---

	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:
  More AHA (was: Whahhhhhh, Whahhhhhhhh) (Steve Jackson)
  Aw, schucks.../Challenger dry hop / Film on beer / Too much foam in sample jar ("George De Piro")
  Burned Malt (oberlbk)
  The AHA (Jim Liddil)
  SS fermentors (John Wilkinson)
  Cornies as secondaries (Sherry Heflin)
  easy keg conversion to brewpot (Ed Basgall)
  Rebuttal of Open Ferment ("Capt. Marc Battreall")
  Challenger in otherwise Columbus Barleywine (Al Korzonas)
  wisecrack ("David Kerr")
  what is best, tell me tell if you think you know (Dave Sapsis)
  De-leading Brass surfaces/AHA bashing (Al Korzonas)
  Berliner/sterols/chloride vs. chlorine (Al Korzonas)
  Alternate Bottle Filling Technique---Comments needed.. ("Peter J. Calinski")
  dry hopping - momilie? (Mark E. Lubben)
  AHA whining ("Bryan L. Gros")
  10 Gallon Rubbermaid Gott summary ("Tim Fields")


BUZZ's Buzz-Off competition is June 27-28. Information is available at
www.voicenet.com/~rpmattie/buzzoff or via R. Mattie at
rpmattie at voicenet.com. 


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: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 07:27:14 -0700 (PDT)
From: Steve Jackson <stevejackson at rocketmail.com>
Subject: More AHA (was: Whahhhhhh, Whahhhhhhhh)

In HBD #2737 (June 11, 1998), Raymond Johnson (JOHNSONR2 at state.mi.us)
writes:

>>>>>>

[snip]

My beef is with those who sling reckless comments calling for heads to 
roll, and "down with the AHA".  George states that the AOB/AHA is no 
longer providing the basic services to its membership, yet still
collecting
 dues.  Ever read Zymurgy?  Ever go to www.beertown.org?  I'll wager a 
big, fat YES on both accounts.

Guess what else cry babies.  My favorite mail-order homebrew supply
shop, 
St. Patricks of Texas, gives ALL AHA mebers 5% off ALL purchases.  I
could 
pay for my dues three-fold every year with this bonus alone--if my wife 
would let me!  And, they aren't the only supply shop to offer such 
discounts. These are just three examples of services that the AHA/AOB
has 
done for you lately.

Please understand, I know full well how frustrating it is to enter
beers 
in a poorly run competition; I simpathize with you there.  I also know 
that those in charge did not set out to ruin my life and felt worse
about 
the farse than anyone.  This doesn't mean that the next one will be run 
poorly.

When I see people bithchin' about the quality of the prizes awarde for
the 
AHC, for crying out loud, I just laugh, then I shake my head, then I
get 
pissed, then I get defensive.  I mean, come on. How childish can one be?

I guess if all you care about is how your beer does in a competition,
then 
maybe the AHA/AOB has failed YOU--this time.  Nobody said life was
fare.  
My mebership dues go a lot further than just sposoring the great
National 
Homebrew pissing Contests(punn intended). And, I will continue to
support  
the AOB/AHA.  As far as I know, nobody is forced to pay dues to the
AHA.  
Nuff said!
<<<<<<

Talk about the pot calling the kettle black. I think we can debate the
merits of the AOB/AHA or lack thereof without resorting to name
calling. Just because someone doesn't see a value in an AHA membership
doesn't make them a "cry baby."

Raymond criticizes George (and by extension, others who've leveled
similar arguments) by saying the AHA offers no value to members by
asking if he reads Zymurgy or visits the AHA's web site. I obviously
cannon answer for George. I can answer for myself: No on both counts.
It's been forever (1995 grain issue, to the best of my recollection)
that Zymurgy has offered me anything of value. I get much more from
Brewing Techniques. As for the website, I visit every few months just
to see if there's anything worthwhile there. I've yet to find anything
meeting that description.

Now, that's just my experience. If you find Zymurgy or the Beertown
site informative and useful, great. You're getting your money's worth.
For those of us who don't (and make no mistake, this is the only
benefit one gets by being a "member" of the AHA), the $33 or whatever
it costs for "dues" (more accurately, subscription fees) is a poor
value for our money.

I don't see the AHA providing anything else of value for most
homebrewers. My main gripe with the AHA is its presenting itself as a
membership organization when it is, in fact, nothing more and nothing
less than a business selling a magazine subscription and a few other
ancillary products. There's nothing wrong with being a business. I'm
all for free enterprise. Just don't try to present yourself as
something different. In my experience, I have not seen the AHA do
anything to further the homebrewing hobby. One example: Here in
Indiana, our local club has spearheaded an effort to loosen the
state's laws pertaining to homebrewing to make it legal to take the
beer out of your home (technically, removing homebrewed beer from the
premises is verbotten) and for brewpubs etc. to host homebrewing club
meetings. The help we've gotten from the AHA is minimal at best.

(Incidentally, the discount given by St. Pat's or any other retailer
to AHA members is something the individual shop decides to do because
its owner wants to do so -- the AHA did not get you that discount.)

I think what all this argument points to is that we all desire an
organization that stands as a strong advocate for homebrewing and
offers a wide array of services to the homebrewing community. Some
people think such an organization already exists in the AHA. For those
people who are satisfied with the job the AHA is doing, great. But
there are an awful lot of people who do not think the AHA is doing a
good enough job. For any organization, that spells trouble, no matter
how good a job it may be, in fact, doing. If a significant portion of
your constituency (or, more appropriately in this case, customer base)
thinks you are failing, than you are failing, regardless of how good a
job you think you are doing.


 -Steve in Indianapolis
 
_________________________________________________________
DO YOU YAHOO!?
Get your free  at yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com



Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 11 Jun 98 10:32:09 PDT
From: "George De Piro" <gdepiro at fcc.net>
Subject: Aw, schucks.../Challenger dry hop / Film on beer / Too much foam in sample jar

Hi all,

Thanks to all, and especially George Fix, for the congrats about my
success at the Spirit of Free Beer.  Just so people don't think the world
 has
gone completely topsy-turvey, it was my Bavarian-style Weizen that won 

BoS.  The IPA took first in its category, but didn't place in the BoS
round.

I was unable to attend the SoFB due to a rather annoying (but not
serious) illness (which is also why I've been posting so prolificly this 
week),
so it was really nice to get such good news.
- ----------------------------------------------------------------------
Dave J. asks about using Challenger as a dry hop.  Oddly enough, one of 

the IPA's I entered into SoFB used exactly that hop for that purpose.  

It was not the one that placed, though.  I don't think it's a bad beer, 

but it isn't as good as the version that was hopped with Fuggles.  Or was
 it American-grown Tettnanger?  Of course, the yeast was different, too, 

so it's not a terribly great experiment.

A local pub brewer that I know loves using Challenger as a dry hop.  Give
 it a shot.  Be courageous, fortune favors the bold!
- ----------------------------------------------------------------------
Andrew is fretting over a film in his fermenter.  He is hoping to find 

out what it is before he tastes it.

Unless you have a pretty well-equiped micro lab, that ain't gonna happen.
Go ahead and sample it.  If it tastes OK to you, package it!  If it
doesn't taste good, note the flavor characterisitcs and report back (or
compare to the side bar in a recent Louis Bonham "Brewing Techniques"
article about the characterisitcs of different contaminating organisms).

Note that Andrew used slow cooling, and seems to have a
less-than-biologically stable beer.  Decide for yourselves how you think
you should cool your wort...
- ----------------------------------------------------------------------
Hans is irritated by the excessive foam in his hydrometer sample jar, and
 is wondering how he can get rid of it so that he can read the gravity!

Simple and pleasant is the solution:  fill the jar to the brim, and sip 

off the foam!  Works for me every time.  You also get a quick taste of 

the beer that way.

By the way, Hubert's post about decocting was quite good.  I never
thought about why most (all?) of the American homebrew books ignore
what the German's call "late saccharification."  I think Hubert may have
hit it on the head:  after a traditional 3 hour triple decoction rest, 
the
enzymes are pretty spent, so you don't want to introduce starch at >160F 

(71C).  With a shorter mash, this shouldn't be a problem.  This may have
been missed by many authors.

Have fun!

George de Piro  (not quite as dizzy today in an overcast Nyack, NY)


Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 10:45:11 -0400
From: oberlbk at NU.COM
Subject: Burned Malt


Thanks to all of those who have sent me a message on how to get the burned
malt off the bottom of my pot.  For those that were wondering, most people
recommended using oven cleaner.  It is currently soaking in oven cleaner as
I write this.

Brent Oberlin
East Hampton, CT




Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 08:06:08 +0000
From: Jim Liddil <jliddil at azcc.arizona.edu>
Subject: The AHA

>------------------------------
>
>From: "Raymond Johnson" <JOHNSONR2 at state.mi.us>
>Subject: Whahhhhhh, Whahhhhhhhh
>
>Whah, whah.
>
>Ok, let me see if I've got this straight.  My comments have put George De 
>Piro "over the edge"?  I think George was itchin' to get into the mix 
>anyway, or perhaps George's wounds are still a too fresh.  Either way, I 
>think I've brought out the beast in him, and probably done him a favor.  
>It's good to vent George--isn't it?  Sinse we've named names... 
>My beef is with those who sling reckless comments calling for heads to 
>roll, and "down with the AHA".  George states that the AOB/AHA is no 
>longer providing the basic services to its membership, yet still collecting
> dues.  Ever read Zymurgy?  Ever go to www.beertown.org?  I'll wager a 
>big, fat YES on both accounts.


First I suggest you check the archives of the HBD and r.c.b. and look at
the concerns raised and how the AHA/AOB ahs addressed them.  FWIW The HBD
and The Brewery have web pages.  What do we pay for them???
>
Look at some of these links and what became of them:


http://WWW.AOB.org/AHA/newahapr.htm
http://WWW.AOB.org/AHA/hbsc.htm

What about Techtalk the "members-only homebrewing
 e-mail forum dedicated to technical talk on beer and
 nothing else. Watch for special industry guest stars on
 this "all beer, all the time" moderated forum!"

What guest stars?  The HBD is more informative IMHO

 -AN EXPANDED BOARD OF ADVISERS with an expanded role -
more input and more direct involvement with programs. 

Really?

 -A NEW AOB BOARD OF DIRECTORS LIAISON giving AHA
members a direct link to the AOB governing board.

Who is this person?

The AHA Financials are still from 1995.  Apparently the financial audit of
the AOB has taken months.  any accountants want to speculate why that is?

The AHA has been running the Nationals for years and you mgith think that
they had the bugs worked out. The judges are volunteers and are likely
going ot be asked to judge the unjudged beers at a less the ideal hour.
And  Brain REzac may be on vacaction, but so what? Is the the only voice of
the AHA/AOB?  Doesn't the AHA have an interem director?  Are all the people
talking about lack of communication from the AHA lying?   Again the AOB on
their tax statement list as thier PRIMARY purpose "the promotion of
homebrewing". Not other brewing, HOMEBREWING.

Jim  
 



Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 11 Jun 98 10:21:16 CDT
From: jwilkins at wss.dsccc.com (John Wilkinson)
Subject: SS fermentors

There has been discussion in HBD recently of stainless steel
fermentors.  One option is to use 10 gallon Cornelius type kegs.  I
have used one quite a while and find it quite satisfactory.  Mine has a
removable pressure relief valve which I remove and replace with an
airlock in a #3 drilled stopper or a blowoff hose if the fermentor is
very full or I expect a violent ferment.  When fermentation ios
complete I replace the pressure relief valve and transfer the beer to 5
gallon kegs through out to out tubes, avoiding possible aeration from
siphoning.  I have cut about an inch and a half off of the liquid out
dip tube to prevent picking up too much yeast and other sediment.  If the
pressure relief valve is not removable the gas in fitting can be removed
and a hose slipped over the threaded portion attached to the keg.
After a week or more in the five gallon kegs I transfer again to fresh
five gallon kegs to leave behind more sediment.  I bought my 10 gallon
keg from Amber Waves in Georgia but that has been about three years ago
and I don't if they still have any.  They may be available elsewhere,
though.  I find the fermentor easy to clean.  I rinse it out and then
fill it with hot water and about ten tablespoons of TSP and let it soak
an hour or more.  This usually cleans everything out without even
needing to scrub.

John Wilkinson - Grapevine, Texas - jwilkins at wss.dsccc.com


Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 10:58:32 -0500
From: Sherry Heflin <sheflin at shreve.net>
Subject: Cornies as secondaries

Hi all,
I needed one of my carboys for another brew and just transferred my Pale
Ale into a corney to free up a carboy. My question is will fermentation
continue in the corney? I had to put several pounds of pressure on the
keg to seat the lid. Secondly how do you attach an airlock or blowoff
tube without loosing the seal on the lid. Right now I just shut off the
keg and put about 5lbs. of pressure on the keg figuring it would just
partially carbonate the keg as the gravity was down to 1.018 at
transfer. Since I have more cornies than carboys I was wondering how I
might primary in a corney.
     On another note I have all the specialty grain to make a Porter
this weekend but I don't have any regular 2-row. Instead I do have
enough light Munich which I was pondering using instead. I'm not worried
about it being to style but whether it would come out O.K. I would
appreciate any advice, suggestions, whatever.
Bodie Heflin
Shreveport LA


Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 12:29:14 -0500
From: ejb11 at psu.edu (Ed Basgall)
Subject: easy keg conversion to brewpot


Hi Eric,
In HBD 2737 you asked about converting a keg to a brewpot.........

I have done this conversion for myself and for members of our brewclub.
It's pretty easy assuming you have one of the straight sided kegs with
integrated carrying handles.
I wouldn't bother if its an older barell shaped keg with a plug in the side.

You'll need to get a tool called a Sawzall (rental places should have 'em
if you don't).  It's basically a heavy duty reciprocating saw used for
remodelling construction (cutting doorways in walls and stuff)./  Get a
couple of fine toothed metal cutting scroll blades 24-32 tpi.  Mark a
circle out on top of the keg just a bit larger than the lid you plan to
use.  I use a large Revereware lid (my opening is 11 7/8").  Drill a 3/8"
starter hole and cut out the lid SLOWLY, it will take two blades.  Wear
safety goggles and hearing protection as it will be rather noisy.  Also,
don't attempt this late at night as your neighbors will not appreciate it.


Once you have the hole cut out get a short fat (1"x1") grinding wheel that
attaches to an electric drill.  You need to grind the cut edge smooth so
you don't cut yourself everytime you reach in.

If you have access to a person or shop that does SS welding you  can have a
hole drilled in the side, near the bottom and have them weld in a SS 1/4"
nipple.  (I used SS SWAGELOK parts)
You can order a 1/4" SS ball valve from a number of mailorder places (I
used McMaster Carr)
and fit this to the outside for easy draining.  I built a circular manifold
with small holes drilled in it inside that connects onto the inside part of
the nipple as a strainer for keeping hops and stuff from clogging the
valve. A SS mesh screen would work too.  You can also look into a weld-free
mash kit (www.beeronline.com) but I don't know about heat resistance during
boilng for their system.

I took pictures as I modified my keg and am planning to post them to my web
page by the end of next week.  Please check at www.personal.psu.edu/ejb11
after Fri June 19 for more details.

The system works great with an outdoor propane cooker.  After the boil I
just attach my counterflow chiller to tthe ball valve and port it directly
into my fermenter, by the time the kettle is drained the wort is cooled and
ready to pitch.  I love it.

cheers
ed basgall
SCUM trustee
State College Underground Maltsters
State College, PA 16801




Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 13:33:13 -0400
From: "Capt. Marc Battreall" <batman at terranova.net>
Subject: Rebuttal of Open Ferment

KESimmonds at aol.com wrote:
> 
> I am sorry that I caused you to be upset at my reply to your posting on open
> fermentation. That was not my intention, and I apologise unreservedly for any
> offence caused. I mistakenly thought your comment about 'candy, raisiny'
> aroma/taste were, by implication, asking for opinions or advice, and I
> thought, again mistakenly, that I was offering such.
> Keith Simmonds

No sweat man....it's not you in particular, and I apologize if it
appeared to be aimed at you as an individual, it's just that it seems
that the HBD (which I too rely on for help and guidance) has become a
bashing forum for the self appointed so-called experts. (not implying
you!)
Everyone should realize that it's a hobby for most.....and if a brew or
two goes sour or you goof something up, it's all part of the learning
experience. The important thing is that you have fun in the process. The
beer still turns out better than alot of commercial brands in most
cases!!!!

Gotta run.....got a California Common in the mashtun (straight infusion
this time. Gotta stay flexible.......tee hee hee)

Cheers,

Marc
- -- 

Captain Marc Battreall
Backcountry Brewhouse
Islamorada, Florida



Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 13:06:50 -0500 (CDT)
From: Al Korzonas <korz at xnet.com>
Subject: Challenger in otherwise Columbus Barleywine

Dave asks what would happen if he dryhopped with Challenger after
making a Barleywine with Columbus for bittering and flavour.

Columbus is a rather citrusy hop and therefore has a noticeable
"American" hop character.  Your beer will have a citrusy, possibly
even grapefruity, flavour if you used more than 1/2 or 3/4 ounce
in the last 15 minutes of the boil.

Challenger is an English hop with a resiny character (not unlike
East Kent Goldings) and a slight woody character (not unlike Fuggles).
If you use Challenger to dryhop your Barleywine, I think that you
will have an "English" hop aroma followed by an "American" hop flavour.

This isn't a problem if this sounds appealing to you, but you may
raise some judges' eyebrows a little.  It depends on how grapefruity
the flavour is (try some!) because many English yeasts tend to lend
a citrusy (lemony, however) character to the beer.  It also depends
on how long you plan to age it... after a year, you probably will
still smell a little of the hops, but after three or four, I'm
pretty sure the hop aroma will be gone.

Al.

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


Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 14:22:19 -0400
From: "David Kerr" <dkerr at semc.org>
Subject: wisecrack

Charles Hudak writes about souring beer:
> ...Pete A'Hearn, the brewmaster at a local micro, used this method to
> make a great Marion Berry P-Lambic that he served at the Southern
> California Homebrewers Festival...

I'll bet that that's one recipe the DEA would love to see disclosed.
Yet another reason that Pete should be thankful that he doesn't work in
Manhattan, Kansas...

Dave Kerr Needham, MA




Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 11:41:49 -0700
From: Dave Sapsis <DAVE_SAPSIS at fire.ca.gov>
Subject: what is best, tell me tell if you think you know

John Murphy has explained the reasons for his dissatisfaction with MCAB
and the BHC clearly, but in doing so confounds issues regarding judging
with issues of competition procedures.  The latter was addressed clearly
by Louis, namely that there was an a priori agreement to hold the MCAB
qualifying as part of the preliminary round judging.  Now whether this
was explicit to the entrant or not, MCAB and BWP seem consistent in that
they meant to judge the QS independent of the other non MCAB substyles.
John also appears  correct that the language of the competition
inidcates a clear link between the "competition" winners and MCAB
bearths.  Apparently, there were two competitions -- one for MCAB and
preliming, and another for BHC.  Thus, to be fair, the entrants should
have been made aware that the MCAB decision would be based on a prelim
flight round and not on the finals.

What is more disconcerting however, is John's failure to understand some
of the basic characteristics of beer judging, as evidinced by:

> Louis has stated he does not agree with this argument. He turns to the
discrepancies in competition judging as
> reasoning for such a view. IMO, this only leaves the whole judging
process (and competition) suspect.

The BJCP is in the process of formulating a new piece on judging
philosophy to go along with the new Study Guide.  While it is in draft
form and has only been reviewed by a couple people, one of the main
points that it makes is that judging beers is fundamentally subjective,
and depends on lots of ancillary things other than what's in the bottle.
The net effect is exactly as Louis maintains, judges will differ.
Varaince will exist within judges between beers, within beers between
judges, within both at two different times, etc. Thus, there is no
absolute best, only a relative best.  The dry stout that won BHC was
best for the final round, but not best in the prelim round.  How can
that be?  As long as the judges were fair minded, there should be no
great expectation that scores will be entirely consistent between
different flights on different days done by different judges.  Consider
only the ordinal rank that a given beer is served in the flight --
something that has a strong influence on judge perceptions and should
thus be randomized.  

This is not to say that there are not cases of poor judging -- they
abound unfortunately.   Rather, it is to emphasize what most of you all
know (and made clear to me years ago when a stout (!) of mine recieved a
38 in prelims and a 22 in finals) -- that any assessment of "best" is
highly conditional.  

Cheers,
- --dave, still chillin (literally) in Sacto





Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 13:51:50 -0500 (CDT)
From: Al Korzonas <korz at xnet.com>
Subject: De-leading Brass surfaces/AHA bashing

John writes:
>To de-lead the surface of brass, soak the item for roughly 5 minutes in
>a 2:1 volume ratio of Distilled Vinegar (5%by volume) and Hydrogen
>Peroxide (3% by volume).  Eg.  2 cups Vinegar to 1 cup H2O2.
>The brass will turn a buttery gold color as it cleans. If the solution
>turns blue, then the copper is dissolving which exposes more lead to the
>surface, and you have to start over again with a fresh solution.

It's this last part that has me confused.  If the solution turns blue
and more lead is exposed, why wouldn't the lead continue to be removed by
the existing solution?

***
A lot of comments have been made from both sides of the "AHA is not doing
their job" issue.  One poster pointed at Zymurgy as being a major benefit.
The quality of the information in Zymurgy has fluctuated over the years
and at present, I don't think it's at its peak.  However, I do feel that
the AHA are indeed more responsive than they have ever been, I feel that
they are enlisting the help of HBD luminaries for writing articles (learned
from BT?) and speaking at the Conference (why don't I recognise most of the
names of the authors in Brew Your Own and why is BYO more error-filled than
Zymurgy and BT combined?).

I think what happened in the NorthEast region is a tragedy, but what about
the judging in the other regions?  In the Chicago-judged region we did
560+ beers Friday night, Saturday all day and Sunday morning, with probably
25% fewer judges than last year.  Other regions have not reported problems,
have they?  It clear that there was an organisational problem in the
NorthEast and it appears to have been the fault of the AHA, but let the
one among us who is without sin cast the first stone.

I don't think the AHA or AOB are perfect, but I think they are better than
they were and seem to be improving.  Just for the record, I renewed my
AHA membership yesterday ($28 not $33).

Al.

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


Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 14:26:24 -0500 (CDT)
From: Al Korzonas <korz at xnet.com>
Subject: Berliner/sterols/chloride vs. chlorine

These are a little older... I found them in a file I had saved.

Alan writes:
>However, I suppose it is possible that all the esters could be supplied by
>one species and that I picked a colony of this species for my starter.
>Still, hard to explain the homogeneity of colony types though, especially
>since this fellow claimed that 3068 is a mixture of cerevisiae, an ale
>yeast, and delbrueckii which I believe is a lager yeast. I'd have expected
>some distinctive colony differences.
>
>Perhaps there is confusion between Wyeast 3068 used for Bavarian Weiss
>(supposedly saccromyces delbrueckii from Weihenstephan 68) and Wyeast 3056
>used for the *Berliner* style which apparently *is* a mixture of
>cerevisiae and delbrueckii.    

Wyeast #3056 is a blend of two yeasts, one neutral and one that produces
4-vinyl guaiacol (that clovey/spicy, phenolic aroma/flavour).  Wyeast
#3068 is a single-strain yeast.  Both are for making *BAVARIAN* Weizen
and neither are appropriate for *BERLINER* Weizen (which should be made
with a clean, fruity, non-phenolic yeast and Lactobacillus) and neither
contain bacteria (well... beyond reasonable levels).  Finally, I intentionally
refrained from using the term "delbrueckii" primarily because I'm not
sure of the actual strains and secondarily because I faintly recall something
on the order of the current taxonomy putting these yeasts in the genera
Torolospora (or something like that).

***
Andy writes:
>I can't really do this. Basically I am saying that even an overpitched
>wort will probably underattenuate if not sufficently aerated, and if
>there are insufficient fats/sterols. Trub has very high levels of the
>latter.

I believe that it is the former, not the latter.

>I think homebrewers can often get away with underaeration
>because their worts are usually very high in trub. Trub supplies the
>basic fatty acids and sterols needed without the necessity of using
>oxygen to build them up instead. <snip>

I believe that trub helps to *reduce* the yeasts' oxygen needs because
it does supply *some* of the fatty acids and therefore allows the yeast
to use what oxygen it has to produce the sterols and fatty acids it
doesn't get from the wort.

>> For example, why not aerate yeast in the
>> fermentor repeatedly over several hours to get LOTS of yeast growth.
>
>Because your beer will be nasty! I am not saying that more growth is
>good, it is not (and somewhat paradoxically also results in *less*
>ethanol, because the wort sugars end up in yeast biomass rather than
>ethanol). There is a fine balance between growth, attenuation and
>flavour that needs to be reached. This is why we have recommended
>pitching rates, trub levels and wort oxygen content. If you want to play
>around with these, go ahead, but you run a risk!     

Your beer with not necessarily be nasty.  Consider Samuel Smith's beer
which is indeed aerated well into the fermentation.  It also shows a
lot of oxidation (aldehydes, specifically) when the beer has some age,
but for their Bitters, served within a few weeks, it's not a problem.

I, personally, feel that you can oxygenate/aerate your beer for a while
at the beginning, but the amout to which your beer suffers will be
dependent on the amounts of various alcohols that are present in the beer.
A little aeration, on and off, for 6 or 8 hours after pitching would
probably not cause much damage.  However, I think that yeast growth
would then be limited by other factors such as nutrition and cell
density.  The law of diminishing returns comes into play.

Comments?

***
Ken writes:
>Lookin' good again, but the chloride is a little high. Depending on
>what, if anything, the chloride is bonded with, just letting the brew
>water sit overnight should reduce this. Boiling for a few minutes
>accomplishes the same thing but cost gas or electricity.

and:
>as the pipes shed the caked carbonate. Unfortunatelly these tend to be
>expensive, like well over $1500. A simple carbon filter would help,
>especially with the chloride but may not solve your husky problem.      

You have accidentally mixed up "chloride" and "chlorine."  You
cannot remove chloride except with a reverse osmosis filter or by
distillation.  

Al.

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


Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 16:30:04 -0400
From: "Peter J. Calinski" <PCalinski at iname.com>
Subject: Alternate Bottle Filling Technique---Comments needed..

I am always frustrated when I bottle because I can't get all the beer at
the bottom of the bucket.  If I use the choreboy or the plastic tip on a
racking cane, a lot of beer gets left behind.  Without these, debris clogs
the Phil'sPhiller. I have ruined many bottles of beer trying to clear the
Philler; they get too much air.  Since I have access to a vacuum pump (but
no CO2 equipment) I thought I would try something different.  

I started with a stopper that just fits in the bottle.  It had one hole for
a ridged plastic tube.  I used a hot nail to make a parallel hole for a
very small diameter tube.  (For now I used a segment from an old portable
phone antenna.)  I put a ridged plastic tube in the big hole and set it so
that one end just reaches the bottom of the bottle I want to fill.  I
connected the racking cane to the other end with some flexible tube and put
it in the bucket of beer (using water for testing).

I put the small diameter tube in the hole I made but only far enough to
seat it.  It didn't go all the way through the stopper.  I connected the
other end of it the vacuum pump.

To use it, I turn on the pump.  Then, insert the ridged tube into the
bottle until the stopper contacts the rim of the bottle.  When that
happens, a vacuum is formed in the bottle and the "beer" flows from the
bucket to the bottle.  When the bottle is as full as I want it, I just lift
the stopper from the bottle rim and the flow stops because the vacuum is
lost.  Takes about 3 seconds to fill the bottle.

Fine points:

(1)  If the bottom end of the ridged tube (the one in the bottle) is too
high, "beer" will siphon back into the bucket unless the tube is pulled all
the way out of the bottle quickly.  The "beer" will flow the other way if
the end of the ridged tube is too low.  If it is at about the right level,
the flow seems to stop fairly well.  Well enough that you can move it
quickly to the next bottle with a negligible loss of "beer".

(2)  It is better to use the stopper upside down so it doesn't fit into the
bottle.  If it goes inside there is enough suction so that it wants to stay
there even when the bottle is full.  Then the "beer" goes into the vacuum
pump ( A real no-no.)  Upside down, it just bumps against the rim of the
bottle enough to make a vacuum but separates easily to stop the flow.

Well, what does the collective wisdom think?

Advantages I hope to achieve are:

Little chance of anything getting blocked because there are no areas where
the flow is "necked down"

Minimal opportunity for introducing air since it is suction (lack of air)
that is moving the beer.

Fast filling (depending on the strength of the vacuum pump).


Potential problem:

Perhaps, when using real beer, there may be a lot of foaming from CO2
coming out of solution in the reduced pressure in the bottle.

I would really appreciate any comments (either private email or to the HBD)
before I try this with real beer.

Thanks (in advance)

Pete Calinski

PCalinski at iname.com





Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 16:36:34 -0400
From: mel at genrad.com (Mark E. Lubben)
Subject: dry hopping - momilie?


It has been a few days, and I expected one of you hopheads
out there to jump on Jack about this so I will ask. (set that hook ;)

Jack Schmidling wrote:
>With the knowledge of how to make good beer
>as a base line, one can then start eliminating the most questionable
>and burdensome rituals, ONE AT A TIME, to see if they are worthwhile.
>Decoction, wort aeration, chilling and dry hopping are just a
>few of the procedures I have dropped along the way.  It is up to
>the individual to sort out the momilies.

Jack, why did you drop dry hopping?

I am not a hop head (2 IPAs make me nap), but I have done several
batchs with hops added at knock out or even during chilling.
When I finally tried 1/2oz of Styrian in the keg last year it gave
a character which was completely different than hops in the kettle.
My first glass made me think "this is like drinking flowers, cool!"
Not right for a festbier, but everyone agreed it was the best batch
of English special bitter I have made.

So, I am puzzled why you don't dry hop occasionally.
I can't see any equivalent except a couple hops in the pint.


Mark Lubben

 Just a satisfied Malt Mill(TM) customer.


Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 13:56:52 -0700
From: "Bryan L. Gros" <gros at bigfoot.com>
Subject: AHA whining

Boy, this AHA topic has sure hit a nerve with some people.

"Raymond Johnson" <JOHNSONR2 at state.mi.us> wrote:
>...
>My beef is with those who sling reckless comments calling for heads to 
>roll, and "down with the AHA".  George states that the AOB/AHA is no 
>longer providing the basic services to its membership, yet still collecting
>dues.  Ever read Zymurgy?  Ever go to www.beertown.org?  I'll wager a 
>big, fat YES on both accounts.
>...
>My mebership dues go a lot further than just sposoring the great National 
>Homebrew pissing Contests(punn intended). And, I will continue to support  
>the AOB/AHA.  As far as I know, nobody is forced to pay dues to the AHA.  

I don't think anyone would argue with this statement.  
I read George dePiro's comments as stating that he didn't feel that he
got his money's worth, and therefore he didn't renew his membership.
Same here.  Same with 5000 other people, according to Bill Giffen.

Raymond obviously feels that he does get his money's worth, so he
renews his membership.  So do about 20000 other people, according
to Bill.

while people like Brian R. and others at the AHA seem to be trying
to expand the AHA services and address members' concerns, the
question is whether they are allowed to do these things, or if the
AHA is really at the whim of a dictator.  
Has the AHA addressed the problem with the NHC judging in the NE
and are they working on a solution?  Is the work all falling on the 
organizer up there?  Or is the AHA just going to take the entry fees
and ignore the problem?

  - Bryan

Bryan Gros	gros at bigfoot.com
Oakland, CA
Visit the new Draught Board homebrew website:
http://www.valhallabrewing.com/~thor/dboard/index.htm



Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 17:33:33 -0400
From: "Tim Fields" <tfields at his.com>
Subject: 10 Gallon Rubbermaid Gott summary

I received at least 20 replies to my post requesting a source for low
cost 10
Gallon Rubbermaid Gott Coolers. Many thanks!  If you can get away with
the 5 gallon
model, do so - I found them in several stores locally in Fairfax VA as
well as on the web.  The 10 gallon appears much harder to find (more of
a commercial product).  Here is a quick summary of results:

1. There appear to be several sources for "seconds" or "discounted"
Gotts.
   a. "Dollar" type stores.  This is the lowest price anyone mentioned:
10 gal rubbermaid cooler for $19.99 in a "Dollar Store" near Hudson, OH.
The cooler was labelled "Second - no accessories".
   b. Previous poster to HBD noted a closeout chain in the TX,OK,LA area
with prices of 19.99 plus tax.
   c. Store called Odd Lots (location unknown) for 29.99, April/May
1998.
   d. At BIG LOTS for $29.00 each (in the UK if I am not mistaken)
2. I found NO 10 gallon Gotts in the Fairfax VA area, with stores
searched including Home Depot, Hechingers, Best Buy, Sports Authority,
and Price Club.  Others, however, were more successful:
   a. Purchase at Home Depot, Chicago IL, April 1998 for $40 (2 replies)
   b. Purchase at Builders Square in the Chicago IL area for around $36.
3. Multiple replies claiming purchases at Wal-Mart online. My first
search there yielded nada. After additional positive replies, I searched
a second time, found one and ordered it (36.67 plus tax and shipping) -
only to have the order canceled because their distributor is out of
stock :-(
4. The reply that wins First Prize for company name is "Man of Rubber",
where they have the Rubbermaid Gott 10 Gallon cooler for $47.95 plus
shipping.  They are on the web at:
http://www.manofrubber.com/rubrmaid.htm or email
(manofrubber at copperhill.com).
 
5. Alan at the Homebrew Shop, New York  (www.homebrewshop.com or
AlanT at homebrewshop.com) replied with a price of 49.90 including shipping
from his location to Fairfax VA.  He noted "The Rubbermaid is not listed
on the web page yet, the page is fairly new."
6. Keith Busby (kbusby at ou.edu) replied with an offer to sell a 10-gal
Gott, complete with Easymasher (still have the original spigot), used
only 3 or 4 times in pristine condition.
7. One can purchase direct from the Rubbermaid factory/outlet for $65
plus, but
they didnt have any in stock when I called.
8. One reply to ask the manager of Home Depot (or any other store) to
order one special (didnt try it).

- -------------------
Tim Fields
    Fairfax, Va
    tfields at his.com ... www.his.com/tfields


Return to table of contents

---