HOMEBREW Digest #1097 Mon 15 March 1993

Digest #1096 Digest #1098

		Rob Gardner, Digest Coordinator

  Re: Cleaning Bucket/Cleaning Bottles (Steve Agard)
  Pumps (Jack Schmidling)
  Sanitizing (Justin Seiferth)
  Keg sanitation / carbonation (Lee Menegoni)
  sanitize keg, "German" porter (Russ Gelinas)
  Doppelbock Names (Jeff Berton)
  Re: slotted copperpipe manifold (Jeff Benjamin)
  sparge manifolds (Brian Bliss)
  hot break (Leo Woessner)
  lautering (Leo Woessner)
  Sanitizer, NA Secrets (Jack Schmidling)
  Sanitization Survey (atl)
  On Brewing Sugar (Jeff Frane)
  **Texas BPub Legalization Update** (ifby546)
  Texas Brewpubs, almost here.. (Dewey Coffman)
  Boiling pots? (BLAST)
  second mail-order hop source for Canada (eurquhar)
  sanitizing Agents Revisited (Timothy J. Dalton)
  Re: dry ice chilling/lye/bitter Frathouse Ale (korz)

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: Thu, 11 Mar 93 17:32:19 -0600 From: sagard at digi.lonestar.org (Steve Agard) Subject: Re: Cleaning Bucket/Cleaning Bottles In HBD #1094 Markham Elliot asks: Q: [paraphrased] how do you clean the oil and soy sauce out of a food grade bucket? A: I would suggest using TSP. I am thankful that it had been recommended by many of the homebrew experts on the net for removing labels. One night, I obtained 30 1-pint beer bottles (previously Sapporo, Kirn, & Asahi) from a Japanese restaraunt. They make homebrew look good, are smaller than wine bottles, require less capping than U.S. domestic bottles, and are the perfect size for Bitter, Stout (and my SNPA-like). ;) Getting these bottles was not fun, but getting them clean and label free was easy :()> The bottles all had lables (both paper and foil), as well as, tobacco & food particles (fish, ginger, wasabi, soy sauce, grease, etc.) on them. I added 1 lb TSP (from hardware and paintstores), and 1 1/2 cups chlorine, to a trashcan with the beer bottles (which had been filled with just enough warm water to cover all the bottles). I let this covered for 2 weeks, and then removed the bottles (while wearing rubber gloves - chemical resistant ones from a hardware store). Most of the lables had simply fallen off. The 4 or 5 lables that were still on were removed by rubbing the ridged fingers of the gloves across them once or twice. None of the lables had any ink left on them. The food parts had been broken down. I rinsed out/off each bottle, and then placed in a bathtub of warm water & let sit for 2 hours (probably overkill, but someone at a homebrew shop warned not to get any in the bottle or I'd never get a beer head). I then ran the bottles through the dishwasher twice (I usually the dishwasher to sanitize the bottles, but I don't like to ignore advice from those of you with more experience...). I bottled with these 3 1/2 weeks ago. Had one yesterday... tasted great, with lots of carbination and great head retention. Hope this info helps. Cheers! Steve Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 11 Mar 93 21:25 CST From: arf at genesis.mcs.com (Jack Schmidling) Subject: Pumps >From: gjfix at utamat.uta.edu (George J Fix) > 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. I am still waiting for an answer to my question, "Why RIMS?" but as a chronic tinker, I can't resist following the discussion. I now pump my beer from lauter tun to kettle, from kettle to primary and from primary to secondary and have solved the foaming problem in a very simple manner. I simply put the appropriate resistor in series with the motor and a separate switch to provide a low voltage startup. Once the beer has driven all the air out of the system, I switch to the normal voltage and foaming is no longer a problem. Perhaps some such system could be used for the RIMS system. I am using the pump from the kitchen sink of my motor home so it is 12 VDC and makes it pretty easy. However, I assume a standard light dimmer would work on most small AC pumps and would be even more flexible. >From: "Mark Rich-mpr8a at acadvm1.uottawa.ca" >Subject: Easymash >I remember reading a few posts about your Easymasher(tm) setup, and I'm curious to know how much trouble it would be to sort of "borrow" (brown-nose-mode on) your skill and experience. I was hoping you could see your way clear to sharing the basics of your design with me. A copy of my article on Kettle Mashing is winging its way to you at the speed of light. Not knowing what your spigot looks like, I can't really make any suggestions other than saying that there must be some way of attaching a tube to the spigot on the inside of the kettle. The article includes a description and parts list so you can buy the stuff (or equivalent) at a hardware store. >From: gummitch at techbook.com (Jeff Frane) >Subject: American Black Malt >Briess black malt, in other words, is the brewing equivalent of decaffeinated coffee. Sounds more like decaffeinated coffee with the coffee flavor removed, vis. FDA Brown #3. >From: fjdobner at ihlpb.att.com >Subject: Non-Alcohol Brews >To be a purist, non-alcoholic beer is a contradiction. For if it does not have alcohol it cannot be _legally_ called beer. I think you got that a little mixed up. It can not be called NA if it has more than .5% alcohol in it. I suspect Big Brother would be delighted if milk produces called milk, beer. Think of all the tax he could collect. There is no alcohol tax on NA so the law is to prevent brewers from slipping out from under the tax. >From: Kirk_Anderson at wheatonma.edu (Kirk Anderson) >Subject: help! nonstop fermentation >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. First of all, what does it smell like? Until a few weeks ago, I would have predicted you used Red Star because I had a batch do that but it smelled like mold, tasted terrible and you said you used EDME. I had a recent batch do that with pure cultured, Pilsener Urquel yeast. It bubbled furiously for weeks at 60F but turned out to be a pretty good beer. I think the proof of the pudding is in the eating. js Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 12 Mar 93 7:56:02 MST From: seiferth at cobra.cs.unm.edu (Justin Seiferth) Subject: Sanitizing With all the continuing talk of sanitizing agents, I'm suprised there hasn't been more talk of my favorite agent- boiling water. It doesn't require rinsing, is environmentally safe and must be effective as it's all I use - even for mead batches which sit in the secondary for months and I've never had an infected batch. I just boil the water in my wort container for 10 minutes or so and then use it to sanitize the primary. I sanitize my secondary by pouring hot tap water into the carboy- letting it warm up and then adding about 2 gallons of boiling water. It seems to work great. Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 12 Mar 93 9:41:36 EST From: Lee Menegoni <necis!lmenegon at transfer.stratus.com> Subject: Keg sanitation / carbonation Some of the text of my recent post on keg sanitaion was missing: After filling the keg and letting some out of the 2 connetors I top it off with water and shake to ensure good mixing of the Beed Brite. (this is the missing part) I let this sit over nite. I then drain the sanitizer into a carboy or another keg and proceed with the boiling liquid rinses. Since I forced hot water out with CO2 the keg is filled with it, its heavier than air. I rack into the keg the CO2 blanket helping reduce the potential for airation. To force carbonate I set the keg in my refridgerator , ideally it would be about 32F and preasureize to 30lbs. I DO NOT SHAKE THE KEG. This could cause your clear beer to get cloudy due to particles racked in. I then adjust the preasure 2 more times in 12 hour intervals. I raise the fridge temp to serving temp. and pour off about a quart or two of foam this lowers the preasure and removes solids from the keg. As the foam settles I drink the beer. - -- Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 12 Mar 1993 10:27:41 -0500 (EST) From: R_GELINAS at UNHH.UNH.EDU (Russ Gelinas) Subject: sanitize keg, "German" porter I've been sanitizing kegs by filling them with a couple of gallons of boiling water, seal, pump in some CO2, open the tap to let some hot water out, and then let sit for 30 minutes or so. The heat will kill off any nasties, and there's no rinsing involved. The keg should already be clean, btw. Rob asked about "German" hops (Hallertauer/Mt.Hood) being used in a porter. Just so happens in my younger/dumber days (before I became an all-grain snob ;-), that I went even further, making an extract porter with Hallertauer hops *and* Wyeast German ale yeast, #1007 I think it is. Certainly not a "classic" porter, but perhaps the best extract brew I ever made: clean, creamy, malty, and a wonderful hop nose. Isn't it perhaps likely that in the early days of porter, continental hops were used? Perhaps even German yeast? What does Foster's Porter book say? Russ G. Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 12 Mar 93 10:40:42 EST From: jeff344 at voodoo.lerc.nasa.gov (Jeff Berton) Subject: Doppelbock Names It's well known that, traditionally, doppelbocks are named using the "-ator" suffix, as in the familiar "Celebrator" or "Salvator" doppelbocks. Just for fun, I decided to generate a nearly comprehensive list of English words that end this way. On my Unix box, I simply used "grep" for the string "ate" on the dictionary file (usually in /usr/share/dict on most Unix machines), and changed "ate" to "ator" globally in an editor. There were, of course, a few words I rejected. Some obvious misspellings occurred, such as "watermelon" becoming "watorrmelon"; and also a few occurrences of senseless words, such as "roommator" and "prostator." I made a single pass through the list and deleted these obvious mistakes. Here are a few potential doppelbock names my search turned up. Apologies if they have been used before.... -Names Schwarzenegger or Eastwood would be proud of: Annihilator, Assassinator, Dominator, Eliminator, Eradicator, Exterminator, Devastator, Detonator, Liquidator, Gladiator, and, of course, Terminator. -Names for scientists and engineers: Accelerator, Collimator, Correlator, Numerator, Denominator, Differentiator, Lubricator, Exponentiator, Evaluator, Radiator... -Names relating to the alcoholic nature of beer: Decimator, Exhilarator, Hallucinator, Incapacitator, Intoxicator, Sedator, Perspirator... And many others. Some examples I don't think anyone would want to use. For example: Nauseator, Regurgitator, Urinator, Flatuator, and a few other more offensive names I will avoid mentioning. :-) The complete list is 594 records long, and hence, too lengthy to post here. I would be happy to e-mail the file to anyone who is interested. - -------- Jeff Berton; jeff344 at voodoo.lerc.nasa.gov; (216) 977-7031 -------- - --------- Aeropropulsion Analysis Office, NASA Lewis Research Center -------- - ------------- "If headquarters is interested, we're interested!" ------------ Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 12 Mar 93 9:43:40 MST From: Jeff Benjamin <benji at hpfcbug.fc.hp.com> Subject: Re: slotted copperpipe manifold > I have a 4.50 gallon Gott Picnic Cooler that I'd like to use as > a mash / lauter-tun for partial mashes. My question concerns the > different false bottoms one uses in the bottom of the cooler. > How do you build a Phil's Phalse bottom, a screen type false bottom and > a slotted copperpipe manifold? How do you use each type? I don't know anything about Phil's, but a screen type false bottom requires installing a controllable spigot in the cooler. IMHO, a copper manifold is easier to build, more effective for sparging, and doesn't require modifications to your cooler. I have fairly detailed plans for my manifold system. They're long, so I won't post here unless there is a great demand. Email me if you'd like them. BTW, this system is a scaled down version of the lautering system used at New Belgium Brewing here in Fort Collins CO. At the risk of sounding snobbish :-), if you're going to outfit your cooler this way, you'll already have most of the equipment you'll need to go all-grain. A large kettle for boiling is the only other thing you'll need, and > Can I use two 4 gallon stock pots for boiling the extract instead > of one 8 gallon stock pot? yes, you can use two pots in a pinch (I've done it myself). A risk is that you won't get consistent hop extraction between batches, since the volume of wort being boiled is a factor in the extraction rate. A larger kettle will make life much easier, though. - -- 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: Fri, 12 Mar 93 11:02:53 CST From: bliss at csrd.uiuc.edu (Brian Bliss) Subject: sparge manifolds Russ Wigglesworth writes: >According to Mr. Bliss on slotted copper manifolds: >>If you try to slow it down, you're only draining wort through the >>slots nearest the outlet. >My manifold has about 10' of 1/2" pipe overall with slots every 1/4", >everywhere. It exits the tun and connects to a 5/8" hose which has a tubing >clamp across it which controls the flow. I sparge by running the water onto the >top of the grain bed allowing an inch or more of standing water to cover the >bed. I then drain at a rate which gets me about 10 gallons of wort in an hour, >keeping the inch of water on the grain bed until I'm within a gallon or so of >my desired total. Then I shut off the sparge water and drain the bed dry. I >typically get a yield of 31 or 32. On my last batch, 14 gallons of mild, I got >35! I sparge in a 1' & 2.5' square cooler, with a grain bed depth anywhere from 7"-14". The pipe is only 5/16" id and 7" long, with slots every inch. The last time I tried keeping the H2O above the top of the grain was with ~20 lbs of grain => 10"-12" deep. I verified by tatse testing that different areas of the bed were better rinsed than others. I only got 20 pts/lb (this is based on the wort that actually makes it into the primary - If you count spillage & the gallon of trub that I leave behind you get significantly higher figures). What are the dimensions of your cooler? How deep is the grain bed? Is the pipe 1/2" inside diameter or outside? (that's a big pipe). >Nor do I see why restricting >the flow out of the manifold would have the effect described by Brian. Its kind of hard to explain, especially w/o graphics. The problem is anologous to that encountered with your auto's exhaust manifold. Compare with a set of racing headers. Visions of "sparge headers" fill my mind... I still need more experimentation with my new setup. bb Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 12 Mar 93 10:45:52 EST From: woessner at psych.purdue.edu (Leo Woessner) Subject: hot break (Adendum to privous posting) A lot of Hot Break seemed to collect when I boiled the wort. This being my first all grain experience I did not try to filter it out and it is now in my carboy. What is a easy and efficient method of leaving the hot break and/or cold break in the pot. I do not have a wort chiller so I put both of my 14 qt. pots in the sink filled with ice and cold water. The break is floating violently ....... -ly arround in my Carboy. Is this a problem. How can I eliminate it next time??..? THanks in advance Leo Woessner Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 12 Mar 93 10:29:46 EST From: woessner at psych.purdue.edu (Leo Woessner) Subject: lautering I finnally tried my first all grain batch. Everything went fine. My extractin........ extraction was a little low I got 23 pts/lb. I used the step mashing procedure given by Papazian. Mashing was easy, complete conversion occured within 40 mins... But lautering was a little more tricky. I am using a Zapat (bucket in a bucket) lauter tun. While filling the tun it over flew a little. Another problem I had was getting the proper crush for the grain. I am using a Corona mill. The How long should I recirculate the wort?? I recirculated about 4 gallons. The wort never seemed to clear more than after the first gallon or so. Questions: 1) What does a good crush look like? 2) How to achive a good crush using a Corona? 3) How clear is clear when lautering? 4) How long to recirculate using a Zapat tun. Recipe: 8# Britsh 2-row pale ale malt 1/2# crystal malt 1/2 teaspoon gypsum in mash 1 teaspoon gypsum in sparge water 4 oz Heshaberker Halertau(sp??) (60min.) 1oz Heshaberker Hallertau (steep 10 min) 1 teaspoon Irish moss (boil 15 min) Whitbread ale yeast (started early in the morning) og 1039 HBU's = 11.6 I used two 14 quart ss stock pots to mash and boil in. THe recipe was taken f ..... from the Cats_Meow. It is Frane's House Ale. Thanks Frane Thanks in advance for all comments/suggestions.. Leo Woessner Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 12 Mar 93 11:54 CST From: arf at genesis.mcs.com (Jack Schmidling) Subject: Sanitizer, NA Secrets >From: "John DeCarlo" <jad at pegasus.mitre.org> >Subject: Sanitizer Utilization >I didn't see any definitive comment on this while I tried to find some quotes from microbiologist acquaintances. But, I didn't want to leave it alone. Me either/too. >My information is that sloshing "a small amount around for a minute", no matter how high the concentration, is generally ineffective for sanitization. Well, I would certainly like to see the details of that information. Frankly, I have my doubts. Pure bleach, sloshed around a keg or bucket would leave a thin film on the surface that would be far higher in concentration than a full keg of weak solution. That film would remain on the surface, long enough before evaporating, to provide an effective bacteriocide. I also suggest that in a closed container, either a keg for a few minutes only, or a plastic carboy with a lid, indefinitely, the gas evaporated inside would provide ample security. I switched from dry to liquid yeast so I can be convinced but someone is going to have to try harder on this one. >From: korz at iepubj.att.com >Remind me not to trust the Copley News Service. You see, there is a third method, which is used by at least one mega-brewer, in which a semi-permiable membrane is used to extract the alcohol by osmosis and a fourth method in which a special yeast is used that does not produce much alcohol. And a fourth which nobody wants to talk about. Once the alcohol is reduced to the lowest practical level by what ever method, they simply dilute it with water to get at least a 50% reduction. Perhaps you were being polite when you tasted mine but it does certainly seem to be one of their dirty little secrets. js Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 12 Mar 93 10:12:13 -0800 From: atl at kpc.com Subject: Sanitization Survey I have been following the threads on sanitization with great interest. I have been brewing for about 10 years off and on, and am now all-graining and yeast culturing (please no snob thread!). I have yet to get an infected batch, even though my sanitization procedures are *very* lax compared to most of what I read here. I use a solution of a couple of tablespoons of household bleach to a couple of gallons of warm water, wet the walls of my scratched plastic fermenters let it sit a couple of minutes (usually, sometimes shorter) and rinse it out with unfiltered, unboiled tap water. The only tyhing I can think of that would explain my complete lack of problems is that I have always lived in areas with chlorinated city water. I would like to run a survey, asking folks to send me email with the following info: 1) How many batches have you brewed? a) > 10 b) 10-50 c) > 50 2) How many infected batches have you had? 3) What source of water do you use? a) city b) bottled c) well 4) Do you filter any tap water you add to your wort? 5) Do you boil any tap water you add to your wort? 6) What sanitizer do you use? a) Chlorine bleach b) iodophor c) b-brite d) other (please describe) 7) Do you rinse with tap water? 8) Please describe (concise please) you sanizitation method (exposure length, rinse method, etc.) 9) if you think I have missed any critical info, please tell me. I'll post a summary as time allows! Thanks, Drew Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 12 Mar 1993 11:05:04 -0800 (PST) From: gummitch at techbook.com (Jeff Frane) Subject: On Brewing Sugar As penance for quoting an author while relying on memory alone, I have typed the following material on brewing sugars from H Lloyd Hind's "Brewing Science and Practice", which was written in the 1930s and stands as the best source of information on traditional British brewing practice. There is a great deal of very technical information about the production of various sugars and their chemical/physical structure, some of which may not even be accurate given advances in the physical sciences, and in any case is well beyond our needs. There is also information about specific sugar blends produced for the British brewing trade, but without brand names; in any case, the information is more than 50 years old so I left it out. ================================================================= BREWING SUGARS 230--Sugars as Malt Adjuncts Various sugars and starch conversion products can be added in the copper to supplement the fermentable extract formed in the mash tun by conversion of the starch of malt, but similar restrictions in respect of the quantity used apply as with cereal adjuncts, on account of the lack of nitrogenous yeast nutrients. They provide a means for varying the composition of worth, within limits set by the requisite balance between sugars and non-sugars, supply extract which may be either entirely or only partly fermentable, give characteristics of fulness and flavour that are appreciated in some cases, increase the stability of beer by replacement of nitrogenous extract and yield beer that will become more readily and rapidly brilliant than when brewed with malt alone. Primings are strong solutions which must not, in this country, exceed 1150 specific gravity but should not be much less. They are sometimes added in the fermenting vessel at the close of primary fermentation but, more frequently, in storage tank or cask to promote rapid condition and, in some cases, on account of their flavour. The sweet and luscious flavour of some sugars does not entirely disappear when the sugar has been fermented but gives additional fulness to the beer. In some cases, sugars which are not entirely fermentable are selected. The sugars used in brewing comprise (1) Cane sugar, derived from the sugar cane and, much less frequently, from sugar beet. (2) Invert sugar, made by inversion of cane sugar. (3) Starch sugars, including corn syrups and glucose, manufactured by the conversion of the starch of cereals, usually maize [that's _corn_, Norte Americanos]. (4) Mixtures of these, their utility in copper or cask depending on their flavour and fermentability. (5) Caramels, made from cane sugar or glucose. (6) Lactose or milk sugar, which is only used in very small quantity in some milk stouts. (7) Honey, even less used. Maltose, which might appear to be the most suitable sugar to replace that formed from malt in the mash tun, is not used in the pure state, but exists as a constituent of corn syrups with dextrin and glucose. Lactose differs from cane sugar, invert sugar, maltose and glucose in that is is unfermentable by ordinary brewery yeasts, while certain of the higher starch conversion products are appreciated because they are only partly or slowly fermentable. (231) Cane Sugar The sugars obtained from the sugar cane, sugar beet, sugar maple, certain palsm or the stem of sorghum are, when purified, of identical chemical composition. All of them are sucrose. The natural juices from which they are derived, however, differ very considerably in flavour owing to the many other substances which they contain. For example, the root of the beet contains a larger proportion of mineral salts than the sugar cane and decomposition products are formed with the larger quantities of lime necessarily used in the course of clarification, which give an objectionable flavour to the juices and raw sugar. These render the latter unfit for consumption until refined. The raw sugars from the cane are, on the other hand, very luscious but they do not all taste the same, varying considerably according to the place in which the cane was grown or the treatment they received during extraction and preparation, characteristic differences being found in sugars from Cuba, Java, Barbadoes, Trinidad, St. Domingo, Mauritius, etc. Since the value of cane sugars in brewing depends so largely on the flavours they communicate, even after all the sugar itself has been fermented, the principal source must be the sugar cane, which yields juices possessing these properties in their most attractive form. The final product of the refineries, from whatever source it originally came, is among the purest substances commercially obtainable, but it lacks the distinctive characteristics of flavour demanded in brewing. As a source of carbohydrate extract it is unexcelled and can be used without hesitation under circumstances in which those flavours are not required, but the raw or partially refined sugars from the cane are more attractive in most cases. [... some technical information on the refining process deleted ...] Usually the lusciousness of the sugars increases with greater proportions of other substances derived from the cane, some of which are in a colloidal state, and many such sugars, among them West Indian and Brazil sugars of comparatively low polarisation, are used in brewing on account of the fulness and sweetness they give. Other low polarising sugars, such as that from Mauritius, have a somewhat acrid after-flavour. On account of these different flavours, great care must be exercised in selecting brewing sugars, fermentation tests being desirable as the original flavour is not always a good guide to that left after the sugar is removed. [...] Cane sugar is used both in the copper and as a priming. Raw sugars of good class are generally employed for the former purpose and when of good class are generally employed for the former purpose and when of suitable purity should not contain excess of undesira- ble substances or micro-organisms. Sugars of this type and pure crystals can also be used for priming but candy sugar is preferred by many. Cane sugar is rapidly inverted when added to cask, the change being generally complete in about 24 hours. This process is believed to be an essential preliminary to fermentation. It is carried out by the enzyme inertiase or sucrase secreted by the yeast and does not appear to affect the fermentative activity of the yeast or influence the rate of fermentation. Baker and Hulton found that cane sugar and invert primings were fermented at sub- stantially the same rate in beer under ordinary cellar conditions and that about one-third of either sugar still remained unfermented after 7 days in cask when added at normal priming rates. [Hind goes on to offer technical information about the cane sugars used in brewing: refined crystals, candy sugar, brown sugar and yellow crystals. "The yellow crystals represent the high grade products turned out at many cane factories, and of which Demerara sugar is well known."] Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 12 Mar 93 13:43:20 -0600 From: ifby546 at ccwf.cc.utexas.edu Subject: **Texas BPub Legalization Update** Texas Brewpub Legalization Guide - March 12, 1993 Action Item: Call & Write The House Committee by Monday, March 15! Brewpub n. A brewery that sells its own beer on premise. Or a Restaurant that brews its own beer. Legal in 42 states. Something Texas needs to legalize to join the rest of the civilized nation. *** The House Licensing and Administrative Procedures Committee is bringing up the bill Monday, March 15. Call and write to the 11 members of that committee ***NOW (March 12, 13, 14,15)***, before the bill leaves the committee. Then hammer the Senate Committee. The Bills are House Bill #1445 & Senate Bill #622. Any other "brewpub" bills are superfluous and shouldn't be refered to at this time.*** What to tell the legislators: Key consideration: BE BRIEF! These folks are busy. If as many folks call in as we hope, we could possibly end up alienating some V.I.P.'s if we drone on. Please limit your calls to the following three statements. 1."I support brewpub legalization in the TABC Sunset Bill" The bill considered is referred to as the T.A.B.C. Sunset Bill. There are identical bills introduced in the Senate and the House. (House Bill #1445, Senate Bill #622). The Brewpub portion of the bill is section #74. 2. "I want brewpubs to have the right to sell for on and off-premise consumption." 3. "I want brewpubs to have the right to limited self-distribution." Who to contact This is a priority issue! The House Bill will be going to committee the week of March 15! Write to and call the following important people: (and communicate the 3 phrases listed above) ****House Licensing and Administrative Procedures Committee (House Bill 1445)***Priority**** Ron Wilson, Chair...512/463-0744, Delwin Jones...463-0542, Dan Kubiak, ViceChair...463-0600, David Cain...463-0476, Tony Goolsby...463-0454, Ben Campbell...463-0478, Bill G. Carter...463-0482, Mario Gallegos...463-0614, Paul Hilbert...463-0572,...Garfield Thompson...463-0716, Ken Yarbrough...463-0648 Your local Senator and House Representative Write to them at the following addresses: The Honorable {Representative} The Honorable {Senator} The House of Representatives The Senate of Texas P.O. Box 2910 P.O. 12068 Austin, TX 78768-2910 Austin, TX 78711-2068 If you aren't sure who your legislator is, call 1-800-253-9693. They may be able to tell you your Senator & Representatives' names. Attend the Public Hearings: I'll post when the Public hearing is. Stay tuned. Remember, the bills in question are referred to as the "TABC Sunset Bill". HB335 is NOT "the" Brewpub bill. At this point in time neither is HB1425. Remember, please BE BRIEF. Other Questions can be referred to: Joe Barfield, Southwest Brewing News at ifby546 at ccwf.cc.utexas.edu 512/467-2225 Address mail to 406 W. 35th, Austin, TX 78705. -FAX (512) 282-4936 Watch for future updates to the SWBN BREWPUB LEGALIZATION GUIDE Sample Letter: VOTE YES FOR BREWPUBS The Honorable The House of Representatives (or The Texas Senate) P.O. Box 2910 (or P.O. Box 12068) Austin, TX 78768-2910 (or 78711-2068) Dear Representative (or senator) As an avid beer connoisseur, I would like to endorse economically viable brewpub legislation. Brewpubs provide jobs, increase the tax base, increase tourism, increase capital investments, and stimulate interest in locally-produced products served straight from the brewery. They do not threaten the existing system. Please consider revising the TABC Code to allow small breweries: 1) the right to sell for both on and off-premise consumption, and 2) the right of limited self-distribution. The great State of Texas will benefit from a burgeoning niche industry currently enjoyed in 42 other states. Please vote YES for the Sunset Bill's expanded brewpub legislation. Sincerely, JoeTax-payer&voter&beer-drinker ------------------------------- Joe Barfield, Publisher, Southwest Brewing News, ifby546 at ccwf.cc.utexas.edu Brewnews from Arkansas, Arizona, Louisiana, New Mexico, Oklahoma & Texas. 406 W. 35th, Austin, TX, 78705. 512/467-2225. (FAX)512/282-4936. Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 12 Mar 93 8:11:24 CST From: dewey at sooner.ctci.com (Dewey Coffman) Subject: Texas Brewpubs, almost here.. You say you want brewpubs in Texas? You say you haven't had time to call and voice your opinion? NOW IS THE TIME. On Monday, 3/15/93, the House Licensing and Administrative Procedures Committee will vote on the changes in the TABC Sunset Bill regarding Brewpubs, this is were it died last time(2 or 4 years ago). They need to know that you support this, you don't want the bill watered down so that no one can afford to do it(this is talk of $12,000 license fees or no offsite sales). Call them and say: "I support ECONOMICLY VIABLE brewpub legalization in the TABC Sunset Bill" The bill considered is referred to as the T.A.B Sunset Bill. There are identical bills introduced in the Senate and the House. If you have time, call each and every one of them. If not, just call Ron Wilson and Dan Kubiak. Print out this list and call over the weekend, fill up their answering machines. Give the list to friends either electronically or hardcopy. Let's not blow it this time. House Licensing and Administrative Procedures Committee Ron Wilson, Chair (512) 463-0744 Dan Kubiak, ViceChair (512) 463-0600 David Cain (512) 463-0476 Ben Campbell (512) 463-0478 Bill G. Carter (512) 463-0482 Mario Gallegos (512) 463-0614 Tony Goolsby (512) 463-0454 Paul Hilbert (512) 463-0572 Delwin Jones (512) 463-0542 Garfield Thompson (512) 463-0716 Ken Yarbrough (512) 463-0648 )))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) Questions can be referred to Joe Barfield, Publisher, Southwest Brewing News at ifby546 at ccwf.cc.utexas.edu Address mail to 406 W. 35th, Austin, TX 78705. (512) 467-2225. SUPPORT FRESH BEER IN TEXAS! - -- Joe Barfield, Publisher, Southwest Brewing News, ifby546 at ccwf.cc.utexas.edu Brewnews from Arkansas, Arizona, Louisiana, New Mexico, OKLA & Texas. 406 W. 35th, Austin, TX, 78705. 512/467-2225. (FAX)512/282-4936. Subscrips - $12/yr. Return to table of contents
Date: 12 Mar 1993 13:49:31 -0600 (CST) From: BLAST at sn01.sncc.lsu.edu Subject: Boiling pots? After several boilovers using a small enamel canner on my stovetop, I am ready to get a larger pot. I have read (Papazian, Miller) that Aluminum is to be avoided. If not Aluminum, then the only choices seem to be enamel or stainless. Where can one obtain a reasonably priced 32 qt. boiling pot? I checked the local (Baton Rouge, LA) restaurant suppliers, they only carry Aluminum. Since restaurants apparently use predominantly Aluminum for boiling, what's the difference between wort and restaurant food that makes Aluminum unsuitable for wort? Is it the acidity of wort and/or its contact time w/the Aluminum? Or what? Thanks, ! What's the difference between a used car salesman Bruce Ray ! and a software salesman? Deep C Software ! One knows when he's lying, the other sells software. Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 12 Mar 93 12:02:57 -0800 From: eurquhar at sfu.ca Subject: second mail-order hop source for Canada There was some talk a while back about where hop rhizomes could be found in Canada. Well, just received my March/April copy of Harrowsmith magazine and noticed an ad for a mail-order brew store in Ottawa called the "Hop Stop" advertising hop rhizomes for sale. Therefore, I decided to pass on the two sources I know of for hop rhizomes in Canada. mail: Hop Stop, 1661 Montreal Road, Ottawa, Ontario K1J 9B7 FAX: 613-748-3052 Tel: 613-748-1374 Don't know anything about this business but they offer a free catalouge. The other source of hop plants I know of is Richter's in Goodwood, Ontario. They list the beer hop varieties: Cascade, Hallertauer, Mount Hood, Nugget and Willamette for sale as plants at $7.00 a plant in their 1993 catalogue. There stock is really expanding so it quite possible that more varieties will be available in the future. I have ordered from them before and the plants while often pricey were very healthy and arrived in perfect condition. Get them to throw in their catalogue. It's probably the most informative and interesting herb catalogue produced by anybody. mail: Richters, Goodwood, Ontario, L0C 1A0 Canada FAX: 1-416-640-6641 Phone: 1-416-640-6677 They accept Visa and Mastercard for payment and ship to the States as well. As always I don't have any involved with either company. Hope this is of help. Eric Urquhart eurquhar at sfu.ca Dept. of Biological Sciences, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, BC CANADA Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 12 Mar 1993 15:35:20 GMT From: POIRIER at IREQ-CCFM.HYDRO.QC.CA Subject: Indoor boiling Hi all, There's been some discussion lately of boiling indoors on electric stoves. One poor fellow was boiling in 4 pots on his stove, another was burning out his elements. Well I did 2-pot boils for about 25 batches. And then I saw the light. As a new convert, I feel that I must share my happiness with all of you: I converted an old scratched 7 gallon plastic primary bucket into a boiler. I used 2 1kW heating elements from a scientific surplus company at 4.50 USD each, so this is definitely a cheap approach. The great thing about it is how effortless the boil becomes - no boilovers, easy cleanup. I cannibalized my counterflow chiller, which was tough to sanitize and constantly clogging with hops anyway, and now just sanitize an immersion chiller during the boil. The trub and hops drop to just below the level of the spigot, and from there I splash it out into the primary. MUCH easier! I have been brewing my brains out since I switched. If anyone would like more info on the supplier, just drop me a line: <poirier at inrs-ener.uquebec.ca>. And thank you to all who responded to my coriander question. While I'm at it, I'll be in San Francisco, San Diego, and all points between in April. (I've already booked a tour with Anchor!) Any beer type suggestions (sent privately, of course) would be greatly appreciated. Thanks. Deb Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 12 Mar 93 15:54:45 -0500 From: Timothy J. Dalton <dalton at mtl.mit.edu> Subject: sanitizing Agents Revisited korz at iepubj.att.com write: Re: Sanitizing Chemicals > I've found this too, but my intention was to minimize the amount of > un-natural chemicals I was dumping down the drain. I don't think that the amount of bleach we use in sanitizing is significant compared to other uses. One bottle of bleach from the store will last me for quite a while. Bleach used to wash white clothes seems to go much faster. (Note: We can't use bleach at home in the wash due to the iron in the water...it makes some really nice rust colored clothes) > Acetic acid and H2O2 seemed much more "green" than > Chlorine Bleach or Iodine. I would agree with that assessment. Both CH3COOH and H202 will decompose in somewhat more friendly products. Using *DILUTE* versions of this may be allright. By dilute, I mean vinegar and hydrogen peroxide that you can buy in the pharmacy or grocery store. I'm not sure on the specifics of using these two in a mixture at low concentrations. Then again, as I was informed in e-mail, using vinegar and steam is an old and accepted method in Germany and it seems safer to me. Steam cleaning/sterilizing may be a good way to do it. But not everyone has a steam line in their house. kurka at bmcw.com write: Re: A few observations regarding cleaners and sterilizing agents. > Experiences I have had with chlorine as a sterilizing agent is that > it has the possibility of giving an "off" flavor to the brew. Whether or not > this was a case of not rinsing the equipment well enough after the chlorine > soak is not known. Something else that was just being discussed in e-mail. One possible drawback to using bleach as a sanitizing agent is the formation of byproducts that you can taste. You probably formed some chlorophenols; they are readily tasteable at the ppb level. Rinsing the chlorine out better should solve the problem. Tim Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 12 Mar 93 14:54 CST From: korz at iepubj.att.com Subject: Re: dry ice chilling/lye/bitter Frathouse Ale Scott writes: BREWERS, >We hit apon an idea that is simple, straightforward, amd seemingly >foolproof; why not cool a hot wort with dry ice? Think about it: There's no guarantee that the dry ice doesn't have wild yeast spores or bacteria in it. ******************** Jack writes: > For us unwashed masses.... it is also known as Draino. > A teaspoon in a cup of water will do the trick. I've heard that Draino has other stuff in it besides Sodium Hydroxide or Potassium Hydroxide. I've heard that Red Devil brand Lye is all NaOH or KOH (I don't recall which). Check the label and use the pure stuff. Further, Jack writes: > Far be it for me to question the wisdom of the ages but I have (had) used the > same plastic primary since the early 70s and have not had an infected beer > since a few months after I started to read the Digest. I attribute the > record to one or both of two procedure changes. > > Number one on the hit list was Red Star Yeast, contamination is built in at > no extra cost. You also need to find out who actually produced the yeast you > use to make sure it is not one of the many brands of re-packaged Red Star. > > Number two was to ignore the usual instructions for making a sanitizing > solution from bleach, i.e. 1 oz bleach to the gal or even 5 gallons of water. > > After cleaning the fermenter with a sponge and Ivory, I rinse it and put in > about a cup of bleach. I then put on the lid with a stopper in the hole for > the air lock and slosh it around thoroughy and set it aside till the next > use. Next time I need it, I slosh it around again, dump out the bleach and > rinse it carefully. I guarantee, there is no scratch deep enough to evade > this treatment. I've read the opposite, but would note that the ususal way that a mild bacterial/wild yeast infection becomes apparent to us homebrewers is gushers. Now I don't mean to imply that Jack has infected beer (I've tasted recent batches and indeed it does not taste/smell infected), but I know that Jack kegs rather than bottles. A minor infection in a kegged beer would not be apparent, whereas the same level of infection in a bottled beer would cause gushing. It also depends on how long you keep the beer. Certainly Stainless Steel is a much better choice for a fermenter than plastic. ******************************* Richard writes: >1. My friends and I have twice attempted the Fraternity House Ale (a 5 >gallon version) from the AHA Winner's Circle recipe book. Both times >the beer has come out alright except for a kick-you-in-the-zipper >bitter after taste which, as you can imagine, is very unpleasant. > >While this recipe is kind of heavy on the hops I have a hard time >thinking that this is the problem. I have boiled lots of hops for more >than an hour before and had it turn out fine. Also, for the second >batch instead of adding the finishing hops to the boil we just strained >the wort through them at the end. I did read something recently (can't >recall where) that said boiling crystal malt can result in bitterness. >It is possible that we let the one step mash heat up too high. There >were several times when we had to reduce the heat. Any other ideas or >suggestions, or has anyone else seen this with crystal malt before? Boiling crystal or any other barley malt will give you astringent flavors which are, sort of bitter, but sort of not. Peel a dark grape and just chew the skin -- that's tannins -- is that the flavor you reported? If so, then it's the boiling of the grains. Also note that bitterness (especially in the finish) can be intensified considerably by hard water -- sulfates especially. Are you adding a lot of Epsom Salts, Gypsum or other sulfates? Al. Return to table of contents
End of HOMEBREW Digest #1097, 03/15/93