HOMEBREW Digest #1279 Tue 23 November 1993

Digest #1278 Digest #1280

		Rob Gardner, Digest Coordinator

  HSA (George J Fix)
  Sam Adams bashing, etc (Iron City Beer has Iron in it)
  Astringency... (GANDE)
  Burners ? (graham)
  Re: First All-Grain (npyle)
  Re: Hop Oils as a Preservative ("Glen A. Wagnecz, X6616")
  Just made a wort chiller - any break-in required? (22-Nov-1993 1037 -0500)
  calcium Chloride ("TIMOTHY LABERGE")
  Bay Area Brewoff Competition Announcement (Bob Jones)
  Decoction: Conversion times (Lee=A.=Menegoni)
  Coors Winterfest (Rick Myers)
  Deadbrew (RONALD DWELLE)
  Re:Crabtree effect (TODD CARLSON)
  boiler waste/respiration ("Daniel F McConnell")
  Re: Defense of Jim Koch (John DeCarlo                             )
  Spice usage information (Drew Lynch)
  A handy tip for making an immersion chiller (Mitch Hendrickson)
  RE: A Defense of Sam Adams (lyons)
  Siphoning Problems (SFFG_WWIBLE)
  crabtree redux (Carl Howes)
  PET soda bottles/Aluminum brewpot ("Mark T. Berard, Dow Plastics, LAD, TYRIN* CPE R&D")
  Lovibond color scale (Allen Ford)
  Hunter Airstat / flying brew (Mike Sadul)
  clarifying Wyeast 1028 ("Anton Verhulst")
  screw caps (Darren Evans-Young)
  Iodine test with dark malt (Darren Evans-Young)
  building a hopback (Pete Langlois)
  Harsh bitterness/Haze/Extractf (Domenick Venezia)
  Leaches and Kettles (Jack Schmidling)
  Ancient Ale (John Walaszek)

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: Mon, 22 Nov 93 09:06:07 -0600 From: gjfix at utamat.uta.edu (George J Fix) Subject: HSA Mike Sharp in HBD#1277 correctly points out that there are two schools of thought about HSA. In its defense is the well established point that HSA definitely increases the colloidal stability of beer. This has been demonstrated in the excellent article by Morton in MBAA Tech. Qr., Vol. 23, 1985, to cite but one reference. Since materials oxidized by HSA are derived from malt (melanoidins, phenols, et al), HSA does find selected application for light beers having a low malt fraction. I, on the other hand, remain very negative about HSA. Removing HSA from my system has lead to a discernible increase in overall beer quality. This is not only a subjective evaluation, but indeed the performance of beers I have brewed in sanctioned competitions has dramatically improved since the change was made. While yeast quality and proper sanitation are by far the two most important issues, in my system avoidance of HSA comes in third ahead of many other issues. George Fix Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 1993 10:03:03 EST From: Iron City Beer has Iron in it <ambroser at APOLLO.DML.GEORGETOWN.EDU> Subject: Sam Adams bashing, etc >I continue my boycott of Samuel Adams products! >>Your loss. Although Koch may be a slime bag, he makes a decent >>product. >Yes, he makes decent beer. But so do literally hundreds of good, decent people >who avoid using the strong-arm tactics of the neighborhood bully to sell their >product. >So, why would you want to buy beer from these people? You can buy good beer, >better than Koch's, from good people. I just had to add my $.02. In the past year or two, I have not considered S.A. (forget the TM junk) a real microbrew. To be technical, I'd say it is rather a MINIbrew. I make this comparison like comparing computers. A Mainframe is Bud, Miller, etc. A Micro is Mendocino, Celis, and the like. S.A. is more like a Mini, it is bigger than a Micro but smaller than a Mainframe. Lets face it, once you begin to sell your brew "all over the country" and have (can afford) radio commercials "all over the country", you're not a "little guy" any more. S.A. is good, "but [there are] literally hundreds of good, decent people" out there that make a beer as good or better than S.A. (IMHO). As far as "Boston" being a trademark, I don't think that single word is anybody's trademark. "Boston Beer Company" is Jim's trademark, but I feel you could call your beer Boston Lager, Boston Ale, etc and would not be violating any trademarks. Lastly, saying you are going to boycott S.A. is fine. It is your choice. But asking other people to boycott it is rediculous. It would be like saying "Boycott Budweiser because they aren't really the King of Beers", or on another subject "The Washington Redskins, Cleveland Indians, and Atlanta Braves have to change their names because they are demeaning" is just as rediculous. IMHO, I don't drink S.A. because I'd rather pick up some other obscure name that I haven't tried before, like Fat Tire Ale, or another well known but true micro brew like Black Hawk Stout or S.N. Porter. Lets quit all of this Jim Koch and S.A. bashing. The only thing he can not say any more is "four years running". He can still say "four years in a row" though. Lets get more politically correct. Jim Koch may use "slime bag" advertising tactics, but I don't think he IS a "slime bag". Time to go to the fridge for some Chimay...... Return to table of contents
Date: 22 Nov 93 15:04:14 GMT From: GANDE at slims.attmail.com Subject: Astringency... >From: arf at mcs.com (Jack Schmidling) >Subject: Astringency >>From: GANDE at slims.attmail.com >>Further to this one could assume that it would be OK to sparge with >> boiling water, which is accurate as long as your grain bed pH >> doesn't raise above 5.3, ideally. <SNIP) >That's a nice number but like so many things, it is only a bench >mark. What if the pH rose to 5.4 or 5.7... would it make a >detectable difference? I doubt it. I'd have to agree with you regarding a slight raise in pH such as that. But,the pH 7.0, boiling water is in fact in contact with the top 1/2 inch of the grain bed. I agree that at the bottom of the mash it's likely to be in the mid 5's due to the grain buffering action, yet this is not a true statement about the top portion, especially at the interface beteween the 200+F water and the grain bed, namely the top half inch or so. >>...boiled for 10 minutes in tap water >> (pH 7.0) and it was what I would call astringent. That's enough >> proof for me. ;) > All that says is that boiling tap water with a pH of 7.0 will make > astringent tea. As you did not convert the starch into sugar, the > astringency could just be the way malt tea tastes without the > sweetening effect of conversion. Not sure what you mean, but a major componant of judging beer is being able to separate flavors. If astringency is present it makes no difference how sweet (or sour, salty, bitter, etc..) the remainder of the liquid is. > In the real world, sparge water is run through the mash which has a > powerful buffering effect on the water. I run 10 or more gallons > of pH 7 sparge water through my mash and it doesn't raise the pH > more than a tenth point or so. Furthermore, sparge water temp is > not the same as mash temp nor does it bear any relationship to > making tea with boiling water. As long as pH is measured at the bottom of the grain. Try this. After about 45 minutes of sparging (in whatever fashion you prefer). a. add some boiling water to the top of the grain bed. b. remove about half of a cup of grain/water mixture (from the top) c. check the pH I'd bet the temperature is up around 200F and the pH is not much under 7.0. One can assume that tannins are being extracted and astringency created. This may seem trivial to a 20 LB mash, but those that do partial mashes (say a couple of pounds of grain and extract) may notice the astringency. > Finally, it does not address the fact that boiling grain in > decoction mashing does not seem to produce astringent beer. Yes it does. My statement is that pH in the mid 5's (optimum 5.3) will prevent/reduce tannin extraction. Boiling a pH 5.3 mash portion is different than adding boiling, pH 7 water to grain. Not sure what you mean here. I am not trying to convince anyone that this is fact. It is my understanding of how astringency is created and why astringency is NOT created in decoction mashing. ...GA +----------------------------------+ | Internet: gande at slims.attmail.com| | Glenn Anderson | | Manager, Telecom. Facilities | | Sun Life of Canada | +----------------------------------+ Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 93 09:36:37 -0600 From: graham%spock.dnet at SEDSystems.ca Subject: Burners ? I have been brewing all grain for several years now, the last few using a 38 qt. stainless pot. I am using a large electric stove element mounted on a piece of .25" aluminium connected to a 240 volt 40 amp source as my burner. This has proven to be barely adequate to boil 6-7 us gallons of wort. Getting the already warm wort up to a boil can take an hour (45 min if I cover the pot with an old sleeping bag). My question is what are the alternatives for burners? Would 2 (or for that matter 3) small stove elements provide more heat than the single large one? I suspect that a gas burner would provide more heat and have been considering stealing the side burner off of the propane BBQ. (After a massive boil over on the kitchen stove I now brew in the garage, so ventilation is not a concern). Any suggestions would be appreciated! Thanks in advance. Reid Graham "graham at sedsystems.ca" SED Systems Inc Saskatoon SK Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 93 8:36:43 MST From: npyle at n33.stortek.com Subject: Re: First All-Grain Mark Alston writes: (Mark, I can't help with your questions on checking pH and starch conversion on dark mashes, I only do pale mashes, but...) >3) For checking my extraction efficiency do I use the total grain > weight (pale, chocolate, patent, crystal) or what? It seems that by > including all the grains dark mashes will always seem less efficient > than pale mashes even though I might have extracted the same amount > from the pale malt. Moreover, I boiled off more liquid than I had > intended and was left with only 4.25 gal or so in my carboy. So > according to miller it seems that I should do the following: > > Degrees = (1.061 * 4.25)/10 = .45 > > since my total grain bill came to 10 lbs (8 lbs pale malt) and I > was only left with 4.25 gal. > > What does this mean. Is this good or bad or what. Miller gives me > no idea as to how what numbers I should get. I include all of the grain bill in my calculations, which I suspect, is one of the reasons I get lower extract rates than claims here in HBD land (procedural/ equipment differences accounting for the rest). Anyway, I would like to see this answered by those claiming 30+, 32+, etc. points/pound/gallon. The dark malts, in my understanding, do not add sugars to the liquor, and really probably shouldn't be added to the grain bill when measuring efficiency. I add them in anyway, but I suspect others do not. I guess one question would be: if you don't include all grains in the calculation, which ones do you exclude? You did the calculation wrong, BTW. For future reference/comparison: Extract = (61 pts * 4.25 gal)/(10 lb) = 26 pts... I get around 25 points using the entire grain bill (of course, higher for pale beers, lower for dark beers), so you are in the ballpark. You can probably do better with a "normal" sparge (I do a batch sparge), but it is a good starting point. Also, you apparently measured the final volume in the carboy, which takes into account losses after the mash/sparge (i.e. volume left in the kettle, soaked up in the hops, etc.). For a more accurate measure of your mash/sparge you should take this reading from the kettle. At this point, you more concerned with your mash efficiency, not the efficiency of the entire brewery. I think it makes for a better comparison with other brewers, too, to take the gravity readings from the kettle liquor. Norm Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 93 10:36:13 EST From: "Glen A. Wagnecz, X6616" <wagnecz at PICA.ARMY.MIL> Subject: Re: Hop Oils as a Preservative Mark Garetz <mgaretz at hoptech.com> writes: >Subject: Hop Oils as a Preservative >Actually there are studies that show that hop oils (responsible for the >aroma) do have a preservative effect and do inhibit the growth of >bacteria. And for an informal opinion, Fritz Maytag strongly believes >that dry-hopped beers last much longer (like 10-20 years) than beers that >are not dry hopped. He bases this on tasting his Christmas Ales from Mark- Have these beers that last this long been carbonated via priming or forced carbonated? I was under the impression that beers that are carb'd via priming last only about 2-3 months, due to the presence of the spent yeast sediment in the bottle. Please "clarify" whether these long lasting beers were primed or forced and other necessary specifics. Thanks In Advance- Glen P.S. Thanks for the catalog, are the '93 whole hops in yet? Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 93 10:38:08 EST From: 22-Nov-1993 1037 -0500 <ferguson at zendia.enet.dec.com> Subject: Just made a wort chiller - any break-in required? I just made myself a wort chiller. I bought 50' of 3/8" ID copper tubing ($29), a plastic hose, some clamps, etc; total cost about $37.00 or so. Now, if there any sort of break-in procedure I need to use to avoid having any sort of reaction between the fresh copper and my wort? Thanks, JC Ferguson Return to table of contents
Date: 22 Nov 93 11:07:00 EST From: "TIMOTHY LABERGE" <LABERGET at gar.union.edu> Subject: calcium Chloride Thanks to everyone who responded to my request for ways to treat my hard water. The gist of most of the replies was "Boil it!". That said, a few suggested adding calcium chloride and then boiling. Does anyone have a source for this? What about for lactic acid? Thanks again, Tim LaBerge Union College No fancy sig--just good beer. Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 1993 09:05:01 +0800 From: bjones at novax.llnl.gov (Bob Jones) Subject: Bay Area Brewoff Competition Announcement **************************** Competition Announcement ************************** Well it's that time of year again for the Bay Area Brewoff. The catagories this year will be : India Pale Ale Pale Ale Bock (Traditional, Helles & Dopplebock) Porter Dry Stout Barleywine/Wheatwine Holiday beer (specify spices/herbs and special ingredients) Mead (melomel, cyser, metheglin - sparkling or still) Competition date : Jan. 22, 1994 Entry fee : $5 per entry. Entry - Two 12oz. bottle per entry. Label with name, address, phone number & club affiliation, catagory and sub-catagory if any. Place : Lyon's Brewery Depot, 7294 San Ramon Rd., Dublin, Ca. 94568 Entries accepted : Jan. 1-8, 1994 (ship to arrive this week) This is a good competition with good judges, and always a lot of fun. Judges comments will be sent to all entrants. Prizes and ribbons are awarded. I'll make this announcement one more time in December. Thanks for listening. Bob Jones bjones at novax.llnl.gov Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 93 12:26:12 EST From: Lee=A.=Menegoni at nectech.com Subject: Decoction: Conversion times RE: My suggestion that one should kettle mash longer than 15 minutes. I should have prefaced my comment on kettle mash times with the fact that I use under modified German Pilsner, Vienna and Munich malts for brews with a decoction mash. I have found these take longer than highly modified US or Belgian malts to convert. My primary motivation in using these malts is from George Fixes analysis of the Belgian malts in Brewing Techniques in which he notes that they are lower in the precursor that produces the malty flavor and aroma compared to good German malts. Since I am doing a decotion to develop these components I use the malt with the greatest potential. RE single decotion step with 50% of the grain. If the intent is to produce a rich malty aroma and flavor then why don't you do 2 decotions of 1/3 each like Noonan? It takes too long. With the under modified German malts each decoction adds 45 to 60 minutes to the brewing process. Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 93 11:08:15 MST From: Rick Myers <rcm at col.hp.com> Subject: Coors Winterfest Norm writes: > Anyone tried this year's Coors Winterfest? It is (this is no lie!) robust, > dark brown/red, balanced (surprise), and quite tasty. There are even some > fruity components that make me wonder if it an ale. From Coors? No way! It > certainly is an order of magnitude better than last year's boring amber lager. > Oh, it is still marketed as a stout, HA! It is no stout but it is good beer. Yes, I've tried it and like it! However, I feel the balance leaves a little to be desired - too bitter and too little malt. I like my brews bitter, but there's not quite enough malt there to offset the bitterness. It is quite a bit darker this year, but, the most impressive thing is: THE LABEL! Check it out! It's laser-etched or something like that. Also new for this year, is a larger bottle size. You can get it in the usual 12oz. bottles, or the larger micro-brewery style bottle of about 26 ounces - I don't remember the actual size. Rick - -- Rick Myers (rcm at col.hp.com) Information Technology Specialist Hewlett-Packard Test & Measurement Organization Information Technology Colorado Springs, CO Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 93 12:57:54 EST From: dweller at GVSU.EDU (RONALD DWELLE) Subject: Deadbrew Started a 5-gallon batch 7 days ago, all seeming normal. Waited, waited, nothing happened. Waited waited patiently. Nothing still happened. My guess is that I pitched the yeast and it dropped dead (for godknows why). Question: to re-do, I'm guessing that I can just heat to near boil, to kill the critters that might have grown, chill, and re-pitch? Or should I do something more? Toss the wort? I'm leaving it sit til I hear from someone (nothing's happening anyway). Ron Dwelle (dweller at gvsu.edu at Internet) "Four Score And Seven Beers Ago It was Friday." Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 93 13:12:10 EST From: carlsont at GVSU.EDU (TODD CARLSON) Subject: Re:Crabtree effect Several recent messages have questioned the type of metabolism taking place in bottles primed with dextrose (glucose). The question: Is the concentration of glucose in primed beer high enough to inhibit respiration (the Crabtree effect)? or as stated yesterday: >It may actually be that the addition of dextrose provides >a carbon source at concentrations below 0.5% and now the >yeast respire giving off CO2 and no alcohol (the addition >of priming sugar does not increase alcohol content, right?) Not an insignificant question since the CO2 yield from respirtation is 3 times higher than the CO2 yield from fermentation (see equations 1 and 2 below) eq 1: fermentation of glucose C6H12O6 ------> 2 C2H5OH + 2 CO2 (ethanol) eq 2: respiration of glucose C6H12O6 + 6 O2 --------> 6 CO2 + 6 H2O (pardon the lack of subscripts in all chemical formulas) Perhaps this analysis will help. You must also remember to include the other character in the respiration reaction - oxygen. Three quarters cup of glucose is about 145 grams which (at 180 g/mol) converts to 0.805 moles of glucose. Respiration of that much glucose would require 6 times as many moles of O2 (4.83 moles of O2). Assuming ideal gas behavior (using PV=nRT, P=1 atm, R=0.0821 L-atm/mol-K, and T=298K or 25C) that converts to 118 L of oxygen gas! But 5 gal (18.9 L) of beer saturated with O2 at a concentration of 3.16 mL O2/100 mL of water (as per the CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics) would contain only 0.597 L of dissolved O2. In other words, aerobic respiration of glucose in a closed bottle of O2 saturated beer could only account for the consumption of 0.5% of the added glucose. It seems to me that primed beer must be carbonated with anaerobic fermentation (eq 1). If so, then the complete fermentation of the 0.805 moles of glucose would produce 1.61 moles each of ethanol and CO2. At 46 grams/mol, this increases the ethanol concentation by 74.1 g or 0.4% (based on 18,900 g for 5 gal of water). I would guess the actual increase would be less at aerobic respiration is negligible (see above) and glucose matabolism is probably incomplete. As for the CO2, the 1.61 moles produced would increase the pressure to about 2 atmospheres or 30 psi (again using PV=nRT) assuming the beer is already saturated with CO2. As for the ethanol, this would be a maximum estimate. What is the desired CO2 pressure of finished beer? Does this sound about right? Todd Carlson carlsont at gvsu.edu Return to table of contents
Date: 22 Nov 1993 13:03:11 -0500 From: "Daniel F McConnell" <Daniel_F_McConnell at mailgw.surg.med.umich.edu> Subject: boiler waste/respiration Subject: boiler waste/respiration From: hollen at megatek.megatek.com (Dion Hollenbeck) >I am leaving too much wort behind in my boiler after siphoning to >primary fermenter. I leave about .75 gal as a combination of what is >held in the hops and what is left because the hop bed causes my siphon >to "break". I use a Sankey keg as a boiler. >2) Any suggestions, or do I just figure in the excess wort needed to be left behind? I had the same problem and recently solved it to my complete satisfaction. I was leaving up to a gallon in the boiler especially when large amounts of hops were used. It really bothered me so I installed a copper false bottom in my boiler that has thousands of 1 mm dia holes and is supported by a ss grid. It was purchased from Pico Brewing Systems. My drain has a Cu dip tube that goes to the very bottom of the boiler and will siphon out all but a few ozs of wort. If you use whole hops, then most of the trub sticks to the leaves and acts as a filter. Pellets can be used in small amounts (I've used up to 2 oz), but they will plug the false bottom (I'm told) unless some whole hops are used. I have had no problems with carmelization of high gravity initial run off, although if you use extracts, I would be very careful to dilute the extract well before adding to the boiler. ******************************************************* >From Patrick Weix weix at swmed.edu >Fermentation is what occurs during the >*anaerobic* growth of yeast, so if one aerated, fermentation would >just stop. They would go on living and turning sugars into CO2, but they >would not make any *ethanol*. (They of course being the yeast!) Not exactly. High concentrations of sugars REPRESS the ability of the yeast cell to undergo aerobic respiration even at high oxygen levels. This is catabolite repression. In aerobic conditions the yeast DOES produce ethanol, but it is oxidized to CO2 and water when the sugar is gone. In ANaerobic conditions the yeast can not oxidize the ethanol produced and it remains in solution. >My point being: aerate early, then leave it alone. Still an excellent point. DanMcC Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 93 13:09:16 EST From: John DeCarlo <jdecarlo at homebrew.mitre.org> Subject: Re: Defense of Jim Koch Well, Hitler may have loved his pets and family--we just judge by his actions <grin>. Trademarking may be as old as the hills, but "Boston" is a silly thing to try and trademark (read, you can't) and besides, *no one* knows that the word Boston is part of any Sam Adams products. I did a survey of 35 people drinking the stuff and none of them had any idea. Every single one thought it was brewed by the Sam Adams brewery. So, Jim may be a good marketer, but he is not an honest one. That's basically what we are judging him on. Dishonest and disreputable marketing tactics, whether law suits intended to damage competitors, mislabeled beer styles, attempts to subvert competitions, or lies in radio ads, can have only a damaging effect on a company or executives reputation. The sad part, as so many defenders point out, is that he makes a half-decent beer. There are lots of restaurants/bars in the U.S. that carry SA and nothing else even close in quality (usually megabrews). If Koch simply refrained from the underhanded activities he could have a slightly bigger market and some respect. Right now, Sam Adams *worst* customers are educated consumers. They know there is lots of stuff out there head and shoulders above his and that his tactics are dishonorable. It may be a tiny percentage now, but I think lots of microbreweries out there are learning the lesson from this and emphasizing good consumer relations through truthful advertising and proper labeling. John DeCarlo, MITRE Corporation, McLean, VA--My views are my own Fidonet: 1:109/131 Internet: jdecarlo at mitre.org If I were you, who would be reading this sentence? Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 93 10:23:33 -0800 From: Drew Lynch <drew at chronologic.com> Subject: Spice usage information Now that you've all already started your Christmas ales, I thought I'd toss out a little info based on my latest Christmas brew. I altered my spice boil schedule based on my guesstimate of how volatile the desireable compound in the spices were. Also note that I use a CF chiller, and take 10 minutes to chill the 5 gallon batch. You may want to add that time to the times listed below. The base beer was a lightly hopped (Cascade/Willamette) high gravity brown ale (1.080 SG - 1.020 FG), using Wyeast American Ale Yeast Spice: 4 cinnamon sticks at the beginning of the boil Result: Warm underlying cinnamon flavor as desired Spice: 4 ounces coarsely chopped ginger, added 5 minutes prior to end of boil. Result: Walloping fresh ginger taste - too much. I think this is the correct boil time for ginger, but I would reduce the amount to 1-2 oz. Spice: Peel from 4 juice oranges and one lemon Added 5 minutes prior to end of boil Result: No discernable orange/lemon flavor. I will add these at the very end of boil, or possibly via a hop back. Drew Lynch Chronologic Simulation, Los Altos, Ca. (415)965-3312x18 drew at chronologic.com Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 93 10:34:51 PST From: Mitch Hendrickson <mitchh at hops.gvg.tek.com> Subject: A handy tip for making an immersion chiller As I was making a second immersion chiller this weekend (a gift for a friend), I found that a 5 gal keg makes an ideal form around which to wind the copper tubing. I found that I was able to get away without even using the tubing bender (spring thing). And it's a lot more regular than my hand-bent version :-). FWIW, -Mitch Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 93 12:48:45 EST From: lyons%adc1 at swlvx2.msd.ray.com Subject: RE: A Defense of Sam Adams Al writes: >>> I continue my boycott of Samuel Adams products! Chris writes: >> Your loss. Although Koch may be a slime bag, he makes a decent >> product. Kevin writes (In Defense of Sam Adams): >A slimebag? Really? Sometimes this guy comes off sounding like Hitler in the >HBD. ... summarizing additional comments (I'm going on a limb here, but the following is my interpertation of Kevin's comments): James Koch is not a slimebag, but a successful buisness man doing what is necessary to promote a successful product. ... (I hope I got that right) I'm not sure I disagree. Please note in my initial comment I used the phrase "MAY BE a slime bag" and not "IS a slime bag". The general tread on these forums is that he "is" a slimebag. I can't say from personnel experience that this is true ... I don't know. I do know that Koch distributes a first rate product and I continue to purchase it as one of the many quality brews I purchase. In short, if a manufactor makes a quality product at a reasonable cost, I'll support it. It may take unpopular practices to advertise a product to the mass-public, but a products cost+quality performance will determine its ultimate fate once it is sufficiently advertised. I for one am glad to see that the mass-public can recognize a quality brew after the many years of drinking the typical american guzzle beer. Chris Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 1993 14:05:28 -0500 (EST) From: SFFG_WWIBLE at VAX1.ACS.JMU.EDU Subject: Siphoning Problems I've got a glass racking crane, which I stick a flexible plastic hose onto, the other end into the secondary/bottle filler. I used to have problems every now and then with gas building up in the siphon and eventually stopping the flow. Then, I figured out that the junction of the hose with the crane wasn't always completely airtight. Even a slightly imperfect fit will result in allowing some air in. Take a look. If the gas is building up at the top of the crane, and you have a similar setup, this might be the problem. I have always been able to fix it by twisting the hose just a little bit, and get a perfect seal. Will Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 93 13:19:09 EST From: sdlsb.dnet!73410%sdlcc at swlvx2.msd.ray.com (Carl Howes) Subject: crabtree redux It looks like an experiment is in order here. The question still is whether or not the Crabtree effect is relevant to priming homebrew. The evidence so far is that priming with maltose (from DME, krausen, gyle) will cause some (all?) of the headspace oxygen to be consumed and priming with corn sugar will not. General opinion (from those who expressed one) runs to "it makes no real difference". Has anyone tried such an experiment? If not, stay tuned and I'll report back in six months or so. BTW, what good is a PureSeal (tm) cap considering that it has been shipped/stored in a 20 percent oxygen atmosphere for some indeterminite period before use? Carl "Worry now and you will have a *good* homebrew to relax with later" - me Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 1993 13:52:32 EST From: "Mark T. Berard, Dow Plastics, LAD, TYRIN* CPE R&D" Subject: PET soda bottles/Aluminum brewpot Hello all, HBD seems mighty unfriendly these days, especially considering that the holiday season is upon us, but I'll chance another beginners question. Do people out there use PET Coke(tm) bottles to bottle beer in? They seem ideal. They are obviously gas impermeable. They come in a variety of sizes, my favorite being 2 and 3 liter (cuts down on bottling time alot). The caps seem to hold pressure, and you don't have to worry about breaking them (should be ideal for travel or mailing them). Plus, if you over- carbonate, it shouldn't be that hard to release CO2 without having a gusher. I've only used them a couple of times (I normally use champagne bottles with PE corks). So, other than the complete lack of charisma, is there something wrong with them that I'm missing? On another note, thanks to all who responded to my aluminum pot question. The consensus is that the acid wort can extract the aluminum, resulting in a "metallic" taste in the beer (which I don't seem to have.) Also, several people noted that the Aluminum/Altzehimers connection was shown to be false, something about the staining procedures for the brain cells was introducing the Aluminum. i.e. Aluminum doesn't give you Altzehimers (I never could spell). Special thanks to Drew Lynch for his post in 1277 on dry hopping. A actual experiment! No snide comments! A sure sign that HBD is "not dead yet!" ;-) insert best Monty Python old man voice ;-) Thanks and Happy Holidays Dr. Mark T. Berard | Internet: mtberard at dow.com Snailmail: | Voice: 504-353-8418 Dow Chemical, La. R&D, Bldg. 2506 | FAX: 504-353-6608 PO Box 400, Plaquemine LA 70765 | SCIENCE! Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 1993 14:29:13 -0600 (CST) From: Allen Ford <allen at darwin.sfbr.org> Subject: Lovibond color scale Am hoping for some answers (or at least appropriate references in order to answer) the following questions regarding degrees Lovibond. Is the scale completely linear? That is, does 1 lb. of 50L grain result in twice as much color in a beer as does 1 lb. of 25L grain used in an identical manner. Does 1 lb. of 500L grain give 50 times as much color as 1 lb.of 10L grain? Does dilution of a beer with equal parts water result in a halving of the color rating? Do formulas exist that will allow one to accurately predict the final color of a beer based on the Lovibond rating of the grains going in? Answers to unasked questions may also be appreciated. Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 1993 14:12:00 -0500 From: mike.sadul at canrem.com (Mike Sadul) Subject: Hunter Airstat / flying brew > After all of this interest in the Hunter Airstat, I am kind of > interested in taking a look at one. Could someone tell me where > I can find one? In Canada, the Hunter Airstat is imported by Melnor Manufacturing Ltd. and it is sold under a different name. It is model number C42215 and is called the Hunter Energy Monitor AC. I found only one store which carries it, Canadian Tire. It's a bit pricey at $80, but if you want it bad enough ... > Has anyone else had any good or bad experiences carrying homebrew > onto a plane? Or, for that matter, checking homebrew in their > luggage? Not homebrew, but that other stuff known as store bought brew. This happened a few years ago, flying out of Halifax, N.S. I loaded up my carry on with an assortment of different brands of six packs (cans). Nothing out of the ordinary, just different from what is available here. That was one HEAVY bag. As my bag went into the X-ray machine, I glanced over at the video screen. The cans showed up as a LARGE black blob. The security person rolled her eyes into her head and looked up at the ceiling. After about half a minute, I assumed she just wanted me to leave, so I picked up my bag and walked away. No questions asked. Mike mike.sadul at canrem.com Number of pieces of brewing equipment purchased for this posting: 1 Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 93 15:44:44 EST From: "Anton Verhulst" <verhulst at zk3.dec.com> Subject: clarifying Wyeast 1028 I've never had problems clearing beer until I started using Wyeast #1028 (London Ale). Is there a fining agent other than Isinglass that will get this yeast to drop to the bottom? - --Tony Verhulst Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 93 16:32:32 CST From: Darren Evans-Young <DARREN at UA1VM.UA.EDU> Subject: screw caps >From: Mark Taratoot <SLNDW at cc.usu.edu> > > Now I have an old-fashioned bench capper of my own >that was found BRAND NEW at a second-hand store (Thanks John). I have >not used screw tops since I have had this capper, but I think it would >cap them fine. The difference: Wing cappers grab the bottle and >squeeze the crown onto the bottle while bench cappers just push >the crown down onto the bottle. Perhaps the cappers that commercial >breweries like SN use cap the bottles like the bench capper and so >screw tops are not a problem. Mark, I used to think this too...til I tried to cap a screw cap with my bench capper. It leaked. YMMV. Try your bench capper and let us know how it worked. Darren Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 93 16:38:59 CST From: Darren Evans-Young <DARREN at UA1VM.UA.EDU> Subject: Iodine test with dark malt >From: "Mark B. Alston" <c-amb at math.utah.edu> >Subject: first all grain! (questions) > >2) This dark color brought out another problem. There would be no way > to tell if iodine went black or not. The mash was black on it's own. > Thus, I could not test for conversion. I simply let the mash sit > at conversion temp for almost 2 hours. The liquid tasted sweet at > this point so I went on. I achived an O.G. of 1.061 so I must have > gotten conversion. So, how do you check for conversion of a dark mash? Mark, What I do is put one or two drops of mash liquor on the edge of a white dish. Tilt the dish so the dark liquor drips to the opposite edge of the dish. Put one or two drops of iodine next to this long drip mark and tilt til they run together. Your dark liquor spread out across a dish will essential be clear so you can see the reaction with the iodine. Darren Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 93 16:19:20 EST From: Pete Langlois <langlp at us0104tb.boston.NCR.COM> Subject: building a hopback From: Pete Langlois (Peter.Langlois at BostonMA.NCR.COM) Subject: building a hopback Drew Lynch writes about planning to build a hopback. I gave the design that appears in the gadgets issue of Zymurgy a shot. This design features a ball jar with holes drilled through the lid, gromets, 3/8 in copper tubing, copper scrubbing pads, etc. A couple of observations: The ball jar top is inherently problematic. I had real trouble getting clean holes drilled (the lids kept producing little burrs at the edges). Once the holes were made, the gromets tended to be cut to ribbons too easily. No amount of sanding helped. The "air-tightness" of the design is highly questionable because of the gromets. hot hot abandon in out gromets | | | | for stopper ----------------- | # 13 Stopper | /-----------------\ / | | | | \ | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | { } | copper mesh | {____} | w/ hop bag cover | loose hops here | ______________________ Figure 1 The rest of the design was not too bad, so I adapted it (as in Figure 1) |-). A number 13 stopper drilled with care does a marvelous job. I have used this changed design with great (IMHO) results. It is lasting well, and works well with a pass-through wort chiller. Also hopping the finishing hops in this way passes hot wort through the hops minimizing infection risks. I sanitize the hop bag by boiling and use iodophors for everything else. Hope this helps. PETE Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 1993 19:13:41 -0800 (PST) From: Domenick Venezia <venezia at ZGI.COM> Subject: Harsh bitterness/Haze/Extractf I tend to do the same recipe until I get it right. Before I commit to the third attempt I thought I'd run some things by the community and see what you-all think. So my second Fullers ESB clone is now four weeks old and still hazy with a harsh note to the bitterness. Here's my guess as to what is going on, correct me if I speak nonsense or drivel. I think the harsh bitterness, which is slowly mellowing, is from the high alpha hops (Cluster) that I used to bitter (about 80% of the IBUs are from Clusters, the rest Kent Goldings). My guess is that my high sulfate (400ppm) water treatment and the humulone analogs from the Clusters (a la G.J.Fix in HBD #1264) combined to to give this harshness. The first batch had the same harshness which faded in time, and it also cleared very nicely. In the latest I ... (small embarrassed cough) ... forgot to take into account the water retained by the grist so came up about a gallon short on my sparge. It gets worse. I drained the grain bed dry, then sparged again with an additional 1.5 gallons at 180F. Whereas the original 7 gallons of sparge water had been "burtonized", the last 1.5 gallons had not. The burtonized sparge water had enough buffering potential to keep the pH low during that part of the sparge, but the last 1.5 gallons had no buffering potential at all. Also the grain bed was dry, but kept in a warmbox where it stayed above 150F, then I hit it with 1.5 gallons of pH 7+ water at 180F and I think I pulled out just enough tannins to create a persistent haze but no noticable astringency, though I must admit the harsh bitterness may well be masking it. After 4 weeks of bottle conditioning the haze has cleared from only the top inch of the brew, and a very definite line of demarcation has formed between the cleared brew and the hazy brew. If you've ever seen an aerogel, it kind of looks like that. There's no ring around the collar and no off flavors and I am meticulous in my sanitation, so I doubt that it's an infection. The recipe was 80% Maris Otter 2-row pale malt, 10% crystal and cara-pils, and 10% flaked maize. Everything was mashed because I find steeping a pain. And of course I do no mash out. So now that half of you are convinced this explains the haze, what about the other half? Also, if anyone remembers EXTRACTF, a small program for calculating extraction efficiencies, it was finally uncompressed, detarred, and put Lastly, no one has yet responded to my request (now I'm begging) for a Samuel Smith Oatmeal Stout clone. A number of people have queued up for the results, but no one has come through with the goods. Thanks in advance, Domenick Venezia ZymoGenetics, Inc. venezia at zgi.com Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 93 22:32 CST From: arf at mcs.com (Jack Schmidling) Subject: Leaches and Kettles >From: Ed Hitchcock <ECH at ac.dal.ca> >Subject: pH and leaching tannins > I know he's only baiting us, but I feel like a sucker this morning. The mash has a buffering effect, yes. As the goodies are drawn off, however, the pH does rise. This is quite variable.... Indeed it is and makes it clear that I wasn't baiting anyone and the rest of your response makes a mockery of all the absolute dogma that has been pronounced on the subject. Every situation is different and brewers must either know exactly what conditions prevail or experiment to find out what works best. >It does indicate, however, that your pH is rising, and soon will reach a level that will extract noticeable quantities of tannins from the husks. Rising, yes.. but "soon"? How can you possibly know that without knowing the water chemestry and that of the mash? And what magic level "extracts noticeable quantities of tannins"? What if I don't reach that level till the last pint of sparge water? > In the decotion mash, you have a thick mash which has not had the sugars and acids removed, so the pH stays low. Where's the problem? I believe I was the one who suggested that there is no problem. >From: prf at cherry-semi.com (Paul Ferrara) >Subject: Stepping up to a 5 gallon boil >Or should I really spend many $$ and buy a stainles steel pot, propane cooker, picnic cooler mash tun, sparging manifold, etc, etc, etc .... I may be biased but I think you should buy a 32 qt enamel kettle and put an easymasher in it. (total cost about $50) That is all you need for mashing, lautering, boiling and fermenting. One piece of equipment does everything including a super boiler for extract beer till you are ready to move on to all grain. What you save on enamel over ss will pay for the propane cooker if you need one. If you do go stainless, do not compromise on anything less that 10 gallons (not dogma, just experience) and sooner or later, that will be too small for boiling but will still make a great mash tun. js Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 23 Nov 93 00:17 CST From: akcs.wally at vpnet.chi.il.us (John Walaszek) Subject: Ancient Ale >From Monday 11/22/93 Chicago Tribune page 15: "Blast from the past" "Thanks to British archeologists and a Scottish brewery, you soon may be able to party like a pharaoh. Cambridge University scientists studying hieroglyphics and wall paintings at the buried city of Tell al-Amarana believe they have deciphered the recipe and the brewing methods for a bread-based ale flavored with anything from honey to flowers, Newsweek reports. The Scottish & Newcastle Breweries hopes to tap kegs of the strong elixir by next year." Sounds pretty similar to something Anchor did a few years back. - Wally Return to table of contents
End of HOMEBREW Digest #1279, 11/23/93