HOMEBREW Digest #2620 Tue 27 January 1998

[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

  Water chemistry (Al Korzonas)
  Weissbier ,bottling starter, ("David R. Burley")
  Happy Birthday (David lamotte)
  Bluebonnet Brew-off (Tony Owens)
  Oxygen: the final word from the experts at Siebel (George De Piro)
  Propane 2 NG conversion (Jeremy Bergsman)
  Devil Mountain Five Malt Ale (DGofus)
  Cherry bomb? ("Arnold J. Neitzke")
  Zima and Lauter Tun Ratios (Glenn Raudins)
  Old brewing textbook (Mark Stevens)
  Steam Questions (cdwood)
  re: heating efficiency (Lou Heavner)
  re: new wort boiling method (Lou Heavner)
  "Change in US Propane Regs" - No they haven't (Darrell)
  sparge depth vs. width ("Bryan L. Gros")
  Re: Fast starts / racking off ("Charles L. Ehlers")
  Re: alcoholism thread ("Joe K. Chang")
  Re: Dry Yeast Expired? ("Robert J. Waddell")
  RE:  Zima Thread (Richard Gardner)
  Re:Bad Brewpubs ("John Pilhoefer")
  Coolroom in new brewery. (peter ryan)
  Altitude correction for IBU calculations ("Carl Shipman")
  small (8 oz) bottles (TPuskar)

Be sure to enter the... The Best of Brooklyn Homebrew Competition Brooklyn Brewery, Brooklyn, NY Entries due by 1/31/98, competition 2/7/98 Contact Bob Weyersberg at triage at wfmu.org for more info. NOTE NEW HOMEBREW ADDRESS: hbd.org Send articles for __publication_only__ to post@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 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... ftp://hbd.org/pub/hbd/digests ftp://ftp.stanford.edu/pub/clubs/homebrew/beer 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, 22 Jan 1998 15:07:14 -0600 (CST) From: Al Korzonas <korz at xnet.com> Subject: Water chemistry Ken writes: >Outside of the mash, calcium aids in extraction of fine bittering principles >from hops, enhances protein coagulation (hot & cold break), is beneficial to >yeast, and aids shelf life. Alkalinity ("carbonates") harshens hop >bitterness; reddens beer; and hinders protein coagulation. I too have read in several books that carbonate/bicarbonate lends harshness. I don't believe it, I'm afraid. I think that it's the high pH and not the bi/carbonate itself. Think about it this way: if bi/carbonates made for harsh bitterness, then Guinness (50 IBUs, ~300 ppm carbonate) would be undrinkably harsh, no? What about Burton-upon-Trent (200-300ppm)? What about Dortmund (550ppm in some books!)? I think that with proper pH management, the bi/carbonate levels are far less of an issue and don't necessarily result in harshness. >Sodium (Na): Adds a "fullness" and "sweetness" to beer in reasonable >concentrations. Keep under 100 ppm (usually under 50), especially in the >presence of sulphate. I've only read "accentuates flavour." Could you email me or post the source that gives these descriptors? See below regarding sulphate. >Chloride (Cl): Adds a "fullness" and accentuates bitterness. Keep under 100 >ppm (usually under 50), especially in the presence of sulphate. Chloride is where I've read "sweetness" and "fullness." I have only read that "in the presence of sulphate" statement associated with sodium, not chloride, but I even question that because Burton-upon-Trent water has around 700ppm of sulphate and quite a bit of sodium (30 to 55ppm). Note that MBS page 779 says some British brewers' water has more than 300 ppm of chloride. Al. Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 22 Jan 1998 19:37:44 -0500 From: "David R. Burley" <Dave_Burley at compuserve.com> Subject: Weissbier ,bottling starter, Brewsters: George De Piro asks about German Weissbiers: >I have always thought that the beers are pasteurized >after bottle conditioning. This never really made sense >to me, nor did it make sense to the folks here at Siebel. I don't know about bottle conditioned beers, but I suspect some of the Weissbiers are not bottle conditioned. I read somewhere that some of the breweries are actually adding trub to get that cloudiness. This rumor may also have come from the fact that I have seen "mit Trub" on the bottles and it just means with sediment. Nevertheless it doesn't say "mit Hefe" which would be with yeast. So who knows? Trub may have a longer shelf life. And if the bottle doesn't say bottle conditioned it probably isn't. Maybe the yeast you are trying to capture is actually trub! I would think that yeast which had been pasteurized would not be able to autolyse since they are dead and no enzyme functions are working. I also have the impression that live yeast keeps the beer fresher longer - but that is with ale yeast. Lager yeast can continue to chew up carbohydrates and I suspect have a higher tendency to autolyse, since they are equipped with a good set of enzyme systems. Maybe the brewers pasteurize after conditioning *because* they use lager yeast to bottle condition? - ------------------------------------------- Alan Talsman has had a problem getting a lager to carbonate, has added some yeast to a bottle and says: >I am sure I'll get fermentation to carbonate now. > I would like to avoid this problem in the future. What do you do? = Then again, you may not. Remember you are putting this yeast = into beer not wort. This beer is stripped of nutrients by the fermentation and you expect it to multilpy and ferment sugar. If you have left it in a secondary for a long time, especially with flocculent yeast the viable yeast count in the beer may be low. Although my method is a little controversial to some folks here, it works great because it acclimatises the yeast to the beer, to the priming sugar and gives them an amino acid and maltose boost when they need it. I dissolve the priming sugar and a tablespoon of malt extract in as little boiling water as possible, boil and cool it. I siphon a small amount of beer and yeast from the bottom of the secondary and put it into a starter jar along with the sugar solution. You can dilute this with cold boiled water to your normal ( 16 oz) priming volume. = In about 12 hours this will begin to foam and that's when you should be ready to bottle your beer. Because the priming sugar is in there, the possibility exists that it will be consumed to some extent and this is the controversial part. I believe, however, that the maltose goes first and the yeast's invertase system has time to invert the sucrose ( if that's what you use) to simpler sugars, but the actual fermentation of the priming sugar is minimal and the carbonation is predictable batch to batch in my experience. = Measure the starter into all the bottles. 48 bottles at 2 tsp apiece is 16 oz of fluid. Put the delivery tube all the way into the bottom of the bottle to avoid aerating the beer.. Keep at a = temperature where the yeast is very active for about a week and then cool. Although you could, I avoid using a bottling bucket as it is one more thing to clean and sterilize and the direct ( versus the bucket) bottling method avoids aeration of the beer at its most sensitive time. = - ------------------------------------------------------- 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, 23 Jan 1998 14:47:16 +1000 From: David lamotte <lamotted at ozemail.com.au> Subject: Happy Birthday While filling in a few minutes at the end of lunch today browsing the HBD Resurrection Page I notice that it has been 12 months exactly since the HBD was resurrected. Congradulations to the Janitors and all the HBD contributors for making such a great forum possible. Cheers, David Lamotte Brewing in Newcastle, N.S.W. Australia. Underneath the center of the brewing universe. Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 23 Jan 1998 23:40:06 -0500 From: Tony Owens <ivy at fastlane.net> Subject: Bluebonnet Brew-off I'd like to take this opportunity to invite all home brewers to enter and attend the 1998 Bluebonnet Brew-off. This is one of the largest homebrew competitions in the Nation. Hope to see you all there! Webpage: http://hbd.org/users/kobb/blue.htm Tony Owens Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 23 Jan 1998 01:23:43 -0800 From: George De Piro <gdepiro at fcc.net> Subject: Oxygen: the final word from the experts at Siebel Hi all, While hanging out at the Siebel bar with a couple of instructors, I asked about the consequences of under oxygenating yeast. I also brought up reasons that one might want to underoxegenate (ester control). Well, the response was quite unexpected (wink). Paul Smith, formerly with Coors (he has held posts at Coors ranging from brewery worker to board of director member of Coors' European division and wields an impressive array of brewing knowledge, some of which was learned at Doemens) said that you most certainly could control esters by manipulating pitching rate and oxygenation, but that the results were likely to be erratic. His exact words were, "That puts you on the edge. You know what can happen when you're on the edge." He was most emphatic that pitching rate and O2 are two variables you should not mess with if you want consistent quality. He pointed out that there are many more easily controlled variables that will affect esters. At this point Lyn Kruger, formerly of South African Breweries (she is a microbiologist and also taught classes at SAB to prepare people for the IOB exam; she, too is quite knowledgable) said that at SAB they increase esters in their Carling Black Label (different from the Canadian version) by over pitching and under-aerating (they also ferment a high gravity wort that is later diluted)! *Of course, they don't reuse the yeast.* We then got into a discussion about how wonderful brewing is because there is so much that is unknown, with so many variables in a complex system, that we will not completely understand it in our lifetimes. So there you have it. My view of it is that yeast should be provided plenty of O2 at the pitching time. I ALWAYS harvset my yeast and therefore want it to be very healthy. To control esters I would rather manipulate variables that I can easily control, like temperature, gravity and yeast strain. As home- and microbrewers it is tough enough to deal with those variables! Why put your beer "on the edge?" To the people who are wondering about adding more oxygen to their wort after pitching time, I say this: are you trying to grow yeast, or make beer? The results taste quite different... Have fun! George De Piro (Still in Chicago, and soon to meet the homebrewing center of the universe) Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 23 Jan 1998 01:14:05 -0800 From: Jeremy Bergsman <jeremybb at stanford.edu> Subject: Propane 2 NG conversion I recently bought a burner from Metal Fusion. They only sell them with propane jets, but I want to use natural gas. Searching the archives, I found a couple of numbers for jet size: propane=.0625", NG=.11". Well, this jet is clearly less than .04". Hooked up to NG, it made a 1" tall dense ring of blue flame. I drilled it out to 1/16 (i.e. .0625) and it made a 2-3" tall blue flame. I then drilled it out to 5/64 (i.e. .078"). It now makes a 3-4" tall blue flame with wispy blue flames rising several inches above the dense flame area. By visual comparison to my 12500 BTU/hr kitchen stove I'd guess this is 20-30K BTU/hr. At all the sizes the flame was essentially all blue no matter how the air intake was adjusted. I'll take all the heat I can get, but I don't want to go too far. (If you see what I'm saying!) Before starting I had intended to drill it to .11", but now I am doubting the size info I have read. What sayeth ye all? Should I drill again? - -- Jeremy Bergsman jeremybb at leland.stanford.edu http://www-leland.stanford.edu/~jeremybb Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 23 Jan 1998 06:58:51 EST From: DGofus <DGofus at aol.com> Subject: Devil Mountain Five Malt Ale I need the groups help on this one. I am in search of information about a product. The product is=Devil Mountain Five Malt Ale. I would like an address, or phone number. Does anybody know anything about this beer, or the Manufracturer. I understand that this beer may be made by a contract brewer, the Hudephol( Sam Adams new brewhouse)S. Brewery. A fellow beer enthusiast and I are on a quest for info and need the help. Thanks! Private E-mail okay. Dgofus at aol.com Bob Fesmire Madman Brewery Pottstown, Pa Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 23 Jan 1998 07:53:39 -0500 (EST) From: "Arnold J. Neitzke" <neitzkea at frc.com> Subject: Cherry bomb? Two days ago (1/21), I split a batch of cream ale, bottled half of the batch, and added 3 pounds of cherrys to the second half. These cherrys were picked from an orchard last fall and frozen until I thawed them in hot water. I added the cherrys and juice to a glass carboy and racked the remaining 2.5 gallons on top of them, picking up lots of yeast in the process. Most of the cherrys were on the bottom even two hours latter, now the cherrys are slowly rising to the top and each cherry is starting to be covered by a white mass (I hope it is yeast?). The stranger thing about this whole thing, is that there is NO fermentation going on? Nada, zip nothing. There isn't any foaming or air lock activity, I know the airlock is seated correctly because the inner peice is stationary but "floating" above the center tube. I have heard several people on the HBD indicate they get a explosive fermentation after adding fruit, this is definitely not my case. Anybody else have a fruit beer behave like this? I really don't want to create cherry bombs, by bottling this stuff, any information will be much appreciated. Slightly north of the center of the universe :) _________________________________________________________ Arnold J. Neitzke Internet Mail: neitzkea at frc.com Brighton, Mi CEO of the NightSky brewing Company - --------------------------------------------------------- Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 23 Jan 1998 09:19:58 -0500 From: Glenn Raudins <raudins at ct.picker.com> Subject: Zima and Lauter Tun Ratios Jeff McNeal writes: >From what Glenn says about the process of "Brewing" zima, it sounds >like it is just alcohol and carbonated water. If I were going to >"brew" some zima, I'd just get some water, add vodka to taste, >and carbonate. Maybe a twist of lemon? I would better describe it as a wine spritzer, and you would probably have better luck approaching it this way. This is not to say though that the challenge of making it isn't worth doing. (The large brewers do some very fantastic things, such as the consistent production of extremely light beers which isn't easy.) It was designed to NOT be considered a beer, so we shouldn't judge it that way. Coors is in the perfect position to make items that are malt/beer beverages and they are taxed lower than wine and spirit based beverages. This is why many of the "wine coolers" are not labeled so, but are "malt beverages." Think profit. One point of reference for those who bash Zima, the only time I have tried it is in a tasting session at Siebel. They have you sample it there because as brewers you will never know what you will be called upon to brew. Kelly Jones writes: >Why does anyone suppose that the RATIO of depth to diameter has >any bearing on the mechanics of sparging? The important parameter >is DEPTH. Agreed. Kunze writes that the optimal is 9-12 inches deep. The deeper you get the more possibilities you have for developing pockets of grain that aren't getting sparged. I wouldn't worry about it though, just shoot for a civil grain depth when building your lauter tun. The bigger issue is people who build their system to the biggest they plan to brew and end up with a lauter tun that is too large for the amount of grain they are using and they get a horrible sparge. I.e. Brewing 7.5 bbl batches on 15 bbls systems, until you grow into needing 15 bbls. It is better to brew 2 7.5 bbl batches. Glenn raudins at ct.picker.com Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 23 Jan 1998 10:21:32 -0500 From: Mark Stevens <mstevens at anent.com> Subject: Old brewing textbook I'd like to sell an old brewing textbook that I've got in my collection and would like to see it go into the hands of someone who can appreciate it... "The Principals and Practice of Brewing", Walter J. Sykes and Arthur R. Ling, Charles Griffin & Co. Ltd., London, 1907, 588 pages. This is a professional-level text covering commercial brewing practices and techniques at the turn of the century. Focus is on British methodology. It is in very good condition. Looking for about $100....any interest??? Cheers! - ---Mark Stevens mstevens at anent.com Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 23 Jan 1998 11:02:52 -0500 From: cdwood at lexmark.com Subject: Steam Questions I had sent this out last week but it never showed up in the digest.... >Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 11:37:03 -0500 >.From: Harold L Bush <harrybush at compuserve.com> >Subject: Heaters for Mixmashing (Mashmixing, Maxmishing???) > > >I, on the other hand, purchased a Rubbermaid cooler (10 gal) and a 5 qt. >pressure cooker with the intention of doing step mashing with steam >injection as my heat source. I assume that stirring would only have to be= >done while heating. Is this a good assumption? And could any >steam-hardened veterans (Charlie Scrandrett?) give me an idea of how long= >it takes to raise mash temps with steam injection. Motorized stirring may= >be a good idea for this setup. Harold asks for help on steam heating a Gott/Rubbermaid Cooler and stiring. I have such a system and have been using it for about a year now. First here's what my system is: 10 gal. Gott with a 1/2" copper manifold in the bottom with a riser pipe to underlet the infusion water and add steam. Steam is provided by a 4 qt. pressure cooker, with the weight set to 15# of pressure. A 1/4" copper pipe runs over to the riser pipe for steam injection. Gate valves are used to direct the water from the hot water tank, and also the gate the steam from the pressure cooker. The valve on the PC is a T valve whith the steam coming in the bottom of the T. With the valve's knob in the middle the PC will build up pressure, turned to the left it blows steam out to air so as to release pressure, turned to the right steam is directed in to the riser pipe. Since the gate valve from the hot water tank is off the steam's path is down the pipe, thru the slotted copper manifold and up thru the mash. The 4qt. PC is filled to ~3qts. and still has plenty of water after I'm finished rising to another temp and mash out. I usually mash ~20-22# of grain with 1.2 qts. of water per pound of grain. This allows for a thin enough mash that the IC motor will run. The added steam does not add the the amount of water. Stirring is provided by a old ice cream maker motor mounted on the top of the Gott cooler (2 pieces of 3/4" x 4" oak notched like the top of the IC maker's bucket. This drives a dip tube from a 1/2 barrel keg that has a piece of wood dowel in the top and cut like a square to mate to the motor. The dip tube runs down thru the center of the cooler lid (No bushing just plastic to SS). On the bottom of the dip tube is a 3/4" x 2" oak board that acts as a paddle. It is cut so that there is about 1" clearance between the ends and the cooler walls. I also have a SS 2" dial Thermometer mounted in the side of the cooler for temp. measurements. The paddle is mounted about 6" above the bottom of the cooler. When I first built my 3 tier system I had an old burner that could just barely keep the pressure cooker at 15# as steam was being added (pressure would drop below 15#) and I got a rise in temp of ~ 1 degree F per minute. Now, I have a 170K BTU burner under the PC and can easily keep up with the demands for steam. I have only made 1 batch with the new burner so my data with it is only for one batch only, but I got 4 degrees F rise per minute with the PC pumping steam at 15# and the burner turned way up. (Now I'm cookin' with gas!!) I have found it takes close to 15# of steam pressure to start pushing steam thru the piping and start bubbling up thru the mash. I plan on setting the burner to a rate so as to rise the temp ~2degrees F/min. I stir after adding water to the dry grain for ~3-5 min. And also as I add steam, letting the motor run for a couple mins. after I turn off the steam to allow the temp to stabilize. I have not tried to do a lot of step mashes since early on I wanted to just measure how much steam was needed to rise the mash. And now with the new burner I need to do more studies (Brew More Beer!!) and document my results so as to better predict the results. I'm happy with the system as a whole but the steam does add complexity to the system as well as more safety concerns from a steam burn. If I was to build another 3 tier I would probably just go for a 15 gal insulated keg with false bottom fired by a 170K BTU burner as my lauter/tun so as not to have to mess with the steam. May your next batch be your best!!! Curt Woodson, Lexington KY. cdwood at lexmark.com Member of B.O.C.K (Brewers Of Central Kentucky) P.S. Many Thanks to Pat and Karl for the GREAT janitorial work!!! Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 23 Jan 1998 10:37:52 -0600 From: lheavner at tcmail.frco.com (Lou Heavner) Subject: re: heating efficiency >From: "Tkach, Christopher" <tkach at ctron.com> >Subject: Upping Heating Efficiency > {snip} > >Is there any way that I can improve the efficiency of the >stove/boil so that I don't have to keep the kettle partially >covered. Would insulating the kettle help much? Chris, The heat loss as steam (heat of vaporization) is going to dwarf any other heat loss. You may improve your situation by insulating or adding boiling chips, or whatever, but my guess is that your heat input is roughly equal to the steam production and there ain't no more heat available. Is there any heat loss from the burner which is not being transferred to your kettle? If so, that would be the place to try and reduce heat loss. Just be careful not to burn up your stove or house!! If your are using 1 burner and can position your pot to cover 2 burners, you could increase your heat input. You may decide it is best to get a propane burner. Maybe Santa could bring one next year. In the meantime, you will have to adjust your mash to produce less volume of higher concentration wort. Most of the recipe software I have seen like 'suds' allows you to define system efficiency and water loss during boil. If you use software to formulate your recipe or do those calcs yourself, you should have no trouble tweaking the amount of grain and reducing the sparge. Just determine what your boiloff rate is in gal/hr. BTW, if your stove has a Btu rating and you want to verify it, you could get pretty close by: 1000 Btu/lb x 8 lb/gal x ??? gal/hr of water evaporated during full boil. That is assuming your burner is completely covered and it is on as high as it goes and you don't lose any liquid to boilover. This is not exact since I don't have my 70's vintage CRC handbook handy. Cheers! Lou - just a couple blocks from the Celis brewery in Austin, TX Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 23 Jan 1998 11:23:56 -0600 From: lheavner at tcmail.frco.com (Lou Heavner) Subject: re: new wort boiling method From: "David R. Burley" <Dave_Burley at compuserve.com> Subject: New Wort Boiling Method Brewsters: One of my buddies attended the recent American Institute of = Chem Engineering National Meeting in LA and brought back a reference to a paper given by Gino Bacon from = Vrije Universitet Brussel. He described a "greener" wort boiling method. Not that the wort is green, but the method is claimed to be more environmentally satisfactory. The news article was titled "Making Better Brews, "Worts" and All" Guess the author just couldn't help her/himself. {snip process description} Interesting idea. I can imagine a pressure cooker being used in some fashion to simulate this in which the wort is held at 212F and not boiled for an hour. Perhaps some form of magnetically coupled agitation would be needed to get the extraction from the hops and then follow this with a brief boil. This might minimize = the "this place smells like a brewery" comments from the SO , and provide more control over the hop aromas/bitterness ratio in the brew. {snip more stuff} Dave, This is interesting, but I don't see it being too useful around the home. The heating part could be achieved by simply putting the kettle in the oven at 212 DegF or so with the lid held on and weighted down with a rock or something. Remember that if no steam is evolving, then there is no need for heat input except to balance losses to ambient and any endothermic affects which are probably negligible if they exist at all. I agree that agitation is probably the biggest problem. How do you keep the wort "rolling" while it is in the oven, but not actually boiling? Maybe it could be removed and stirred frequently, but that may not be enough. Plus, that could lead to HSA. Maybe some kind of stirrrer mounted on the lid (which could also act as a weight) or magnetically coupled could keep it "rolling", but would it fit and survive in the oven for the 60-90 minutes? I imagine it would be hard to use the stovetop to control the temp since there would be very little heat loss. Of course, maybe you just heat the wort to temp and turn it off and insulate the kettle, since losses will be so small. A RIMS like set up is possible. Now you have agitation and good temp control. Instead of circulating through the mash/lauter tun, you could circulate the wort through a hopback. Of course, we have to decide how to make late hop and Irish Moss additions. Wow, the more I think of this, the more interesting it becomes. Maybe we could lick that problem, but then how many homebrewers are going to have reasonable access to stripping equipment without confronting HSA. Do you think that the undesirable volatiles could be stripped from cooled wort during aeration. If so, maybe this problem goes away. Just cool the wort and aerate. O2, CO2, N2, air, any of them might work. If I were going to do this, and didn't have a column to maximize liquid-gas contact area, I would immerse as many aeration stones or bubblers as I could and would consider stirring the wort during aeration. If this can be done without fear of infection, this might be interesting. Of course, the brewery smell (yum yum!) would still be there, it would just evolve during aeration instead of during the boil. In a commercial/industrial setting, the the overhead exhaust could be sent somewhere besides the atmosphere for destruction/treatment. Pity! ;) These are just the ramblings of a sick mind. Any other thoughts out there? Cheers! Lou - just a couple blocks from the Celis brewery in Austin, TX Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 23 Jan 1998 15:04:13 -0700 From: Darrell <darrell at montrose.net> Subject: "Change in US Propane Regs" - No they haven't Just a few comments... The US reg's have not changed. This is a *proposed* new requirement by NFPA (NFPA is *not* a rulemaking authority, they are a trade association, and they have no ability to enforce any "rules" they write). The US D.O.T. regulates cylinders, and unless they adopt the NFPA document, the US reg's don't change. It is possible that your state or local authority may adopt this change, making it law for your area. I spoke with the D.O.T. today (1/23/98), and according to them, this change hasn't even passed NFPA yet, so it's still a ways down the road before the D.O.T. would incorporate it into the reg's. They first have to publish a Notice of Proposed Rule Making in the Federal Register, then a Notice of the Final Ruling. A quick search on the Federal Register web page (http://www.gpo.gov/su_docs/aces/aces140.html) will reveal that no such event has occurred. However, some of the cylinder manufacturers are saying that the rule takes effect in April of 1998. And all my drizzle may not mean that Lil' Abner at your local Propane Store is going to agree to fill your tanks. (Even if you show him a copy of this eloquent rebuttal from the Cylinder King.) Here's the facts: The proposed rule says that: - Beginning April '98, at re-certification (hydrostatic test or visual inspection), eligible 4 lb. to 40 lb. cylinders will require an OPD valve. Forklift, Welding and Cutting Gas cylinders are excluded. [This just said "at re-certification", NOT "before filling".] - After April 2002, all eligible cylinders will require the OPD valve before filling. The OPD is an Over-fill Protection Device build into the valve that prevents Lil' Abner from filling your cylinder to more than 80% capacity. So, here's what you do... Don't go out and buy new cylinders!! All you have to do is get your existing cylinder inspected before April, and you're good till 2002!! Inspection for a propane cylinder means a visual - costs ~$5 and gets you 5 years, or a Proof Test - costs ~$10 and gets you 7 years, or a Water Jacket test - costs ~$15 and gets you 12 years. Since 2002 is only 4 years from now, just get the visual (this is an external visual examination performed by a competent person). You then get to use your cylinder until 2002 for SURE, and maybe longer, knowing how long it takes our government to do *anything*! By then, you'll be able to buy new 20 lb. propane cylinders with the OPD valve for $20 at Walmart. That's all for now. I'll write an update when the reg's do actually get changed. - -- Cylinders are my business... It's been a pressure! Darrell Garton General Manager Galiso Inc. Montrose, CO Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 23 Jan 1998 15:09:54 -0800 From: "Bryan L. Gros" <gros at bigfoot.com> Subject: sparge depth vs. width Kelly Jones wrote, in HBD #2617: >George Danz in HBD #2613 asks: > >>What is a good guideline for ratio of grain depth to tun diameter? > >Why does anyone suppose that the RATIO of depth to diameter has any >bearing on the mechanics of sparging? The important parameter is >DEPTH. If you consider a drop of water making it's way down through the >grain bed, it has no knowledge of how far it is from the sides of the >tun. The only thing it sees is the distance it travels from top to >bottom. >..... Your argument sounds good to me. The only time that diameter should matter is in how you drain the tun. Jim Busch (I think) discussed this in a BT article. You ideally want wort to be collected uniformly from the entire bottom of the tun. If this ideal is achieved, then diameter shouldn't matter. - Bryan Bryan Gros gros at bigfoot.com Oakland, CA Visit the Draught Board club website: http://www.dnai.com/~thor/dboard/index.htm Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 23 Jan 1998 20:01:18 -0800 From: "Charles L. Ehlers" <clehlers at flinthills.com> Subject: Re: Fast starts / racking off <<From: "Andrew Avis" <Andrew.Avis.0519423 at nt.com>>> <<I use a yeast starter method that is unorthodox and in theory should lead to bad beer, but has in practice made excellent beers that start in 2-4 hours. I've done this with both lager and ale yeast: 1) I make a 1 litre starter w/ OG 1.040, well aerated, & pitch the smack pack or washed yeast from a previous batch. The starter is kept at about 70F. I do this 2-3 days before brewing. (I'll step up once if brewing a strong beer). 2) I pitch the entire starter at high karausen into well aerated 85F wort.......>> This is essentially the same technique I've used since I began using liquid yeast and have always had excellent results with both ales and lagers. However, my wort has usually cooled lower than 85F, but usually not lower than 75F. Have always wondered why others have complained about slow starts. <<Now a question: does anyone rack a second time after a few hours to get the wort off of settled trub?>> I've read about doing this, but have never done so myself. I don't rack after pitching until it's time for the secondary. After boiling, I let the trub settle out of the wort and rack into the primary before I pitch the yeast. Yes, I know you're supposed to chill/cool the wort quickly and pitch immediately thereafter. But I'm still "just" an extract brewer and don't have a wort chiller. I do a three gallon boil, add ice (from boiled water) to cool the wort and bring the volume up to about four gallons, sparge and then bring the volume up to five or six gallons (depending on the recipe) with cold (also previously boiled) water. The wort is still relatively warm at this point. As it cools, a lot of trub settles out. It's pretty easy to watch this happen. Once the trub has settled, but waiting no more than two hours, I rack (actually, drain as the spigot is an inch above the bottle of the bucket) into the primary and pitch the yeast. A heretical procedure indeed, but I've never had a problem. Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 23 Jan 1998 19:00:52 -0700 (MST) From: "Joe K. Chang" <jkchang at U.Arizona.EDU> Subject: Re: alcoholism thread It's a simple question to ask yourself.... Why do you drink beer? particularly homebrew! There are two possible answers. 1. If you enjoy the taste of a good homebrew and drink because you need the bottles, then you are not an alcoholic. 2. If you drink cheap beer and drink till you get loaded, then you are an alcoholic and need some help. my point is that drink a good homebrew and enjoy it. Don't drink it till you can't tell the difference between a Coors and an I.P.A. relax man.. good beer isn't goning to kill you, but Coors will!!! The best BUD is a BUD that Brews! <><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><> Joe Chang University of Arizona jkchang at u.arizona.edu or jkchang at engr.arizona.edu <><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><> Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 23 Jan 1998 20:39:30 -0700 From: "Robert J. Waddell" <rjw at dimensional.com> Subject: Re: Dry Yeast Expired? Michael Beatty <beattymp at dscoe.com>wrote in HBD #2617: > Subject: Dry Yeast Expired? > I've collected a few packets of dry yeast over the past few years with > various kits and am now having thoughts of attempting to use them in my > next couple of batches of brew. Some packets have been refrigerated the > whole time, and some have been stored in a cabinet in my garage (temps > varying from 25F-105F). All packets were from ale or stout kits. > > Anyone have a reason why I couldn't pitch the dry yeast? I'm not so > sure that temperature would affect dry yeast, but I thought I'd get some > input from the collective. Michael, The viability of the refrigerated packets would be higher than the others, but probably quite low. If you pitch multiple packets, you may be getting different strains, which may be interesting, or disastrous. When I've had a few kit packets accumulate, I've pitched them into the last couple of minutes of the boil. The yeast cells rupture and the stored nutrients are diluted into the wort, where the starter from slants or smack packs can use them. I've even used expired bread machine yeast, at about 1 tbs. per five gallons in the boil and had fantastic starts and great final gravities. If dry yeast is all that you use, I'd still pitch the old ones into the boil and use fresh, well cared for, packets. RJW I *L*O*V*E* my [Pico] system. 'Cept for that gonging noise it makes when my wife throws it off the bed at night. Women... --Pat Babcock *** It's never too late to have a happy childhood! *** ******************************************************************** RJW at dimensional.com / Opinions expressed are usually my own but Robert J. Waddell / perhaps shared. ICQ #7136012 Owner & Brewmaster: Barchenspeider Brew-Haus Longmont, Colorado ******************************************************************** (4,592 feet higher than Jeff Renner) Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 23 Jan 1998 23:19:12 -0600 (CST) From: Richard Gardner <rgardner at papillion.ne.us> Subject: RE: Zima Thread There have been few real answers to the question asked, besides derision, so figured I'd jump in. Zima was a big topic in the HBD 4 years ago after it came out. I remember seeing the patent description, but couldn't find it with the search engine (Spencer Thomas). Also, if you have access to the Jan/Feb 95 Brewing Techniques, there is an article called "Zomething Different." Reviewing the old posts, and from memory, here's a recipe: Brew a very high gravity beer - no adjuncts/specialty grains, around 9-10% alc with no/minimal hops, yeast that has no flavor. Can't remember if this is done using a lager process, but probably it is (so don't use Chico) Filter the beer Force filter it again through a charcoal filter to remove any last vestige of taste/color.... Dilute down to 7% alcohol (I distinctly remember the dilute step) Add citric acid and lemon-lime flavor. Force carbonate. I actually believe this to be fairly accurate, and well beyond the capability of the average homebrewer. BTW, in the 93-95 archives Zima was a major topic, like several others recently that I don't dare bring up. Let us allow this one to DIE AGAIN. Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 24 Jan 1998 00:22:51 -0700 From: "John Pilhoefer" <jpilhoe1 at elp.rr.com> Subject: Re:Bad Brewpubs (Long time lurker about to speak up) My name is John Pilhoefer and I am the Brewer at Jaxon's Restaurant and Brewing Co. in El Paso, TX and I would like to comment on Eric Fouch and his number of points about a "Bad Brewpub". Eric points out that the beers he tried were very oxidized and points the finger at transfer of hot wort to fermenters to cool. Good hypothesis but most likely not. Most breweries (everyone I have known) first cool down through a heat exchanger right after the boil kettle and before the fermenters. My guess is that the finished beers are being oxidized during filtration or in the serving tank. In both cases the lines, filter or serving tank are not being adequately flushed with co2. Coming from a long homebrewing background, I like most of you, understand that an obvious problem may be very difficult to diagnose. It could stem from a bad pump seal, high iron content in their filter aid (diatomaceous earth), slow selling beer, tainted co2 from their gas distributor, loose fittings on transfer hoses, etc.. etc.. etc.. My point is please give the brewery the benefit of doubt, lets hope they realize there is a problem and that they are trying to correct it. I don't believe people are brewing beers with defects and just don't care that these problems are present. Brewing is a basic process that can become very complicated when "simple" problems arise. My last comment concerns "bland" beers. In some markets, believe it or not, it is very difficult to sell beers that are considered full flavored (hops and malt, yum). In my particular market the top selling beer is Bud Light, beers such as Sierra Navada have to hunted down, when you find them you pray that they are in decent shape. Some consumers don't want to drink great beer. In order to pay for those beautiful systems behind glass you have to sell a hell of a lot of pints, you have to sell to the average Joe on the street. I have lost uninitiated customers that tried my pale ale for their first "craft beer" and got instant "bitter face", once you lose them it is almost impossible to get them back. I am not trying to defend one breweries bad beer, but I am trying to point out that there may be more behind the story. I try to brew beers for the neophyte drinkers and I also brew beers to quench the thirst of dedicated beer lovers, me being one of them. Most pro brewers I know love great beer, but the beer they love may not be the beer that their market wants. If their beer are that bad mention it to the brewers/owners make constructive criticisms not hurtful comments, and also request that they brew an assertive beer for the true beer lover.. >About bad brewpubs: Some of my friends and I visited the Harper Brewing >Company in East Lansing last Friday night. The first thing that struck me was >that the mash and lauter tuns were in the front window. The fermenters were >pretty much on the other side of the pub- at least 20 yards away. It made an >interesting visual impact. The four of us got four different beers: An >American Wheat, a Cream Ale, a porter, and a stout. When I tasted my American >Wheat, my first reaction was to tell my homebrewing buddy to *not* get it. >Upon tasting all the brews, they varied in flavor very little. The colors >were appropriate for style, and the stout did have some roastiness to it, but >the predominant flavor in all three beers was that of OXIDATION! They all had >heavy wet cardboard flavors to them. Very little hop character, no malty >flavors, and my "wheat" beer was totally bland. >My suspicion (not knowing how brewpubs operate) is that they transfer from the >mash tun to the fermenters hot, and chill in the fermenters. They are >probably getting oxidation in the transfer lines given that they transfer so >far, probably hot, and probably don't flush the transfer lines with CO2. >Seems that would be a good source for the oxidation problems. If I could have >found the brewmaster that night, I would have straightened him out, that's for >sure! >Anyone else been there? Mr. Booth? >Anybody reading this affiliated? >Need some recipe consultant work/brewery redesign? >Eric Fouch- Things would different if *I* was in charge! >Bent Dick YoctoBrewery >Kentwood, MI >efouch at steel Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 24 Jan 1998 20:12:26 -0800 From: peter ryan <tilook at amaze.net.au> Subject: Coolroom in new brewery. G'day fellow HBDer's from Down Under, I have an exciting time in front of me.Permission has been granted by SHE WHO MUST BE OBEYED to build a new Brewery in the old house that we have recently bought and are currently renovating.SHEwmbo feels that it is imperative that my hobby must be contained to a an area that does not infringe into her territory so the Local Authority has granted approval for a 13 x 13 foot Brewery.I want to build a coolroom to ferment my largers and ales at temperatures that are suitable rather than the completely unsuitable tempertures here in Sydney at the moment that will continue till at least april/may/(25>35d C. approx 75>95d F>) I need some help on how to technolige a cheap cool room of approx 3.5 feet wide by 12feet long by 8feet high.The insulation and building is not a problem but do any HBDer's have any ideas on how a couple of dismanted old frig's will work if I leave the freezers at each end of the coolroom high up with motors and evapouraters outside thhe coolroom above the ceiling.ANY HELP is gratefully accepted and private email is OK.Thanks Pals, Peter Ryan. BREWER ORDINAIRE.Sydney Australia Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 24 Jan 1998 06:04:25 -0700 From: "Carl Shipman" <cshipman at dakotacom.net> Subject: Altitude correction for IBU calculations I winter at 3000 feet and summer at 8000 feet (being retired). I am making a spreadsheet to record brewing data and do some calculations using IBU equations from Ray Daniels' book Designing Great Beers*. The book suggests correcting for boiling temp at altitude but doesn't seem to go further. I can calculate or measure boil temp with my wife's jelly-making thermometer, but don't know how to make the correction. Anybody have data that I could put in a lookup table, or a formula? Thanks Carl Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 24 Jan 1998 08:45:38 EST From: TPuskar <TPuskar at aol.com> Subject: small (8 oz) bottles I'm looking to make a barley wine and would like to bottle it in small (8 or 9 oz) bottles. We used to call them Pony bottles or nips. The only ones I can find are screw off and don't want to risk my batch in these. Does anyone know of a source for these nips? Post or email is fine. Thanks Tom Puskar Return to table of contents
[Prev HBD] [Index] [Next HBD] [Back]
HTML-ized on 01/27/98, by HBD2HTML version 1.2 by K.F.L.
webmaster at hbd.org, KFL, 10/9/96