HOMEBREW Digest #1523 Sat 10 September 1994
Digest #1522
Digest #1524
FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
Rob Gardner, Digest Janitor
Contents:
Hops: To dry or not? (Glenn Tinseth)
RE: Fruit beer methods (via RadioMail) <jhorzepa at radiomail.net>
Beginner's Guide to All-Grain Brewing, by Richard Webb (Darren Tyson)
Iodophor CORRECTION/Break material (Algis R Korzonas +1 708 979 8583)
Estimation of hop bitterness (Allen Ford)
yeast popsicles / fruit (KWH)
FROZEN WORT (ding.dong)
orange peel (Rob Skinner)
Preventing boilover (KUZEN001)
Malt house terminology (Mark A. Stevens)
big krausen and self-flaming brewers (uswlsrap)
Source needed (Steve Scampini)
2-bucket lauter tuns (Charles Wettergreen)
Rice Hulls / Wyeast 1728 (brewing chemist Mitch)
RE: worthless posts from lazy brewers (Jim Dipalma)
Iodophor concentration (Pierre Jelenc)
new book (M. Murphy)
Iodophors (R. Keith Frank, DCR&D, 409-238-9880)
Re: Lauter Tuns (Bryan Dawe)
Brews/Brews/Delphunk (Pronto Connections)
Worthless Post about Artic Ice (Steve Armbrust)
Hop utilization (Gordon Baldwin)
cracked carboy (Turner)
couldn't help it (DGERTH)
Lazy posts (Ulick Stafford)
hard cider (Christopher Evans)
Mississippi River Microbreweries (DAVE ELLSWORTH)
Fruit Concerns / annoyed / Dirty Hops (Rich Larsen)
More on Rice Hauls/Hulls (Diane Palme)
******************************************************************
* NEW POLICY NOTE: Due to the incredible volume of bouncing mail,
* I am going to have to start removing addresses from the list
* that cause ongoing problems. In particular, if your mailbox
* is full or your account over quota, and this results in bounced
* mail, your address will be removed from the list after a few days.
*
* If you use a 'vacation' program, please be sure that it only
* sends a automated reply to homebrew-request *once*. If I get
* more than one, then I'll delete your address from the list.
******************************************************************
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.
FAQs, archives and other files 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, 8 Sep 1994 10:07:54 -0800
From: gtinseth at teleport.com (Glenn Tinseth)
Subject: Hops: To dry or not?
Steve Lichtenberg asked for my opinion on the difference between dried and
fresh (undried) hops. First of all, let me say that if you're really
curious, try it on a small batch--very small I'd say-- and see if you like
the result.
Freshly picked hops are somewhere around 80% water and dried are less than
10%. In addition, the drying process (140 F for 10 or 12 hours with *lots*
of air flow) oxidizes many of the essential oil compounds present in the
green hop flowers. Bad you say? Well, yes and no. Taste panels have, on
more than one occasion, rejected beer made with undried hops, especially
when compared to a similar beer brewed with normally dried hops. It is
evident that oxidation of some of the aroma compounds is necessary before
hops really become hoppy; this is especially true for noble varieties. Thus
it isn't alpha-humulene or beta-caryophyllene that you smell in hopped
beer, but their oxidation (and fermentation) products instead.
Despite the fact that some oxidation is good, too much is disastrous for
both aroma and bittereing compounds. Don't let anyone rationalize inferior
packaging with the statement "These here noble hops need to be oxidized,
that's why we use paper bags and staples" All the oxidation hops *ever*
need occurs during the drying process. Do everything in your power to
prevent it from there on out. Get your hops from a reputable supplier you
trust, or your garden, and store them in barrier packaging in the freezer.
I'd be very interested in the results of anyone who has tried this. If you
use undried hops in your beer, are you "wet hopping?" ;^)
More questions? Feel free to email me.
Glenn
Glenn Tinseth Terra Pacific Writing Corp
gtinseth at teleport.com 503-754-6043
Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 08 Sep 1994 11:21:32 PDT
From: John Horzepa (via RadioMail) <jhorzepa at radiomail.net>
Subject: RE: Fruit beer methods
In HBD 1521 Eugene Sonn <eugene at sccs.swarthmore.edu> wrote:
> I'm about to attempt my first fruit beer. A wheat beer flavored
>with raspberries (frozen). I am an extract, single stage fermenter,
>brewer and am confused about the many ways I have heard to add fruit.
>TNCJOHB says put them in to steep after the boil, but before cooling
>while others have told me to put it in the second stage of two stage
>fermentation. I know I shouldn't boil the fruit, but does anyone have
>experience with both the above methods? If so, please drop a quick line
>about which you found more effective. Private e-mail is great, but post
>to the digest if you like.
I have made several fruit beers, all with extract, and had very good results
(my girlfriend keeps trying to convince me to brew nothing but fruit beers).
I've always added the fruit to the brewpot after the boil in order to sanitize
the fruit but not set the pectins. After letting the fruit steep for 10
minutes or so, I put the brewpot in an icewater bath to cool it to pitching
temperatures with the fruit still in it. I then dump the entire contents of my
brewpot into my primary, again with the fruit. Primary fermentation usually
lasts 10-14 days. When I transfer to secondary I leave the fruit behind. I
know you said you do single stage fermentation, but I find two stage better for
fruit beers. Leave in the secondary for a few weeks, rack and bottle. The
beer will get better and better with age (I brewed a raspberry ale with
Wyeast's Belgian ale yeast that I started New Year's Eve. I wish I had a way
to make it last forever, the flavor is unbelieveable at this point and I'm down
to my last 15 bottles).
john
Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 08 Sep 1994 13:48:14 -0600 (CST)
From: Darren Tyson <TYSONDR at SLUVCA.SLU.EDU>
Subject: Beginner's Guide to All-Grain Brewing, by Richard Webb
Howdy brewfolk,
I have recently received a compiled (and properly formatted) version
of "The beginners guide to advanced and all-grain brewing By Richard
B. Webb, the Brews Brother's 1993 Homebrewer of the year" from Rich.
It is now available from the sierra archive (sierra.stanford.edu).
Enjoy,
Darren tysondr at sluvca.slu.edu
Return to table of contents
Date: 8 Sep 94 18:47:00 GMT
From: korz at iepubj.att.com (Algis R Korzonas +1 708 979 8583)
Subject: Iodophor CORRECTION/Break material
In response to Tony's question about Iodophor, I posted the wrong
dilutions for BTF and BEST Iodophor.
The correct dilutions are:
12.5 ppm : 1/2 oz. in 5 gallons.
25 ppm : 1 oz in 5 gallons.
I've been using 1 oz. in 5 gallons with good results. In response to
Mark's question:
>So if the object is not wasting money: why use 25 ppm? The rinse wastes
>water as well as the Iodophor.
It is because I will reuse the sanitizing solution quite a bit in one
brewing session (sanitize several kegs or six cases of bottles) and I
do rinse either with water or cheap beer (depending on the smell of the
water on brewing day) that unenlightened friends have left at my house.
Please note that not rinsing is only valid if you AIR DRY the item.
I sanitize just before use, so I must rinse, not having the time to
wait for air drying.
******************
Jim writes:
>BTW, Algis, using a counterflow does not add another siphon step,
>provided you do follow one of the above methods (other than in
>professional floatation tanks).
If you mean, "don't worry about the cold break," then yes, it does not
mean another transfer, however, if you are siphoning through the counterflow
into a settling vessel and then siphoning again into your fermenter after
some time, which, I believe, is what Phil originally was suggesting.
I've read a great many homebrewers are including a cold break settling step.
Remember when we had the "let the yeast eat cold break and THEN siphon off
debate" a few years ago?
Personally, I chill with an immersion chiller, pick up the kettle and pour
the cooled wort into the carboy through a funnel. I do leave *some* of the
break at the bottom of the kettle along with any hop pellets that made it
through the hop bags, but generally, I don't worry too much about the break
in either my all-grain or my extract batches (incidentally Jim, about 50/50
over the last 6 months, thanks to better time management). I do use a
blowoff tube for 90% of my beers and yes, some (most?) of the trub does seem
to get blown out.
Regarding the "issue of early racking prior to adequate diacetyl reduction,"
I don't think this is that important of an issue -- I believe that there
is adequate yeast in suspension. For example, in a 1.074 Bock that I fermented
at 45F with Wyeast #2308 "Munich Lager," I racked after 2 weeks, did no
diacetyl rest and had no noticable diacetyl in the beer. Just a datapoint.
Al.
Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 8 Sep 1994 15:16:37 -0500 (CDT)
From: Allen Ford <allen at darwin.sfbr.org>
Subject: Estimation of hop bitterness
I am currently involved in a project to determine the usefulness of the
various formulas and devices for estimating hop bitterness (IBU) in
finished beers. As a first step in the process, I need to know how
homebrewers attempt to determine the bitterness in their beers. Any
methods that appear to be in wide-spread use will be evaluated as part of
the project. Your comments will be especially helpful if you can quote
the source of your method and if you will indicate how much you trust
your method and why. Please send direct e-mail. Thanks.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Allen L. Ford <allen at darwin.sfbr.org> =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
=-=-= Southwest Foundation for Biomedical Research San Antonio, Texas =-=-=
Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 08 Sep 94 16:37
From: KWH at roadnet.ups.com (KWH)
Subject: yeast popsicles / fruit
I have used the parallel yeast propagation technique from the yeast faq
with great success. However, three bottles of propagated Wyeast 2565 were
frozen when my refrigerator was inadvertantly turned down. I assume that
these are total wastes now (headed for that big cool, aerated wort in the
sky, so to speak...). Is this correct? I would hate to pour out viable
yeast, but it's pretty darn cheap compared to other ingredients and time.
In the future, if the propagated bottles of yeast were not stored in my
fridge, how long would they be good for?
This also made me think about freezing fruit before adding it to a
secondary. Would freezing sterilize the fruit? I suppose that you could
add the frozen fruit to a sanitized carboy and siphon the beer on top of it
before it completely thawed. Of course, it the bacteria, etc. was viable
upon thawing, you would be hosed.
Kirk Harralson
kwh at roadnet.ups.com
Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 08 Sep 94 21:17:56
From: ding.dong at esbbs.com
Subject: FROZEN WORT
Hi, all, this is my first post to the digest, after
having been a lurker for a while. I have been brewing
for about 2 years, have made the step to all grain,
at least I do single infusion mashes for ales
( my favorite style anyway).
In addition to all grain, I have cultured some yeast and
regularly use the liquid yeast's from Wyeast, ( I cultured
some yeast from "sierra Nevada" with success!), don't mean
to boast, but all I did was drink the
beer (that was easiest part)!, pour the last ounce or so
into a starter wort and about a week later I had a pitchable
amount of yeast that made some rather nice ale, IMHO :).
Anyway, to finally get to the point, I made up some
sterile wort a few months ago to make yeast starters,
storing it in ball jars.
I processed the wort as I would canned veggies (boiling
the jars for at least 10 minutes). Just now I was looking at
the boxes of pickles I canned up about a week or so ago and
noticed that the maker of the jars suggests using them
for freezing as well as canning, so the next thought I had
was "Why not freeze sterile wort?"
Anyone ever try this? Any feedback would be appreciated.
Also I have enjoyed reading the posts for the past few weeks
although I have not been a strong contributor.
Frank
Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 8 Sep 94 18:26:00 -0800
From: rob.skinner at kandy.com (Rob Skinner)
Subject: orange peel
>When a recipe calls for dried orange peel, if there any particular
>method of drying the rind other than removing it form the peel itself
>and letting it get stale for a few days??
A lazy man's option is "Dried Orange Peel" from the spice section of
your supermarket. Don't be concerned with the preservative content
of the "store bought" product. The preservatives will have no
adverse affects on your yeast in the amounts you will be using (you're
not making orange soda, are you ;-)
Rob Skinner <rob.skinner at kandy.com>
.. When I was your age we carved our transistors out of wood
- -- MR/2 2.03 NR
Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 09 Sep 1994 08:21 -0400 (EDT)
From: KUZEN001 at mc.duke.edu
Subject: Preventing boilover
This may be dumb; I've only been brewing for 9 months, with 22 batches
(extract/specialty) quite literally under my capacious belt. But my
method of dealing with boilover is to *stir* the two pots I boil in
as the boilover begins. By stirring frequently, I can get both pots
to a roiling boil without any spillover.
The drawback, of course, is that you have to be present and watching
the pots as the boil begins. But I don't mind sitting there having
a beer and looking for that thick crusty foam to appear on top of the
boil--that's the sign that boilover is imminent.
(The experienced folks can now tell me/others why this is bad. <-: )
Ken Kuzenski AC4RD kuzen001 at mc.duke.edu or Fido 1:3641/1.1
Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 9 Sep 94 08:50:59 EDT
From: Mark A. Stevens <stevens at stsci.edu>
Subject: Malt house terminology
Quick question for any of you who happen to know about
malt houses.
I've been reading up on how malts are produced, and picked up
a book from the U.K. called "Steeped in Tradition" in which
they described two types of malt house: the traditional floor
malting, and the pneumatic malting. They seem to group every
type of modern, mechanized malting under the category
"pneumatic", which includes a discussion of the development
of the Saladin box.
When I read Briggs et al., "Brewing and Malting Science", they
discuss various mechanized maltings separately, i.e., there's
a section for pneumatic maltings, followed by a discussion of
the Saladin box, followed by a discussion of towers and
conveyers etc.
Soooo. Is it correct to lump all mechanized maltings under the
category "pneumatic", or is pneumatic malting really just one
of many methods for mechanically malting grain???
Cheers!
- ---Mark Stevens
stevens at stsci.edu
Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 09 Sep 94 09:42:20 EDT
From: uswlsrap at ibmmail.com
Subject: big krausen and self-flaming brewers
- ----------------------- Mail item text follows ---------------
To: I1010141--IBMMAIL
From: Bob Paolino
Research Analyst
Subject: big krausen and self-flaming brewers
When I read the arrogant post from BREWS at Delphi.com, I figured that it
was so outrageous as to be self-flaming and didn't bother responding.
But I'm glad that that kind of stuff did get put in its place. Now that
several people have said what needed to be said, let's move the digest
back to beer and brewing....
Curtis Speaker wrote of his experience with a blown out airlock and
quickly fashioning an improvised blow-off tube. I did much the same
thing once, although I use the 3-piece airlocks and simply cleaned up
the crud-filled one, replaced it without the other two pieces and
attached a hose to the stem for my blowoff. Worked like a charm.
Now, however, I'm able to avoid that problem completely. I'm guessing
that his plastic primary was one of those taller 6-7 gallon white opaque
fermenters from a starter kit with the very tight-fitting lid. For a
primary, I now use one of those shorter, fatter 7 gallon "semi-opaque"
plastic wine fermenters. I first bought one to have an extra primary
when I started having more than one batch going at once (actually, it
was when I had a beer already going and was going to do a cider
...whatever). At first, I was a little annoyed that the lid was not quite
so tight-fitting and thought about sending it back. I'm glad I didn't,
and have since bought yet another one.
The lid does "kind of" seal--it doesn't just sit on top--but it's not a
_tight_ seal. When things get active, the less-than-tight fit gives the
excess CO2 a release. The airlock may not look so busy, but the slight
outward bulge of the lid shows that there is indeed activity in there.
The gas "blanket" on top of the beer keeps the nasties (that's a
technical term ;->) away, so the slightly loose fit of the lid shouldn't
be a problem. After all, some beers are done in _open_ fermenters. Just
as a precaution against something I shouldn't be worrying about anyway,
I wrap some handiwrap(tm) around the outside where the lid fits the
bucket. That keeps me from worrying about anything getting in before
respiration/reproduction/fermentation gets going.
I haven't had a need for a blowoff tube since switching. If someone
knows of any reason why that's _not_ such a good idea (aside from a
recommendation to switch to a glass primary), please reply. Otherwise,
I've been happy with the results.
P.S. Why do you make the reference to the BATF and your 14th batch? 14*5
(assuming they've all been 5 gallon batches) is way less than the 200
gallons/household limit.
"Beer is good food,"
Bob Paolino
Disoriented in Badgerspace
Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 9 Sep 94 9:59:45 EDT
From: Steve Scampini <scampini at hpangrt.an.hp.com>
Subject: Source needed
Maybe someone out there can help. I recently misplaced the "trigger" piece
which activates the beer flow from a BEER KING dispenser for mini-kegs
(5 liters). The rest of the rig is in fine shape. It is made in
Germany. Is there a source for replacement pieces? If not, what is
the lowest cost source of a new dispenser? Please only sent to my
address, no HBD postings please since we all want to cut down on that
"driveL" stuff. P.S. I wonder in that gentleman's headache was related
to tying into a nasty batch of howebrew?.
TIA Steve Scampini
Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 9 Sep 94 09:21 CDT
From: chuckmw at mcs.com (Charles Wettergreen)
Subject: 2-bucket lauter tuns
To: homebrew at hpfcmi.fc.hp.com
Scott Keegan <scott at jolt.mpx.com.au> wrote when talking about two-bucket
lauter tuns:
HH> Underletting does add a considerable extra volume which either must
HH> be boiled away if you are to use a reasonable sparge volume,
HH> otherwise you must accept a loss of efficiency.
When I used to use one of these, I avoided adding the extra liquid in
the dead space between the buckets by putting in capped water-filled beer
bottles. I filled the clean bottles totally with water and then used a
standard bottle cap. I'd also preheat the bottles in a bucket of hot
water to avoid thermal shocks and to maintain the temperature of the
sparge liquor.
Chuck
/*/*/*/*/*/*/*/*/*/*/*/*/*
Chuck Wettergreen
Chuckmw at mcs.com
Geneva, Illinois
/*/*/*/*/*/*/*/*/*/*/*/*/*
* RM 1.3 * Of course I'm sane. The voices said so.
Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 9 Sep 1994 09:17:40 -0500 (CDT)
From: gellym at aviion.persoft.com (brewing chemist Mitch)
Subject: Rice Hulls / Wyeast 1728
Diane Palme asks:
> I think 1/2 a pound might be more appropriate. Does anyone out there use
> rice hauls? How much? <help!>
I have used them a couple of times, particulary in mashes with large wheat
proportions. The last time I used them was in my pLambic, the grain bill
consisting of 18 lbs of barley and 14 lbs of _raw_ wheat, ground to near
flour (talk about a stuck sparge waiting to happen!). I used about 1/3 to
1/2 pound of hulls in that, and I think it was plenty. That was for 32 lbs
of grain, also (No, it was not a five gallon batch ;-> ).
I think a 1/4 pound would be more than enough for your typical 5 gallon
weizen batch.
I brewed an old ale recently, and used the Wyeast Scottish ale yeast (1728).
I had a pretty good starter of it with at least a cup of pure slurry. The
fermentation of course took right off, went like the devil and finished a day
and a half later. I racked it, and the next day had another 3/4 inch of
flocculation (which I expected), but the beer was still pretty 'milky' looking.
Two days later I racked it again, and still that milky appearance.
In all my batches it has only taken at most two rackings to get bright beer.
The only variable this time was the 1728 yeast, which I have not used before.
Other than that, pretty standard batch: infusion mash, saccharification
at 156F, mash out at 170F, sparge water never getting above 185F, plenty of
hot and cold break, etc. OG 1074, FG 1018.
Can there really be *that* much yeast in suspension ? And does this yeast take
that long to settle out ?
TIA for any advice or anecdotes,
Mitch
- --
| - Mitch Gelly - | Zack Norman |
|software QA specialist, unix systems administrator, zymurgist,| is |
| AHA/HWBTA beer judge, & president of the Madison Homebrewers | Sammy in |
| - gellym at aviion.persoft.com - gelly at persoft.com - | Chief Zabu |
Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 9 Sep 94 11:00:39 EDT
From: dipalma at sky.com (Jim Dipalma)
Subject: RE: worthless posts from lazy brewers
Hi All,
In HBD#1521, Bruce Stevens rants:
>I have a headache coming on from reading some of the drivel sent up here
>continuously by lazy brewers who won't do their own legwork.
<much rubbish deleted>
I think you're missing the point. The primary reason the HBD exists is
the exchange of information about homebrewing. That which you call drivel
may be of educational interest to someone else. It's not for you to
validate the input of others.
>I hope it gets better soon or its
>off to another interest area.
See ya.
>And while I'm at it , I need judges for the upcoming Maine HBC in November.
Wow, you really have a way with people, Bruce. First you dis a
significant portion of the readership, then you turn right around and ask
for help from same. Have you ever considered a future in politics?
>Bruce P.Stevens - MALT Prez
But clearly not representative of the MALTs I met when I judged at that
competition last year, nor the majority of homebrewers in New England.
Jim dipalma at sky.com
Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 9 Sep 94 11:06:55 EDT
From: Pierre Jelenc <pcj1 at columbia.edu>
Subject: Iodophor concentration
in the Homebrew Digest #1522, Jim Busch says:
> First of all, not all Iodophor's are created equal. Check the
> concentration info on the label. Many brands have a level that gives
> 12.5 ppm when used at 1 oz per 10 gallons (at least the stuff I get from
> breweries uses this concentration). I seem to recall that the food prep
> stuff (the one that foams, the brewery stuff usually wont foam) is 1/2
> as strong.
Indeed iodophors are a whole family of compounds, but that 12.5 ppm is
valid for some of them only, as it is a measure of *total* iodine. What
counts is really the *free* iodine concentration. Iodophors should be
viewed as "iodine buffers", in which there is an equilibrium between free
iodine (which does the work) and complexed iodine (which acts as backup).
It so happens that with most of the iodophors we commonly use, the ideal
concentration of 5 ppm of free iodine is achieved at 12.5 ppm of total
iodine. Each brand is calibrated in such a way that the recommended
working concentration will yield 5 ppm of free iodine.
> Higher levels will give faster results, but rinsing is a good idea (as
> long as you have reasonably clean water, I use hot hot water).
Higher levels do not give faster results above the recommended
concentration (in a first approximation) because of the buffering effect:
more iodophor means more reserve, but not higher free iodine. It is only
if considerable amounts of iodine are consumed, for instance when cleaning
the skin of a patient, that higher amounts are recommended, in order to
make up for the iodine consumed. For our purposes, the amount consumed by
clean equipment should be infinitesimal.
Iodophors with 5 ppm free iodine will sterilize completely anything in
less than 5 minutes (except for one or two very odd spores), and kill any
common microorganism (though not their spores) in 15 seconds.
There is a wealth of data on the subject dating from the mid-50's, at the
time when iodophors where introduced as the preferred hospital antiseptic.
Pierre
Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 09 Sep 1994 08:13:17 +0000
From: mmurphy at efn.org (M. Murphy)
Subject: new book
I didn't write it, I just bought it. It came into the store today.
I work at a bookstore, but I don't get commission, I'm just spreading the
news.
The title is the Brewers Companion, and it is a large size book
that is filled with some very handy charts, charts on bittering, on
mashing, on decoction, on roasting yer own grains. Haven't had a chance to
read it yet, but it looks good; like a worthy addition to the shelf.
The crux of the book are its computer-like "spreadsheets" for
recipies and batches. Seems pretty helpful, like a log or a journal.
Anyway, thought I'd recommend it. Its by Randy Mosher.
mmurphy at efn.org.
Can't think of anything brilliant to put here.
Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 9 Sep 1994 10:16:44 -0500
From: keithfrank at dow.com (R. Keith Frank, DCR&D, 409-238-9880)
Subject: Iodophors
I was recently talking to an industrial formulator of food sanitizers. He
told me that in many uses in the food industry it is actually illegal to
rinse after using idophor. So if you are concerned about ingesting
iodophor, you probably already are. Of course the relative exposure vs.
homebrew equipment sanitizing is undoubtedly different.
One of the main reasons I like iodophor is the speed vs. bleach combined
with no rinse. If you are in a bind during a brewing/bottling process (who
hasn't been?) and need something sanitized quick it's great to have around.
For those who aren't aware you can sanitize with iodophor in 2 minutes.
If you're happy with bleach and don't have any problems the time factor
is the only reason I would see for using iodophor. According to the
formulator mentioned above iodophor is no more effective than bleach in
killing undesirables (assuming you are using both correctly).
Bruce DeBolt
c/o keithfrank at dow.com
Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 9 Sep 94 9:23:57 MDT
From: Bryan Dawe <bryand at gr.hp.com>
Subject: Re: Lauter Tuns
Scott Keegan writes:
> Slotted manifolds do seem to be a lot less efficient than a non-underlet
> holey bucket, and probably less than an underlet one, judging by the
> figures I see reported in HBD and elsewhere. I'll take a deep breath here
> and say I think that includes Easymashers as well... (Quick! To the
> trenches!....) I have been getting extract rates of about 13 pts/kilo/20
> litres which is near enough to 34-35 pts/lb/gallon expressed in American
> units (and consistent with what Miller claims as reasonably acheivable.
I had a really good professor in college. At the time I thought he was a
raging *ssh*le, but he taught me a really useful lesson. We should always
try to be able to identify those things we don't know.
Mr. Keegan has made at least two errors above. I am sure he can find
the math error on his own. The other one is subtle.
It is problematic to try to compare results reported outside your own
brewery since you do not know the conditions under which those results
were obtained.
Mr. Keegan should be pleased with his fine extraction rates. He
seems to understand the importance of and pays attention to 1) time,
2) temperature, and 3) pH.
I, too, am please with my extraction rates. They are higher than we
usually see reported in this forum, and higher than any we saw reported
in HBD1517. This detail is not important. I have used buckets in my
brewery. I have used manifolds in my brewery. I have mashed on the
range top. I have mashed in the oven. I have mashed in a cooler. I
have infusion mashed. I have step mashed. I have decoction mashed.
In general, its not the equipment that dictates extraction rates. Its
time, temperature, pH, and a few other lesser details.
For those of you considering going all grain soon, build, use, and buy
equipment with which you are comfortable. All of the mash/lauter systems
discussed in this forum work well and all are capable of excellent
extraction rates.
Regards,
Bryan P. Dawe
Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 9 Sep 1994 10:25:49 -0500 (CDT)
From: Pronto Connections <tmmpci at Mcs.Net>
Subject: Brews/Brews/Delphunk
Being my first week on the HBD list, I was disappointed to see a few
unfriendly individuals posting on a supposedly kinder, gentler network...:)
However I looked a little more closely and found that one particular
fellow, not to mention names BREWS at Delphi.com :), is a subscriber to a
large BBS system which has many special interest areas of it's own. I
would make a suggestion to that individual to start his own interest
group on that area and not subject others, that would like to share
information with like-minds/interests, to his ill-minded behavior. NUF-Said.
Sorry for the Drivel!!! I just brewed an All grain E.S.B. last Friday
and had a little problem I had never had before. Has this happened to you.
I am familier with fermentation locks, but, after this experience I'm
beginning to wonder:) I know that the temperature of the water/liquor in
the lock must be close to the temp of the brew or we will get leakage
from the lock into the primary.
what happened,
1) I added my wort to my fermenter at about 80 degrees,
2) I pitched my bag o yeasties, I normally do a starter, but I didn't have
time.
3) I noticed lots of bubbles in my fermenter due to my vigorous aeration.
4) I then placed my lock on the fermenter.
5) Lag time approximately, too long 28 hrs.
6) I noticed all during the lag that my lock was leaking and me being
very worried about that, took the lock off and replaced it letting air be
sucked into the fermenter :(.
Is this Brew doomed? There was probably a small amount of water that got
into the fermenter and lots of air.
I eventually had vigorous activity for 3 full days, but I am wondering
how things will turn out.
Drivel, well not to me? If anyone has had this problem, please Email me
directly, or post it, someone else may have this problem in the future.
TIA,
Todd McGuinness
PCI Direct
I don't have a fancy macro that does my identifier yet! :)
Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 9 Sep 94 08:49:26 PST
From: Steve Armbrust <Steve_Armbrust at ccm.co.intel.com>
Subject: Worthless Post about Artic Ice
Text item: Text_1
Regarding the spelling of "Artic" Ice beer, here in Oregon I think it's against
the law to use the name of a place in your brand name, unless the place name is
accurate. For example, Oregon wineries can't call their wine "Chablis" or
"Champagne" because the wines aren't from those regions. But they can produce
Chardonnay, because that's the name of a grape. Likewise, breweries can't make
"Russian Stout" because it's not from Russia. But the Deschutes Brewery is near
the Deschutes River, so that's OK. (This rule doesn't apply to beverages
produced out of state, so we might still see California Chablis in the stores.)
Other states may also have such rules. So even though this ice beer belongs in
the arctic (buried deep), it wasn't brewed there. Perhaps this is the reason
for the "Artic" spelling. It's pretty lame though, and opens up the possibility
of more misspellings such as "Belgun Ales".
P.S. India Pale Ale doesn't seem to apply to this rule. But even the original
wasn't made in India, so maybe that's why.
Steve Armbrust
Steve_Armbrust at ccm.hf.intel.com
Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 9 Sep 1994 08:50:40 -0700 (PDT)
From: gbaldw at zaphod.usin.com (Gordon Baldwin)
Subject: Hop utilization
> From: Jim Busch <busch at daacdev1.stx.com>
> >
> > I observed the same thing with the forced air hood on my brew pot. In my
> > old house the hood over the stove only had about 3 inches clearance, so
> > when the exhaust fan was on it created quite a flow of air accross the
> > top of the brew pot. I never had a problem with boil over.
>
> OK, the boil over issue seems to make sense, its the increase in hop
> utilization that is a radical result. Did your utilization decrease
> when the hoods changed?
>
I really can't help you with that. I radically change my brew styles
on an almost monthly basis. I can go back through my notes and see if I
can see a trend, but I don't do a complete flavor analysis on each
batch. My notes on flavor usually are how the batch deviates from what I
was attempting. Not the best method because I forget a few years later
what exactly I was attempting to brew on that occasion. This is probably
why Jim and Micah are brewing professionally and I'm not. (sigh)
As for the guy who doesn't want to see newbie stuff on the HBD, do him a
favor and unsubscribe him now. That way he won't have to see it. :-) The
HBD has been a very valuable resource for me over the years. Especially
since the ammount of information for doing small batch size brews has
been really lacking.
- --
Gordon Baldwin
gbaldw at usin.com
Olympia Washington
Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 9 Sep 94 11:35:40 EST
From: turner at cel.cummins.com (Turner)
Subject: cracked carboy
I just have to share an experience I had last Monday. I was cleaning a
carboy, in preparation for racking my latest to the secondary. It was full
of sterilizing solution. After soaking for a while, I picked it up out of
the sink... and it just kept right on going over the top. The carboy (moving
in slow motion by the way) dropped in a lovely silent path from the counter
top to the floor. When they say "do not bump" perhaps they are referring to
a 4 ft. drop onto linoleum (sp?).
Glass, water everywhere, all in all it was a beautiful sight. Fortunately
the local Revere/Corning outlet store sells glass carboys (cheaper than
the local brew store) and they were still open, so I was able to rack to
the secondary, after cleaning up and running to the store.
The one thing I am VERY grateful for (besides the fact that all my blood
remained within the confines of my skin) was that it was full of sterilizer
(the beer gods were looking after me). After tasting the beer (bock from
extract, Hallertaurer hops and Yeast Labs Lager yeast) I was even more
glad. I could have sat down and drank it after 5 days in the primary. I
can't wait till it's done.
BTW large shards of glass with a great deal of energy behind them can
really cut up linoleum. Oh well, sometimes I am glad I rent. So if anyone
has need of about 3 lbs of broken glass I can make you a deal.
Steve Turner turner at cel.cummins.com
Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 9 Sep 1994 10:48:38 -0600 (MDT)
From: DGERTH at LIMS1.LANL.GOV
Subject: couldn't help it
Folks:
Sorry, but I couldn't help but join in about the "useless posts". I've
been brewing for about a year, reading HBD for about 8 months, and even
managed to answer a few questions posted here. I have a Ph.D. in chemistry,
and I've NEVER found a "stupid question" here. Bruce, have you ever noticed
the variety of responses, ideas, suggestions that most questions elicit? One
of the great things about HBD is the amassed knowledge and experience that
we can draw on. This stuff feeds creativity, and without that, homebrewing
would be dead. Newbies (myself included) - keep asking those questions and
we all win. 'nuff said.
To Ed O' (and the Coyote) : Check out a basic biochemistry text. The one
I used in undergrad way back when was Lehninger's, and it had some excellent
material about enzymes, proteins, and carbohydrates, and was actually
relatively easy to understand!
Dr. Dan the Chemistry Man (and brewer)
Lost Almost, NM
dgerth at lanl.gov
Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 9 Sep 1994 11:57:47 -0500 (EST)
From: ulick at ulix.rad.nd.edu (Ulick Stafford)
Subject: Lazy posts
Now while I believe Bruce Stevens may have been having a bad day when he made
the post re lazy posters, and used stronger language that was appropriate, I
must echo some of his sentiments. I know from the deluge of flammage his post
drew that it is not PC to flame our brew education deficient brethren, but
I also belive that they should try to educate themselves a little before
making asinine posts. Not that I am bothered about the space the questions
take up - I skip such posts as I do many others, and those posters have as
much right to post their questions as anyone else, but really, many of the
questions could be better answered by another real live breathing homebrewer
or homebrew supply retailer, or by reading. Some people are just a little
bit too joined at the hip to computers. It is my opinion that certain
information can be far more readily obtained by judicious phone calls,
even if one are two are finding out where to call.
hbd is great for trading tips, getting into pedantic arguments about wheat
ratios, the benefit of decoctions, etc., but is a poor substitute for
the basic books, or a knowledgable homebrewer or retailer for the basics.
Some of my homebrew opinions. Copper manifolds are much superior than holey
buckets in my experiences - less trouble with clogging, breakthrough, and
much faster clearing of wort, and greater efficiency. However, all manifolds
are not created equal, and mine is at times a maintenance pain in the ass (so
much so that I had to use an em for my last batch and it did seem less
efficient, although otherwise performed up to the high standards of jsp
products).
The key to wheat is decoction and a sloooow sparge (i.e. restrict flow at the
beginning - the overall time will be much less in the end than if you start
at full speed) - rice hulls are just creating channels and preventing efficient
loitering.
__________________________________________________________________________
'Heineken!?! ... F#$% that s at &* ... | Ulick Stafford, Dept of Chem. Eng.
Pabst Blue Ribbon!' | Notre Dame IN 46556
http://ulix.rad.nd.edu/Ulick.html | Ulick.Stafford at nd.edu
Return to table of contents
Date: 09 Sep 94 13:38:18 EDT
From: Christopher Evans <75124.1463 at compuserve.com>
Subject: hard cider
Hello,
As the apple season gets into full swing up here in the Northeast, I
thought it might be fun to try making a hard cider. Problem is,
I don't have any idea how to proceed. If anyone has any advice/recipes
for accomplishing this, I'd appreciate it. E-mail is preferred.
Thanks, Chris Evans, 75124,1463 at compuserve.com
Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 09 Sep 1994 13:48:10 -0400 (EDT)
From: DAVE ELLSWORTH <DE12344 at conrad.appstate.edu>
Subject: Mississippi River Microbreweries
Last summer some friends and I paddled down the Mississippi River.
Needless to say it was a very wet but rewarding experience. Unfortunately,
our beer consumption was limited to Blatz, Schlitz, Milwaukee's Best,
etc. etc.
I recently heard about a microbrewery in Davenport, Iowa brewing a beer
called "Raging River Ale"(?). Anyone know their address? Or for that matter
any other microbreweries along the Mississippi?
We thought it might be nice to find out what we missed in the way of good
river beer.
Due to the strong current we couldn't paddle over to Heilman's in Wi. and
make a closer inspection of the world's largest 6-pack. At the risk of a few
flames, i'd have to say that even a nice cold Schlitz tastes good after a
12 hour day of thrashing in The Big Muddy.
Aaaaannny waaaay, any and all replies will be appreciated, thanks,
Dave Ellsworth DE12344 at Conrad.Appstate.edu
Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 9 Sep 1994 13:13:17 -0500 (CDT)
From: Rich Larsen <rlarsen at free.org>
Subject: Fruit Concerns / annoyed / Dirty Hops
Mark A. Stevens <stevens at stsci.edu> asks about fruit additions:
I've never had a problem with fruit additions to secondary.
I usually don't add whole fruit, but juice it instead. I then
pasturize the juice at 170F for 30 minutes. Careful that you don't
let it boil or you'll set the pectins giving you a haze. A little
pectinase will help should this happen. I then add the juice to the
secondary (which is large enough to deal with a renewed fermentation)
and rack the beer on top of it.
If you want to add whole fruit (disclaimer time folks: I ain't never
done what I'm about to say, but it makes sense) It would seem to me
that the fruit can be sanitized with a meta-bisulfite solution, rinsed,
then added.
"It was a run by fruiting" Robin Williams as Mrs Doubtfire
**********************
To the DH who can't be bothered with the beginner questions:
If you feel that the HBD is below you... Don't let the Cyberdoor hit you
in the Cyberbutt on the way out. Good luck finding Judges... you'll need
it with an attitude like that.
**********************
Rats!(c) My hop plant fell. The string broke and the bine lay across
my neighbor's garden. I restrung it, but the cones got muddy. Guess
I won't be using those for dry hopping. Any suggestions how to launder
them without destroying the cones. I tried wetting them and rubbing
them lightly, but it left some dirt on them.
Alzo, when does one harvest in the Chicago area?
*********************
=> Rich (rlarsen at squeaky.free.org)
_______________________________________________________________________
Rich Larsen (708) 388-3514 * Also on HomeBrew University (708) 705-7263
"I never drink... wine" Bela Lugosi as Dracula
_______________________________________________________________________
Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 9 Sep 1994 13:23:10 -0500 (CDT)
From: dspalme at mke.ab.com (Diane Palme)
Subject: More on Rice Hauls/Hulls
Ok, I think I need to do some clarifying. (I had no idea!)
First of all, no, I didn't mean to say "hulls" when I said "hauls". The
package that I bought actually said "Rice Hauls" on the side. No brand
label (except for the store) and no ingredient list. The look of the
"hauls" (hulls, whatever) was like straw. Each piece about 1/2" long, and
then split on the long axis. It made me think of the leaves or stalk of
the rice plant rather than a husk of the rice kernel itself. I'm going
back to that store in the near future (it's the backup store, but it's
handy when I don't have an ingredient during the protien rest) and I'll
double check.
Ok, next point. The *taste* of the wort wasn't fouled by the hauls, but
rather they were inedible. You get this nice mouthful of grain and then
hitting the hauls was like a speed bump. Couldn't be chewed, couldn't be
swallowed - so, spit it out. The hauls themselves have *no taste*
whatsoever. It was like chewing on fibers. So, no problems with the taste
of the sweet wort and no problems with the taste of the beer. We just had
to deal with a thinner runoff than expected due to an extremely loose mash.
Final point. What I meant to say was that if I'd really thought about it
and hadn't been so tired, I would have recirculated *all* the runoff. All
6 1/2 gallons of it in order to try and extract more sugars. The grains on
the top of the bed were indeed spent, but I think that those in the center
of the mash, and at the bottom, still had sugars in them. I'd not have
redone the entire mash, just the sparging.
So, back to the same question.. has anyone else tried these?
Thanks to Ed, Norm and John (so far ... haven't checked my mail again) for
their prompt replies and our quest for clarification continues ...
D.
- --
Diane Palme, EIT You really think that A-B would
Design Engineer, Special Machines accept my opinions as their own?
Allen-Bradley Co. (414) 382-2617 <sheesh!>
dspalme at mke.ab.com
palme at am1.icgmfg.mke.ab.com
Return to table of contents
End of HOMEBREW Digest #1523, 09/10/94