---

	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:
  why enter (kathy/jim)
  Big Buck (kathy/jim)
  homebrew cooking - steamed artichokes (Scott Murman)
  Emus & homebrewing (not a good idea) ("Chris Herrod")
  Re: Question...how do you chill and transfer from boil to ferm. ("J. Doug Brown")
  Big Brew '99 Milk Stout & "Swine-heitsgebot" ("Brian Rezac")
  Diacetyl/Alcohol (AJ)
  Joke- beer prayer (Ian Smith)
  Sugar Substitute (Beer and Diabetics) (Ian Forbes)
  Poor Extraction Causes, Beers for Diabetics (Dan Listermann)
  RIMS/thermocouple controller (Wade Hutchison)
  Re: Diacetyl, can I get it out of kegged beer? (Jeff Renner)
  Rehydrating Yeast, Aluminum, diacetyl formation (Dave Burley)
  Reminder: brief outtage today (Dave Burley)
  Re:  Diabetes and Beer ("Eric McIndoo")
  Stupid Brewer Tricks ("Philip J Wilcox")
  Proofing yeast ("Nathaniel P. Lansing")
  Re: Guinness/Real Ale taps ("Michael Maag")


Beer is our obsession and we're late for therapy!

This space free to a good competition...

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. Digests
  CANNOT be reprinted or reproduced in any format for redistribution
  unless said redistribution is at absolutely NO COST to the consumer.
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. Home brew clubs NOT associated with organizations having a
  commercial interest in beer or brewing may republish articles in their
  newsletters and/or websites provided that the author and HBD are
  attributed. ASKING first is still a great courtesy...)

JANITORS on duty: Pat Babcock and Karl Lutzen (janitor@hbd.org)


----------------------------------------------------------------------


Date: Fri, 02 Apr 1999 00:05:35 -0500
From: kathy/jim <kbooth at scnc.waverly.k12.mi.us>
Subject: why enter

Bryon Gros writes compellingly about why he enters homebrew contests.

I'm a BCJP recognized judge and my home brew club has some good brewers,
but I/we in the club situation have our personal preferences turned on
and usually do not fill out a judges sheet about the beer.  And in the
club situation, I/we never get to blind test my beers in a flight of
competing beers of a similar style, while referring to a recognized
standard of what that style should represent. 

cheers, jim booth, lansing, mi 62 mi NW of Jeff R.

p.s. Fouch's (Bent Dick Brewery's brewer) Bath Bees made it to the Class
B BBall Finals, got beat badly, but not before the BD brewer belted
bunches of beer.




Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 02 Apr 1999 00:21:31 -0500
From: kathy/jim <kbooth at scnc.waverly.k12.mi.us>
Subject: Big Buck

Nathan in Madison comments on the Big Buck Brewpub in Gaylord.  I won't
argue with his assessment of the beers, but after drinking in the bars
of N. Michigan......well, the Big Buck isn't that bad compared with the
BudMillercoors typical offerings.  

Besides, the custom woodcarvings in the bar and unlimited peanuts are
worth something to the weary traveler.

cheers, jim booth, lansing, mi



Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 1 Apr 1999 22:35:17 -0800 (PST)
From: Scott Murman <smurman at best.com>
Subject: homebrew cooking - steamed artichokes


For some reason artichokes are dirt cheap in Northern Cali. right now.
Anyway, I bought some last night, and didn't have time to get fancy
and make a filling or anything.  I poured a few ounces of beer into
the leaves.  Gave them a decent soak.  The outer leaves actually
opened slightly, as if to invite in the lovely nectar.  I then steamed
the chokes for one hour.  I can't say for sure, but it seemed to me
they tasted just a little bit more tender.  As if the steam heated the
beer nestled deep in the heart of the choke, and helped cook it from
the inside out.  Anyway, it makes a nice theory, and a damn fine
appetizer.

 -SM-





Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 2 Apr 1999 17:40:27 +1000
From: "Chris Herrod" <daking at idx.com.au>
Subject: Emus & homebrewing (not a good idea)

G'day All,

In answer to Randy Erickson regarding Emus & chooks (chickens).

When he saw an emu at Sydney's Taronga Zoo he would have noticed that they
are a good six feet taller than a chook.

A traditional Australian 'curse' is...
'I hope your chooks turn into emus and kick your dunny (outhouse) down!'


Not a desirable situation for homebrewers at all.



Chris Herrod

Brewing Downunder in Sydney, Australia.


Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 02 Apr 1999 12:55:08 +0000
From: "J. Doug Brown" <jbrown at labyrinth.net>
Subject: Re: Question...how do you chill and transfer from boil to ferm.

>Question...how do you chill and transfer from boil to fermenter?
>nathan in madison, WI

Nathan,
  I built a counter concurrent wort chiller that I use to do just that. 
It is made entirely out of copper, cost me $56 in materials.  Mine was
overkill I had to add boiling water to bring the wort up to ale
fermenting temps.  I would suggest using only 25 feet of copper tubing
of each size instead of the 50 feet.  Using 25' for the coil should
reduce the cost to around $30, or just buy extra fittings and make two. 
If you are interrested I have a description and instructions for what I
designed and did at http://www.labs.net/jbrown/Doug/Brew/chiller.htm  If
you find any discrepancies please let me know, as I just made this page
yesterday.

PS I am working on an insulated container to ferment in that will have
both heating and cooling via use of a 12v power supply, heating coil,
2-12v fans, lost of PIC foam board, and ice.
 
Sincerely
  J. Doug Brown
  jbrown at labyrinth.net


Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 2 Apr 1999 06:40:11 -0700
From: "Brian Rezac" <brian at aob.org>
Subject: Big Brew '99 Milk Stout & "Swine-heitsgebot" 

John Varady wrote (in reference to the Collaborator Milk Stout recipe
for Big Brew '99):
>Perhaps that quick decision should have been to pick a different
style?? <and>
>I'm curious how the decision to brew milk stout came about.

The decision to brew the Collaborator Milk Stout for Big Brew '99 came
about this way:  We wanted to have the Big Brew site directors from
last year choose the recipe for this year's event.  I emailed all of
them to solicit their requests and opinions and the majority wanted to
brew an American Pale Ale, a Sierra Nevada clone.

However, right around the time I was compiling their responses, I got
the news that Bob McCracken had passed away.  Bob was the current
president of the Oregon Brew Crew, BJCP judge and volunteer organizer
of the Oregon Brewers Fest.  He helped the AHA immensely with the
National Conference and Competition in Portland last summer.  He also
spearheaded the collaboration between the Oregon Brew Crew and Widmer
Brothers Brewing to produce the Collaborator beer line.  I could go
on, but I think you get the idea.

The news of his death got to me and I thought that maybe Bob had an
American Pale Ale recipe that we could use for Big Brew.  So I spoke
with Rob Radtke and he laughed saying that Bob hated APAs and that he
was more into Belgians.  So, I emailed the site directors again, told
them about Bob and asked them to vote on whether or not they want to
brew the Collaborator Milk Stout.  The overwhelming majority said,
yes.  Many said, yes, regardless of the recipe.  So, we've moved the
SNPA clone to Big Brew 2000.  (I still have to get Sierra Nevada's
blessing, first.)

That's how it was decided.  Since then, I have heard of complaints
about choosing this recipe.  It was suggested that I was honoring
someone who's done a lot for homebrewing in his region over others who
have done a lot in their region.  It was never our intention to
downplay anyone's contribution to homebrewing.  We've even changed the
wording on the Big Brew '99 website to reflect this.  In the "Big Brew
Toast" we will be toasting all homebrewers.

Someone also expressed disdain for me "picking a friend's recipe".  I
got a kick out of this.  While I greatly respected Bob, I doubt if he
would have referred to me as, "a friend".  In most of our
conversations, we were butting heads or putting out fires.  (Remember,
we were organizing and coordinating the National Homebrew Competition,
the National Homebrewers Conference and the Oregon Brewers Festival.
They all took place within the span of 3 days last summer.  It was
hectic.)  Bob was a straight-shooting leader who worked his tail off
and always had the interest of his club at heart.  I admired him for
that and I would like to think that we would have become friends.

Well, that's the story.  I apologize for running on, but I wanted to
explain everything.

In reference to the extract/partial mash version of Big Brew '99
recipe, John wrote:
>The fact that home brewers have been doing something wrong for years,
doesn't
>make it ok. It certainly shouldn't be propagated in such a high
profile
>fashion with AHA approval.

John, I never said that the recipe was wrong.  I said it was
inefficient.  What is "wrong" in brewing?  There have been mistakes
and un-intended series of events that have turned into what we now
refer to as classic beer styles.  I could see someone saying that it
would be wrong to put coconut in a porter.  However, Ichiri Fujiura
did just that and won the AHA 1998 Homebrewer of the Year.  Not only
have homebrewers been using these ingredients this way for years, but
they're happy with their results, regardless of the beer's
"imperfections".

I should explain that most of us who subscribe to the HBD know all
about the German Purity Law, Reinheitsgebot.  Well I have to admit
that I actually brew by a different "purity" law.  I refer to it as
"Swine-heitsgebot" and it's basically one "rule":  I don't put
anything in a beer that I wouldn't feed to a pig.  Admittedly, this
gives me a wider berth of options.  (I can see this being a thread on
the HBD for months!)

Anyway, we still have an unsolved puzzle:  Can anyone come up with a
better recipe for the extract/steeped grain or partial mash version of
Collaborator Milk Stout?  As I said before, I am open to all
suggestions.  All the Big Brew '99 Site Directors have email and I can
inform them of any recipe changes in an instant.

I am, seriously, asking for help with this.  We, absolutely, want to
have the best possible recipe for brewers of all levels of brewing
techniques.

John, I think you sum it up best with one of your final comments:
>But, I'll be there. It should be *fun* which is what it really is all
about.

I agree with you 100%!  Big Brew is all about fun.  It's true that
it's a great way to promote homebrewing and introduce new brewers to
this rewarding hobby, but it should be fun!

Thank you for participating in Big Brew '99 and in the 1999 National
Homebrew Competition.  We do appreciate it!  I hope you score the
yeast.

Everyone is welcome and I encourage all to check it out at the website
listed below.

Brian Rezac
Administrator
American Homebrewers Association
736 Pearl Street, Boulder, CO  80302
303 447-0816, ext. 121
brian at aob.org        http://beertown.org

Brew With 1000 of Your Closest Friends -
Big Brew '99
E Pluribus (Br)Unum!  -   {From Many, One (Brew)!}
http://www.beertown.org/bigbrew99






Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 02 Apr 1999 13:57:38 +0000
From: AJ <ajdel at mindspring.com>
Subject: Diacetyl/Alcohol

Dave Humes wants to know (#2994) if there is any way to get rid of
diacetyl once the beer is in the keg. The traditional method is to
expose the beer to yeast in kreusen phase. They will reduce it to 2,3
butane diol which has a much higher flavor threshold than the dione
(diacetyl). Thus Dave might try adding a cuple of quarts  of kreusen
beer from his next batch. Wait a couple of weeks for it to ferment out
and for the yeast to drop out. Higher temperature to keep the yeast
active is also recommended. Don't forget to vent pressure if this is
done because yeast start to get sluggish when pressure builds and we
want active yeast.

Kreusening is known to work but here's another thought. Try Uncle AJ's
favorite brewing reducing agent: a Campden tablet. There is a chance
that the metabite will reduce the dione to diol. I haven't tried this
myself (having not been cursed with an overly diacetylish brew) and so
can only offer it as a speculation at this point. Guess I could try it
with some Pilsner Urquel and if I get a chance I will. Diacetyl assay is
not a trivial matter, however, but, I need to check a couple of beers
anyway - another weekend shot. Vintners use one tablet per gallon. You
might want to start with 1 tablet in 5 gallons and work up if 1 doesn't
do the trick. The potential problems with this method are that the
metabite will reduce other oxidized state things in the beer
preferrentially to the diacetyl i.e. if the beer is at all stale the
aldehydes may get reduced leaving no metabite for the diacetyl. The
reduction reaction may not be energetically feasible at beer pH. I can't
look up the reduction potential of diacetyl in the CRC handbook so I
can't do a calculation. The reaction may take place only at glacial
speed absent some enzyme (though as David Harris pointed out in the same
number, alpha acetolactate is oxidized to diacetyl without benefit of
enzymes). The beer will smell of sulfur dioxide, at least initially.

 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Bill Frazier (also in #2994) is seeking a reliable home method for
measuring alcohol at the 1% level.  I'm starting to think that
ebulliometry may fit the bill, even at these low levels. Below 1% the
"law" is quite close to 1% per degree (C) depression of the boiling
point and the ebulliometer thermometer is easily read to 0.05 degree.
Thus I think you could probably estimate alcohol to about 0.1% with an
ebulliometer. A catch is that a correction needs to be applied for the
residual sugars in the beer which requires you to measure the true
extract but as the corrections are small and a weak function of TE I
think you could probably estimate the true extract as some factor times
the apparent extract and be fine. Another way to dodge this bullet is to
dilute the beer 50% with distilled water. This, in a lite beer at least,
will lower the TE to the point where the correction is less than 0.04%
so you can probably ignore it. If you dilute, the ebulliometer behaves
better i.e. it is easier to get an accurate reading but some of this
accuracy has to be given back because you must double the answer (and
the error) to account for the dilution. My 0.1% accuracy estimate
assumes that dilution is done.

Now ebulliometers aren't cheap (except in comparison to the equipment
required to do alcohol analysis by other means) but the key component is
the thermometer and they aren't too expensive. I think you could
probably kluge something with one of these thermometers, a small
distilling flask and a reflux column (very important). Another approach
is to try to sell the ebulliometer, which is a rather remarkable looking
thing, to the Mrs as an example of 18th century  Continental design
which you bought as a center piece for the dining room table. This
didn't work for me but someone else may have better luck.
- --
A. J. deLange
Numquam in dubio, saepe in errore.




Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 2 Apr 1999 08:57:14 -0700
From: Ian Smith <isrs at cmed.com>
Subject: Joke- beer prayer



=============================================================
	T  H  E     B E E R      P R A Y E R
=============================================================
Our lager,
Which art in barrels,
Hallowed be thy drink.
I will be drunk,
At home as I am in the tavern.
Give us this day our foamy head,
And forgive us our spillages,
As we forgive those who spill against us.
And lead us not to incarceration,
But deliver us from hangovers.
For thine is the beer, the bitter, the lager, and the Killian's, With Dewars
and water, Barmen.



Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 2 Apr 1999 10:57:52 -0500
From: Ian_Forbes at AICI.COM (Ian Forbes)
Subject: Sugar Substitute (Beer and Diabetics)



Trevor Good recently questioned sugar substitutes in beer and
Eric Dreher replied;

"Now I'm no expert on diabetes at all, but I thought the cause
of problems
is simply the sugar.  Please correct me if I'm wrong, but
once's (sic) yeast has done
its job, then the sugar's turned to alcohol and CO2, thus no
more sugar and
therefore no longer presenting a problem, no?  Do diabetics
have problems
with beer normally?  Seems like another natural "wonder" of
beer. "

Eric,

I need to correct you.

I am a diabetic. (that doesn't make me an expert either)

It is not sugar that is the problem for diabetics (much to
popular belief), rather it is all carbohydrates that are the
problem.  Sugar is a carbohydrate, but so is starch, or pasta,
or many of the unfermentables in beer.  The body breaks
carbohydrates down into simple sugars that the cells can then
utilize for energy.  The only real difference between different
carbs for a diabetic is how fast they are broken down.  Table
sugar is sucrose (I think) so it is very quickly broken down to
glucose, which is what the body utilizes.  Fruit juice is
mostly fructose, a more complex sugar that takes longer to
convert.  Bread is a yet more complex carb and on it goes.

The next time you are at the grocery store, take a look at
"sugar free"  cookies.  Look at the nutrition label, and then
look at the amount of carbohydrates.  You will see that all of
these products still have carbs, it's just that the companies
use more complex carbs for the sweetness.  Now look at
something like diet coke.  It has 0g total Carb.  It derives
all its sweetness from aspartame, a non-carbohydrate sugar
substitute.

Back to beer.  All beer have carbohydrates.  Yeast can't
convert them all.  You can get an idea of how much carbohydrate
is present in a beer by looking at the calories.  A "lite" beer
may have around 100 calories.  One gram of carb has
approximately 4g carb, so a "lite" beer has 25g of carb.

Your diabetic friend needs to allow for the carbs in beer by
adjusting his insulin (or pills, but I'm not really sure how
the pills work or if this is an appropriate analogy).  I
recommend that he frankly discuss his love and consumption of
beer with his doctor.  Hopefully the doctor will listen to him
and help him come up with strategies for managing his
medication to allow for the consumption of beer.  One other
thing to be weary of is that alcohol inhibits the body's
release of glucagon.  Glucagon is how the body raises its blood
sugar if it drops too low.  If your friend takes insulin, he
needs to pay extra attention to his blood sugar levels while
drinking.  If the insulin starts working too fast he can get
into trouble with hypoglycemia.

To answer a question from the original post, if your sugar
substitute is a sugar replacement (aka Equal) you defeat the
purpose.  Yeast need the corn sugar to eat to produce CO2 for
carbonation.  If your sugar substitute is a derivative (as you
state) that still contains carbs then it's "6 of one and a
half-dozen of the other".  In either case you still have all of
the residual carbs present in the beer to contend with.

Luckily for me, the adjustments I need to make for beer
consumption are relatively easy.  I use an insulin pump, so
when I am going to drink a beer, I can immediately send the
proper amount of insulin into my body (for the above example it
would be about 4 units).

For any diabetics out there who are interested in the insulin
pump check with your doctor or look at http:/www.minimed.com.

If anyone out there picks up any errors or omissions to this
post, please post a correction to the digest.  I've made
mistakes before and would rather have them corrected than to
send out mis-information.

Ian
Hamden, CT


Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 2 Apr 1999 11:32:51 -0500
From: Dan Listermann <72723.1707 at compuserve.com>
Subject: Poor Extraction Causes, Beers for Diabetics

Joe Rolfe rolfe at sky.sky.com write:

<More two cents on the bad crush/mbad malt debate....

Dan Listermann        dan at listermann.com    72723.1707 at compuserve.com
said:
>"Old and stale" malt is not the cause of poor extraction.
> Poor crushes are the primary cause of poor extraction.

Ok I'll agree for the average novice poor extraction is going to come
from poor process.  But once you get by this issue, if you constantly
use the same process >  Ect.,ect...

I presume by "the the same process" also includes the same mill gap.  We
sometimes forget to remember that malt is a product of nature and, like
most things, not just natural things, it demonstrates variation.  The 
malt
could have very well been "in spec," but at the other end of the spec and
 a
different mill gap could have been called for.  I always check my grist 
and
adjust the gap to suit.  


If the malt was truely "bad" a chew test could have indicated excessive
moisture or steely corns.  With today's methods and practices, neither of

these conditions, while perfectly possible, are very likely.  


Trevor Good  (tgood at printwest.com) brings up beer for diabetics.   I have

been working on this problem for about a year.  The fellow who got me
restarted in brewing was diagnosed as a type two diabetic.  His doctor 
said
that generally he should avoid alcohol ( surprise, surprise), but if he
must drink, he should drink spirits, dry wine or lite beer.  Evidently 
the
Doc is concerned about residual sugars.  My tack has been to try to
develope a beer that has a  very low final gravity, but does not taste
thin.  I have been using rye malt without any barley malt because rye has
 a
"sliminess" to it.  The idea is to mash the rye at low temperatures ( 140

F) for very long times like 6 hours to maximize attenuation.  I further 
cut
the final gravity with sugar. The rye gives it body at very low levels.  
My
latest, which is just now finishing up, was made with 3 lbs of rye malt, 
 .5
lbs of rice hulls and 1.5 lbs of corn sugar.  It stated out at 1.030 and
appears to be finishing at around 1.002.  The sample I tasted was very 
good
considering it was only six days old.  The body was medium.  It needs 
more
hop flavor and aroma.  I used 2 oz of Golding for bittering and a half 
oz.
each for the last five minutes and steep during chilling.  


Dan Listermann   dan at listermann.com        72723.1707 at compuserve.com

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 02 Apr 1999 11:48:41 -0500
From: Wade Hutchison <whutchis at bucknell.edu>
Subject: RIMS/thermocouple controller

I've received a bunch of emails for futher information on the 
way I'm using a PC to control my RIMS setup, and further
information on the t/c amplifier chip.  I spoke with Tom,
the erstwhile electronics tech guy, and he said he'd be
glad to write up what he did along with sources for the 
chips and a schematic of the circuit we used for the 4-channel
board.  I'll post something probably mid-next-week on these
details.  I should have known there'd be a lot of interest, and
not mentioned anything until I was ready to explain.  *sigh*
	-----wade hutchison

Oh, Dave Burley correctly noted that a recycle loop on a 
centrifugal pump will tend to beat up the proteins and 
enzymes in wort.  My only suggestion is that if you are
planning a RIMS setup and you think you'll want to use a recycle
loop, buy the lowest RPM pump you can get (I've seen mag coupled
pumps between 2,000 and 10,000 RPM).  Lower RPM's of the pump
will equal lower chance for cavitation and lower shear stresses
on the fluid.
	

	


Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 2 Apr 1999 11:49:30 -0500
From: Jeff Renner <nerenner at umich.edu>
Subject: Re: Diacetyl, can I get it out of kegged beer?

Dave Humes <humesdg1 at earthlink.net> asks how to get rid of diacetyl from a
kegged pale ale.  I'm skeptical of your being able to do it with CO2
scrubbing.  For one thing, I suspect you'd be losing other desirable
volatiles as well.

The way old time American brewers did it was by kraeusening - that is,
adding a portion of freshly fermenting beer.  This was typically taken at
high kraeusen.  Ten percent was a typical amount, I believe.  You wouldn't
want to seal the keg right away for carbonation unless you know it won't
overcarbonate (figure out how much additional CO2 the kraeusen beer will
add).

I'd suggest using a different yeast since obviously the one you used caused
the problem - one that you know is clean - 1056 for example.  If you don't
just happen to have a newly fermenting batch of PA going, you could use
another compatible beer, or just make up a 1/2 gallon extract wort, pitch
it and add it at 36 hrs. or so.

Or, you could learn to like diacetyl.

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


Date: Fri, 2 Apr 1999 14:14:46 -0500
From: Dave Burley <Dave_Burley at compuserve.com>
Subject: Rehydrating Yeast, Aluminum, diacetyl formation

Brewsters:

Dave Clark asks about rehydrating yeast. As far as I know
all ( lager and ale) beer yeast are rehydrated in warm water
typically 100-110F for fifteen minutes and THEN a source of
<fermentable> sugar is added. Keep the SG of this to below
1.04 ( some say 1.02) or so at the beginning to properly
acclimate the yeast.

Often brewers add dried yeast directly to a wort.  This can
damage the yeast causing petite bodies - broken yeast cells
 - as I understand it. Petite bodies will ferment, but will stop at
a higher than desired FG and can produce off-flavors.

Rehydrating dried yeast should be done carefully to get
full activity. A single five gram pack may take 24 to 48 hours
to show visible signs of fermentation in five gallons.

Dave also asks about a stout he has recently tasted.
Murphy's Irish Stout is a sweet Irish Stout as compared to 

Guiness which is a Dry Irish Stout.
- -------------------------------------------
Dan Cole asks about the reactivity of aluminum with regard to
pH and temperature. Aluminum is one of those rare "metallic"
elements that is amphoteric.That is, it can react with both acids
and bases. It can even react with water directly, but is stopped
by an oxide coating which is vital to the stability of the metal.
Thus, the correct question is at what pH does this oxide coating
degrade so that the metal will react?

The oxide coating is soluble in bases - typically above 8.0
and penetrable to acids below 5.0. All of us have noted
that cooking in aluminum pots will either deposit a brown
coating ( reaction with the oxide coating) or a shiny new
metallic color due to the stripping of the coating.

In other words, in brewing as in cooking, aluminum will always
dissolve to some extent.  Do not use strongly alakline or
acidic cleansers, except with a short contact time. Lye
(sodium hydroxide) will dissolve aluminum with the emission
of hydrogen, just as will strong acids like muriatic
( hydrochloric acid). I presume strong bleach solutions will
dissolve aluminum since it is 5% sodium hydroxide.
- ---------------------------------------
David Harris incorrectly parphrased me in saying that I
said that copper and zinc cations were already reduced.
Sorry, but I did not say that. These ions are already fully
<oxidised>. And I said it was unlikely they could be
reduced in aqueous media by an organic agent.

But that is less important, as David provided a quote from 

M&BS that appears to be totally ridiculous. David says 

that the following quote appears in M&BS, p595    2nd edition.
My 2nd ed is 800 miles away and my scan of the 1st edition
produced no such statement.

According to David ( and I do not doubt him), M&BS says:

"Molecular oxygen is not necessary for this oxidation and
other electron donors ( Cu++, Al++ and Fe+++) also increase
the formation of diacetyl from a-aceto lactate" 


What happened to the Ca++ & Zn++ ion in your original quote?
Sorry, but Cu++ and Fe+++ cannot be electron <donors>.
 And this is supposed to be an OXIDATION in which
electrons are taken from the a-aceto lactate. I also 

doubt that the Al++ ion would be very stable in an aqueous
environment, so it would be unable to be a participant in
any such conversion.

I suppose it is possible that cuprous and ferrous ions could
be formed ( that is Cu++ and Fe+++ are REDUCED by the
a-acetolactete and TAKE UP electrons) and could therefore
somehow oxidize the a-acetolactate. However, the
concentration of these ions in beer is pretty low and it
seems unlikely that this is a general principle.  I would like
to see the molecular balanced equation which takes into
account the carbon and oxygen balance in the proposed
scheme.

This is obviously a statement taken out of context or just
plain incorrect.  Maybe David can clear this up by further
study.  For now, I am unconvinced that any of the
aforementioned ions are participating chemically in the
production of diacetyl.

Yeast strain and the presence of insufficient quantities of
valine are the most likely causes of excess diacetyl.
Pediococcus infection ( Sarcina Sickness) is another 

unwanted source of diacetyl. Petite mutants can also
produce diacetyl in excess of the primary strain.

P 622 M&BS 1st ed says in Table 22.13
results are mg/l i.e. ppm
Beer Style              Diacetyl                  2,3  Pentanedione

Barley Wine (4) 0.11--.44               0.04-0.08
Lager (9)               0.02-0.08               0.01-0.05
Ale (9)         0.06-0.30               0.01.0.20
Stout (5)               0.02-0.07               0.01-0.02
Stout 1)                0.58            0.26

(n) = number of samples

Diacetyl has a butterscotch aroma and 2,3 pentanedione like
that of honey. These compounds  are the oxidation products
of a-acetolactate and a-acetohydroxybutyrate, by products
of pyruvate conversion.

This table causes me to puzzle over the oft repeated BJCP
guideline that lager should have minimal diacetyl and it is
expected in ales. This table does not strongly support this
position as the maximum amount in ales is only about 4 times
that of the highest lager. Diacetyl taste threshold in lager beer
(op cit Table 22.11) is 0.162 whereas it is 0.00261 in water. In
degassed beer it is 0.005.  Note that this table is a collection
of three different references, so it is unlikely there is a strong
correspondence as an examination of other entries in the table
shows. Likely diacetyl is detectable at the 0.02 level and
therefore is detectable in lagers as well as ales.


Keep on Brewin'



Dave Burley

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 2 Apr 1999 14:20:18 -0500
From: Dave Burley <Dave_Burley at compuserve.com>
Subject: Reminder: brief outtage today

Message text written by Homebrew Digest
>Just to remind you that there will be a (hopefully) brief outtage today 
as
the server is put through the rigors of yet another upgrade. Thanks for
bearing with us - and for providing the means to upgrade the server!
<

Lest we all forget, Pat and Karl, you guys are the most important means 
to
upgrade the server.

Thanks!!

Keep on Brewin'

Dave Burley

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 2 Apr 1999 13:35:44 -0700
From: "Eric McIndoo" <emcindoo at micron.net>
Subject: Re:  Diabetes and Beer

Trevor Good asks about corn sugar substitutes for a diabetic friend:

I have had a few diabetic friends and this is what they told me.  First,
there is sugar in beer (attenuation rates are <75% usually).  This would
tend to increase the blood sugar level.  However, alcohol has the opposite
effect and lowers ones blood sugar levels.  I would still suggest that this
person check their sugar levels after a couple tall ones, but I have seen
one of my diabetic friends down 5 or 6 glasses and his sugar levels didn't
change one bit.  Just remember, I'm not a doctor and YMMV.  Happy
Consumption.

emcindoo at micron.net




Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 2 Apr 1999 17:19:08 -0400
From: "Philip J Wilcox" <pjwilcox at cmsenergy.com>
Subject: Stupid Brewer Tricks




From: Philip J Wilcox at CMS on 04/02/99 05:19 PM

Did you ever think that molassas was ever slow and sticky? Forget about it.
Did you ever think you had the most gooey, tacky mess possible all over the
brewpot, stove and wastebasket? Forget about it. Did you ever think you did
the stupidist thing in the world, even after you considered a better
alternative and sluffed it off to "I'll just be more careful?" If so, you
might have a clue as to what I'm about to explain.

This Monday I got home from my parents' house about 8:30. My mother had
kindly picked me up a four lb can of McManimans Stout LME and a 2.2 lb can
of Rice LME from the Merchant of Vino. I heated both cans in the oven at
170F while I went to work crunching the numbers.  My plan was to water down
the LME 1 to 1 with water. This I hoped, would actually pour down a funnel.
This would add a fresh gallon of wort to a 6.5 gal carboy that already had
~5 gal of 1.053 fermenting wort in it. While running the numbers the first
time I realized that I still would have a beer in the realm of an imperial
stout. "This would not do!" So I figured in a pound of honey and cut the
volume back to just the liquid sugar additions and got what I was after. A
Honey Oat Malt Cheerio and 5 1/2 Other Grain Imperial Stout!!

I grabbed the can opener and malt cans from the oven and decended into the
dungeon. The can opened with a pleasent "phssst" as I proceeded into my
first mistake. My brew can opener was in rare form--it was working. It
worked so well, in fact, that I ran it all the way around the can only to
watch the lid fall an inch down into the sticky black mire. I attempted to
dislodge it with a nearby screw driver, but it was to no avail. My handy
one inch cube magnet was nearby and that did the trick. I carefully tried
to wipe off all the goo, but a half dozen strands of sweet, sticky sinews
followed the lid no matter what I did. With no other place put it, I
plopped it right in the middle of my calculations sheet. I then squeezed
the open end of the can to create a narrow spout. At the last second, it
buckled and a sticky ooze sprang over the edge. I quickly hoisted the can
into place, but not before knocking the airlock off with the sticky part of
the malt can. I put my pinky on the neck of the carboy and my thumb on the
edge of the can that I was holding with my other hand. I was hopeing that
this would give me better aim. In fact, it did. It wasnt until I tried to
stop that I slopped malt on the carboy neck. Some, but not enough to worry
about.

Next was the rice LME. I had no idea it would be translucent. You could
read a newspaper through an entire bucket of this stuff. The can was still
warm so I figured I was OK. The can was too small to do the squeeze-job I
did on the malt can. This can was made of heavier stock anyway. I brought
the can into position, slowly tilted and squeezed the mouth simultaneously.
Slowly, the contents of the can began to shift. I should have been alarmed
when I saw a thin film of hardening sugar on the surface of the liquid. I
sluffed it off as I watched the first wide blob break the edge of the
container and slowly decend to the carboy. I thought if I raised the can
higher it would stretch out more and surely would fit into the carboy. I
was wrong. Oh was I wrong. The bulge flowed forth over the mouth of the can
not narrowing a bit and slowly gravity took its toll. It slowly, lost
momentum moving slower and slower till I thought time stood still. I was so
engrossed in how this flow could just stop in mid pour that I didn't
realize that I had started to bring the can upright. When I realized it, I
quickly started to pour again, but it was too late.  A huge blob had
escaped and was quickly catching up with the first one, which had just got
to the carboy neck. It hadn't shrunk at all, it wasn't going to fit! It hit
both sides of the mouth of the caryboy at the same instant. It didn't go
down. It quickly covered the whole hole and began stacking itself like a
fluid accordian. A sicky gooey oozing translucent accordian that was now
playing sloppy music down the side of my carboy. The second blob hit the
covered mouth and oozed over the side in deafening silence. I was in agony.

I put the can down as quickly as I could, twisting and turning hopelessly
trying to keep from making a mess. With a lump in my throat, I did what had
to do. I plunged my finger down the carboy neck trying to free the
blockage. The warm thick syrup gurgled reluctently when I tried to stuff it
down the neck of the carboy. The syrup was about as cooperative as a cat
getting a bath. With my thumb pointed as far from my finger as I could, I
tried to scoop the glop off the carboy's shoulder. I could get some up to
the neck, but I couldn't get it to go down the hole. I cried out in mental
anguish as my other thumb began forcing the syrup down the hole. It was
gruesome, but I finally got it all in the carboy.

Cleaning it up was no mean feat either. I ferment in a basment where there
is no laundry tub. So, sticky me and then sticky carboy had to go upstairs
to the kitchen avoiding clean laundry, recycling and a pair of oversized
stair-dwelling lethargic cats. Eventually I sprayed enough hot water to
melt away the sugar. I pulled the carboy out of the sink to dry it off and
quickly noted the 3 1/2 inch layer of sludge on the bottom of the carboy.

My plan was to do as I do for meads and just swirl until disolved. Well, I
stirred, and I stirred and I stirred some more. I stirred so hard that all
the carbon dioxide in suspension foamed up and sputtered the airlock so
hard I got a face full of water! I got the yeast suspended and whiring
about as fast as I could. But the sludge, well, was being sludgelike, it
wasn't moving. Rather than further scratch up the kitchen countertops, I
decided to move into my favorite mead shaking spot...in front of the TV.
After some more futile swirling, my wife made a simple observation. Why
don't you just stir it like you used too? Dooh!!! I trugded into the
dungeon, and on the back of the middle shelf behind my old zap-pap lauter
tun and bottling bucket, was my old tired brew spoon. I dusted it off and
tossed it into a keg of idophor. It sure did the trick. I pried the sludge
off the bottom like roofing tar. Appropriate since it was a stout kit...
Within a few minutes, it was all disolved. I gleefully replaced the airlock
and colapsed on the couch.

My wife hit play on the movie and yelled GOTCHA!! Not that I had the energy
to carry the carboy back downstairs. So there it quietly sat, in the middle
of the table. About a half hour into the movie, perfectly timed for the
middle of the first romantic interlude, Blurp! The airlock anounces
fermentation has restarted! I shot a glance at my wife out of the corner of
my eye, she didn't hear it, I was safe. By the end of the movie the airlock
was bubbling on a 15 second pace and there was a three inch krausen on the
wort!!! I couldnt believe it, three inchs in two hours. I hauled the carboy
back to the basement, put its T-shirt back on and called it a night.

In summary, this stout has gone from 1.053 original starting gravity down
to 1.022 before the estimeated 45 point addition. This yields an estimated
1.098 total gravity from which it has fermented down to 1.032 (current
gravity) and continues to ferment at 1 bubble every 2 min. Yum.

Phil Wilcox
Poison Frog Home Brewer
Warden-Prison City Brewers
In Jackson, MI 32 Mi. West of Jeff Renner
AABG, AHA, BJCP, HBD, MCAB, ETC., ad nausium...





Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 2 Apr 1999 21:42:51 -0500
From: "Nathaniel P. Lansing" <delbrew at compuserve.com>
Subject:  Proofing yeast


Clark at capital.net asks about long lag times with a dry lager yeast.
Dry yeast should not be "proofed", but do benefit from being rehydrated
before pitching. The yeast need to first resume a natural hydrated state
before they are presented anything to ferment. If you used table sugar 
this
would get the yeast acclimated to fermenting sucrose, a minor constituent

in wort. At pitching the yeast would need to reacclimate to fermenting
maltose, this would add to the lag time. The proper thing to do is follow

the manufacturer's directions closely. If it says hydrate at 105 degrees
for
15 minutes then 15 minutes it is, longer is not better.
Waiting up to 30 minutes is acceptable but does lead to_significant_drop 
in
viability, giving longer lag times. The dry lager yeasts require no
different
treatment than dry ale yeasts and the tests I have done showed similar 
lag
times
until high K. Glad it finally took off OK for you, nothing worse than 
that 

long wait. 


Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 2 Apr 1999 22:44:02 -0500
From: "Michael Maag" <maagm at rica.net>
Subject: Re: Guinness/Real Ale taps

I was looking for a tap which would inject air (mostly N2) into beer as it
was dispensed.
I recieved several emails from people who had "creamer taps".  They act like
regular taps except when the handle is pressed backward, it restricts and
foams air into the beer.  They report Guinness-like heads on ale from the
action of the tap.  I ordered one today.  They are available from
http://www.williamsbrewing.com/   Yada, yada.  Thank you HBD.
Mike, In the Shenandoah Valley, Va. 8*)



Return to table of contents

---