---

	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:
  Oxidisers, ("David R. Burley")
  Re: Head Start Cultures (Ted Major)
  Burners ("Jim Busch")
  starters (Michael Lausin)
  Confusion over delta T ("Matthew J. Harper")
  repitching from the same batch? ("Bryan L. Gros")
  Beer police (Al Korzonas)
  boiling hopped extract (Al Korzonas)
  Re: stout/porter and another opinion (Spencer W Thomas)
  A pub by any other name... (Dave Sapsis)
  Stainless Conical Fermenter ("Fortes, Jim R")
  Boil Roll and Evaporation Rate (Troy Hager)
  Brinkmann Burners ("George, Marshall E.")
  Cheap Burners (Jack Stafford)


JudgeNet is under repair and will return online May 1.

BURP's Spirit of Free Beer competition is June 6-7 and entry information
is available by contacting Jay Adams (adams at burp.org).


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, 5 May 1998 08:33:59 -0400
From: "David R. Burley" <Dave_Burley at compuserve.com>
Subject: Oxidisers,

Brewsters:

AlK says:

>As for oxidation, I suspect that each alcohol has a different likelyhood

>of being oxidised

I doubt there is much difference in simple alcohols with different chain
lengths, except those in which steric hindrance comes into play. 


> (it can come from oxidised melanoidins in beer or
>even from iron in the water, Dave... surely you know free oxygen is not
>the only source of oxidation)

Right, but it is the most common one.

> and I'm not willing to presume that ethanol
>is more or less likely to be oxidised than the higher alcohols.  Is 
there
>any kind of data on this in chem books?  I know that alcohols have a
higher
>affinity to the oxygen than the melanoidins... this explains why the
>melanoidins will give up their oxygen to the alcohols to form aldehydes
>in stale beer.

Actually, I have read this here, but have never seen it in scientific
literature.  Doesn't mean it is wrong, just that it is difficult to 
explain
unless the oxidised melandoins were oxidised during the boil ( for 
example)
and then these react with alcohol after it is formed in fermentation at a

much later time.  I would like to hear a good discussion of the kinetics 
of
this reaction. Other pathways are also theoretically possible in which 
the
oxidised melandoins break down to aldehydes - a prospect I find more
likely.

>No, wait... I'm *sure* ethanol doesn't have the highest affinity for
>the oxygen... the aldehyde of ethanol is acetaldehyde, right? 


Yes and acetaldehyde is the "sherry" taste. Oxidation of ethanol produces

acetaldehyde and sherry tastes.  Oxidation of acetaldehyde produces 
acetic
acid. This can form the ester with ethyl alcohol to give ethyl acetate or

nail polish remover.

> Given that
>there is at least 100 times more ethanol in a typical beer than any 
other
>alcohol, I suspect that the existance of *any* other aldehyde indicates
>that those alcohols have a higher affinity for the oxygen.  Granted, I
>don't know what other pathways there are for the formation of 
aldehydes...
>I know that trans-2-nonenol is a significant player in stale beer.  If
>I'm not mistaken, it's the "wet cardboard" aldehyde.

Well I don't entirely agree with your logic.  Suppose all the alcohols 
were
the same potential  then you would still get these aldehydes of fusel 
oils
and other sources. It is also likely that many of these do not come
directly from alcohols, so that further disturbs the logic.  Also, we 
have
differing sensitivities to all kinds of chemicals, so what we detect with

our noses is not a representative example of the concentration in the
liquid..

I know that esters form during storage.  I recently had a sorgenkindern
(problem child) Merlot that had a funky taste that I presumed had come 
from
oxidation but the components of the aroma were not clear.  A year in the
bottle and it smells like nail polish remover, so there isn't much doubt
that esterification occurred in the bottle.
- -------------------
Alan T quotes Dr. J.R. Harrison's discussion of stout and Harrison says:

>There is no doubt about the origin of stouts. When high gravity porters
began
>to be produced in the early nineteenth century they were called 'stout
>porters'. The adjective 'stout' was carrying its old English meaning of
>'strong' [1]. Some brewers then began to drop the word porter as
unnecessary,
>leaving just stout. 


Of course, he is dead wrong on this, as one of my quotes ala Lewis
indicated that the adjective "Stout" was often applied to beers and ale 
in
the 17 century and likely before that. He is also wrong about the grist 
for
Irish Stouts.

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: Tue, 05 May 1998 08:17:31
From: Ted Major <tidmarsh at mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Head Start Cultures


>Date: Sun, 03 May 1998 22:41:46 -0500
>From: Jim Wallace <jwallace at crocker.com>
>Subject: Head Start Yeast Co... Where are you??
>
>Does anybody know the whereabouts of the Head Start Brewing Cultures...??
> .........Old address and info was.........921 Bill Smith Road
> ...Cookeville, TN  38501 
>(931) 372-8511          BAN5845 at TNTECH.EDU
>

Dr. Brian Nummer, proprietor, is now owner of the Athens Brewing Company
in Athens, Georgia, but I think he still does the Head Start cultures as
well. 
Try Athens Brewing Company
	312 E Washington St
	Athens GA 30601
	(706) 549-0027
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: Tue, 5 May 1998 10:17:56 +0000
From: "Jim Busch" <jim at victorybeer.com>
Subject: Burners

Someone mentioned using Solarflo burners.  I use one too, a 24 jet 
slotted cap burner I bought in '91.  At the time they sold direct to 
individuals, since then I have had friends denied service from them.  
I think its for liabilty reasons.  That said, for large systems I 
would advise looking at Wok burners, much cheaper than Solarflo and 
evey bit as good compared with impinged jet burners.  You can get em 
for around $50 new from restaurant supply houses.  Best for 20 gal+ 
systems.

For smaller units I also would go with the Superb.

Been interesting to read about the Big 12 brew.  I think it will be 
fun to hear what the physical data, post fermentation reveals.  
Final gravities in particular Id like to know, as O2, mashing and 
yeast variations will have large effects on the final beer.  I wonder 
if ever in the history of North America have so many gallons of 
barleywine ever been frementing at once!

Prost!

Jim Busch



Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 05 May 1998 08:41:33 -0600
From: Michael Lausin <soscc at cmn.net>
Subject: starters

greeting fellow beerlings,

i brewed the big 10/20 barly wine on saturday. i split it between 2 carboys
because of the explosive blow off i had heard about. it was a good thing
too, each carboy was 1/2 filled with foam and it was (emphasis on was)
bubbling like crazy.

it now appears that the initial ferment is over, time to add the champagne
yeast. how do i do a starter for the champagne yeast or is it better to
just pitch a pack into each carboy?

tia,
michael lausin



Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 12:53:16 -0400
From: "Matthew J. Harper" <matth at progress.com>
Subject: Confusion over delta T

I'm in the planning process for RIMS construction.  Many
thanks to the replies I received two weeks ago regarding
various questions I posted then.

My current question may be simple, but isn't just a RIMS
issue.

Most RIMS target a rate of Temperature increase of 1-1.5
Degrees a minute.  Many non-RIMS all-grain brewers who do
stepped infusion mashes do so by either heating the mashtun
or by adding a measure amount of water at a specific 
temperature to reach the target goal.  (my former method.)

I've seen conflicting information lately regarding the 
good/bad of quick temperature changes.  Basically, anything
over 1 degree or so a minute being *bad* and causing undesired
early sacharification of the mash.

This would imply that the 'add so many quarts of X temp water'
method is a *bad* thing, but it *does* work and *has* proven
to be a usable process for making good & great beer.

ObRIMS

I've been contemplating a non-standard heating chamber using an
external mounted (wrapped) heat source (tape or ceramic) that
gets wrapped around the pipe.  However, some of these beasties
have pretty high temps.  A good flow rate would help reduce the
(proposed) risk, but I dunno.  Has anyone tried this method?


Can someone *please* clear up my confusion on this?  Is a quick
immediate jump to the target temperature (by overshooting and letting
it average out..) as bad as some would say?

Why or why not?


Many thanks in advance!  This issue is holding up my brewing
and my reserves are running out... :-(

 -Matth



Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 05 May 1998 10:30:52 -0700
From: "Bryan L. Gros" <gros at bigfoot.com>
Subject: repitching from the same batch?

Has anyone ever repitched a batch from the primary to the secondary?

I have a lager which is just putting along very very slowly.  Most likely
due to low pitching rate.  
I decided to rack it to the secondary, wash the yeast left behind in the
primary, and add it back to the secondary.

The secondary fermenter is now bubbling along again, hopefully faster
than before.  I tried not to aerate it while racking.

Comments?

       - Bryan
         gros at bigfoot.com
         Oakland, CA


Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 12:59:38 -0500 (CDT)
From: Al Korzonas <korz at xnet.com>
Subject: Beer police

Dave writes:
>I have heard from time to time
>comments by BJCP types - "well that's not a real XYZ
>beer" even though the brewer called it that.  If the brewer
>is a brewpub who stated brewing last month and only read
>about beer XYZ in a homebrewer magazine, then I think the
>BJCP has the right to say something like that.  If the beer
>is a classic from the native country where the style was born
>then I think it is time for a little perspective adjustment.

Firstly, I take pride in being one of those "BJCP types" and
to the best of my knowledge, no official BJCP statement has
been issued regarding any beer being or not being representative
of a style.

Secondly, if a beer is a classic from the native country where
the style was born, you will not have any argument from us
"BJCP types" that the beer is representative of the style.
However, when British brewers create 1.035 beers and call them
"IPAs" then the brewer needs a little perspective adjustment.

You may have had a problem with one person who happened to be
in the BJCP, but besides Dennis Davision, who is the current
BJCP President, no one person speaks for the BJCP.  I've judged
with some very high-ranking BJCP judges who were jerks and
had little interest in much beyond their own ego, but a few
bad apples don't spoil the whole bunch.

As far as I can tell, all of the people in the BJCP Beer Style
Committe are level-headed and genuinely interested in making
the style guidelines as accurate and representative as possible.
I'm probably the most impulsive of the whole group, but we all
keep each other in check and I'm sure the guidelines (the first
pass of which has just gotten up to category 17, incidentally)
will be very good if not excellent.  If we goof up (and we probably
will make a few mistakes), we'll accept suggestions from anyone
(really!) who wants to make improvements to the guidelines.  I'm
afraid I'll have to vote against lowering the OG of IPAs to
1.035 if any of you have that suggestion in mind...

 ... I didn't think you did ;^).
Al.

Al Korzonas, Palos Hills, IL
korz at xnet.com
http://www.brewinfo.com/brewinfo/


Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 13:05:34 -0500 (CDT)
From: Al Korzonas <korz at xnet.com>
Subject: boiling hopped extract

John writes:
>The local homebrew shop owner
>told me that the 25-35 EBU range means you start at the lower range (25 EBU)
>and increase the longer you boil up to 35 EBU.  I always assumed that hopped
>extracts were fully isomerized and additional boiling would not increase the
>bittering--unlike boiling hops up to 60 or 90 mins. 

Perhaps he meant that as you boil off more water, the gravity *and* bitterness
would go up.  Then again, most brewers would add water back to reach 5
gallons, so that's probably not it... no, it sounds like another misguided
homebrew supply shop owner.  You're right... the hop extract they add is
already isomerised.

Al.


Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 05 May 1998 14:06:49 -0400
From: Spencer W Thomas <spencer at engin.umich.edu>
Subject: Re: stout/porter and another opinion 

I do find it interesting, however, that the Oxford English Dictionary
includes the following quotes in support of its definitions for stout
and porter (as types of beer).  In each case, the first is the
earliest known (to the editors of the OED) quote containing the word
in that meaning.

For stout:

    1677 R. Hawtrey Let., Egerton MS. 2716 We will drink your healths
	both in stoutt and best wine.  

    A. 1700 B. E. Dict. Cant. Crew, Stout, very strong, Malt-Drink. 

For porter:

    1727 Swift Further Acc. E. Curll Wks. 1755 III. i. 161 Nursed up
    on grey peas, bullocks liver, and porters ale.

Note that the earliest usage of "stout" to refer to a beer precedes
the earliest usage of "porter" by more than 25 (and maybe 50) years.
That's not to say that the "stout" of 1677 was in any way similar to
the "stout" of today.  In fact, the 1700 quote from a dictionary,
defining "Stout" as a "very strong malt drink", implies that it was
used as we might use "barley wine" today.

I think I'll sit firmly on the fence, and say:

* "Stout" preceded "Porter" as a name for a kind of ale.
* "Stout Porter" became the beer we now know as "Stout".

=Spencer in Ann Arbor, MI, USA


Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 11:21:59 -0700 
From: Dave Sapsis <DAVE_SAPSIS at fire.ca.gov>
Subject: A pub by any other name...

Good Folks,

Away to Catalonia and England, I come back, catch up on HBD, and I find
I have a magetically induced dipole boring through my head causing me to
salivate into my breathalyzer and piss in my Clinitest cup.  I think I
need to find me a chiropractor and drink a stout.  Or maybe a porter...

Here is what I do know:  The institutiion that is the Pub in the UK is
an artful creation that brings people and beer together in a unique and
highly satisfying way -- one that i have yet to fully see explored
anywhere else.  While pubs (and the beers served) span a range, when put
together like the Victoria in Bayswater (a lovely Fuller's house) or the
New Flying Horse in Wye ( A Shepard Neame Inn) you find yourself
naturally engaged  in good converation whilst drinking good real ale.
As natural a convergence as I have yet experienced.

May we all learn something from the small island.
Cheers,
- --dave in sacramento (trying to relearn to drive on the right)

David Sapsis
Fire and Fuels Specialist 
CDF Fire and Resource Assessment Program
916.227.1338       dave_sapsis at fire.ca.gov



Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 12:32:31 -0700 
From: "Fortes, Jim R" <JRF7 at pge.com>
Subject: Stainless Conical Fermenter 

Looking for a stainless conical fermenter for 20 gallon batches that I won't
have to mortgage the house for. Sabco has a 17 gallon, I think PBS has a 15
gallon, and there used to be some advertised in BT that were 10 gallon corny
kegs fitted with a cone. All ok but I would have to buy two and at their
prices I wouldn't be able to eat for a year. I might just have to stay with
four 6.5 gallon carboys fitted with Fermentaps. Even a one barrel would do
if the price was right. Any info appreciated and I'm located in the SF bay
area.

Thanks,

Jim Fortes
jrf7 at pge.com
http://www.sirius.com/~merojo/hopheads/jimbrew.html


Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 23:36:14 -0700
From: Troy Hager <thager at bsd.k12.ca.us>
Subject: Boil Roll and Evaporation Rate

HBDers,

With all this talk about burners, I have been contemplating the boil
evaporation rate that I have seen using my Cajun Cooker and a 1/2 barrel
keg as my kettle. In all of the literature I have read, the recommended
rate of evaporation is 10% of your starting volume - if you start with
10gal you should end with 9 at the end of the boil and have boiled off one.
Evaporation reduces volume, increases gravity, and reduces DMS.

Another issue is getting a "rolling" boil to facilitate hop extraction and
protein coagulation.

Fix says in Analysis of BT, "The key to successful wort boiling is to avoid
excess and to find a balance. Extracting hop constituents and removing DMS
require at least some thermal loading. We found that percent of volume
evaporation during the boil is a very useful control parameter." They state
as guidelines that "The best general recommendation is an evaporation rate
of 9-11%. In all cases, avoid evaporation rates in excess of 15%" and that
"also striking is the number of times the negative effects from (excess
evaporation) are incorrectly identified as problems in fermentation."

Well, with my setup, a moderately rolling boil will evaporate about 1 gal
per hour. I brew 5 gal batches and usually start with about 7 gal in the
kettle and at the end of the 90 min boil I am left with 5.5 gal.  1.5/7 =
21.4% evaporation rate - way over the recommended 10%

I have cut it down to a very low boil (*barely* rolling) and come up with a
rate at about 15%.

I'm sure most of you brewing 5 gal batches in converted kegs have this same
dileama. Those who brew 10 gal batches probably can come closer to the
magic 10% number because of the greater initial volume.

So, what am I to do?

1. Cut my boil to almost no roll and try to get close to 10% evaporation at
the expense of hop extraction and protein cagulation.

2. Bump the boil up to a medium roll and live with evaporation that is way
over the recommended rate.

3. Cover the kettle partially to allow a more rolling boil and to lower the
evaporation rate to 10%. BTW, isn't this essetially what the pros do? Their
kettles are partially covered with a vent tube to carry off the
evaporations, aren't they? To simmulate this design, how about something
like a wok top with a hole cut in it to allow a limited evaporation? I have
heard so much about "NEVER cover the boil!"  I personally don't see
anything wrong if you partially cover your boil and hit about 10%
evaporation rates. This would be enough to drive off the DMS - correct?

4. Or, say "screw it" and stop being so anal (although this is the home of
the anal brewer, myself included of course!).

Personal email encouraged! Thanks!!!


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




Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 15:48:10 -0500 
From: "George, Marshall E." <MGeorge at bridge.com>
Subject: Brinkmann Burners

Rick Olivo writes:

>Shopping tip for all you cheap (like me) Brewers. Menards is selling
Brinkmann 160,000 BTU burners with adjustable flame controls for $44;
they
list at $90. Menards also has 20 Lb Propane tanks on sale at $20. Burner
units are cast iron and the frame welded steel.

If this is what I'm thinking, then this is the one that I'm wanting to
buy.  However, I'm nowhere near a Menards, and the Brinkmann I found is
at Wal-Mart w/a fish frying kit.  I can live w/o the fish kit, so maybe
Menards is the way to go.  Rick, where are you located at? 

Marshall George
Edwardsville, Illinois



Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 14:20:27 -0700 (PDT)
From: Jack Stafford <stafford at newport26.fu.hac.com>
Subject: Cheap Burners

My home has an electric stove which is barely acceptable for brewing.
Last summer I spotted a propane burner w/stand in ElRosario, Baja California
for 180 pesos.  Burner is cast iron and has the name Murillos on it.  With
a high pressure regulator it kicks out alot of heat, perhaps 100K BTUs.
180 pesos is about $25 US, add another $20 US for the regulator and I'm
cookin' for less than fifty bucks.  I use my BBQ propane tank for fuel.

Jack        stafford at newport26.hac.com
Yeast of Eden Homebrewer's Club Member
Costa Mesa, CA



Return to table of contents

---