HOMEBREW Digest #2487 Tue 19 August 1997

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

		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

  causation and experimetation (DAVE SAPSIS)
  MN Ren-Fest Contest (Jim Ellingson)
  mint beer ("Bryan L. Gros")
  Plato Conversions (Troy Hojel)
  IPA recipe (Mark Tumarkin)
  New contraversial sparging method (Jon Bovard)
  RIMS v. Decoction Part Deaux (Louis Bonham)
  Efficiency of Propane vs Nat gas vs Electrical ("Thor")
  Jethro forwards a Comment ("Rob Moline")
  Filters ("Marty Purselley")
  Bucket Cooler (Bigdogs)
  Another use for hops (John Varady)
  RE:Coors response to Blue Moon (Kit Anderson)
  A Pint's a Pound the World 'Round (John W. Braue, III)
  Re: Hops and Cows ("Audra Macmann")
  Pints, pounds ("Michael Baum")
  Flying Brews ("Decker, Robin E.")
  What a find! ("BRIAN F. THUMM")
  First faltering steps... (MIS, SalemVA)"
  Bottling in pop aka soda bottles (Brent Irvine)
  born-on dating (Samuel Mize)
  Kidney stones/Alcohol and Medications ("Nathan L. Kanous II")
  Status of eisbock/BATF issue (Oliver Weatherbee)
  A pint's a pound..,hoppiness f(C), 122F again ("David R. Burley")
  Queen of Beer - Competition Announcement (Charles Burns)
  Boiling Mash volume ("David L. Thomson")
  Judge Digest? (Steve)
  Extract IPA, revisited (Matthew Arnold)
  Sanke material ("Raymond C. Steinhart")
  Bicarbonate ppm (Dana Edgell)

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: Fri, 15 Aug 1997 02:16:14 -0700 From: DAVE_SAPSIS at fire.ca.gov (DAVE SAPSIS) Subject: causation and experimetation While I agree with the general intent (to not presume causation due to a single factor when whole methodolgies are changed) of his message, Alan writres: >For what it's worth, though, in my own controlled experiments (i.e. >only one variable changed), I get at least 5% better extraction if I >include a mashout (~170F) than when I don't (~155F). I would cuation him against being too rigid in his condemnation of the use scientific method by homebrewers. There *are* no controlled experiments without replication, and I have yet to see a homebrewers setup that can effectively replicate mashing regimes (the most obvious factor that varies when trying to repeat identical mashes is temperature -- just get yourself a very accurate and spatially resolving temp probe, and you will see what I mean). Also, while not obvious, I beleieve that Alan refers to attempts at controlling the main variables involved in carbohydrate transformations (temp, thickness, grain, crush, lauter vessel/method, etc.); there are likley additional environmental and procedural factors that not only have main effects, but also interactions (effect of factor A dependent on level of factor B). Hence the need for rigorous testing with replication to find out which ones really drive the system. This does not mean our observational studies regarding causation are meaningless -- just considerably weaker in power to detect effects. Where we are interested in homebrew methods in particular, and cannot directly relate our questions to those explored by the big guys and reported in refereed journals, we are relagated to doing our best at controlling extraneous factors, which is I'm sure what Alan refered to. However, remember: there is no "proof" in science and that is why the null hypothesis is the thing that is tested. cheers, --dave in Sacto "Think you used enough dynamite there, Butch?" --Sundance Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 14 Aug 1997 21:54:55 GMT From: Jim Ellingson <jellings at me.umn.edu> Subject: MN Ren-Fest Contest Renaissance Festival Beer, Mead and Cider Competition. Call for Entries, Judges. The 3rd annual AHA Sanctioned Beer, Mead, and Cider competition will be held in conjunction with this year's Minnesota Renaissance Festival. Final judging will be on Labor Day, Monday September 1. Entries will be accepted from 11:00 - 6:00, 19 August (Tue.) through 24 August (Sun.) at L. L. Kraemer Co., 9925 Lyndale Ave. S., Bloomington, MN 55420. Entrant must specify the AHA category for the entry (1-28, A-G). Entries will be grouped into 6 prize categories after 24 August. 2 12-oz. standard (AHA) bottles are required and the fee is $6 per entry. A S.S.A. Legal Size Envelope is also required. This contest is sponsored by L. L. Kraemer Co. Homebrew Shop, the Minnesota HomeBrewer's Assoc. and Mid-America Festivals. Contact the Shop FFI on the contest. 1-800-200-3647 LLKRAEMER at aol.com Please contact me if you're interested in judging. Cheers, Jim - ------------------------------ http://www.menet.umn.edu/~jellings/ * * James Lee (Jim) Ellingson jellings at me.umn.edu * * University of Minnesota, 125 Mech. Engr. tel 612/645-0753 * * 111 Church St.SE, Minneapolis, MN 55455 fax 612/624-1398 * Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 14 Aug 1999 13:27:53 -0700 From: "Bryan L. Gros" <gros at bigfoot.com> Subject: mint beer >I was contemplating a chocolate mint stout recipe that called for 4oz of mint >leaves in the secondary. Based on all the posts about hops and drying them, I >became concerned about how to best use the mint. The recipe called for raw >mint leaves, not "dried", in the secondary. >1) Now presumably hops are OK in the secondary but is there anything I can do >to "clean" the mint leaves that I pick so that I reduce the infection chance? > >2) Should I use raw leaves, or should I dry them first? I don't want that >grassy flavor similar to undried hops. >3) Should I add mint leaves to the secondary? Or has anyone tried them added >at the end of the boil like aroma hops? >4) Is 4oz of undried mint leaves too much? Four oz. sounds like a lot, based on my experiences with basil. But I added to the boil. Basil is a pretty "strong" herb, and I think mint is almost as "strong". I would suggest you add some mint leaves to warm water and steep, or warm tea. See what the flavor is like before trying in five gallons of beer. I guess you could also add more mint and only leave it in the secondary for a couple days. Let us know how it turns out. I'm interested in such a beer myself... - Bryan gros at bigfoot.com Oakland, CA Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 14 Aug 1997 17:33:51 -0600 From: Troy Hojel <hojel at flash.net> Subject: Plato Conversions Thanks to everyone who e-mailed me the formulas for Plato conversions. I received three different formulas (from the simple, divide by four, to a few that are a bit more involved). Thanks to David Mercer and Graham Wheeler for their contributions. Anyway, for those who are interested, the following is the most "accurate" formula I received: %Plato = -616.868 + 1111.14*SG - 630.272*SG^2 + 135.997*SG^3 I programmed an applet that does most of the common conversion types. I hope it helps. BrewConverter Applet (http://www.flash.net/~hojel/) Troy Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 14 Aug 1997 21:08:23 -0400 From: Mark Tumarkin <tumarkin at mindspring.com> Subject: IPA recipe Hi all,=20 I got home this evening to find that several people had sent requests to me for the IPA recipe I mentioned in my post. This is the first time I am trying this recipe, and it is still dry-hopping in the fermentor (to be bottled this weekend) so I can't vouch for it yet. So I am also sending a porter recipe that came out extremely well - I think you'll like it, if you're a hop head that is. =20 Porter - Scorned Lover -A Dark & Bitter Brew 3.3 Lbs NorthWestern Amber Malt Extract 3.3 Lbs Northwestern Light Malt Extract 1 Lb Munich grain 1 Lb British Crystal grain =BD Lb Black Patent =BD Lb Roasted Barley=20 1 tsp Gypsum 4 oz Chinook - boil 1hr 4 oz Cascade - 40 min 4 oz Cascade - 5 min pitched on Wyeast 1056 from previous batch Brewed April 27, 1997, 6 gal batch SG 1.042 FG 1.012 Bottled June 7, 1997 India Pale Ale - Anniversary Ale 8 lb. Alexander's Pale Extract 1 lb. Crystal grain=20 1/2 lb. Pale Ale grain=20 1/2 lb. Munich grain=20 2 oz. Columbus hops 12.4% 1.5 hrs 2 oz. Columbus hops 1 hr=09 2 oz. Cascades hops 5.8% 15 min 2 oz. Cascades hops 5 min 2 oz. Cascades hops dry hop 1 tsp. Gypsum pinch table salt Danstar London Ale - dry yeast=20 Brewed Sunday Aug. 3 6 gal. batch OG 1.048 Dry hopped Thursday, gravity at 1.014 Don't know the final gravity yet although it's probably mostly done. I usually use Wyeast liquid rather than dry yeast. But this was a last minute, unplanned brew day and I didn't have time to do a starter. So I just ran to the brew shop and got the Danstar. It seems to be cleaner than most dry yeast.=20 I know some of you are going to say that I am using so damn much hops that I can't taste anything else. Not true. First of all, I'm doing extract brewing on a stove top, also I'm using hops bags - so the hops utilization is not as good as it could be. But the results speak for themselves. I have really been trying to create a full hops experience from a deep, bitter bottom through a rich tasty flavor, and a heady hop aroma. Dry hopping is great for that aroma! (Delano DuGarms's "Wall of Hops", what a great descriptor!) And I do try to balance it with the malt flavors. I'm an extract brewer but I try to do partial mash as well to get better malt flavor.=20 I have been playing with hops combinations. I love Cascades, but I have been trying to find other hops that work well with it. I like the Columbus a lot, and have also had good success with Chinook. Chinook seems sort of like Cascades on steroids. I know that some people seem to find the high alpha hops like Chinook or Columbus to impart a harsher flavor, but I have been pretty satisfied. Do you all have any combinations you particularly like? I'd love to hear about them.=20 Hoppy brewing,=20 Mark Tumarkin The Brewery in the Jungle Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 15 Aug 1997 11:57:44 +1100 From: Jon Bovard <j.bovard at student.qut.edu.au> Subject: New contraversial sparging method I know of many German breweries and a local micro which uses a method of sparging similar to that of some English breweries, but with a twist. Once recirculation has completed. The bed is 90% drained and filled with water at around 80C. Once this covers the grain bed the mash is then stirred like mad . This supposedly encourages sugars into solution and increases efficiency.The mash is left to settle for 15 minutes and then re-circulated once again. The process is repeated until enough wort is colected or pH>6 etc ect. My question is ( I plan to try this) will mixing the mash bed so violently cause irreversible damage. ie Leaving it almost undisturbed for 1.5 hours beforehand creates a preety decent bed.?? Cheers Jon BOvard Brisbane, Aus Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 14 Aug 1997 23:24:59 -0500 From: Louis Bonham <lkbonham at phoenix.net> Subject: RIMS v. Decoction Part Deaux A real puzzler for the HBD collective . . . . Along with my fellow Foam Rangers Andy Thomas and Steve Moore, last month we conducted a follow-up experiment to last year's RIMS v. Decoction mash-off (the original experiment is written up in an article to be published in an upcoming issue of BT). In this follow up experiment, we once again brewed the same beer (this time, a bock) on the same day, in the same place, using the same malt, hops, water, yeast, etc., etc. etc., but with the only differences being that I used a step mash on a RIMS system, while Andy did a triple decoction mash and Steve did a standard single infusion mash. OK, brew day went as planned, and each 6 gallon batch (OG's = 1.066) were aerated and pitched with 2+ quarts of Wyeast 2206 starter that had been grown on a stir plate (i.e., smack pack to 1 quart of starter, which was grown for 24 hours on a stir plate and then used to innoculate 6 quarts of additional starter, when was similarly grown on a stir plate with constant aeration for 24 hours, then split into thirds and used to pitch each batch.) All 3 batches were in identical 7 gallon acid carboys, and were in the same fridge (in which a powerful fan has run constantly to keep the temperature consistant throughout the fridge). All 3 batches were off to the races within hours at 50F, with typical krausen formation. After 10 days at 50F, the heads were subsiding, and the temp was increased to 60F for 48 hours for a diacetyl rest, then slowly lowered to 39F, where it remained for a month. Everything appeared to be going according to plan. Tonight we racked the batches to kegs. Guess what: the &*%#% Wyeast 2206 had pooped out, and none of the three batches were anywhere close to being done. The decoction batch was at 1.039, while the RIMS and the single infusion were at 1.031. I checked samples on my scope and the RIMS batch had yeast at about 6 million cells/ml, while the decoction was at 2 million cells/ml. Yeast viability was high. OK, the questions: 1. Should we just grow up some additional 2206 and repitch? Or perhaps go with something neutral like 1056 or 1007 that would finish the job? 2. What gives? I know 2206 can be finicky, but we pitched tons 'o yeast and aerated all batches quite a bit. 3. Any theories why the decoction mash would be substantially higher gravity than the others? One possibility: the decoction mash had considerably less trub than the other two. OTOH, the RIMS batch had considerably more trub than the SSI mash, yet the SSI mash was at about the same gravity. All theories greatfully accepted! Louis K. Bonham lkbonham at phoenix.net Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 14 Aug 1997 21:41:38 +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? THOR - ----------------------------------------------------------- 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 97 22:00:08 PDT From: "Rob Moline" <brewer at kansas.net> Subject: Jethro forwards a Comment The Jethro Gump Report >From: Fal_Allen at mdv-beer.com >Subject: FWD> An Idea who's time has >All this fuss about freshness, born on dates, best-by and such. Whether >it's the date it was brewed on or the day it was bottled. We are missing >the real question here people! Sure it's important to know that the brew >is fresh but isn't it much more important to know that the beer is going >to be compatible with you? To really agree with you, as a person? That is >why I propose the astrological dating of beer. I might know that a certain >beer was made on the 8th of May but what does that tell me; I mean, >really tell me about that beer? Sure, it's a Taurus with Virgo rising but >what house is it in?! These are the important issues. Now that many of us >are brewing round the clock a simple date no longer suffices. I mean what >about when it was lagered or crash cooled? Say the beer was primarily >fermented as a Scorpio but finished as a Libra and was packaged as a >Virgo >unaware, and takes it home to enjoy with his wife, an Aquarius with >Pisces >on the cusp. I think you can see that something needs to be done. Sure, I >could have gone ahead and selfishly implemented this at my own brewery, >getting a jump on the rest but this is too important an issue. I am, after all, >a virgo with a >taurus bull in the house of the rising sun. > > the ubiquitos Anon. >"Eagles may soar but weasles don't get sucked into jet >engines" >From: wdan at oz.net (W. Dan) >Subject: An Idea who's time has come Thought the collective might enjoy this. I know I did. Jethro Gump Rob Moline Brewer At Large "The More I Know About Beer, The More I Realize I Need To Know More About Beer!" Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 14 Aug 1997 23:42:15 -0500 From: "Marty Purselley" <brewer at flash.net> Subject: Filters Anyone filtering their beer? I read the reviews in Zymurgy, but would like to hear some unbiased opinions. I was particularly interested in the Marcon filters-well maybe a bit less interested since they've apparently (based on the prices on their web page) gone up $45.00 in price to $160.00. Is anyone using the filter from the "Vintage shop". Marty Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 14 Aug 1997 22:05:12 -0700 From: Bigdogs <bigdogs at concentric.net> Subject: Bucket Cooler >A question that arose during a discussion about building a CF chiller. >Rather than have the copper tubing run thru a hose, why not just set >the coil into a bucket of water? Or, if the space is available, >freeze the water first. Cleaning out the tubing would still be an >issue, but construction would be much simplier. Has this been tried? Yes and it works GREAT if done correctly. I used 50" of 3/8" copper that connects to a ball valve on my kettle. The copper tubing is wound into a coil (I used a paint can for a form) that sits in a plastic bucket that is filled with ice. It spirals down to where it passes through the side of the bucket near the bottom. There are many ways to achieve this last "pass through" . I think that the best way may be with a short piece of vinyl tubing that fits snugly in a drilled hole. This last piece of tubing can drop directly into your fermenter where the cooled wort can splash and become oxygenated. There is minimal outside air (infection possibility) contact. No muss, no fuss and less than 5 gallons of (prevoously frozen) water that can go right into the pool or garden. Steve Berry Barking Cat Brewery Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 15 Aug 1997 01:39:04 -0400 (EDT) From: John Varady <rust1d at usa.net> Subject: Another use for hops I frequent a brewpub that used to have these revolting mints stuffed into the vents in the mans bathroom. After discussions with the owner, i convinced him to switch the grapefruit mints with an oz of pellet hops. Now the bathroom smells like a hophead dream come true. From time to time I bring an oz of hops down and stuff them in the vents in the laboratory. Now people walk out of there with a smile on their faces and a renewed desire for some fresh hoppy beer (of which a get a sample). I hope that this catches on because I hate the smell on bowl mints in the morning (well late evening anyways). So if you are a bar owner, I suggest that you get hops. They smell sooo good, and they get me thristing. This is very similar to the pratice of casinos where they actually pump in the sound of money falling from a slot machine. Well? mmmmm.... Hops.... John Varady * New email address ***> rust1d at usa.net Lafayette Hill, PA Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 15 Aug 1997 06:57:33 -0400 From: Kit Anderson <kitridge at bigfoot.com> Subject: RE:Coors response to Blue Moon Thanks to Graham Barron for this article. > In what I consider a very much appreciated gesture and a commentary on > the relevance of our discussions on this digest, Coors Brewing Company > has responded directly to me regarding the recent thread on Blue Moon and > surrounding issues. Per their request, I have posted the email I > received from Keith Villa, the brewer of the Blue Moon line of beers. > Commentary, etc., is welcome. > Regarding beer quality and medals, I ensure that Blue Moon ales > are made from only the highest quality 2-row malt, hops and spices. > The only adjunct we use is the real honey in Honey Blonde Ale. Maybe it's only a typo. Where's the unmalted wheat? > Finally, as you claim to have a cynical > view of large brewers, you might be surprised to find out who really > owns Hoegaarden and Celis breweries I don't care who makes anything as long as it is good. > 4) reiterated that while Blue Moon white may be in style, I am not > obsessed with style nor am I very concerned with style definitions; If it is distracting because it is too far from style, then you should be concerned. > 5) that being said, I was trying to state in my original post that there > are several far better examples of Belgian white beer available in the US > (both domestically produced and not) that homebrewers should try to > emulate when reproducing white beer; BINGO! > First, some of my credentials. I am a homebrewer (since 1983), > a professional brewer (since 1986), and a certified beer judge with > the BJCP. I judge at numerous homebrew competitions (including the > national AHA competitions), and at the Great American Beer Festival > and our state fair microbrew competition. I also lived in Belgium > for almost 4 years while earning my Ph.D. degree in brewing > biochemistry from the University of Brussels (Flemish campus). > During my studies, I had the opportunity to visit and tour in-depth > many Belgian breweries including large, small, artisanal, lambic, > Trappist, etc. Further evidence that Coors knows better but chose a recipe not to style. Whether you like it or not is irrelevant. It is a good example of a wit? No. - --- Kit Anderson ICQ#2242257 Bath, Maine <kitridge at bigfoot.com> I suppose that it's theoretically possible for a Yankee to make decent barbecue. But it sure ain't a pretty thought! -Smokey Pitts Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 15 Aug 1997 07:24:36 From: braue at ratsnest.win.net (John W. Braue, III) Subject: A Pint's a Pound the World 'Round Ray Kruse <kruse2 at flash.net> writes: >Dave Burley writes: >> Eugene Sonn asks how to measure out his >> hop extract in pounds when he doesn't have a scale. >> >> First idea is to make your own scale (balance). >> Use a flat board on a fulcrum ( a pencil taped on, >> for example) on which you can place bowls at >> either end. Put a bowl with 16 ounces ( 2 cups) >> of water on one end and a similar weight bowl >> on the other. Pour in warm hop extract into the >> bowl at the other end until the board balances. >> Measure the volume with a measuring cup. > >Sorry, Dave, but what you have here is 1 pint, not 1 pound. Common >mistake in the English measurement system. > But a trivial and inconsequential mistake. In fact, the weight of one pint of water at English STP is close enough to one pound that it may be taken as such in an activity such as brewing. This is, IMHO, no worse than the equally common (and equally inconsequential) mistake of identifying the weight of one liter of water at metric STP as "one kilogram" (as we pedants like to point out, the kilogram is a measure is *mass*, not *force*; the weight of the water is about 9.81 newtons). - -- John W. Braue, III braue at ratsnest.win.net I've decided that I must be the Messiah; people expect me to work miracles, and when I don't, I get crucified. Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 14 Aug 97 10:38:40 PDT From: "Audra Macmann" <kestrel at full-moon.com> Subject: Re: Hops and Cows I'm a little behind on the digests -- about 12 digests' worth. As a nursing mom who gave birth in Germany, I can tell you this: I was advised to drink a) beer to help my milk let down and b) because the hops in beer are supposed to increase milk production. I have since read this in a few herbal books that I have as well. Maybe if you give cows hops to eat they'll produce too much milk or too fast or something. But hey if you can give them BGH why NOT hops? At least they're natural. <G> Audra Macmann, Ohio kestrel at full-moon.com ICQ UIN 1674976 Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 15 Aug 97 08:54:31 -0400 From: "Michael Baum" <michael.baum at nist.gov> Subject: Pints, pounds >Dave Burley writes: >> Eugene Sonn asks how to measure out his >> hop extract in pounds when he doesn't have a scale. >> >> First idea is to make your own scale (balance). >> Use a flat board on a fulcrum ( a pencil taped on, >> for example) on which you can place bowls at >> either end. Put a bowl with 16 ounces ( 2 cups) >> of water on one end and a similar weight bowl >> on the other. Pour in warm hop extract into the >> bowl at the other end until the board balances. >> Measure the volume with a measuring cup. > >Sorry, Dave, but what you have here is 1 pint, not 1 pound. Common >mistake in the English measurement system. > >Why not just use an empty 3.3# can to measure the extract? Seems like >as good a measuring cup as any. > >Ray Kruse >Glen Burnie, PRMD Ray, while I wouldn't go bail for the accuracy of a balance based on a board, a pencil, and a couple of kitchen bowls, I think what Dave is doing here is capitalizing on the fact that -- to _his_ levels of accuracy -- a pint of pure water at STP weighs roughly a pound. Hence the traditional saw "A pint's a pound the world around." Or something like that. Granted, it's a bit of the long way 'round given that you could use the same technique with some other kitchen item -- sugar or salt or flour, say -- that is traditionally sold by weight as your reference mass. ========================================================================= Michael Baum Public & Business Affairs Division National Institute of Standards & Technology <michael.baum at nist.gov> (301) 975-2763 ========================================================================= Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 15 Aug 97 9:12:00 -0500 From: "Decker, Robin E." <robind at rmtgvl.rmtinc.com> Subject: Flying Brews Scott Jackson reports that he flys his brews in a backpack.... I like this idea Scott! (BTW, hello from Greenville, how is Denver treating you? <g>) However, I have never had a problem carrying brews onto a plane. I have found that a case box which holds the standard 12 oz bottles fits great under the seat (on smaller planes it sticks out towards me a bit, but I don't mind and the stewardesses never complained). So whenever I travel, I stop off and cram a case full of whatever I can get my hands on that isn't available at home. I do have to admit that I get a lot of attention carrying my case thru the airport. I guess I can't blame people for wondering about a 5'2", 120 lb. female with a case of belgian beer and barleywines in her arms, but I enjoy the good natured ribbing my party in a box, and people asking if they can sit next to me! Also, I have never noticed any ill-effect from the beer being sent thru the x-ray machine. YMMV <bg> There are also specially designed wine and beer shipping boxes, which are great if you're trying to move more than you can carry. Since each bottle is in its own styrofoam compartment, its quite safe, either in checked luggage, or by UPS, regulations and strikes notwithstanding. Goldings in SC check out our web page (www.biermeisters.com) for premium recipe kits Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 15 Aug 1997 09:16:04 -0400 From: "BRIAN F. THUMM" <THUMMBF at GWSMTP.NU.COM> Subject: What a find! > Recently I was cleaning up my brew cellar and came across > a batch of a IPA that has to be at least 5 or 6 month old. It > is in a secondary fermentor (glass carboy)... How does one forget there is 5 gallons of beer in the basement? Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 15 Aug 1997 09:13:24 -0400 From: "Moyer, Douglas E (MIS, SalemVA)" Subject: First faltering steps... Fine folks, With a combination of fearful reluctance and quivering excitement, I purchased a 5 gallon Igloo and fitted it with a CPVC slotted manifold. While I have some leaking issues to resolve, I am looking forward to taking my first steps towards all-grain brewing. (I suspect that my parents would not be as proud as of other first steps, but then they are teetotalers, so I won't tell them...;-) ) So, here are my first questions to the group: (1) At what rate should I expect the liquid to run off? Yes, I know that mileage varies, but what range am I shooting for? I want to make sure that my manifold isn't designed completely wrong. Is 6 minutes/gallon reasonable? (I haven't put any grain in it yet--I'm just running water through it.) (2) What is the normal method to recirculate the first runnings to build up the filter bed? How do you prevent HSA? How do you keep the temperature constant? Do you care at that point? (FWIW, I will NOT be buying a pump yet. Of course, who knows about next week... %-) ) (3) How much grain can you mash in a 5 gallon Igloo? (4) Several people have mentioned mashing in the range of 1.25 qt/gal. If you are doing several step infusions, do you start with a thicker mash to make up for the boiling water added later? TIA! Doug Moyer Big Lick Brewing Collective "Big Lick--our excitement is evident." Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 15 Aug 97 9:24:20 EDT From: Brent Irvine <brenirvi at enoreo.on.ca> Subject: Bottling in pop aka soda bottles When I started brewing some five years ago, I used standard brown bottles. However, I did not find it at all enjoyable to have to fill so many small bottles or cap using a non-reuseable cap. At the time, at least in Ontario, our pop (aka soda) could be purchased in 500 ml (imperial volume??) glass bottles which fit the screw-on caps available at homebrew outlets. I collected about 20 cases of 24 bottles. Though the bottles are clear, I never had a problem with degradation from light - I brewed in a dark environment, and stored the covered cases in a likewise dark environment. Since then, our province has changed over to 600 ml plastic pop bottles (presumably for the lower costs of shipping and manufacturing). My question is as follows... Though brown plastic beer bottles are sold at homebrew supply shops, it seems that both in my area and across the HBD brewers use the standard 341 ml beer bottle with metal caps. Why? Does the plastic bottle have a shorter shelf life? Do people not like re-using screw-on caps? For me cost is not an issue, since the return value of a standard beer bottle is $0.10, the pop bottles are free and the caps range from $0.05 to $0.10 and can be used over and over. Not really a pressing issue, but I am afraid that the problem might be the shef life, and I would HATE to waste a batch in finding out. Thanks. Brent Irvine 149 Third Street, Cochrane. Ontario "Home of the Polar Bear Express." Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 15 Aug 1997 08:38:11 -0500 (CDT) From: Samuel Mize <smize at prime.imagin.net> Subject: born-on dating >From: Steve Jackson <stevejackson at rocketmail.com> > >It seems to be the consensus of those who responded to my post >regarding Bud's "born-on" dates that they assume the date represents >the bottling date. To me, a beer is born when it is set to >fermentation -- after all, you don't label your child's birth as the >day he or she left the hospital -- but I realize I'm playing with >semantics a bit here. Since they pasteurize before bottling, wouldn't it be more accurate to call it a "killed-on" date? - -- Samuel Mize -- smize at imagin.net -- Team Ada Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 15 Aug 1997 10:04:40 -0400 From: "Nathan L. Kanous II" <nkanous at tir.com> Subject: Kidney stones/Alcohol and Medications Hi, I'm actually a clinical pharmacist. Kidney stones can be comprised of a variety of things. There are oxalate stones, urate stones, struvite stones. You need to know what kind of stones you had. Alcohol can do a couple of things. Yes, it causes a relative diuresis and can result in some dehydration. Dehydration causes urine to concentrate and this can lead to a worsening of kidney stones in susceptible individuals. Second, alcohol can lead to a relative hyperuricemia. If you had urate stones, you could potentially worsen your situation. The recommendation to avoid alcohol is a CYA thing. Moderation is the key. So is adequate hydration. Alcohol and medications. It is primarily a CYA thing. Some medications require that you avoid alcohol because of potential toxic reactions. TALK TO YOUR PHARMACIST. Pharmacists know more about the medications than the physicians. You will find pharmacists that don't have a clue. Similarly, you will find some physicians that just aren't up to date. YMMV. I am not trying to defame anyone. Using the proper source of reference for any information is critical. Sorry for the wasted bandwidth on a non-brewing topic. Heresay and misinformation is a pet peeve of mine. Yes, I do offer my opinions about brewing on occasion here, but I am always open to other more well informed brewers correcting my mistakes. That's how we learn. What the hell would we know about bridge building if someone hadn't built a bridge over the Tacoma Narrows in Washington? TTFN nathan in frankenmuth, MI Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 15 Aug 1997 10:08:26 -0400 From: oliver at triton.cms.udel.edu (Oliver Weatherbee) Subject: Status of eisbock/BATF issue Just thought I should post a short note about the current status of the eisbock/BATF issue. It went offline for a little bit and we are now just waiting. Jim Parker agreed that as the director of the AHA and a representative of many homebrewers, he would approach the BATF for a definitive statement or ruling about the homebrewing of eisbocks. Jim said he would post the results to HBD (and maybe rcb) as well as possibly making it a letter from the editor in Zymurgy. For those who thought this thread is excessive like the botulism one, I apologize. I just felt it was time to get a definitive answer to this question rather than the traditional hearsay. - Oliver Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 15 Aug 1997 10:49:46 -0400 From: "David R. Burley" <Dave_Burley at compuserve.com> Subject: A pint's a pound..,hoppiness f(C), 122F again Brewsters: Ray Kruse says in response to my suggestion on how to make a balance at home using 2 cups of water as a known 1 lb weight: >Sorry, Dave, but what you have here is 1 pint, not 1 pound. Common >mistake in the English measurement system. Sorry Ray, but in the American English system a pint (16oz vol) IS a pou= nd (16 oz wt.) since an ounce in volume of water weighs an ounce. Didn't you= learn "A pint's a pound the world around" at your Mommy's knee?" Of cour= se this is ONLY true in the US of A. It would be a mistake in the English English system to assume that. What with 20 fluid ounces to the pint and where a pint is a pound and a quarte= r. Maybe that's why you made the mistake, being from Pennsylvania and all...= =2E - --------------------------------------------------- Nathan in Frankenmuth comments about the non-linearity of hop extraction = as a function of added hops, and not being able to locate this being taken care of in formulas estimating the extraction. To my knowledge, although hop extraction is dependent on time and OG of t= he wort, it is not dependent on the amount of hops within even abnormal amounts being added, unless some kind of mechanical blockage occurs to prevent the free movement of hops during the boil. However your *perception* of hoppiness and specifically bitterness, like all of our senses, are logarithmic in concentration and negatively time dependent in= nature. Doubling concentration of the source of the sensation does not double the sensation and later sips will *appear* to be less bitter. - --------------------------------------------------- Charlie Rich, criticises me for apparently saying that 122F produces heading proteins. I'll admit it looks that way and is a result of sloven= ly editing on my part.. He is absolutely correct that held for a long time (not 15-20 minutes as I suggest) at 122F will reduce the proteins in solution to amino acids and other short chain nitrogen compounds which wi= ll damage the mouth feel, compared to the proteins in solution without the 122F hold. There is plenty of protein available ( as the volume of the ho= t break will indicate) to be chopped up before the mouth feel is affected. The biggest danger of a long hold at 122F may be the off flavors produced= by excessive yeast growth or contamination from bacteria growth may resul= t from the high amino acid concentration. It often used to be common practice in low modified malts to hold at both 122F and 135F, but for sur= e the Germans held in the 122F region. Highly modified malts need shorter lower temperature holds since the majority of the proteolysis was done at= the maltsters. If I remember, I believe the point of the discussion I was commenting on was how to increase the yield of sugars or how to use flaked barley. My suggestion of a short hold at 122F (definitely necessary for flaked barle= y) was to chew up the protein matrix using the proteases and phosphatases active at this temperature , freeing the carbohydrates for later easy amylolysis. As I understand it ( do you agree Charley?) this chopped up matrix along with all the other high molecular weight proteins will be us= ed later ( at 135F or thereabouts) to produce the mid-molecular weight heading proteins as (in my suggestion)as the mash is heated up from 122F = to 155F and passing through the high 120s and mid-130s. As I read your comments, you would not hold at 122F under any circumstanc= e - contrary to my understanding of most of the professional activity with adjuncts today. Most of the work on malt proteins is carried out at the maltsters. The more highly modified the malt, the shorter should be the hold in the low 122F region, as I have commented in the past. - ------------------------------------------------------ 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: Fri, 15 Aug 97 08:34 PDT From: cburns at egusd.k12.ca.us (Charles Burns) Subject: Queen of Beer - Competition Announcement H.A.Z.E. - Hangtown Association of Zymurgy Enthusiasts announces the 4th Annual Queen of Beer Competition. The Queen of Beer women's only homebrew competition is open to all non-commercial home brewed beer, mead or cider produced by a person of female gender. Sponsored and hosted by HAZE. AHA sanctioned competition, entries due by October 11, 1997. All details and forms are on our web site: <http://haze.innercite.com> questions? email Nora Keller-Seeley, our VP and competition organizer: nkseeley at jps.net Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 15 Aug 1997 11:49:34 -0300 From: "David L. Thomson" <dlt at ici.net> Subject: Boiling Mash volume Hello fellow brewers! I would like to start mashing i have a mash tun and sparger setup made. My poblem is boiling the volume from a full mash. I only have a 5 gal enamal caning pot. And do not possess the funds as of yet to buy a 7-10 gal pot and the burner/ vent to boil it. Is it ok to use two smaller pots?? does anyone have a source of partial mash recipies?? Thanks Dave Thomson Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 15 Aug 1997 11:27:55 -0500 (CDT) From: Steve <JOHNSONS at UANSV5.VANDERBILT.EDU> Subject: Judge Digest? Anybody have any info on what has happened to the BJCP hosted Judge Digest that I used to get daily along with my HomeBrew Digest? Haven't seen one from them in about a week... Steve Johnson Music City Brewers, Nashville, TN (6 of us are stepping up to the plate tomorrow and taking the BJCP exam... wish us well...hope they don't ask me how to brew a plambic! ;) Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 15 Aug 1997 16:44:07 GMT From: mra at skyfry.com (Matthew Arnold) Subject: Extract IPA, revisited Greetings fellow botulism fearers, Thanks to all who responded to my post regarding the extract IPA recipe. Some major events transpired over the past couple of days which has resulted in a major "Britishization" of the recipe. I managed to get some supplies from a member of my homebrewing club who runs a supply store out of his house part time. Unfortunately, the good people at UPS have forced his selection to dwindle (as well as eliminate his ability to ship anything). So here is the revised version: Zoot's E.P.A., Mk III 6.6# Munton and Fison Light LME 1.5# Northwestern Gold D(Dry)ME 1# British Crystal 2 oz Galena pellets (8.8% AAU) 1 oz Galena pellets (12% AAU) 3 oz Willamette whole leaf (4.3% AAU) 2 pkt Danstar Nottingham dry ale yeast I got the Galena hops from two different sources, thus the different AAUs. The hop schedule will be as follows: 1) 1 oz 8.8% Galena and 1 oz 12% Galena for 75 minutes, 2) 1 oz 8.8% Galena for 30 minutes, 3) 1 oz Willamette for 10 minutes, 4) 1/2 oz Willamette for 2 minutes, 5) 1 1/2 oz Willamette dry hopped in secondary. This recipes assumes a between a 4 and 3 1/2 gallon boil. It should weight in around 91 IBUs. I'll let everyone know how it turns out. I will also be using the recipe to teach my sister and brother-in-law the fine art of brewing. My sister and my wife are two of the very few women I've met who like both IPAs and Stout. My wife and I have been known to share a barleywine on occasion too. Life is rough. Later, Matt (are all IPA-lovers named "Matt"?) Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 15 Aug 1997 12:42:11 -0500 From: "Raymond C. Steinhart" <rnr at mcs.net> Subject: Sanke material Are Sanke domestic kegs made of 304 or 316? I am getting conflicting information. How about Cornelius kegs (ball lock). Thanks, Ray Steinhart Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 15 Aug 1997 11:00:44 -0500 From: Dana Edgell <edgell at quantum-net.com> Subject: Bicarbonate ppm Hi! I have two questions about the ppm of bicarbonates vs carbonates. As I understand it the chemical equations of importance here are... CaCO3 <--> Ca++ + CO3-- CO3-- + CO2 + H2O <--> 2(HCO3-) for the dissolving of chalk in a mash or in reverse the precipitation of chalk by boiling water. Every molecule of CaCO3 produces one CO3 carbonate ion which then is converted into 2 bicarbonate ions. Now water analysis usually gives the carbonates in ppm as CaCO3 which needs to be multiplied by 0.6 to calculate the ppm CO3. My 1st question is: When calculating the HCO3 ppm from a water analysis or from chalk addition do I need to roughly double the CO3-- ppm? (actually multiply by 122/60) i.e. 1 gm of chalk in 1 litre of water gives 1000 ppm(mg/l) chalk = 600 ppm CO3 = 1220 ppm HCO3 (=20 mval HCO3) My 2nd question is: What ion are people talking about when they report ppm in the literature? Half of the literature I have talks about CO3-- ppm and half HCO3- ppm For example an article by Greg Noonan (Beer & Brewing Vol 11) says that London water has 125 ppm HCO3- while a brewing techniques (Vol 1 #3) article says it is 125 ppm CO3-. These obviously are taking the number from the same source but which ion is really correct? My personal guess right now is that the water analysis numbers are for carbonate and not bicarbonate (even though bicarbonate is the ion actually present in the water) This would be because they are traditionally measured by the dry weight precipitated out of water by evaporation or chemical treatment. This solid residue would be CaCO3. The reason I am asking is that I am working on a JavaScript water treatment workpage (www.quantum-net.com/edge_ale/beer/water.htm). I have been using the HCO3 ppm as input because it is the ion actually present in the water/mash but I suspect that I should switch to ppm CO3 because that is the number people are actually using even when they say it is ppm HCO3. Thanks for any help clearing this up Dana Edgell PS: Any comments on the water analysis webpage would be appreciated also. - --------------------------------------------------------- Dana Edgell edgell at quantum-net.com www.quantum-net.com/edge_ale Return to table of contents
[Prev HBD] [Index] [Next HBD] [Back]
HTML-ized on 08/19/97, by HBD2HTML version 1.2 by K.F.L.
webmaster at hbd.org, KFL, 10/9/96