---

	FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
		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


Contents:
  water via hot water heater (Heiner Lieth)
  Caustic soda ("Braam Greyling")
  Mash pH (A. J. deLange)
  chiller operation (Tim Eitniear)
  The Price of Good Beer ("Decker, Robin E.")
  Corny Keg Source ("Rosenzweig,Steve")
  Hops growing (Christian O Miller)
  Re: Micro Prices..... (Joe Rolfe)
  Thermometers and Mashing (MaltyDog)
  Spirit of Free Beer (Mark Stevens)
  Temperature Controller ("Bryan L. Gros")
  oak flavor/misc. (BAYEROSPACE)
  Trivia of the Week (Paul Niebergall)
  pH (korz)
  saccharification temperatures (Charles Rich)
  Re: extraction efficiency; lightbulbs (Mike Uchima)
  Part 2, SO,keg cost, kraeusening, ("David R. Burley")
  Part 3, Oak casks, mash schedule ("David R. Burley")
  Part 1 mash pH, and temps ("David R. Burley")
  Thermostat for lagering (John Wilkinson)
  Ultimate Brewing Setup request (Jeff Donnelly)
  Hop Page Update (Glenn Tinseth)
  Bulk honey (Randy deBeauclair)
  re: Counter Pressure Filler Recs (Sharon/Dan Ritter)
  Holding Mash Temp in SS (Ronald Babcock)


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 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 from:
	
	brew.oeonline.com	/pub/hbd	
	ftp.stanford.edu	/pub/clubs/homebrew/beer

  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, 21 Apr 1997 23:32:30 -0700 (PDT)
From: Heiner Lieth <lieth at telis.org>
Subject: water via hot water heater

There are a few logic problems with some of the various comments about not
using water that has come through a hot water heater. (Minerals, lead, etc...)

I have run a relatively large amount of water through my hot water heater as
most of you have (showers, baths, dishwasher, clothes washer,...).  If there
is stuff building up inside the hot water heater, then, if anything, there
will be less of that stuff (by some miniscule amount) in the water you get
out of the hot water tap.  Concerns about the "water heater build-up crud"
in your beer are IMO misplaced.

Also, if stuff is precipitating as a result of being in the hot water
heater, then that would be a good thing.  Afterall, it then settles out in
the sediment at the bottom of your fermenter. The cold water, on the other
hand, has this stuff in solution. Personally it does not scare me (but maybe
that's why I have kidney stones?).  Anyway, perhaps logic would suggest that
you would want the stuff percipitated out. 

If you have lead solder on your hot water lines and it is leaching out, then
I recommend that you abandon your residence (it's bad for your health).  But
even in that case I would guess that the molecules of lead in the relatively
small gallonage of beer will be miniscule compared to total amount of lead
that you are consuming. You'll get more lead just from residue left on your
dishes after washing them than from drinking your beer.

I personally like using the water from my hot water lines because the
likelihood of live bacteria (and other organisms) is much smaller. My hot
water heater is near 180F (pasteurization temperature) and most of the water
that comes out of it will have had a residence time at that temperature of
more than a day. That's pretty good compared to the cold water tap from the
standpoint of bacteria.

Thus I figure that the water in my hot water lines has some features that
should not be overlooked.  I particularly like using the cold water that
flows before the hot water arrives from the hot water heater.  (My hot water
heater is a long way away from the kitchen sink).  This cold water is
pasteurized (not sterile). It has quite a few uses in brewing that seem
pretty obvious.

Heiner Lieth


Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 22 Apr 1997 12:33:59 +200
From: "Braam Greyling" <braam.greyling at azona.co.za>
Subject: Caustic soda

Hi,

Ive got some caustic soda from a local grocery store.
I know this is dangerous stuff but I have a problem with extremely 
dirty old cornie kegs. Can I use this caustic soda to clean the 
cornie kegs. What concentration should I use ?
Will caustic soda attack rubber parts and pipes too ?
I am thinking of also cleaning a VERY dirty old beer line with it 
too.
Should I do this or not ?
Thanks 

Braam Greyling    I.C. Design Engineer
Azona(Pty)Ltd     
tel +27 12 6641910
fax +27 12 6641393

Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 22 Apr 1997 13:01:07 -0500
From: ajdel at mindspring.com (A. J. deLange)
Subject: Mash pH

Jim Wallace wrote:

>1...pH of mash!... I have been trying to keep this in the range OF 5.2-5.5
>to control the extraction of husk tannins.

This pH range represents a compromise of the optima for the various enzymes
which operate to carry out proteolysis and starch conversion. Tannin
extraction shouldn't be an issue at normal mash temperatures. If a
decoction is being done then a fair amont of tannin is going to be
extracted anyway but a lower pH would help. Nevertheless, this range is
still selected to maximize conversion rather than reduce tannin extraction.

>I thought I was doing just fine
>until I relized I was cooling mash sample to 65F to measure the pH and have
>just recently heard that my actual pH at 153F would be ~.35 higher making my
>very acceptable reading of 5.3 actually becomes 5.65 putting it in the upper
>part of this range.

It's the other way around. pH at mash temperature is _lower_ than at room
temperature. I hope you didn't get the impression that it's higher at mash
temperature from something I posted. I frequently write "pH goes up" when I
mean hydrogen ion concentration goes up. When [H+] goes up, pH goes down.
It's just a mental block and knowing I have it I try to check everything I
post but I miss sometimes when I'm in a hurry (which is most of the time).

>...Should I be concerned and use phosphoric acid to acidify this mash?

No! If you are in the 5.2 - 5.5 range at room temperature you could be out
of range at the low end at mash temp.

>...Is there agreement on this .35 pH increase at the higher temp range?

Agreement among brewers? Come now. The 0.35 number comes from DeClerk who
cites Hopkins and Krause, "Biochemistry Applied to Malting and Brewing",
London, 1950 p 199.  pH vs temperature is tabulated for 2 mashes. Fix, in
POBS, cites I.C. MacWilliam "pH in Malting and Brewing - A Review,
J.I.B.,1975 but the numbers are exactly the same as in the table in
DeClerk. It's amazing how some pieces of data circulate for years from book
to article to book without ever being questioned.

As I've checked 2 mashes I can now double the "database"

     Temp.  Mash 1     Mash 2    Mash 3     Mash 4
      18     5.84       6.03
      20                          5.55
      28                          5.54       5.58
      31                          5.53
      35     5.70       5.90
      40                          5.48
      52     5.65       5.80
      63                          5.38
      65     5.50       5.70                 5.46
      78     5.40       5.55

Mash 1 - deClerk: "Distilled Water" (Vol I, p267)
Mash 2 - deClerk: "Medium Hard Water"
Mash 3 - deLange:  DWC pale ale malt; water: Alkalinity 71, Ca 21 mg/L
Mash 4 - deLange:  DWC pilsner makt;  water: Alkalinity 18, Ca  5 mg/L

Thus I measure changes of about half what Hopkins and Krause reported. Note
that the state of the art in pH measurement has advanced somewhat (this is
gross understatement) in the 47 years since publication of their book.

Note also that there are well known figures in the craft/home brewing
community who believe that the target 5.2-5.5 range is as measured at room
temperature.

A. J. deLange
 - Numquam in dubio, saepe in errore.

- --> --> --> To reply remove "nosp" from address. <-- <--



Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 22 Apr 1997 08:09:42 -0500
From: Tim Eitniear <Timothy_Eitniear at csg.mot.com>
Subject: chiller operation

I recently purchased a counterflow wort chiller and have a few questions.
If i do not have a drain in my bioling pot, what is the best way to get the
hot wort to the chiller.  I also need to know what kind of tubing I should
use to connect to the chiller.

Thanks

Tim

Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 22 Apr 97 9:07:00 -0500
From: "Decker, Robin E." <robind at rmtgvl.rmtinc.com>
Subject: The Price of Good Beer


Steve asks...

>>>In Michigan (Detroit area), micro prices are 8+.  Even Sam Adams is like 
=
$7.99.  I was in Tuscon, AZ a few weeks ago and their prices were MUCH =
lower.  Sam Adams was going for $4.99!  Is it the stores, the =
distributors, or the micros themselves causing the excessive prices?<<<<

As the SO of a beer retailer, I can tell you that (in S. Carolina at least) 
the price of the beer on the shelf is dictated mainly by the distributors. 
 We have a three-tiered system that is heavily skewed to favor the 
distributors.  The retail mark-up on beer in this state is an average 13 - 
17%.  Do you realize how much beer you have to sell in order to make any 
money at it?!  The brewers sell to the distributors for much less than what 
you see in retail, which means all the profits are going to the middle man, 
and in our state its very, very much against the law to do anything about 
it.  (As a retailer, you are not even supposed to know the price the brewer 
puts on the beer.)

As for the disparity in the Sam Adams prices, either the profits are being 
shared more equally in the north, or the retailers are putting a more 
realistic mark-up on their beers.  The north has probably got better 
educated beer drinkers than the south <g,d & r>, so the higher price doesn't 
hurt sales as much as if "bubba" comes in and looks
at your $8.99 sixer and compares it to his 2.99 grocery-store-swill sixer.

Also, I know that Boston Brewing gives a decent price break for 200 cases. 
 But you have to purchase 200 cases of one beer.  No problem for the 
distributors, but they don't pass on a similar price break unless you also 
purchase the same 200 cases.  So, grocery store chains & discount stores get 
the break, the rest of us don't.  Its awfully tough for a retailer who 
averages 40-60 cases per week TOTAL, to justify purchasing 200 cases of just 
one beer.

As a parting thought, keep in mind that that .50/six cheaper microbrew you 
bought at the grocery store was stored with ~200 cases of its brethren in an 
unconditioned warehouse, or out back of the store in a locked tractor 
trailer for god-knows-how-long before it was placed on the shelf.  Just 
because it ain't out of date, doesn't guarantee it was stored properly.

Goldings

 --I have to get off this planet!--

Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 22 Apr 1997 06:52:56 PDT
From: "Rosenzweig,Steve" <Steve_Rosenzweig at wb.xerox.com>
Subject: Corny Keg Source

In HDB 2401, Brander Roullett asks

On a seperate note, i would like to find sources for 3,5,10 gallon Corny
kegs for reasonably cheap.  my local HB store has one keg for $50 bucks.
i have heard of places that send them for $20 or better.  any one got
any good sources?

To which I reply:  try Mayer's Cider Mill at 800-543-0043

They generally only do wholesale to HB shops, but I was talking to the 
 owner and occasionally they get a bunch of used cornies (5 gal).  He 
 mentioned $20 each plus UPS shipping, but he may be negotiable on 
 price and/or give quantity discounts.   I think he mostly has 
 ball-lock, but may have some pin-lock as well, shipping would be from 
 Rochester NY.

No affiliation, blah blah blah, other than buying a few kegs myself and 
 being generally satisfied as a customer.

Steve
****************
"blessed is the mother that gives birth to a brewer" - old czech saying

http://eetsg29.bd.psu.edu/~ford29/erika.html

"she doesn't have much choice, you've brewed with her every weekend 
 she's been alive!" - my wife Ann

Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 22 Apr 1997 09:10:23 EST
From: comiller at juno.com (Christian O Miller)
Subject: Hops growing

I  just bought several hop roots for my backyard. But I heard two
different ways to plant them. What's the best way? Should I lay them flat
or stand them up in the hole I dig? Private e-mail is okay.
Thanks,
Christian Miller
Brewin' in Durham, CT

Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 22 Apr 1997 09:22:13 -0400 (EDT)
From: Joe Rolfe <onbc at shore.net>
Subject: Re: Micro Prices.....

 for an example on pricing for a microbeer.  i will go case costs
as these are documented in most cases.

these are some of the average posted prices in Mass.

case 24/12oz posted price to retailer is about $20.00 on average
if the store buys on a "deal" that may drop anywhere from
$1 to as much as $4 per case.  the avererage brewery to distributor
pricing would be in the range of $12.00 for a larger micro to 
as much as $15 for a smaller micro. the common figure i had was
$13 with say 10 cases on a 100 would get you a price to retail
of about $18/cs.  If the brewery splits the post off with the distributor
price to retailer drops some more...

now these $17 - $20 cases are typically sold at $6.50 to $7.50 per six pac
on occasion $5.99 for something at price to retailer of $17 can be had.

this is a typical Mass markup, other states may vary wildly...by i would
venture to guess the markups alongthe way are similar in percentage.

it looks like ever step along the way margins are $6-$8 per case.

the brewery does the real grunt work, has to pay all the capital equipment
costs , the distributors really dont give a crap they take order and do 
deliveries, the retailer probably could care less - as evidenced by 
dusty bottles in some stores and very old beer on the shelf. 

i agree in hole the price/quality of most micros is not what you would
expect, hence the potential for paying big buck for crappy beer.


joe




Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 22 Apr 1997 09:53:59 -0400 (EDT)
From: MaltyDog at aol.com
Subject: Thermometers and Mashing

There has been a thread up here recently about the reliability of various
thermometers, especially for mashing. I've been using one of those dairy
thermometers, and I'm not happy with it's accuracy-aside from the fact that a
friend of mind recently had one break in the mash, ruining a batch. 

I just bought a digital thermometer, apparently waterproof with a ten-inch
probe from Brewer's resource, but I haven't recieved it yet, so I don't know
how good it is. I've had a couple of other digital thermometers in the past,
but they both got damaged by water, so I'm hoping this one will work better.

I mash in a picnic cooler, and the thing that always drives me crazy with the
dairy thermometer, and makes me doubt it's reliability, is when I add 2
gallons of boiling water to mash to bring it up to the next rest, stir it in,
and the temperature goes down! Anyone else there have that happy to them?

Bill Coleman
MaltyDog at aol.com

Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 22 Apr 1997 11:37:53 -0400
From: stevens at stsci.edu (Mark Stevens)
Subject: Spirit of Free Beer


5th annual "Spirit of Free Beer" homebrew competition
June 7, 1997
Vienna, Virginia
Sponsored by Brewers United for Real Potables (BURP)

 ..............

Exciting changes in store for this year's "Spirit of Free Beer"
homebrew competition....

* More great prizes than ever before!
  This year, we will award at least 5 "brewer for a day" opportunities,
  including 3 that will brew your winning recipe. The Best of Show
  will once again be brewed at Virginia Beverage Company. In addition,
  one top lager will be brewed at Blue N Gold, and one top ale will
  be brewed at Oxford Brewing Company.

  Ribbon winners in every category also win great prize packages. 
  We are awarding several 50-pound sacks of malt, cases of beer,
  gift certificates from area homebrew shops, sets of glassware,
  sweatshirts, hats, brewing equipment, books, magazine subscriptions,
  breweriana, hops & yeast, and lots more....

* More places to enter than ever before...
  
  In addition to the 8 drop-off points listed in the competition
  announcement, entries will be accepted at Shenandoah Brewing
  Company in Alexandria VA, and BrewMasters 3 in Arlington VA.

* Great opportunity to earn judging points...
  
  Judging will take place at Brew America in Vienna, Virginia. The
  location is very close to the I-495 capital beltway, and is
  adjacent to the Dunn Loring Metro station. 

  We can arrange accomodations for out-of-town judges, we will have
  an informal pub crawl Friday night, and we PROMPTLY report all
  judge points. (Great food too! (Look for the return of Jim Tyndall's
  outrageous grilled bratwursts...)

  Judges can contact Greg Griffin, gmgriff0 at wcc.com

- --------------

Info is available on the BURP web page (http://www.burp.org)

Need more info?  Contact Mark Stevens, stevens at stsci.edu


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: Temperature Controller

 JohnT6020 at aol.com wrote
>
>Who is the vendor for the thermostat that is used to maintain lagering
>temperatures in a adapted chest freezer?  I know there have been posts from
>satisfied users.  Who can find them when you want them?  I have also checked
>several issues of Zymurgy, BYO and Techniques without finding the ads that I
>know I have seen.

I asked about this last week, so I'll summarize.

The model I have is a Johnson Controller Model A19, Grainger 
part number 4E047. ($37) This model has a minimum 5 deg. 
differential.  Unfortunately, the thing doesn't come with 
a cord.  What I did, which is what several people also recommended,
is get a short (6') three prong extension cord.  Figure out where your
fridge is and where the plug is and where you want your controller
mounted.  Strip some insulation and find the black wire.  Leave the
other two wires alone.  Cut the black wire and connect one end to the
"red" connector on the controller, the other end to the "yellow"
connector.  When the temperature of the probe rises, the circuit
between the red and yellow connectors is closed, turning on the
power to the freezer.
Charlie Rich commented that his controller was about six degrees
off, so keep a thermometer inside to verify the temperature in the 
fridge/freezer.

There is some more information online at The Brewery, including
this picture of the wiring: 
http://alpha.rollanet.org/library/TempControl.JPG
Other people gave me helpful suggestions like use a relay.  The
other good thing about this model is that there is another
terminal which closes when the temperature falls.  You could 
hook up one cord to this terminal and plug in a light bulb.
Then, if the outside temperature drops too low, the light bulb
will come on to heat up the fridge/freezer.

Prior to this, I used the old Hunter Airstat.  Worked great (still
does), but it only goes down to 40F.  Not low enough for
lagering, and the chest freezer's thermostat doesn't go high
enough.  No, it's not for sale.

Hopefully this wasn't too confusing; let me know if you
have more questions.

  - Bryan Gros
    grosbl at ctrvax.vanderbilt.edu
    Music City Brewers, Nashville TN


Return to table of contents


Date:     Tue, 22 Apr 1997 13:09 -0600
From: M257876 at sl1001.mdc.com (BAYEROSPACE)
Subject:  oak flavor/misc.

collective homebrew conscience:

jim wallace wrote, regarding measuring mash ph:

><snip> I was cooling mash sample to 65F to measure the pH and have
>just recently heard that my actual pH at 153F would be ~.35 higher making my
>very acceptable reading of 5.3 actually becomes 5.65 putting it in the upper
>part of this range.

i believe it's actually that as the temperature of the mash increases, the 
ph is lowered.  there were several submissions (in response to a letter or an
article discussing mash ph) in brewing techniques a while back that discussed
this topic.  a j delange submitted the most substantial letter, if i remember
correctly.

so what you want, at 60 deg f or so, is a ph measurement about .35 ph units 
higher than your desired ph at saccharification temp.  if your 60 deg. f 
measurement is 5.7, that means that your actual mash ph at, say 155 f, would
be *roughly* 5.35.
**************

jim also wrote:

> I have been brewing with all grain for the past year (8-10 batches) and
>feel I am getting a much lower extraction than others out there.

>12.25 Lbs of grain (AmerKlages,Cryst,Munich)
>MashIn  at  131F_20min
>Convert  at  154F_90 Min (drops to 150 at end)
>MashOut  at  168F_10
>Lauter lasted 1 hr and grain bed stayed at 166-168
>I collect 8.25 Gallons of wort..
>boil off 2 Gallons in 90 Min boil..
>loose .75 Gal as Trub ..
>finishing with a batch of 5.5 Gal and an OG of 1.052.

this efficiency would be 5.5*52/12.25 = 23.3 points/lb/gal, which is on the 
low side.  there is nothing wrong with the procedure outlined above.  

the basic things to examine would be the crush of the grain, the ph of the 
mash (which, based on the previous item, could be a tad low, particularly for
alpha amylase at 154 f), the mineral content of your water, the water-to-grain
grist ratio (how many quarts of water per pound of grain?), and the accuracy
of your temperature and ph measuring equipment.  this all has to do with the
production of sugar in the mash.

if all these things are adjusted appropriately and measured accurately, i don't
see any reason why you couldn't get at least 28 points/lb/gal from klages
malt with typical homebrew equipment.

keep in mind that as the grain bill increases, and necessary mash water volume
increases, that efficiency will suffer.  how much sparge water were you
using?  if it's a lot less than 5 gallons or so, you may simply be volume
limited in terms of sparge water and thus lautering extraction.  still, i 
would think the extraction could be increased on the above recipe.
******************

al k wrote:

> Also, 4 ounces of American oak chips in 5 gallons
>of beer is going to give you a *lot* of oak flavour.

here's my $.02 on using american oak chips:  i had 5 gallons of an og 1.054 
ipa last year that i put 2 ounces of american oak chips in for the secondary,
which lasted probably about 2 weeks.  the final product tasted like plywood 
that had had a little beer spilled on it.

brew hard,

mark bayer

Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 22 Apr 1997 13:11:38 -0500
From: Paul Niebergall <pnieb at burnsmcd.com>
Subject:  Trivia of the Week

Trivia question of the week:

How many times do the letters "hop" appear on a bottle of AB's newest
mega-psuedo-micro beverage called "Michelob Pale Ale" (answer at end
of post)??  Are they trying to tell us something (beat us over the head,
more likely)?

Actually, I will give AB some credit (even though the got the wrong hops
for a pale ale).  With the recent thread about the cost for a 6-pak of micro
product (and drawing on years of personal experience) I have come to
the conclusion just because it is micro it is not necessarily good beer.

What is worse, a small micro run by a group of yuppified investors trying
cash in on the latest craze (at exorbitant pricing), or a mega brewery
who has shunned taste in the past but now is trying to make an effort to
masquarade their brew as micro?  Sometimes it's hard to tell.

Paul Niebergall
pnieb at burnsmcd.com

(BTW - I counted 9 references to hops on the bottle I drink)


Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 22 Apr 1997 13:33:06 -0500 (CDT)
From: korz at xnet.com
Subject: pH

Jim writes:
>I thought I was doing just fine
>until I relized I was cooling mash sample to 65F to measure the pH and have
>just recently heard that my actual pH at 153F would be ~.35 higher making my
>very acceptable reading of 5.3 actually becomes 5.65 putting it in the upper
>part of this range.

I believe you have the pH shift the other way around, but I'm sure that
AJ will post a full explanation, so I'll ask something related and very
important that has been bothering me for quite a while.  I don't recall
if it's Malting and Brewing Science or DeClerck's A Textbook of Brewing,
but one of these books is self-contradictory on the subject of mash pH.
On one page it says to cool the sample before measuring the pH and on
the next page it says to measure the pH *at* mash temperature.  So which
is it?  Having the same book say two opposite things has left me unsure
all these years.

Help!

Al.

Al Korzonas, Palos Hills, IL
korz at xnet.com


Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 22 Apr 1997 11:44:43 -0700
From: Charles Rich <CharlesR at saros.com>
Subject: saccharification temperatures

In HBD #2402, Charles Burns expresses his surprise at saccharifiaction
rates at low temperatures and describes an experiment that confirms it.
This is an excellent HBD contribution, in a form that improves the tone
of the digest and ensuing discussions on his topic.

I don't have George Fix's brewing science book handy, but it contains a
graph that shows enzyme activity over three different temperatures.  The
lowest temp (I don't recall exactly, but something like 112F or 125F)
still yielded about 45% conversion over a period of hours.  There are
real limits to the efficiency of saccharification though, because it's
well below barley starch gelatinization temp (148F, 65C), but can be
significant.

I still highly recommend mashing in at 135F (57C) and resting there for
the proteolytic enzyme's, protein rest benefits.  But instead of holding
there while your decoc cooks, let it fall to wherever it wants after the
rest.  You will have denatured the peptidase enzymes, which will be
active if you mash in at 122F (50C) and which IMHO will be detrimental
to your beer's protein profile.  Holding a rest first at 135F will
provide a good proteolytic conversion and destroy the peptidase enzymes
which would otherwise be active at lower temps.  After the rest,
withdraw your fraction.  Saccharification will proceed more slowly at
the falling temps while you convert and cook the fraction.

I brewed a Czech Pilsener this weekend using pressure cooked decoc.  I
pressure cooked the decoc while letting the remaining mash cool as above
(I still can't locate big canning jars for pre-cooked decoc).  As I had
expected, it was much less of an ordeal than hand stirring and the
cooked fraction was beautiful.  It did not produce *bigger* malt flavor,
but *nicer* malt flavor.  However, after seeing Charlie Scandrett's
suggestion recently re:cooking first runnings for this effect, I will
try that next time instead (lazier - good), and trade off improved
utilization from greater gelatinized starch.  I would pressure cook the
runnings during sparging then add back to the kettle.  As both CharlieS
and Steve Alexander have pointed at, the temperature and time will
determine the malty profile.

Cheers
Charles Rich (Seattle, USA)

Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 22 Apr 1997 13:51:10 -0500
From: Mike Uchima <uchima at mcs.net>
Subject: Re: extraction efficiency; lightbulbs

Jim Wallace <jwallace at crocker.com> wrote:
> 
> [snip]
> I figure my efficiency to be 75% but others expect 80-90% from 
> their batches...
> 
> Any Ideas on improving my efficiency?

I wonder a little bit about the preoccupation many homebrewers seem to
have with extraction efficiency. IMHO, *consistent* extraction from
batch to batch is much more important than absolute efficiency. 

I suppose some people see it as a personal challenge; if you're into
that sort of thing, then fine. But personally, I'd rather just spend the
extra $0.60 for another pound of grain, and not worry about it...

*****

eric fouch wrote:
> 
> Q:  How many internet mail list subscribers does it take
>     to change a light bulb?
> 
> A:  1,331:
>
>     [snip, snip, snip]

You forgot "1 to post to the mail list pointing out that the numbers in
the joke actually add up to 1678, not 1331". :-)

- -- 
== Mike Uchima == uchima at mcs.net ==


Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 22 Apr 1997 15:01:26 -0400
From: "David R. Burley" <Dave_Burley at compuserve.com>
Subject: Part 2, SO,keg cost, kraeusening,

Brewsters:


Jim Booth asks about the commonality of::

>The experience with significant others who greet beer (anybodies-not
>Just mine) with the "do I have to?" look on their face.

I have one like that. "but I just finished eating chocolate".  She does
like dark beers, however, and drinks one or two a year.
- ----------------------------------------------
On the subject of cornelius kegs and their cost Kiernan O'Connor ( no Irish
in your blood, huh?) says:

>I've ordered some: will report on the quality. Apparently they come
cleaned
>by Pepsi. Cost with shipping to NY State makes the keg total $20 per.

Don't forget to add in the cost of new O-rings or you will have root-beer
beer. Smell the big O-ring when you get your kegs.  If it smells fruity or
like root beer, replace it.  I pay $25 at my local HB store for a fully
conditioned keg, clean and with new o-rings.

When I got my first kegs about 15 years ago, (kegs were not available at a
HB  store or anywhere else in those days) I went to a local distributor of
soda pop, told him what I was doing and he set me up with kegs,hoses,a
cobra head and tank. I learned about o-rings the hard way. I had a root
beer lager which was undrinkable.  Boiling, bleaching, grain alcohol soaks
for a week just would not remove the smell from the rings, but changing the
rings for new ones solved the problem.
- ----------------------------------------------
Ken Smith asks:

>For a 1.050 gravity beer, how much wort do I need to cask 
>Condition (in a 5 gallon corny) the beer.

>If so, how much wort should I use? 

Well, it depends on the dextrin content of your wort.  Assuming you will go
down to about FG = 1.015, then you have about 12 ounces of fermentable
sugar per gallon of wort. If you want 1% sugar as the condition add 0.01 X
128 X 5 =  6.4 ounces or about 0.5 gallon of freshly fermenting wort.

>If not, what would be a better way?

I prepare a starter with 4-6 ounces of corn sugar and a tablespoon of malt
extract as a nutrient source, boil and cool in about a pint of water. 
Remove yeast and some beer from the bottom of the secondary with a siphon
hose and pitch to the starter.  In about 12 hours the  starter should just
begin foaming.  Put this into a Cornie and add your beer.

This latter method is much simpler and more reliable in my opinion. You
know exactly how much sugar you are adding ( unlike above) It doesn't
require you to sterilize a 0.5 gallon of wort in a pressure cooker ( with
its tendency to foam)  or have an identical beer just starting to ferment.


Keep on brewin'


Dave Burley
Kinnelon, NJ 07405
103164.3202 at compuserve.com
Dave_Burley at compuserve.com  
Voice e-mail OK 

Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 22 Apr 1997 15:01:23 -0400
From: "David R. Burley" <Dave_Burley at compuserve.com>
Subject:  Part 3, Oak casks, mash schedule

Brewsters:

AlK reports on his experience at Samuel Smith's in Tadcaster, UK. They use
unlined oak casks.  Thanks for the information. I could not find one clear
mention of the practice today ( or in the past) in the UK.  The only
indication was the Brit Michael Jackson commenting on the use of unlined
casks ( implying to me that other casks would be lined) for some of the
Belgian Acid Reds.The fact that he noted this and DeClerk's extensive
discussion on how casks are lined, led me to believe most casks were lined.
And I still believe it was the continental practice to do so for un-aged,
carbonated beers, like lagers and such I.E. by far the major portion of the
beer produced.  It may be that the British Ales today  which are
refrigerated,  consumed rapidly and are poorly carbonated don't need a
lining. Lining is a real pain, so I can understand why they wouldn't do it
if not necessary.  Question I still have though is what was the historical
practice in Britain for bitters and the like?

I agree that as far as the beer police are concerned one should not put oak
in the pale ales or vice versa.  I have never tasted oak in any British
beer - even the so-called real ales - which was part of my reasoning that
the British kegs were lined, I guess.  However, if someone wants to put oak
in their ale its OK with me and after all this IS homebrewing. Not everyone
is afraid to deviate from the "standard" and not every beer will be entered
in a contest  expecting to get best of style.  I admit I like a little hop
nose in my lagers however sacreligious that may sound. 
- ----------------------------------------------
Bruce Baker from way down under in NZ asks for information on mash
schedules.  My first comment is - what kind of malt and adjuncts are you
using in the grist?  This is the main determining factor.  What kind of
water? What kind of beer? 

The enzyme rests of major importance are the peptidase and protease  121F
and 135F, and sacccharification from about 149 - 158 F classically. At the
low end of the saccharification range you will produce highly fermentable
low dextrin beers and at the high end lower fermentable beer with  more
dextrins.  The optimum temperature for beta amylase is around 145F, I
believe, and alpha amylase is around 158F. These broad optima are dependent
on mash concentration, pH, calcium ion concentration and other stuff.

For highly modified malts like the British Pale Ale malts it is not
necessary to hold in the proteinase regions below 140F, as this will often
be detrimental to the head forming capabilities.  It is common practice to 
do a single temperature saccharification around 155F by infusion for
British style beers.  Old style schedules for lager are more complicated,
sometimes holding at 93F for the formation of phosphoric acid by phytase
action to acidify the wort before moving up through all the holds. 
Decoction mashing is even more complicated. Most of the mash heating
schedules have temperature increments of 1-2 minutes/degree C during the
transition between holds when decoction is not involved.  Some infusion
mashers, especially amateurs who mash in a cooler, use boiling water
additions to move through various temperatures in a stepped infusion mash.
I suggest you get a copy of Malting and Brewing Science in which they do a
thorough job on all these schedules in practice in the 1950's.
- -----------------------------------------------  
Keep on brewin'


Dave Burley
Kinnelon, NJ 07405
103164.3202 at compuserve.com
Dave_Burley at compuserve.com  

Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 22 Apr 1997 15:01:30 -0400
From: "David R. Burley" <Dave_Burley at compuserve.com>
Subject: Part 1 mash pH, and temps

Brewsters:

Jim Wallace asks:

>Lots of Questions:
>I have been trying to keep this ( the mash pH) in the range OF 5.2-5.5
>to control the extraction of husk tannins.

It may do this also, but the major purpose is to be in the pH operating
range of the enzymes.

>I was cooling mash sample to 65F to measure the pH and have
>just recently heard that my actual pH at 153F would be ~.35 higher

The pH at higher temperatures is LOWER by 0.2 to 0.3 units. So you are
actually operating at  around 5.0 - 5.2 which is OK.  The pH optimum is
pretty broad.

> After my most recent mash I also pulled some grains in a
>Separate examination and pressed them with the back of my spoon.

That is the way to do it or take a small sample and boil it in the
microwave and do the iodine test.

>Am I dealing with limited enzyme availability or activity here

Probably just enzyme accessibility to the starch. 

I suspect this problem of starch and your poor efficiency  mentioned below
are caused by poor milling.  Pass the malt through a nip of about 0.008 in.
and again through 0.006 in.  Measure the nip with a spark plug gauge.  The
second pass does some additional milling, but it also frees cracked malt
from the husk without destroying the husk.  This will improve your
efficiency markedly and allow you to go to the boil starch free. Be sure to
take at least 45 minutes for the sparge.

3...Preserving Extra Wort for yeast starters...

I think the summary of the long discussion on this was that at the pH of
wort, boiling water temperatures is not enough and you should pressure cook
the wort or risk botulism.  You should boil this wort again before using it
in your beer in any event.
- ------------------------------------------        
After doing one poorly designed experiment, Charlie Burns says:

>My observation really is this - all the temperature's being talked about
in
>All these posts about decoctions and saccharifcation ranges are to be
taken
>with a grain of salt.

Well, all the useful temperatures cover a range, since the optima for the
enzymes are not sharp, but they are well known and have been for decades.
Perhaps you need to do a little more reading so you understand all this.

>I went back and compared Dave Millers Handbook to Noonan. They both
>Recommend protein rests between 122F and 131F. I think I'll try a 125F
>Protein rest next time I make a pale ale, boosting after 20 minutes to
155F

Actually they recommend holds at BOTH temperatures to reduce gums and
higher proteins and produce amino acids.  BUT they are talking about pale
malts NOT pale ale malts as I recollect.
 .
>And you can bet I'll taste the mash during protein rest to see if it is
also
>Sweet at that low temp.

Malting produces a low percentage of simple sugars so it should taste
sweet. Beta amylase is also somewhat active at 135F and can reduce any of
the LMW degraded starch/sugars to produce a sweet taste without converting
any of the ungelatinized starch.
- -----------------------------------------------------------
Keep on brewin'


Dave Burley
Kinnelon, NJ 07405
103164.3202 at compuserve.com
Dave_Burley at compuserve.com  
Voice e-mail OK 

Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 22 Apr 97 14:13:43 CDT
From: jwilkins at imtn.tpd.dsccc.com (John Wilkinson)
Subject: Thermostat for lagering

>Who is the vendor for the thermostat that is used to maintain lagering
>temperatures in a adapted chest freezer?

The thermostats I use are made by Johnson Controls and by Honeywell.  They
appear identical to me.  I got them from Grainger for about $25 but I got
them through my son-in-law who is in the business so that may be a wholesale
price.
For refrigerators I cut the hot wire to the existing thermostat and route
it through the thermostat but for my lagering chest freezer I cut the hot
wire of an extension cord and routed it through the thermostat and plugged
the freezer into the cord.

Usual disclaimers and warnings about screwing with house current and the
dangers of getting fried apply.  If you don't feel comfortable, don't do it.
In that case, Williams Brewing (800) 759-6025 sells the same type controller
with cord attached to plug into for $49.90 plus shipping.  Brewer's
Resource (800) 827-3983 has an electronic one that switches both high and
low for $99.90.  I don't know whether or not the electronic controllers
are as reliable as the mechanical types.

I don't have any connection to any of the mentioned companies.

John Wilkinson - Grapevine, Texas - jwilkins at imtn.dsccc.com


Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 22 Apr 1997 17:47:24 -0400
From: Jeff Donnelly <jeff at geoplex.com>
Subject: Ultimate Brewing Setup request

I'm famous for buying something, using it a while and then realizing it
doesn't meet my needs and into a corner of my basement it goes.  I figure
that most of you have gotten to this point with your brewing equipment so
I'd like to tap your experience with the following question:

If you could start over with what you define to be a decent sized budget,
what would you buy?

I hope to convince my spouse to spend a portion of our income tax refund on
upgrading my brewing equipment.  I do extract now but am going to just do
it and move to all grain and I'd prefer to buy good equipment that is best
for the job over several years and spread the cost over several years
rather than buy what fits my budget this year.  Let's assume that I would
rather buy than make but I can make if that's the right thing to do.  I am
very handy but I have 2 years worth of jobs on the house to do ...

I currently own:
old fridge
couple of corny kegs, CO2
6.5 gal glass carboy
canning pot (stolen from unhappy wife) for boiling

I think I should buy:
5 gal glass carboy for secondary
ss 10 gal brew pot with drain connection

Now it gets fuzzy:
mashing pot (another ss pot with false bottom and therm?)
lauter tun
burner for brewing (I think we covered this sufficiently with the cajun
cooker threads)
mill

Part of the issue revolves around, should I go for one of those tiered
setups, hot water to mash/lauter to kettle, where all are ss, or is this a
waste and I should go for the picnic cooler approach?

jeffd at att.com

Return to table of contents


Date: 22 Apr 97 16:18:56 -0700
From: Glenn Tinseth <glenn at terrapacific.com>
Subject: Hop Page Update

The Hop Page (now at <http://realbeer.com/hops/>) has
a couple new features. First, the bitterness calculator
is available as a JavaScript and allows multiple hop
additions =

<http://realbeer.com/hops/bcalc_js.html>. =

Second, I've created a similar JavaScript that calculates =
the ppm of important brewing ions, based on user-supplied =
volume and added salt mass data =

<http://realbeer.com/hops/wcalc_js.html>

Let me know how they work for you -- suggestions for =
improvements are very welcome.

Cheers,

Glenn

Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 22 Apr 1997 19:23:13 -0400
From: Randy deBeauclair <debeau1 at provide.net>
Subject: Bulk honey

Just a quick question for everyone out there.
Any one have any suggestions for a good source of bulk honey, for the =
purposes of making mead?  I live in Southern Michigan, although mail =
order would be fine.
Thanks for your help.


Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 22 Apr 1997 19:40:03 -0700
From: Sharon/Dan Ritter <ritter at camasnet.com>
Subject: re: Counter Pressure Filler Recs

>Does anyone have a recommendation for the best/easiest to use Counter
>Pressure filler (besides yet another trip to Home Depot to build my
>own!)? Hoptech has a pretty inexpensive model that boasts an "automated"
>adjustable pressure relief valve, which on other models seems mostly
>"un"-automated but also usually has a hose attached to it which makes me
>wonder if the feature on this model is more like a pressure relief
>"spray."

I've been using the counter-pressure filler from Braukunst (1-800-972-2728
 -  no affiliation blah, blah) for the past three years. I added a needle
valve, which wasn't necessary, but it gave me a higher level of control on
filling speed. I'm very happy with it's performance and construction. You
might want to check out the Fall 1995 issue of Zymurgy for their Road Test
of counterpressure bottle fillers.



Dan Ritter <ritter at camasnet.com>
Ritter's MAMMOTH Brewery - Grangeville, Idaho



Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 22 Apr 1997 20:43:45 -0600
From: Ronald Babcock <rbabcock at rmii.com>
Subject: Holding Mash Temp in SS

I'm looking for suggestions from fellow converted keg brewers.

I have a hard time holding the mash temperature in my converted keg.
Currently I am applying heat as needed to adjust the temperature but I find
this to be unsatisfactory for the following reasons:
1) I get hot and cold spots varying in temp by as much as 5 degrees.
2) When heat is applied the SS false bottom must rise enough to let grain
under it, that has to be circulated out which sometimes is enough to plug
up the system.
3) The fluctuating temperature makes it impossible to maintain my desired
consistency in quality brewing.

I have an idea or two, as I am always looking to improve my system, but
some input would greatly be appreciated.  I thought of just insulating the
keg with some fiberglass batting and covering that with SS or aluminum to
protect it from the neighboring kegs burners but the temperature would
probably still drop just not as fast.  An other idea would be to build a
coil and place it in the hot liquor tank maintain the temperature a couple
of degrees above the desired wort temp, to compensate for heat loss, and
circulate the mash through it to maintain the desired temperature.

If anyone has any other ideas I would entertain them as well.

Private email would be preferred, as I will post the suggestions as well as
my findings.

TIA

Ronald Babcock
rbabcock at rmii.com
Denver, CO


Return to table of contents