HOMEBREW Digest #2355 Sat 22 February 1997

[Prev HBD] [Index] [Next HBD] [Back]

		Digest Janitor: janitor@ brew.oeonline.com
		Many thanks to the Observer & Eccentric Newspapers of 
		Livonia, Michigan for sponsoring the Homebrew Digest.
				URL: http://www.oeonline.com

  Raspberry Cream (Cody Payne)
  Re: Zinc anti-skunking (Steve Alexander)
  Yeast Culture Conditions... (Brian Deck)
  "Yow-yowing" ("Val J. Lipscomb")
  re: Stainless Steel Pots + botulism + ("C.D. Pritchard")
  Re: Cold Break separation using CF wort chiller ("Alan L. Edwards")
  Re: dry hopping in the bottle? ("Alan L. Edwards")
  Composition of extract from steeped versus mashed grains (Brian and Carol Dixon)
  brew dogs.. (Dckdog)
  joining the digest/ (Russell Robinson )
  summary re: whole hops source (Sharon/Dan Ritter)
  Skunkiness; Kegs on stovetop (Ron Gasik)
  Warming up a stout ("Tim M. Dugan")
  Re: Mash methods (Geoff Scott)
  AHA/AOB: the $100,000 Question (Part 1) (Louis Bonham)
  AHA/AOB: the $100,000 Question (Part 2) (Louis Bonham)
  Re: mixing bitter and mild (Mark Peacock)
  Homemade RIMS question ("Mike Szwaya")
  siphon filter thingies (mark evans)
  Semi-RIMS (Jay Ward)
  RE: HBD protocol / chemotherapy and beer ("Keith Royster")
  Water Quality Web Site (James_Nachman_at_USCC__P3)
  home unitanks ("Bryan L. Gros")
  partial mash/old hops (Paul Brian)
  sierra nevada ale yeast (HOUCK KEITH A)

NOTE NEW HOMEBREW ADDRESS: brew.oeonline.com Send articles for __publication_only__ to homebrew at brew.oeonline.com (Articles are published in the order they are received.) Send UNSUBSCRIBE and all other requests, ie, address change, etc., to homebrew-request@ brew.oeonline.com BUT PLEASE NOTE that if you subscribed via the BITNET listserver (BEER-L at UA1VM.UA.EDU), you must unsubscribe by sending a one line e-mail to listserv at ua1vm.ua.edu that says: UNSUB BEER-L Thanks to Pete Soper, Rob Gardner and all others for making the Homebrew Digest what it is. Visit the HBD Hall of Fame at: http://brew.oeonline.com/ 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: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 15:12:46 -0700 (MST) From: Cody Payne <paynec at ucsu.Colorado.EDU> Subject: Raspberry Cream I just recently had a raspberry cream brew made by Bluemoon. I was wondering if anyone could tell me what gives the beer its cream flavor? Is it lactose like in a sweet stout or what? Thanks, Cody Payne paynec at ucsu.colorado.edu http://ucsu.Colorado.EDU/~paynec/Home.html Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 17:48:25 -0500 From: Steve Alexander <stevea at clv.mcd.mot.com> Subject: Re: Zinc anti-skunking David Burley wrote ... >Steve Alexander comments: >> I came across a patent application in a food sciences book that >> describes adding 0.5 ppm to 5 ppm of zinc to wort (added as zinc >> sulphate) to decrease hops skunking. The claim is that the zinc > ... >It is a nice thought and thanks, Steve, for passing it along but, in >the absence of real data, like, did they actually skunk a beer by >shining light into it and analyzing for prenyl mercaptan? > I am skeptical. Patent applications don't contain that sort of info. This was strictly a FWIW suggestion. I can't recommend it as a sure cure for skunkiness, just an interesing note for the experimentally inclined brewer. Might work - might not. >patent authors learned how to screw up yeast metabolism causing the >generation of hydrogen sulfide by adding zinc salts to the ferment. If >so, this has absolutely nothing to do with the photochemical reaction >of iso-alpha acids to produce prenyl mercaptan. Prenyl mecaptans contain sulphur, humulones don't. So where does the mercaptan sulphur come from ? Doesn't seem likely to come from the X-methyl-sulfides in the hops oils to me. Without knowing more about the chemistry producing the mercaptans from isohululones I'd be hesitant to state what is or isn't involved in this sequence of reactions. >Before adding zinc to my beer, I would like to have some actual data >from the patent or book that it really stopped or reduced >photochemical skunking. Any idea of the RDA for zinc? Toxicity? >Pharmacists... Actually ~0.5ppm zinc is a yeast growth requirement. 5ppm (5mg/L) will keep you well below any harmful dose unless you're planning on drinking more than 20 L/day regularly. 100mg/day is suggested as an upper limit for human ingestion. Note that a lot of zinc is lost in the yeast layer too. For a brief but referenced discussion of light-stuck beer see G.Fix's PoBS, I believe he may sites the references you seek. George says 400nm to 500nm light will skunk beer. 400-500 nm is well into the visible range and soft glass will be transparent to these wavelengths. Fix also stated that these reactions are well understood (tho not by me). Steve Alexander Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 16:50:27 -0600 From: Brian Deck <deck at pathbox.wustl.edu> Subject: Yeast Culture Conditions... Howdy: I have been subscribing to the Digest for over a year now and have been just a quiet observer, but lately I have been having a problem some of you old pros may be able to help with (hopefully) or at least find interesting. My problem is, apparently, contamination. There is a terrible "winey" taste in my last two batches, and they are <WAY> over-carbonated, sort-of like cola. I have been brewing almost three years now and I have never contaminated a batch since right as I was starting up brewing, and that was a different contamination. (That one had the characteristic white ring of bacteria in the bottle-necks at the surface, these do not. Also tasted different.) That said, I want to say that I am very cautious in my yeast culturing technique and I have a slight advantage: I work in a boilogical research laboratory. My yeast cultures are glycerol-frozen and stored in liquid nitrogen, and every time I thaw one to make a starter, I streak-plate in a sterile culture hood to make sure it is pure. I have caught low-level contaminations this way in the past before they could do any damage. I am also able to autoclave my carboys and bottles. (For those who may not have heard of one, an autoclave is a special pressurized oven used to sterilize instruments and heat liquids to boiling temperatures without them actually boiling.) At home I thoroughly soak in bleach anything that cannot be autoclaved eg. tubing. I realize some of you pooh-pooh bleach, but the problems with bleach are usually "over-doing" it, arent they? The only two things that I can think of are #1: I have just had poor luck lately and my sterile technique at home could use even more work (suggestions?), or #2: my yeast, specifically brewers yeasts that we all know and love, were never meant to be treated like laboratory yeasts, and they are somehow losing their "good" properties? NOTE: I culture them both in liquid culture (including my starter) and on solid agar plates here in the lab using a yeast propigation medium called YPD. It consists of 1% yeast extract and 2% bacto-peptone (both common laboratory media ingredients), and 2% glucose. That is all; it's very bare-bones stuff. Could the lovely brewers' yeasts be getting "sick" in this media, somehow becoming no longer capable of making my wort taste like beer? I have discussed this with some of my brewmeister freinds, and we just don't know. I HAVE made good beer in the past this way, but certainly not recently. Please feel free to criticize me in any way you feel like, I certainly need the help. I am getting <GASP> turned off on the whole homebrew thing lately because of this. P.S. Has anyone tried the yeast cultures from the Yeast Culure Kit Company in MI? I used these for the aforementioned last two batches, but surely that cant be the problem? Gratefully & Sorry So Wordy, Brian "I drank what?" -Socrates Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 17:37:32 -0600 (CST) From: "Val J. Lipscomb" <valjay at NetXpress.com> Subject: "Yow-yowing" Back when my brothers-in-law were pre-teens and fighting, yelling and hitting each other with large weapons, my Mother-in-law would say, "If you kids are gonna keep up that yow-yowing (sic), take it outside" To Dave, Bill and Al, I say, If you guys are gonna keep up that yow-yowing, take it outside the HBD. You are all learned and usually helpful, but the rest of us are tired of the &%$&^##$% "yow-yowing"!!! Val Lipscomb-Brewing in San Antonio Return to table of contents
Date: Sun, 16 Feb 1997 12:04:09 +0700 From: "C.D. Pritchard" <cdp at mail.chattanooga.net> Subject: re: Stainless Steel Pots + botulism + re: Stainless Steel Pots, William Rich noted he had large quantities of foam when the boil started and noted: >The bottom line is, I think anything less than a 10 gallon pot is too >small for 5 gallon batches. Opinions? I use a 33 qt. enamel pot with success for boiling 6 to 6.5 gal all grain worts. Over a propane burner, with a cover over the top and left unattended, it would very readily boil over. I remove the cover just prior to the onset of boiling (it's 2/3 on during preboil) and gently stir the foam back into the wort as it is formed during the first 5-10 mins. of the boil. After this initial crop of foam is taken care of, there's very little subsequent foaming. Others recommend skimming off the initial foam. - ------------------------------------------------- re: the ongoing wort canning and botulsim debate: I kinda started this juggernaut of a thread so, I feel like I own the readership a followup. I've have always canned starter worts via processing 30 minutes in a boiling water bath instead of the recommended pressure canner. Based on Scott's and others cautionary posts and some outside reading, I popped the top on a recently canned bottle of starter and tested it with pH paper. ~5.0! I've been lucky with this and the previous batches (~7 gals. total) 'cause I've not been "botulized" even tho' I always sample the starters before pitching and (usually) before stepping up. Henceforth, I'm continuing to use a boiling water bath for processing but I'll adjust the wort pH to <= 4.5 with lactic acid. - ------------------------------------------------- Bill Griffin flamed Al K. for proposing a web page listing of the errors in popular brewing texts and impugned Al's brewing expertise. Oh yeah, there was that alledged spelling error dig re: "compleat" (it may not be in Bill's spelling checker it is in the '79 Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary). Bill also said: >Instead of nitpicking you should praise the effort of those who are >honestly trying to help improve homebrewing. Or aren't you a big >enough person to do that? Finally, Bill wants any flames via private e-mail to "save bandwidth"! The brewing text authors in question are human as far as I know and hence can and do make errors. Other than buying a more expensive subsequent edition (when and if available...), I know of no errata published for the inevitable mistakes. For this reason, I'm eagerly awaiting Al's listing even tho' it too will probably have mistakes or items we disagree with. Also, we can question Al about his ideas and get feedback. Al posts regularly herein and I've learned alot from him and the threads spun from his posts. Other than George Fix (THANKS George!), I've never seen any Digest postings from the other authors defended by Mr. Griffin. I'm certianly not denigrating their HUGE contributions to homebrewing- it's just that one learns alot from the dialectic thesis/antithesis type of forum this Digest affords while books are largely a one-way exchange of ideas. An excellent example of this is the aforementioned botulism thread- the boiling water bath canning method w/o pH adjustment is straight out of Miller's book. I've also learned a little something about Bill Griffin from his unwarranted flaming of Al... Three cheers for Al's endeavor! - ------------------------------------------------- re: mass bottling Nathan Moore posted: >I think I will go with the PET bottles... I plan on using an >adaption of the PET keg system...I'm going to test this first but my >idea is to simply insert a hose through the bottom of the PET and use >silicon to seal it. If this method is tried, consider the following: - --Make sure the edges of the hole in the PET bottle are very smooth. Jagged edges will function as stress risers and hence greatly weaken the PET bottle. - --Hydrostatically pressure test the bottle before you use it. - --At least until you've some experience with completed kegs, put the completed keg into a larger, covered container in case the joint doesn't work. - --Roughen the surface of the penetration tubing to get a better bond with the silicone. I've had good luck with 3 liter PET soda bottles modified for use as short term (1 month) beer kegs and longer term (3 months so far) soda storage; however, the CO2-in and beer-out lines are in the caps instead of in the PET bottles themselves. Details are accessable via the URL in the sig. line below. c.d. pritchard cdp at chattanooga.net My brewing page: http://caladan.chattanooga.net/~cdp/index.html Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 16:24:57 -0800 From: "Alan L. Edwards" <ale at cisco.com> Subject: Re: Cold Break separation using CF wort chiller Nathan asks: | > | >Two things. Does anyone out there that uses a counterflow chiller have a | >system for removing break material from the fermentor? Harlan adds: | Yes, but it may seem a bit unorthodox. | | 1. Chill the cast out wort to ~45-50*F and transfer directly to a CO2-purged | carboy, careful not to admit any air. | | 2. Cover, and allow to sit overnight to settle trub and to reach pitching | temperature. | | 3. In morning, siphon wort off trub into primary fermenter, aerating well. I do this also, with all my beers except I only cool it to 65-70 and only wait a few hours for the trub to settle. (Also, I don't think that CO2 purging is necessary, if you make sure the tip of the racking hose is under the surface of the beer when you rack.) How do I get the trub to fall out of suspension so fast? Wheat. I add a half-pound of malted wheat to every batch solely for this purpose. I don't know the scientific explaination, but it works. I have experimented with different amounts of wheat (none, 4oz, 8oz) and adding the 8oz of wheat in my 5 gallon batches *definitely* makes the trub fall out of suspension much faster. I've also noticed a big difference in cooling methods on the action of trub percipitation. When I replaced my immersion chiller with a counter-flow chiller, I noticed that the trub fell *much* quicker, and was more compact. | >Second, can anyone describe what sort of "off flavors" end up in the final | >product if the break is not adequately removed? | | This I can't answer, but I'd like to ask the corollary: What are the | dangers, if any, to removing ALL the cold break? I don't have any hard data, | but with Wyeast 1968, I seem to be getting more active ferments WITH the | cold break. I noticed a marked improvement when I started removing the trub before fermentation, but have since forgotton what the difference is--I've been doing it this way for a few years now. Next beer I make, I'm only going to rack half of it off the trub. I'll let you all know what differences I find. However, I don't try to remove every trace of trub, as I have been told that that would be a bad idea. I let a little of the lighter trub siphon over toward the end of the racking. Alan Edwards (ale at cisco.com) H3CO.____ O CH3 Systems Administrator / / \ || | Chile-Head / Homebrewer HO-< >-C-N-C-(CH2)4-C=C-C-CH3 Cisco Systems Inc 408-526-5283 \____/ H2 H H H H Capsaicin Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 16:42:54 -0800 From: "Alan L. Edwards" <ale at cisco.com> Subject: Re: dry hopping in the bottle? Jeff Beaujon askes: > > Has anyone ever tried dry hopping in the bottle ? I just Yep! When I had fresh hops growing in my backyard, I bottle- hopped IPAs on two different occasions. I directly compared the hopped bottles with the unhopped and there was a big difference in the nose (surprise). > bottled a batch of American Brown Ale and got to wondering > what effect putting a couple hop pellets (they were some left-over > Northern brewer) into the bottle would have. I did it only with whole hop cones. The only problem is that the hop cone is a good nucleation site for the CO2 bubbles, and you get some foaming when you open the beer (but not gushing). > Will it add to the hop aroma/flavor? Definitely. > Will the three bottles get a nasty infection? No, in my case. I would say the risk of infection is *very* small. (Do you sterilize your hops when you dry-hop?) > Will it have any effect other than to cause > me to have little green things floating in my glass ? Probably some extra foaming like I mentioned earlier. Brew on, -Alan Alan Edwards (ale at cisco.com) H3CO.____ O CH3 Systems Administrator / / \ || | Chile-Head / Homebrewer HO-< >-C-N-C-(CH2)4-C=C-C-CH3 Cisco Systems Inc 408-526-5283 \____/ H2 H H H H Capsaicin Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 18:03:59 +0000 From: Brian and Carol Dixon <just_say_no at no.spam.com> Subject: Composition of extract from steeped versus mashed grains Looking for information or scientific info on the relative compositions of the extract gained from specialty grains and malts (crystals, brown, chocolate, black barley, black patent, roasted barley etc. etc.). I want to compare the composition of the extract gained by mashing the specialty grains and malts with the base malt(s) to the extract gained by steeping them in untreated water at 150-160 F. I have some references already, but am highly interested in verifying the results that I've read and experienced. Any experts out there? Noonan? You there? How about you, Dave Miller? (I just ate at your pub about a week ago on a business trip to Nashville...nice brews, nice food! See you next time!). George Fix? Meyers, Daniels, Richman??? Any other experts out there hanging around that I wasn't good enough to name? FYI, when I say 'composition' of the extract, I'm referring to color, flavor, fermentable, nonfermentable, and any other solubles or suspended solids that may end up in the extract. If you want to get very particular, then the question to answer is, can I get away with mashing only the base malts and then steeping the specialty grains and malts? The technique would be to calculate, using your known extract efficiency, the expected contribution to the SG in a mash. Then, knowing your extract efficiency for steeped grains, increase the amount of specialty grains and malts to derive the same contribution to SG in the wort. Or is it your opinion that even though the SG contribution was the same for each of the specialty grains and malts, that due to a different composition of the extracts (balance of the various components), the wort would not turn out to be the same after all? TIA! - -- Brian Bierkiester Brewery, Corvallis, Oregon Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 22:10:48 -0500 (EST) From: Dckdog at aol.com Subject: brew dogs.. Have to agree with a previous poster, labrador retrievers are my brewing pals. Just look at the colors, yellow, chocolate and black. Is there any beer color not represented here? I have a pair, a black and a yellow. They are both booze hags, don't dare leave a bottle or glass around or a slobbery tongue will find it's mark! Cheers, Dean Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 19:44:54 -0800 (PST) From: Russell Robinson <rob at mail.wsu.edu> Subject: joining the digest/ I would like to join the digest. How can I do this? Russ Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 20:09:24 -0800 From: Sharon/Dan Ritter <ritter at camasnet.com> Subject: summary re: whole hops source In HBD #2351 I posted this question: >My favorite supplier of whole hops went out of business a few months ago. >Can anyone recommend a mail order source for imported and domestic whole >hops of the highest quality? The feedback fell into two categories. Several people asked me to forward any responses I received (I assume they were also looking for a hops source) and everyone else (4) recommended Hop Tech as a source that met my criteria (it was unanimous!). Hop Tech's phone number is 1-800-379-4677 and they have a site on the WWW <http://www.hoptech.com>. Dan Ritter <ritter at camasnet.com> Ritter's MAMMOTH Brewery Grangeville, Idaho Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 15:53:43 -0600 From: Ron Gasik <ronster388 at worldnet.att.net> Subject: Skunkiness; Kegs on stovetop Dave Burley wrote: >I am skeptical, even though I have read it, that a few minutes >exposure of beer to bright sunlight can produce skunkiness. >It is especially hard to believe since it is through soft glass >which is not a good transmitter of ultraviolet in most cases. It's happenned to me, even on a cold Chicago winter day! Last winter on a bright, sunny, but cold (about 20 deg. F) winter day I poured a home-brewed Munich Helles into a clear mug and took it outside with me to go and split some firewood. After about 5-10 minutes of chopping, I went over to the beer and took a sip. It had turned into a skunky Beck's light in that short period of a time! I thought it was pretty cool, so I tried it again that same afternoon with an Oktoberfest and the same thing happenned. The beers were perfectly "un"skunky prior to taking them outside. Spencer asked: >Ok, so now I've been contradicted twice by folks who DO use converted >kegs on their stoves. I still don't see how, unless you've got >nothing above the stove. It certainly won't fit under my (stove) >hood. And do you stand on a stool to see inside the kettle, or what? Mine did fit, just barely, under the range hood. I usually would pull the stove about 1 1/2 feet away from the wall to give me more room. And yes! -I did have to stand on a stool to stir and to look into into the kettle. I forgot to add in my last post that I was able to maintain a 12-13 gallon boil on the stovetop. Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 1997 00:27:31 -0600 From: "Tim M. Dugan" <tdugan at netins.net> Subject: Warming up a stout OK, so maybe I've "relaxed and had a home-brew" a bit much tonight, but I was wondering what would be the effect of warming a 35 degree Fahrenheit beer (specifically a stout) in a microwave for oh say 10-20 seconds? Tonight I decided that I wanted one more home-brew, but all my beer was still quite cold. Dilemma. I'm sitting here with an empty glass, full bottle, waiting for the beer to warm up, thus the above question comes to mind. On a related, but a bit more serious note, which warms up faster an opened or an unopened bottle? Or does it really matter? I would think an opened bottle, but I don't have a good reason why. Well, my "Black-Lab Stout" is getting to a drinkable temperature, so I'll leave it at that. TIA Tim M. Dugan tdugan at netins.net M.U.G.Z. - Mississippi Unquenchable Grail Zymurgists Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 1997 07:43:44 -0500 From: ibex at interlog.com (Geoff Scott) Subject: Re: Mash methods In HBD 2353, Tad Seyler <tad at bimcore.emory.edu> wrote: >I have seen somewhere on the web, a homebrewer's site describing a mash >system where the mash is recirculated through a copper coil in the hot >liquor tank, for temp boosts. I am interested in hearing from anyone who >uses this method, or the location of the web site. Tad's looking for Rick Calley's site: http://www.pressenter.com/~rcalley/index.htm And perhaps more specifically: http://www.pressenter.com/~rcalley/how.htm regards, Geoff Scott ibex at interlog.com Brewing Page http://www.interlog.com/~ibex Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 1997 07:31:56 -0600 From: Louis Bonham <lkbonham at phoenix.net> Subject: AHA/AOB: the $100,000 Question (Part 1) As the AHA has responded here to the issues raised in r.c.b., in the interests of completeness here are some of the r.c.b. replies to the "response" of Mr. Papazian to the questions about the AHA's operations. Again, if any HBD readers lack newsserver access, I'll be happy to e-mail them the r.c.b. threads. Louis K. Bonham lkbonham at phoenix.net ========================================== In article <330A1899.5872 at aob.org>, charlie <charliep at aob.org> wrote: [a heartwarming story about warm and fuzzy genesis of the AHA.] That's a very nice story, Charlie, but it doesn't answer the question. Is the AHA an *association*, or a *company*? If it's the latter, why don't you say so? I'm sure if it were called "The American Homebrewer's Corporation" nobody would be very upset that the fees they pay - which are now somewhat deceptively referred to as "dues" - subsidize your travel. If the AHA is to be a real association of members, the members are the ones who should run it, through elections of officials. If it's a corporation, it should not be masquerading as an association. -A member (membership number on demand) - or is that a "customer"? - ----------YoYo-------------yoyo at tezcat.com-------------------------- "Whenever A annoys or injures B on the pretense of saving or improving X, A is a scoundrel" -Mencken's Law ================================================================== cathy wrote: > Again, I attempted before to explain the organizational structure of the > AOB many months ago. Please understand that we are a business with a > board of directors made up of business and professional people in the > Boulder/Denver area. These people take their board positions very > seriously. They do not answer to Charlie, in fact, it is exactly the > opposite, he answers to the board. I have a very basic question that I believe will cut to the heart of the matter. If the AOB is a business, who owns it? There are no stockholders. If the membership "owns" the AOB, they should have direct control over how it is structured and run through the election of officers and board members. Today, our involvement is limited to funding the business and none of the board members, officers or staff are in any way accountable to the membership. So again I pose my question: Who owns the AOB? As to Charlie's epistle, I can't feel sorry for *anyone* who makes six figures drinking and writing about beer. By the way Charlie, there are some of us working a lot more than 50 hours a week for much less money having much less fun. Rich Scotty (membership number available on request) Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 1997 07:33:39 -0600 From: Louis Bonham <lkbonham at phoenix.net> Subject: AHA/AOB: the $100,000 Question (Part 2) [more r.c.b. replies to Charlie] Recall the the admonition I received last year from longtime AHA Board of Advisors Member Jeff Frane (posted in full an earlier message): >The people running the AHA are not going to give up control or >money, period. If you think they might, you're deluding yourself. After reading Charlie's recent posting, there should be no doubt in anyone's mind that Mr. Frane was 100% correct. We can add that not only will the people running the AHA never give up control or money, they won't even discuss those issues. >I can recall the days [snip] As Yo-Yo inquired, what does this history have to do with the price of tea (or beer)? The questions that I and others have been asking for months are essentially (1) why can't AHA (and IBS) "members" have any role whatsoever in selecting the officers or directors of the AOB/AHA, (2) why should this organization be paying Charlie in excess of $100,000 for a position that apparently involves little or no management, oversight, or apparently much else other than why globetrotting and promoting his Avon-published books, and (3) WHY WON'T THE AOB ANSWER THESE QUESTIONS?? (BTW, per Charlie's confessions of how much he has made in the past from non-AHA jobs, perhaps in the interest of completeness he would also tell us how much he makes from Avon and his other publishers -- and whether these for-profit publishers are ever asked to reimburse the AHA for all the free press the AHA gives gives TCNJOHB.) >For those of you who are aware of the personal attacks on me, I must >sincerely admit I am very uncomfortable defending what I hear has been >said about me (I haven't personally read these messages, but have been >told about their general nature). I don't feel it necessary to defend >my personal lifestyle, philosophy, reasons for being involved in the >beer business, my salary, or my position at the Association of Brewers. This really sums up the problem at the AOB/AHA. The head of the AOB won't even bother to *read* -- much less respond to -- complaints about that organization, and feels it is not necessary to explain to AHA members why they are getting their money's worth by paying his stratospheric salary and benefits. And the AHA wonders why its membership is declining! >There's really nothing in my life that I feel the need to defend. I >enjoy it immensely [snip] No one doubts that you're having a good time, Charlie. The question is whether a nonprofit organization should be paying you that much money to do so. >Finally, I'd like to tap out a few most important words of thanks to all >those beer enthusiasts and brewers out there that provide the >Association of Brewers the support and continuing confidence that has >allowed us to provide the educational and informational services, >products and events that millions of Americans have benefited from or >have been touched by. And, of course, pay Charlie in excess of $100,000 per annum, for which he will thank you but won't explain why he should be receiving it. When this thread started last year, it was entitled "Boycott the AHA." A number of readers indicated that critics should try to work and fix what everyone (even the AOB) acknowledges are problems in that that organization, rather than simply grousing about it. As Charlie's posting makes crystal clear, that recommended course of action is illusory: as several Board of Advisors have told me repeatedly, Charlie and his minions simply won't do anything that they don't want to do -- even something as simply as answering questions. And there's nothing AHA members can do about it. So what do we do? It is now apparent that trying to work with the AHA is a waste of time. I suggest first putting your time and money into your local homebrew club, rather than the AHA. Second, I suggest reminding the AHA of their response (more accurately, their lack of a response) to this thread the next time they come looking for volunteers (and certified beer judges) for their various events (as Steve Moore noted, most of what they do could not be done without *lots* of volunteer labor). Third, if you've not already do so, switch your reading from Zymurgy to BT or BYO. And fourth, maybe invest in shirts, buttons, and bumperstickers that read: Relax, don't worry, just send money (and don't ask any questions) Louis K. Bonham lkbonham at phoenix.net ======================================================================= Charlie Papazian wrote: > I enjoy it immensely and the fact that I've been part of a team here > at the Association of Brewers that has helped increase the quality of > life for millions of people in the United States and in other parts of > the world. It feels really neat to have a great staff, supporting > members who offer constructive comments and to see positive results. > "It's cool." And I would wish this for anyone else who has the notion > of helping others improve the quality of life. It was a good speech. Unfortunately, I don't think he's going to do that well in the swimsuit competition. Steve Moore Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 1997 07:35:16 -0400 From: peacock at webspun.com (Mark Peacock) Subject: Re: mixing bitter and mild > Rob Moline's articles on Porter are much appreciated. He mentions mixing > stale and mild for Porter, and he mentions mixing modern-day mixing of > bitter and mild. I confess to being largely ignorant of BOTH practices > (actually *each* practice). Here's an anecdotal data point -- A friend of mine from Lancashire used to mix draught bitters with bottled brown ale to make (naturally) a "brown and bitters". The bottled brown ale was low in alcohol -- I seem to remember the label saying about 2.5%, though I'm reaching for some very dusty neurons. His rationale for the mixture was: 1) Lower alcohol content meant a longer and more social evening at the pub (he was a very slight man); 2) He liked the taste. Regards, Mark Peacock Hinsdale, Illinois USA peacock at webspun.com Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 1997 08:54:00 -0800 From: "Mike Szwaya" <mike.szwaya at coler-colantonio.com> Subject: Homemade RIMS question This is an open question to those out there who have constructed their own RIMS system. I constructed mine pretty similar to the one outlined in the 1995 All-Grain Zymurgy issue "Mash Systems & Components" by John Roberts. I used the same Little Giant pump and Vulcan heating element. My question/problem is this: I initially mounted my heating element inside 1 inch PVC which, in retrospect, was a pretty stupid idea. After 4 or 5 brews, the heating element melted the PVC and split the pipe, luckily at the tail end of a sparging session. Not only that, but after I disassembled the unit, I found that the very small volume of the 1 inch pipe caramelized the wort and left quite a bit of scorched residue on the element (I wouldn't doubt if I left the heater on once or twice while the pump was off). I initially wanted a bigger housing for the element but had a hard time locating equipment. In the article, John Roberts has the heating element is mounted inside a 1 1/2 inch copper tubing but the Vulcan element has a 1 inch NPT(M) fitting. Can anyone give a schematic of the materials they used for their heating element housing and suggestions as to where I could get them? Thanks. Mike Szwaya mike.szwaya at coler-colantonio.com Watertown, MA "Yellow snow, yellow beer? Hmm, you make the call." Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 1997 08:04:08 -0600 (CST) From: mark.evans at midplains.net (mark evans) Subject: siphon filter thingies Brew Howdy! I'm back after a several year absence and glad to see that things are still rather... lively. I'm siphoning secondary today (dry hopped IPA) for bottling, and as I monkey-rig a filter on the end of my racking cane, I'm wondering how other brewers have dealt with (in clever ways) this problem. Some small descriptions of hop flower/pellet/trub filtering methods might be nice -- including materials, etc. thanks! mark ========================================================= "I do a lot of different things. I just can't remember what they are right now." mark.evans at midplains.net Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 1997 09:05:52 +0500 From: Jay Ward <jaywward at gate.net> Subject: Semi-RIMS Tad Seyler asks: >I have seen somewhere on the web, a homebrewer's site describing a mash >system where the mash is recirculated through a copper coil in the hot >liquor tank, for temp boosts. I am interested in hearing from anyone who >uses this method, or the location of the web site. I am interested in >setting up something similar but I have questions including: How hot do >you maintain the hot liquor tank? How long is the coil and what's the >rate of flow through the coil? I use that method and the location of the web site is shown below. It came about as a result of various leftovers in my equipment developement. The bucket I use is not really my hot liquor tank though it started out as one. It's nothing more than a 5 gal bucket with a 1500 watt water heater element installed in the side. The web site has links to Dion H's excellent document on how to build an elctric brewery. I plug this puppy in when I start heating my mash water. By the time I need it, the bucket is at 200-212 degrees. BE CAREFUL, do not allow this device to run dry, potential fire and health risks aside, my wife would kill me if I burned down the house. I've installed a water heater thermostat as a saftey precaution. I bolted it to the mounting flange of the heater element. Due to poor heat coupling it's calibration is way off but it will shut down the element if the bucket boils dry. The copper coil is 25 feet of 1/4 inch line originally designed as an immersion chiller. It consists of two spirals with gradually increasing diameter, about 6 inches high, tied together with 12 gauge solid copper wire. I recirculate from the mash tun through a pump into the coil and back into the MT. A ball valve on the inlet side of the mash tun allows me to control the flow rate. A desired addition would be an inline thermometer on the outlet side of the coil. When mashout is reached, I remove the coil from the bucket and continue to pump till the wort clears. Once this happens, I disconnect the coil from the mash tun inlet and attach it to the boiling kettle inlet, continuing to pump as I sparge. - -- Jay Ward Ft. Lauderdale, FL check out the Three Boys Bathtub Brewery http:\\www.gate.net\~jaywward Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 1997 09:45:14 +0500 From: "Keith Royster" <keith.royster at pex.net> Subject: RE: HBD protocol / chemotherapy and beer Dave Burley responds to Bruce Baker: > > 4. As a newcomer to the HBD, I wonder about the protocols. There > > are lots of questions asked with scarcely any replies. > > Too many replies to the same question is almost as bad as no reply. Worse, IMO. > > My earlier questions on yeast received lots of private answers > with even more private mailings requesting the answers. Why don't > answers go on the HBD? Is this because the questions are deemed > too elementary to answer? The other lists I'm familiar with (BBQ, > chile-heads) have a lot more answers. > > It's up to the author of both the question and the answer. No > protocol that I've been able to discern. Actually, Dave, there is a protocol. Perhaps you've been following it and just didn't know it. And it is precisely because of this voluntarily followed protocol that the HBD has such a high signal-to-noise ratio. After joining the HBD as my first email discussion group I have become spoiled and can not tolerate other discussion groups that don't follow these simple rules. Here is the gist of this protocol as I understand it: 1) If you have a response to someone else's post, first ask yourself if it is of general interest? If not, then private email is probably most appropriate. This especially goes for flames and arguments! 2) If it is of general interest, then next ask yourself if you anticipate that a lot of other people will also throw in their $0.02? Nobody likes to see 20 posts to the HBD all containing the exact same info because that wastes space that other information could have been posted to. If you expect that you have a unique answer, then go ahead and post to the HBD directly. But if you think your answer is more mundane and others may offer the same advice, then private email is more appropriate. 3) If you receive a lot of private email responses to your question, and some of this information was not also posted to the HBD, then perhaps a summary post to the HBD is appropriate. Share the knowledge that you have gained *in a digested format* with the rest of us. To determine if this is appropriate or not, see steps 1&2 above. 4) And finally, if you are interested in the responses to someone else's question but don't have anything to offer, then send them private email asking them to either forward responses to you or better, to post a summary to the HBD. These four simple rules are what keeps the quality of the HBD so high by keeping out redundant posts, "Me Too" posts, and posts that are not of general interest! ================================= Now a question: Has anyone else out there experienced a loss of taste/interest for beer related to chemotherapy? If so, was is temporary (God, please say yes!)? Lately, I have not had much interest in drinking beer especially the more bitter kinds like APA, normally my favorite. Porters and stouts, however, I still enjoy for the most part. And I do still enjoy the brewing process (I'm in the process of upgrading my RIMS to be more automated by adding a PID temp controller!). I know that chemo can do weird things to your taste buds, but beer is really the only thing I have noticed that I have had a decreased interest in. Luckily my treatments will only last for another 6 or 7 months assuming things go as expected, so I'm just hoping that this is just another *temporary* side effect of the chemo! ================================= Don't forget about the 1997 U.S.Open homebrewing competition this April 26th in Charlotte, NC sponsored by the Carolina BrewMasters. Visit our club page below for more info on how to enter! Keith Royster - Mooresville, North Carolina "An Engineer is someone who measures it with a micrometer, marks it with a piece of chalk, and cuts it with an ax!" mailto:Keith.Royster at pex.net http://dezines.com/ at your.service - at your.service http://dezines.com/ at your.service/cbm -Carolina BrewMasters club page http://dezines.com/ at your.service/RIMS -My RIMS (rated COOL! by the Brewery) Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 97 09:10:10 EST From: James_Nachman_at_USCC__P3 at CELLULAR.USCC.COM Subject: Water Quality Web Site I was watching the news last night and they were doing a piece on water filtration systems. They listed the web site for the Water Quality Association, www.wqa.org. It has all kinds of information about water quality as well as filtration systems. Their mailing address is: Water Quality Association 4151 Naperville Road Lisle, Illinois 60532 There is also a 1-800 number but I was not fast enough to write it down. Enjoy, Jim james.nachman at cellular.uscc.com RF Engineer United States Cellular Corporation Chicago \\///// (.) (.) ------o000---(_)---000o------------------------------- Return to table of contents
Date-warning: Date header was inserted by ctrvax.Vanderbilt.Edu From: "Bryan L. Gros" <grosbl at ctrvax.Vanderbilt.Edu> Subject: home unitanks Last week, stevek at propwash.co.symbios.com (Steve kemp) wanted a home conical fermenter. I mentioned that small, stainless unitanks have been advertised in the literature, and I got several requests for the details. I finally remembered to bring my BT to work, so here's what I got. >From the Nov/Dec 96 issue, under new products. Northwest Brewers Supply sells stainless unitanks in 11, 15, or 20 gallon sizes. The smallest one is less than 3 ft. tall. and goes for $549. It looks like a corny keg with a conical bottom, valve on the apex, and three removeable legs. Call them at 1800-728-ALES or brewdog at wolfenet.com. No, I haven't seen these things in person nor do I work for this company. - Bryan grosbl at ctrvax.vanderbilt.edu Nashville, TN Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 1997 10:52:29 -0500 From: pbrian at ctc-fund.com (Paul Brian) Subject: partial mash/old hops I plan on doing a very partial mash with the following grain bill: 2# Pale Malt 1# Munich Malt .75# Crystal Malt .75# Cara-Pils Malt .5# Chocolate Malt In 1.25 gal. of water(1 quart per pound of malt?) I plan on mashing for 1 hour at 155 deg.(or as close to that as possible on my stove top with a hand-held thermometer). I will then sparge with hot water through a standard kitchen strainer. Nothing fancy here. My question- What kind of yield should I expect? In other words, if I would like 7 pounds worth of liquid malt extract, how much LME should I add after I do this? Also, need I worry about HSA during my not-so-sophisticated sparging technique? I've also had some hops in my freezer for over six months in nothing more than plastic baggies. Since they've probably lost some of their "hop power", what percentage more should I use to equal the same bitterness as fresh hops? (I will buy fresh hops for aroma). TIA and a special salute to those who helped bring back HBD. Cheers, Paul Brian Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 1997 14:54:14 +0000 (GMT) From: HOUCK KEITH A <HOUCK_KEITH_A at Lilly.com> Subject: sierra nevada ale yeast Out of curiosity, does anyone know the origins of this yeast (aka chico yeast, WY1056)? Is it an English ale yeast? Something cultured from the clean and slightly fruity Sierra Nevada air? On a related note, a local brewpub, reportedly using this yeast, has somehow created several ales reeking of diacetyl. In the many ales I tasted made with this yeast, I've never found this. Anyone ever experience this and have an idea what caused it? Cheers, Keith Houck Return to table of contents