HOMEBREW Digest #2689 Thu 16 April 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

  Getting VERY frustrated . . . Please help! (salvator)
  Sanitation problems & Iodophor questions ("Hans E. Hansen")
  Accurate temperature measurement (Ian Smith)
  beta-glucans ("Ray Estrella")
  4th Annual Boneyard Brew-Off, June 13, Champaign IL ("Joel Plutchak")
  2nd Annual St. Vrain Spring Runoff ("Robert J. Waddell")
  RE:  CO2 - A Hazard?  No (Long) (Richard Gardner)
  Kolsch Article ("Capt. Marc Battreall")
  In defense of BT ("Dave Draper")
  malting own grains (Jon Sandlin)
  plum wine (Jon Sandlin)
  Buffalo Brewpubs (Roger Whyman)
  Judge Digest (Jeremy Bergsman)
  Green eggs and Spam (Charles Hudak)
  Re: Sparging Temps And Big Brew Day (Tony Barnsley)
  CO2 ("Ray Estrella")
  Help! I've fallen and I can't get up! (Some Guy)
  .08 Legislation/HBD2 (Doug Geiss)
  Acid level for Berliner Weisse? (Ted Major)
  Sankey Kegs (Tim.Watkins)
  Courteous behaviour/CO2/Grolsch (EFOUCH)
  Right name, wrong person! (Kenneth Sullivan)
  Breast feeding and beer ("David R. Burley")
  IGLOO v. GOTT ("Raymond Johnson")

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 hbd.org 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: Tue, 14 Apr 1998 15:39:28 +0000 From: salvator at future.dreamscape.com Subject: Getting VERY frustrated . . . Please help! To all: Apologies for the length but I have GOT to solve this problem. Please stick with me. I've been brewing all grain batches for almost 2 years and I'm still not at all satisfied with the results. Every batch (10 total) except 2 that were wheat beers (the rest have been pale ales and a couple of porters) have had a rather prominent harshness. The 2 wheat batches actually came out pretty good albeit a little thin. All along I have suspected a water/pH problem as I'd been using water from a nearby spring. This water left behind a very significant amount of residue when I accidentally boiled a quart dry when making some tea. So I deceided to by a carbon filter for my tap water supply and used that for the first time in my latest batch. And unfortunaltly had the same results!! -:( Even though the numbers seemed to indicate all was OK. From all I've read the symptoms seem to point to a water/pH problem - or at least I have convince myself as such! Here are some specifics: The recipe: 9# English 2-row pale malt 1/2# med crystal malt 1/4# special B 1 oz Chinook (12.5%) 60 min 1/4 oz Tettenang 20min 1/4 oz Fuggles 10 min 1/2 oz Cascade knock out 1056 Wyeast 1 pint starter Single temp infusion mash at 154F Strike temp 168F O.G. 1.050 The setup/equipment: Maltmill grain mill 8 gal enamel pot w/easymasher 8 gal enamel boiling pot Hanna Inst. Checker pH meter Tap water specs: pH 9.2 from tap 9.6 from filter Ca 6.4 MG/L Mg 0.73 MG/L Na 4.2 MG/L So 9.5 MG/L Alkanlinity MG/L as Calcium Carbonate = 25 Total Hardness MG/L as Calcium Carbonate = 19 Calcium Hardness MG/L as Calcium Carbonate = 16 Mag Hardness MG/L as Calcium Carbonate = 3 Whew! The water looks to be pretty neutral to me. The mash (1qt/lb) measured pH=5.26 (cooled) after 10 min. and 5.21 after 30min. I made no adjustments to the mash. I added 5 drops of lactic acid to 3 gals of sparge water and brought the pH from 9.2 to 7.0. I was affraid to add any more at the risk of creating off flavors. Go figure! Prior to boiling I added a gal of filtered water. I had NO break during the boil -this has been the case with ALL batches as I recall - all that was left was some hop residue at the bottom of the boiling pot prior to dumping it into the fermenter. At which point I topped off to 5.25 gals with some distilled water. I now have the EXACT same harshness! Arrggggg! Am I missing something or concentrating too much on the water supply? As far as I can tell everything else, the grain crush, OG/FG, fermentation process/temp all seem to be fine. The wort prior to fermentation tasted sweet with a bitter finish - I guess what I would expect. Can anyone offer any suggestions as to where my problem/s may lie? Remember I didn't perceive the same harshness from the 2 wheat batches - but they were less hopped. The frustration level is running very high - if I can't solve this real soon there'll be some equipment for sale. Thanks in advance for any help. Carm Salvatore Frustrated Brewer in Central NY Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 1998 12:54:20 -0700 From: "Hans E. Hansen" <hansh at teleport.com> Subject: Sanitation problems & Iodophor questions I think that my latest batch may be infected. It is a pale ale that has developed a little bit of a sour flavor. The only deviation from the norm is the use of Danstar Manchester yeast - which, unless someone says otherwise, is probably not the problem. My biggest question involves the rinsing of Iodophor. It says 'no-rinse', but I think this assumes the article will be left to dry. What if the item is still wet with the solution? Should it be rinsed? Will residual droplets (such as in hoses, etc.) harm the yeast? I have been rinsing with tap water up to this point. (FWIW, my water is extremely soft municiple water from a mountain stream, with minimal chlorine (gaseous) addition.) How do others handle hoses, spoons, etc. that must come into contact with post-boiled wort? Also, some items get stained with the Iodophor. Clear hoses take on a brown tint after soaking. This tint goes away with extended rinsing, but I may be re-contaminating the hose doing this. Help! Hans E. Hansen hansh at teleport.com Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 1998 13:49:57 -0700 From: Ian Smith <isrs at cmed.com> Subject: Accurate temperature measurement I wondered if anyone out there could help me with a temperature measuring (accuracy) problem I have. I have a number of 100 Ohm (0.385 coefficient) 3 wire platinum RTD's. I also purchased a PC card with 8 digital inputs, 8 digital outputs and 8 analog (12 bit) inputs. I also purchased a temperature transmitter from Omega - what a load of cr..... It is supposed to be accurate to 0.1% FS but it is not anywhere near this. If I set the zero and span pots. (0 F = 4.000 mA and 200 F = 20.000 mA) and then so much as bump the device the settings are lost. In addition I have been checking the device against a precision resistance and it never gives me the same reading twice! Even if I get it to work properly by removing the pots. I will still have to convert the 4-20 mA output current to a voltage (250 Ohm resistor) so that the PC card can read it. Does anyone out there have a simple circuit (such as an Op. Amp etc.) that does not even have a pot. in the circuit at all or one that wasn't so sensitive to mechanical vibrations or ambient temperature changes. It would also be nice to be able to subtract the 3 rd sense wire from the RTD but this may not be necessary if I calibrate at say 0 deg C (100.00 Ohm) and 100 C (138.50 Ohm). I realize that I can use the LM34 but I was hoping to use the RTD since it is already nicely packaged in a stainless steel probe. Thanks in advance Ian Smith Isrs at cmed.com (303) 530-2626 (303) 530-2866 (fax) Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 1998 15:30:30 -0500 From: "Ray Estrella" <ray-estrella at email.msn.com> Subject: beta-glucans Hello to all, Stephen Cavan talks about beta-glucan rests, >Al Korzonas mentioned yesterday that the kilning temperature of Pale Ale >malt denatures this particular enzyme. This is true. If you want a malt >that can do an effective beta-glucan rest, you'll need to use "Stout" >malt. This type of malt is kilned between 45C and 50C until break, then >raised to 85C. The retention of this enzyme is important when the grist >may contain up to 20% barley (flaked or roasted), and is the standard malt >for Guinness and others Stout brewers. Since the Digest seems to be slow right now I will use up a bit of space on this subject. The following is from New Brewing Lager Beer, "In intermediate stages of cell-wall solubilization, the release of beta-glucan inhibits lautering and filtering and causes hazes. One consequence of forced malting is insufficient hydrolysis of beta-glucans to glucose by beta- glucnase enzymes, which are denatured above 140 degrees F and do not usually survive kilning. High wort viscosity indicates excessive beta-glucans in the malt. With reasonably well converted malt, manageable amounts of beta-glucans may be liberated from hemicellulose by proteolytic enzymes during a 95 to 133 F mash rest and contribute to a beer's fermentability, body, and foam head." I believe that Dr. Fix recommends a 104F beta-glucan rest. I am not a fan of the low temp rest. I feel that you are setting your mash up for acid production to rest that low, and can experience flavor problems later as a result. I very rarely use protein rests either. I met a gentleman who is the US Accounts manager of SAF-ISIS, a company that produces yeast, yeast derivatives, and enzymes. After sharing my thoughts on beta-glucan rests he asked me if I would like to try a commercial product that they produce for the food industry. (Brewery,fruit and vegetable juice, starch production, sugar, and distillery industries.) He wanted to know if I thought there was an application for their product in the homebrew market, and how it might be received. He sent me a large sample of the product, and a bunch of information. It is called SAFIZYM PTN-L, it is "an enzymatic complex that displays strengthened Xylanase activities. (Endoglucanases, cellbiohydrolases, and b-glucosidases) It is especially suited for the hydrolysis of the hemicellulosic and cellulosic fractions" In their specifications they come up with 12000 B-glucanase Units/ml. "The B-glucanase unit is described as the amount of enzyme that releases one micromole of reducing function per minute as glucose equivalent, with barley B-glucan as substrate" (Quoted items are from material they sent me) The recommended usage is 500 grams per ton of malt, or .25 gm/lb... >From charts they sent, I read that pH and temperature affect on the Glucanase activities are as follows. 96% active at pH5. 90% active at 68 degrees C, the limit of its range. As I only brew during the winter months, I only got to use it a few times. To test it I did single infusion mashes at 153F. Extraction rates seem to be higher, but until I can do side by side comparisons I can not be sure. Since the reduction of beta-glucans is supposed to make it easier to lauter, I did not use my normal 165f mash-out. All three lauterd fine, with my last batch, a barlywine, clarifying quicker than any batch this year. I am going to see if some of our club members would be interested in using it, and helping me get more usable information. I will be using it myself again when I fire up the brewery in October. I will follow up with information as available. Ray Estrella Cottage Grove MN ray-estrella at msn.com ****** Never Relax, Constantly Worry....have a better Homebrew ****** Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 1998 16:00:46 -0500 From: "Joel Plutchak" <joel at bolt.atmos.uiuc.edu> Subject: 4th Annual Boneyard Brew-Off, June 13, Champaign IL Brewers, start your kettles! Judges, mark your calendars! The 4th Annual Boneyard Brew-Off will be held on June 13, organized by the Boneyard Union of Zymurgical Zealots, Champaign Illinois. Entries will be accepted May 30 through June 10 in all BJCP beer and mead categories (sorry, no cider). We are also continuing our tradition of a No One Gets Out Alive High-gravity category, with a hedonic judging of any beer or mead with a starting gravity over 1.070. Full details, forms, etc., are available on the World Wide Web at <http://starfire.ne.uiuc.edu/buzz/contest4.html>. To receive a hard copy of the materials, send us your mailing address. Contacts: Competition Organizer: Alan Mead <adm at ipat.com> Judge Director: Troy Jesse <tjesse at students.uiuc.edu> B.U.Z.Z. President: Joel Plutchak <plutchak at uiuc.edu> Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 1998 17:47:07 -0600 From: "Robert J. Waddell" <rjw at dimensional.com> Subject: 2nd Annual St. Vrain Spring Runoff Greetings from Longmont, CO. The Tribe homebrew club is sponsoring the Second Annual St. Vrain Spring Runoff Homebrew Competition. Please pass this note on to your club or whomever may have interest: This is an AHA sanctioned competition featuring all AHA categories and subcategories. Standard 50 point score sheets and AHA methods will be used by judges, and written results will be made available to entrants. Eligibility: The 2nd Annual St. Vrain Spring Runoff is open to homebrewers age 21 or older. All entries should be hand-crafted products, containing ingredients available to the general public, and made using private equipment by hobbyist brewers (i.e. no use of commercial facilities or Brew On Premises operations, supplies, etc.!). Where To Enter: Entries can be shipped, postage paid, by common carrier to, or may be delivered in person to the following. Entries are to arrive between April 27th and May 6th, 1998. Entry Fees: An entry fee of $5 per entry will be collected on all entries. Attach it to the Entry and Recipe form. Enclose a self addressed stamped envelope with each entry submitted to insure receiving a copy of the judging results of your entry. Bottles: An entry shall consist of two bottles, 10 - 22 ounce, clean of all paper or printed or enameled labels, label adhesive, misc. debris, or any other distinguishing features. Clear glass, wire swing-top (Grlsh) type, corked, and oversized (22 oz, champagne) are acceptable. No entry will be turned away because of the bottle. Ship to: The Overland Stage Stop Brewery 526 Main St. Longmont, CO 80501 (303) 772-3734 Drop Off Points: Homebrew Hut 555 Hwy. 287 Unit I Broomfield, CO 80020 (303) 460-1776 Odells 800 E. Lincoln Ave. Fort Collins, CO 80524 (970) 498-9070 Namaqua Brewing Co. 437 N. Garfield Ave. Loveland, CO 80537 (970) 635-9288 What's Brewing 2886 Bluff Street Boulder, CO 80301 (303) 444-9433 Highlander Homebrew 151 W. Mineral Ave. Littleton, CO 80120 (303) 794-3923 Beer at Home 3157 S. Broadway Englewood, CO 80110 (303) 789-3676 Tribe Contacts: Don Blake: (303) 772-2307 (dblake at ortechnology.com); Terri Mertens: (303) 651-7229; Misha Hasan: (303) 604-0282; Tribe Website: http://www.geocities.com/NapaValley/4003/ I will E-Mail all rules & particulars to any querys. Entry forms and bottle labels are available at www.beertown.org Good Brewing, 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: Tue, 14 Apr 1998 20:06:52 -0500 (CDT) From: Richard Gardner <rgardner at papillion.ne.us> Subject: RE: CO2 - A Hazard? No (Long) After seeing all the posts of the hazards of the Carbon Dioxide tank, I figure it is my turn as one with more that a passing knowledge of air chemistry and control. I have spend considerable time breathing air that was well above the normal CO2 levels (weeks). This particular issue is of concern in many industries, including mining, tanks and void spaces, submarines, compressed gas (SCUBA), spaceships, and of course, government regulators. I think it is time to look at some facts. Big picture (proof and details later): Normal air 0.03% CO2 Short term limit: 3% CO2 Long term limit 0.5% SCUBA air limit (ppm conversion) 0.6% A full 20 lb tank in a 20x20 ft sealed room, if fully discharged, would result in about 5% CO2, that would disperse throughout the room and NOT POOL, nor would there be an appreciable decrease in O2. This is NOT a toxic amount of CO2, although you'd be breathing pretty fast due to some automatic lung responses and would know something was wrong (see Brad Johnson's post in #2687 for details). The CO2 would rapidly disperse throughout the house, further lowering the concentration. ===================== Details (for those who care): >From the r.c.b thread: > OK, lets see. 400 sq ft * 8 ft ceiling = 3200 cubic feet. -->> 3200*30 > liter/cu ft = 96000 liters > > 20 lbs *1000(g/kg)/2.2 (kg/lb) ~9090.1 grams > C O 2 = 12 +2*16 = 44 grams/mol > 9090.1/44 = 206.6 mols. ---->>206.6 * 22.4 l/mol = 4628 liters > > So the maximum concentration would be about 5%. CO2. (OK, the actual cu ft to liter conversion is 28.3, but this is rough math, and worst case too with a full 20 # cylinder in a sealed room) So, that begs the question about 5% CO2 - is it safe? Normal CO2 is less than 1% (.03%, to be precise per CRC Handbook). >From LLNL Cryogenics Safety Manual: "A concentration of 0.5% CO2 in the air will begin to stimulate a more rapid breathing rate; when 3% CO2 is present in the air, lung ventilation will double; 10% CO2 can be tolerated for only a few minutes. A condition of 10% CO2 and 90% normal air actually has an oxygen concentration of 18.9%. This degree of oxygen deficiency would not be considered immediately dangerous to life or health if the contaminant gas was N2, He, or Ar instead of CO2. Obviously it is important to measure the CO2 concentration, especially if it is suspected that this gas may be present at levels greater than 0.5%." Similarly, from the American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH) come the following Threshold Limit Values (limits): TWA (Time Weighted Averages) - i.e., exposure over an 8-hour shift - 0.5% - or long-term exposure. STEL (Short Term Exposure Limits) - 3%, where STEL is the maximum amount to which a worker can be exposed in a fifteen-minute period without adverse effects. These same limits are used by the Safety Standards for Underground Coal Mine Ventilation of the USDOL Mine Safety & Health Administration (30 CFR Part 75 for the lawyers out there), and of course OSHA has to be different and use ppm instead, but at similar levels. However, you should also remember that these limits have a fudge factor built in to ensure you don't get to a deadly level. These folks have am O2 limit of at least 19.5% (21% normal), while we have from other posts that you are OK down to 16% (or maybe as low as 12%). However, prolonged exposure at above normal levels does have some side effects. Your endurance goes way down and you get a killer headache. It really impairs your immune system, and cuts take along time to heal (sorry, don't have any references handy on this, but lots of experience). However, CO2 does not pool like Freon will (displacing the air = suffocation), so in this case in your average house it will rapidly disperse throughout the house, lowering the concentration. From some related private correspondence I've had on this: >Thanks for taking the time to answer my question. Would it really disperse >throughout the house quickly enough? I thought CO2 was heavier than air. At >least that`s what the people who use CO2 to purge their fermenters and kegs >seem to say on the newsgroup. If so, they don't understand the fluid dynamics of it. Molecular weights: CO2 = 12+16(2) = 44 O2 = 16(2) = 32 N2 = 14(2) = 28 Freon = 112-130 (depending on type) Do you expect the N2 and O2 to separate? No. As you can see CO2 isn't all that much different (44 vs about 29 avg between N2 (79%) and O2 (20%)). Yes, there may be a bit of separation initially, but not much. As far as how fast it will diffuse, it depends on the ventilation in the house. Now, putting it into a carboy/keg works if you seal it or only wait a short time. In fact, given the turbulence of the CO2 going into the carboy, what you are doing is a simple dilution, rather than a "drain and fill" reduction. There is no way that the CO2 is not mixing with the air already in the carboy! Now, there may be a little efficiency due to the velocity and momentum of the CO2 going in - maybe ending up on the bottom and pushing out the regular air out the top - but I wouldn't count on this at all. That would be one tremendous fluid dynamics problem to figure out. The diffusion of the CO2 back out will take some time due to the narrow neck of the carboy. However, it doesn't take very long to make the contents of the keg/carboy mostly CO2. for example, with my regulator at 30 psig (vs 1 ATM at 14.7 psia) if I fill a keg, the contents are now 2/3 CO2 and 1/3 air, I then vent and this ratio stays the same. (This example takes the total absolute pressure up to 45 psia = 14.7 + 30 --- psig = pounds per square inch gage - that is, above atmospheric). Back to the house problem, assuming 5% is right for a room, think about how rapidly a little smoke diffuses throughout the house when you burn something on the stove. Enough said on diffusion. And unless you house is very tightly sealed, you probably won't get the buildup of CO2 in the tissues to give the headache. As far as CO2 detectors, I don't know of any "household" automatic detectors. MSA (Mine Safety Apparatus) makes a portable detector, and the are always Draeger tubes from Germany, but CO2 is not the hazard that Carbon monoxide is. Most of my experience has used spectrophotometry or ion separation, the cost of which is beyond most of our incomes. Bottom Line: even if you have an explosive decompression of the bottle - where I'd worry more about the projectile - and if it all went into one room rapidly and stayed there, you're not killing off the family. Carbon Monoxide is a totally different story. Disclaimer: If you bottle is in a very small totally sealed space you could have a problem when you opened the seal. Brad Johnson wrote in #2687 (with a good description of CO2 in the human body) >You could replicate the experience to a small degree by taking a full breath from an actively >fermenting carboy - but I wouldn't recommend it. Guess its time to get off my soap box and snort another air lock. (Actually, it isn't very pleasant). Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 1998 22:30:04 -0400 From: "Capt. Marc Battreall" <batman at terranova.net> Subject: Kolsch Article Hello All, Haven't been following this thread real closely but it seems like the folks at Brewing Techniques are taking yet another bashing for this article about German Kolsch. Yes, I too subscribe to, and anxiously await every issue of BT, along with just about every other brewing magazine. Judging from what I read in the article, it inspired me enough to run out and buy and gather all the ingredients necessary to brew this beer and see what happens. I personally found out enough about the beer and it's background to give it a whirl. I mean c'mon, the magazine is called Brewing Techniques, not "The Entire Background/Procedure/Theory Of Every Possible Beer You Could Dream Of Making At Home Without Having To Go Out And Buy The Real Thing Journal"!!!! Bottom Line..............If you don't like the contents of a particular magazine or book, either stop subscribing, or write your own in rebuttal if you think you can. It's a free country you know! I personally thought it was a pretty good piece of literature. Especially now knowing the circumstances now as there are as explained by Deb Jolda in her recent post. - -- Captain Marc Battreall Islamorada, Florida Future site of "The BackCountry Brewhouse" Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 1998 21:34:44 -6 From: "Dave Draper" <ddraper at utdallas.edu> Subject: In defense of BT Dear Friends, I had meant to do this sooner, but real life has a way of intruding. Deb Jolda's post in HBD #2687 reminds me to do so now. I have written for Brewing Techniques just once, but I have nothing but the very highest regard for their process. The BT team, from Stephen Mallery to all the rest, are one hell of a class act. I deal with publishing in scientific journals, and the BT folks are every bit as professional and competent, and in some aspects moreso. They are helpful, communicative, and responsive to authors' concerns, and they keep on being interested in the subjects long after the ink dries. I think one of Deb's points is especially relevant: we all have been spoiled by their consistently high quality, so that our expectations are raised. Life is full of compromises, so that if they have to cut a corner or two once in awhile, we still all benefit from the very high quality they routinely deliver. So I think it's a little premature to warn about the BT sky falling just yet. No disclaimers offered; I got my subscription to BT in lieu of payment for my writing so I guess I have a bias. You'll have to sue me. Cheers, Dave in Dallas - --- ***************************************************************************** Dave Draper, Dept Geosciences, U. Texas at Dallas, Richardson TX 75083 ddraper at utdallas.edu (commercial email unwelcome) WWW: hbd.org/~ddraper Beer page: http://hbd.org/~ddraper/beer.html I am speaking from a materials perspective... ---John Palmer Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 1998 19:55:43 -0700 (PDT) From: Jon Sandlin <sandlinj at ucs.orst.edu> Subject: malting own grains I am curious about malting my own grains for brewing. Can anybody help me out? I don't know much at all about the process, but I think that it would be rewarding to "malt my own". Can any barley be used? Private e-mail is fine. Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 1998 19:58:42 -0700 (PDT) From: Jon Sandlin <sandlinj at ucs.orst.edu> Subject: plum wine I just tried my first plum wine at a new Japanese restaurant in town. I loved it! I want to learn how to make some for myself. Does anybody know of some good recipes? Do I need a press? Private e-mail is fine. Jon Sandlin Corvallis, OR sandlinj at ucs.orst.edu Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 1998 21:38:19 -0600 From: Roger Whyman <rwhyman at milehigh.net> Subject: Buffalo Brewpubs Greetings, I will be in Buffalo, NY on May 3rd thru the 7th and would like to know about the "don't miss" Brewpubs. Private e-mails are fine. Thanks in advance. Roger Whyman Englewood,CO Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 1998 21:19:35 -0700 From: Jeremy Bergsman <jeremybb at stanford.edu> Subject: Judge Digest Anyone know anything about the life or death of the judge digest? It was in full swing on April 6, and now nothing. synchro.com shows no IP address anymore. - -- Jeremy Bergsman jeremybb at leland.stanford.edu http://www-leland.stanford.edu/~jeremybb Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 1998 23:39:58 -0700 From: Charles Hudak <cwhudak at gemini.adnc.com> Subject: Green eggs and Spam Joe writes: >Ken also writes: > Comeon guys, are you asleep at the wheel? What the hell is >> the deal with >> this spam crap making it past the janitors? Hope this won't >> be a trend. > >Lighten up Ken. I have been reading hbd for some time now and have seen very >little spam. I think that the janitors are doing a helluva good job for what >must be a fairly thankless job. Keep up the good work, guys!! > Actually, that was me, not Ken--I'd hate for Ken to take the heat for this one. FWIW, I think that the janitors usually do a great job. Maybe I've (we've) been spoiled by the lack of this kind of garbage making it onto the digest so I really noticed it when it showed up. I must admit, I must be a little naive about the "man behing the curtain" since I was under the impression that these guys actually compiled the digest manually. I've had my share of posts come back, rejected, with terse comments which suggested to me that the digest was being moderated and edited, not magically generated via software. Live with SPAM? Not willingly. That's why I rarely browse the usenet anymore (rec.crafts.brewing) because of all the chaff that you have to sort through to find anything of interest. Forgive me if I show some concern over something which could affect the pristine condition of our beloved digest. For those that would insinuate that I put my money where my mouth is, I'd gladly help run the digest if necessary. I think that I'm a little far from the server though ;0 Getting back to beer.... C- Charles Hudak in San Diego, California (Living large in Ocean Beach!!) cwhudak at adnc.com ICQ# 4253902 "If God had intended for us to drink beer, he would have given us stomachs." - --David Daye Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 1998 09:52:26 +0100 From: Tony Barnsley <Tony.Barnsley at riva-group.com> Subject: Re: Sparging Temps And Big Brew Day Paul in Vermont Asked in #2688 2) Why is 170F better for sparging than lower temperatures (say 160F or 150F)? I understand about higher temperatures & starch. The theory goes that 170F allow for better liquefaction of the malt sugars and so easier run off / higher extraction. I haven't noticed this effect myself but tend to have water at least as hot as mash temp, so the effect, may or may not, depending on your set up, be apparent. For a first all grainer you had an easy time of it! Big Brew Day! What a brilliant idea, Good luck to all the brewers who will be participating. Having looked at the starting times, I think that there is no way I will be able to join Taking EST and adding 5 Hours makes for a start time of 7PM allowing 6 hours for the brewing and another hour for clean up thats 2Am in the morning. Sorry guy's you're on your own this time. I'll be with you in spirit! Wassail Tony (Blackpool, Lancashire, UK) Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 1998 04:42:49 -0500 From: "Ray Estrella" <ray-estrella at email.msn.com> Subject: CO2 Hello to all, About the CO2 thread, it amazes, and amuses me the way that a post can take on a life of it's own, and this is a case in point. This got started because Al K. replied to a post about CO2 cylinders, and warned that the highest percentage of brewing fatalities are caused by CO2. That is death for brewers, as in professionals. Not homebrewers. And they usually die while cleaning out the giant fermenters, without having properly flushed them out with air. So if you stay out of your carboys, you should be safe. Ray Estrella Cottage Grove MN ray-estrella at msn.com ****** Never Relax, Constantly Worry....have a better Homebrew ****** Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 1998 08:51:00 -0400 (EDT) From: Some Guy <pbabcock at oeonline.com> Subject: Help! I've fallen and I can't get up! Greetings, Beerings! Take me to your lager... On CO2... Well! The perennial question of what to do about the stopper stuck in the carboy is upon us again: I popped my stopper into the carboy after siphoning via CO2 pressure. Well, you guessed it! Without thinking, I dove in after it. And, damn it, I forgot to purge the carboy with air first. Well, this CO2 kinda burns the ol' nose, sinuses and lungs a bit as I breathe it, but, if I press my mouth against the mouth of the carboy, I can get fresh air nonetheless. I have but two requests: Could someone push a broom in here so I can at least scrub the ol' boy whilst in here? And soap up the mouth of the bottle. It'll help me pop out when I'm done. This has, after all , happened before. (And watch out that the mutated Tartan plaid ale doesn't grab you on the way...) On Digesting spam... Well, I thank you all for your support. As foretold in a post - what? Last week? - the queue is to the size that moderation has become somewhat "real time". Things have - and likely will again - slipped through. For those of you, like Charles, who don't know: the Digest is moderated, but not in the traditional sense. Traditional moderation requires that each and every submission be "approved" by the moderator in order to appear in a digest. If the moderator doesn't moderate, the digest doesn't digest and there is no publication. We didn't like that. We felt that, should some pan-american cataclysm take both Karl and I out, the Digest would continue digesting and publishing until the server crapped out. In our moderation, each and every article in the queue publishes unless we intervene and cancel it. (I'm fairly sure this is all detailed on the HBD web site: hbd.org.) Hence, when the queue gets short, the chance that something will get by goes up. And thanks, Charles: we think you usually do a great job as a subscriber, too. Of course, one incident does not constitute a trend, so I'll comment no further. ;-) (The neck of this carboy really cuts off the circulation of the ol' arm. Come to think of it, the walls distort my view of the monitor, too. Hmmm. Maybe posting from within a fermenter isn't such a good idea...) See ya! Pat Babcock in SE Michigan pbabcock at oeonline.com Home Brew Digest Janitor janitor@hbd.org HBD Web Site http://hbd.org The Home Brewing Page http://oeonline.com/~pbabcock/brew.html Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 1998 09:21:40 -0400 From: Doug Geiss <dgeiss at ford.com> Subject: .08 Legislation/HBD2 I took a trip to DC over the easter holiday, and read an extensive article in the Washington Post on Monday about the .08 legislation. I don't have the article here, but I will touch on the main points: 1. The House committee that oversees the bill voted NOT to send the .08 amendment with the full highway bill. What this means is that the House's highway bill will not force states to have the uniform .08 intoxication level. (Side note: The Dems are worried about Joe Sixpack being pissed off in an election year, as well as holding up millions of dollars in highway spending if the bill gets hung up on this issue.) 2. The Senate DID include the .08 intoxication level in their legislation. According to the article, it sailed through rather easily. 3. When both highway spending authorization bills are finally passed by both the house and senate, there will be a committee established of representatives and senators to reconsile the two bills. Basically they have to fight over the differences in the two bills, and report one final bill to the house and senate to vote up or down. 4. Once the committee is formed, Homebrewers/alcohol drinkers/etc. need to contact the members appointed, and express (once again) why they feel this legislation is not good legislation. Some additional info : The supporters of the bill claim this legislation will save 500 people per year in the U.S., with statements like "Saving 500 people a year is better than NOT saving 500 people a year." True, except what is the toll on normal law abiding individuals who will fall into this expanded category of intoxication? Loss of license, loss of job, extra stress in marriages, etc. We all know the courts aren't there to rehabilitate, but rather to collect your fines, and make you take "safety" courses which in effect are hidden fines. In addition, it gives the insurance groups reason to charge you outrageous rates. ======================================================= Disclaimer: REASONS FOR POSTING NON-BREWING INFO. 1. The collective has shown interest, and wants to keep abreast of this developing story. It DOES affect us, because we are consuming alcohol. 2. Its a free country. 3. To piss off people who can't use <PAGE DOWN> ======================================================= On a separate note, I saw the post(s) about SPAM on the HBD. I won't mention the individual, but I wanted to remind all that this is really the HBD2. A few years ago, the HBD died, if only for a short duration. If it weren't for Pat and Karl donating their time and energy, and the donations ($$) of many to buy the computer systems to handle this, you'd be looking at a blank page. Hopefully Pat and Karl enjoyed their weekend with their families, and made it out to the real world to enjoy a brew in the spring sun. Isn't that what its all about?? (And Pat, be kind to your PICO!) Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 1998 08:56:06 From: Ted Major <tidmarsh at mindspring.com> Subject: Acid level for Berliner Weisse? The recent Berliner Weisse thread has me itching to brew one of my own, and while I'm intrigued by the simplicity of the traditional no-boil 4-5 hr mash, I'm still just a bit leery of inviting the Lactobcillus clan to lunch in my fermenter, so I'm thinking of a longer (overnight probably) sour mash with a 15-minute boil such as Jackson reports that Kindl uses. What I wonder is, how do I know when the mash is acidic enogh? Does anyone know what sort of acid level I should shoot for? As with mead and wine, it seems that total titrable acid would be the parameter to measure rather than pH. Tidmarsh Major tidmarsh at mindspring.com Birmingham, Alabama "Bot we must drynk as we brew, And that is bot reson." -The Wakefield Master, Second Shepherds' Play Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 98 10:02:49 EDT From: Tim.Watkins at analog.com Subject: Sankey Kegs Clint Thessen wrote in HBD 2688: " I was wondering if anybody has thought seriously about or is actually using a kegging system with sanke kegs." I use Sankey kegs, and I believe Jeff Renner also uses them. They work just fine, but are a bit more of a hassle than corney kegs. Cornies have a top that can be removed, leaving the insides wide open to sight. Therefore, they are easier to clean, and sanitize. They are also 5 gallons, which is perfect for a batch of homebrew. Sankeys are bigger. I use a 1/4 barrel (7.75 gallons) and shoot to make 6 gallon batches. The extra headspace doesn't matter, as long as it's full of CO2, and not air. To fill Sankeys, you've got two choices (that I know of). One is to completely remove the valve on the keg, and remove the tip tube assembly. Then you can fill it with cleaner, sanitizer, etc. Then, once full, you've got to replace everything. It's more difficult than it sounds, but not impossible. The other option (what I use) is to just siphon everything into the keg, through a tap. I use a plastic 'party pump' tap to do this. Just remove the pressure relief valve, and siphon through the liquid out valve. Very simple, but slow, due to the small size of the pressure relief hole. I siphon cleaning solution (B-Brite) into it, and then force it out with CO2 through my whole system, and repeat with rinse water a few times. I don't sanitize (except for the first time I use it). The keg is completely closed to the outside world, and I only use CO2 to push things out. If the first batch didn't get infected, I have a very minimal chance of infecting anything else I put in. The biggest caveat (IMHO) is that they take up way too much room in my fridge. I can fit only one 1/4 barrel in my fridge at a time (and leave the top shelf in). If I were to switch to 3 gal cornies, I could have six in there at once with the top shelf in. As soon as I can afford the cornies, I'm probably going to switch over. as always, YMMV Tim in Lowell, MA Return to table of contents
Date: 15 Apr 1998 10:29:30 -0400 From: EFOUCH at steelcase.com Subject: Courteous behaviour/CO2/Grolsch HBD- I think it's just deplorable how "Mr." Moline has blasted Mr. Gump for his simple error. Calling him a bonehead repeatedly for a simple error is not only totally innapropriate in this forum, it's just bad form. I would think a man who has been treated poorly himself would be a little gun shy of such a public display of disdain over anothers honest error. What's the matter, Rob? A little displaced aggression at Jethros expense? Trying to make yourself look better by pointing out the flaws in others? What?.....He's Who?.....He IS?!.........Never mind. Anyway, per the last HBD regarding CO2 inhalation: " From: Philip J Wilcox at CMS on 04/14/98 09:56 AM In HBD 2687 Brad Johnson writes about:"You could replicate the experience to a small degree by taking a full breath from an actively fermenting carboy - but I wouldn't recommend it." I recently experienced this effect. For all of you kegging folks out there its quite easy. Most of us when we initially tap a keg do so with a pitcher to remove all the yeast gunk in the first pint or so. Mine is also usually " -When I was a Co-op at Dow Chemical Co, my fellow Co-ops and I used to while away the hours by sticking our heads in the dry ice cabinet and trying to take a deep breath. Didn't affect ME a bit! But seriously, when reaching for that last piece of dry ice, if I perchance did try to take a breath, my lungs would lock up, not allowing any CO2 in. Moral: I don't think it matters what CO2 might do to your body in excess, your body won't let it in (or anything else) resulting in asphysxiation. On Grolsch bottles: I routinely prepare my Grolsch bottles for bottling by putting them in the dishwasher, swing tops and all, with the rubber seals intact, and run a cycle with bleach instead of dishwasher detergent. Works for me. PS- Insert smiley faces wherever you think they should go so as to offend the fewest people possible. Eric Fouch Bent Dick YoctoBrewery Kentwood, MI Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 1998 08:51:07 -0600 (MDT) From: Kenneth Sullivan <kenneth.sullivan at Central.Sun.COM> Subject: Right name, wrong person! Hi fellow brewers, Just need to correct a misunderstanding... I did ask about CO2 vs O2 concentrations and true to form a wealth of expert information spewed forth! Thank you all! I am not the individual whom accused the moderators of "being asleep at the wheel" that's a different Ken. I actually go by 'KJ' and was the inventor of "KJ's Killer Chiller" a couple of years ago. I respect and depend upon the diverse and insightful knowledge and opinions of this digest. So please don't stigmitize me by confusing me with another Ken. KJ Ken Sullivan, Kernel Support Engineer Sun MicroSystems Customer Call Center Broomfield, Colorado 80020 (303) 464-4633 kjsulli at central.sun.com Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 1998 11:04:08 -0400 From: "David R. Burley" <Dave_Burley at compuserve.com> Subject: Breast feeding and beer Brewsters: Thor comments on the use of Hefeweisen to encourage the freshening of a new mom and is afraid we might think it was a belated April Fool's joke. The Germans have known this for centuries and always encouraged beer drinking by the new Muttchen. And then there's Milk Stout ( name no longer allowed due to truth in packaging laws) from Britain reputed to be helpful to the breast feeding British Mums. I always imagined a few beers would let both new Mom and baby get a much needed sleep while getting nourished and rehydrated at the same 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: Wed, 15 Apr 1998 11:07:40 -0400 From: "Raymond Johnson" <JOHNSONR2 at state.mi.us> Subject: IGLOO v. GOTT I know this is an old subject, but I've not seen anyone say they've experienced a warped Gott cooler. I use a Gott 10-gallon.(I bought it at Builders Square), and it's warped to beat hell. I have no experience with the Igloo cooler, but if it does warp, it couldn't be worse than my Gott I've attached a copper pickup tube, and use a circular tupperware container that fits perfectly in the bottom. I used my dremmel tool to drill hundreds of holes in it for the false bottom. Warped or not, it makes great beer. Return to table of contents
[Prev HBD] [Index] [Next HBD] [Back]
HTML-ized on 04/16/98, by HBD2HTML version 1.2 by K.F.L.
webmaster at hbd.org, KFL, 10/9/96