---

	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:
  Another one for the Homebrew Lawers... (TheTHP)
  Force Testing: Followup ("Louis K. Bonham")
  re: On Esters... / diacetyl too (Charles Burns)
  Re: Rodenbach clone (Sheena McGrath)
  sigs; esters; Dr. Farnsworth (Samuel Mize)
  verdigris (Al Korzonas)
  mini brew (Mason Harris)
  RE: Yeast culturing ("Kensler, Paul")
  When to rack... (Al Korzonas)
  RE: Molten rocks, dry yeast, and Ma Kettle (LaBorde, Ronald)
  Extract brewing, yeast, water and pH (David Muzidal)
  Sanitizing Wort Chillers (Tom_Williams)
  CO2 Generator ("Morton, Mike")
  Storage of yeast (Troy Hager)
  Big 'ol helping of crow (Chasman)
  ester degradation ("Andy Walsh")
  Science and art :^) ("Michel J. Brown")
  re: Parti-gyle ("Michel J. Brown")
  Compression Fittings (Mark_Snyder)
  dry hpping in keg (Paul)
  Re: pitching.... (Joe Rolfe)
  aeration age of slants and Maredsous abbey ale (Saul Laufer)
  Yeast at Bottling and extract brewing ("David Johnson")
  reading a hydrometer in dark beer... (Lou Heavner)
  Re: Carbonation of first 2 batches (Spencer W Thomas)


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: Thu, 6 Nov 1997 10:23:53 -0500 (EST)
From: TheTHP at aol.com
Subject: Another one for the Homebrew Lawers...

Work Christmas Party Ale...with a Twist

Greetings all, after conversing with the party organizer of this years
christmas party who was lamenting the Cash Bar from last year, I volunteered
2 cornies of ale for the party. After the requsite discussion of non-payment
for beer and the legality of home brewing in Michigan, (Bill is on the Senate
Floor). A new interesting point came up. The party is to be held at a bar
owned by one of people on staff. So assuming that the bar owner doesnt refuse
my gift of 2 kegs... Are there any laws pertaining to the giving away of beer
for free in a bar? One of the party orgainzers thought so but wasnt sure. A
more insidious question would be a liablilty question in case of an accident.
 What says the great collective?

Sincerely, Phil Wilcox
Poison Frog Home Brewery

Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 06 Nov 1997 10:28:42 -0600
From: "Louis K. Bonham" <lkbonham at phoenix.net>
Subject: Force Testing: Followup

A quick followup on my force testing post, summarizing 
responses to the mail I've gotten:

1.  Corrections: proper spelling should be "actidione" and
"cycloheximide."  Also, although's Dr. Farnsworth's manual
says that the actidione "will kill the yeast, so anything
that grows is bacteria," Jim Liddil and others have pointed
out that it will *not* kill quite a few non-saccharomyces 
yeasts and molds.  Ergo, while running the force test with 
and without actidione is a good test to see if your yeast  
is a contamination vector, you can't necessarily assume
that anything that grows in the actidione-treated wort is
bacterial.

2.  Dr. Farnsworth's lab manual is not published, and
I'm *not* at liberty to make copies of mine.  I'm trying to 
get in touch with Paul (he's in Tahiti doing an installation)
to see if he's willing to let me make copies or if he'd sell 
them to those of you who are interested.  (The manual is 
part of Paul's brewery consulting package.)

3.  The recipe for the actidione solution:

100 mg cycloheximide + 100 ml distilled water.

Keep it in the refrigerator, as it is somewhat
thermolabile.  You can also purchase the solution
ready-made from Seibel, Scientific Service (Paul's
business, but he's not available for a while), 
and other places that cater to hard-core
homebrewers or to the craft brewing industry.  
Cycloheximide is available from the usual chemical
supply houses; it runs about $25 / gram.  (1 gram 
would make up a liter of actidione, or enough for
1000 tests).   PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE -- while probably
no more toxic that lots of stuff we all have around
the house, treat this stuff with respect and keep it 
away from little hands -- cycloheximide is nasty 
stuff.  AND MARK THOSE ACTIDIONE-TREATED SAMPLES!!!

To use: get some disposible luer-lock syringes
(I use the 10cc size) and fitting 0.22 micron
filters.  Fill the syringe, attach the filter,
and add 1 ml of the solution to the sample.
(I keep the container of my stock solution and
the partially-filled syringe+filter in a jar in
my beer fridge, so it's just a matter of opening
the jar and dispensing.)

4.  I've just learned that the Brewing Science 
Institute (www.problemsolved.com/bsi) sells a lot 
of pre-prepared differential media at really good
prices -- $0.80 per tube or plate), and thus it's
now possible for us to do more sophisticated tests
cheaply and without access to a lab or having to 
buy lots of media that has a limited shelf life.  

Currently available:

LMDA:  Add a few drops of your sample to this plate, 
and in a couple of days you'll not only know if 
there's any bacteria, you'll be able to identify
which of the 8 most common genera of brewery bacteria
are present -- without a microscope!  And this test 
does not need anaerobic incubation, making it easy 
enough for most of us to use.

HLP:  The old standby for assaying for lacto's and 
pedio's.  

HRM:  Tests for bacteria, while killing off brewing
yeast.  Doesn't tell you what's growing, however.  It's
thus equivalent to the wort + actidione force test, but 
gives results a little quicker and accentuates the growth
of bacteria.

LCSM: Test for wild yeast (Saccharomyces and 
non-Saccaromyces).

LWYM: Tests for Saccharomyces wild yeast.

Starch Agar: Tests for starch-digesting wild yeast.

Wort Agar: All purpose agar for yeast culturing/storage.

Petite Mutant Agar: Tests for petite (respiratory deficient)
mutants.  Absolutely essential if you repitch your yeast many
times (Dr. Farnsworth suggests running this test every 10
repitches to make sure the yeast hasn't mutated too much.)

The BSI folks tell me they will sell you any combination 
of these, or even a customized test kit that's complete
with all necessary media, reagents, and step-by-step 
instructions.

Louis K. Bonham
lkbonham at phoenix.net

Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 6 Nov 97 09:20 PST
From: cburns at egusd.k12.ca.us (Charles Burns)
Subject: re: On Esters... / diacetyl too

Steve Alexander gives us some great in depth technical information on the 
formation of esters in HBD #2549,thanks Steve. I've got two questions that 
are a bit more pragmatic, ie I need to know the best way to both eliminate 
and to promote esters and diacetyl while at the same time achieving as rapid 
a fermentation as possible. These could possibly be cross purposes, that is, 
making a beer that accentuates style guidelines, but making it FAST. I'm 
guilty of having little patience, tough for a brewer.

After spending 9 grueling weeks in a beer judge training program, I have 
come to much more appreciate some of the more subtle nuances of taste and 
aroma. I have enjoyed some fantastic beers (one of them was even a belgian, 
Grimbergen Dubbel) during this time and have decided to try and make some of 
'em. This was my whole intention in doing bjcp training and I'm still 
undecided whether I'll even take the test next month.

To the question on esters: Some styles (Imperial Stout and Foreign Stout for 
instance, and some bitters, depending on which style guidelines you worship) 
call for high degrees of esters and low diacetyl. If esters are produced 
early in fermentation, should we start fermentation warm and after the 
fireworks are over, reduce the temp later? We don't want to create the 
higher alchohols, just the esters. Reducing temp might also raise diacetyl 
levels which are inappropriate for that style. I think it depends on WHEN 
during fermentation these compounds are produced and what temperature they 
are dependent on.

To the question on diacetyl: Again, depending on which style guidelines you 
subscribe to (if any) and how your tongue works, some beers require some 
diacetyl (strong scotch ales for instance). Is there a way (aside from yeast 
selection) to maximize the production of diacetyl, minimize its loss (from 
aging or other factors) while keeping the fermentation going quickly without 
trashing the beer from other respects.

I think this post is rambling a bit, but my main question is, can we 
maximize either of these two characteristics of beer by either starting 
fermentation warm and then cooling off, or starting fermentation cool and 
then warming it up. If these compounds are produced during the "lag time" 
and are produced more at high or low temperature, is it advisable (or not) 
to set temperatures based on this knowledge and whether or not you wish to 
maximize or minimize the production?

See, now that I have a fermentation chiller (thanks to Ken Schwartz's plans) 
I can actually control this now (yep, I'm a control freak and proud of it).

Charley (not controlling enough) in N.Cal


Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 06 Nov 1997 09:39:12 -0800
From: Sheena McGrath <sheena at gte.net>
Subject: Re: Rodenbach clone

Dear Homebrewers:
I have been thinking about making a Rodenbach clone. Since I don't have
a barrel, I might use a plastic bucket and some wood chips. Does this
sound feasible?
Thanks to all who reply,
Sheena

Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 6 Nov 1997 12:13:56 -0600 (CST)
From: Samuel Mize <smize at prime.imagin.net>
Subject: sigs; esters; Dr. Farnsworth

Greetings to all, and especially to:

> HOMEBREW Digest #2550               Thu 06 November 1997
> (Incredibly huge, non-beer-related sig hacked off by irate Janitor.

Maybe we should put a policy in the header: sigs > 225 letters
(3 full lines) may be replaced with
  "[HUGE SIG - RUDE OR CLUELESS POSTER]".


> HOMEBREW Digest #2549               Wed 05 November 1997

> From: Steve Alexander <steve-alexander at worldnet.att.net>
> Subject: On Esters ...
> 
> Due to enzymatic action ...
>   ethyl acetate   arises from ethanol and acetyl-CoA
>   ethyl caproate  arises from ethanol and caproyl-CoA
>   isoamyl acetate arises from isoamyl alcohol (a fusel 
>     alcohol) and acetyl-CoA.

Great data!  Do these have different specific flavors?  P. Edwards
wrote in HOMEBREW Digest #2548 "ethyl acetate (the solventy ester)."
Where can I find out which esters provide clove, banana, etc., so
that using your data I can control which I get?


> From: "Louis K. Bonham" <lkbonham at phoenix.net>
> Subject: Force Testing
> 
> Here are the three I typically use, which are adapted 
> from Dr. Farnsworth's lab manual.

Could you provide a more specific reference?  (I probably SHOULD know
to what book you are referring, but I don't.)

Best,
Sam Mize
- --
smize at imagin.net

HELP
US
HALT
LONG
SIGS!
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
(85 chars :-)

Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 6 Nov 1997 12:45:54 -0600 (CST)
From: Al Korzonas <korz at xnet.com>
Subject: verdigris

While looking up the spelling of something, I ran across "verdigris" in
Webster's dictionary.  It is said to be the blue-green substance that
is formed from the action of acetic acid (vinegar) on copper and is
*poisonous*.  Webster says it is made up of copper acetate.

Now I know this has been posted to HBD before, but since then, I've also
seen vinegar suggested as a way to clean copper chillers.

I have also read where Lambic/Lamiek brewers (no, the real ones in Belgium)
use beer that has gone super-acetic for cleaning the beerstone off their
copper kettles.  Presumably the copper acetate is very soluble in water?
Presumably rinsing well after cleaning with vinegar will render the
copper item safe for brewing again?

I don't want to start another frenzy... let's just discuss this calmly...
let's limit our posts to what we know as *fact* and resolve this without
a lot of speculation which will only confuse most and drag the discussion
out unnecessarily.

Al.

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

My new website (still under construction, but up-and-running):
     http://www.brewinfo.com/brewinfo/

Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 06 Nov 1997 22:56:44 +0000
From: Mason Harris <smharris at ed.co.sanmateo.ca.us>
Subject: mini brew

Hello!

This is my first post to the list.  Does anyone out there have any
experience with the all plastic mini brew from southern California?  It
is a conical type fermenter made from 1/4 inch plastic.  What are your
experiences with this unit?  How have you liked it?  Any problems with
it?  Any thing I should know before I buy one?  If you have any
information regarding this unit, please e-mail me personally.

Thank you very much.
- -- 
Mason Harris, MA	                     (\
SMCOE Educational Audiologist    -{ ||| 8-
smharris at ed.co.sanmateo.ca.us	    (/

Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 6 Nov 1997 13:53:40 -0500
From: "Kensler, Paul" <PKensler at itcmedia.com>
Subject: RE: Yeast culturing

Keith Busby was asking about yeast culturing and stepping up.

I have been culturing for about a year, and typically take the yeast
from slant into a 10 - 50 ml starter, and then step it up to a 400 - 500
ml starter after 2 days.  I make the starter from unhopped pale DME and
of the same gravity as the wort I will be pitching it into, so as to not
affect flavor or gravity.

This usually gives me strong, healthy fermentations with 6-8 hours lag
time.  However I have noticed that with Brewtek yeast strains in
particular, I have always had longer lag times, and less attenuation
(final gravities in the 1.020 - 1.030's) and flocculation.  Adjusting
the starters for yeast nutrients and oxygenating the wort have made no
difference.  The beers always end up tasting good with no off flavors,
just high in the FG.

I have not had this experience either with Wyeast strains I have put
onto slant, or with Yeast Culture Kit Company yeasts.  I can only
surmise that this performance difference is related to the difference
between my brewing techniques and the propagation techniques used by
Brewtek.

Paul Kensler


Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 6 Nov 1997 13:24:14 -0600 (CST)
From: Al Korzonas <korz at xnet.com>
Subject: When to rack...

Capt. Marc writes:
>I have been using Greg Noonans' New Brewing Lager Beer as a
>guideline. According to it, I should "rack the beer off its sediment
>when its density is one third or less of the wort density (OG). But it
>should be free of any foam cover".
>This is where I wonder, which is more important? I had an OG of 1.063
>and the SG is now 1.024 which is about 38% but there is about a half
>inch of foam on top.

I have not looked up the actual text, but I believe that the problem here
is misinterpretation of the "one third" either by Noonan or by Capt. Marc.
I've seen that "one third" rule written before, but what it was for was
the proper time at which to do the diacetyl rest.  Furthermore, it was
not "one third of the OG" but rather "when one third of the attenation
remains," i.e. when the beer has progressed 2/3 of the way down from 
the OG to the FG.

Therefore, when you begin with an OG of 1.063 and are expecting an FG of
1.016, that's 47 points of difference.  One third of 47 points is about
16 points.  So, 2/3 of the way from 1.063 to 1.016 is 1.016 + 0.016 = 1.032.

Now, having said all that, I simply go three to four weeks in the primary
on lagers (I *only* use a primary for ales) and then rack to a secondary,
regardless of the SG, foam, etc.  In fact, I would prefer there to be a
little foam and fermentation still going on because it would mean that any
oxygen that was introduced would quickly be sucked-up by the yeast in
suspension and any air in the headspace would be purged out by continued
yeast activity.

Al.

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

My new website (still under construction, but up-and-running):
     http://www.brewinfo.com/brewinfo/

Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 6 Nov 1997 13:36:27 -0600
From: rlabor at lsumc.edu (LaBorde, Ronald)
Subject: RE: Molten rocks, dry yeast, and Ma Kettle

Date: Tue, 4 Nov 1997 23:25:04 -0500 (EST)
Guy says:

 ...Lastly, on the Kettle thread.  For those considering all-grain: No, a
 ...zillion dollar Vollrath is not necessary.  It might be nice, but it's
 ...not necessary.....

 ....but ya gotta brew before you figure what you need.  Brew with
 ...what ya got, OK! Get a big pot, a lauter tun, a heat source,a
 ...thermometer, and a fermenting bucket.  Go from there.  The rest is
 ...nice, but not essential.....

I fully agree.  It seems like so many of us are nearly hypnotized over
the idea of stainless steel, stainless kettles, stainless everything,
and of course in an ideal world that would be the first choice.  But you
can make great beer with plastic kettles.  I paid $7.00 each for my 15
gallon HLT and my 15 gallon kettle.   I am using electric heating
elements inside and most happy with the rig.  I am using all three
vessels, HLT, Mash Tun, and Kettle on the same level (about 2 feet off
the ground), I do not need any ladders, but am using two pumps.  The
money I saved on the kettles paid for the pumps and dinner with the
wife. My wife, of course  :>))

Happy Brewing

Ron


Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 6 Nov 1997 14:47:58 -0600
From: David Muzidal <Dave.Muzidal at dssc.slg.eds.com>
Subject: Extract brewing, yeast, water and pH

I recently posted a question regarding the pH of my yeast starter.
Due to some responses I got (and from feedback I received from
a few folks I emailed privately) I decided to take a closer look at
the pH of my extract based beers.  My water is high in bicarbonates
(93mg/L) and low in calcium (30mg/L) and magnesium (3mg/L).
The combination of this water with light DME resulted in a wort
pH of 6 for my yeast starter.  After adding some yeast nutrient
the pH went up to around 7.  The starter fermented out OK, but
it was never as active or healthy as I thought it should be.  With
the optimum pH before fermentation being in the low 5's, the high
pH was probably not a good way to get the yeast started out.

I never thought much about the water I used because I was making
extract beers.  I am now starting to think it does make a difference,
at least from a pH perspective and the effect it has on yeast
performance.  The batches I seem to have trouble with are the ones
using light malt extracts - they all seemed to ferment rather feabily.
My ales and stouts that contained darker malt extracts or darker
specialty grains all fermented and turned out very well.  After
witnessing the pH of my yeast starter I concluded that the pH of my
wort might be high as well for these lighter batches (same water,
extract and approximate gravity as the yeast starter) where the pH
probably fell into the correct range on the darker batches due to the
acidity of the darker malts and grains.  In addition, I thought the
low calcium (which would precipitate out during the boil due to the
high bicarbonates) might be hindering my beer from clearing.  Add to
that the fact that my local water company uses chloramines and there
are many sources for potential problems here.

I just brewed another batch on Monday and decided to try using
bottled drinking water.  This water had small amounts of calcium
chloride, magnesium chloride and sodium bicarbonate added for flavor
and I thought it would be more suitable than using distilled water (a
water analysis is on the way from the manufacturer - Ozarka).  The
combination of this water and light DME resulted in a wort pH of 5.5
before boiling - just about perfect.  I also seemed to get a much
better hot break than I had in the past.  I decanted most of the liquid
off of my yeast starter before pitching it into the wort at a =
temperature
of 64F.  I held the temperature at 64F and there was slight activity in
6 hours.  It is now bubbling at a rate of about once a second and seems
much more vigorous and healthy than the same batch I brewed a couple of
weeks ago using the same recipe and fermentation temperatures but with
tap water and a couple gallons of distilled water (pH unknown).  The
last batch bubbled at a steady rate of once every two seconds for six
days before trailing off (as did most of the other light batches I =
brewed
that I can recall), and this seems suspect to me.  The current batch =
built
up to 1 bubble/second over the course of two days and now seems to be
starting to decrease.  This is more like the activity I remember with my
darker ales, and I am fermenting at a much lower temperature to boot =
(64F versus 70F).  To be fair, I am using a different yeast this time - =
Wyeast American Ale II (1272?) versus Wyeast American Ale (1056) in the =
previous batches.  But I'm not sure I would see much difference in the =
activity of
these two yeasts under optimal conditions.

I guess a lot of this may be conjecture on my part at this point, and
it may be a little premature to be optomistic, but I will know in a few
weeks if my suspicions are correct.  If this batch turns out well, I =
will
at least know that it was possibly either the pH of the wort or the
mineral/chloramine content of my tap water that caused me problems.  If
I am then able to brew another successfull batch using the same method
and bottled water I will be convinced my hunch was right (especially if
I try Wyeast 1056 again).  If this batch fails, too, then I may need to
look at my process, which I really believe is sound.

I will post the outcome in a few weeks, so keep your fingers crossed!

Special thanks to Dave Draper, Al Korzonas, John Wilkinson and
A.J. deLange for their input (and putting up with my dissertations).

Dave Muzidal






Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 6 Nov 1997 16:37:17 -0500
From: Tom_Williams at cabot-corp.com
Subject: Sanitizing Wort Chillers


Danny Breidenbach writes about sanitizing wort chillers:
"My wort chiller consists of a coil of copper inside a plastic bucket.  I
put
ice & water in the bucket, then I run the wort through the copper."

I use an immersion chiller (running tap water inside the copper tube) which
I sanitize by placing it in the kettle for the last few minutes of the
boil.  I like this because it is simple and easy to clean up after.

I find that with constant, gentle agitation of the chiller during cooling,
the tap water is cool enough to chill 3.5 - 4 gallons (I'm hoping Santa
will bring me a 33qt pot so I can do full boils) of boiling wort to ~85F in
about 8-10 minutes, even in the summer here in Atlanta.  You may be
surprised at how much the agitation affects the cooling rate.  I think that
the typical immersion chiller cools roughly twice as fast with agitation
than if left alone.

Therefore, I haven't bothered with pre-chilling, BUT....

A suggestion from an old HBD, can't remember who:  Get a second, perhaps
smaller, immersion chiller, and connect the two in series.  Use the bigger
coil as I described above, and when the wort has been cooled about half
way, immerse the smaller coil in a bucket of ice water.  Some
experimentation should tell you how cool you should get the wort prior to
the ice bath.

Tom Williams
Dunwoody, Georgia



Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 6 Nov 1997 16:32:53 -0800
From: "Morton, Mike" <mmorton at unocal.com>
Subject: CO2 Generator

Upon reading several of the posts regarding aeration of beer when
racking to a secondary fermenter I thought I might add my 2 cents.  What
I do is flush the secondary fermenter with CO2 (nothing new) but I do it
rather unconventionally (no CO2 tank).  I have constructed (with about
10 minutes work) a CO2 generator that I think does a fairly adequate job
at displacing air with CO2 in the secondary. Here's how:

Materials:
1 gallon jug or similar closed container
A few feet of tubing
A 2-holed stopper that fits jug
Duct tape (Red Green says use this for everything)
One of those orange plastic carboy cap thingers with the two appendages
(my kids say it looks like a snail head)
Vinegar - some
Baking Soda - some (this ain't big science)
A snot rag..er..kleenex (no association...with Kleenex that is)

Ingredients sound familiar...like the fire extinguisher you made in
Scouts?

Okay...now put the vinegar in the jug.  Put the baking soda in a
kleenex, fold the corners together and tie corners with a string.  Add
vinegar to the jug. Feed string of baking soda "bag" through one hole in
the stopper of the jug. Stuff baking soda bag into jug being careful not
to break it and making sure soda bag is suspended above the vinegar,
place the stopper in the top of the jug.  Put a small piece of duct tape
(or any other kind) on the string extending through the hole in the
stopper to keep it from falling into the vinegar before you are ready.
Put orange cap (sanitized) onto carboy.  Put one end of tubing into hole
of stopper on jug (the one without the string running through it), the
other end onto one of the orange cap tubes.  Pull up duct tape on top of
jug stopper to allow baking soda to fall into vinegar, replace tape over
hole and swirl so that the magical reaction takes place. Voila! CO2
in...Air out.

Some additional thoughts:

Sometimes I am concerned (not worried) about acetobacter (sp?)
contamination so I boil my vinegar first...if anyone knows if this is a
possibility I would appreciate some feedback as I also boil vinegar
before cleaning beerstone out of my carboy (I like overkill).  Also warm
vinegar speeds up the reaction with the baking soda (and beerstone).

Don't use too much vinegar/baking soda or you will spew the mixture into
the carboy...yes it is very much like a fire extinguisher.

Does anyone have any data on volume of CO2 produced?  I am sure I am not
filling the entire secondary. What my intention is to merely get a bit
of CO2 onto the bottom of the carboy (CO2 is denser than air???) before
racking the beer in. As beer fills the carboy the cushion of CO2 rises
and air is displaced. 

My apologies if this has been posted a bunch.  No physics or chemistry
intended.  Flames/Accolades welcome.

		Cheers,

		Mike

Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 6 Nov 1997 18:11:40 -0700
From: Troy Hager <thager at bsd.k12.ca.us>
Subject: Storage of yeast

Fellow Homebrewers,

I am new on the digest experience (and what a HUGE bit of daily experience
it is) and have been talking to John Thomas (Hobby Beverage) about
collecting and storing yeast from the fermentor. I have talked and read a
lot about this and it seems everyone has a different answer.

I wrote:
 After collecting it in a sterilized jar and storing it in the fridge,
how long have you kept it and successfully pitched it into a new batch?

John wrote:
This is a big discussion.  If you keep it long a few weeks you must feed it
because it settled to the bottom with all the dead cells.  So you have a
mixture of old cells and live cells (about 30%).  I read a few days ago the
best way is to make a starter  a few day after you store the yeast then you
can store the new batch for a longer period.    I have stored the clean
yeast, the starter, for over a year in the ice box.

Just had a discussion with the Brewing Science Institute people in CO
and here is what they said about the yeast crop issue.  I think this is
what I was trying to say but whatever I said this is from the experts.

"Slurries directly from labs such as Wyeast will last two weeks at 38F (a
good
general storage temp for both beer and yeast) with little ill effect.  They
have been aerobically propagated and are much "cleaner" than slurries cropped
from fermentors.

If you do not wish to wash or otherwise treat your entire mass of cropped
yeast for storage, or you fear contaminating it in the process, you may
always take a small amount of it (about like what you got from Wyeast
originally),
store that at 38F, and two days before brewing, propagate it up via a starter
culture.  This will ensure that what you pitch is healthy and highly viable."

Just save a small amount and you will build your own taste.
______________________

Does anyone have the bottome line on this? Some say never to save it, some
say to wash it and save it, some say don't wash it and save it, some say
save it and freeze it, some say save it and culture it up... Help!!!



Troy A. Hager
Franklin Elementary School
2385 Trousdale Drive.
Burlingame,  CA  94010
259-3850



Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 06 Nov 1997 22:12:08 -0800
From: Chasman <cwhudak at gemini.adnc.com>
Subject: Big 'ol helping of crow

Fellow HBDers,

I would like to publicly apologize to any that might have taken offense to
any of my recent postings (especially Jeremy). It is not my intention to
offend or inflame. I have found, though, that often times, one finds
oneself so caught up in the fray that one takes comments very personally
and, unfortunately, responds in kind. Of this, I am all too guilty.

In addition to this, my style tends to be very sarcastic and
tongue-in-cheek (ask those that know me personally) and as such, many of my
comments which may have been made light heartedly, in the bland, harsh
spotlight of plain text, may be misconstrued as being overly insensitive,
defensive or derogatory. I will try to be more sensitive to this.

Again, I apologize to any whom I've inadvertantly or intentionally
embarassed or chided. Conduct like that is not acceptable on this or any
other digest.  

C--
"Comments expressed are those of the author and may not be in good taste"

Charles Hudak
cwhudak at adnc.com

"If God had intended for us to drink beer, he would have given us stomachs."
- --David Daye



Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 7 Nov 1997 19:54:04 +1100
From: "Andy Walsh" <awalsh at crl.com.au>
Subject: ester degradation

Esters arise in beer during fermentation in a complex fashion due to
activity of a number of yeast enzymes (alcohol acyl transferases). These
enzymes are deactivated  as yeast budding ceases, thus ester production
slows. Although esters are also slowly produced from beer acids and
alcohols non-enzymatically, the converse is also true, and esters break
down into constituent alcohols and acids. The reaction favours the reverse
direction (ie. esters decrease) post fermentation.

Enzymatic breakdown of esters occurs via esterases released from yeast
cells after cell-lysis. ie. yeast release enzymes that reduce esters to
acids and alcohols after fermentation. Top fermented beers lose esters more
rapidly than lagers.

The nett result can be a reduction in isoamyl acetate of 35% after 6 months
for unpasteurised beer.

All the above was taken from Belgian researchers, who were specifically
looking to reduce the amount of ester degradation that occurred during
storage of bottle conditioned beers. My own experience concurs with this.
Coopers is an excellent example of beer that is fruity when fresh, and
solventy/phenolic when aged. I am therefore a bit confused by Al K's
comments about the reverse happening.

Another often neglected ester source is hops.Dry hopping in particular can
dramatically increase ester levels. Hop esters do not smell specifically
like hops, as has been demonstrated via isolating the hop ester fraction by
CO2 extraction. Hop esters are also reduced to acid/alcohols and
transesterified by yeast to other esters (mainly acetates).

Andy.

ref: Neven et al, "Flavor evolution of top fermented beers", TQMBAA, v34(2)
1997 p115.


Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 7 Nov 1997 03:23:48 -0800
From: "Michel J. Brown" <homemade at spiritone.com>
Subject: Science and art :^)

>How many botulism spores can dance on the head of a pin?

That would depend on three variables; first: the cross sectional area of
the pin's head. Second, on the ambient temperature; and last, whether the
spores are doing rave dancing, or are just jumping around to the beat of
brownian motion (no affiliation, just another scientific person with the
same last name). Qualitatively, this can also be expressed by the aphorism:
as many red herrings that swim in the sea ;^)
 
			    Dr. Michel J. Brown, D.C.
        		              homemade at spiritone.com 
	           http://www.spiritone.com/~homemade/index.html
	               "Big Man don't drink no stinking light beer!"
                           "Big Man drink beer what got BIG TASTE!"
                                       Big Man Brewing (R) 1996

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 7 Nov 1997 03:54:59 -0800
From: "Michel J. Brown" <homemade at spiritone.com>
Subject: re: Parti-gyle

>If anyone has an idea how the term Parti-gyle came to be, or perhaps I'm
>mispelling it, I sure would be interested.

Yes, you did misspell indeed! The term for which you are searching is
actually "party-girl"! This is a female person who enjoys home brewed beer,
and pays for equipment, supplies, and ingredients for her favorite home
brewer :^) I even married one 8-)

			    Dr. Michel J. Brown, D.C.
        		              homemade at spiritone.com 
	           http://www.spiritone.com/~homemade/index.html
	               "Big Man don't drink no stinking light beer!"
                           "Big Man drink beer what got BIG TASTE!"
                                       Big Man Brewing (R) 1996

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 7 Nov 1997 08:34:19 -0600
From: Mark_Snyder at wastemanagement.com
Subject: Compression Fittings




Mark Snyder at WMI
11/07/97 08:34 AM
Bill questions the adequacy of compression fittings for attaching 1/2"
copper tubing in his yet to be converted keg.

Bill, keep in mind that the compression fitting will be located inside of
the keg, where any minor leaks won't matter.  You can leave the compression
ring and nut on the copper tube and not disconnect the fitting when
cleaning, and even devise different internal apparatus that will connect to
the fitting via another ring and nut set if you desire.  Any leakage you
experience will be far less than the flow through the screen and siphon
assembly and will just contribute to flow to your counterflow chiller
and/or fermenter or boiling kettle (whichever be the case).

Mark Snyder



Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 7 Nov 97 08:38:04 -0500
From: Paul <pedwards at iquest.net>
Subject: dry hpping in keg

Rich wrote:

>I recently dry-hopped a batch by throwing a hop boiling bag containing
>an ounce or so of whole leaf hops directly into the cornelius keg. I am
>getting quite a lot of hop particles in the glass when I dispense.

The mesh of a hop bag is relatively coarse.

What I've done that works well is to us a fine mesh stainless steel "tea 
ball" that i picked up in a coffee store.  A a few HB shops sell them, 
too. Mine cost $3 or so. 

 Anyway the tea ball is about 2 inches in diameter, or a little larger.  
It's two hemispheres of stainless screen, with a hinge on one side and a 
latch on the other.  Mine will hold two 1/2 ounce hop plugs very nicely. 
I sanitize the tea ball, put in one or two plugs, latch it, and drop it 
into the corny.

I do still get a few small bits of hop escaping, but you have to look 
very hard to see them. Also, if I think the beer will be in the keg for 
more than a couple weeks after conditioning, I'll transfer the beer to 
another keg using a jumper hose & CO2, so the beer doesn't get _too_ much 
dry hopping.

Hope this helps...

- --Paul

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 7 Nov 1997 09:29:51 -0500 (EST)
From: Joe Rolfe <onbc at shore.net>
Subject: Re: pitching....

 with all the talk about size of the starter....

just remember that volume is not the correct
way to determine how much...granted it works
and the results are pretty duplicable...

the "real" way is to determine the number of viable
cells you (the brewer) want to start with...yeah i know
90% or more dont have the tools to measure this....


the viable count will vary from strain to strain and the brewing 
set up you have...amoungst a 100 other variables...


joe rolfe
jrolfe at mc.com

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 07 Nov 1997 09:33:42 -0500
From: Saul Laufer <laufers at vaniercollege.qc.ca>
Subject: aeration age of slants and Maredsous abbey ale

I read in HBD 2551 of Pat Babcock's and Jim Larsen's system of using
aerating with oxygen.  I never thought of aerating the starter with
oxygen and it seemed so easy to simply shake the erlenmeyer flask
containing 200ml of DME, starting from a slant and then shaking 500ml
etc.  What I do aerate is the 5 gal of wort with  two 15 sec blasts of
oxygen as suggested by Liquid Bread.  I have done this for the last 5
batches and have had lag periods of about 12 - 20 hours.

While I have read that slants should be recultured every 2-3 months I
recently pitched from a slant that was a year old (it got overlooked in
the reculturing process) and stored in my beer fridge.  The yeast was
viable and produced a most delicious brown ale.  I have not given up
reculturing after 3 months but does anybody have opinions about keeping
slants for longer periods (6 - 12 months).

I was given a couple of bottles of Maredsous Abbey Ale (Belgium).  It is
a bottle conditioned ale and I can see the yeast at the bottom of the
bottle.  Does anybody know anything about this yeast? Can it be used to
produce a Trappist ale (as can Chimay)? 

Saul

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 7 Nov 1997 08:38:32 -0600
From: "David Johnson" <dmjalj at inwave.com>
Subject: Yeast at Bottling and extract brewing

This is just a data point about adding yeast at bottling. I did this for the
first time with a Belgian Strong Ale I made for this years Christmas brew. I
added a packet of dry EDME ale yeast by rehydrating and adding it with my
priming sugar at bottling. I have made several observations. I tasted before
and after conditioning and I noticed a definite but subtle "British
character" after conditioning. Of course, I was looking for it. It
conditioned much faster than my other high gravity beers and the flavors
(high alcohol...9% ABV) came together faster than my other big beers. I had
expected about 6 months before it was ready but it was quite presentable in
2.  In fact it placed second in a competition. The judges did not mention
the british character I noticed. Am I right in thinking that fresh yeast
helped the flavors mature faster in the bottle?
    A thought on extract brewing. A lot of people when giving advice on
extract recipe formulation advise not to use hopped extracts. This is sound
advice in most instances. There are two chronic problems with extract
brewing that hopped extracts can help address. One is lighter color in the
final product. With a properly chosen hopped extract, one can use it in
place of the bittering hops and shorten the boil and minimize darkening. I
know that the flavor will not be perfectly to style  but there is debate on
how important the flavor impact of bittering hops is. This makes selection
of high quality flavor and aroma hops more important. Secondly, in beers
where getting enough hop bitterness out of a concentrated wort boil is a
problem, one can supplement the bitterness with a portion of properly
selected hopped extract. Please note that I have said properly selected.
Part of the problem with properly selecting extract in general is lack of
information from the producers. (much like not having lot info on malt).
Dave


Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 7 Nov 1997 08:59:36 -0600
From: lheavner at tcmail.frco.com (Lou Heavner)
Subject: reading a hydrometer in dark beer...

     From: Joe Sever <JPS at cbord.com>
     Subject: Help - I don't want flat barleywine!
     
     I just racked a 3 gal. batch of barleywine, for which I used Wyeast
     #1728 (Scottish Ale).  It tasted delightful at racking, at which time 
     the SG
     was about 1.027.  I say "about" because I never seem to be able to 
     "see
     through" the meniscus...
     
     
     Joe,
     
     You might try diluting your sample with an equal quantity of distilled 
     water.  Then read the hydrometer and calculate the affect of dilution. 
     For liquid density of diluted wort/beer, it ought to be pretty easy do 
     this without a labfull of fancy glassware and maintain reasonable 
     accuracy and precision.  If the sample is still too dark, try shining 
     a flashlight through it.
     
     Lou

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 07 Nov 1997 11:16:39 -0500
From: Spencer W Thomas <spencer at engin.umich.edu>
Subject: Re: Carbonation of first 2 batches 

Carbonation definitely changes the flavor of beer.  It does several
things:

* Dissolved CO2 produces carbonic acid, which makes the beer slightly
  tarter, and balances the residual sugar.  This might account for the
   perceived reduction in "smoothness" in your porter.

* The bubbles "tingle" your tongue and produce a perception of
  "sharpness".

* CO2 outgassing from the beer carries aroma compounds with it, and
  increases the perception of, among others, hop aroma.

=S

Return to table of contents

---