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


Contents:
  Lautering, continued (Jim Busch)
  Help ("Diggles, Damien")
  Re: harvesting yeast -- complex? worthwhile? (Jeff Frane)
  Plugs / Burners (Norman C. Pyle)
  Attenuation Question (Russ Brodeur)
  Marmite/All-Grain brewing time (Steve Robinson)
  Dropping deja vu (Btalk)
  rotating(?) sparge arm (Btalk)
  Vinegar, Snobbery, and Rye. (Russell Mast)
  Hop Plugs (Jeff Stampes)
  beer system (LimaWiskey)
  RE: Hops Fertilizer (Art McGregor)
  hbd (troussos)
  Hop Plugs (Ken Schroeder)
  Rye Addendum (Jacob Galley)
  Belching mini-kegs! ("Clay D. Hopperdietzel")
  Rousing, Racking, Dropping, Aerating (Kirk Fleming / Metro Technologies)
  Re: Hop Utilization at High Altitude (rdevine)
  Seltzers? (Martin Lodahl)
  Hot spots/ cleaning (Eamonn McKernan)
  False Bottom in Zapap (Robert Parker)
  Kegging Equipment (SweeneyJE)



******************************************************************
* 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, 27 Jun 1995 10:53:16 -0400 (EDT)
From: Jim Busch <busch at eosdev2.gsfc.nasa.gov>
Subject: Lautering, continued


In digest 1766, Matt comments on Dr. Fix and my own comments regarding
sparging:

< Somewhere (BT,HBD, his Vienna-Marzen book) George Fix wrote that shorter
<sparges make for rounder more malty and bigger beers.

I looked in the Vienna book and found very little relating to sparging
or flow rates in particular.  Thus, I surmise you are refering to HBD
submissions.  What Dr. Fix wrote was that one can increase the malty
character of a beer by reducing or eliminating the sparge (Im paraphrasing
here).  An important factor in this was the shifting of some of the 
quantity of water that would normally be used for sparging into the
mash, if I recall correctly.  This is not a suprising concept to me,
but one would not normally create recipes based on this approach.  

One of the terms we need to define is what constitutes the sparge.  Does
the time that a brewer reports as sparging include any recirculation,
or is merely the time between the initiatation of the sparge and the
termination of the runoff?   Since the period required to achieve 
suitably clear sweet wort varies with systems, lets define sparge as
only the period between commencement of the sparge and the filling
of the kettle.  

In August '94 Darryl Richman posted:

<One of the interesting things I learned while researching "Bock", and
<which I included in the book, is that the folks at Weihenstephan have a
<general recommendation for lautering decoction mashes at a pretty slow
<rate, which is based on the surface area of the lauter tun (assuming a
<uniform depth and a uniform drainage).  By specifying the rate per
<square area, they are really describing a particular flow rate of fluid
<through the bed.  The rate recommended was approximately 1 gallon / (6
<minute * square foot) to start, speeding up to 1/4 as the wort thins
<out.  (I'm quoting from memory, always a dangerous thing.)  These
<figures are quoted from volume 2 of Narziss' "Die Technologie der
<Bierbereitung".  Also, Narziss indicates a shallower bed for decoction
<mashes than Hough et al in "Malting and Brewing Science" do for
<infusion mashes.

This clearly indicates the importance of lauter tun geometry on flow
rates as they relate to the surface area of the tun.  It also points
out that sparge times vary with mashing programs and malts (and 
surely influenced by the desires of the brewer with respect to the
finished beer).  Assuming a 60 minute lauter, this flow rate would
yield 10-14 gallons of sweet wort.  So, it would appear that Dr. 
Narziss is in aggreement with my previous comments, at least with
respect to decoction mashing.

Note that Noonan suggests between 2-4 hours for sparging, but also
suggests that with a bed depth of 6" and using 6 row malt one can
sparge in as little as 30 minutes.

Dr. Fix has also posted several data points with respect to mashing
efficiency and extract yield (a far more interesting topic IMHO). To
wit:

< Data
<         brew size = 15.5 gals
<         total water = 9.5 gals in mash + 9.5 gals for sparging
<         grain bill : 24 lbs. D-C Pale Ale malt
<                       2 lbs. D-C Caravienne
<                       1 lb.  D-C Aromatic
<
<   Temperature Program
<         40C (104F) - 30 mins.- 24 lbs. base malt + 6.5 gals. water
<         Transition 40 to 60C - add 3 gals. of boiling water - add
<             adjunct malts at the end as a brake - less than 5 mins.
<             is needed
<          60C (140F) - 30 mins.
<          Transition 60 to 70C - external heat is needed and this can
<             be done in 15 mins.
<          70C (158F) - 30 mins.
<          % extract = 22P (i.e., 22 grms extract per 100 grams mash)
<          SG =1.092
<   Converting to wt/vol and US units the % extract comes out to 62.24
<          62.24*9.5/31 = 19.1 lbs. extract.
<   Yield in commercial units is
          19.1 * 100/27 = 70.7%.
<   Yield in homebrew units is
         92 *9.5 /27 = 32.3 pts/(lbs/gal).
< By using a slower runoff and a higher fraction of sparge water it is
<     likely one could leach most of the residual extract out of the grains.
<     I choose not to do this because this is not the way I brew. The finished
<     wort in the fermenter typically cames out as follows:
<                   Vol = 15.5 gals.
<                   % extract = 13.3 P
<                   SG =1.053
<      This means that a final yield of 30.4 pts was obtained. With a single
<      temperature mash (or 60-70 combo) this would have dropped into the
<      26-28 pts/(lbs/gal) range.

And Matt reports:

<After reading this I redesigned my converted 1/2 barrel mash-lauter tun and
<now I routinely get a 25 to 30 min. sparge with 20 - 25 # of grain.  I always
<get 34+ points to the pound and my beer has greatly improved.

What kind of malts, what kind of mashing program?  What are the volumes
of cast out wort and the OG?  How did you "redesign" your mash-lauter
tun to reduce the sparge time?  Did you reduce the quantity of sparge
water, or increase the flow rate? What was the SG of the final runnings?

I would be highly suspect of these numbers, based on the carefully
controlled manner of Dr. Fix's mashing programs *and* your claims to
fairly rapid sparge rates.  Sure, to get the optimum extract one needs
to sparge longer, but optimal extract is really not the primary goal
of lautering (despite what the title of my last BT column suggested!).
The primary goal of lautering is to provide the brewer with the quantity
and quality of sweet wort desired.  Brewers will differ as to what this 
means, and how to get there.

Good brewing,

Jim Busch
Colesville, Md
busch at mews.gsfc.nasa.gov

"DE HOPPEDUIVEL DRINKT MET ZWIER 'T GEZONDE BLOND HOPPEBIER!"

Return to table of contents


Date: 27 Jun 1995 16:01:21 +0000
From: "Diggles, Damien" <Damien.Diggles at mcl.co.uk>
Subject: Help


All
I am new to the homebrewing theme, recently a relative bought me all the kit
to brew, by that a can of extract lager a bin and bottles etc, I followed all
the instructions yet it tasted completely crap.
Reading the digest i see that you brewing Guru's are making some exellent
tasting beers.
What equipment do i need (inexpensine and not space consuming) and  what are
the most effective methods of producing the beer.
TIA a hopfull beginner.

Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 27 Jun 1995 08:17:36 -0700 (PDT)
From: Jeff Frane <gummitch at teleport.com>
Subject: Re: harvesting yeast -- complex? worthwhile?

Christopher Pickslay wrote:

> 
> What advantages are there to harvesting and re-using the yeast from a prior
> batch, besides saving a few bucks? Does it noticeably improve the beer over
> using fresh liquid yeast? My impression from the last few posts on the
> process is that it seems like an awful lot of work.
> 
One particular advantage is that fermentation greatly increases the
number of available yeast cells.  This, in turn, means that you can
pitch massive quantities of yeast (i.e., *correct* quantities) in the
next batch.  This, in turn, means shorter lag times and shorter
fermentation periods.

The truth is that harvesting yeast from the fermenter is absurdly
simple, although it's possible to make it more difficult.  

- --Jeff Frane


Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 27 Jun 95 9:19:15 MDT
From: Norman C. Pyle <npyle at hp7013.ecae.StorTek.COM>
Subject: Plugs / Burners

Russel Mast writes about hop plugs:

>> From: r-brodeur at ds.mc.ti.com (Russ Brodeur)

>> I contacted one of the hop houses on the west coast, and inquired about
>> availability of plugs, since I personally prefer them.  I was told they
>> were
>> of inferior quality to both whole and pellet hops.
>> Is this true??
>
>It's not only not true, it almost sounds like a lie.  I consider hop plugs in
>many ways to be the best of both worlds.  If there is only one company making
>them, then it could be your hop house makes no money on them, and has a
>vested interest in considering them inferior.  Maybe there are problems I
>don't know about, but I've used them in about a dozen batches with not a
>single problem.

I think you're overreacting to this, Russel.  See my previous post about
plugs.  An obvious drawback of plugs, BTW, is that the pressure used to
create them is enough to burst probably all of the lupulin glands in the
flowers.  This should, in theory, expose them more to oxygen.  Combine that
with the long boat ride(s), and I can certainly believe the poor assessment
of them from the "hop house" previously mentioned.  Hop quality is probably
the most debatable topic in brewing, BTW, so I can agree to disagree on this
without a second thought.

**

Glen Hathaway wrote:

>  I also have probably a dozen or so natural-gas hot-water tank burners
>kicking around - both 36000 and 50000 BTU. How well do these work as
>wort boiling heat sources? Are they big enough to do 5 gallon full boils
>in a reasonable amount of time? Has anyone out there tried up-rating one
>of these things to a higher BTU rating by drilling the orifice? If so,

Glen, I use this type of burner for 10+ gallon boils with no problem.  Fairly
short lag times to boiling.  Mine are converted from natural gas use to
propane, which I believe gives them a substantial BTU gain.  Maybe you can
quantify the difference here.  I used a larger orifice bought from a shop
that sells propane - they have a handy conversion chart on their wall.  I
haven't pushed the limits of the burners, though; let us know what you find
out about that.

Cheers,
Norm

Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 27 Jun 95 11:27:35 -0400
From: r-brodeur at ds.mc.ti.com (Russ Brodeur)
Subject: Attenuation Question

I have a hypothetical question or two.

Let's say we are using an ale yeast strain with a max apparent attenuation
of 77% and vary our mash parameters such that all the extract is
fermentable, with an OG around 1.060.  Exactly how this is accomplished is moot.

Going strictly by the max AA of our yeast strain we should wind up with an
FG of ~ 1.014.

1)  Would a "normal" yeast strain attenuate beyond its stated max level, and
if so, how much?

2)  Assuming only 77% AA, would the finished beer taste "sweeter" than one
which contained some more dextrinous components?  i.e. do shorter chained
sugars taste sweeter than longer ones?  (note the highly technical lingo
used here)

Just curious ;^)

TTFN

Russ Brodeur  (r-brodeur at ds.mc.ti.com)


Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 27 Jun 95 11:28:53 EDT
From: Steve.Robinson at analog.com (Steve Robinson)
Subject: Marmite/All-Grain brewing time


OH NO!!  The Marmite thread that ran amok on the soc.culture.british newsgroup
about 6 mos ago has spilled over onto the HBD!!  Must be a symptom of the
Good Times virus, which I suspect also caused the Stardust bow-tie effect.
For the record, Marmite is wonderful stuff.  It's also a Brit thing.  Like
chip butties and real ale, it loses something in translation.  Trying to
explain the concept to an American will result in nothing more than looks of
incredulity and disgust.  Also for the record, Vegamite is a cheap imitation
produced on the other side of the world that can't even begin to compare to
Marmite.

Now that I've thoroughly upset all the Aussies, on to some beer related stuff.
Several posts recently have brought up the issue of the time expenditure
required for all-grain brewing.  This is one area where your mileage will
definitely vary, by quite a lot.  The first few all-grain batches will probably
consume a lot of time.  As you get more used to the process, and your
procedures become more efficient, the time will go down.  You can also take
some proactive time-saving steps, such as installing an activated-charcoal
water filter so you don't have to preboil, and boiling on a propane cooker
instead of the stovetop.  With practice, it is definitely possible to get to
the point where you can (infusion) mash on a weeknight, and yes, it is very
possible to mash with a toddler underfoot.

Brew on,
Steve Robinson
steve.robinson at analog.com

Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 27 Jun 1995 11:37:56 -0400
From: Btalk at aol.com
Subject: Dropping deja vu

Domenick expanded on and clarified my post about dropping vs racking.
You know how it is...sometimes you only _think_ you said what you really
meant;)
 
In the dropping experiments I did, I dropped the beer at different times
during the primary ferment ( ie nearer the end, or more in the middle).
 I also splashed  (aerated) a little, or more than a little. A 'little' is
being vague, but I'm still not sure how much is enough with out going
overboard
Anyhow, the whole idea of aerating during fermentation is kinda scary to me
and certainly something I had never done before, being the oxidation paranoid
guy that I am.

As Andy says, the ESB yeast is a diacetyl producer anyway.
I used this yeast for both my dropping attempts. In my experience, dropping
it while fermentation is more active with  'more' splashing/aeration does
noticeably increase diacetyl.

What led me to dropping beers was that my beers rarely produce noticeable
diacetyl, and I wanted to be able to create it for those styles that are
supposed to have it, just to round out the flavor profile.
The one time that I had tons of diacetyl was from an abbreviated ferment
using Wyeast 2308 Munich lager yeast.


I look forward to the results of the vinegar yeast wash trials.
Later,
Bob Talkiewicz, Binghamton, NY <btalk at aol.com>

Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 27 Jun 1995 11:37:58 -0400
From: Btalk at aol.com
Subject: rotating(?) sparge arm

Dion,
Does your sparge arm rotate on its own?
What type/size holes are in the arm?
Regards,
Bob Talkiewicz,Binghamton, NY <btalk at aol.com>

Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 27 Jun 1995 10:37:57 -0500
From: Russell Mast <rmast at fnbc.com>
Subject: Vinegar, Snobbery, and Rye.


> From: Domenick Venezia <venezia at zgi.com>
> Subject: Acid washing yeast

> Please include the brandname in the 
> message.  My guess is that a particular brand of vinegar is going to be 
> pretty consistent for pH over different manufactured batches.

Vinegar, unless its a funky craft-brewed vinegar, is required to maintain a
certain pH.  Actually, they're required to maintain a certain %age acetic
acid, but this is proportional to pH.  They also list the %age on the label.
So, any 6% vinegar is going to have about the same pH as any other.  I'm going
to try vinegar washing my yeast next time around.  (First the pH paper...)

> From: Nicholas Christopher <ir001265 at interramp.com>
> Subject: Salvaging gushers?
> 
> 
> I've got a really nice IPA that I made up but about every
> third one is a gusher (must not have mixed the bottling
> sugar/malt in evenly ?). Is there an easy way to salvage
> these - pour them into a pitcher and let it settle or some
> such?

Sounds more like an infectoin to me.  If so, the ones that are gushers now 
may be bombs later, especially if you used cheap bottles.  

> From: chrispix at uclink2.berkeley.edu (Christopher Pickslay)
> Subject: RE: Harvesting fermenter yeast
> 
> What advantages are there to harvesting and re-using the yeast from a prior
> batch, besides saving a few bucks?

High pitching rate.  I don't usually store used yeast without a batch of
beer on it, but I have 'pitched' yeast from primary dregs by simply aiming
the output of my chiller right into the carboy with the dregs in it.  It 
has the usual advantages of high pitching rates.

> From: Mark King <mking at sparc1.castles.com>
> Subject: Please add
> 
> Please add me to the list

Should we tell him?

> From: Otto Radtke                          <IZZY126 at MVS.OAC.UCLA.EDU>
> Subject: Rooty-Tooty-Fresh-N-Fruity Lambic
> 
> 
> I just bought a pair of Lambics from some outfit that calls itself the
> Brewery De Troch Wambeek.  They put together some tropical lambics with
> strawberry and banana flavors.

I hate to be a stickler for style, but I'd as soon brew a Bud Lite clone as a
De Troch.  Try a Boon Gueze.  De Troch is more "lamb-ic" than Sam Adams' 
Cranberry Copyright, but not much.

> From: Joseph.Fleming at gsa.gov
> Subject: Flakey question
>  
>  Flakes
>     I'd like to thank Jacob Galley and Russ (Mast?) for his Brown Rye Ale 
>  recipe and ask a question. 

His?  It's Jake's recipe.  I just sit around and drink and boil water for him.
(Actually, the last batch was brewed at my house with a combination of his
and my equipment...)
 
>  what's the difference between malt & flakes?

Rye malt has been malted.  THey soak it, let it start sprouting, and then 
dry it.  It's got enzymes.  I've been told it imparts a reddish color.  Flakes
have just been flaked.

>  How are flakes made? 

Same as oatmeal.  I'm not positive, but I think raw grains are pressed between 
metal rollers at high temps and pressure.  This gelatinizes most (all?) of the 
starches, but does not malt the grain, and doesn't, in my limited experience, 
alter the taste much.  Malted Rye will taste different from flaked rye, in the
same way that malted barley and raw barley will be different.

>  Why would flaked barley, wheat or rye be preferable to malted (as I've seen 
>  in recipes)?  

Depends entirely on the recipe.  (Actually, Jake has used other forms of 
unmalted rye, and found the flakes far easier to brew with and we haven't 
noticed a difference in taste.)  If you're making a Bavarian Wheat beer, you 
want to use malted wheat.  If you're brewing a Belgian Wit, you want unmalted 
wheat.  If you're brewing Jake's Famous Rye, you want unmalted Rye.  If you're 
making a stout, you want malted barley, unmalted barely, and unmalted toasted 
barley.  It depends on the style.


>  What is the malt:flake usage conversion ratio?

0:0

>  I've seen 
>  flaked wheat in wit recipes; do flaked adjuncts add to cloudiness more 
>  than malt? 

Yes.  Jake's Famous Rye is not cloudy.  But, unmalted adjuncts increase the 
risk of haze more than malted ones, generally speaking.

> Thread-searching garnered usage info: just add flakes to the mash? 

Yep.

> Seems that flakes would make the mash thick or gummy; am I correct 
>  in assuming that in 10-20% quantities this would not pose a problem?

I've used flaked wheat up to 50% with little problem.  Flaked Rye would 
probably be in the same category.  Flaked Rye in the qtty's we use doesn't
bug the sparge.  Cooked Rye Berries, as little as 10%, can be a big PITA.

The primary advantage in using flakes vs. using other unmalted adjucts is that
they don't gum up the mash as much.  The advantage of malted vs. unmalted 
adjunct is totally style dependant.  

If you want to use Jake's recipe, or a modification of it, with malted Rye, 
feel free.  It won't be the same beer, but it might be a good beer.  I want 
to hear about your beer either way.

 -R

Return to table of contents


Date: Mon, 26 Jun 95 15:20:17 MDT
From: stampes at neocad.com (Jeff Stampes)
Subject: Hop Plugs


re: the supposed inferiority of hop plugs

I wouldn't doubt this statement.  I have absolutely no scientific
data to back this up, but my guess would be the following:

To make these plugs, the are compressing the hops (obviously).  In
the process, they are bursting many of the resin glands which is 
where most of the flavor and potency of the hops resides.  I would
imagine that this would have to result in some degradation of the
hops.

Thoughts?

Jeff

Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 27 Jun 1995 11:51:17 -0400
From: LimaWiskey at aol.com
Subject: beer system

Collective:

I am an extract ( convenience, security) brewer thus 
far but am making the jump to all-grain ( enjoyment, 
cost, historical purity) . My motivation is cost. It is 
easier for me to rationalize more beer toys if indeed I 
am brewing beer from grain. Something about the primal 
forces of beer production .... some inner urge ....and 
the fact my friends look at each other in a knowing way 
when they discover I didn't use gain to make the nectar 
they enjoy.

Why I am consulting the collective is that I am 
finalizing my procurement list (auctions, discount 
houses, and the like). This is the big one - my system 
for the next several years.

I wonder if the 10" Gott cooler/Phalse bottom 
arrangement will be sufficient for the 15 gal batches I 
plan to ferment. These would include stouts (rarely) 
and I imagine 25 lbs of crushed grain would be the 
upper limit of capacity for mashing.

I plan to use steam infusion for the temp boost. Matt 
Howell recently commented on the system for control 
boost for 4 gal H2O and I believe that for the 5 gal 
H2O + 20 LB grain bill that additional volumes of 
stream may be desirable. High volume low pressure 
production (10# or less differential) would seem wise 
to avoid blowing mash (now steam mash) out of the Gott 
and onto me. 

I have calculated the thermo requirements for the heat 
transfer - but does anyone know of an easily obtained 
steam vessel in the 3 1/2 gal. range ? Counter weighted 
blowoff, of course.

For my new fermentors, I want to use stainless steel 
milk cans. I remember seeing some 12 gal. stainless 
when I was in Ireland. Is there a source for these 
items in the US ( anyone near an Mennonite community 
know of these ?) They seem perfect - easy to open 
(gummygoo - re: Kirk) and clean/sanitize. I am a little 
anal about sanitation and produced some fine Clorox 
flavored brews in the earlier days. I still have a 
batch I am trying to learn to drink. ( I have learned 
the error of my ways).

I'll use a replacement bath immersion cooler for the 
hot wort. With mild agitation, this cooling method has 
worked given my copious quantity of 50*F well water. 
(Can't use it for brewing - surface water contaminants 
from industrial ag chemicals).


I am planning on constructing a 15 gal. boiler out of a 
keg of questionable origin. 

My roller mill is in the design phase now along the 
league of the PVC roller mill (Will Self style ?) and 
the prototype looks functional though it will need 
expansion for high-volume grind to reduce crush time to 
a few minutes. \\

Boiler, Gott-Tun, Steam boost, Roller-mill, and 
stainless fermentors. Except for a yeast lab, is there 
anything else I could add ?

I would appreciate comments on this concept because I 
new to grain and I am curious - will my beer be ruined 
? (WMBBR).

Private reply is fine. - Oh, I have a fermenting rock 
cellar with a poured slab fermenting bench. It is just 
the thing any brewery would envy and I had nothing to 
do with its construction. I am just lucky. (ales in 
summer, lagers in winter ...  ) .

limawiskey at aol.com

jd sprague
co-owner of the Das Nagatier Haus brewery.
Lawrence , Ks.  


Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 27 Jun 1995 09:01:41 -0400 (EDT)
From: Art McGregor <mcgregap at acq.osd.mil>
Subject: RE: Hops Fertilizer

Hi All!
Sorry for not posting the responses to my question from early June on
fertilizers for hop plants.  Work and home got a little busy :^(
The post yesterday from Dan Roman (which appears to have been lost in
cyberspace for three weeks ... sound like the work of those bow tie yeast
loving
aliens!) reminded me that it was overdue.  With all the good suggestions, I'm
sure I won't have any problem finding one that works for me.   The Japanese
beetles started eating my plants last week, so I got out the Liquid Sevin,
since it was handy, and it seems to have done the trick.  I bought some
Retonne (?) which is supposed to be a biodegradable insecticide, only problem
is that it is a powder.  I will disolve it in water and spray it on next time.
With all the hops I'm expecting, my beers will be Hoppy to see it :^) Anyways,
here are the responses, just be careful not to burn the roots when you add
fertilizer. 
* * * * * * * * * *
From:       Kurt Crake KCrake at aol.com
    I just happened to be reading my way through "Growing Hops" by David
Beach.  Summarizing what he says about fertilizer:
    Use manure and straw to mulch the hills - water will pick up the nutrients
and carry them to the root zone.
    If you must use a commercial (chemical) fertilizer, you should keep in
mind that the fertilizer must 1)supply nutrients missing from your native,
unmodified soil, and 2) replace what the hop plants "use up".  In order to
determine what's missing from your soil to begin with, you need a soil
analysis.  If you don't want to do that, Beach gives the proportional mix for
fertilizer applied at a commercial hopyard in Oregon as 90 lbs of nitrogen,
200 lbs phosphorus, 190 lbs potassium, 50 lbs sulfur, and 3 lbs of boron per
acre.  You can use the proportions of these to select an appropriate "off the
shelf" fertilizer by looking at the "N-P-K" ratio shown on the labels.  You
probably won't find boron or sulfur listed as adjunct ingredients, but Beach
suggests that these were likely added because of a deficiency pointed out by
the local soil analysis done at the hopyard.  
* * * * * * * * * *
From:        CLAY at prism.clemson.edu
    Miracle grow and the like are immediately-available high-nitrogen products
good for stimulating growth of above-ground parts.  They do not hang around in
the soil at all, which is why they are formulated for use in the watering
water.
    I use a slow-release 10-10-10 which I put, in small handfuls, in one or
two shovel-jabs (i.e. jab the shovel about 4-6" into the ground, make a slit, 
dump in the fertilizer, and stomp it shut) near the roots but not right in
at the stalk.  For most of my plants and shrubs, I figure that the minor root
damage is more than made up for by the benefit of the fertilizer.  I do,
however, align the blade perpendicular to the trunk of the plant, and move out
to the edge of the dripline (not much help on a vine - there I just move out
"some").  You may also want to just poke a small hole in the ground with your 
finger or a stick and put the fert in there. Works great. BTW - just
sprinkling it on the ground will work, too, it's just not as effective a
delivery method.
* * * * * * * * * *
From:   Neil Flatter     FLATTER%MHS at mhs.rose-hulman.edu
    The book "Growing Hops" by David Beach, suggests specific pounds per acre
for commercial yards.  The ratios ended up being something close to a 10-20-20
for a commercial blend.  Not knowing any different, I thought I could just
walk into the local garden shop and buy it right off the shelf.  What I walked
out with was three different bags so I could blend my own fertilizer.  The
book also suggests adding about a tablespoon of borate per hill.  I didn't
find any boron at the garden shop either so I've added some 20 Mule Team to my
blend.  We use it in our stockroom as a technical grade of sodium borate, if
you're not chemically inclined.  As far as application rate, I don't have a
good measure for you.
    You might also consider digging out enough of the soil from a mound as to 
accommodate a new application of composted manure.  It's not that I'm 
against commercial fertilizers, but Mother Nature has a way of taking 
care of such things on Her own if given the chance.
* * * * * * * * * *
From:   Dan Roman     romand at dialogic.com
    Cow manure and Miracle Grow have too quick a release for hop plants, cow
manure might even burn the roots.  A slow long-term release fertilizer like
bone meal is a better choice and bone meal gives a near perfect nutrient
mix for those rhizomes.  Just wish I could keep my dog from digging
under the fence to get at the bone meal every time I put some down!  My
dog is a nut though, he actually likes and will roll in dog repellant.
    I'm not a professional hop grower, I just have my Williamette, Cascade,
and Tett growing in my back yard.  They have always thrived with bone meal and
a little bit of mulching with leaves in the spring from the previous fall.
I'll just relax and dump some bone meal on them once a month like I've 
been doing for the past four years.
* * * * * * * * * *
From:   Brian Cornelius     bcorneli at wsu.edu
    I add well mulched manure at the end of the season.  However, during the
season, I make a "manure tea" and pour that around the plants.  I take a 5 gal
bucket and fill it half full of manure (horse and mule for me).  Then add
water until everything is covered. Stir it a bunch, and let sit (outside) for
a few days.  Pour the liquid on the hops and dump the manure in the compost
pile.  And no, I really don't notice a bad smell, but then I usually use
manure that has dried out in the sun for a few days.
* * * * * * * * * *
Hoppy Brewing, :^) Art McGregor (mcgregap at acq.osd.mil) Northern, Virginia, USA



Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 27 Jun 1995 11:26:32 -0500
From: troussos at fefjdcc.attmail.com (troussos)
Subject: hbd

I've been brewing for sometime now and can't seem to completely eliminate the
chill haze.  I use Irish Moss and have modified the amount of time I boil 
the Iish Moss from 1 - 2 minutes to 20 - 30 minutes. But no success. Any
suggestions on what I should do or add to eliminate the haze ???

Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 27 Jun 95 09:14:21 PDT
From: kens at lan.nsc.com (Ken Schroeder)
Subject: Hop Plugs

The past few HBDs referances a lack of US hops in plug form. For
a reference, my local hombrew shop, Bucket of Suds, has many US 
hops in plug form. From memory, the shop carries Cascade, Willamette,
Perle, Hood and others. Many European varieties including Germann 
Northern Brewer, East Kent Goldings, Tettnagger, Hallertauer, are usually 
instock. The plugs were brought in response to demanding customers (I 
take pride in that ;-) who will not settle for second best products. 
I am not sure which hop house Ben, the owner, purchases the plugs from, 
but it may be Hop Union.

The quality of hop plugs, IMHO, is outstanding. Pellets produce a
glop at the bottom of my mash tun which the wort will not flow through.
The quality of the hop bitterness, flavor and aroma seems fair to good.
Pellets are execellent for dry hopping. The compact size makes them easy
to get into the carboys. I have yet to see a bag of "flowers" contain 
mostly flowers. These bags should be called cone leaves or crushed cones. 
Flowers tend to oxidize, which not a problem with properly stored pellets 
and plugs. Flowers quality seems to go up and down and many times appear 
light green and brownish, a sure sign of aged hops. Probably the best 
testimony to plugs is the 90% plus cones I find in the mash tun after 
boiling. My hop utilization went up when I switched to plugs. That may be 
a subjective determination, but almost all who know my beers claim an 
increase in hoppiness. It is my hope that the superior packaging (IMHO) 
becomes popular and we may find plugs for all of our favorite hop varieties.

By the way : I have no financial interest in Bucket of Suds other than I
hope it makes enough money to keep Ben in business. Ben can be reached at
bsuds at aol.com.

Hoppy Brewin' (of course)

Ken Schroeder
Sequoia Brewing

Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 27 Jun 95 11:10:41 CDT
From: Jacob Galley <gal2 at midway.uchicago.edu>
Subject: Rye Addendum

Russell Mast wrote:
> 
> I don't usually store used yeast without a batch of
> beer on it, but I have 'pitched' yeast from primary dregs by simply aiming
> the output of my chiller right into the carboy with the dregs in it.  It 
> has the usual advantages of high pitching rates.

Another idea is to bottle the slurry and let it go dormant in your
fridge until you want to use it again.  Next time, make a starter for
it just like you would for new Wyeast.


> > From: Joseph.Fleming at gsa.gov
> > Subject: Flakey question
> >  
> >  Flakes
> >     I'd like to thank Jacob Galley and Russ (Mast?) for his Brown Rye Ale 
> >  recipe and ask a question. 

You bet.

>  Cooked Rye Berries, as little as 10%, can be a big PITA.

Let me emphasize this.  DON'T USE RYE BERRIES.  You have to crush them
somehow (MaltMill would probably handle it; I used an electric coffee
grinder, which made a floury mess) and then boil them into a gruel,
which itself takes about an hour, before the mash even starts.  And
they make the mash much more gummy than do flakes.  There is no point.
In my experience the flavor of berries is just the same as flakes.

> If you want to use Jake's recipe, or a modification of it, with malted Rye, 
> feel free.  It won't be the same beer, but it might be a good beer.  I want 
> to hear about your beer either way.

Me too!  The recipe I posted Monday comes out as a fairly strong
tasting (spicy), hoppy, bronze ale with a nice creamy head.  Extra
creamy if you serve it from a Party Pig instead of a bottle.  I have
never gotten my hands on malted rye, but you should probably show some
restraint (ie. 1 lb.) the first time you use it.

Jake.


Stand up and use your ears like a man!			      <-- Charles Ives

Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 27 Jun 1995 12:19:55 -0500
From: "Clay D. Hopperdietzel" <hoppy at appsmiths.com>
Subject: Belching mini-kegs!


david lawrence shea <dshea at indiana.edu> stands accused of saying:

>>Subject: Solution: *Never* have puffed or bulging 5l kegs again
>>
>>Okay, so the subject header may be a bit grandiose, but after Chris 
>>Strickland wrote about puffed out kegs during the warmer weather I 
>>thought I would offer my solution.
>>
>>All that is needed is to stick a kitchen (dull) knife between the the top
>>of the mini keg and the outer lip of the bung.  Push into the center very
>>hard and excess CO2 will bleed out. It will sound like a compressed air
>>unit at a gas station.  When you hear the CO2 flow starting to slow down
>>significantly, remove the knife. I do this once a week or so until I
>>encounter a time where there doesn't seem to be much excess pressure ( you
>>will know it when it happens).  After this, I check the pressure every
>>three or four weeks, if the keg lasts that long. 

I have done this before, and find it to be a bad idea.  What ends up 
happening is that the knife will scratch the coating from the minikeg,
which allows rust to set in.  Ruined keg either way.  If you decide to 
try this, be careful.

I've thrown out 4 minikegs so far.  2 bloated, 2 scratched.  I've since 
gone to priming with 1/2 cup per 5gal and have no more grief with the things.


Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 27 Jun 1995 12:39:23 -0600 (MDT)
From: Kirk Fleming / Metro Technologies <flemingk at usa.net>
Subject: Rousing, Racking, Dropping, Aerating

My earlier post included quotes from Wheeler and Protz which defined
dropping. There may be other definitions, what Wheeler and Protz say may
not be gospel, and definitions change over time.  Based on what they *do*
say and on a small number of comments from the UK homebrew digest, I think
I can respond to Domenick V (#1766):

> it seems to me "dropping" without aeration is called "stirring"

No.  The purpose of dropping is to get the beer out from between the trub
and the dirty kraeusen *without* disturbing either.  Also...

> What distinguishes "dropping" from "stirring" and "racking" is aeration.

Disagree.  Dropping is distinguished from stirring in that the *purpose* is
to avoid dredging up the precipitate in the fermenter.  It is distinguished
from racking only in that it is done specifically when the yeast are still
in a mobile state--clean active yeast in suspension are carried over with
the beer to the secondary.  Dropping is earlier-than-normal racking,
although one accepted rule-of-thumb is to drop when sg = .5(OG).  For a
slow ferment, this may not be too early, but it is certainly before
clearing begins, IMO. But even with #1968, I think when sg = .5(OG) the
ferment is turgid to the point of being hard to rack with a small ID line.

But...*aeration IS an accepted part of dropping* according to Wheeler and
Protz for those "certain" strains of yeast that they claim "may" benefit
from it.  As Domenick and Norm P point out, if you have a flocculant yeast
such as #1968, even early racking may not get too much still suspended.
Aeration may then be warranted to drive up the yeast population in the
secondary.  Personally I feel you've just waited too long to rack--in an
open fermenter I'd expect this to be at << 24 hrs.  I have had slow starts
with 1968, however.

This thread first surfaced when Brian Gowland was asked about the UK
practise of dropping.  At the time he too felt aeration was an
essential part of the process.  He later came back to the HBD saying he 
had more carefully read Wheeler and concluded he had mis-read what they had
actually said--which was, "avoid aeration".  I think he retained his
practise of aeration, however.  This is all either in HBDs from the
period, or I'm just fabricating it to make my point. 

The definition of dropping (from the source cited) does not include
aeration as a requirement--only as an option under 'certain' circumstances
(unspecified). Domenick and Norm P have each cited circumstances where
aeration is attractive--a process issue.

Finally, you could rouse the yeast prior to racking, but again the purpose
of an early rack is to get the beer off the precipitate before the healthy
yeast goes stationary.  If you see very little activity in the fermenter
then you've waited probably too long to call it dropping.  Your're racking.

Maybe US brewers should say "rack and aerate" when that's what they mean,
to avoid misunderstandings. If you say "I dropped the beer at...", you can
still expect to be asked, "Did you also aerate?"

You're views may differ, but this is how the terms are used from my limited
virtual experience.  Corroborative viewpoints warmly welcomed, but please,
as always, no wagering.  :-)

KRF Colorado Springs
"Not a role model. Not even a real person. Just a cartoon."


Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 27 Jun 95 12:22:11 TZ
From: rdevine at microsoft.com
Subject: Re: Hop Utilization at High Altitude

Luke <LAVANSA0_at_WC-DENVER at ccmail.wcc.com> asks in HBD #1766:
     Whilst brewing this weekend, (and planning to move operations up the
     hill, literally) I tried to reason out how to adjust recipes (or if I
     even need to) to counter the effects of altitude, ie, lower boiling
     temperature and therefore(?) lower hop utilization and/or
     isomerization. Does anyone out there have any words of wisdom or tips?

There appears to be nothing special about the temperature
of the boil to affect alpha acid isomerization.  I lived in Colorado
Springs at ~6,500 ft and now in Redmond, WA at ~400 ft but
I detected no real difference in utilization whether the water
was boiling at 212F or ~200F.  The key is that isomerization
occurs at high temperature with some agitation caused by the
rising steam bubbles.  This is not to say that a higher heat
would not give a more efficient or quicker extraction -- a 250F
steam extraction is probably better but not worth the bother.

A recipe formulated in Boulder (elev. ~6200 ft) should work
as well as one formulated in Death Valley (elev -200 ft).
Bigger errors in hops use will come from the varying level of alpha
acid in each package you buy, the age of the hops, how they
were stored, wort gravity, and length of boil.
In short, I don't see elevation as a big concern for hops (it is, of
course, a different matter for boil time and expected evaporation...)

I wonder how much of an economic advantage Coors brewery
has because it undoubtably costs less to boil water in Golden
Colorado (elev. ~6000 ft) where it is "high and dry" compared
to, say, Anheuser-Busch's plant in St Louis which is lower and
has a higher partial pressure of water vapor from Dat Ol' Man River.
While the total cost of operation is probably the same, the
expense of boiling is probably 10% less for Coors.

Bob Devine



Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 27 Jun 95 12:41:31 PDT
From: Martin Lodahl <malodah at kriek.scrm2700.PacBell.COM>
Subject: Seltzers?


May I ask advice on something other than beer?

I've just started experimenting with using my kegging gear to make
seltzers, and I'm sure there are people out there who do this
successfully already.  What I've done is add the juice of a couple of
lemons to about three gallons of drinking water chilled down to near
freezing, then "jam it" with CO2 at pressures ranging from 10-40 psi.
The results have always been the same:  A crisp, refreshing beverage
that doesn't hold its carbonation worth beans.  Any suggestions?

        - Martin
- --
= Martin Lodahl     Systems Analyst, Capacity Planning      Pacific*Bell =
= malodah at pacbell.com      Sacramento, CA USA               916.972.4821 =


Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 27 Jun 1995 15:48:56 -0400
From: eamonn at chinook.physics.utoronto.ca (Eamonn McKernan)
Subject: Hot spots/ cleaning

Well the most likely cause of the hot spots on my RIMS heating chamber is
a trapped air bubble. Though Damned if I know how to bleed it out. Maybe I'll
install a small valve or something... Thanks for all the advice.

And yes my terminology was incorrect, It was a flare connection that was
leaking. Though the packaging called it a compression fitting. 

- --------------
So, what's everyone's favourite way to clean the insides of freshly soldered
pipes? Can't take 'em apart to scrub all that black crap off, so what will
dissolve it without wrecking the SS, copper, and brass components? That
B-Brite stuff I keep hearing about? Can't find it anywhere!

- -----------------
Keith Royster: Your stated address is undeliverable according to the
"Mail Delivery System". 
	
	eamonn McKernan
	eamonn at atmosp.physics.utoronto.ca

Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 27 Jun 1995 14:50:42 -0700 (PDT)
From: Robert Parker <parker at mote.ME.Berkeley.EDU>
Subject: False Bottom in Zapap

Troy (troy at oculus.jsei.ucla.edu) asked about reducing the space between 
Zapap buckets.

My solution is to cut the bottom out of the inner bucket and set it inside
the outer bucket.  One might think the cut off bottom would be too small
to rest inside the outer bucket, but it fits very nicely if the cut is
made through the side wall of the inner bucket rather than a circular cut
in the bottom of the bucket.  Even a crude job works quite well. 
Obviously the remainder of the inner bucket is trash.  My spacing between
buckets occupies about a pint. 

Rob


Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 27 Jun 1995 18:36:24 -0400
From: SweeneyJE at aol.com
Subject: Kegging Equipment

Hi Everybody,

  I have been brewing for about 3 years now, and I think that it is about
time that I look into kegging my beer.  Does anyone know of any places that
sell kegs and any other equipment that I may need?  I live in the Boston
area, but if there is a mail order place I would like to know of them as
well.

TIA private e-mail is fine,

 Joe

Return to table of contents

End of HOMEBREW Digest #1768, 06/29/95