and then say that > you attribute your higher extraction to one simple variable like the > water > temperature, or whether or not you have to transfer the mash. This > is so far from a controlled experiment that it isn't funny. You've > basically > changed every single variable, yet want to believe that your better > extraction is a result of only one of them. > Excuse me if I seemed to be oversimplifying things. It's true that my whole system is different than it was before. I didn't mean to imply that I only changed one element of the operation. The point I had *hoped* to make, however, was that the general aim (and the result) of the majority of my changes (not needing to transfer the grains to a separate vessel for sparging, for example) was more consistent (and higher) temperature maintenance throughout the mashing/sparging process. It remains logical to me that whatever methods we use to increase that particular *overall* element of the the process (including a complete system re-design, as was my case) should contribute significantly to improving the extent and predictability of efficiencies we see in our brews. - -- Cheers4beers, Rob Kienle Chicago, IL rkienle at interaccess.com Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 14 Aug 1997 8:08:23 -0700 (MST) From: Jim Liddil <JLIDDIL at AZCC.Arizona.EDU> Subject: hops, caveat emptor Andy wrote: > Date: Wed, 13 Aug 1997 13:01:20 -0700 > From: Andy Walsh <awalsh at crl.com.au> > Subject: US Tettnanger conspiracy! > > I'm sorry, but I can't stop myself from posting on this topic! > > The following comes from the Haas hop web-site. Haas are *major* growers > in the US and also own the entire Australian hop fields (hmmm...). > > http://www.john-i-haas.com/tett.htm > > "Tettnanger is an old aroma variety originating in the Tettnang area > around Lake Constance in Southern Germany. Selection of Tettnanger > rootstocks in Germany resulted in two different rootstocks now available > to U.S. growers. Each produces hops with distinct analytical data. One > is more like the German grown Tettnanger than the other. Analytical data > in this brochure are for the rootstock most widely grown in the U.S.A." > If nothing else all this points out that as consumers we should always questions our suppliers and their information. Whether it be malt, hops or YEAST. Jim Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 14 Aug 1997 11:07:16 -0400 From: "Alan McKay" <Alan.McKay.amckay at nt.com> Subject: My hopback URL (the right one) Sorry folks, I posted the wrong URL for my hopback. It can be found at : http://www.magma.ca/~bodnsatz/brew/tips/gadgets/hop-back.html cheers, -Alan Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 14 Aug 1997 08:34:49 -0700 From: Mark Rancourt <rancourt at nelson.ca.boeing.com> Subject: NW Micros My earlier posting was not a unilateral attack on all of NY but I did have to vent after reading of one dimensional, boring ,overhopped micros. Brew on, use lots of hops! Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 14 Aug 1997 11:32:53 -0400 From: "BRIAN F. THUMM" <THUMMBF at GWSMTP.NU.COM> Subject: Re: Can I save my brew?? (Apparent Stuck Fermentation) Mark Arneson wrote: > I pitched the yeast (dry M & F ale yeast) > on saturday, with an OG of 1.045. It pretty much stopped > fermenting on monday with a gravity of about 1.022 I wince at saying it, but you need to "Relax. Don't worry." A 23 point drop in two days is respectable, and you should expect it to drop another several points over the next week. For example, my most recent batch (a honey wheat) started at 1.051, and darn-near exploded it's way out of the fermenter for two days. When it slowed down to 6-8 bubbles per minute, I curiously took a measurement, and it read 1.026. I smiled, tasted it (very bubble-gum flavored) and waited another 10 days. I just bottled Tuesday night, when it finished at 1.012. If you don't see a drop at all after three more days, then you should declare it a stuck fermentation, but I'd give it a few more days. If it is stuck, more yeast will help, but check the temperature, too. Brian Thumm Pier 147 Brewery Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 14 Aug 97 10:27:44 CDT From: jwilkins at imtn.tpd.dsccc.com (John Wilkinson) Subject: Malta Delano DuGarm speculated that Malta might contain a preservative which inhibited yeast growth. However, since he said the malta was carbonated, I wonder if the CO2 could have been toxic to the small amount of yeast added? Mike Frank wondered if bottles of beer could be checked as baggage or carried on airline flights. I have carried both wine and beer both ways (checked and carried) without hassle. The first time I tried it I wondered what the reaction would be to the x-ray of my carry on bag. The bottles were obvious in the x-ray but provoked no reaction. I guess they are not worried about it. I am not. John Wilkinson - Grapevine, Texas - jwilkins at imtn.dsccc.com Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 14 Aug 1997 11:53:10 -0400 From: "David R. Burley" <Dave_Burley at compuserve.com> Subject: Minty, Hoppy,Efficiency, I did not! {8^) Brewsters: John Penn asks about using fresh mint leaves to give his Chocolate Stout the I-dreamed-I-was-skiing-down- this-montain and... taste. As with most fresh fruits and vegetables bacteria can be a problem and lead to beer spoilage. Since mint flavors hold up to cooking (mint jelly) I suggest you drop them into the boiler just as you finish the boil and remove them with the hops. If you want to put them in fresh, treat them with acidic (pH< 3.5) metabisulfite followed by ample washes of cold boiled water. You could also prepare a concentrate from mint leaves crushed in very hot water and add this to your beer to get the flavor just right. - -------------------------------------- Andy Walsh comments: >At last an open mind out there in HBDland = has prompted me to post again on >this topic, in hope of reaching similar souls... I hope I didn't give you the impression with my comments that I didn't find this whole thing fascinating and riddled with irony. I do, just don't know quite how to apply it except to use my hops differently. I think it is probably one of the best pieces of unique information we have had here in a long time. I would like to hear more about it. Andy also says: > The same variety grown under different = conditions >will also brew differently, so forget about the anecdotal evidence. Or is this myth based on the incorrect identification of the hop variety? I have read that the Hallertauer is the only hop that produces the same quality in the US as Germany. Maybe the reason is that it is the same plant and others were incorrectly identified - perhaps on purpose?? Remember Styrian Goldings is actually Fuggle. - ------------------------------------------ = Jackson, a recent transplant to NC asks how to improve his efficiency beyond 70%. = One thing that will give you an improvement is to include a hold at 122F which will help free up the starch from the protein matrix. Also, I would suspect that you may also have a milling problem. See my past comments about milling at least twice in a roller mill. - ------------------------------------------ Mark Turmakin says: >Dave Burley recently commented about Northwestern brews being too hoppy, or >rather too one-dimensionally hoppy - I would agree that we should try for >balance. But on the other hand, it's fun to push the envelope. Nope that was George De Piro, I believe. I would love a drinking tour of Oregon, Washington and Northern Ca. = But I did push the envelope recently with a Whitbread Special Bitter I made that had lots of hops and crystal. A well known BCJP judge and author visiting my house said after finishing a glass. "I like it but that is the hoppiest beer I have ever tasted" that says a lot. I like it but then I also make my Melita coffee with two heaping scoops of coffee in a 4 cup Mister Coffee. - ------------------------------------------ Keep on brewin' Dave Burley Kinnelon, NJ 07405 103164.3202 at compuserve.com Dave_Burley at compuserve.com = Voice e-mail OK = Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 14 Aug 1997 11:08:11 -0500 From: "Alan McKay" <Alan.McKay.amckay at nt.com> Subject: Pumpkin Ale (Full Mash) Hi there folks, Well, last weekend me and 2 friends decided to tackle a pumpkin ale which will be served at our halloween party. We did a 10 gallon batch where we mashed in 2 separate 5 gallon Gotts, then boiled the whole thing together in a 17 gallon aluminum brewpot on a 65K BTU burner. Here's the recipe we used for each of the 5 gallon mashes : 250g wheat 2 lb 6Row 6 lb 2Row 1 lb Munich 1 can pumpkin For one mash we mashed in to 153F, then brought the pumpkin up to that temp in a pot on top the stove, and finally just stirred the pumpkin into the top 1/4 of the mash. We didn't want to go too deep with the pumpkin in order to avoid runoff problems. FOr the other mash we mashed the pumpkin on top the stove with purchase enzymes, then mixed it into the top 1/4 of the mash in the other cooler. SO for runoff purposes, the only difference was that one cooler had a Phils in it, where the other had my home-made copper manifold (circular), cut with slots. When the time finally came to sparge, both were running very freely up until the last 10 or 15 minutes, when the Phils kept flowing freely, but the home-made manifold started running more slowly. We did manage to run it off fine, but it was starting to make us nervous. Unfortunately we didn't keep the runoff separate, so we don't know if we got higher extraction from one or the other. Looking back this would have been a good idea. In order to run the same amount of water through both, we just counted how many litres of water we put into the top of each, and kept the two the same. Oh, I should add as well that this is the first time any of us has used 6Row, and we were totally impressed with how quickly the wort cleared during the re-circulation even with only 2 lbs of 6Row. Normally with my Gott it takes a dozen or more quarts of recirculation to get a reasonably clear wort. This time it was 2 or 3 and the wort was clear as a bell. We were all completely amazed. As for the 65K BTU burner on a 10 gallon batch, we were extremely please with that, as well. It did take about 70 minutes to boil 15 gallons of cold water before we began, but that was acceptable to us. During the runoff, though, we put half the wort to boil before running off the other half, so it only took about 10 minutes to come to a rolling boil after the runoff had completed. So all-in-all we found the 65K BTU burner to be more than adequate. Just set your cold water to boil an our in advance, and that's the longest wait out of the way by far. I'm ashamed to say that I don't recall what exactly we used for hops. We were going by the recipe on P315 of Papazian's 2nd book, and used the spices that are given there (doubled for the 10 gallons). As for hops, we used different ones than he specified for boiling, but worked them out to the same HBUs. The spices added were cinnamon, allspice, vanilla, and I think some nutmeg. Check the book for exact proportions. We'll keep you posted on the progress of the beer. Just thought some of you might be interested. cheers, -Alan Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 14 Aug 1997 10:35:59 -0500 From: "Tim M. Dugan" <tdugan at netins.net> Subject: A New Way To Remove Chloramines Our homebrew club (MUGZ) is fortunate enough to have a member who is a = professional in the field of water treatment. He just wrote this = article for our newsletter, and I though the HBD might find it = interesting. If you have any questions you can contact Jim at humph39 at aol.com. Chloramines - The Yeast Killers by Jim Humphreys Chloramines are compounds formed by the reaction of free chlorine and = ammonia. Some cities form these compounds on purpose to control = bacterial growth, both in the water treatment plant and the distribution = system. It also replaces chlorine disinfection and reduces the = formation of trihalomethanes (THM's) that result when chlorine reacts = with naturally occurring organic matter. In some instances they are = formed by ammonia naturally occurring in the water. Chloramines occur as mono-, di-, and trichloramines. Since the drinking = water supply of most cities has a pH of 7 or higher, we have to deal = with monochloramine. The matter is complicated by the fact that = monochloramines are highly stable in nature, making them the most = difficult type of chloramine to remove. But remove it we must because = it is a yeast killer. The most common method of removing both chlorine and chloramines is = activated charcoal. The use of wood or coconut based activated carbons = are common practices but have limitations. Choramines tend to be more = difficult to remove and deplete the carbon bed quite readily. More = efficient removal can be realized by using activated charcoal with a = mesh size to 30 x 70, if you have a choice. In addition, run the water = through at a slower rate and increase the temperature of the water. There is a new player in the charcoal field, activated carbon. This is = a special carbon produced from bituminous coal by Calgon Corp. This = carbon is 10-15 more efficient in chloramine removal than any form of = carbon. The author, who once worked for Calgon, will contact them and = find a source for those that are interested. As an added bonus, = activated carbon also removes iron. This article was based on information contained in "Catalytic Carbon, A = New Weapon in the Chloramine Battle" and "Catalytic Carbon, A New Level = in Iron Removal Technology" by Ed Bockman published in the August 1997 = addition of "Water Conditioning & Purification". =00 Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 14 Aug 1997 10:05:30 +0000 From: "Thor" <*Dont.spam* at dnai.com> Subject: Efficiency of Propane vs Nat gas vs Electrical Does anybody know what the relative efficiency of heating your brewery with propane, natural gas or electricity? My current setup is made for propane but I'm planning on moving it indoors and cant safely do so with propane because of the fumes and because it will be easier to automate. Its currently set up to make 15 gallons with plenty space. If I convert it to electrically heated with immersion elements, is it going to cost a fortune? Would it be better to use natural gas? - ----------------------------------------------------------- email addresses: *mikew at ricochet.net, *thor at onthemenu.com (remove *) *thor at dnai.com, *thor at expressway.com Raw Web page at http://www.dnai.com/~thor/index.html Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 14 Aug 1997 13:33:10 -0400 (EDT) From: Robert Parker <parker at parker.eng.ohio-state.edu> Subject: Starter method: better AND easier? Starters are a topic of late and I'd like to float an intriguing idea that somehow received little discussion when originally posted 3 years ago. Pierre Jelenc (a former hbd all-star and unfortunate hbd dropout after last year's difficulties) provided the following post in August 1994: > The problem is that this is not a starter, but a mini beer. A starter > should NOT ferment, but grow aerobically; get rid of that air lock, in > fact get rid of that bottle as well: make your starter at the bottom of > your primary fermenter, where you will get a huge surface/volume ratio. > > Splash it around regularly, and do not close the fermenter: Use a loose > plug of sterile cotton for a carboy, or a freshly boiled kitchen towel > for a bucket. That way, all the sugar is used to make more yeast, not to > make alcohol. He followed it up with the following private email: > When I make my starters, typically I start from yeast on a plate, but > the dregs of a fresh bottle are usually OK. I put 1/2 gal of a simple > wort made with dry extract and a few hops pellets (OG 1.02-1.04) in a > sanitized (iodophor) plastic fermenter, and scrape the yeast into it. I > cover loosely with Al foil, and give it a shake once in a while, when I > happen to pass by. > > At least one day, and preferably not more than two, after pitching, I lift > one end of the fermentor on a few books, to gather the yeast all on one > side, and I let it rest overnight. Just before adding the wort, I pour off > the liquid from the starter, to keep only the yeast. > > I do my primary in an essentially open fermenter, with skimming with a > slotted spoon rather than a blow-off in a carboy (mostly for practical > space reasons). As soon as primary fermentation slows down, I rack to a > glass carboy and fit an air lock. I will admit that I need help with the microbiology to evaluate this, but it looks intriguing, and, based only on the usual quality of Pierre's info, I'm inclined to think it's effective. Let's see some discussion of this starter method that is clearly easier and in one informed person's opinion better. Rob Parker parker.242 at osu.edu Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 14 Aug 97 10:55:36 -0700 From: brian_dixon at om.cv.hp.com Subject: Re: Extraction Efficiencies >Rob Keinle writes : >MHO I believe that the extraction *deficiencies* many of us see are >directly related to our sparging techniques. For 5 years, I too mashed >on the stovetop, transferred the mash to a bucket, and sparged using >Phil's setup. My efficiencies were *always* around 5 pts off projection >and *consistently* about 70% overall. I am certain the problem was due >to temperature loss in transferring the grain and an inability to make >up for that loss with 170 degree sparge water. >My proof for this assumption is the fact that, at the beginning of this >year, I switched to a dedicated 3-vessel system in which the grain is >*not* moved to another vessel for sparging and heat may continue to be >applied to it (as well as to the sparge water itself) throughout the >sparge procedure. I doubt the low 70% rate is due to cooling during the transfer of the mash to a separate lauter tun. I use a system very similar to what you describe and regularly get 88% extraction efficiency (and hit my SG predictions right on the mark). I'd examine a) your crush, b) mash time, c) temperature and temperature loss during the mash rest(s). In addition, did you use Fix's technique for including a mash at 105 F, or did you mash out at say 165 F or so for 10 minutes (or so)? I don't use Fix's low temperature rest, but do mash out. I also mash for about an hour in a preheated (150 F) oven, experiencing a loss of about 2 degrees during the rest. The rest of my procedure is purely stove-top and I use an uninsulated (yikes!) plastic bucket with a Phil's Phalse bottom in it. I have always worried about temperature loss when transferring the mash, and during the sparge (I use 170 F water), but my efficiencies have bred laziness in me and I haven't taken further steps to correct the mash transfer/lautering temperature loss issues. I do get a slowing of the sparging once in awhile though, with exit temperatures of around 120 F or so (!), so I will probably insulate and preheat the lauter tun somewhere along the line (when I get less lazy), but it sure hasn't affected my efficiency. Oh yeah, I also take pains to do a slow sparge. Most recipes take an hour or slightly longer for me to sparge. Brian ....................................................................... Item Subject: WINMAIL.DAT Couldn't convert Microsoft Mail Message Data item to text at a gateway. Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 14 Aug 97 12:40:20 CDT From: jwilkins at nps001.imtn.tpd.dsccc.com (John Wilkinson) Subject: Plato/SG Graham Wheeler: >The closest Troy is likely to get without getting into heavy maths is: > >(SG-1) * 258.85 >- --------------- > SG > >Where SG is in the form of 1.xxx Spencer Thomas: >A curve fit (due to deClerck) gives: > > E = 0.258*(1-0.0008*Pts)*Pts + 0.003 > >where E is extract in degrees Plato, and Pts is (SG - 1) * 1000 My God! No wonder my ESB has not been turning out right. I was shooting for 1.052 SG for 13 Plato and I should have been shooting for 1.053! No disrespect intended, guys. It just struck me as funny considering how inexact my brewing is. John Wilkins - Grapevine, Texas - jwilkins at imtn.dsccc.com Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 14 Aug 1997 15:48:13 -0700 From: George_De_Piro at berlex.com (George De Piro) Subject: Apologies to Pike Place Pale Ale / Cleaning Cornies Hi all, After I read Mike's post, in which he said that two years ago Pike Place Pale Ale was a balanced beer (in his opinion), I checked my notes, and sure enough, I wrote that I thought it was pretty good. There was actually some balance to it. I apologize to all who were offended. I stand firmly on my ground regarding their other beers, though. I found the stout to be especially bitter and acrid. --------------------------------------- Somebody (sorry, don't recall the name) stated that they read that taking Cornies completely apart will harm the seals, so they don't do it regularly. They go on to describe their sanitizing procedure which includes a very hot water soak, which they say is probably unnecessary. In my opinion, if you aren't taking apart the keg so that every bit of every part is in direct contact with sanitizer, you are risking infection. The hot water soaking that the poster describes IS necessary because the heat will help to kill what the sanitizer cannot get to in an assembled keg. --------------------------------------- Just a quick note to let Andy Walsh know that I hate him. I have 4 Tettnang vines in my first year hop garden, and they're doing really well. Thanks to Andy, I now doubt their true variety even more than I already did (I don't entirely doubt that somewhere along the line from field to homebrew shop they got mislabeled). What the heck should I call them now? And what of the others I'm growing? Oh, hell...forget it! In case anybody missed the point of this last bit, I don't hate Andy. I do in fact respect him and enjoy his posts. Have fun! George De Piro (Nyack, NY) Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 14 Aug 1997 17:08:51 -0400 From: haafbrau1 at juno.com Subject: Mead lovers digest Besides loving beer, mead has a special place in my heart. After reading a post with info on how to subscribe to mld, I attempted to do so, only to be rejected as "spam". How do I get around this to actually subscribe? I have done nothing to my address, and I followed the directions exactly. Any help would be much appreciated. TIA. Paul Haaf haafbrau1 at juno.com Return to table of contents
[Prev HBD] [Index] [Next HBD] [Back]
HTML-ized on 08/18/97, by HBD2HTML version 1.2 by K.F.L.
webmaster at hbd.org, KFL, 10/9/96