HOMEBREW Digest #1716 Thu 27 April 1995

Digest #1715 Digest #1717

		Rob Gardner, Digest Janitor

  got dropped/primary explosion ("Thomas Lajoie")
  Enzymes and brewing hi-alcohol beers!! (kevin)
  Homebrew Competition (Michael L Montgomery +1 708 979 4132)
  Dinged enameled pot ("Troy Howard" )
  IBU measurement questions (Jeremy Ballard Bergsman)
  AI Robot (Kelly Jones)
  S/N ratio >> 65 dB (Dan Pack)
  There will be no Who's Who. (David Draper)
  Re: Homebrew archives ("Philip Gravel")
  Yes, gelatin again. Last, time I promise. (Pierre Jelenc)
  fruit in beer (Mark Ruhe)
  artificial sweteners in beer (Tom Keith)
  Brewery Web Sites (Aaron Shaw)
  gelatin, agar and enough of Wheeler (Andy Walsh)
  Stainless vs. brass (Anatum)
  Burner/Aluminum/Mosher Book/pH paper/.Z ("Dave Bradley::IC742::6-2556")
  subcription information (Leo Christoffer)
  CO2 (Lance Stronk)
  Mini Keg Bombs (Overcarbonation) (Ben Rettig)
  Conditioning Casks (Jim Grady)
  Coyote??? (Robert Schultz)
  CO2 purging of kegs, was co2/air mixtures (Jeff Renner)
  mash brewing time (Btalk)
  HopBack onto the HBD (Scott Howe)
  10 gal Gott does work excellent! (I stepped inside and didn't see too many faces  26-Apr-1995 1147 -0400)
  Microwave sterilization/Yeasty beer (Robert Parker)
  CO2 Rises(?) ("Dutcher, Pier")
  NA revisited ("Wallinger, W. A.")
  fermentap ? (jehartzl)

****************************************************************** * 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. ****************************************************************** ################################################################# # # YET ANOTHER NEW FEDERAL REGULATION: if you are UNSUBSCRIBING from the # digest, please make sure you send your request to the same service # provider that you sent your subscription request!!! I am now receiving # many unsubscribe requests that do not match any address on my mailing # list, and effective immediately I will be silently deleting such # requests. # ################################################################# 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. 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 ARCHIVES: An archive of previous issues of this digest, as well as other beer related information can be accessed via anonymous ftp at ftp.stanford.edu. Use ftp to log in as anonymous and give your full e-mail address as the password, look under the directory /pub/clubs/homebrew/beer directory. AFS users can find it under /afs/ir.stanford.edu/ftp/pub/clubs/homebrew/beer. If you do not have ftp capability you may access the files via e-mail using the ftpmail service at gatekeeper.dec.com. For information about this service, send an e-mail message to ftpmail at gatekeeper.dec.com with the word "help" (without the quotes) in the body of the message.
---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 25 Apr 95 11:24:56 EST From: "Thomas Lajoie" <lajoiet at CC.IMS.DISA.MIL> Subject: got dropped/primary explosion Hi, I'm new to the homebrew world, and the guy that got me started also gave me the address for HBD. In the few short weeks I've been getting the postings, I've learned alot, albeit I'm only a extract brewer. I was also concerned with getting dropped, and I have to agree with Dave Ebert that the filter is skewed to keep some of the whiners and to boot those of us short on brew knowledge who are just looking for a good source of info!?! All that aside....the real purpose for writing. I recently brewed John Campbell's Honey/Wheat recipe from HBD# 1705 (I don't plan on priming with honey though!!) It went into the primary bucket Sunday and seemed to be fermenting nicely.....BOOM!! Tuesday morning my airlock and lid had launched. I noticed that there was a foamy residue approaching the top of the bucket, and this apparently clogged the airlock, causing the explosion?? Anybody got any suggestions on how to avoid this in the future?? Is my batch ruined or just stick it out and wait?? Also anyone have a good Holiday recipe using maple syrup and/or maple sap(in the place of water)?? I figure I better start early. Thanx, Tom Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 25 Apr 1995 12:48:00 -0600 (MDT) From: kevin at wheels.aar.com Subject: Enzymes and brewing hi-alcohol beers!! I recently asked a question about a packet of "pilsner enzymes" that was contained in a brewkit I had purchased. I have come accross quite a bit of useful information in regards to enzyme use at fermentation time, and thought I'd share it. Some of this was sparked by Collin's stuck fermentation that was revived by the addition of enzymes, that resulted in an FG of 1.008! In trying to figure out why the Mexican brewkit (from Brewmart) had this packet of enzymes, I found two brief comments about enzyme use at fermentation time. One was regarding a variety of Wyeast that had enzymes to produce low SG, and high alcohol ferments, and another one in a book that mentioned using enzymes to help revive stalled/stuck fermentations. That was a TOTAL of two sentences that I could find - the subject just isn't covered well! I tracked down the manufacturer of enzymes I used back when I had a distiller's permit to make fuel alcohol in the early 80's. I have obtained technical literature, and have also ordered enzymes (food grade) to use in my homebrew effort. In the literature, it repeatedly speaks of using them (especially enzymes containing BETA-amylase, in combination with alpha-amylase) in brewing low carbohydrate (i.e. "dry") beers of high alcohol content. :) Knowing this, it dawned on me that the two batches of beer I have that stopped fermenting could be stuck because they had run out of fermentable sugars, and this could be corrected by the addition of enzymes! However, our local brew store doesn't sell any :( In desperation, I decided I would extract active enzymes from high enzyme malted barley. I ground 10 oz of malted barley, and tried to keep the temperature below the breakdown temp of beta-amylase (which begins to breakdown at 149F, and even more at higher temps). I extracted it by heating it for 15 minutes at 140F (60C). I obtained 20 oz (600ml) of "extract". I had two stuck fermentations. #1) 6 gallons stuck at 1.042 (stuck for over two weeks) #2) 1 gallon stuck at 1.012 (and should go down to 1.002). I added 5 oz (150ml) to #2, and 15 oz (450ml) to #1. Both began fermenting within 2 hours! 24 hours later, #1 was at 1.032, and #2 was at 1.004, and both hadn't reached peak fermentation yet! It has been several days now, and the fermentation has pretty much slowed to a snail's pace. The SG's are now: #1 = 1.020, and #2 = 1.002. I considered batch #1 as a loss, and so the addition of unpasteurized enzyme extract was a risk - but I only had to gain by it! BTW, #1's OG was 1.090 - I wanted STRONG beer :) ************************************************************************* I have two conclusions from this: #1) If you want high alcohol beers - add enzymes at fermentation. #2) If you have a stuck fermentation - add enzymes to possibly break down the unfermentable carbohydrates to usable sugars for the yeast. This way you will obtain a lower FG that possible otherwise. Enzymes must be added at temperatures below 149F (65C), and can be added when pitching the yeast. Enzymes may not be the cure-all for all stuck fermentations, but in two of mine - it cured them! ************************************************************************* While this information was available, it was very lmited, and not discussed much at all. I offer this for your benefit. Some people might find this to be the wrong approach, since the beta-amylase will convert much of the body-enhancing dextrins to fermentable sugars - so be forewarned. Myself, I found the Mexican beer to be of superior quality to commercial beers, and had much more body that the run-of-the-mill beer. Kevin - -- Kevin Hass WB0DPN ! ! PGP public key by request via email kevin at wheels.aar.com ! Return to table of contents
Date: 25 Apr 95 14:00:00 -0500 From: mlm01 at intgp1.att.com (Michael L Montgomery +1 708 979 4132) Subject: Homebrew Competition The Winfield Chamber of Commerce is sponsoring its First Annual "Rites of Spring Homebrew Competition" on June 10, 1995. This competition is AHA Sanctioned and is in need of judges and stewards. If interested in judging or stewarding, please contact Ron Meyer at "Beer in a Box" 1-708-690-8150 or 1-800-506-BREW. Beer in a Box homebrew supply store is working out the details to get the judges free entry into the "Rites of Spring" beer and wine tasting scheduled for the evening of June 10 which will feature several beers and wines from numerous distributors. The entry fees and requirements are as follows: 3 bottles/entry 1-3 entries: $4.00 each 4-7 entries: $3.50 each 8 or more: $3.00 each Checks should be made payable to Winfield Chamber of Commerce Send or drop off entries to arrive between June 1 to June 5 to: Rites of Spring Homebrew Competition c/o Winfield Liquors - Beer in a Box 27W460 Beecher Ave. Winfield IL 60190 For entry forms or questions, call Josette Allen at 1-800-506-BREW or 1-708-690-8150 Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 25 Apr 95 11:24:56 PDT From: "Troy Howard" <troy at oculus.jsei.ucla.edu> Subject: Dinged enameled pot While washing my 33 qt. enamel-on-steel boiling kettle after my last batch, it slipped from my hands and bounced off the tub. Now there is a (~1/2 inch diameter) area where the enamel spallated from the steel. Does anyone know of an effective method for repairing this damage? Any comments on what that small area of raw steel will do to my wort/beer the next time I brew? And I know, I know. . . I should get a stainless kettle. -Troy - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Troy Howard | Live fast, die young, and leave a good troy at oculus.jsei.ucla.edu | looking corpse. Jules Stein Eye Institue, UCLA | - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 25 Apr 1995 13:08:13 -0700 (PDT) From: Jeremy Ballard Bergsman <jeremybb at leland.Stanford.EDU> Subject: IBU measurement questions I have two related questions about using the spectrophotometric method (ASBC) of IBU measurement. (All this talk got me to go ahead and buy the isooctane and octanol and test out my own utilization curve that I always tell people works for me.) 1) What is a good commercial beer to use as a control? It should be available, consistant in its IBU level (which of course must be known), and I suppose a high IBU beer might be more useful than a low one. 2) At what points in the handling must you be concerned with exposure to UV (or oxygen or anything else)? For example if the beer is exposed to light in the sealed bottle are the IBU's changing? Basically, where am I likely to screw this up? TIA Jeremy Bergsman jeremybb at leland.stanford.edu P.S. The AI cancelbot was a joke. Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 25 Apr 1995 09:53:36 -0600 From: k-jones at ee.utah.edu (Kelly Jones) Subject: AI Robot Someone said: >I for one am totally opposed to the AI Robot deciding who can stay >subscribed to the HBD. >I may go the next quarter without a single post and according >to your formula, I will be dropped. The REAL bad news is, the humor impaired are dropped almost immediately. The AI Robot has no tolerance for digest readers who can't recognize a joke. Kelly Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 25 Apr 1995 15:02:06 -0700 From: danpack at grape-ape.che.caltech.edu (Dan Pack) Subject: S/N ratio >> 65 dB In the previous HBD: >Date: Mon, 24 Apr 1995 09:12:52 EDT >From: "Paul Stokely" <PSTOKELY at ea.umd.edu> >Subject: S/N ratio at 65dB >Dan writes in response to pH technique: >> Proper practice for pH paper is to leave it in the solution until the >> color stops changing. For a weakly buffered solution (such as wort) >> this may take a few seconds. However, you need to take into account >> the color change caused by the color of your beer. For darker beers >> this can be a problem. That's the limitation of pH papers. >FWIW, the instructions that come with the Whatman narrow range pH >papers say to dip the paper in the liquid and shake off the excess >and wait 5 to 10 seconds. They also advise "reading" the wet paper in >bright light against a white background. O.K. I don't know Paul's qualifications but for the record I'm a PhD student in Chemical Engineering at Caltech so I've seen and used my fair share of pH papers. As Paul's e-mail address places him at the University of Maryland I have no doubt that his may be similar. Anyway, FWIW, I have two narrow range pH papers (6.5 - 10.0 and 4.0 - 7.0) from E. Merck (not the drug company but it's original parent company in Germany). The instructions on both read: "Immerse in weakly-buffered solutions until there is no further color change (1 - 10 minutes)." I also have a wide range paper (0-14) from Baxter Scientific Products on which the instructions read: "If test solution is weakly buffered, leave test stick in solution until color no longer changes." I have no experience with Whatman pH papers so I can't comment on them but as far as I know most pH paper is essentially the same. I don't mean for this to sound like a flame, Paul, but I was somewhat irked by your subject header which implies my S/N is low. Also, Paul doesn't give the name of the poster of the comment about supporting Jim Koch and the BBC and it may appear from Paul's post that I made that statement. Not so. On the contrary, I very much agree with Paul on this one. Thanks for the bandwidth, Dan Pack Pasadena, CA Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 1995 08:02:10 +1000 (EST) From: David Draper <ddraper at laurel.ocs.mq.edu.au> Subject: There will be no Who's Who. Dear Friends, I am putting aside the idea of compiling a Who's Who list. Numerically, the votes are about evenly split, but the ideas raised by the no votes are simply too compelling to ignore. These very thoughtful responses have convinced me that this idea belongs in the "Looks good on paper, but..." department. Basically the potential value to newcomers of the proposed list does not outweigh the probable deterioration of the HBD that would result from the next steps in the list process. Many newcomers will remain ignorant of how to retrieve archive files long enough to figure out who is who around here the same way we all have--by reading the digest. There is a risk of bandwidth-devouring flamage that the rest of you didn't ask for and should not have to put up with just because someone else has an idea that, although reasonable, would be more trouble than it is worth. And as mentioned in my second call for input, such a list would not be able to accurately reflect the contributions of private-email communications. On the pro side, the argument can not be extended much beyond "sounds good, it would be handy"--which in all honesty was as far as my own support for it could be taken before asking for input from you all. I'm very glad I did--my thanks to all who responded. To paraphrase a couple of my most recent responses, the HBD and the net in general aren't perfect, but they work (more or less), so let's not try to fix what ain't broke. Cheers, Dave in Sydney - -- "We [HBDers] are like the Borg" ---Chris Geden ****************************************************************************** David S. Draper, School of Earth Sciences, Macquarie University, NSW 2109 Sydney, Australia. email: david.draper at mq.edu.au fax: +61-2-850-8428 ....I'm not from here, I just live here.... Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 25 Apr 1995 21:33:37 -0500 (CDT) From: "Philip Gravel" <pgravel at mcs.com> Subject: Re: Homebrew archives ===> Gregg Willis asks about the Homebrew Arcives: >Being recently unceramoniously dropped from the mailing list I called upon >the archives to fill in my missing issues. Using ftp.stanford.edu in the >/pub/clubs/homebrew/beer/digest directory I found my missing volumes but they >are in a format I cannot read ("z files"). What do I need to read these >files? Can anybody out there help me? When you ftp to the archives and retrieve the file, leave the .Z off of the file name and the server will automatically decompress the file before sending it to you. - -- Phil _____________________________________________________________ Philip Gravel Lisle, Illinois pgravel at mcs.com Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 25 Apr 95 23:03:39 EDT From: Pierre Jelenc <pcj1 at columbia.edu> Subject: Yes, gelatin again. Last, time I promise. In HBD #1714, Andy Kligerman <homebre973 at aol.com> struggled with glass and gloop: > Zymurgy (Spring 1994) quoting from the New Brewer 8(2) 1991 stated that > brown glass blocked 96 % of the UV, green glass blocked 20% and clear > glass blocked 10%. But remember that, unless you are in the habit of storing your beer in the sun, these are useless data because skunking is also caused by *visible* light below about 550 nm (greenish). > The beer was dry hopped with hop pellets, which is why I wanted to clear > the beer and then have the stuff sit on the bottom, held by the gelatin. > > What I did was heat about a pint of bottled water to about 120 deg F, > then dissovled a little over half of a packet of Knox gelatin to the > water. This mixture was then added it to my beer about 5 days before > bottling. Gelatin clears *yeast*, not hops debris. Also, it does not gel at the concentration used to clear beer; do not expect it to form a layer of Jello at the bottom of the carboy. The interaction is between individual yeast cells that bind to free gelatin molecules, eventually forming larger aggregates that can settle by gravity much faster than single cells. Anyway, don't try to dissolve gelatin directly into warm water. Always let it swell in cold water, then when it is thoroughly swollen (it may take 10-30 min), dissolve it by heating. > While the beer seemed somewhat clear (although not as much as I had > expected), but there were many large pieces of gloop (I don't know what > to call it) floating in the beer. That was undissolved gelatin. You did not boil it. :-) --- Chris Weirup <cerevis at panix.com> had problems with gelatin, and did an experiment. With 8 tsp of gelatin in 500 ml (I calculate that as being 5.6 g/100 ml) he finds that the boiled solution does not set while the unboiled one does. I found that flabbergasting, so I whipped up my own experiment: I made a 5% stock solution of gelatin, swollen in cold water then dissolved in a 65 C water bath. This stock was then placed into a duplicate set of test tubes and diluted with warm water to 1, 2, 3, 4, and the original 5%. One set of tubes was left at 65 C while the other was placed in a boiling water bath for 15 minutes. Both sets were then taken out and left to cool to room temperature. Both 5% samples gelled, while the more dilute ones thickened but did not gel. They were then placed at 4 C, and the 4, 3, and 2% samples gelled completely, while the 1% samples gelled to a quivery blob. After a couple of hours at room temperature, both 1% tubes had remelted, both 2% ones were quiveringly blobby, and the others stayed put. There was no observable difference between the boiled and non-boiled sets. I conclude that boiling gelatin in water has no detrimental effect on its gelling ability as logic predicted. Chris's experience may be related to his use of wort (presumably, since he was trying to prepare culture tubes). Wort is mildly acidic and that might be enough to cause cleavage of the peptide backbone, although my gut feeling is that it is much too weakly acidic for that. In any case, to prepare culture tubes it should be easy to sterilize separately 2x gelatin in water and 2x wort, and to mix them after they have cooled somewhat. Pierre Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 25 Apr 1995 20:17:04 -0800 From: mtruhe at ucdavis.edu (Mark Ruhe) Subject: fruit in beer this weekend(hopefully) i will be brewing a rasberry wheat beer. the wheat part i got pretty much figured out; it's the fruit part that i'm not sure about. so, if anybody or everybody has any wisdom, experience, or just feels like sharing their two cents on how to get just a hint of flavor, aroma, and color of rasberry in to a pretty standard(~60% wheat, ~40% 2-row,hallertauer, wyeast 3068) wheat beer i would be more than happy to heft one in your honor approx. ten days after bottling. you can e-mail me at mtruhe at ucdavis.edu. cheers, mark Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 25 Apr 1995 22:09:33 -0500 From: nr706 at mcs.com (Tom Keith) Subject: artificial sweteners in beer glenn_wikle at Warren.MENTORG.COM writes: >Do commercial breweries really use artificial sweeteners? If beer >were required to adhere to US FDA laws for food labeling, we might >know what nasty food additives they are using. I know that aspartame (the sweetener in Equal and other "blue stuff") was approved for use in beer and related beverages about two years ago by the FDA - that came basically at the request of Stroh's. I don't know if they're actually using it in anything, though ... - ---------------------------+-----------------------------------------+ Tom Keith | Advertising, Promotion and New Product | Thomas Keith & Associates | Development for smaller companies and | 1016 Mulford Street | smaller divisions of large companies. | Evanston, IL 60202-3317 | Now! Multimedia and WWW development! | voice: 708-328-1282 +-----------------------------------------+ Fax: 708-328-2242 | check out our Web page | e-mail nr706 at mcs.com | http://www.mcs.com/~nr706/home.html | - ---------------------------+-----------------------------------------+ Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 1995 01:02:39 -0400 From: ar568 at freenet.carleton.ca (Aaron Shaw) Subject: Brewery Web Sites My sister is designing a Web site for Upper Canada Brewery in Toronto and would like to see some Brewery Web sites for some general ideas. Does anyone know of any breweries that have Web sites? If so, could you please send me (private E-mail) their web address. Any information will be greatly appreciated. Sorry for the lack of homebrew content in this post. - -- "Come my lad, and drink some beer!" Aaron Shaw Ottawa, Canada Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 95 21:23:12 EDT From: awalsh at pop03.ca.us.ibm.net (Andy Walsh) Subject: gelatin, agar and enough of Wheeler Well, there certainly seems to be a bit of divided opinion about what to do with gelatin! I, for one, am more confused than ever. Fredrik Stahl says it works fine for him below 25C (yes my room temperature was below this level. I used 16 teaspoons/ litre.I left it alone for 3 hours and it would not set. The unboiled samples set in about 20 minutes in the same room). Pierre Jelenc says boiling gelatin in acid (eg. wort?) will degrade it, and Irwin Gelman says any boiling will make it useless. #8>| (confused and need a haircut) Anyway, I went to the local Asian grocery and bought some agar powder (7 grams for A$1). Unfortunately, it was laced with vanilla extract, but I hope this won't worry the yeast! It was a sufficient quantity to make 1litre of nutrient, which should be ample for about the next year. It was quite messy to use, but despite boiling the heck out of it, the solution set very quickly, at quite a high temperature, and very firm. So, provided my yeasties seem to like their new home (I'll know in a few days), it would appear to be a better solution ;-) Does anyone know how good agar is either as a yeast-settling agent (for the secondary) or in the boil (a la Irish moss?). My packet says it is seeweed based. I guess since I haven't heard of it being used in these roles it isn't suitable. ****************** For those affronted by my Wheeler criticism: if you like the recipes, go ahead and make them. They appear to be fine for English-style ales, I just have huge reservations about the hopping levels - eg. Exmoor Gold 32IBU p104 listed hop schedule: 34g fuggles at 4.5% for 90 mins 28g challenger at 7.7% for 90 mins 20g goldings at 5.3% for 90 mins 20g goldings at 5.3% for 15 mins. volume = 23 l This recipe was selected *at random*. % alpha acids are the average content provided by Wheeler in the same book. I plugged these numbers into SUDS 3.0c This is the analysed (unmodified) result: ***************************************** Exmoor Gold Style : English E.S.B. Method : Full Mash Recipe makes 23.0 liters Total Grain: 5.00 kgs. Color (srm): 5.4 Orig Grav : 1.046 Efficiency : 70% Hop IBUs : 69.5 Malts/Sugars: 5.00 kg. Pale Ale Hops: 34.00 g. Fuggles 4.5% 90 min 28.00 g. challenger 7.7% 90 min 20.00 g. Kent-Goldings 5.3% 90 min 20.00 g. Kent-Goldings 5.3% 15 min ************************************* Note the hop IBUs at 69.5 are more than double those suggested by Wheeler at 32. Have I made my point clear yet? My main criticisms concerned his claims that his book was just the "reference work on the subject", when clearly it is not the best available. It is full of errors (as I wrote before) and many omissions. He doesn't even tell you how to make a beer kit for goodness sake! Other books would at least discuss how to improve them by not following those awful instructions that they all come with. What it does do is discuss how to make (hoppy) full-mash English beers. It describes English brewing practice. Now that's OK, and I'm not about to throw my copies away, but surely other books offer more than this? ***************************** //// Andy Walsh from Sydney //// awalsh at ibm.net //// phone 61 2 369 5711 ***************************** Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 1995 07:55:52 -0400 From: Anatum at aol.com Subject: Stainless vs. brass Hello again, I am posting a summary of the responses received to my question: Are brass nipples OK to use in a brewing system? One person said not to worry. Another said it would be a bad idea. A few people asked for a summary. In response to my comment that brazing had been described to me as unsafe for food contact, one person noted that because brazing rod consists of copper, tin and zin, none of which are harmful in food, that brazing should be OK. The jury is still out for me - can John Palmer or any other metallurgist respond to this question? There seems to be interest in this, considering the feedback I'm getting. Also - I would like to make an excellent ale recipe available. Is this the appropriate forum, or is there a preferred site? Thanks again for your input, Greg Tatarian Petaluma, CA Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 1995 07:14:08 -0500 (EST) From: "Dave Bradley::IC742::6-2556" <BRADLEY_DAVID_A at Lilly.com> Subject: Burner/Aluminum/Mosher Book/pH paper/.Z Greetings from a first-timer. Thanks go out to all for helping me learn the craft of brewing! Pointless discussions aside, the HBD is a great resource for new brewers, those who may absorb info without contributing for months while building a good knowledge base. My questions to The Collective: Having never seen a Superb propane burner, does it resemble the fryer/smoker units available in hardware stores? These are handily available to me at decent prices and are NOT jet-style (Cajun Cooker) units. Morroni (?) makes a stable unit (170k BTU) available locally for under $60, and full boils are ahead! Why not use aluminum kettles? The weak correlation of aluminum ingestion with Alzheimer's Disease left me asking this question, then I read the Brewing Techniques (Jan/Feb '95) article comparing Al levels in beer brewed half in Al and half in SS pots. Good article. The next day I bought a 10 gallon Al pot for $60 at a local restaurant supply warehouse. Especially convincing were the Al levels in ordinary foods, our water supplies, etc. That from beer ain't gonna add much! Another important note in the article mentions the relatively more significant hazards of copper FWIW. Does anyone use the Mosher "Brewer's Companion" book? Seems a useful tool for me, though some knowledge helps in interpretation of the graphs/figures. My contributions for The Collective: As a practicing chemist using pH test strips routinely, the standard practice is to immerse the strips for 3-4 seconds, then watch them for 5-10 seconds until the color change reaches an end point. For Mac users accessing info from the Stanford archives, Stuffit Expander *WITH Expander Enhancer* decompresses .Z and just about anything else. Its available many places via anon. FTP for demo, but register...its worth the $$. Thanks for the BW! Dave From: BRADLEY DAVID A (MCVAX0::RC65036) To: VMS MAIL ADDRESSEE (IN::"homebrew at hpfcmi.fc.hp.com") cc: BRADLEY DAVID A (MCVAX0::RC65036) Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 95 06:18:00 PDT From: Leo Christoffer <LEO at WV.BE.WEDNET.EDU> Subject: subcription information I would like information on your service and subscription as well. Thanks Leo Christoffer leo at wv.be.wednet.edu Return to table of contents
Date: 26 Apr 1995 09:42:05 -0500 (EST) From: Lance Stronk <S29033%22681 at utrcgw.utc.com> Subject: CO2 CO2 is not heavier than air? Really? Well, I haven't done the experiment in a long time but maybe some people out there would like to prove it to themselves rather than listen to the endless banter and bullshit on this subject (I confess that I am a contributor). Take a firestone keg (with air from normal atmosphere) and a lit match and hold the match down inside the keg. The match will consume the oxygen in the keg to stay lit. Next, seal the keg and fill with CO2. Now, the amount of CO2 you put in is dependant on how much you want to waste. I would say put a few psi of CO2 in the keg. Let the keg stand for a few moments. Remove the gas line on the keg and relieve the pressure. Take a lit match and place it down inside the keg. I would be very surprised if it stays lit. I wonder why this happens? I think the original argument was that the CO2 mixes with the air already in the keg. I agree with this. The real question is, how much CO2 is required to provide the barrier needed to prevent degradation of the beer by oxygen. In my kegging experience it does not seem to be that much. I also agree that when filling the keg from another keg under pressure, that the empty keg should be filled through the 'out' port or liquid tube such that it will fill from the bottom up taking advantage of the so-called "fictitious" blanket of CO2. As to why CO2 does not accumulate on the earth and kill all the O2 breathing life on the planet I am not sure. Perhaps an off-HBD discussion would be better to analyze this phenomenon. I would be interested in the answer. Lance Stronk Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 95 08:43:06 EST From: blrett at most.magec.com (Ben Rettig) Subject: Mini Keg Bombs (Overcarbonation) >psg at ix.netcom.com (Paul Gibson) writes >systems are potentially deadly! (5 Liter Mini Kegs) This is no understatement!! I had a dangerous situation with my 5 Liter mini keg also. My problem was with the Keg itself. I corn sugar primed a normal 5 Gal. batch of homebrew. I siphoned the first 5 Liters off into a mini keg and bunged. The keg was stored at garage temperature (72 deg F). Two weeks passed, no problem. Four weeks, no problem. Six weeks, I checked the keg and it had swelled up. Both the bottom and the top had swelled outward. The bottom had swelled about 1.5 inches from normal. The top had swelled about 2 inches and the crimp that hold the top on and forms the rim had opened up, but the keg was still pressurized. I could not imagine how much pressure was in this keg. What to do? I had the family go to the farthest room from the garage. Put on heavy gloves and gently put the keg into the garage refrigerator, allowing the co2 to dissolve into solution. I taped the refrigerator shut incase the motion of moving liberated any new co2. After a week I tapped the keg, of course the tap wouldn't fit the top. Total foam and in a few minutes all the co2 had leaked out of the bung seal because it wasn't seated on the top. Bad experience! The rest of the batch that was bottled was overcarbonted but none of the bottles exploded. I know this is unrealated to the problem Paul wrote about but it scared me. I have since backed off the carbonation sugar for any mini kegged brew. Ben Rettig Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 1995 09:51:54 -0400 From: Jim Grady <grady at hpangrt.an.hp.com> Subject: Conditioning Casks In #1715, Troy Downing asks about conditioning casks. Last time I checked, "Progressive Winemaking" by Bryan Acton & Peter Duncan had a good section on getting a cask ready to hold wine. From what I recall it should be applicable to beer. Last time I checked was a long time ago and I cannot find my copy; I have, however, seen it for sale recently at Beer & Wine Hobby in Woburn, MA. If your local supplier does not carry it, e-mail me for the address & phone number of Beer & Wine Hobby. One thing I remember from my wine making days is that the cask size is important. One of the reasons that wines are aged in casks is because the casks breathe so the wines oxidize slightly & slowly. Now oxidation generally is bad in wine as well and part of the problem with a small cask is that the surface area to volume ratio is very high so whatever is in it oxidizes more rapidly. Now I really don't know how or if this applies to a beer that will not be in the cask nearly as long as a wine will. Does anyone out there have experience with this? BTW, paraffin lined casks don't count in this regard. They are lined to prevent this sort of thing; appearance aside, they are no better for aging a beer or wine than a big bottle. - -- Jim Grady grady at an.hp.com Hewlett-Packard Medical Products Group Andover, MA Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 1995 08:36:40 -0600 (CST) From: Robert Schultz <Robert.Schultz at usask.ca> Subject: Coyote??? Anybody hear from the Coyote lately? What happend to him? His neighbours didn't get to him did they? Rob. Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 95 10:52:13 -0400 From: Jeff Renner <nerenner at umich.edu> Subject: CO2 purging of kegs, was co2/air mixtures In HBD 1715, "Wallinger, W. A." <WAWA at chevron.com> said <snip> > gas mixtures remain fairly well mixed, regardless of the molecular > weights of the components in the mixture. so, the best solution is to > purge air from a keg by pressuring and depressuring a few times with > co2 rather than by relying on a 'blanket' of co2. Better solution, but I propose this as "best." When I'm really worried about having nothing but CO2 in a keg, I fill it with water after sanitizing it (the keg, I presume my water is sufficiently clean, but you could use boiling water), the seal it up and push out the water with low pressure CO2. I figure this *really* purges it and probably uses less CO2 than your pressuring and depressuring. Jeff Renner in Ann Arbor, Michigan c/o nerenner at umich.edu Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 1995 10:52:27 -0400 From: Btalk at aol.com Subject: mash brewing time I'm wondering how long it takes most folks to do a full mash brew. I've done enough all grain batches to know what I'm doing without having to stop and think about it or have to look something up. My last batch took 7 hours end to end. This is from rounding up equipment to pitching yeast/cleanup. Working with 10 lbs of grain and a motorized grain mill. I use a King Kooker w/ a converted 1/4 keg and also use an immersion chiller. Figure mash 1.25 hours, sparge 1 hour, boil 1.25 hours, chilling time 30-40 minutes (I whirlpool and wait a little before siphoning). All that accounts for about 4 hours. I've heard folks say they can do it in 5 hours or less. My question is ...how? I must putz around too much along the way. Regards, Bob Talkiewicz, Binghamton, NY <btalk at aol.com> Note: the previous was posted by Bob's Unmanned Robotic Posting Program (BURPP) which is designed to ensure earning maximum HBD anti boot-off points by incorporating the crypitc word forms known only by those who have achieved the highest levels of beer geekism. Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 1995 07:36:17 -0700 From: Scott Howe <howe at appmag.com> Subject: HopBack onto the HBD Greetings, I'm Back from the cyber-death that happened. I thought the HBD had only taken a spring break, but when I had no HBD this Monday either, I decided to re- subscribe. I work in the Drive-head business, and I hope it was not one of OUR heads that died! ;) Now I gotta figure out this archive thingy...How's it go? No ".z" on file names??? Tuesday, Jim Fitzgerald" <jimfitz at netcom.com> wrote a summary of his SNPA replies, and included the following: >Hops: They no longer use a hop-back in the brewery for SNPA. There seems to be >a time when they did, which may explain why a lot of people have written >articles about hop-backs for SNPA in the past, but they no longer do. They >finish the boil with cascade and then use a hop extractor of some sort which >may be similar to the use of a hop-back. I hate to start a bad thread, but isn't "Hopping Back" another name for "Separating the Hops from the hot wort?" And isn't this what a "Hop Extractor" does? When I brew, I think I am hopping back when I use my lauter tun to separate out my hops, but I could be wrong. Please flame me here if I'm wrong, since I think the collective HBDers would benefit from the wisdom at hand here. GO BOSTON BRUINS! GO FREMANTLE DOCKERS! GO HAVE A BEER! --Aubrey Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 95 11:49:56 EDT From: I stepped inside and didn't see too many faces 26-Apr-1995 1147 -0400 <ferguson at zendia.ENET.dec.com> Subject: 10 gal Gott does work excellent! >Date: Thu, 20 Apr 95 11:50:03 EDT >From: dipalma at sky.com (Jim Dipalma) >Subject: RE: Mash-Lauter Tun Question > >In HBD#1710, Chip Shabazian asks: > >>I am building an all grain system using Sankey kegs. I was thinking of >>using a cooler for the Mash/Lauter Tun and had some questions. I believe >>the 10 Gallon Gott coolers would give me a better grain bed for filtration >>than the standard rectangular coolers, but heard from my local store that >>some people have problems sparging 10 gallon batches in them because the >>grain bed is _too_ thick. What is the consensus from those of you out there >>using Gott coolers for 10 gallon batches. I second Jim's report. I have a 10-gal gott and i regulary do 10-12 gal batches with 15-22# of grain and i have had no probs. works like a charm. jc Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 1995 09:39:38 -0700 (PDT) From: Robert Parker <parker at mote.ME.Berkeley.EDU> Subject: Microwave sterilization/Yeasty beer Irwin Gelman talks about microwaving his gelatin growth medium and mentions that 'Microwaving is ideal for sterilization as it kills microorganisms and even spores rapidly, without the side-effect of long-term heating' I'd love to hear some discussion of this idea. Last batch I found myself in immediate need of a funnel, but my plastic one hadn't been sterilized and even had discolorations from previous use on it. I threw it in the microwave for a few minutes and then used it. Was I doing any good by microwaving? If so, why not use this method to sterilize siphon tubing, yeast culture tubes, airlocks, ....? How long of a microwave is necessary? Any concern about running the microwave without any liquid in the oven? This strikes me as an extremely convenient procedure if it works. ++++++++++++ A recent lager has a very yeasty smell and taste as evidently the yeast did not settle well. I used Wyeast Czech Pils yeast from the secondary of a previous batch (which did not have this problem). I did a decoction mash and must admit lost temperature control a few times along the way. I'll also admit to poor aeration of this batch. I want to spare you the details of my process, but can anyone explain the main, generic causes of poor yeast settling? Rob ________________________________________________________________ Robert G. Parker parker at mote.me.berkeley.edu Return to table of contents
Date: 26 Apr 1995 09:57:09 PDT From: "Dutcher, Pier" <PEDU at chevron.com> Subject: CO2 Rises(?) From: Dutcher, Pier -PEDU To: OPEN ADDRESSING SERVI-OPENADDR Subject: CO2 Rises(?) Date: 1995-04-26 09:33 Priority: - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Wade Wallinger writes: < by that logic we would all be dead since co2 in the atmosphere would surround us on the surface and o2 would rise above us.> <snip> Wade, there's probably a bit more activity in the atmosphere than there is in your fermenters. We had a thread going around for a while regarding using propane cookers in enclosed spaces, and the point was often brought up that heavier gases (like propane and CO2) settle in the lower spots unless there's good air circulation, thus the danger of gas concentration and explosions. FWIW, I drop a couple of chunks of dry ice in my secondary shortly before transferring. Once sublimation is complete, a burning match lowered ~1" into the secondary's neck is extinguished immediately, so I'm fairly sure the diffusion that you mention is a SLOW process. -- Pier (pedu at chevron.com) Return to table of contents
Date: 26 Apr 1995 11:16:11 PDT From: "Wallinger, W. A." <WAWA at chevron.com> Subject: NA revisited From: Wallinger, W. A. (Wade) To: OPEN ADDRESSING SERVI-OPENADDR Subject: NA revisited Date: 1995-04-26 13:02 Priority: - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Bob Paolino asks a few questions about my NA beer. Q1. I, too, was concerned about the bitterness of a 1 gallon batch. I chose a short boil, low alpha hops, and the lowest weight of hops that I could reasonably measure (1/2 oz). The result was a moderately, not overly, hopped beer. In fact, it was about what I was looking for, to match the commercial imported versions. IMHO, the imported versions are considerably better than their American counterparts precisely because of the added hoppiness. (Hophead alert!) Q2. You are precisely correct that the yeast only helped carbonate the beer, since no fermentation took place. The beer was very cloudy, even before adding the yeast. I agree that this version would do better with forced carbonation, which I was not equipped to do for such a small batch. The beer remained rather cloudy, which settled slowly. I received two suggestions to improve this: a) use liquid yeast, which settles better, b) use gelatin to clarify (unheated, heated, boiled, microwaved, dishwashed?). The beer did mostly nothing while it sat awaiting bottling: no krausen, nothing. The taste was not sweet, either. I think any sweetness was diminished by the low gravity (low concentration of dextrine). indeed, the dextrine didn't ferment at all. The yeast remained viable during the 'fermentation' (settling) phase in order to provide carbonation at bottling. FWIW, I was suprised by Mark's news of Coors' claim for their NA beer, Cutter. Cutter is just as watery as the rest of the American-style NA beers, none of which compare to their imported counterparts, let alone non-NA microbrewed beer. The specimens that I bought for my Dad, which he refused to drink, are now pressed into service for boiling bratwurst (why waste one of my good homebrews for that). Wade Wallinger (brewing contraband in Pascagoula, Mississippi) Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 1995 13:55:35 -0600 (CST) From: jehartzl at rs6000.cmp.ilstu.edu Subject: fermentap ? has anybody purchased a fermentap? if so could you email me with any information you would think would be valuable for someone who may purchase one i.e. cost, effectiveness, is it worthwhile, etc... private email is fine. thanks in advance. jeh - --------------------------------------------------------------------- Jason Hartzler Office of Student Insurance jehartzl at rs6000.cmp.ilstu.edu Campus Box 2541 Benefits Counselor Normal IL 61790-2541 ===================================================================== Return to table of contents
End of HOMEBREW Digest #1716, 04/27/95