Homebrew Digest Thursday, 20 June 1996 Number 2076
![[Prev HBD]](/img/previous.gif)
![[Index]](/img/index_button.gif)
![[Next HBD]](/img/next.gif)
![[Back]](/img/up_level_button.gif)
FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
Shawn Steele, Digest Janitor
Thanks to Rob Gardner for making the digest happen!
Contents:
Analyze my H2O? ("Barry Wertheimer")
RE: moonshine (genitom at nyslgti.gen.ny.us (Michael A. Genito))
CO2 / N2 gases (Brian Bliss)
botulism again - seeking _informed_ opinions (CLAY at clust1.clemson.edu)
Stuck Fermentations (John Wilkinson)
iodophor (BOBKATPOND at aol.com)
Re: WBC (walter at lamar.ColoState.EDU (Brian J Walter (Brewing Chemist)))
Copy of: Brewing Techniques ("David R. Burley")
HSA (Charlie Scandrett)
Radler bier (Sjackson at x-net.net)
ps Those plaid jokes never get old... (THE HIGH AND MIGHTY PLAID GOD)
Force carbonation (John Miller {83802})
FAN Levels in Extract (GEORGE DIETRICH - ACME)
Chlorine Filter Addendum (KennyEddy at aol.com)
RE: Strange mash schedule (George_De_Piro at berlex.com (George De Piro))
High gravity brewing (Bill Giffin)
HANDMADE CIGARS AND HOMEBREW (wesc at mails.imed.com)
Enzymes/Maltiness ("David R. Burley")
Copy of: Ginjo Beer ("David R. Burley")
Copy of: Re: Ireland Brews ("David R. Burley")
GOTT COOLERS (n43a at cnsp.navy.mil)
Re: Priming (jdecarlo at mail04.mitre.org (John A. DeCarlo))
re: Dogs + Hops = Malignant Hyperthermia. ("Robert Perron")
spoiled starters (Peter Thompson [remote])
Re: esters ("Tracy Aquilla")
NOTE NEW HOMEBREW ADDRESSES
homebrew at aob.org (SUBMISSIONS only)
homebrew-digest-request@ aob.org (for REQUESTS only)
Send articles for __publication_only__ to homebrew at aob.org
(Articles are published in the order they are received.)
Send UNSUBSCRIBE and all other requests, ie, address change, etc.,
to homebrew-digest-request@ aob.org, BUT PLEASE NOTE that if
you subscribed via BEER-L, you must unsubscribe by sending a
one line e-mail to listserv at ua1vm.ua.edu that says: UNSUB BEER-L
This list service is now being provided by majordomo at aob.org, so some
of the commands may have changed. For technical problems send
e-mail to the Digest Janitor, shawn at aob.org.
If your account is being deleted, please be courteous and unsubscribe first.
ARCHIVES & OTHER INFORMATION
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 or visit
http://alpha.rollanet.org on the Web. Othere information is available by
e-mail from info at aob.org and on the AHA's web site at http://www.aob.org/aob.
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 at /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. Some
archives are available via majordomo at aob.org.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Barry Wertheimer" <wertheim at libra.law.utk.edu>
Date: Wed, 19 Jun 1996 15:08:23 EST
Subject: Analyze my H2O?
Although I am reluctant to post this for general consumption, at
least one person in the past expressed the view that this sort of
thing is useful and educational for the group as a whole. Having
been encouraged by this singular opinion, what follows is my just
received water analysis. This analysis is of my tap water, after it has run
through my under-the-sink carbon filter. If anyone has comments
about my water for brewing purposes, I would love to hear them. I am
at the dawn of my knowledge of brewing water chemistry, so all input
is welcome.
ph 7.45
total solids 156
alkalinity as CaCO3 90
hardness as CaCO3 110
chloride 16.5
conductivity 226
sulfate 11.2
aluminum 26
calcium 31.6
copper 2
iron 3
magnesium 7.5
manganese 3
potasium 2.4
sodium 6.6
zinc 8
I have left out some of the trace elements, but believe I have listed
the important ones for brewing purposes. Thanks much.
- --Barry
wertheim at libra.law.utk.edu
Return to table of contents
From: genitom at nyslgti.gen.ny.us (Michael A. Genito)
Date: Wed, 19 Jun 1996 16:35:26 -0400
Subject: RE: moonshine
In HBD 2074 Greg Tompkins asked about moonshine & a recipe for it. Moonshine
is a distilled spirit, where some malted grain (corn, rye, barley, etc) is
fermented, sometimes with added sugars (cane/beet, honey, etc.), and the
resultant fermented liquid (known as beer - not necessarily the fizzy barley
stuff we speak of)is then heated in a closed system which allows the vapors
to escape and be cooled back to a liquid (called distillation - the unit is
called a "still"). The vapors that escape are alcohol, so the cooled liquid
is somewhat pure alcohol. This is then mixed ("cut") with water to make
moonshine.
For a real thorough reading on the matter, check out the Foxfire books -
probably volume 1 or 2. They not only discuss how it was done, but the
dangers, the illegality, etc. Unlike brewing beer or making wine,
distillation is illegal in the U.S., unless properly licensed such as the
major distillers (Seagrams, etc.).
Moonshine was a term given to the practice of typically making this in the
middle of a "hollow" in the woods at night, by the light of the full moon,
when it was less likely for police or other officials to catch you.
Michael A. Genito, City Comptroller
City of Rye, 1051 Boston Post Road, Rye, NY 10580 USA
TEL:(914)967-7302/FAX:(914)967-4604
Return to table of contents
From: Brian Bliss <brianb at microware.com>
Date: Wed, 19 Jun 96 15:58:22 CDT
Subject: CO2 / N2 gases
After 2 years of playing with my Guinness system and not getting it right,
(then moving), the (new) local supplier finally set me straight.
Don't expect to take your CO2 tank in and get it filled with CO2/N2 mix.
("beer gas").
They can partially pressurize it with CO2 and N2, but not force it to
condense, if you wish (In which case, it's good for about 2 kegs), but
to fill it full of liquid (note that pure CO2 will form a solid in the
tank, where as beer gas forms a liquid), you need a special tank.
First of all, the tank must (should) be rated at 2000+ psi, not the 1800
psi that regular CO2 tanks are rated at. Second, it must have what is
referred to as a "dip tube". i.e., beer gas containers are filled and
dispensed from the bottom, not the top. You cannot fill a such a cylinder
with pure CO2 - as the CO2 begins to freeze, it will clog the dip tube.
I'm not sure why you cannot (should not?) dispense beer gas from the top.
>From playing around with the pressure, and obsering the results compared
to what you see in a bar, I'm pretty certain that most bars dispense
Guinness in the 15-30 psi range. If you dispense at 40 psi, the beer comes
out almost as completey white, and it takes a minute just to get to the
rolling/raining effect that you normally see when a Guinness is poured.
Not that it doesn't work - dispensing at 40 psi gives a wounderfully
creamy head - I just don't think that most bars do it.
bb
Return to table of contents
From: CLAY at clust1.clemson.edu
Date: Wed, 19 Jun 1996 17:05:03 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: botulism again - seeking _informed_ opinions
If one of "our" resident microbiologists would comment on the swollen
cans/botulism thread I'd appreciate it. I hate to throw the stuff out.
Respondents will be granted a lifetime supply of answers to
structural-entomology questions (_my_ area of expertise).
Thanks in advance,
Cam Lay
Return to table of contents
From: John Wilkinson <jwilkins at imtn.tpd.dsccc.com>
Date: Wed, 19 Jun 1996 16:57:58 -0500
Subject: Stuck Fermentations
In hbd #2073, in response to a question from Domenick Venezia about stuck
fermentations, Tracy Aquilla said:
>Considering that you may have overpitched this
>batch and the OG is only about 'average', it's also possible that yeast
>growth quickly became FAN-limited, especially if you used much malt extract
>in the recipe.
If the batch was overpitched why would it matter that the growth became
FAN-limited? Wouldn't there be enough yeast to do the job without growth?
Or won't yeast ferment without growing at the same time?
Also, it has been mentioned by some (AL K. and others, I think) that as the
yeast population grows, the growth rate slows. Is the population density
growth limiting? If so, wouldn't this have the same effect as low
FAN levels of an overpitched batch?
John Wilkinson - Brewing in East Texas
Return to table of contents
From: BOBKATPOND at aol.com
Date: Wed, 19 Jun 1996 18:42:14 -0400
Subject: iodophor
Robs writes:
Interesting to note that while working in Operating Rooms, it was
not uncommon for certain surgeons to rinse out an open abdomen with an
Iodophor/saline solution, suction it out and repeat. Particularly in the
presence of abdominal infection, or when spilled bowel contents were
present. One surgeon noted that the patient would be able to taste it for a
few days post-op, but that was a small price to pay for an opportunity to
offset any further infection.
I can't really comment on the taste. But the practice of irrigating an
abdomen with iodophor is no longer done. It was found that the patient could
easily absorb toxic quanities of iodine. In the studies that were done a
catheter was left in at surgery and continous irrigation was done after the
abdomen was closed, so they did have more than a brief exposure. Other
studies have shown no therapeutic benefit to using iodophor intra
abdominally. Usually just saline is used or sometimes with an antibiotic.
Bob Morris
Return to table of contents
From: walter at lamar.ColoState.EDU (Brian J Walter (Brewing Chemist))
Date: Thu, 20 Jun 1996 09:49:06 -0600 (MDT)
Subject: Re: WBC
Rob Moline wrote:
> >From: "Bryan L. Gros" <grosbl at ctrvax.Vanderbilt.Edu>
> >
> seems like a lot of beers that we consider "defining the style"
> >weren't listed. No mention of Pilsner Urquell, Sierra Nevada Pale Ale,
> >Anchor Steam, Pete's Wicked Ale, and even Salvator. Either they
> >didn't win, or they didn't enter. What does it mean to make a better
> >bohemian pilsner than PU? Can PU be out of style? Also, no german
> >beers won for Kolsh, Alt, or any of the four wheat styles.
Most of the "style defining" beers not present on the winners list were
not entered. I know for a fact that Anchor did not enter, and I don't
remember seeing SNPA either. As did Rob, I also heard that there will be
a list of the breweries and what they entered on the AOB web page sometime
soon.
Make sure you look at the winners list a little closer also. For
example, Edelweiss a silver in the weizen category and a gold in the
dunkel weizen category. Edelweiss is in either Austria or Germany, but
is listed under Pa's Bier, Inc. Long Beach CA -- the importer. Paulaner
dunkel weizen won the silver in the dunkel weizen category. Paulaner is
obviously in Germany. Aventinus won the gold in the weizenbock category,
another German beer. The winners list is a bit confusing because of the
importers, but my impression was that the imported beers won more medals
based on a per entry status. (A greater percentage of the imported beers
won medals than the american beers entered, I believe).
> I'm told that by Friday, there should be a list of all participating
> breweries, products, and judges.
>
> >Third, some funny names. Augsburger Doppelbock won a bronze
> >for bock, not doppelbock. And Stovepipe Porter won a bronze for
> >European dark lager. Lager? I guess these are marketing names and
> >the beers were entered in the appropriate category.
> >
Just because Augsburger calls their bock a doppelbock doesn't mean it is
a doppelbock. Brewers call their beers whatever they want. Do you
really think Sam Adams Cranberry Lambic was supposed to be a lambic?
Neither did Jim Koch. It is all marketing.
> This is something that has more than a few folks wondering as well.
> Last years GABF had a "*.* Ale" that won in a lager category, as well. Now
> I'm sure that without a test for the presence and/or absence of certain
> sugars, there are many products that would be capable of emulating a
> different style, or yeast, and how would the judges know?
Not only that, something a brewery calls a porter may well be brewed as a
dark lager.
> Seems to me
> though, that an obvious name like "ale" in a lager competition would be
> certain to draw the attention of someone, if not the judges, then certainly
> the person who has to assemble the beers for tasting, or the person who has
> to ascribe a name to a number at the conclusion of judging. Maybe this is
> one of those "Great Cosmic Unknowns."
The judges obviously do not see the names of the beers until the awards
ceremony. And just as in homebrew competitions, it is not the organizers
job to second guess the category a brewer entered a certain beer in.
When beers that seemed to be entered wrong by name came up they were
double checked against all the paperwork (which was confirmed by the
brewer) to make sure everything was correct (I know the people who
organized the judging, which is how I know this info).
> I do agree that there are names used
> by marketers that do not reflect the true nature of the product. But, it
> does make you reconsider when deciding which category to enter. "Maybe my
> *.* beer would be more competitive in this other category," where maybe
> there weren't so many entries last year or any other reason!
I think most of it is "My doppelbock is really a bock, so I am going to
enter it there, as the doppelbock judges slammed it last year" kind of thing.
> >American beers certainly dominated, which indicates that there are
> >a lot of diverse and quality beers being brewed here. Great Britain was
> >almost shut out, as was Germany. I'm sure this has to do with shipping
> >problems. They should do next year's competition in Europe and
> >see how the brews stack up.
Again check the beer/brewery name. More German and British beers won
than you think.
> Frankly, I was amazed at the small number of participating
> breweries. With 3000 invitations sent out, for only 250 or so breweries to
> be interested seems like it could be just a 1st year situation, where the
> breweries wanted to see how the whole deal played out before making the
> go-ahead decision to participate. One of my customers said that he could
> easily understand why small fish like me would be eager to get in, while he
> doubted that any of the better established track records of some major
> European breweries would be enhanced by an "American up-start competition."
> The event will be 2 years from now in Barcelona. They plan to run it in
> conjunction with the international beer marketers conventions, which
> apparently meet just every other year.
>
> >Well, just my comments. I like this idea better than the GABF, which
> >has boiled down to winning ribbons for marketing purposes. But if
> >the best beers aren't entered, then the results don't mean as much.
Seriously, what other reasons are there than marketing to enter such a
competition? You spend $100 per beer and shipping to enter the WBC. Do
you think a brewer is going to do this to stroke their ego? Do you
really think the brewer is not thinking of the good press his brewery
will get by doing well?
I agree that the competition needs the big names to enter to really gain
prestige though.
Good Day,
- --bjw
Brian J Walter | walter at lamar.colostate.edu
Chem Graduate Student | Homebrewer | RUSH Rocks Best!
Colorado State Univ | BJCP Certified Beer Judge| Green Bay Packers
Fort Collins, CO | Pres Mash Tongues HB Club| Eleven Times NFL Champs
Brian J Walter | walter at lamar.colostate.edu
Chem Graduate Student | Homebrewer | RUSH Rocks Best!
Colorado State Univ | BJCP Certified Beer Judge| Green Bay Packers
Fort Collins, CO | Pres Mash Tongues HB Club| Eleven Times NFL Champs
Return to table of contents
From: "David R. Burley" <103164.3202 at CompuServe.COM>
Date: 19 Jun 96 18:54:20 EDT
Subject: Copy of: Brewing Techniques
Russ, Your address didn't work for me, so I'm posting it here. e-mail is OK
Dave
- ---------- Forwarded Message ----------
From: David R. Burley, 103164,3202
TO: Russ Broeder, INTERNET:r-broeder at ds.mc.ti.com
DATE: 6/19/96 3:24 PM
RE: Copy of: Brewing Techniques
Russ,
BT sounds like my kind of zine. Who is the publisher?
Dave Burley
103164.3202 at compuserve.com
Return to table of contents
From: Charlie Scandrett <merino at buggs.cynergy.com.au>
Date: Thu, 20 Jun 1996 09:51:28 +1000 (EST)
Subject: HSA
David Burley posted some good stuff on rates of oxygen adsorption, BUT
>What is the big deal about HSA versus CSA? From a rate of reaction standpoint,
>100 deg C versus 20 deg C will mean a rate of reaction difference of
>2X2X2x2x2X2X2X2 = 256. Based on the reaction rate declining by a factor of two
>for every 10 deg C decline in temperature. So cooling down will slow down the
>reaction, but with our penchant for bubbling in oxygen and long term exposure
>before the carbon dioxide sweeps out the oxygen, we will still have ( within a
>factor of 5 or so) the same effect from hot or cold side absorption. In fact,
>oxygen is substantially less soluble in hot wort than in cold, so with HSA
and a
>closed fermentation with no oxygen added as CSA, the damage could be less.
What
>am I missing?
What you are missing is that HSA (hot side aeration) is not just dissolving
O2 in wort. It is the oxygenation of Mellanoids and fatty acids. This
reaction slows exponentially I think below about 70C, it is considered
insignificant below that threshold. The darkening mellanoids form in
unoxygenated wort, but are in a reduced state. This lowers the redox
potential of the final beer, greatly prolonging its shelf life.
DB>Remember, professional brewers exclusively use closed boiling which we don't
>have the opportunity to practice in most cases due to boil-over potential. To
>me an hour at a rolling boil in a small kettle ( high surface to volume ratio)
>in the presence of air will do plenty of HSA, oxidation and browning. Giving
>lots of by products and beer darkening. What am I missing?
The solubility of O2 is about 1.54 x 10E-5 at 100C (boiling)i.e. 2/3 that at
pitching temps, however the one way passage of water vapour (steam)
effectively insulates your wort by excluding air, even in an open boil. A
wind blowing across your kettle may change this, but the scrubbing effect of
steam bubble movement is still very significant.
And, yes, volatile byproducts of maillard reactions are removed. In fact a
lot of design effort has gone into heating calandria in commercial boilers
to do this because they have a negative effect on aroma.(mainly the
methyl-butanals). I am fabricating a similar calandria/fountain for
direct-fired homebrew kettles. If successful, I'll offer the design free to
some appropriate homebrew manufacturer.
Charlie (Brisbane, Australia)
Return to table of contents
From: Sjackson at x-net.net
Date: 19 Jun 1996 23:16:48 EST
Subject: Radler bier
Radler bier is indeed a great thrist quencher. Since it is literally
"the bicycle riders beer" is was so designed. As a cyclist who lived
in Bavaria for 6 years and one who spent many hours in the gasthaus I
must say that radler bier is made from what the house pils is and an
equal amount of limonade (white lemonade). I have a cool clear stein
with cycling images and a little handlebar type bell on the lid.
Suppose it is designed to warn pedestrians when the drunk cyclist is
walking the sidewalks.
Steve
Return to table of contents
From: THE HIGH AND MIGHTY PLAID GOD <PLAID at PLAID.COM>
Date: Thu, 20 Jun 1996 00:25:04 -0500
Subject: ps Those plaid jokes never get old...
>Thanks,
>
>- - Jerry Cunningham
> Annapolis, MD
>
>ps Those plaid jokes never get old... (extreme sacasm intended)
That's -15 points for spelling Jerry.
Do not anger the PLAID GODS Jerry or pay the price of PLAID. Your Mortal
follies gather no sympathy from THE GODS OF PLAID.
- -YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED!
REPENT PLAID SINNER
Return to table of contents
From: John Miller {83802} <jwm at swl.msd.ray.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Jun 1996 07:35:55 -0400
Subject: Force carbonation
I've been force carbonating beer for about six months ... When I do, my
brew becomes cloudy. It does eventually clear up, by the last glass
anyways. The carbonation and consumption is performed at room
temperature. Also, I use irish moss during the last 10 minutes of
boil. Has anybody else had this happen? Is there a way to prevent
it?
TIA ~ John Miller
Return to table of contents
From: GEORGE DIETRICH - ACME <GEORGE at ACMEMILL.MHS.CompuServe.COM>
Date: 20 Jun 96 08:05:03 EDT
Subject: FAN Levels in Extract
We have seen the statement that extract brews sometimes suffer from low FAN
(Free Amino Nitrogen) levels. Why would this be in an all malt (no other
added sugars) extract? Isn't the only difference between a package of malt
extract syrup and a wort that we produced from grain be the amount of
remaining water?
George
Return to table of contents
From: KennyEddy at aol.com
Date: Thu, 20 Jun 1996 08:21:54 -0400
Subject: Chlorine Filter Addendum
I posted a brief reply an HBD or three ago about charcoal filters for
chlorine removal, where I said they remove chlorine but "not much else". I
received this E-mail from an on-line brewing buddy -- name withheld to
protect the insolent:
>Being the vigilant lurker that I am, I wanted to embellish on something you
>said today in HBD. Activated charcoal filters remove chlorine, true, but
>just as importantly, they remove all DOC, such as organic contaminants,
>pesticides, virtually any hydrocarbon, etc. Based on the general principal
of
>"likes dissolve likes"----the organics partition into the activated carbon
>until the active sites on the carbon are saturated, then the filter media
>must be replaced. I'm frequently too chickenshit to actually subject myself
>to public scrutiny. ;-)
Poultry-feces or not, I thought his own words said it better than I could
summarize. Sorry, Tim (oops).
What *I* meant as far as "not much else" was in terms of the
"brewing-related" ions, but the filter certainly is designed to otherwise
"clean up" your water as noted above.
Ken Schwartz
KennyEddy at aol.com
http://users.aol.com
Return to table of contents
From: George_De_Piro at berlex.com (George De Piro)
Date: Thu, 20 Jun 1996 08:49:05 -0700
Subject: RE: Strange mash schedule
Jerry Cunningham writes that he used a 127-164-146-148-150-152-170
mash schedule, and was wondering what it did.
In short, the rest at 127 broke down large proteins into smaller ones
(127 favors protease over peptidase). The step up to 164 is quite
unconventional. Even though you rested there a short time (2-3 min. I
think), the mash was probably over 150 for a while time during the
trip to 164, so I would bet that most (if not all) the beta amylase
was denatured. You probably denatured a good amount of your alpha
amylase, also (most homebrew texts recommend mash-out at 165-168F for
5 min. to denature all enzymes).
Bringing the mash back down to 146 was almost pointless, because there
could not have been enough beta amylase left to do anything. If you
had some alpha amylase left, some conversion of starch to
unfermentable dextrins would occur.
The same holds true for the small steps you took up to 152. These low
temps favor beta amylase activity, but there probably wasn't any left!
My guess would be that you ended up with a very unfermentable wort,
possibly with a lot of starch left in it (did you do an iodine test to
check for conversion?).
The weird smell in your fermenter can be caused by the yeast you're
using, or by invading microbes munching on the starch that the yeast
can't metabolize.
In the future, you can do a mash schedule featuring a dextrin rest
before the lower temp saccharification by following a decoction
schedule. This way, only part of the mash is heated to the high temp
that denatures the beta amylase. Dextrins are made, then the thick
mash is added back and they can be broken down to fermentable sugars
by beta amylase at ~150F.
George De Piro (Nyack, NY)
Return to table of contents
From: Bill Giffin <billg at maine.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Jun 1996 09:22:58 -0500
Subject: High gravity brewing
Good morning,
Both George DePiro and Jim DiPalma are correct in their assessements
of the high gravity brewing thread.
The use of the proper yeast, the proper mash temps, and the
fermentation temps will determine the final character of the finished
beer.
Newcastle Brown is a blend which blends a low gravity beer with a
high gravity beer after fermentation. I think this gives some credence
to the reduction of gravity at the end of primary fermentation.
It is easier to brew a high gravity beer that ferments out to a 1/3
gravity then it is with a low gravity beer. The low gravity beer is quite
apt to have too low a terminal gravity. Having a higher final gravity
can add to the mouthfeel and the malty character of the beer. This adds
too George's case for dilution after primary fermentation.
Jim says:
>Conversely, sharp flavors such as hop bitterness and dark roasted
malts are Bad Things(tm), since they will contribute to the impression
that the beer is thin and watery.
Hops and speciality grains such as dark malt are like salt and pepper.
They have to be in balance with the beer. Can I use "Bad Things(tm)"
Jim? I will anyway . Hops and dark malts in low gravity beers are not
Bad Things. It is only when they are used in too high a quantity for a
low gravity beer are they unpleasant.
In fact roasted barley when used in low quantities, say an ounce for a
five gallon batch, adds a sweet malty note to the beer.
Bill
Return to table of contents
From: wesc at mails.imed.com
Date: Thu, 20 Jun 96 08:53:59 cst
Subject: HANDMADE CIGARS AND HOMEBREW
SINCE I BREW MY OWN BEER, I WAS LOOKING TO ROLL MY OWN CIGARS. DOES
ANYONE KNOW ANYWHERE I COULD FIND A "HOW TO" BOOK OR MAIL ORDER HOUSE
FOR THE RAW MATERIALS. I HAVE SURFED THE NET AND HAVE HAD NO REAL
LUCK. THE ONLY THINGS I'VE FOUND ARE PLACES THAT WILL SELL ME THE
FINISHED CIGARS OR CIGAR OF THE MONTH CLUBS.
Return to table of contents
From: "David R. Burley" <103164.3202 at CompuServe.COM>
Date: 20 Jun 96 10:05:20 EDT
Subject: Enzymes/Maltiness
Brewsters:
Jim Busch responded to my comments on high gravity beers resulting sometimes
from too short a saccharification time at high temperatures.
Jim, you and I both agree, I think. I am talking about relative rates of
disappearance. A wort is a dynamic thing. Enzyme accelerated reaction rates, in
fact, cover a broad range of temperatures, generally bell curve type in shape (
at a constant enzyme concentration). The temperatures we normally associate
with an enzyme is its maximum rate in a temp vs rate plot ( at a constant enzyme
concentration). It is of course active at much lower and higher temperatures.
e.g. The amylases are active in the 130 deg F range, it is just that unless the
starch has been pre-gelatinized, they don't do anything. Likewise at the high
end they are also active, but their concentration and rate constant are both
substantially reduced over time and therefore their effect is less.
The issue I was trying to bring out in my discussion was that enzymes degrade
faster at the higher temperatures and therefore we have competing reactions in
the wort - the decomposition of the enzyme which is temperature dependent and
amylolysis whose rate constant is dependent on the temperature and on the enzyme
concentration. Ways to counteract this is by 1) increasing the time at the
upper temperatures so the beta amylase( even though its concentration and
efficiency is declining at the upper temperatures) can do its stuff and to 2)
increase the concentration of all enzymes present by using a little stiffer
mash. Both of these actions will improve the chances of increasing the
concentration of fermentables for a saccharification step carried out at a
higher temperature. I know that the production of sugar interferes with the
amylolytic enzyme's action and, therefore, we have this peculiar phenomenon that
reducing the concentration of the enzyme increases the net rate of reaction over
the complete reaction, but this really only becomes important at the end of the
reaction, which in our high temperature case won't make much difference in the
profile, since the beta Amylase will be substantially reduced.
Paulaner Octoberfest's "malty" taste is due to caramel type malts used in its
production. For a given recipe, having a higher FG will produce a maltier beer.
- -----------------------------------
Calvin Perilloux of Erding, Germany ( send some Hefeweiss - quick!) gave a
thorough explanation of why the Reinheitsgebot is no longer enforced. US Bud can
be sold even though it uses adjuncts. Thanks for answering my question.
Why don't we give the politicians something else to play with, so they will
leave our beer alone!
Keep on brewin'
Dave Burley
Return to table of contents
From: "David R. Burley" <103164.3202 at CompuServe.COM>
Date: 20 Jun 96 10:07:35 EDT
Subject: Copy of: Ginjo Beer
- ---------- Forwarded Message ----------
From: David R. Burley, 103164,3202
TO: Harold R. Wood, INTERNET:hrwood at uog9.uog.edu
DATE: 6/20/96 8:52 AM
RE: Copy of: Ginjo Beer
Harold:
re: your question on Ginjo Beer
The Koji ferment used in the production of Sake is a mixture of an amylase
producing mold called Aspergillus Niger and yeasts. Amylase acting on the
starch
produces sugar from unmalted grains. Rice beer has been produced for centuries
using this method. I presume this method is used to produce the starting
material for Sochu, the 30% alc distilled liquor ( reputed by some to be
derived
from sweet potatoes - but this may be a translation problem) drunk mixed with
hot water. I always presumed it was rice based, but it may use other forms of
starch ,
e. g.potatoes (like vodka). The Koreans and Chinese have a similar drink that
on some occasions is darker and sweeter called Soju.
I suppose it is an easy transition to use Koji fement with barley, but in my
many visits to Japan, I never tasted Ginjo Beer.
Keep on brewin'
Dave Burley
Return to table of contents
From: "David R. Burley" <103164.3202 at CompuServe.COM>
Date: 20 Jun 96 10:07:33 EDT
Subject: Copy of: Re: Ireland Brews
- ---------- Forwarded Message ----------
From: David R. Burley, 103164,3202
TO: Tony McCauley, INTERNET:afmccaul at rs6000.cmp.ilstu.edu
DATE: 6/20/96 7:15 AM
RE: Copy of: Re: Ireland Brews
Tony,
I don't have MJ's World Book of Beers which I think is the one you want, I have
his 1993 orig copyright "Beer Companion" a very good hardbound.
Anyway here's the contents on Ireland
1) Beamish and Crawford pp 176,181
Dry Stout - Located in Cork
B&C is owned by Carling O'Keefe of Canada and now by Foster's
2) Cherry's p112
Ale brewery (presumably a bitter)
owned by Guiness
used to brew Phoenix, now brewed at MacCardle see below
3)Dempsey's p112
Opened in late 1980's with cask conditioned ale, but closed, bottom
fermented version is brewed by Huber in Monroe, Wis. USA
4) Guiness p 112, 176-8, 181-2
Three ale breweries:
Cherry's of Waterford
Smithwick's of Kilkenny
MacCardle of Dundalk
Dry Stout (of course)
5) GH Lett p 111
15 th century brewery closed in 1956,licenses to Coors in US under
George Killian ale name
6)Macardle p112
ale owned by Guiness
Phoenix Beer
7) Murphy p176, 182
Dry Stout
8) Perry's of Rathdowney, County Laois p 112
closed in 1960's - the last independent ale brewery in Ireland
9) Smithwick's of Kilkenny p112,113
ale house owned by Guiness, ale can be called Kilkenny, but Smithwick's
is the name of the principal Irish Ale
SO, it looks like most of the brewing in Ireland is done by Guiness (which I
think you already knew).
Keep on Brewin',
Dave Burley
Return to table of contents
From: n43a at cnsp.navy.mil
Date: Thu, 20 Jun 96 09:32:26 PST
Subject: GOTT COOLERS
Rubbermaid...the makers of Gott coolers...has a web site. I believe
the URL is http://www.rubbermaid.com. They provide details about
their products and provide a method to order direct from Rubbermaid.
The 10 gallon cooler comes delivered to your door for about $60.00.
There is also an 800 number that can be gotten from an 800 directory.
I've got a 5 gallon one, but I'm going to go get a 10 gallon...if you
undershoot the the temperatures, there just isn't enough room to add
much hot water when you are trying to mash 12 or so pounds.
John Kneipp
Return to table of contents
From: jdecarlo at mail04.mitre.org (John A. DeCarlo)
Date: Thu, 20 Jun 96 12:37:25 -0400
Subject: Re: Priming
Bruce Herron mentions problems with uneven carbonation due to uneven mixing
of priming syrup. So here is my contribution towards improving that
process.
1) Since you want to boil your priming syrup for sanitation anyway, mix it
in while it is still warm--the overall thermal influence should be small.
2) Put the priming syrup in the bottling bucket first, then rack onto it.
Direct the siphon tube along the edge of the bottling bucket to cause the
wort to swirl around in the bottling bucket as it siphons in.
3) Don't bother to stir, as everything should be mixed very well now.
Return to table of contents
From: "Robert Perron" <robert at lclcan.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Jun 1996 12:52:59 -0400
Subject: re: Dogs + Hops = Malignant Hyperthermia.
To me this is a very relevent discussion, however, does anyone know exactly
what it is about hops that affects dogs?
Are they affected by spent hops? Fresh hops? etc.
Are all dogs susceptible or are there any other factors?
- --
Robert Perron <robert at lclcan.com>
Return to table of contents
From: Peter Thompson [remote] <pthompso at coe.edu>
Date: Thu, 20 Jun 1996 13:16:28 -0500
Subject: spoiled starters
I am having a terrible problem with infections in my yeast starters.
Four packs of Wyeast have bitten the dust and I'm at my wit's end.
Each time I have stepped up sanitation measures, washing and soaking
with chlorine everything that comes in contact with the starter.The
last time I switched to iodine, confident that that would kill this
nasty chlorine-resistant bug that must be living in my kitchen. But
no luck. Within six hours the starter was bubbling and emiting a
sour, cider-like odor, just like the other three did.
Has anyone else had a problem like this? What can I do?
Peter Thompson
Return to table of contents
From: "Tracy Aquilla" <aquilla at salus.med.uvm.edu>
Date: Thu, 20 Jun 96 16:06:32 CDT
Subject: Re: esters
In Digest #2075:
"David R. Burley" <103164.3202 at CompuServe.COM> wrote:
>Finally, on the question of ester formation. There seems to be two
>diametrically opposed opinions, sometimes put forth by the same person. More
>oxygen will give more, or sometimes, less esters? I'm confused.
My opinion is that this is highly dependent on the yeast strain. I also
believe pitching rate is significant, although there is some literature to
the contrary. For now, let's just say it's a complex process and broad
generalizations may not mean much.
>Is there a problem here in confusing esters (a product of reaction between
>alcohol and a carboxylic acid) and aldehydes and ketones ( an oxidation
product
>of alcohols and related products). Is any odoriferous substance( whether or
>not it is chemically an ester) called an ester by some people?
Doubtful, although I suppose it's possible. As far as I know, the folks
involved in the discussion so far know what esters are.
>I understand that oxygen can (and is necesssary to) oxidize ( directly or
>through an enzyme catalysed reaction) an alcohol to an acid so that with a
>higher acid concentration we will get more ester formation.
Oxygen isn't really necessary for oxidation; other oxidizers work too (eg.
melanoidins). Since esters don't form spontaneously at any appreciable rate,
enzymes are the key to ester synthesis. However, it has been demonstrated
experimentally that increasing the concentration of the substrate pools
(alcohols and acids) can increase the rate of ester synthesis. So you are
correct, increasing concentrations of acids (and alcohols) can lead to
increased ester levels.
>that aldehydes and ketones are partial oxidation products of alcohols on the
>way to formation of acids. More oxidation would give more of them, but
>continued oxidation would carry these products to acids and more ester
>formation.
Not necessarily. Ester synthase activity is needed to catalyze the reaction.
If these enzymes aren't present and active, no esters will be formed, even
if the substrate pools are huge.
>Since these products are require oxygen, how could increasing the oxygenation
>reduce the formation of ester and related intemediates? What am I missing?
For one thing, oxygen is not required for oxidation. The current dogma is
that oxygenation inhibits esterification by redirecting substrates through a
different pathway. I'm researching another article now, this time on esters.
I expect it to take me at least a couple of months to complete. Expect more
tidbits as the data flow in.
Tracy
Return to table of contents