---

	FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
		Digest Janitor: janitor@hbd.org
		Many thanks to the Observer & Eccentric Newspapers of 
		Livonia, Michigan for sponsoring the Homebrew Digest.
				URL: http://www.oeonline.com


Contents:
  Plate Coolers/My RIMS/LP Burners/Flow Meters/Denver/CO2 Leaks (Darrell)
  Malt Extract Stains ("Robert D. Dittmar")
  Danstar brand dry yeast (GuyG4)
  Whole Hop Weight (Bob Falcon)
  Rising Gravity (Evan Dembskey)
  Leaking Corny Kegs (Mark_Snyder)
  Bud Beer School (Dave Williams)
  re: Fermentors for 10+ gallon batches (Rick Seibt)
  Northwest Micros (Mark Rancourt)
  Mint Question (Gordon & Cindy Camp)
  Summer fruit brewing (MGadd24)
  Summer fruit brewing (MGadd24)
  Extraction Efficiency (John Gilman)
  Re: Extraction Efficiencies (Rob Kienle)
  hops, caveat emptor (Jim Liddil)
  My hopback URL (the right one) ("Alan McKay")
  NW Micros (Mark Rancourt)
  Re: Can I save my brew?? (Apparent Stuck Fermentation) ("BRIAN F. THUMM")
  Malta (John Wilkinson)
  Minty, Hoppy,Efficiency, I did not! {8^) ("David R. Burley")
  Pumpkin Ale (Full Mash) ("Alan McKay")
  A New Way To Remove Chloramines ("Tim M. Dugan")
  Efficiency of Propane vs Nat gas vs Electrical ("Thor")
  Starter method: better AND easier? (Robert Parker)
  Re: Extraction Efficiencies (brian_dixon)
  Plato/SG (John Wilkinson)
  Apologies to Pike Place Pale Ale / Cleaning Cornies (George De Piro)
  Mead lovers digest (haafbrau1)


NOTE NEW HOMEBREW ADDRESS:  hbd.org 

Send articles for __publication_only__ to homebrew at hbd.org
  (Articles are published in the order they are received.) 

If your e-mail account is being deleted, please unsubscribe first!!

To SUBSCRIBE or UNSUBSCRIBE send an e-mail message with the word
  "subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to homebrew-request@hbd.org. 
**SUBSCRIBE AND UNSUBSCRIBE REQUESTS MUST BE SENT FROM THE E-MAIL
**ACCOUNT YOU WISH TO HAVE SUBSCRIBED OR UNSUBSCRIBED!!! 
IF YOU HAVE SPAM-PROOFED your e-mail address, the autoresponder and
  the SUBSCRIBE/UNSUBSCRIBE commands will fail!

For "Cat's Meow" information, send mail to brewery at realbeer.com

Homebrew Digest Information on the Web: http://hbd.org

Requests for back issues will be ignored. Back issues are available via:

  Anonymous ftp from...
	hbd.org	/pub/hbd	
	ftp.stanford.edu	/pub/clubs/homebrew/beer
  E-mail...
        ftpmail at gatekeeper.dec.com (send a one-line e-mail message with 
                                   the word help for instructions.)
  AFS users can find it under...
        /afs/ir.stanford.edu/ftp/pub/clubs/homebrew/beer

JANITORS on duty: Pat Babcock and Karl Lutzen (janitor@hbd.org)


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


Date: Wed, 13 Aug 1997 17:43:14 -0600
From: Darrell <SdarrellP at Amontrose.netM>
Subject: Plate Coolers/My RIMS/LP Burners/Flow Meters/Denver/CO2 Leaks

Ray Kruse in #2478 asks about Plate Coolers.

Try Foxx Equipment in Denver 800 525-2484 and Kansas City 800 821-2254,
or try Rapids 800 472-7431.  Both companies stock them in various sizes
and configurations.

No affiliation, blah blah blah....
- --------------------------------
My RIMS idea:

There have been a number of comments on my counterflow heat exchanger
idea between my RIMS and sparge tank.  Thank you all very much.  Some of
the commentors suggested a simple immersion type with the coils in the
sparge tank.  From what I have read on wort coolers, without agitation,
the efficiency of a counterflow heat exchanger exceeds immersion by a
factor of 12x.  Is that not so?  Also, diverting the flow when no heat
is required would also require additional control equipment.  I'm
thinking my idea is still the simplest.  Anyway, thanks to all for the
help!
- -----------------------
Mike Hoag in #2480 asked about LP regulators and burners.

The question of tying 3 LP burners together using 1 regulator depends on
your regulator's flow.  Regulators are rated for pressure ranges and
flow rates.  I have a Cajun Cooker, and added a Tee to another burner
off of the same line (lame experiment to have a high and low burner on
the same cooker), and the regulator flowed plenty of gas to run both
burners at "full speed".  In my lame experiment, the orifice size was
too large, and I wound up with the second burner producing higher BTU's
than the original.  So, I don't think you would have a problem running
all three burners on a standard LP regulator, but that will depend on
the flow rate of your regulator.

To answer your specific questions, I would not use a high pressure
regulator with restricted plumbing size.  Depending on the hose and
connections you use, they may not be rated for the pressure you're
asking them to maintain.  Also, (part of previously stated lame
experiment) high pressure makes it difficult to control the flame. I set
the regulator on high, then used a valve to regulate flame level, and
wasn't able to gain as much control as using the regulator.  The
relationship of pressure/flow/BTU is that if your regulator cannot flow
as much gas as your collective orifice size(s), your pressure will drop
as you open up successive burners.  Since you will not be flowing as
much gas, your BTU's will also fall off (each burner, that is. Max.
BTU's will still, collectively, be the same).  Higher pressure might
seem to be the answer, but if you have a high pressure regulator with
low flow, you will wind up in the same situation, and flame control will
be more difficult.  Therefore, a low pressure regulator with high flow
is the best answer - IMHO.
- --------------------------------
Eric Fouch in #2481 asked about gas flow (imagine that...!)

Eric,

There are a number of different types of flow meters.  Depending upon
your application, what you thought was flow may not necessarily be
flow.  Some flow meters work well for in-line applications (usually more
expensive, "positive displacement" models), while others must be vented
to atmosphere for proper metering.  Whatever the case, measured flow is
a function of pressure.  13 l/m at 10 psi is NOT the same as 13 l/m at
100 psi. A desired flow rate must be accompanied by the corresponding
pressure, or the number is meaningless.  So, to take a stab at your
questions:

1. What is the best configuration of the regulator and flow meter?

That depends on your flow meter.  If your meter is designed to be vented
to atmosphere, neither of the configurations you described will work.
If it is an in-line flow meter, both will work the same, but you will
have to take into account the pressure at the point of measurement.

I am very surprised by your observation that the flame seems to be
higher with the regulator between the flow meter and the tank.
Presumably, if you measure 13 l/m of regulated flow (10 psi), it should
be *less* than 13 l/m of unregulated (100 psi?) flow.  13 liters of gas
at 100 psi will expand to fill a volume much greater than 13 liters if
it is allowed to expand until it reaches 10 psi. So, the 13 l/m that you
measured before the regulator should have given you a bigger flame than
the 13 l/m that you measured after the regulator.  (Unless, of course,
your flow meter includes a pressure/flow correction gradient, in which
case, this entire dissertation is superfluous!)  So, if your flow meter
does have the correction lines on it, maybe it is not properly
calibrated.

2. Is pressure drop in the line a major factor?

In a static state, there will be no pressure drop.  The line will reach
equilibrium if you turn a valve off at the end of the line.  However, as
soon as you open the valve, line length and tubing I.D. will play a
major factor in how much gas you can pass through the line.  Your
corrected flow measurements should be the same at both ends of the line,
but you will find that you have to maintain a higher pressure in the 50'
line than you would in the 20' line to push the same amount of flow.  If
your tubing I.D. is large enough (i.e., less restriction), you may find
this difference immeasurable.

- --------------------------
Mike Frank in #2483 asks about bottles on airplanes:

Mike, no problem taking bottles as carry on, or checking them in your
baggage.  Make sure they are well padded if you check them!!! I have
taken bottles in my checked baggage to Europe with no problems.

I'm not sure about Denver, but we've been getting pounded by afternoon
monsoon rains for the past month here on the Western Slope. Good luck!
- ----------------------------
Keith Royster in #2483 asks about CO2 leakage.

Take your bathroom scale down to the garage and put the cylinder on it.
Maybe you're just getting stronger in your old age!! ;-)  You'll need to
know the tare weight (should be stamped on cylinder shoulder), the
difference tells you how much CO2 is left.

As for leaks;  Take some soapy water solution and spray it all around
your valve and where the valve threads into the cylinder.  Then get your
finger real wet with the stuff and run the edge of your finger across
the outlet of the valve, drawing a soap bubble across the outlet.  If
any bubbles grow, you have a leak.  It is also possible for the cylinder
itself to develop a pin hole leak through the side wall, but then you
will usually see a small patch of frost on the cylinder at the leak.

As for testing;  Your cylinder is required to be hydrostatically tested
every 5 years, or you can't get it filled.  Keith said, "I assume they
pressure tested it when they last filled it recently".  Nope,  they
don't just do this, they charge you for it.

Although there is some degree of checking for leakers, it is not at all
uncommon for cylinders (especially CO2) to come back with leaks after
just being filled.
- ------------------------

Brew on!!
- --
Darrell Garton
Montrose, CO



Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 13 Aug 1997 11:57:00 +0000
From: "Robert D. Dittmar" <Robert.D.Dittmar at STLS.frb.org>
Subject: Malt Extract Stains

     Collective:
     
     I am still extract brewing:  boiling around 2 gallons of water and 
     adding DME and malt extract syrup.
     
     I have a 4 gallon stainless steel stock pot that I have been using for 
     the boil, and some stains have developed on the bottom of the pot from 
     carmelized and burned extract.  Detergent and elbow grease have proven 
     incapable of removing them.
     
     Does anyone know of any household chemicals that would remove them, or 
     are they now a permanent addition to the stock pot.
     
     Rob Dittmar
     dittmar at stls.frb.org

Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 13 Aug 1997 20:43:55 -0400 (EDT)
From: GuyG4 at aol.com
Subject: Danstar brand dry yeast

Greetings, collective.

I've been using liquid yeast cultures, chiefly wyeast brand, for several
years.  I seem to lose a starter now and then, and going back through my
brewnotes I noticed I lost them to infection largely in the late
spring/summer months. I was noting this to my local brewshop provider, who
suggested using Danstar brand yeast. My last three batches have employed this
kind of yeast, and I have had good results.  I use two packs...In two  I
mixed "nottingham" and "windsor" varieties in a light simple pale ale, the
other I used "london" variety in an IPA. I've been very impressed by the
performance and flavor,  and I don't miss the uncertainties with liquid
yeasts in the summer. Is anyone else out there is using it?  My impression is
this is a high quality product, but perhaps someone has some criticism. No, I
have no interest in any yeast company, etc.etc....

 Heck, if my good fortune with this stuff continues, I may just abandon
liquids for ales altogether.  Any feedback would be appreciated.

GuyG4 at aol.com
Guy Gregory
Lightning Creek Home Brewery
Spokane, WA

Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 14 Aug 1997 00:19:34 -0400
From: Bob Falcon <bfalcon at erols.com>
Subject: Whole Hop Weight

I have a recipe calling for 6 (six) Chinook whole hops to be dry hopped.
I'd prefer to use pellets for simplicity.  How much does a whole hop
weigh??

Bob Falcon
Voorhees, NJ
bfalcon at erols.com

Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 14 Aug 1997 09:52:09 +0200
From: Evan Dembskey <evyn at global.co.za>
Subject: Rising Gravity

Hi there.

I am new to both this list and to brewing in general. I have one
puzzling problem. I made my second ale
a couple of weeks ago. When I check the SG it seems to be rising, not
falling. It started out at about 
1100, and is now 1300. 

What now?

Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 14 Aug 1997 08:13:18 -0500
From: Mark_Snyder at wastemanagement.com
Subject: Leaking Corny Kegs




Mark Snyder
08-14-97 08:13 AM
Chris Ragaisis writes that his corny keg just won't seal.  A possible
solution (assuming the leak is at the lid seal and not with either the
poppet or relief valves) is to try an O-ring sold by Williams Brewing.
These o-rings are softer and larger diameter to better seal slightly
damaged kegs.  Something to try before chunking the thing out.  BTW Chris,
if you do decide to throw the thing out, let me know, I'll send you postage
and a label to put on the keg to send it to me :-).

Mark Snyder

(Oh yeah, no affiliation ... yada, yada, yada...)



Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 14 Aug 1997 08:28:37 -0400
From: rdavis at gator.net (Dave Williams)
Subject: Bud Beer School

Arnold J. Neitzke went to the Budweiser Beer school.  So did I.  I went to
the one at Bush Gardens in Tampa.  I was *not* impressed with the guy who
gave the presentation.  It was apparent to me that he was a marketing type
rather than a brewing type and hadn't done his homework.  In describing the
brewing process, he had starch conversion occuring during malting and the
amount of fermentable vs unfermentable sugars controlled by the proportion
of rice in the brew. 

After explaining the difference between ales and lagers, he  made a big deal
about how proud AB is of their yeast and that they use the same yeast strain
for all of their beers.  During the question/answer session at the end of
the presentation I asked if Michelob Pale Ale is fermented with ale or lager
yeast.  He sidestepped with something like,"It's dry hopped, that's a
different process", and quickly took the next question.  


He also mentioned that AB can't sell Bud in The Chech Republic under the
name Budweiser because sombody else over there was already using the name.
He was righteously indignant over this even though he mentioned that it was
part of the agreement when AB licensed the name from the Chech Budweiser in
the first place.  "We can't even use our own name!", he fumed.  

Oh yeah, also Michelob uses only 2 row malt and Bud has some 6 row.  But who
can tell with all those bubbles.  I can't drink the stuff.  Gives me the
hiccups.

If you're currious about how they (AB) make that stuff and you don't care
about the cheesey certificate, you can find all of the information (without
the righteous indignation) on Bud's web page.  www.Budweiser.com, I think.

Cheers
Dave W.

Whiskey's too rough
Champagne cost too much
And vodka puts my mouth in gear

This little refrain should help me explain
As a matter of fact , I like beer
           -Tom T. Hall-


Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 14 Aug 1997 09:24:34 -0700
From: Rick Seibt <rseibt at apk.net>
Subject: re: Fermentors for 10+ gallon batches

In HBD #2483 BBrowne at golder.com (Barry Browne) wrote:

>The Sankey seems to be a decent option (durability etc.). I'd
appreciate hearing from folks about their experiences, good
or bad, with these vessels (or any others) as fermentors.

Barry,

I've been hooked on Sankey kegs as fermentors since I tasted
my first beer from them.  I don't know if I just got lucky, or the
keg really had something to do with it, but as I continued to
ferment (primary only) in them, I became very happy with the
results.

That said, my last 3 batches have been fermented in glass
because of a nasty yeast ring I haven't been able to get
rid of.  I use 1/4 bbl for 5 gal batches and 1/2 bbl for 10 gal
batches.  I just take the spear out, and ferment using a #11
stopper & ferm. lock.   Here's some things to consider:

Activity is tough to judge, you can only go by the bubbling
of the fermentation lock (or lack thereof).

The #11 stopper fits, but because of the notch in the top
of the keg, you need to make sure its snugly in there.

Cleaning can be a bitch.  I soak w/tsp or dishwasher
detergent asap after racking or you get a yeast ring like I
got.  I plan on using NaOH to get rid of it as soon as I find
some.

To inspect the inside of the keg, I use a night light (w/o
shade, just bare bulb), attached to an extension cord, and
lower it into the keg  and then use a telescopic mirror (Sears
tool section - like a dental mirror) and use the mirror to
inspect the keg.  IT WORKS.  Just make sure the keg is dry
and I also plug into an GFCI outlet to be safe otherwise
electrocution is possible.

Racking is easier and harder.  You need to find a way of
holding the racking cane vertical, but you can rack
straight down the center of the keg due to the concave
bottom and get most of the good stuff and leaving the
lees and residue behind.

Overall the work load is increased, but the results are
worth it. IMO

Rick Seibt


Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 14 Aug 1997 07:01:11 -0700
From: Mark Rancourt <rancourt at nelson.ca.boeing.com>
Subject: Northwest Micros

This is in reaction to that NY guy from HBD 2482 that more or less
stated
that micros from around here are one dimensional, out of balance, and
generally
overhopped.

Consider this your pee-pee being slapped.

I happen to think the majority of the brews around here are great.

There are some of the MOST AWSOME brews to be found almost in my back
yard.

This includes but not lilited to:

Leavenworth Brewery (Thank you Florida, good taste!) PS. Ever tried
DANTE'S ?
Winthrop Brewing
Diamond Knot (Best damn IPA on God's planet)
Hale's
Captian City
Skagit River (Yellow Jacket Bitter, yummy stuff, New Yorkers stay away)
Elysian Brewing
Big Time
Pike Place 

This list could go on for days...

I most certianly will not go to NY in search of brew.

There are a few not so good brews here also. A few that come to mind:

Redhook
Aviator
Pyramid

My veiws as a NW hophead, other opinions may vary...

Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 14 Aug 1997 10:07:16 -0400
From: Gordon & Cindy Camp <revcamp at epix.net>
Subject: Mint Question

John Asks about brewing with fresh mint, which I 
grow and occasionaly have tossed into a brew or 
two. So here are my suggestions based on my few 
excursions:

1. On cleaning the mint leaves, wash them well 
in water. then soak in a cheap vodka for a few 
minutes. 

2. Dry verses fresh leaves? Always fresh. Mint 
unlike hops loses much of its flovor and aroma 
when you drie them. 

3. Ive used them in the secondary, more alcohol 
to retard botulism/BATF growth. But I've also 
used them at the end of the boil. The former 
yeilds better aroma and less flavor, while the 
later produces taste and fading aroma. So, why 
not try some of each, you add hops at different 
times for different results right?

4.  4oz of undried mint will give you alot of 
mint flavor, depending on your beer recipie I 
would recommend 1oz at the end of the boil and 
3oz for secondary. But experiment and have fun.

Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 14 Aug 1997 10:01:01 -0400 (EDT)
From: MGadd24 at aol.com
Subject: Summer fruit brewing

Homebrewer looking for a "Peach Cream Ale" recipe. Would prefer a extract
recipe. Trying to take advantage of the summer fruit coming in.
Thanks. Send recipes to: MGadd24 at aol.com

Clumbsy Dog Brews

Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 14 Aug 1997 10:02:05 -0400 (EDT)
From: MGadd24 at aol.com
Subject: Summer fruit brewing

Homebrewer looking for a "Peach Cream Ale" recipe. Would prefer a extract
recipe. Trying to take advantage of the summer fruit coming in.
Thanks. Send recipes to: MGadd24 at aol.com

Clumbsy Dog Brews

Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 14 Aug 1997 09:37:31 -0500
From: John Gilman <gilmanj at mindspring.com>
Subject: Extraction Efficiency 

> I am looking for suggestions to increase my extraction efficiency. I have
> never gotten over 70%. I think my problems lie in temperature control at the
> end of the mash and sparging.
> 
>
> Should I raise the temerature of the mash (do a mash-out) before I begin
> recirculating the mash to get a clear run-off?
> Should my sparge water temperature be different?
> How long should the sparge last for a typical 5 gallon batch? (i.e. 10 lbs of
> grain and an initial boil volume of 6 to 6.5 gallons).
> What should the temperature be of my run-off from the mash-tun to the brew
> pot?

I recently got my efficiency up to 31.5pts/lb from 28pts/lb without
changing my EasyMasher System.  For me it was a matter of finally
putting all the pieces together, i.e. mash-out, hour long sparge, acid
adjustment etc.  The thing that I think made the most difference,
however, was stirring the grain bed twice during the sparge.  Twice I
stopped sparging and completely stirred the grain bed.  With the
EasyMasher this isn't a problem because run-off runs clear in about two
cups.  I don't know how long this would take with your system.  

John Gilman

Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 14 Aug 1997 09:56:55 -0500
From: Rob Kienle <rkienle at interaccess.com>
Subject: Re: Extraction Efficiencies

> Alan McKay responds to my post on extract efficiencies and system overhauls:
>
> Rob, you can't change your entire brewing system and then say that
> you attribute your higher extraction to one simple variable like the
> water
> temperature, or whether or not you have to transfer the mash.  This
> is so far from a controlled experiment that it isn't funny.  You've
> basically
> changed every single variable, yet want to believe that your better
> extraction is a result of only one of them.
>
Excuse me if I seemed to be oversimplifying things. It's true that my
whole system is different than it was before. I didn't mean to imply
that I only changed one element of the operation. The point I had
*hoped* to make, however, was that the general aim (and the result) of
the majority of my changes (not needing to transfer the grains to a
separate vessel for sparging, for example) was more consistent (and
higher) temperature maintenance throughout the mashing/sparging process.
It remains logical to me that whatever methods we use to increase that
particular *overall* element of the the process (including a complete
system re-design, as was my case) should contribute significantly to
improving the extent and predictability of efficiencies we see in our
brews.

- --
Cheers4beers,
Rob Kienle
Chicago, IL
rkienle at interaccess.com




Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 14 Aug 1997 8:08:23 -0700 (MST)
From: Jim Liddil <JLIDDIL at AZCC.Arizona.EDU>
Subject: hops, caveat emptor

Andy wrote:

> Date: Wed, 13 Aug 1997 13:01:20 -0700
> From: Andy Walsh <awalsh at crl.com.au>
> Subject: US Tettnanger conspiracy!
> 
> I'm sorry, but I can't stop myself from posting on this topic!
> 
> The following comes from the Haas hop web-site. Haas are *major* growers
> in the US and also own the entire Australian hop fields (hmmm...).
> 
> http://www.john-i-haas.com/tett.htm
> 
> "Tettnanger is an old aroma variety originating in the Tettnang area
> around Lake Constance in Southern Germany. Selection of Tettnanger
> rootstocks in Germany resulted in two different rootstocks now available
> to U.S. growers. Each produces hops with distinct analytical data. One
> is more like the German grown Tettnanger than the other. Analytical data
> in this brochure are for the rootstock most widely grown in the U.S.A."
> 


If nothing else all this points out that as consumers we should always
questions our suppliers and their information.  Whether it be malt, hops or
YEAST. 

Jim

Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 14 Aug 1997 11:07:16 -0400
From: "Alan McKay" <Alan.McKay.amckay at nt.com>
Subject: My hopback URL (the right one)


Sorry folks, I posted the wrong URL for my hopback.
It can be found at :
http://www.magma.ca/~bodnsatz/brew/tips/gadgets/hop-back.html

cheers,
 -Alan


Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 14 Aug 1997 08:34:49 -0700
From: Mark Rancourt <rancourt at nelson.ca.boeing.com>
Subject: NW Micros

My earlier posting was not a unilateral attack on all of NY but I did
have to
vent after reading of one dimensional, boring ,overhopped micros.

Brew on, use lots of hops!

Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 14 Aug 1997 11:32:53 -0400
From: "BRIAN F. THUMM" <THUMMBF at GWSMTP.NU.COM>
Subject: Re: Can I save my brew?? (Apparent Stuck Fermentation)

Mark Arneson wrote: 

> I pitched the yeast (dry M & F ale yeast)
> on saturday, with an OG of 1.045.  It pretty much stopped
> fermenting on monday with a gravity of about 1.022

I wince at saying it, but you need to "Relax.  Don't worry."

A 23 point drop in two days is respectable, and you should expect it to drop
another several points over the next week.  For example, my most recent batch
(a honey wheat) started at 1.051, and darn-near exploded it's way out of the
fermenter for two days. When it slowed down to 6-8 bubbles per minute, I
curiously took a measurement, and it read 1.026.  I smiled, tasted it (very
bubble-gum flavored) and waited another 10 days. I just bottled Tuesday night,
when it finished at 1.012.

If you don't see a drop at all after three more days, then you should declare
it a stuck fermentation, but I'd give it a few more days.  If it is stuck, more
yeast will help, but check the temperature, too.

Brian Thumm
Pier 147 Brewery


Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 14 Aug 97 10:27:44 CDT
From: jwilkins at imtn.tpd.dsccc.com (John Wilkinson)
Subject: Malta

Delano DuGarm speculated that Malta might contain a preservative which
inhibited yeast growth.  However, since he said the malta was carbonated,
I wonder if the CO2 could have been toxic to the small amount of yeast
added?

Mike Frank wondered if bottles of beer could be checked as baggage or
carried on airline flights.  I have carried both wine and beer both ways
(checked and carried) without hassle.  The first time I tried it I
wondered what the reaction would be to the x-ray of my carry on bag.
The bottles were obvious in the x-ray but provoked no reaction.  I
guess they are not worried about it.
I am not.

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

Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 14 Aug 1997 11:53:10 -0400
From: "David R. Burley" <Dave_Burley at compuserve.com>
Subject: Minty, Hoppy,Efficiency, I did not! {8^)

Brewsters:

John Penn asks about using fresh mint leaves
to give his Chocolate Stout the
I-dreamed-I-was-skiing-down- this-montain and... taste.

As with most fresh fruits and vegetables bacteria
 can be a problem and lead to beer spoilage.
  Since mint flavors hold up to cooking (mint jelly)
 I suggest you drop them into the boiler just as
 you finish the boil and remove them with the hops.
  If you want to put them in fresh, treat them with
 acidic (pH< 3.5) metabisulfite followed by ample
 washes of cold boiled water. You could also prepare
 a concentrate from mint leaves crushed in very hot
 water and add this to your beer to get the flavor just right.
- --------------------------------------
Andy Walsh comments:

>At last an open mind out there in HBDland =

has prompted me to post again on
>this topic, in hope of reaching similar souls...

I hope I didn't give you the impression with my
 comments that I didn't find this whole thing
 fascinating and riddled with irony.  I do, just
 don't know quite how to apply it except to use
 my hops differently.  I think it is probably one
 of the best pieces of unique information we
 have had here in a long time.  I would like to
 hear more about it.

Andy also says:

> The same variety grown under different =

conditions
>will also brew differently, so forget about
 the anecdotal evidence.

Or is this myth based on the incorrect
 identification of the hop variety?  I have read
 that the Hallertauer is the only hop that
 produces the same quality in the US as
 Germany.  Maybe the reason is that it is the
 same plant and others were incorrectly
 identified - perhaps on purpose??

Remember Styrian Goldings is actually Fuggle.
- ------------------------------------------ =

Jackson, a recent transplant to NC asks
 how to improve his efficiency beyond 70%. =

  One thing that will give you an  improvement
 is to include a hold at 122F which will help
 free up the starch from the protein matrix.
  Also, I would suspect that you may also
 have a milling problem. See my past comments
 about milling at least twice in a roller mill.
- ------------------------------------------
Mark Turmakin says:

>Dave Burley recently commented about
 Northwestern brews being too hoppy, or
>rather too one-dimensionally hoppy - I
 would agree that we should try for
>balance. But on the other hand, it's fun
 to push the envelope.

Nope that was George De Piro, I believe.
 I would love a drinking tour of Oregon, Washington
 and Northern Ca. =


But I did push the envelope recently with
 a Whitbread Special Bitter I made that had
 lots of hops and crystal. A well known BCJP judge
  and author visiting my house said after finishing a glass.
  "I like it but that is the hoppiest beer I have
 ever tasted"  that says a lot.  I like it but then
 I also make my Melita coffee with two heaping
 scoops of coffee in a 4 cup Mister Coffee.
- ------------------------------------------

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: Thu, 14 Aug 1997 11:08:11 -0500
From: "Alan McKay" <Alan.McKay.amckay at nt.com>
Subject: Pumpkin Ale (Full Mash)


Hi there folks,

Well, last weekend me and 2 friends decided to tackle a
pumpkin ale which will be served at our halloween party.
We did a 10 gallon batch where we mashed in 2 separate
5 gallon Gotts, then boiled the whole thing together in
a 17 gallon aluminum brewpot on a 65K BTU burner.

Here's the recipe we used for each of the 5 gallon mashes :
250g wheat
2 lb 6Row
6 lb 2Row
1 lb Munich
1 can pumpkin

For one mash we mashed in to 153F, then brought the pumpkin
up to that temp in a pot on top the stove, and finally just
stirred the pumpkin into the top 1/4 of the mash.  We didn't
want to go too deep with the pumpkin in order to avoid runoff
problems.

FOr the other mash we mashed the pumpkin on top the stove 
with purchase enzymes, then mixed it into the top 1/4 of the
mash in the other cooler.  SO for runoff purposes, the only
difference was that one cooler had a Phils in it, where the
other had my home-made copper manifold (circular), cut
with slots.

When the time finally came to sparge, both were running very
freely up until the last 10 or 15 minutes, when the Phils 
kept flowing freely, but the home-made manifold started 
running more slowly.  We did manage to run it off fine, but
it was starting to make us nervous.  Unfortunately we didn't
keep the runoff separate, so we don't know if we got higher
extraction from one or the other.  Looking back this would
have been a good idea.  In order to run the same amount
of water through both, we just counted how many litres of
water we put into the top of each, and kept the two the same.

Oh, I should add as well that this is the first time any
of us has used 6Row, and we were totally impressed with
how quickly the wort cleared during the re-circulation
even with only 2 lbs of 6Row.  Normally with my Gott it
takes a dozen or more quarts of recirculation to get a
reasonably clear wort.  This time it was 2 or 3 and the
wort was clear as a bell.  We were all completely amazed.

As for the 65K BTU burner on a 10 gallon batch, we were 
extremely please with that, as well.  It did take about 70
minutes to boil 15 gallons of cold water before we began,
but that was acceptable to us.  During the runoff, though,
we put half the wort to boil before running off the other 
half, so it only took about 10 minutes to come to a rolling
boil after the runoff had completed.  So all-in-all we 
found the 65K BTU burner to be more than adequate.  Just
set your cold water to boil an our in advance, and that's
the longest wait out of the way by far.

I'm ashamed to say that I don't recall what exactly we used
for hops.  We were going by the recipe on P315 of Papazian's
2nd book, and used the spices that are given there (doubled
for the 10 gallons).  As for hops, we used different ones
than he specified for boiling, but worked them out to the
same HBUs.  The spices added were cinnamon, allspice, vanilla,
and I think some nutmeg.  Check the book for exact proportions.

We'll keep you posted on the progress of the beer.  Just 
thought some of you might be interested.

cheers,
 -Alan


Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 14 Aug 1997 10:35:59 -0500
From: "Tim M. Dugan" <tdugan at netins.net>
Subject: A New Way To Remove Chloramines

Our homebrew club (MUGZ) is fortunate enough to have a member who is a =
professional in the field of water treatment.  He just wrote this =
article for our newsletter, and I though the HBD might find it =
interesting.

If you have any questions you can contact Jim at humph39 at aol.com.


Chloramines - The Yeast Killers
by Jim Humphreys

Chloramines are compounds formed by the reaction of free chlorine and =
ammonia.  Some cities form these compounds on purpose to control =
bacterial growth, both in the water treatment plant and the distribution =
system.  It also replaces chlorine disinfection and reduces the =
formation of trihalomethanes (THM's) that result when chlorine reacts =
with naturally occurring organic matter.  In some instances they are =
formed by ammonia naturally occurring in the water.

Chloramines occur as mono-, di-, and trichloramines.  Since the drinking =
water supply of most cities has a pH of 7 or higher, we have to deal =
with monochloramine.  The matter is complicated by the fact that =
monochloramines are highly stable in nature, making them the most =
difficult type of chloramine to remove.  But remove it we must because =
it is a yeast killer.

The most common method of removing both chlorine and chloramines is =
activated charcoal.  The use of wood or coconut based activated carbons =
are common practices but have limitations.  Choramines tend to be more =
difficult to remove and deplete the carbon bed quite readily.  More =
efficient removal can be realized by using activated charcoal with a =
mesh size to 30 x 70, if you have a choice.  In addition, run the water =
through at a slower rate and increase the temperature of the water.

There is a new player in the charcoal field, activated carbon.  This is =
a special carbon produced from bituminous coal by Calgon Corp.  This =
carbon is 10-15 more efficient in chloramine removal than any form of =
carbon.  The author, who once worked for Calgon, will contact them and =
find a source for those that are interested.  As an added bonus, =
activated carbon also removes iron.

This article was based on information contained in "Catalytic Carbon, A =
New Weapon in the Chloramine Battle" and "Catalytic Carbon, A New Level =
in Iron Removal Technology" by Ed Bockman published in the August 1997 =
addition of "Water Conditioning & Purification".

=00

Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 14 Aug 1997 10:05:30 +0000
From: "Thor" <*Dont.spam* at dnai.com>
Subject: Efficiency of Propane vs Nat gas vs Electrical

Does anybody know what the relative efficiency of heating your brewery 
with propane, natural gas or electricity? My current setup is made 
for propane but I'm planning on moving it indoors and cant safely do 
so with propane  because of the fumes and because it will be easier 
to automate. Its currently set up to make 15 gallons with plenty 
space. If I convert it to electrically heated with immersion 
elements, is it going to cost a fortune? Would it be better to use 
natural gas?
- -----------------------------------------------------------
email addresses: *mikew at ricochet.net, *thor at onthemenu.com
(remove *)       *thor at dnai.com, *thor at expressway.com

Raw Web page  at  http://www.dnai.com/~thor/index.html

Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 14 Aug 1997 13:33:10 -0400 (EDT)
From: Robert Parker <parker at parker.eng.ohio-state.edu>
Subject: Starter method: better AND easier?

Starters are a topic of late and I'd like to float an intriguing idea that
somehow received little discussion when originally posted 3 years ago. 
Pierre Jelenc (a former hbd all-star and unfortunate hbd dropout after
last year's difficulties)  provided the following post in August 1994:

> The problem is that this is not a starter, but a mini beer. A starter
> should NOT ferment, but grow aerobically; get rid of that air lock, in
> fact get rid of that bottle as well: make your starter at the bottom of
> your primary fermenter, where you will get a huge surface/volume ratio.
> 
> Splash it around regularly, and do not close the fermenter: Use a loose
> plug of sterile cotton for a carboy, or a freshly boiled kitchen towel
> for a bucket. That way, all the sugar is used to make more yeast, not to
> make alcohol.

He followed it up with the following private email:

> When I make my starters, typically I start from yeast on a plate, but
> the dregs of a fresh bottle are usually OK. I put 1/2 gal of a simple
> wort made with dry extract and a few hops pellets (OG 1.02-1.04) in a 
> sanitized (iodophor) plastic fermenter, and scrape the yeast into it. I 
> cover loosely with Al foil, and give it a shake once in a while, when I 
> happen to pass by.
> 
> At least one day, and preferably not more than two, after pitching, I lift
> one end of the fermentor on a few books, to gather the yeast all on one
> side, and I let it rest overnight. Just before adding the wort, I pour off
> the liquid from the starter, to keep only the yeast. 
> 
> I do my primary in an essentially open fermenter, with skimming with a 
> slotted spoon rather than a blow-off in a carboy (mostly for practical 
> space reasons). As soon as primary fermentation slows down, I rack to a 
> glass carboy and fit an air lock.

I will admit that I need help with the microbiology to evaluate this, but
it looks intriguing, and, based only on the usual quality of Pierre's
info, I'm inclined to think it's effective. 

Let's see some discussion of this starter method that is clearly easier
and in one informed person's opinion better. 

Rob Parker
parker.242 at osu.edu


Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 14 Aug 97 10:55:36 -0700
From: brian_dixon at om.cv.hp.com
Subject: Re: Extraction Efficiencies

>Rob Keinle writes :

>MHO I believe that the extraction *deficiencies* many of us see are
>directly related to our sparging techniques. For 5 years, I too mashed
>on the stovetop, transferred the mash to a bucket, and sparged using
>Phil's setup. My efficiencies were *always* around 5 pts off projection
>and *consistently* about 70% overall. I am certain the problem was due
>to temperature loss in transferring the grain and an inability to make
>up for that loss with 170 degree sparge water.

>My proof for this assumption is the fact that, at the beginning of this
>year, I switched to a dedicated 3-vessel system in which the grain is
>*not* moved to another vessel for sparging and heat may continue to be
>applied to it (as well as to the sparge water itself) throughout the
>sparge procedure. 

I doubt the low 70% rate is due to cooling during the transfer of the
mash to a separate lauter tun.  I use a system very similar to what you
describe and regularly get 88% extraction efficiency (and hit my SG
predictions right on the mark).  I'd examine a) your crush, b) mash
time, c) temperature and temperature loss during the mash rest(s).  In
addition, did you use Fix's technique for including a mash at 105 F, or
did you mash out at say 165 F or so for 10 minutes (or so)?  I don't use
Fix's low temperature rest, but do mash out.  I also mash for about an
hour in a preheated (150 F) oven, experiencing a loss of about 2 degrees
during the rest.  The rest of my procedure is purely stove-top and I use
an uninsulated (yikes!) plastic bucket with a Phil's Phalse bottom in
it.  I have always worried about temperature loss when transferring the
mash, and during the sparge (I use 170 F water), but my efficiencies
have bred laziness in me and I haven't taken further steps to correct
the mash transfer/lautering temperature loss issues.  I do get a slowing
of the sparging once in awhile though, with exit temperatures of around
120 F or so (!), so I will probably insulate and preheat the lauter tun
somewhere along the line (when I get less lazy), but it sure hasn't
affected my efficiency.  Oh yeah, I also take pains to do a slow sparge.
Most recipes take an hour or slightly longer for me to sparge.

Brian

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

Item Subject: WINMAIL.DAT
Couldn't convert Microsoft Mail Message Data item to text at a gateway.

Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 14 Aug 97 12:40:20 CDT
From: jwilkins at nps001.imtn.tpd.dsccc.com (John Wilkinson)
Subject: Plato/SG

Graham Wheeler:

>The closest Troy is likely to get without getting into heavy maths is:
>
>(SG-1) * 258.85
>- ---------------
>	SG
>
>Where SG is in the form of 1.xxx

Spencer Thomas:

>A curve fit (due to deClerck) gives:
>
>    E = 0.258*(1-0.0008*Pts)*Pts + 0.003
>
>where E is extract in degrees Plato, and Pts is (SG - 1) * 1000


My God!  No wonder my ESB has not been turning out right.  I was shooting for
1.052 SG for 13 Plato and I should have been shooting for 1.053!

No disrespect intended, guys.  It just struck me as funny considering
how inexact my brewing is.

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

Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 14 Aug 1997 15:48:13 -0700
From: George_De_Piro at berlex.com (George De Piro)
Subject: Apologies to Pike Place Pale Ale / Cleaning Cornies

     Hi all,
     
     After I read Mike's post, in which he said that two years ago Pike 
     Place Pale Ale was a balanced beer (in his opinion), I checked my 
     notes, and sure enough, I wrote that I thought it was pretty good.  
     There was actually some balance to it.  I apologize to all who were 
     offended.
     
     I stand firmly on my ground regarding their other beers, though.  I 
     found the stout to be especially bitter and acrid.
     ---------------------------------------
     Somebody (sorry, don't recall the name) stated that they read that 
     taking Cornies completely apart will harm the seals, so they don't do 
     it regularly.  They go on to describe their sanitizing procedure which 
     includes a very hot water soak, which they say is probably 
     unnecessary.
     
     In my opinion, if you aren't taking apart the keg so that every bit of 
     every part is in direct contact with sanitizer, you are risking 
     infection.  The hot water soaking that the poster describes IS 
     necessary because the heat will help to kill what the sanitizer cannot 
     get to in an assembled keg.
     ---------------------------------------
     Just a quick note to let Andy Walsh know that I hate him.  I have 4 
     Tettnang vines in my first year hop garden, and they're doing really 
     well.  Thanks to Andy, I now doubt their true variety even more than I 
     already did (I don't entirely doubt that somewhere along the line from 
     field to homebrew shop they got mislabeled).
     
     What the heck should I call them now?  And what of the others I'm 
     growing?  Oh, hell...forget it!
     
     In case anybody missed the point of this last bit, I don't hate Andy.  
     I do in fact respect him and enjoy his posts.
     
     Have fun!
     
     George De Piro  (Nyack, NY)

Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 14 Aug 1997 17:08:51 -0400
From: haafbrau1 at juno.com
Subject: Mead lovers digest

Besides loving beer, mead has a special place in my heart.  After reading
a post with info on how to subscribe to mld, I attempted to do so, only
to be rejected as "spam".  How do I get around this to actually
subscribe?  I have done nothing to my address, and I followed the
directions exactly.  Any help would be much appreciated.  TIA.
Paul Haaf
haafbrau1 at juno.com

Return to table of contents

---