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


Contents:
  protein rest / sparging technique (Brian Bliss)
  Re: Cloudy, questions (Jeff Benjamin)
  Lager Starter?? General Comments (Lee Menegoni)
  Weizen Request (rosenthal)
  Ginger beer update (Dave Whitman)
  RIMS (George J Fix)
  Easymash ("Mark Rich-mpr8a at acadvm1.uottawa.ca")
  bottle conditioning takes a long time? (Peter Maxwell)
  American Black Malt (Jeff Frane)
  In need of some history (chris campanelli)
  Cheap 5 Gallon Carboys (BELLAGIO_DAVID)
  Real Root Beer and Cancer ("ONREUR::JSAMPSON")
  Re : British pubs (Conn Copas)
  Peracetic Acid and Other Strong Cleaners! (Timothy J. Dalton)
  Non-Alcohol Brews (fjdobner)
  help! nonstop fermentation (Kirk Anderson)
  new jersey brewpub legalization (dave ballard)
  English and British (Ed Hitchcock)
  plastic pails (DAMON_NOEL/HP0800_01)
  Bubble gum aroma during primary ferment ("C. Lyons / Raytheon-ADC / Andover, MA")
  Mashing Questions (Chris Mackensen)
  Crystal malt (CCAC-LAD) <wboyle at PICA.ARMY.MIL>
  Filtration, pt 1 of 2 (Jim Busch)
  wit beer recipe and comments (Tony Babinec)


Send articles for __publication_only__ to homebrew at hpfcmi.fc.hp.com
  (Articles are published in the order they are received.)
Send UNSUBSCRIBE and all other requests, ie, address change, etc.,
  to homebrew-request@ hpfcmi.fc.hp.com, BUT PLEASE NOTE that if
  you subscribed via the BITNET listserver (BEER-L at UA1VM.UA.EDU),
  then you MUST unsubscribe the same way! 
If your account is being deleted, please be courteous and unsubscribe first.
Archives are available via anonymous ftp from sierra.stanford.edu.
  (Those without ftp access may retrieve files via mail from
  listserv at sierra.stanford.edu. Send HELP as the body of a
  message to that address to receive listserver instructions.)
Please don't send me requests for back issues - you will be silently ignored.
For "Cat's Meow" information, send mail to lutzen at novell.physics.umr.edu



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

Date: Tue, 9 Mar 93 10:48:25 CST
From: bliss at csrd.uiuc.edu (Brian Bliss)
Subject: protein rest / sparging technique

Ulick Stafford <ulick at bernini.helios.nd.edu> writes:
>I intend to make a stout using a single infusion mash with the major
>component of the grain bill being a British Pale Ale malt.  But
>I want to know if I should worry about the fact that my roast and
>flaked barley have not been exposed to a protein rest - usually 
>I make stout using lager malt with a protein rest, quite successfully.
>Is the likely problem a stuck sparge or simply poor conversion of 
>the adjuncts?

It won't make the sparge stick any more than usual (no problems
since I switched to a copper-pipe manifold), though you could get
poor conversion of the adjuncts.

If you're aiming for gainess, you want to increase the protein
content of the finished product.  By all means go ahead an eliminate
the protein rest, even if you use lager malt.  The result is
excellent head retention, creamy mouthfeel, and additional haze,
which is no problem in a stout.

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

Frank Tutzauer <COMFRANK at ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu> writes:

>First, things went pretty well.  Temperature control in my picnic cooler was
>harder than I expected and sparging was easier than I expected.  I got about
>28 points a pound.  The runoff cleared *very* quickly, like within a quart or
>two.  (I suspect Jack's mill is the reason why.)

I assume you used a slotted copper pipe manifold which will not stick.
I cut too many holes in mine, and the runoff is actually too fast for
great extraction.  I was always having stuck sparges with a Zapap
lauter tun.  Crushing the grain with a Maltmill only made a minor
difference.  Shorter mash times helped the most - I think the husk
material begins to decompose after about 90 minutes and tends to
clog a false bottom.

Anyway, now my technique is as follows: 1) crush all the grain and
place in cooler, stir (dry) to mix.  2) hook a siphon hose up to
the outlet, and gently upward-infuse with 163F water, to avoid
oxidation.  when the water is well above the level of the grain, you
can (gently) stir the (thin) mash without any additional oxidation.
3) To mash out, drain a gallon or two, heat to 170F, and return
to the mash.  This can all be done (gently) through the siphon hose,
simply by lowering or raising the kettle.  4) drain completely,
possibly recirculating .5-1 gal.  5) siphon in 170F acidified sparge
water.  Again, backwards, through the copper pipe manifold.
6) repeats step 4, then 5 and 4 again if you wish.

>From an oxidation standpoint, it would be preferable to be able to
sparge with water running just under the surface of the mash, while
it is being drained from below.  The copper pipe manifold drains
so quickly that the sparge water does not run evenly through the
grain bed, leading to poor extraction when this is done.  Perhaps
this would work if there were fewer slots in the manifold (mine
currently is 7 ft long, with ~100 slots in it, 1 slot per inch),
and if the slots where closer together farther away from the
outlet.

>Now the questions.  First, in yesterday's digest, Joe Stone asks how long the
>sparge should take.  I've got the same question.  Miller, people in my club,
>and lots of other folks talk about the sparge slowing to a trickle.  Mine
>didn't.  It did slow a little, but never to a trickle.  If I'd wanted to, I
>could have run it out like gangbusters.

One of the advantages (disadvantages) of a copper pipe manifold.
The disadvantage is that if it runs too fast, you get poor extraction.
If you try to slow it down, you're only draining wort through the
slots nearest the outlet.

>The most convenient is to finish the sparge right as the wort on the stove
>is coming to a boil.  Is this reasonable?

The first running from my setup are around SG 1.100, which will caramelize
easily if I heat it too vigorously.  I usually wait until I collect a
full 7 gallons before I start heating towards a boil.  If you do heat
the first runnings earlier, so it gently to avoid caramelization, and do
not splash the hot wort when you add the second runnings later, to
avoid oxidation.

>Second, what's the deal on acidifying the mash?  Miller says to get the pH to
>5.0 to 5.5.  I checked right after doughing in, and it was like maybe 6.3.

If I preboil my mash water, mine always comes out 5.3-5.5, so I don't
worry about it.  (it's impossible to use ph papers accurately with
dark malts anyway, due to the staining action).  If you don't boil the
mash water to drive off the chlorine, the buffering action will insure
that the ph never gets low enough, unless you add massive amounts of acid
(gypsum won't do it), which will adversely affect the flavor of the final
product.

>Finally, should I acidify the sparge water?  Charlie P.'s silent on the
>matter, Miller says to acidify to a pH of 5.7, and Noonan spouts of a
>typically let's-make-it-harder-than-it-needs-to-be Noonanism, something like
>acidify if the pH rises .7 during sparge but never more than .2 unless the
>azimuth of the moon corresponds to the declination of blah, blah, blah.... 
>What should I do and how important is it?

The consensus is to try to get it down below 5.8.  For me, this works out
to be about .5 tsp of acid blend in 5 gal water.  If you add, say 1
tsp, then the ph of the sparge water will drop further (to 5.0 or below),
but as soon as the sparge water mixes with the wort in the grain bed,
the buffering action will raise the ph back to the 5.2-5.5 range.  better
to overdo it (slightly) than under do it.

bb


Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 9 Mar 93 10:02:25 MST
From: Jeff Benjamin <benji at hpfcbug.fc.hp.com>
Subject: Re: Cloudy, questions

Norm Pyle writes:

> Second problem:  my all-grain brews (3 to date) are, without exception,
> cloudy....  What gives?

Eliminating the particles that can cause hazy beer happens at two points
in the brewing process (and neither one is in the mash, although I
suppose your mashing technique may have a small effect).  The first is
during the boil, where proteins coagulate.  This is known as "hot
break".  I've heard a good hot break referred to as "egg drop soup", and
sometimes you see 1-2 inch long strands of goo rolling around in your
boil.  The second is during cooling, where more protein particles
coagulate.  This is the "cold break".  To make things confusing, both
the process and the resulting sludge from the boil are called "hot
break", but the result of the cold break process is called "trub".  Go
figure.

Here are some tips I've collected to help you maximize your breaks :-)
and maximize your chance at clear beer:

Hot Break:
1.  Make sure you have a full, rolling boil (can't be stirred down).
2.  Try adding Irish moss about 10-15 minutes before the end of the
    boil.  This is supposed to provide nucleation sites for the protein
    strands so they settle out.
3.  Leave the hot break in the kettle.  I use a copper Chore Boy wrapped
    around a 4" piece of slotted copper tubing to siphon with, and that
    seems to filter nicely.

Cold Break:
1.  Cool the wort as quickly as possible after the boil.
2.  Cool to as low a temperature as possible.  Noonan states that you
    don't get effective cold break until you cool to 50F or so.  I think
    that's a little much, but if you can cool to 60F or so you'll get a
    much better cold break.

If your beer is still cloudy, you can try racking to a secondary and
fining to get the remaining particles out of suspension.  After racking,
add a teaspoon of gelatine dissolved in water.  As the gelatine settles,
it should carry a lot of the particulates with it.

Frank Tutzauer has a few questions after his first all-grain batch.

> Joe Stone asks how long the sparge should take.  I've got the same question.

I haven't really seen a consensus on this in the Digest.  My experience
is that a 20 min.  sparge suffices to get me a 30-33 pts/lb/gal extract
rate, but your mileage may vary.  Others insist a 2 hour sparge with
lots of recycling is the way to go.  Try experimenting, and make sure
you taste the runoff.  Your tastebuds will be your biggest guide for
avoiding tannin extraction.

> Second, what's the deal on acidifying the mash?
> Finally, should I acidify the sparge water?

It depends on your local water.  Where I live, the water is naturally
soft and I haven't worried about it (in fact, I've never even checked
the pH of my mash or sparge water).  Regulating the pH seems to be a way
of reducing tannin extraction, so if your beer doesn't come out overly
astringent, you probably don't need to adjust anything.

- --
Jeff Benjamin                               benji at hpfcla.fc.hp.com
Hewlett Packard Co.                         Fort Collins, Colorado	
"Midnight shakes the memory as a madman shakes a dead geranium."
					    - T.S. Eliot

Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 9 Mar 93 11:52:28 EST
From: Lee Menegoni <necis!lmenegon at transfer.stratus.com>
Subject: Lager Starter?? General Comments

 I will be brewing a lager soon.  I use a refridgerator with Hunter
 Air stat for temp control.  The controls on the fridge are broken so
my choices are on / off.  This limits my lagering temp to 40F.  Given
this constraint what is the promary fermentation temp  I should use
for Wyeast Bohemian yeast?  
When producing a starter I plan to pop the bag at cellar temp 65F.
What temp should the starter I pitch to be?  Should I pich it at 65 and 
cool it to 60 let it reach full krausen, pitch this to a 2nd larger
starter solution at 60 and cool to 55F and pitch this to the 55F wort?
I plan to deal with the long lag time of cool initial wort temp by 
having a large amount 2-3oz of starter slurry.  Am i corect in my
assumption that pitching at to high a temp while reducing lag time
can produce flavors and ester inappropriate for a pilsner?

Norm mentions having problems with his all grain brew remaining cloudy:
did you iodine test the stirred mash? or just mash for x minutes?
did you recirculate the first few gallons of sparge?
did you rack off the trub?
Taking the above steps I have not had a clarity problem with AG brews.

I protein rest all grains for 15 to 30 minutes even highly modifeied British
grain.  I find that the time to (mash only) == (mash + protein rest).

Beer loses sweetness in bottle.  Attenutive yeast, like 1056, will
 continue to ferment complex sugars making for a less sweet beer over time.
My sweet brown ale became a dry brown ale with 1056 yeast.

Acidified mash water reduces the amount of tannins that can be leached ot during the sparge.  It helps reduce astringency and can improve yield.

- -- 

Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 09 Mar 1993 13:27:42 EST
From: rosenthal at aclcb.purdue.edu
Subject: Weizen Request


Greetings,

I would be grateful if someone could post a good all grain weizen
recipe.  I am relatively new to the all grain business, so any
specifics on the mashing process with the additional wheat malt
would also be helpful.  Thanks in advance!

Additionally, for those individuals in the northern Indiana/southern
Michigan region, there is a relatively new brewpub in Mishawaka 
(not sure of the spelling) Indiana called Mishawaka Brewing.  
The food is pretty good and the beers are quite nice, especially 
the Founders Day Classic Stout.  The quality may not be up to 
that of the brewpubs found on the west coast, but there's not
very many in this particular area (except Chicago).


Scott Rosenthal
Purdue University

Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 9 Mar 93 14:20:07 EST
From: Dave Whitman <rsndww at rohmhaas.com>
Subject: Ginger beer update

To homebrew at hpfcmi.fc.hp.co
X-Mailer: LeeMail 1.2.4

I racked my ginger beer into the secondary last night.  As in the wort, the 
beer had very little ginger flavor.  This despite 3 oz of ginger added during 
boiling.

To attempt to correct this, I added 4 oz of shredded ginger root to the 
secondary.  I dropped the whole root into a cup of boiling water for 10 minutes 
to sanitize.  I figured that the short boil and low surface area of the 
uncut/ungrated root would minimize loss of volatiles while sanitizing at least 
the outside.  After boiling, the root was grated in a sanitized food processor, 
and the grated material was added into the secondary (along with the boil 
water, which smelled strongly of ginger).

I'll taste again at bottling time, and post how it worked out.

Dave Whitman   
PROFS/OV: smtp(rsndww)         *  "Slime molds have 13 sexes, but is this 
internet: rsndww at rohmhaas.com  *   arrangement stable?"
US Mail:  get real.            *   Science; Vol 257, p324 (17 July 1992)


Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 9 Mar 93 14:03:53 -0600
From: gjfix at utamat.uta.edu (George J Fix)
Subject: RIMS

We had the good fortune of having Conrad Keys at this years Bluebonnet,
which was held last weekend. He was hoping to bring his first production
RIMS model, but this unfortunately was not possible. He is wisely seeking
insurance coverage for his system, and they have required that changes in
the wiring be made before they extend coverage. He did come with a brochure
on the system which contained a detailed picture of his prototype. Given
the average homebrewer's skill at reverse engineering, this may provide 
a lot of grist for one's mill (so to speak). Conrad indicated he would
sent copies free of charge to anyone who requests one.

I was reluctant to give out much detail in my review because I consider
Conrad as a good friend, and I would have a hard time sleeping at night
if I said something that was not in his best interest. However, he was
very candid about things at the Bluebonnent, and the following is a summary
of his ideas about RIMS:

  1.There are three crucial design parameters. These are the following:
           a. Type of crush used to mill the malt
           b. Geometry of the mash tun
           c. Diameter of the tubing used in the recirculation
It will come as no surprise that a corona is not appropriate, and any mill
which gives too fine of crush will experience the problems described by
Bob Jones in his post. The other two parameters are system dependent, and
Conrad recommends that those who are designing RIMS cut themselves as
much slack as possible in this area. For example, the optimal configuration
in his 1/2 bbl. system is quite different than with the 2 bbl. system.

   2. Top flight pumps are also crucial. Most pumps will eventually give
a laminar flow. Some, however, will cause foaming at the start and at the end.
These should be avoided.

   3. Less than optimal yields will occur if there are temperature gradients
in the system during the mash. This tends to be more important for the larger 
versions than the small one described in Rodney Morris' articles. I personally
am not a "yield uber allen" type. My bottom line is the finished beer itself.
If it is to my taste in the case of my beer, or to another's taste in the case
of their beer, then whatever procedures used will not be faulted by me. In any
case, those wishing to increase the yield of their RIMS may want to investigate
the heating used with an eye to removing thermal gradients. Obviously this
depends very sharply on the geometries involved.

George Fix

P.S. The Bluebonnet was a great success. I was really proud of the dignified
and refined behavior of the participants. There were, at the very most, only
2 or 3 fistfights, a new record for Texas! Seriously, it was a lot of fun, 
and we were all grateful for the entries sent in from outside our region.   



Return to table of contents


Date:         Tue, 09 Mar 93 15:37:21 EST
From: "Mark Rich-mpr8a at acadvm1.uottawa.ca" <MPR8A at acadvm1.uottawa.ca>
Subject:      Easymash


**** OPEN MSG TO JACK SCHMIDLING*** (did I spell that right?)

Hi Jack...
             I've been reading the digest for a while now, and am considering t
he shift to all-grain. I have been slowly gearing-up, and recently lucked into
a used 8 gal SS stock-pot with a spigot already attached. I remember reading a
few posts about your Easymasher(tm) setup, and I'm curious to know how much tro
uble it would be to sort of "borrow" (brown-nose-mode on) your skill and experi
ence. I was hoping you could see your way clear to sharing the basics of your d
esign with me.Please please please please. I will- of course - understand, shou
ld you not wish to part with it.

                                 Grovellingly yours,    Mark

Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 9 Mar 1993 14:02:55 -0800 (PST)
From: Peter Maxwell <peterm at aoraki.dtc.hp.com>
Subject: bottle conditioning takes a long time?

Recently I posted an item in which I expressed concern over my beer not
conditioning.  After regularly experiencing 3 day ferments, and reading about
how conditioning occurs "rapidly" I was upset to find almost no pressure in
the bottles after 4 days.  I then tried experiments by modifying three
bottles as follows:

(a) add 1/4 teaspoon extra sugar directly
(b) add 1/16 teaspoon (roughly measured) of dried yeast directly
(c) put 1/4 teaspoon of dried yeast in 25 ml water to rehydrate and pour 5 ml 
of slurry into a bottle

This is to report the results of that experiment, since people have
expressed interest.

The summary is that I was indeed too hasty.  Two weeks later and the bottles
had conditioned beautifully.  In comparing each of bottles a,b and c above
with an unmodified bottle, there is virtually no difference between b, c and
the standard bottle, at least as far as carbonation is concerned.  There
seems to be a very subtle difference in flavor, but so subtle that it can be
effectively ignored.  In my case I suspect the M&F dried yeast I added is
less attenuative than the WYEAST 1056.  There may have been a difference if
it was the other way around.

As far as bottle (a) goes, yes it's more carbonated, a bit too much so.

The bottom line is to not expect bottle carbonation within two weeks.
TNCJHB
suggests some beers are ready to drink in days, but this will be strongly
dependent on the yeast used.

Thanks to everyone who replied to my original note.

	Peter

Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 9 Mar 1993 15:20:57 -0800 (PST)
From: gummitch at techbook.com (Jeff Frane)
Subject: American Black Malt


For those who are using American black malt in their beers, I thought
the following might be interesting.  It's from an article by Roger C.
Briess, of the Briess Malting Co., in the October 1986 issue of Brewer's
Digest, a professional publication.  As far as I know, Briess is the
only American malthouse producing black malt.  This article was what
convinced me to use only British black malt in my beer (since upgraded
to include malts from Germany).

"Black malt is specifically produced for coloring value. Extract and
enzyme activity are inconsequential.

"Historically, black malt imparted an astringent, harsh, smoky flavor to
beer. Beers dating back several hundred years could tolerate such flavor
profile due to high gravity worts. We have been successful in
eliminating this undesirable characteristic to make the product
compatible with the lowest gravity beers, such as 'light' beer.

"The proper application is in the mash tun; however, black malt flour
may be added to the kettle for minor color adjustments.

"Coloring value has been empirically established at 0.08 lb/US Bbl to
increase beer 14 degrees Lovibond. The value is linear. It was
established in our pilot brewery in Chilton and corroborated by
cooperative tests by select commercial breweries."

Briess black malt, in other words, is the brewing equivalent of
decaffeinated coffee.

- --Jeff


Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 9 Mar 93 17:52 CST
From: akcs.chrisc at vpnet.chi.il.us (chris campanelli)
Subject: In need of some history

Awhile back some pinhead posted an article titled "Wave of Wort".  It
appeared in the HBD around Sep/Oct/Nov.  If someone knows which digest
number the post appeared in or has the digest on disk, could you please
send it to me by email.  Thanks in advance.

chris campanelli

ps. Thank you, yes, I know about the archive site.  I figure this is the
easiest and fastest way to go.

Return to table of contents


Date: 9 Mar 93 16:46:00 +2000
From: BELLAGIO_DAVID at Tandem.COM
Subject: Cheap 5 Gallon Carboys

I don't know about 7 gallon carboys ( I got my used one through mail order for
$10.00 plus $8.00 shipping ), but for brand new 5 gallon carboys, try your
local Corning Glass outlet.  They have them for $8.99 brand new.  I compared
them to the ones for sale at the beer stores and they are exactly the same only
$7.00 cheaper!  While you are there, pick up some foot, half yard, and yard
classes in stands for magnitudes less than the beer store.  The one I go to
is in Gilroy Ca.  I assume they are nation wide.

Super Dave

bellagio_david at tandem.com

Return to table of contents


Date: 10 Mar 93 11:31:00 WET
From: "ONREUR::JSAMPSON" <JSAMPSON%ONREUR.decnet at onreur.navy.mil>
Subject: Real Root Beer and Cancer

While catching up on my cross-discipline reading on the train this 
morning, I came across a very interesting paper on natural vs. synthetic 
carcinogens in the diet (L. S. Gold, et.al., Science, vol. 258, pg 261, 
9 Oct 92, "Rodent Carcinogens: Setting Priorities").   Since many of us 
long for the taste of REAL root beer, I thought it would be interesting 
to compare the banned chemical safrole (the primary carcinogen in 
sassafras) with other known carcinogens.  

The paper ranked 80 natural and man-made chemicals shown to cause cancer 
in laboratory rats.  First some definitions:

   TD50 = the daily lifetime dose (milligrams of chemical per kilogram 
          of body weight per day) which halves the proportion of rats 
          which remain cancer-free at the end of a standard lifetime.

   HEPR = (Human Exposure/Rat Potency) the percentage of TD50 received 
        by a 70 kilogram human for the given lifetime intake rate, i.e.,

	(mg chemical per day) / (70 kg)/(TD50 for that chemical).  


HEPR (%)	HUMAN EXPOSURE (PER DAY)	RAT CARCINOGEN
4.7		Wine (250ml)			Ethanol (30 ml)
2.8		Beer  (12 oz; 354 ml)		Ethanol (18 ml)
1.4		Mobile Home Air (14 hrs/day)	Formaldehyde (2.2 mg)
0.4		Regular Home Air (14 hrs/day)	Formaldehyde (598 ug)
0.3		Lettuce, 1/8 head (125 g)	Caffeic acid (66.3 mg)
0.2		Real Root Beer (12 oz; 354 ml)	Safrole (6.6 mg)
0.1		Apple, 1 whole (230 g)		Caffeic acid (24.4 mg)
0.1		Mushroom, 1 (15 g)		various hydrazines
0.1		Basil (1 g of dried leaf)	Estragole (3.8 mg)
0.07		Pear, 1 whole ( 200 g)		Caffeic acid (14.6 mg)
0.07		Brown Mustard (5 g)		Allyl isothiocyanate (4.6 mg)
0.06		Diet Cola (12 oz; 354 ml)	Saccharin (95 mg)
0.04		Coffee, 1 cup (from 4 g )	Caffeic acid (7.2 mg)
0.03		Celery, 1 stalk (50 g)		Caffeic acid (5.4 mg)
0.03		Carrot, 1 whole (100 g)		Caffeic acid (5.16 mg)
0.006		Bacon, cooked (100 g)		Diethylnitrosamine (0.1 ug)
0.002		White bread, 2 slices (45 g)	Furfural (333 ug)
0.002		DDT, daily avg before ban	DDT (13.8 ug) (before 1972)
0.001		Tap Water, US avg (1 liter)	Chloroform (83 ug)
0.00003		Approximate HEPR of upper-bound risk estimate used by US 
		regulatory agencies to control exposure to man-made 
		chemicals.
0.000000006	Captan (synthetic pesticide),	Captan (11.5 ng)
		US daily avg residue intake

	g = gram, m = milli-, u = micro-, n = nano-, l = liter

Please note that HEPR is NOT a direct estimate of the risk of a human 
getting cancer, but rather is an index of relative carcinogenicity.  
Thus, all it seems you can say is that drinking one bottle of real root 
beer entails about the same risk of cancer as eating two fresh, 
unsprayed, organically-grown apples.

Again, this is not my field, so I suggest anyone with an uncontrollable 
urge to flame first read the whole paper and then refer their professional 
comments to the authors.

John A. Sampson
Office of Naval Research European Office


Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 10 Mar 93 12:49:16 GMT
From: Conn Copas <C.V.Copas at lut.ac.uk>
Subject: Re : British pubs

I came here to GB 3 years ago and was disappointed at the number of tied pubs
which offer only one brewery's products. The best opportunity for beer
education is to find a festival. These are advertised in the CAMRA mag "Whats
Brewing", presumably available to non-subscribers from the London office. There
is a festival somewhere in the southern regions about fortnightly. One tip:
most brew is past its best after 2 days, so go early. Continental festivals are
also starting to find their way in there, eg, Cantillon in Belgium seem to have
regular beer breakfasts!

- -- 
Conn V Copas
Loughborough University of Technology          tel : +44 509 263171  ext 4164
Computer-Human Interaction Research Centre     fax : +44 509 610815      
Leicestershire  LE11 3TU              e-mail - (Janet):C.V.Copas at uk.ac.lut   
G Britain                                      (Internet):C.V.Copas at lut.ac.uk


Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 10 Mar 93 08:54:28 -0500
From: Timothy J. Dalton <dalton at mtl.mit.edu>
Subject: Peracetic Acid and Other Strong Cleaners!


With all of this talk about using peracetic acid, let me just
give people a brief warning.  Mixing peroxides and acids is not
to be taken lightly.

We use a 3:1 mixture of a mineral acid (I will not name it) to 50 percent
hydrogen peroxide as a method of removing photoresist from wafers.
This mixture is called 'piranha etch' as it is very powerful.
It will very strongly attack any organics, skin included.

Also, the cleaning power of such a mixture diminshes very rapidly.
If allowed to stand for a while before use, its essentially just 
the same as using the acid by it self.  The oxidizing power of
the hydrogen peroxide is short lived.

Someone mentioned that the Merck Index talked about peracetic acid
being explosive at 110C.  Peroxides can be very unstable. A few years
ago, the bomb squad had to remove hundreds of vials of peroxides
from Thomas Edison's lab in NJ as he had lots of old peroxides
sitting around for 50 to 75 years. 

I have found that plain old unscented chlorine bleach is a very
effective cleaner.  Stuborn 'gunk' from a vigorous primary can easily be
removed by just filling the carboy with water and adding a little
bleach and letting it sit for a week. 
It is also safer than many of the more concentrated cleaners.

Similar warnings go for using strong caustics like sodium hydroxide.
They are dangerous stuff, so please don't take they're use lightly.
Its roughly equivalent to using draino as a cleanser.

Just some things to think about.  Read up on these cleaners before
you use them!

	Tim

- ----
Timothy J. Dalton                                   tjdalton at mit.edu
MIT, Dept. of Chemical Engineering, Materials Etching Technology Lab

Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 10 Mar 93 07:56 CST
From: fjdobner at ihlpb.att.com
Subject: Non-Alcohol Brews


To The Gentleman Asking About Non-Alcohol Brewing,

To be a purist, non-alcoholic beer is a contradiction. For if it does not
have alcohol it cannot  be _legally_ called beer. However, as long as we
we're being picky the commercial versions of NA beers are not precisely
NA beers. They contain something under 0.5% alcohol.

Recently, I saw an article written about such beverages and I just wanted to 
pass this information along to someone who really could use it. It was
prepared by the Copley News Service.

Basically brewers employ either of two methods to achieve a non-alcoholic
product:

1. The older technique takes beer that has been made in the usual way and 
evaporates the alcohol by heating the brew in a vacuum chamber, which allows
a low boiling point. Kingsbury and Kaliber are made this way. The principal
problem here is to avoid changing the taste of the brew by cooking it.
In addition, this process would be very impractical for one of more
modest means like most homebrewers.

2. A more modern method, used by most of the German brewers, uses intense
cold and rapid extraction of the yeast to arrest the brewing process 
before too much alcohol forms. This technique seems to leave a lot of the
sugar in the brew and therefore gives it a sweet taste.

The second option would seem to give homebrewers a chance to attempt a
low-alcohol beverage. Assuming that you make ales, chilling the
fermenting wort sufficiently would be practical in a refrigerator.
In addition, the remaining yeast could be fined with your favorite
fining (I would probably use polyclar since it would seem to
be able to work with the high gravity liquid).

The resulting beer would not be the same, but much sweeter. It depends
upon your taste. I have not read the HBD since you posted and I
wonder whether you have heard similar words from others but I hope this
helps. I hope you can drink beer in some way or other. 


Good Luck.


Frank Dobner

Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1993 09:21:31 -1100
From: Kirk_Anderson at wheatonma.edu (Kirk Anderson)
Subject: help! nonstop fermentation

Dear Colleagues:
Words of consolation, anyone?  My wife and I finally collaborated on a
batch of HB and despite the initial excitement, we have a problem on our
hands.  Here's the dope:

1 can (4lbs.) Ironmaster "Special Lager" malt extract
packet of Isohop extract (included with above)
2 lbs. corn sugar
1/2 lb. maple syrup
2 oz. apricot wine flavoring ("Wines Inc.")
11.5 g sachet Edme dry yeast

It was a 50-minute boil with apricot extract only going in the last five. 
I rehydrated the yeast in warm water shortly before pitching.  O.G. was
1.050 and when I racked to secondary three days later it was 1.018!  Now
here's the problem: *that was exactly four weeks ago and fermentation has
not stopped.*  Bubbles still rising, a cute layer of foam still on the
surface.  I've never encountered this before.  I've always been a careful
sanitizer, but should I assume something got by me this time?  Temperature
has been 58-62F for the duration.  Don't pick on me for using corn sugar
(it was the first time I've done so in years--my last few batches were
nearly non-alcoholic and my checking account was low: MEA CULPA).  And yes
I'll be going to liquid yeast for my next one.  But what about now?  Down
the loo?
Thanks for you advice or condolences via e-mail.
Kirk Anderson


Return to table of contents


Date: 10 Mar 1993   9:21 EST
From: dab at cc.bellcore.com (dave ballard)
Subject: new jersey brewpub legalization


Hey now-  A friend of mine has become involved with the campaign of one 
of New Jersey's gubernatorial candidates and would like to start bending 
some people's ears about brewpub legalization.   Does anyone know 
exactly where this matter stands right now and where I can get some more
information about it?

Thanks in advance...

dab
 
=========================================================================
dave ballard	
dab at cc.bellcore.com 
=========================================================================


Return to table of contents


Date: 10 Mar 1993 10:38:46 -0400
From: Ed Hitchcock <ECH at ac.dal.ca>
Subject: English and British

Can I use the term English and England when referring strictly to England 
and not Scotland or Wales?  It seems to me that in the original post the 
person wrote England and meant England, and not Britain.  I try to be 
precise, and if in conversation I wish to refer to the UK I say Britain or 
UK, but if I mean England alone I say England.  In fact two yeasr ago I 
went to England and Wales, never quite made it to Scotland.  Can I say I 
went to England and Wales?  Or do I have to say I went to Britain?
	ed


Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 10 Mar 93 15:17:00 +0000
From: DAMON_NOEL/HP0800_01%mailhub.cs.itc.hp.com at mailhub.cs.itc.hp.com
Subject: plastic pails

re the reuse of plastic pails...a data point...in my early brew
days in an effort to save money I came by several "food grade"
pails which had contained pickles.  I cleaned them with every
thing I could think of in every concentration to no avail. Some
cleansers would seem to do the job, but in a few days the pickle
smell would reappear. I concluded that the plastic had absorbed
the taste/smell and was exuding it over time.  I threw them out
and would not recommend reuse of containers which had liquid in
them...soy sauce???? not a common adjunct!

Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 10 Mar 93 08:30 EST
From: "C. Lyons / Raytheon-ADC / Andover, MA" <LYONS at adc3.adc.ray.com>
Subject: Bubble gum aroma during primary ferment

   Based on recent discussions recommending Nottingham dry yeast 
I decided to try it.  One major difference I've observed so far 
that a strong bubble-gum aroma is given off during the primary 
fermentation.  Last night, my son entered the room were the 
fermentation was occuring and aske if he could have some bubble 
gum too.  So this is not in my mind.  What gives?  Has anyone 
else ever observed this?

Chris
LYONS at ADC3.ADC.RAY.COM

Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1993 10:44:19 -0500 (EST)
From: Chris Mackensen <cygnus at unh.edu>
Subject: Mashing Questions

Okay, I seem to be still confused about mashing...

 -what is a protein (enzyme) rest and at what temperature?

 -what is a good temperature to keep your mash so that the enzymes don't
break down the complex sugars?  I am more concerned about a heavy
malty taste (not caramelly taste) than the alcohol content.

 -what temperature converts starches over to sugars?

 -what "normal" order or succession should each of temperature
categories be in?  does it matter?

any help would be most appreciated...
thanks,
 -chris

- --. 
David (Chris) Mackensen
dcm2 at kepler.unh.edu, dcm2 at bifur.unh.edu		I am the Time Daemon
+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+
"Hi... My name is Hobbes.  I'm the product of a malicious 6-year old's
twisted and destructive imagination.  Would YOU like to be my friend?"

Return to table of contents


Date:     Wed, 10 Mar 93 11:43:40 EST
From: William Boyle (CCAC-LAD) <wboyle at PICA.ARMY.MIL>
Subject:  Crystal malt

I have a question about crystal malt.  Crystal malt will add body,
sweetness and color to a beer.  These three contributions will
vary depending on the lovibond of the malt.  I feel that any
crystal malt should add the same amount of unfermentables to the
beer, this in-turn should add the same amount of body and
sweetness to the beer.  I think some of the sweetness may be
masked by the flavor of darker crystal malt, but the increase in
body will be the same for any crystal?  Am I wrong for thinking
like this?

On a side note in my dictionary beer is defined as a beverage made
from malt, hops, yeast, and water.  It does not say malted barley,
so the clear beer can be called beer is it is made from malted
rice of corn? I know it really does not matter but its a thought.
				
					B^2

Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 10 Mar 93 11:51:05 EST
From: Jim Busch <busch at daacdev1.stx.com>
Subject: Filtration, pt 1 of 2

Filtration for homebrewers:

After brewing for several years, I finally had an occaision that called for me
to consider filtering my beer.  What happened is that in my quest to brew true
to style beers, I used a diferent yeast strain, specifically a Weihenstephan 
Altbier strain (no, it is not from Wyeast).  I calculated out a Alt bier recipe
of 40 IBUs, 11% CaraMunich malt and 2 row grist to yield an OG of 12P (1.048).
All went as planned, ferment was vigorous and a ton of yeast was skimmed off of
my open fermenter.  The beer was kegged and lagered at 31F for 3 weeks.  After
sampling this beer many times during the lager stage, it became apparent that 
the yeast was refusing to flocculate.  I mean were talking milkshake looking
stuff (kinda like Widmer "HefeWeizen" :-). So, I decided to do some research
on home filtration.  I had just won a copy of the AHA 92 conference transcripts
and noticed that steve Daniels wrote about filtering his beers.  I was aware 
of The Filter Store and some of thier products since a local brewer uses the
standard kit to filter some of his beers.  Steve also recommends using this
basic kit.  He claims to have tried all sorts of filters and found a 
"happy medium" using a .5 micron sterile filter. This is indeed the filter 
sold with the basic kit from the Filter Store.  Now, I am quaffing a few ales 
with my local Brewmaster friend and we are discussing the merits of filtration 
and specifically the degree of filtration required.  Old Dominion Brewing CO,
where my brewmaster friend brews, filters using a plate filter and removing
down to 5-7 microns.  Another Baltimore brewpub does a similar level of yeast
removal.  The beers produced from these breweries have a fine degree of 
clarity to them.  Not sparkling crystal clear, but certainly quite clear. I
also feel the flavor from hops and malt and overall mouthfeel of these 
beers is very good and devoid of any "thinness" or lack of head retention. 
At this point, I decided to post a inquiry to the HBD on filtration methods.
I got three responses, two of whom were using .5 micron sterile filters and 
one who said his was 2 microns.  So, I was at a delemma stage, where my 
professional brewer friends were claiming to not go below 5 microns to avoid 
stripping the beer of important flavor elements, especially proteins, whereas
people who actually used the home filter methods seemed happy with .5 micron
sterile filtration.  I decided to ask Dr. Fix, who provided the following:

>From gjfix at utamat.uta.edu Wed Mar  3 14:22:15 1993
Jim: 
Content-Length: 1736
X-Lines: 32
Status: RO

>A quick question, how many microns is a yeast cell?  I need to
>buy a filter to clarify my Altbier that is real yeasty, despite
>being lagered at 31F for 3+ weeks.  What I want is a real coarse
>filter, I am not interested in removing chill haze, I just want
>to remove yeast.  Any ideas on the coarsest filter that will do 
>the trick?  All I read is about people using .5 micron filters
>and I believe this is smaller than I need.

Yeast cells vary from 5 to 10 microns. My own filter is a Zahm+Nagel
cartridge which is precoated with DE. The cartiridges come in 3, 1, and
 .45 micron sizes. I use the 3 micron version for my own homebrew. We
also use this size for BRD brew pubs. Some yeast will make it through
this type of filtration (don't ask me how!), but only at very low levels.
>(apparently any very young cells can be smaller than 3 microns and thus
>make it through the filter, JB)
Plating with SDA has indicated that the counts rarely go above 20-25
cells/100 ml, which is next to nothing considering we pitch at a rate
of 10 million cells/ml. I have found that a 1 micron filtration will
eliminate yeast, but will also start to compromise the beer's foam
stand. Pedios, if present, will also make it through. They are only
 .8 microns in diameter. A filtration at .45 microns will remove 
everything, but it has a very negative effect on both beer foam and
flavor. These defects in "sterile filtration" are well recogonized.
Nevertheless, many micros (as well as large breweries) are starting to
filter at the submicron level. They claim their unpasteurized bottled
beer tastes better after 3-4 weeks in the trade than it would if the
sterile filtration were not used. They are likely correct, but I 
personally would do what ever it takes to keep the bugs out, and not
go below a 1 micron filtration.
Take care.

George Fix

end part one.............

Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 10 Mar 93 9:52:36 CST
From: tony at spss.com (Tony Babinec)
Subject: wit beer recipe and comments

Here's a wit beer recipe (for 5 gallons) and comments:

   5 pounds pale malt
   1 pound wheat malt
   2.5 pounds flaked wheat
   0.5 pounds flaked oats
   hersbrucker hops to 18 IBUs
   20 gms ground coriander seed
   5 gms dried orange peel
   2 gms ground cardamom
   yeast:  Wyeast Belgian
   
Process was an upward step infusion mash:

   110 degrees F for 45 minutes
   122 degrees F for 45 minutes
   144 degrees F for 30 minutes
   150 degrees F for 90 minutes
   mash out

Spices were added in the last 10 minutes of the boil.

Flaked wheat is available from homebrew shops, but can also be
found in health food stores or natural food sections of
supermarkets.  I MUCH prefer flaked wheat to raw wheat berries. 
The flaked wheat is already gelatinized.  The raw wheat berries
should be boiled and gelatinized, and that's a mess.  Also, there
are different wheats available, and it's not clear to me that
what's available in the health food stores is the same wheat as the
Belgians use.  The wheat malt in the above grain bill was a hedge,
and in retrospect could have been flaked wheat.

Flaked oats are available from homebrew shops, but rolled oats
(such as Quaker oats) could be used.

Somewhere in Michael Jackson's writings, I'm pretty sure he says
that Hoegaarden Wit has a grain bill as follows:

   50 parts barley malt
   45 parts wheat
    5 parts oats

While my grain bill used a bit more barley malt than these
proportions would suggest, I was nervous about conversion and my
starting gravity.  Not to worry -- the deliberate low temperature
rests and long rest times did the trick, and I got about a 1.050
beer.

Ground coriander is a great spice, and I thought that 20 gms would
not be too heavy-handed.  Incidentally, there are different types
of coriander seeds available.  Instead of going to the spice rack
of your favorite grocer, go to a spice specialty store to seek out
the larger coriander seed that is more "noble" -- that is, aromatic
and flavorful.  

Ideally, the orange peel should be from the curacao orange.  Here's
a thought -- use a dash of orange curacao liquor in the beer.  I
used McCormick dried orange peel to no apparent bad effect.  If I
were to do things again, I might up the amount a bit, or substitute
something fresher.

Cardamom is a very elegant spice with a lemon-citrusy aroma and
flavor.  I use it lightly for background flavor and character.

Wyeast Belgian is a strong-gravity performer, but I used it here in
a conventional-gravity beer.  It did contribute a bit of its own
flavor, though somewhat muted.  I racked onto the yeast cake from
a just-racked beer, and maybe that contributed a bit of pleasant
dryness to the beer.  I'd love to get my hands on Hoegaarden or
Celis yeast, and failing that, might use Wyeast "London."

The suggestion in HBD to add a dash of lactic acid for some
tartness sounds like something to try.  As the acid is quite
concentrated, it shouldn't take much.

Return to table of contents



End of HOMEBREW Digest #1095, 03/11/93