HOMEBREW Digest #2903 Thu 17 December 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

  AOL Readers: Please read! (The HBD Janitorial Staff)
  Attenuation, milling ("David R. Burley")
  Fusel aclohols / protein rests / home malting ("George De Piro")
  re: stolen recipes ("Larry Maxwell")
  Mazer Cup Mead Competition ("Ken Schramm")
  RE: Smoke Peated v.s. Smoked (was liquid smoke) (David Houseman)
  RE: Paul Gatza's fable (David Houseman)
  Re: Grain Mill ("Brian Dixon")
  Re: Waffles ("Brian Dixon")
  re: Cider (Dick Dunn)
  The Jethro Gump Response ("Rob Moline")
  Re: air/oxygen/pure oxygen ("Brian Dixon")
  Oxygen in the headspace again... ("Brian Dixon")
  Grain Mill Modifications (Rich Byrnes)
  Hemp cake ("Doug Evans")
  Re: Legal status of homebrewing and AHA (Steve Jackson)
  New digital thermometer ("Jim Kingsberg")
  Online Wahl-Henius book (Steve Jackson)
  Best of Brooklyn Homebrew Competition ("George De Piro")
  Braggot (Richard Buckberg)
  The speed of change at the AHA ("Brian Wurst")
  Re: Got them Carbon Monoxide blues... (Jeff Renner)

Beer is our obsession and we're late for therapy! Enter The Mazer Cup! _THE_ mead competition. Details available at http://hbd.org/mazercup NOTE NEW HOMEBREW ADDRESS: hbd.org Send articles for __publication_only__ to post@hbd.org 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! Contact brewery at hbd.org for information regarding the "Cat's Meow" Back issues are available via: HTML from... http://hbd.org 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 COPYRIGHT for the Digest as a collection is currently held by hbd.org (Pat Babcock and Karl Lutzen). Digests in their entirity CANNOT be reprinted/reproduced without this entire header section unless EXPRESS written permission has been obtained from hbd.org. COPYRIGHT for individual posts within each Digest is held by the author. Articles cannot be extracted from the Digest and reprinted/reproduced without the EXPRESS written permission of the author. The author and HBD must be attributed as author and source in any such reprint/reproduction. (Note: QUOTING of items originally appearing in the Digest in a subsequent Digest is exempt from the above.) JANITORS on duty: Pat Babcock and Karl Lutzen (janitor@hbd.org)
---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1998 08:42:21 -0500 (EST) From: The HBD Janitorial Staff <janitor@ brew.oeonline.com> Subject: AOL Readers: Please read! People subscribing from America Online MUST - absolutely MUST - turn off the AOL-supplied external mail filter to subscribe! If you DO NOT turn this off, the Digest cannot reach you since it is OUTSIDE AOL! If you recently tried to subscribe, and have received neither an acknowledgement of your attempt, nor a Digest, check your MAIL CONTROLS. Brewfully yours, The Home Brew Digest Janitorial Staff Janitor at hbd.org Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1998 14:24:26 -0500 From: "David R. Burley" <Dave_Burley at compuserve.com> Subject: Attenuation, milling Brewsters: Timo Peters says: >I have problems with my apparent attentuation. >whether I brew a lager or an ale all my beers suffer from low >apparent attentuation. For a pils it is about 66% (12 deg B start, 4 deg >B end) and a current old ale stops fermentation with only 54%. >this high remaining extract leads to a sweet beer, uncommon for the >desired style. He then suggests two fermentation related problems as a possible explanation: While we do not have enough data to say for sure, if you pitched adequate yeast ( even much less than desired), had enough FAN and kept the fermentation at the temperaure appropriate for the yeast, and are in the "normal" OG range of <1.070 or so, then it is unlikely poor fermentation is the cause if you are using a pure mashed wort. Once when using a John Bull Stout Extract for a class demonstration, it did not finish properly and I assumed it was due to low FAN apparently due to a high added glucose. Pure wort should be OK. I doubt oxygenation of the wort is a problem Your third suggestion that your problem lies in the mash tun is most likely. First check your thermometer. This is the most common problem. Make up boiling water, check the temperature and don't forget to correct the boiling point for elevation ( see my comments on this a year or so ago in the archives). Make up a water and finely crushed ice slurry and check that temperature. Then remove any ice by straining the slurry and make up mixtures of ice water and boiling water to cover the range of temperatures. Use a glass thermos ( double walled vacuum) bottle if you can. Plot these actual readings on the "Y" axis and the apparent readings on the "X" axis to provide you with a correction plot. Rather than adding a certain volume of water, I put the ice water in the thermos, weigh it and then add boiling water increments and weigh that. Measure the temperature after each addition. Weigh the bottle empty, then you can get an accurate idea of the volumes ( and temperatures) without cooling off the water by pouring it into a measuring vessel first. In Centigrade degrees you are OK since the ice water is 0, but with F degrees you need to subtract 32, apply the proportionality and then add the 32 degrees back on. Although it is unlikely you are destroying the beta amylase, it is a possibility as you suggest. Rather than directly heating the mash tun for the entire mashing procedure, try using boiling water infusions to achieve your various rests, with minor temperature adjustments by direct heat - ---------------------------------------------. Eric Fouch says: > With a few adjustments, I increased the adjustablility from 3 >settings to 15 settings, motorized it and mounted it on a platform which >straddles a 5 gallon pail. It does not have a huge throughput, but it is >adequate, especially for $50. I believe Mr. Burley also employs the use of an >Italian made Marga. Eric is correct. I have used a Marga for at least that long I guess and have been very satisfied with it. The only difference is I use an aluminum dishpan to catch the milled grain which gives, perhaps, a more stable base onto which to mount the plywood board ( big enough to cover the dishpan) with a rectangular hole in the middle holding the mill and power drill. Using 4 mill plastic sheeting and duct tape as milled grain guides, I constructed a relatively dust free mill. I widened the input area and used a gallon plastic milk jug as the hopper. I hold the board onto the dishpan with small "c" clamps for quick disconnect. Throughput is very adequate. Also, on this subject, the use of an adjustable mill allows me to mill the malt twice, first on a wider adjustment (0.080 I think) to crush the grain coarsely and then the regrind thorugh a smaller nip ( 0.060 in, I think). This is actually faster than a single fine pass and gives the equivalent of a four roll mill just like the big boys. Extraction efficiency and lautering is significantly improved over a single fine pass. A third pass at 0.055 in will give you the equivalent of a six roll mill and the preferrred milling in the brewing industry. I don't bother. Use a sparkplug feeler guage for the measurements of the nip. I have a second dishpan into which I pour the milled grain between millings. See the archives to check the details. 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, 15 Dec 1998 14:32 -0800 From: "George De Piro" <George_De_Piro at berlex.com> Subject: Fusel aclohols / protein rests / home malting Hi all, There has been some mention of fusel alcohols and how to control them. Fusel alcohols are also called "higher" alcohols because they have more carbon atoms than our beloved ethanol (which has 2 carbon atoms). I like to talk about fusel alcohols because they are one of the few brewing topics where one can use the word "always." High yeast growth ALWAYS leads to the production of excessive fusel alcohols. Anything that promotes yeast growth will therefore promote fusels. Things like fermenting above 68F (20C), underpitching, and agitating the fermenting beer will all promote increased yeast growth. Forcing the yeast to utilize trub instead of oxygen will also promote the formation of higher alcohols. In other words, proper yeast management will help you to avoid excessive fusels in your beer. Excessive fusel alcohols is one of the most common homebrew flaws, as are excessive esters. Both are caused by poor fermentation management. The January issue of Brewing Techniques will have a nice little article about yeast management; I recommend it highly. (Yeah, it's my article, but I don't get compensated based on the number of subscribers). ---------------------------------------------- Ah, protein rests. Any of you who have been reading this electronic tome for the past year know that I think they are worse than useless when brewing with commercial barley and wheat malts. Here's why I think this: 1. Large proteins are foam positive, as are some mid-weight proteins. Small peptides and free amino acids are not foam positive. Modern malts (yes, even wheat malts and German malts) are well-modified, meaning that they have already undergone substantial protein breakdown. Why do any more? The maltster did it for you! 2. Chill haze is caused in large part by the mid-weight proteins that are degradation products of larger proteins. Resting at the high end of the protein rest range (~130F; 55C) can actually INCREASE haze potential by forming more of these haze precursors. The reason some of us care about chill haze is because after you have been brewing a while you may want to make beer that lives up to very high standards, in taste as well as appearance. 3. The body of a beer can be compromised by the loss of large proteins. Some styles should be watery, but most of us aren't striving to make watery beer! 4. The folks at Briess malting advertise all of their malts (including wheat malt) as not needing a protein rest. 5. The brewers at Schneider und Sohn (makers of one of the world's great Hefeweizen beers) use custom-made malts, in Germany, and STILL need to minimize protein rests because the stuff comes to them more modified than they would like! Evidently, modern grains malt really easily. The list goes on... Why make life complicated? A complex mash schedule does not automatically make a more complex beer. The only malt I have seen that needed a protein rest (because it was undermodified) was stuff I made myself, and it wasn't outrageously undermodified, either (I had it analyzed chemically). ---------------------------------------- That segues nicely into home malting. Some people are concerned about ergot and other biological contaminants affecting their homemade malt. This could become the malting equivalent of the botulism thread... If you are malting properly you should not get lots of bacterial and fungal growth. If you do, I'd bet that the grain will smell really bad, look really odd, taste quite off, and exhibit very poor germination (in other words, it won't malt!). The biggest danger when home malting is suffocating the grain by steeping it too long and turning it infrequently. Dead, soggy grain makes a great environment for bacterial and fungal growth, but as I said, you'll notice the stench! Home malting is something that I would encourage all brewers to try at least once. It is the best way to gain a solid understanding of the process. Have fun! George de Piro (Nyack, NY) Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1998 12:39:43 -0800 From: "Larry Maxwell" <Larry at bmhm.com> Subject: re: stolen recipes >I saw this and remembered Louis Bonham' post in HBD 2575 in >which he expressed the idea that recipes are not protectable >intellectual property. I agree. I second Bob McDonald's comment. I wish I were a plant pathologist, fluid dynamicist, a fridge guy, electrician, or had some other skill genuinely useful to homebrewing, but I'm just a patent, trademark and copyright lawyer. Individual recipes as such are simply not protectable by any of these means. Once your secret recipe is published, the cat's out of the bag. Larry Maxwell larry at bmhm.com Suing and brewing in San Diego Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1998 16:11:54 -0500 From: "Ken Schramm" <schramk at wcresa.k12.mi.us> Subject: Mazer Cup Mead Competition After a brief hiatus, the Mazer Cup is resuming its staid and worthy tradition of soliciting the finest meads from around the globe for judging and recognition. This is the largest single-site mead judging in this country, and perhaps the world (we may even seek Guiness Book acknowledgement this year). We will, as always, be awarding custom, limited edition, hand-thrown ceramic Mazers to the top three places in each of the eight mead categories (Traditional, Show, Melomel, Metheglin, Braggot, Cyser, Pyment, Open/Mixed). And we have kept the entry fee at $6.00 (Yes, we usually do lose money on this, but the AABG bails us out). Entries will be accepted from Feb 1 - 20, 1999, and the judging will be completed as soon after 2/27 as can be, bearing in mind that each entry will be judged by at least two competent judges. The Mazer Cup Rules, regs and entry forms are online at http://hbd.org/aabg/mcmc/ or can be obtained via US mail or sent as a Word attachment to EMail by contacting me, Al Franken (no, wait) Ken Schramm at schramk at wcresa.k12.mi.us. Judges interested in joining us can contact me at the above EMail. Beds will be made available. The quality and variety of meads in this competition is unparalled (yes, I have done second round NHC meads on more than one occasion. I will put the MCMC up against anything in the US). We run a jovial but thoroughly professional judging. Please enter this fine competition. Many Thanks, and Happy Holidays. Ken Schramm Troy, Michigan "Even moderation is only good in moderation." Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1998 19:56:34 -0500 (EST) From: David Houseman <dhousema at cccbi.org> Subject: RE: Smoke Peated v.s. Smoked (was liquid smoke) The use of smoked malt, or liquid smoke, in scotch ales is really questionable. The hint of smokiness in these beers is [usually] due to other factors such as the yeast used that gives off some smoky character or the use of roasted barley that can result in that perception. The smoked malts are either peat smoked, that is smoked over peat fires, or wood smoked, most commonally smoked over beachwood. While German Rauchs may have 50% or more of rauchmalz in the grain bill, the use of peat smoked malt in scotch ales should be used VERY sparily. An once in a 5 gallon batch would be quite sufficient to impart the slight smokiness to scotch ales. This is a very strong malt! The one expection may be the Wee Heavy that support higher levels of smoke character in its malt strength. Dave Houseman Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1998 20:17:34 -0500 (EST) From: David Houseman <dhousema at cccbi.org> Subject: RE: Paul Gatza's fable While Steve and others have commented on Paul's fable with various reasons to join or support the AHA or not, there is one that I do feel that the experienced brewers are missing. That is that unless there is a sufficient market to support the suppliers of this hobby, they will exit and it will leave a void in the current vast array of brewing products, malts, hops and yeasts available. Hobbies only have an average 7 year life with people as they move from one interest to another. Some of us will maintain this hobby for life; some of us will try it and quit after a few batches. But if new people don't start out and stay with the hobby it could well die out. Already many stores have closed. Some of the distributors have reported down sales. So whatever we can do to help the newcomers is needed to generate and maintain interest in brewing. The AHA may not appeal to many experienced brewers as they have moved on. But Zymurgy and the AHA may be much more useful and attractive to newcomers and others less experienced. If they are successful in attracting and maintaining a body of new brewers it will help us all as the more people there are in the homebrewing market the more it will keep suppliers in the market as well. Dave Houseman Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1998 21:55:03 -0800 From: "Brian Dixon" <mutex at proaxis.com> Subject: Re: Grain Mill Just a clarification on your summary, which seemed quite correct by the way. You mentioned that the gaps were not "calibrated" on the Valley Mill and that the manufacturer "wouldn't say what they were", and consequently you assumed that they have manufacturing variation that they don't want to advertise. First of all, I don't know why they don't print the gaps on the mill, because they ARE known and the manufacturer DOES tell you the info if you ask for it. I either saw it posted here in the HBD (search the archives) or in rec.crafts.brewing (search using http://www.dejanews.com). In any case, the info can be had ... yes, they should print it right on the mill, but nothing is being hidden and there doesn't seem to be an variation in the product that would make them want to hide anything. It's a very good mill and you get more for your money than with the JSP MaltMill that offers the same features. I did the analysis and bought a Valley Mill and my question is "Why doesn't Jack make a better hopper and also sell his adjustable mill for the same price as the Valley Mill?" and "Why, in spite of there being many uses for it, do people keep defending single-setting mills that they either a) already bought, or b) sell?" To me, most of the arguments come from people who have reason to be defensive rather than unbiased. These questions seem a lot larger than whether or not Valley Mills have the thousands of inches printed for each gap. Dang! Please don't turn this into a flame war. I'm just trying to be honest. I came to these conclusions long before buying a mill... Just my 2 cents worth. Brian Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1998 22:00:31 -0800 From: "Brian Dixon" <mutex at proaxis.com> Subject: Re: Waffles >In light of Al K.'s post on Fries, I'd like to point out that the Flemish are >incorrectly attributed in the production of Belgian Waffles. These >creatures were introduced at the 1964 NY World's Fair and, then, called >Bel-Gem Waffles. Kind of a French (why? I don't know) Beauty thing, I >suppose. But, those Noo Yawkers...Bel-Gem quickly became Belgian >and then there was no turning back... > >Chris in Brooklyn, NY. So, how come when I went to Belgium last year there were Belgian Waffles being made in street stands everywhere. Considering the fact that the US of A is not highly respected in Europe (we are crass and have no culture, we wear tennis shoes like little children, and our president keeps warming his willie for national news casts), then why would they copy something from the 1964 World's Fair in NEW YORK? Seems odd. Might be true, but seems odd... Brian Return to table of contents
Date: 15 Dec 98 23:01:48 MST (Tue) From: rcd at raven.talisman.com (Dick Dunn) Subject: re: Cider Eric Fouch writes, as one item in a longer note: > A cider question (can't seem to get any response from the cider digest) > or two: Eric, patience please. Your questions appeared in the _most_recent_ issue of the Cider Digest. You haven't had a response because the next issue has not appeared yet. The Cider and Mead digests move at a slower pace due to their smaller readership and also due to the slower pace of fermentation of the beverages they address. (Fast fermentation may be a Good Thing for beer, but it is at best arguable for mead and not-so-good for cider.) Oh, they also go slower because the digest janitor is lazy. > If fermenting at room temp. does the malo-lactic fermentation take place > simultaneously with the the yeastie fermentation, or does it only happen when > doing spontaneous (no campden) fermentations?... It generally happens after the main fermentation. Often it doesn't happen at all. Why do you expect it to happen? >...I am a bit concerned of the > "spring malo-lactic fermentation" taking place in bottled product, causing > overcarbonation problems. It doesn't produce a lot of gas, at least not that I've observed. > Also- last week I fined my cider with gelatine: a teaspoon of gelatine > stirred into water at about 190F. I added the gelatine solution rather hot. Don't fine cider with gelatin. I've got that in my brew log for a couple of batches. The first, it's just a sentence in the text. The second, it's in bold-italic with some embellishment around it. It's not the heat. It's the gelatin. - --- Dick Dunn rcd at talisman.com Hygiene, Colorado USA ...Don't lend your hand to raise no flag atop no ship of fools. Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1998 00:08:43 -0600 From: "Rob Moline" <brewer at ames.net> Subject: The Jethro Gump Response The Jethro Gump Response Gee, and I felt honored that my recipe was chosen........in an attempt to create the first 'simultaneous' brewing record! Oh, well, at least more than a few brewers have enjoyed the result! For the record, my position with regards to LABCO is that I have continued to offer support to the brewers there, ALL of them in succession. First to Bret Kimbrough, when I left, in offering him the latest tweaks on my recipes, by many months.....the photocopies in his possession that easily preceded his tenure even as an assistant at LABCO......info which more than updated his collection of illicit access to my recipes.....then to Heidi Helwig, who graduated to brewer from bar manager after Bret left before being thrown out for lack of performance....I couldn't say that he spent more time drinking than brewing, as I wasn't there.......... But to Lou Kaylor, the current Head Brewer, who I had wished to install as an assistant, years ago, I have not only offered the same assistance...... I also entertained him recently at CABCO, when he was on his way to a Short Course at Siebel, I even invited him to my home, where we spent a grand evening, before he left for Chicago, after spending the night at Chez Gump. I had previously written a glowing reference for him, when he was in the military.....and I also praised him to Bill Siebel...... Now, if these are the actions of a brewer involved in a vendetta....please get in line..... the next person I have a row with will undoubtedly be given a winning lottery ticket! My position with regards to LABCO finally is such....I owe much to the 'true' owners of that institution....and my loyalty to people such as Galen Fink, who gave me my 'shot' is undying.....but that will never approach my loyalty to the customers, the true supporters of my brewing efforts there.... I owe them much more than I could ever return...... Others involved in the administration of the LABCO still earn my scorn....but I see no need now, nor have I in the past, to discuss that.....they will get their own as time goes by......It all evens out, eh? Not having posted to the HBD for some time, I apologize to the collective for my venting....Mr. Henning, your apology is accepted, partially.......It won't be accepted in full until you buy me a beer ....and we drink together..... Jethro Gump "The More I Know About Beer, The More I Realize I Need To Know More About Beer!" Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1998 22:17:20 -0800 From: "Brian Dixon" <mutex at proaxis.com> Subject: Re: air/oxygen/pure oxygen >Am trying to determine what to use to help kick start fermentation. There has >been conversation here about pure oxygen (99.9%) and ~20-30 second blasts. > >What is the need for pure O2 when carboys are shaken vigorously just before >pitching? Instead of using pure 02 can the small canisters of oxygen for >welding/cutting found in hardware stores also be used? It would seem that the >oxygen in this type of tank is greater than the oxygen in air but less than >pure 02. > >Thanx for your thots. Ok, let's see ... one thing at a time. First, kick starting a fermentation. There are about 3 primary things that effect how quickly your fermentation kicks off. The first is the amount of yeast you put in. If using dry, I'd recommend 2 to 4 packets ... rehydrated in warm water for 30 minutes first. If using liquid yeast, then I'd recomment a minimum of a 2 cup starter, with a 1 quart or larger starter being better ... it actually takes about a gallon of starter to pitch at an optimal rate like the professionals do. But then you have to let it go to sedimentation and pour off most of the wort, pitching the leftover slurry at the bottom. About a cup of slurry is correct for 5 gallons (but I forget the number of cells per milliliter that gives you ... something like 50 million I think). The second thing that'll help kick off the fermentation is the provision of a good healthy environment. That means you don't use old extract, and you do make sure your water has 50 to 100 ppm calcium as a couple of minimum requirements. Best route for health is to make your own wort from grain (mash) and to treat your water if necessary to reach 50-100ppm calcium. Finally, the third thing you can to to promote a good kick off is to make sure you aerate/oxygenate appropriately. Lots of ways to do it, but some are more effective than others ... so let's move on to your other questions where we'll cover this one too. Pure O2 like you buy in the brew shop -vs- vigorous carboy shaking -vs- welding oxygen. I think it was Zymurgy that did a study on oxygenation techniques here awhile back. But anyway, the 2 best ways (if memory serves) to aerate is to either use a very fine airstone (like the LiquidBread one) with pure _clean_ O2 (like the Oxynator bottles), and carboy shaking. If shaking the carboy, it seems the best method was laying it horizontally across your knees and rocking it back and forth to make "ocean waves" ... for about 5 minutes. Then you take a rest and do it again. Once your bad back has established itself though, the Oxynator seems a lot more attractive. Note that the methods of oxygenation that use air suffer primarily from the fact that O2 is a small percentage of air (16%? 25%? can't remember ...), otherwise it'd be a lot easier. And as far as the welding O2 goes, it's pure O2 like the Oxynator stuff also ... but may have dirt and oil in it too, so it's not clean. You may consider doing it anyway, but use a 2-micron inline filter between the O2 bottle and your wort. For the pilots in the crowd, note that you can use your portable oxygen mask setup to oxygenate your beer also. That's what a friend of mine does and his O2 costs a lot less than mine as a result! One thing I'll say against the Oxynator (it works great) is cost ... the setup costs a lot to begin with, and the oxygen bottles (1.4 ounces of oxygen is all they carry) cost too much. Good luck, Brian Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1998 22:34:45 -0800 From: "Brian Dixon" <mutex at proaxis.com> Subject: Oxygen in the headspace again... Just a quick note here. Got a lot of responses from my lengthy post about how I go about trying to avoid oxygen (when you are supposed to) and how to get it when you want it. First question: When filling the secondary with CO2 from the primary during fermentation, doesn't the CO2 just diffuse in the air that's there? Answer: Yes. I don't know how pure the CO2 in the secondary is by the time the primary finishes, but I suspect it's a lot better than a plain ol' air filled carboy. Make sure you always rack quietly and smoothly. Question number two: Since the priming solution is likely higher in gravity than the fermented beer, doesn't it just sink to the bottom of the beer in the secondary and risk getting left behind when you rack to a bottling bucket (or carboy)? Seems like it might be a risk. But I rack every little bit out and don't leave much behind. I've never yet gotten an undercarbonation from this cause ... leaving beer in the secondary for 6 or 8 weeks and bottling without new yeast, yes, but not from priming this way! I recommend that if you prime this way that you tip your carboy and get each little ounce out of the secondary. A bit of yeast from the secondary certainly won't hurt your beer any. Third question: CO2 from dry ice to fill bottles prior to bottling ... doesn't that just diffuse around and not do that good of a job? Answer: Maybe if you treat the bottles too quickly. But since the CO2 is heavier than air and it's cold coming off the dry ice, your bottles will experience good convection of CO2 and this will help flush rather than just diffuse the CO2 into them. Take your time with this step and don't worry. Last questions: Will using a syringe and a squirt of water get much CO2 out of the beer into the headspace? The beer was not force carbonated and counter pressure bottled, so where is the CO2 coming from? And why not use a shot of beer rather than sterilized water? Answers: Remember that I said I haven't tried this yet. But based on my observation of CO2 coming out of solution when I bang a bottle on the counter (don't do this ... risks breakage) the last time I bottled, I suspect that there is still plenty of CO2 dissolved in the beer after bottling. Might not be quite as efficient as the pro's, but it's better than nothing. Oh, and yes, use beer if you want. Sucking it out of each bottle and blowing it back in with the syringe is a great opportunity to adjust the headspace(s) AND it means you don't have to sterilize any water. Someone else recently mentioned that he/she (? .. no offense, just can't remember) figured that O2 in the headspace wasn't a problem because yeast scavenges O2 anyway, and if you don't shake the bottle too much, the O2 will stay out of the beer and won't have a chance to react with alcohol. Yes, yeast will scavenge some. But at this point, it doesn't need too and it grows just fine anaerobically, so there's no need (O2 in the wort prior to pitching is for improving the health of the yeast membranes in preparation for budding, not for 'food' that's necessary for growth). and O2 will indeed diffuse into the beer in the bottles, so any excess will end up in your beer. Anyway, this is dragging on, so I'm going to go. I'm sure it'll get discussed a lot anyway (feel free to make any and all corrections ... I don't claim perfection, only my wife does that <g>). Brian Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1998 08:02:39 -0500 From: Rich Byrnes <rbyrnes2 at ford.com> Subject: Grain Mill Modifications OK, before this gets into a pissing match about who's mill can and can't be used on a bucket, I will correct "the other guy". Yes, the philmill CAN be used on abucket, regardless of it's upside down design. Simply cut a piece of wood to fit whatever bucket you want and drill a hole in the middle of it, the diameter of a carboy opening. Now use the small piece of wood that came with the Philmill as a template for drilling the mounting holes and bolt the philmill under the board as before. Unbolt the handle of the philmill and replace with a 3 or 4" long bolt, whatever it takes to be wider than the bocket, drill a small hole in the side of the bucket so the bolt head can pole through when the mill sits on top. NOW, go buy one of those nifty blue collars used for drying a carboy upside down, or stacking carboys on top of each other upside down (aboiut $8 at a homebrew supply shop) and screw it down to the topside of the piece of wood, directly centered over the hole. Now go get a plastic carboy and cut the bottom off (I used a jigsaw and a file to get the burrs off) and plunk it upside down into the plastic collar. Now step back and admire your drill moter driven 5 gallon hopper Philmill that sits on a bucket. It's amazing how many pounds of grain a 5 gallon carboy will hold! I use a triple gear reduced drill for the torque so I can start the mill with grain in it. I've been using ths setup for 3 years now without a problem. So yes virginia, you can use a philmill on a bucket (with about 30 minutes worth of work and a scrap piece of plywood and a hole saw or two) and yes, there is a Santa Claus! Rich Byrnes Founder/Secretary Fermental Order of Renaissance Draughtsmen Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1998 08:25:57 -0500 From: "Doug Evans" <Devans at greenapple.com> Subject: Hemp cake Due to the Holiday season, I've been offering 1 LB of Hemp cake to anyone who e-mails me. I've had quite a few people take me up on it on the Beer List. I take care of shipping, however, I will send it USPS. The other thing is that I only have ten to fifteen pounds of it left. If you are on the beer list and have already received this you are not eligible for another LB. BTW, Hemp cake is legal and is a product of a company here in Ohio.(Athens) I do have some information on the use of the cake if you need it. Generally, 10-20% of your grist bill should be Hemp..It also needs to be steeped with your grains.(so I've been told). Take care... Doug Evans VinBrew Supply Carroll, Ohio (740)756-4314 ProMash ONLY $20.00 Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1998 05:36:17 -0800 (PST) From: Steve Jackson <stevejackson at rocketmail.com> Subject: Re: Legal status of homebrewing and AHA In HBD #2902 (December 16, 1998) Lee Menegoni <Lee.Menegoni at digital.com> wrote: >>>> Homebrewing may be legal in most states but possession of outside the home,transporting home brew or , holding competitions is either illegal or a violation of liquor commission policy in many states. <<<< I'm not sure how many states this applies to, but Indiana, where I live, is one. We've been trying for the past two legislative sessions to get that changed, as well as allowing pubs to host club meetings without risking their licenses. Hopefully, the third time will be the charm, which leads to a not-so-subtle solicitation: Any Indiana folks out there who are interested in seeing it become legal for us to haul our homebrew around (not that anybody's cracking down on the practice), let me know. Actually, our legalization effort does lead me to one gripe about the AHA. When our club requested some help from the AHA on this, all we were sent was some fact sheet that didn't lend a whole lot of insight (for instance, it contained absolutely no Indiana-specific information) and was contained information that for the most part was easily accessible elsewhere. That was it (Caveat: another club member handled the dealings with the AHA, so there may have been more to it than that, but I don't recall the circumstances as being such. If I am incorrect, however, I do apologize). If legalization efforts are supposed to be one of the perks of AHA membership, the organization appears to be falling short on that account too. -Steve in Indianapolis _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free at yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1998 07:45:19 -0600 From: "Jim Kingsberg"<jdkingsb at hewitt.com> Subject: New digital thermometer The S.O. and I exchanged a couple Christmas gifts early. She gave me a Taylor digital thermometer. This one has a 6 inch probe, about a 3 foot lead (so you can plug the probe into meat while in the oven) which plugs into the unit which can keep time, has an alarm for hitting the temperature and digital read out (of course). I remember discussions past regarding the Polder thermometer and the need to plug up/seal the probe so that liquid does not get into the electronic unit. Anyone familiar with the Taylor brand of digital thermometer? Any info is greatly appreciated. Thanks, Jim Kingsberg (a coupla two-tree miles left of Jeff Renner, over by der by Chicago.) Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1998 05:46:19 -0800 (PST) From: Steve Jackson <stevejackson at rocketmail.com> Subject: Online Wahl-Henius book Does anybody out there know of another online location for the Wahl-Henius American Handy book of Brewing, Malting and Auxillary Trades? I've tried the one link I have (http://hubris.engin.umich.edu:8080/wahl) several times over the last couple months, and the server has never responded. Alternately, if anyone has a copy of the book themselves and would be kind enough to send me a copy of the information I'm seeking (I'm researching Kentucky Common Beer), I would be most appreciative and would be willing to compensate you for your costs in cash or the beer equivalent. Also, feel free to toss me any other information any of you may have about KKC my way. -Steve in Indianapolis _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free at yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1998 9:01 -0800 From: "George De Piro" <George_De_Piro at berlex.com> Subject: Best of Brooklyn Homebrew Competition Hi all, Just a quick note to announce the second annual ***BEST OF BROOKLYN HOMEBREW COMPETITION!!!*** The *Malted Barley Appreciation Society* and *Brooklyn Brewery* are once again joining forces to bring you one heck of a homebrew contest! The event will be held on Sat., Feb. 27, 1999 at the Brooklyn Brewery (79 North 11th Street in Brooklyn, NY). Entries must be received by Friday, Feb. 19. Judges may carry in entries ONLY if they are pre-registered by the entry deadline! Last year over 50 judges and stewards worked hard evaluating over 260 entries. All of them went home with gifts to reward their efforts, and over $2000 worth of prizes were awarded to the brewers of winning beers! We are hoping to have an even greater prize package this year!!! The Association of Brewers president, Charlie Papazian, will be on hand and will be the guest of honor at a beer dinner following the contest at nearby *Mug's Ale House*. This is a great opportunity to meet Charlie and discuss important brewing issues with him! Aside from the standard BJCP categories, there are two new beer categories in this year's BoB: 1. The "First Time Entrants" Category. There is no need to be intimidated by contest veterans! As well as being judged in their respective categories, "first time entrants" will compete in a special category that will be judged by a panel that includes Charlie Papazian! 2. The "Experimental" category. Do you make a lovely recreation of a historical beer style but fear entering it into contests because there are no appropriate categories? Do you make a great Brettanomyces black pilsner but have nowhere to enter it? This is the category for you! Check out our website at http://members.aol.com/MaltyDog/bob99.html or contact Bob Weyersberg at 212-989-4545 or triage at mindspring.com for more info about the contest and the dinner. We need judges and stewards!!! You can register electronically at the above website or contact Bob for more info! You must register to judge or steward by Feb. 19. Preference will be given to people that are active in the Beer Judge Certification Program. You will be notified of your category assignment the week prior to the contest. Good luck and have fun! George de Piro (Nyack, NY; a former president of the Malted Barley Appreciation Society, and I was not impeached) Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1998 06:07:18 -0800 (PST) From: Richard Buckberg <buck at well.com> Subject: Braggot If any of you ever get to Bar Harbor, ME there is a great beer to be had on tap, an aged braggot at the Lompoc Cafe, which is Atlantic Brewing Company. (usual disclaimers and all - I have nothing to do with them) Does anyone have a good braggot recipe? I have found a few on the web, but wonder if anyone can recommend one they've had good results with. Braggot is an old style that is generally half malt, half either honey or maple. I'd like one that's made with honey. The brew is then aged, up to a year or so. Thanks in advance. Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1998 08:38:39 -0600 From: "Brian Wurst" <brian at mail.netwave.net> Subject: The speed of change at the AHA Brian Rezac writes in HBD#2902.... - ---quote----- As for me being one of the good guys over at the AHA, I wonder as well. I am not perfect. I wish I could get more done faster. I get frustrated with the "change takes time" thing. But I can tell you that Paul and I are working to move the AHA into a more member-driven organization. And, you are correct, we do have limited resources, but we are always open for suggestions. - -----endquote---- In an organization with TWO employees (a Director and Administrator) change can be effected quite quickly, if not immediately. Which one is impeding change? The most probable explanation is neither Paul nor Brian. My suggestion is to do what you think is right and damn the Board of Advisors and the AoB(=charlie). If what you do isn't what they think is right, let them undo it after the fact. If there is that much resistance to change (or lack of trust in your vision) then the AHA is in far worse shape than what its detractors make it out to be. A true revolution begins when people who benfit most from the status quo step forward to champion the cause of changing the status quo. Brian, Paul - start a revolution! Happy Trails! Brian Wurst brian at mail.netwave.net Lombard, Illinois "Nature has formed you, desire has trained you, fortune has preserved you for this insanity." -Cicero Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1998 09:57:01 -0500 From: Jeff Renner <nerenner at umich.edu> Subject: Re: Got them Carbon Monoxide blues... Hmbrwrpete at aol.com is having monomxide problems but only when he puts the kettle on the flame. Evidently what's happening is that the flame is cooled by the kettle and incomplete combustion is occuring. I think lots more people have this problem that are aware of it - they just don't have a detector. I have one and brew in the garage, where I can regulate the monoxide by opening the doors more or less. If you have a garage, I recommend that for a brewery. Spills are less of a problem, too. Glad you're taking your kids' well being into account. A few 10s ppm won't hurt us, but why endanger them at all? A cautioinary tale: Keep that detector going in the house when you're not brewing. We had some kind of cold block in our furnace chimney (perhaps compounded by a patented heat activated damper that I removed) and awoke last week 20 minutes after the heat came on in the morning to 138ppm! No alarm that soon, and no health consequences, but what if it had happened early in the night and no detector? The basement was worse - fumey smelling, moisture in the air, and the flue icey cold and dripping with condensate. The furnace man couldn't find anything wrong with the chimney or furnace. Apparently the particular temperature and direction and speed of the wind combined with the closed damper kept the heat and combustion products from the furnace from being able to push past the cold air in the flue stack and get a draw going, and they spilled out of the front of the furnace. Most important brewing equipment to ask Santa for - a digital plug-in monoxide detector! Doesn't even cost any beer bullets since what spouse wouldn't agree to it for daily monitoring? I have a Nighthawk, which Consumers Report recommended as tops. Paid under $50. Jeff -=-=-=-=- Jeff Renner in Ann Arbor, Michigan c/o nerenner at umich.edu "One never knows, do one?" Fats Waller, American Musician, 1904-1943. Return to table of contents
[Prev HBD] [Index] [Next HBD] [Back]
HTML-ized on 12/17/98, by HBD2HTML version 1.2 by K.F.L.
webmaster at hbd.org, KFL, 10/9/96