HOMEBREW Digest #1818 Wed 30 August 1995

Digest #1817 Digest #1819

		Rob Gardner, Digest Janitor

  Wheat / esters, phenols / hopback / new Web page (Troy Howard)
  stainless screens (HOUCK KEITH A)
  Irish WYEAST Bombs? (Aubrey Howe)
  Re: scum skimming, pumps (Jim Dipalma)
  Wheat extract (Jim Busch)
  Wyeast 1338 European Ale yeast (Mark Kuebeler)
  RTP yeast cultures ("Lee A. Menegoni")
  Lagering Advice Please (rapaport)
  Saranac Fall Fest: Call for Entries/Judges (Scott Barrett)
  Re: MM Motorization (FLATTER)
  Hunter fix and defrost clock (DONBREW)
  RE: Need Pumpkin Ale recipe/Misc (MClarke950)
  Re: Mega Craft Breweries (Benwrtr)
  Low-Alcohol Beer Follow-Up, Pt. I (Nicholas A. Franke)
  Low Alcohol Beer Follow-Up, Pt. II (Nicholas A. Franke)
  Sour Mash Beer Recipes? (Roy Bourcier)
  Cat's Meow Database (Ray Robert)
  Pilsner (JOHN)
  Carboy Hairline Cracks (hadleyse)
  Re:outflow connections for cooler-mashtuns (djt2)

****************************************************************** * 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. # ################################################################# NOTE NEW HOMEBREW ADDRESS hpfcmgw! Send articles for __publication_only__ to homebrew at hpfcmgw.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@ hpfcmgw.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 alpha.rollanet.org 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: Mon, 28 Aug 1995 13:43:05 -0800 From: troy at oculus.jsei.ucla.edu (Troy Howard) Subject: Wheat / esters, phenols / hopback / new Web page Whew! I guess a lot of subjects built up while we were offline. :-) Let's get started... #################### Wheat Malt Diastatic Power: Yes, malted wheat has sufficient diastatic power to convert itself. In fact, according the info in the BJCP Study Guide (available at http://www.umich.edu/~spencer/beer/judge/studyguide_v2) malted wheat has a little MORE power than Pale Ale malt. Here are some numbers (in degrees Lintner): 6-row Lager 100-200 2-row Lager 63-70 Pale Ale 36 Malted Wheat 49 #################### Esters & Phenols: palmer at San-Jose.ate.slb.com (Eric Palmer) asks what esters and phenols taste like. My understanding is that they are two large classes of chemicals. The individual chemicals can taste very different. But the terms usually used to describe them are that esters tend to taste "fruity" (e.g., banana, plum, citrus, etc). Phenols tend to taste "medicinal" (e.g., Listerine, band-aid, etc.) #################### Hop Back: I have been toying with the idea of using a hop back. But I do not want to move from my immersion chiller to a Counter Flow chiller (I like the ease of use and the ease of cleaning, and I don't trust the sanitation of CFs). Here is what I thought I might do: construct a screen of some sort and place it ~ 2-3 inches below the top of a 33 qt enamel-on-steel kettle. I could then place hops on the screen and laddle/pour cooled wort thru this screen. Then siphon the wort from under the screen into a fermenter. Opinions? Is this a really dumb idea? My big problem that I have yet to resolve is whether I will get any hop character at all using cooled wort. It would be effective (I imagine) for removing break. Any other (better) ideas out there? #################### New Web Page: My Home Brew Club (Pacific Gravity from Culver City, CA) now has a Web Page. Check it out! It's brand new, so stuff is being added all the time. URL is http://soho.ios.com/~cchbs/pg.html. -Troy - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Troy Howard | Live fast, troy at oculus.jsei.ucla.edu | die young, Jules Stein Eye Institue, UCLA | and leave a good looking corpse. - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 28 Aug 1995 20:43:20 +0000 (GMT) From: HOUCK KEITH A <HOUCK_KEITH_A at Lilly.com> Subject: stainless screens Hey y'all, Anyone know a source of stainless screens for a converted keg false-bottom? Anyone know what happened to Stainless in Seattle? Their phone number is no longer in service (Revenuers got 'em?) Thanks much. Keith Houck (hak at lilly.com) Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 28 Aug 95 07:58 PDT From: howe at shemp.appmag.com (Aubrey Howe) Subject: Irish WYEAST Bombs? Greetings, I thought I had been either dropped from the list, or that the majority of people were on vacation or something. Luckily it was just an AI Robot malfunction..."Open the HBD Door, Hal!" I have a question about Wyeast #1684 (?) the Irish one. Has anyone had a similar experience of the extraordinarily quick fermentation that I got? I brewed on a Sunday (First all grain batch in a while) and was able to bottle on the very next Friday! Wow! I tried it the other day, and it is one of the better batches I've made. Now for the real question: Will the bottles be OK? Did I just create two cases of bombs? Is this why they call the 22 ounce bottles "Bombers?" TIA, & Hurry up and get here, hockey season! --Aubrey Howe, III Santa Barbara, Ca. Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 28 Aug 95 16:13:41 EDT From: dipalma at sky.com (Jim Dipalma) Subject: Re: scum skimming, pumps Hi All, In HBD#1814, Brian Pickerill asks: >Does anybody know >of a cheap ($10) source for propane burners? About a year ago, I bought a multijet propane burner casting for $15.50 from Metal Fusion, (part# WKAF2, phone# (504)736-0201). I used the hose and regulator (5 psi) from an old gas grill, and mounted the casting on an angle iron rack under my mash tun. I'm not sure what the burner is rated for, but I've used it for temperature step mashes with ~30# of grist in the tun, worked very well. Seems to put out plenty of heat. You might consider calling Metal Fusion and asking for the catalog. They sell a variety of different castings as "parts". I know the $15.50 is a little over your price limit :-), and I'm not sure how that price would compare to the cost of converting a natural gas heater. Just wanted to give you another option. ******************************************************************* In HBD#1815, Kevin Imel asks about scum skimming: >Should the foamy scum that forms during the boil (especially with wheat >beers) be skimmed off? Having started my illustrious brewing career making >mead, I have a well learned impulse to skim the scum. Is this the right >idea or does it matter? If I skim the scum am I removing some of the mouth >and head of my beer? What is the collective wisdom of the HBD on this one? I confess, I've always been a scum skimmer. Gives me something to do while hovering over the brew kettle, and flinging the gobs of scum around can be way fun! I usually open the garage door and shoot for the basketball hoop out in the driveway. All kidding aside, what I've read about this is the foamy scum is mostly high molecular weight proteins, the kind that cause haze and stability problems in the finished beer. Also, removing the scum seems to help prevent boilovers. Once removed, the surface of the wort is exposed to the air, the boil stabilizes faster than if I don't skim. Haven't noticed any negative effects on head retention from doing this. My beers are fine in that regard, and I've developed great 3-point range! ******************************************************************* In HBD#1816, Rich Lenihan asks about pumps: >I need a high-temp pump to complete my brewing system. It doesn't >have to be self-priming (although that would be nice) but it should have >enough force to move hot water and/or wort to a height of 8 feet. It should >also be food-grade as well as easy to clean and operate. Finally, it should >introduce little or no air into the liquid being moved. I've heard about the >March pumps, but I don't have specific model #'s. March MDX-3 or MDXT-3, US Plastics Corp, 1-800-537-9724. The distinction between these two models is that the MDX-3 has 1/2" O.D. smooth connectors that you can slip tubing right over, the MDXT-3 has a 1/2" FPT threaded connector on the inlet, 3/8" FPT on the outlet. At 8 feet of head space, the graph in the catalog sez this pump will move about 4.5 GPM. I have the MDX-3, the housing is glass filled polypropylene. No temp specs given, but I've pumped water at about 200F, and wort at ~160F, through it with no problems. The catalog sez the pump is designed for "sanitary liquid food applications." The pump doesn't introduce air, but it's not self-priming, either. I think you're going to have a problem finding such a pump. Every pump I found that was magnetic drive and produced a laminar flow was not self-priming. I think you'd have to go with some kind of peristaltic pump if you want self-priming. Personally, this hasn't been a problem. Mine is set up to be gravity fed, once the housing fills up, the pump starts. No big deal. >I would also >appreciate any tips you might have regarding set-up, tubing, connectors, etc. One caveat: the standard poly tubing that many of us use gets a bit soft at 150F-200F, the tubing attached to the pump inlet actually collapsed when I started the pump. I had to use the braided, reinforced PVC to pump hot liquids. YMMV. Cheers, Jim dipalma at sky.com Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 28 Aug 1995 18:09:42 -0400 (EDT) From: Jim Busch <busch at eosdev2.gsfc.nasa.gov> Subject: Wheat extract <In HBD #1815 (August 26), Bill Bunning questioned whether <wheat malt had the diastatic power to permit a wheat beer to be <made from a 100% wheat grist. In my opinion, a 100% wheat grist <can be used. This is correct. <I believe that had barley malt been added to the grain <bill of this beer that the extract yield would have been higher. <In my opinion, extract yield suffers as the percentage of wheat <in the grist increases. Actually, wheat malt has the highest extract potential. The difficulty arises in getting this extract out of the mash and lauter tun and into the brew kettle. Thats why in practice 70% wheat is generally accepted as the upper limit where one can still have acceptable lauter results. FWIW, DeWolf Pale ale has 80.8% Fine Grind extract potential while DeWolf Wheat has 83.5%, and Shreier 2 row has 81%. (data from Shreier, probably on one shipment of 94 malt). Good brewing, Jim Busch busch at mews.gsfc.nasa.gov Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 28 Aug 1995 17:49:47 -0500 (CDT) From: kuebeler at PICARD.tamu.edu (Mark Kuebeler) Subject: Wyeast 1338 European Ale yeast Has anyone else experienced long lag times with this yeast? The first time I used it, I just pitched the contents of the smack pack and it took almost 36 hours for signs of fermentation to appear. I used this yeast again, this time pitching from a 1 quart starter that was prepared the day before. It's been 24 hours since I pitched from the starter and nothing has happened yet. Wort temperature was about 68^F (this was a main goal for this batch) and the wort was as well aerated as previous successful batches. The only possible problem I can see is that I usually keep the fermenter in a wash tub of water that is around 70^F, but yesterday I just reused the ice water from the chilling phase, and as a result the wort may have gotten down below 60^F for the first six hours. Could this have caused the yeast to go dormant or slowed them down, even with a higher pitching rate? Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 28 Aug 95 19:03:43 -24000 From: "Lee A. Menegoni" <lmenegoni at nectech.com> Subject: RTP yeast cultures RTP is a new product available in the Boston area. The product has been made available by a professional microbiologist and home brewer. He is a member of Bostons largest home brew club and has supplied cultures to many Boston area brew pubs. He recently introduced the product to a few homebrew shops and a brew on premisise. RTP cultures are available for 5 and 12 gallon batches, there are about 6 ale yeast and a German lager yeast. I have no financial intrest in the venture though I would like to see it be successful. Here is a homebrewer that saw the potential for a product and delivered it to the market at a competitive price. Lee menegoni LMenegoni at nectech.com Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 28 Aug 95 17:02:43 From: rapaport at srvware.serviceware.com Subject: Lagering Advice Please I want to make my first batch of German lager and I've got a couple of questions about the temperature of fermentation. I've read a couple of things on it and there seems to be some discrepancy regarding the temperature of fermentation and storage. My beer-supply-store guy says that it should be primary fermented at 45-55 degrees for about 3 weeks, then secondary fermented then stored at the same temperature. From what I read, these temperatures are for american lagers, and I want to make a German Lager. A book I read says to primary ferment it at 45-55 degrees, then secondary ferment it at 60-65 degrees, then store it at 32 degrees. Anybody know what the right way to do it is? Also -- I think the warmest I can get my refrigerator is 44 degrees. Will this work? Again What temp should it be at. If it is still too cold, how do I get an external thermostat -- what is THAT toy going to cost me? Please respond either direct or on this digest. Mary Rapaport rapaport at serviceware.com Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 28 Aug 1995 20:55:31 -0500 From: scott at partech.com (Scott Barrett) Subject: Saranac Fall Fest: Call for Entries/Judges Attention New York State homebrewers (with apologies to the rest of the hive) CALL FOR ENTRIES CALL FOR JUDGES AND STEWARDS The 1995 Saranac Fall Fest Homebrew Competition will be held Saturday, September 23, 1995 at the F.X. Matt Brewing Company in Utica, NY This BJCP-registered homebrew competition is open to all New York State homebrewers with entries in all 1995 AHA styles, except sake. In addition to style category prizes, special prizes (personalized Saranac canoe paddles) will be awarded to the five entries selected as closest to the Saranac family of beers: Saranac Adirondack Amber Saranac Golden Pilsener Saranac Black & Tan Saranac Stout Saranac Pale Ale This competition is a part of the F.X. Matt Brewery's Fall Fest celebration, the proceeds of which benefit the United Way. Your competition entry also gets you a Fall Fest admission ticket, Saranac sampling tickets, and Saranac T-shirt (available at the door). Listing of events at the Saranac Fall Fest (tentatively) include: Special "Brewer's Heaven" brewery tour by members of the Matt family. Saranac beers on draft, including the new Saranac Stout (the Black of their Black & Tan). Special "Behind the Scenes" brewery tours of interest to homebrewers. A chance to win "Saranac Beer for a Year". Seminars and discussions by members of the brewery. Live entertainment and great food throughout the day. Saranac specials and give-aways in the Brewery Shop. Special "beer library" in the Brewer's Cafe. 100+ years of brewery memorabilia on display. The competition also kicks off the first year of the "NY State Homebrewer of the Year" and "NY State Club of the Year" awards. For homebrewing entry forms, judge/steward registration forms by US mail, or more information, please contact competition organizer Scott Barrett (barretts at partech.com). Competition entries deadline is September 16th. Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 28 Aug 1995 11:55:30 -0640 From: FLATTER%MHS at mhs.rose-hulman.edu Subject: Re: MM Motorization Kirk Fleming <FLEMINGKR at afmcfafb.fafb.af.mil> tried to reply to Rob ? about motorizing the MaltMill (tm) but couldn't find articles discussing optimum roller RPMs, etc. I saved the information on my computer at home, knowing I'd want it someday. Now, I don't have the reference memorized, but I recently decided to look at upgrading from my Corona to a roller miller. [Anyone out there have a used one for a good price?] I'd be glad to provide the source if asked. If I remember correctly, the reference related a discussion with Jack Schm. about motorizing his roller mills. [Standard warning about invalidating the warranty.] The suggestion was for no more than 200 RPM and 1/4 HP electric motor with a belt drive. A geared, direct drive won't allow any slippage in the rare event that the rollers jam. There was no mention of other safety devices like a hopper lid lockout or shear shaft keys. I suppose if I were going to put it in a commercial shop, I'd consider it. I'm looking at something I can mount to the work bench when I want to grind grain. One other option you might consider. I "motorized" my Corona by removing the bolt that held the handle on and replacing it with one that had a hex head. I then keyed up a standard nut driver in my electric drill. Short bursts on the trigger crank the grain through in no time at all. A variable speed drill ought to be adjustable to ~200 RPM, making this an alternative. The problem I ran into running the Corona continuously with the drill was all the flour in the air made a mess. +++++++++++++ Neil Flatter Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology Chemistry - Math Chemistry Facilities Technician Novell Supervisor 5500 Wabash Avenue 73 (812) 877 - 8316 Terre Haute, IN 47803-3999 FAX: 877 - 3198 Flatter at Rose-Hulman.edu Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 28 Aug 1995 21:34:51 -0400 From: DONBREW at aol.com Subject: Hunter fix and defrost clock Well, add one more satisfied customer (at least for a day). Last night I did the two 12V 1W zener diode from RS fix on my broken Hunter unit. It has functioned properly for a day. On a related note. I certainly hope that everybody who uses a refridgerator for fermenting/lagering has remembered to either use an old fashioned "defrost it yourself" fridge or disabled the defrost clock. If you explore underneath the fridge, probably near the back side you will find a little "black box" with a knob on it and two wires plugged into it, this will probably be the clock. Just short the two wires and voila, no more auto defrost cycle. BTW this clock is in my limited experience the most common cause of a "dead" refridgerator, they tend to break in the off cycle. Don Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 28 Aug 1995 22:05:07 -0400 From: MClarke950 at aol.com Subject: RE: Need Pumpkin Ale recipe/Misc joep at informix.com (Sr. SE) asked for a pumpkin ale recipe, here it is: Beer Name: Spiced Pumpkin Ale Batch Size (gals): 5 Amt Mash Ingrediants Color Color Extract Extract %Grist (lbs) Rating Total Rating Total 7.50 Maris Otter 2 Row 3.00 4.50 30.00 45.00 77% 0.50 Crystal Malt L40 (8o 40.00 4.00 18.00 1.80 5% 0.20 Chocolate malt (3oz) 350.00 14.00 18.00 0.72 2% 0.50 Wheat Malt HMD Belgi 3.00 0.30 18.00 1.80 5% 1.00 Pumpkin Flesh 5.00 1.00 20.00 4.00 10% 9.70 Total 23.80 53.32 100% Starting Ending %Alcohol Gravity Gravity by Vol Estimate 1.053 1.013 5.25 Amt Hops and Spices AAU HBU Time In Util. Estimated (oz) Boil Rate IBU 2.00 Hallertauer 3.2 6.40 60 30 28.38 Cinnamon stick-2 inc 0.0 0.00 30 17 0.00 Ground Mace-1.5 gram 0.0 0.00 15 8 0.00 Ground Nutmeg-1.5 gr 0.0 0.00 15 8 0.00 Ground Ginger-1 gram 0.0 0.00 15 8 0.00 2.00 Total 6.40 28.38 Yeast: Wyeast American Ale Procedure: Steam Pumpkin for 10 to 15 minutes or until tender, add to mash in progress. Single Step Mash at at 152F until conversion is reached. Mash for 1.5 hours. Amt Dry Spice Additions (grams) 6 Cinnamon Chips 3 round Nutmeg 2 Ground Mace 3 Sliced Ginger root 0.5 Ground Cloves Notes: I used fresh pumpkin, but canned pumpkin should work. Cut into 1/2 inch to 1 inch cubes. If its soft you can probably omit the steaming part. For the Dry spice additions, I boiled a cup of water, then added the spices (inside a hop bag). I let it steep for a couple minutes, then transferred the whole shebang to the fermenter. I racked it again a couple of days later. Tasting Notes: The majority of the taste/aroma came from the ginger. The spices really came through. The hops and malt were balanced and neither dominated. The pumpkin showed up in the color, a nice orangish/ brown. I didn't get much taste though. It was my wife's favorite beer, it was also the hit of the Christmas party. Good Luck I hope this helps. BTW this was based on a recipe in the zymurgy's Indigenous Beers Issue, sorry don't remember the authors name. - ------------------------------ SoarMoose at aol.com (Chris) writes: >I've never used a smaller amount of Mt. Hood for finishing >because I used a butt-load the first time and I loved the result. Is butt-load one of those new-fangled brewing terms? ;-) Cheers, Mike Mike Clarke Seattle, WA. USA Email: MClarke950 at aol.com Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 28 Aug 1995 22:39:07 -0400 From: Benwrtr at aol.com Subject: Re: Mega Craft Breweries I tried to send this a week ago, but it got lost in the shuffle to HBD's new address. Hope I'm not beating a dead thread, but I wanted to toss in my two p's on the megaswillery invasion of the micros. The megaswilleries definitely don't want to eliminate the craft brewing industry--they just want a piece of the action. In the first half of 1995, beer sales at Anheuser-Busch grew by less than 1% from the first half of 1994, while sales at Miller and Coors actually declined. By contrast, craft brewers have been growing by 50% or more annually, and they have pretty fat profit margins. As an example, take Redhook (I think I'll take one right now...), which went public recently. Anheuser-Busch paid $18 million in October 1994 for a 25% stake in Redhook. When Redhook issued stock two weeks ago, A-B invested another $10 million to maintain its 25% stake. Based on the current share price (as of 8/29) of $33 a share, A-B's stake (which originally cost $28 million) is now worth nearly $70 million! So megas like A-B will gladly leave the actual brewing operations of the micros alone, as long as they can siphon off their share of the profits. I expect this unfortunate invasion to continue, since the micros are probably willing to give up part ownership in order to have access to the megas' national distribution system and big marketing dollars. As for who's next...maybe one of the many Portland-area micros? jeff tonole SlothBrew Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 28 Aug 95 20:35:43 PDT From: NAFRANK at pop03.ca.us.ibm.net (Nicholas A. Franke) Subject: Low-Alcohol Beer Follow-Up, Pt. I PART I INTRODUCTION. In the July 6, 1995 issue of the Digest (HBD #1774), I requested information on making alcohol-free beer from the collective. My motivation for making alcohol-free beer was that a friend of ours had recently become pregnant but still wanted to have an occasional beer. I thought I would provide a summary of the responses I received and my experience with making low alcohol beer. THE RESPONSES. I want to thank everyone who responded to my request. All of the responses were very helpful. I received twenty-four responses to my post, which provided the following input: -- 4 responders suggested using heat (78-82 C) to remove the alcohol from regularly-made beer; -- 4 responders suggested freezing regularly-made beer, and pouring off the alcohol (that would not freeze at the temperature water freezes at). Most of these responders were very pessimistic about the heating method, claiming that it would ruin the flavor of the beer; -- 2 responders suggested making the beer with non- or low-fermentables. The primary suggestion was to make the beer entirely with Cara-pils, which would give an O.G. of no more than 1.010, and thus keep fermentation and alcohol production at a minimum; -- 1 responder suggested that using a reactant that would turn the alcohol into a type of salt might be a possibility; -- 1 responder felt that it was too expensive and impractical for a homebrewer to make non-alcohol beer; -- 7 responders though that pregnant women should just drink regular beer in moderation, and that reports of detrimental effects of moderate alcohol consumption on fetuses were largely exaggerated; -- 3 people then responded to those posts that any risk alcohol might pose to fetuses was too large to take; -- 2 responders suggested that non-alcohol malt beverages be substituted for beer during pregnancy. Specifically, a German product called "malzbier," and a Hispanic product called "malta goya," were suggested. Coincidentally, the Fall 1995 issue of Zymurgy contained a small blurb regarding an article written by Dr. Siegfried Gunther and Stefan Vetter for Brewing and Beverage Industry International (April 1994 edition) regarding alcohol-free brewing methods. That article divided methods into "biologic" and "physical". The three biologic methods noted were: 1. Interrupting fermentation with a one minute pasteurization at 140 F at the desired alcohol level; 2. Brewing a low-gravity beer and using yeast of the strain Saccharomyces iudwiggii, which will ferment only simple sugars; 3. Mixing the yeast and wort at 32 F and filtering the yeast out after a rest period (duration not specified). The three physical methods noted were: 1. Heating the finished beer at atmospheric pressure. The authors noted damage to the beer that made this method undesirable; 2. Reverse osmosis. Removing alcohol by passage through diaphragms by use of pressure gradients; 3. Dialysis. Passing the beer through fibers that are bathed in a counterflow dialysate that produces a concentration gradient. THE PLAN. Armed with this information, I decided to merge two of the most popular concepts together. I decided to brew a fairly low gravity beer, and then to freeze it after fermentation so that the alcohol could be poured off. For reasons that I will go into later, and although not planned, I also ended up using a third method of removal--heat--but in a different way that was suggested. The recipe I used was for a pale ale-type beer, and consisted of the following: 3# Domestic Malted Barley 1.75# Munich Malt 1.25# Cara-pils 12 ozs. Canadian Wheat 6 ozs. English Crystal (80L) 2 ozs. Domestic Crystal (120L) .88 ozs. Northern Brewers (8.2% A)--60 mins. 2.69 ozs. Liberty (2.7% A) --10 mins. Wyeast American Ale yeast (#1056) The mash was a standard infusion mash, except that the Cara-pils was not added until the mash was brought to 158 F. The boil was for 90 mins. A 300 ml yeast starter and 3 tsp. yeast food were pitched into 6 gals. The O.G. was 1.031. Primary fermentation lasted for four days at 68 F. Secondary fermentation was for another ten days at 68 F. F.G. was 1.012. 270.4 fl. ozs. was separated from the main batch after fermentation was complete for use in the "no alcohol experiment". REMOVING THE ALCOHOL. The 270.4 "experimental" ozs. were racked into 4, 2-liter plastic soda bottles. Those bottles were placed upside-down (on their caps) in a freezer at between 0 and 10 F for 36 hours. The fluid in the bottles was solid at the end of that period. By inverting the bottles, the fluid that did not freeze (including the alcohol) was at the cap-end of the bottle, making it easier to pour it off. The biggest surprise of this whole process was that when I opened the cap on the bottles, they virtually exploded. After the first bottle, and cleaning the sink, cabinets, walls and ceilings of alcohol sludge, I opened the remaining three bottles underneath a plastic bucket. Each one of them exploded. I estimate that 770 ml of the alcohol sludge (I will call the "extract") was lost on the walls and down the sink. I did manage to save 950 ml of the extract. There was an unexpected problem when I removed the 950 ml extract. I had been forewarned that this freezing method removed a lot of body and hop bitterness (thus the 1# Cara-pils and 35 IBUs), but no one had mentioned the loss of color. This was supposed to be a pale ale, and had been the appropriate color when I froze the beer. But when the extract was removed the beer remaining frozen in the 2 liter bottles was almost as clear as ice--no color at all. The extract, on the other hand, was as dark as a stout. The extract also had a S.G. of 1.039 and smelled like alcohol and HOPS (capitalized on purpose and for effect). So, I was left with the problem of a colorless, no alcohol beer. This is when I decided to employ the third method of de-alcoholization--heat. Numerous people had warned me about the bad effects of heat on the beer for alcohol removal, and so I decided to heat only the extract. After all, that's where the alcohol was. After I removed the alcohol from the extract, I planned to put the extract back in the beer to give it color again. Those suggesting heat as an alcohol removal method instructed that alcohol evaporates at 78-82 C (I did not check this fact). Therefore, I heated the 950 ml of extract at 174-178 F for 13 minutes, which resulted in 600 ml of extract at 1.069. After cooling, I returned this extract to the melting beer. CARBONATION. After going to all this trouble, I did not want to add any alcohol back into the beer through priming. I was also concerned about the viability of the yeast after the freezing/thawing/heating process. So, I put the thawed beer into a 3 gallon keg and force carbonated the beer for approximately 2.6 volumes of CO(2). The end result was 244 ozs. (7,222.4 ml) of low alcohol beer. PART II Part II, which includes the estimates of the alcohol content and extraction for the beer, will be sent in a separate transmission. NAF. nafrank at ibm.net Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 28 Aug 95 20:44:17 PDT From: NAFRANK at pop03.ca.us.ibm.net (Nicholas A. Franke) Subject: Low Alcohol Beer Follow-Up, Pt. II INTRODUCTION. In Part I of this post, I described my attempt to make a low alcohol beer by starting with a low gravity beer and then removing the alcohol by freezing the beer and pouring off the alcohol. In this follow-up post, I will set out my estimates of how efficient that alcohol removal process was. THE NUMBERS. My Disclaimer: I am not a chemist, physicist, mathemetician, professional brewer, alchemist, botanist, or floral arranger. However, I am a lawyer and know how to write a disclaimer. Accordingly, none of the following theories, theorems, equations, hypotheses, statements, opinions and conclusions should be relied on. If you need a truly alcohol-free brew for health or safety reasons, please do not rely on my (probably flawed) methodology and results. Instead, buy a tried and tested commercial, non-alcohol beer. The purpose of this post is the amusement of the homebrewing collective. If anyone sees an error in any of the following (and I'm sure there are a few), please point it out. I don't mind admitting that I struggled greatly with these equations and the theory underlying them. The Alcohol Content of the Original Beer. I started by figuring the alcohol content of the beer before I did anything unnatural to it. I used the following formulas (taken from the Summer 1995 Zymurgy): O.G. 1.031 F.G. 1.012 A%(by weight)=76.08(OG-FG)/(1.775-OG) =76.08(1.031-1.012)/(1.775-1.031) =76.08(.019)/1.744 =1.996574585 A%(by volume)=A%(weight)[FG/.794] =1.996574585[1.012/.794] =2.544752491 Thus the beer had a very low alcohol content of approximately 2.5% even before doing anything to it. I next computed the volume of actual alcohol in the beer. The total beer volume was 244 ozs. (7,222.4 ml), and so I multiplied that number by the percent alcohol by volume to determine the number of milliliters of alcohol in the beer: 7,222.4 ml beer x .02544752491 = 203.6779104 ml alcohol Composition of the Extract. Out of necessity, I made the assumption that the freezing method removed all of the alcohol in the beer with the extract, and that no alcohol remained in the frozen beer. Therefore, all 203.6779104 ml of alcohol were contained in the extract. I saved 950 ml of the extract and, based on the beginning and ending volumes of beer, estimate that I lost approximately 770 ml of the extract down the sink, on the walls, etc. Therefore, the total volume of the extract was 950 + 770, or 1,720 ml. Again, out of necessity I assumed that the percentage of alcohol in the extract I lost was the same as the percentage of alcohol in the extract I saved. This does not seem to be an outrageous assumption to make. Then I computed the volume of alcohol that was lost with the lost extract: [770 ml lost extract/1,720 ml total extract volume] x 203.6779104 ml alcohol = 91.1813901199 ml alcohol lost 203.6779104 ml alcohol - 91.1813901199 ml alcohol lost = 112.496520281 ml alcohol in 950 ml saved extract Specific Gravity of the Extract Without Alcohol. Next you must compute the specific gravity of the extract as if there were no alcohol in it. I used the number .796 as the S.G. of alcohol in this equation: (extract gravity)(extract volume)= (SG alcohol)(alcohol volume)+(SG of extract without alcohol)(alcohol-free extract volume) (1.039)(950 ml)=(.796)(112.496520281)+(SG)(837.503479719) 987.05=89.5472301436+(SG)837.503479719 897.502769857=(SG)837.503479719 1.07164064578=SG of 950 ml extract without alcohol Adjusting the Specific Gravity for Volume. The next calculation adjusts the specific gravity of the extract without alcohol (1.07164064578) for the reduction in volume of the extract that occurred when it was heated. The extract volume was reduced from 950 ml to 600 ml. From the above, though, it was determined that only 837.503479719 ml of the original extract was not alcohol. Assuming there was a proportional decrease in the volume of extract that was alcohol and the volume of extract that was not alcohol, the non-alcohol portion of the extract would have been reduced from 837.503479719 ml to 528.949566144. [The reality is that the non-alcohol part of the extract actually evaporated slightly quicker than the alcohol part. This can be demonstrated through several equations which I have not included here.] The specific gravity of the non-alcohol part of the extract is adjusted for the reduction in volume as follows: 837.503479719 ml (begin volume)/528.949566144 (end volume) x 1.07164064578 (SG non-alcohol part) = 1.11343102248 (SG of non-alcohol part of 600 ml extract) Calculating the Alcohol Content of the Processed Beer. Finally, taking the results from the foregoing, the new alcohol content of the beer, after the freezing and heating processes, is calculated. [Actual SG of extract]/[SG of extract without alcohol] = Efficiency Factor Efficiency Factor x Original Alcohol Vol.=Actual Alcohol Volume 1.069/1.11343102248 = .60829919797 [efficiency factor] .60829919797 x 112.496520281 ml alcohol = 68.4315430613 ml alc. The remaining amount of alcohol in the extract, which is added back to the beer, is 68.4315430613 ml. The total volume of the beer is 7,222.4 ml. Thus, it is simple to do the final calculation and figure out the alcohol content of the beer by volume: 68.4315430613 ml/7,222.4 ml = .0094749035, or approximately 1% The beer therefore still has about 1% alcohol by volume because the extraction method was only about 61% efficient. COMPARISON OF BEERS. The untreated beer was only slightly darker (maybe 2-3 SRM) than the beer which had been frozen and had alcohol removed. The untreated beer also had slightly more hoppiness and a little more body. However, on the whole I can not say that the alcohol removal process dramatically changed the beer. While I would certainly prefer a regular pale ale, I found both the treated and untreated versions of this beer to be very drinkable, and certainly recognizable as beer. METHODS OF IMPROVEMENT. If I were to attempt a no- or low-alcohol beer again, which, by the way, is a lot of work, I would use this same method. Freezing the beer, removing the extract, heating only the extract, and returning the extract to the frozen beer gives the benefits of alcohol removal without losing all of the body, hoppiness and color found in the extract. Improvement is needed primarily on the efficiency of the heating process to remove alcohol. A longer heating process is necessary. Through a series of other calculations, I estimated that to get a beer of this OG/FG to less than .5% alcohol v/v (the legal definition for a no-alcohol beer), approximately 90% of the extract would have to be evaporated by heating. One-half of the volume that evaporates could be replaced by water without harming the color or flavor of the extract. I would be very interested in receiving any comments or suggestions anyone might have. NAF. nafrank at ibm.net Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 28 Aug 95 21:58 MDT From: rjbourc at nmia.com (Roy Bourcier) Subject: Sour Mash Beer Recipes? I have the interest span of a fruit fly - I'm not proud of it, but I accept it. A month ago, I was possessed by brewing the perfect American Pale Ale. I will get back to this obsession shortly. But for the moment I've found a new diversion... A couple of weeks ago, I tried brewing a minor spinoff of a sour mash beer recipe by Micah Millspaw which I found on Cats Meow III. It's still in secondary, but already it's apparent (to my taste) that this is something worth pursuing. What (incredibly) little I can find to read on this style suggests (nay, hints) that this is a truly native US style worthy of the same respect as Steam Beer and Cream Ale. I'm presently working on my second recipe, incorporating several hints from Randy Mosher's excellent book (no connection, yada, yada, yada) and some suggestions posted by Bill Vaughan (I forget where). My current thinking is as follows: Sour Mash Beer (5 gal.) 8.5 lb American 2 row malt 1.5 lb Rye malt 1 lb Cara Pils malt 1 lb 95-115L Crystal malt 1 oz Galena hops (60 min) 1 oz Cascade hops (30 min) 1/4 tsp powdered Irish Moss (10 min) Yogurt culture American Ale yeast Mash 2 lb of 2 row malt using 50-60-70 schedule Mashout at 175=B0F for 5 minutes Cool to 90=B0F and stir in yogurt culture Sour for two days Mash remaining malts using 50-60-70 schedule Mashout at 175=B0F for 5 minutes Combine mashes Sparge at 170=B0F Boil for 90 min Cool and pitch yeast Any comments on this formulation? Anybody got a REALLY GOOD RECIPE? C'mon, let's bring this American classic back into vogue - I'm tired of having to brewing funky European styles to dabble with bacterial "innoculations". TIA. - ------------------------------------------------------------------- Roy J. Bourcier rjbourc at nmia.com "Once a guy stood all day shaking bugs from his hair." A Scanner Darkly, by Philip K. Dick Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 1995 08:13:49 EDT From: uscgc2r3 at ibmmail.com Subject: MPBITU I couldn't seem to make out Bill's (most powerful beer in the universe) address, and maybe this has general interest so here's my thought... Bill, >From what I've read, yeast can't take that level in the solution with them. Something in a wine book had some scheme for multiple yeast additions over time to get up over 8-9%. Have you got some special yeast in mind? Wallie Meisner 1800 334 9481 x-2410 Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 95 08:33:00 PDT From: Ray Robert <rayr at bah.com> Subject: Cat's Meow Database Hi All! Awhile back there was a posting about the possibility of a Microsoft Access Cat's Meow 3 database. Was this true or had my homebrew clouded my mind? If it is available please post on where it is. Also is Meow 3 available in SUDS 4.0 format. It would be great to upload all those recipes once instead of one at a time. Inquiring minds want to know. Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 1995 7:44:00 -0500 (CDT) From: JOHN <KRHOVJAK_JD at lvs-emh.lvs.loral.com> Subject: Pilsner Can someone post or send me a good recipe for a pilsner? I was in the Czech Republic recently and drank a lot of their Pilsner Urquell on tap which turned out to be about the best I've ever had. I've tried the pilsner recipes in "The new joy of..." but they were not very close to the real thing. Thanks, John Krhovjak krhovjak_jd at lvs-emh.lvs.loral.com Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 95 09:40:17 EDT From: hadleyse at pweh.com Subject: Carboy Hairline Cracks I was taking a close look at my 5 Gal. carboy while I was cleaning it and noticed many thin cracks encircling the conical section near the neck. It wasn't very noticeable because they're kind of hard to see. Its only a year old and has seen a dozen batches. I bought it new and never looked at it really closely before so I'm not sure if I bought it with the cracks. I'm going to replace it because of the thought of it breaking while I'm carring it full of beer in the house. Is this typical of 5 Gal. carboys made in Mexico? Does anyone regularly recycle their carboys? TIA Scott Hadley Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 1995 09:40:52 -0400 From: djt2 at po.cwru.edu Subject: Re:outflow connections for cooler-mashtuns cem at cadre.com (Chuck E. Mryglot) wrote >I have jest received a round, 10 Gal Igloo cooler which I >want to modify to be a mash/lauter tun. I am looking >for a source to find a replacement for the push-button >spigot that comes with it. Anyone have any advice? For my 5 gallon Gott cooler I found that the spigot screwed right out and that a plastic bulkhead fitting fit tightly in its place. I used the 3/8 " tube size union made out of polypropylene, allowing access to the 3/8" copper manifold on the inside, and a vinyl tube outflow with a tubing clamp. The nice thing is that when I switched over to a larger tun, I could just return the spigot to make the cooler usable for drinks again. I don't know if the Igloo spigot just screws out or not. I get my plastics parts from US Plastics 1-800-537-9724. The bulkhead union is #61123, $1.30. There is a $2 addition for orders under $20. Their catalog has a wide variety of valves, fittings, and tubing. For my new tun I discovered another neat trick; Using a 48 quart rectangular Coleman cooler, with a flip-up plug, I tried to unscrew that one as described above. It became clear that it was going to be irreversible, and I wanted not to destroy the cooler. Instead, I found that a piece of vinyl "bubble tubing" placed from the inside would fit snugly in the hole, leaving a segment inside to connect to the manifold and an outflow piece too. Bubble tubing is the kind that has areas of enlarged diameter spaced at meter intervals. Cutting the tubing at these bubbles results in a funnel-shaped end that can be easily connected to other tubing. I got mine from my lab, and I've never seen bubble tubing elsewhere. The scientific supply houses carry it (Fisher, VWR, etc.) at some high price for about 50 feet. You might also accomplish the same end by boring a 3/8" hole in a stopper to fit the opening, and sliding this along the tubing to make a removable bulkhead union too. Dennis Return to table of contents
End of HOMEBREW Digest #1818, 08/30/95