---

	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:
  Long mash, dextrins and mouthfeel (Dave Burley)
  Hop Oil (BrewInfo)
  Known Alcohol Levels ("Philip J Wilcox")
  dr pivo/hops in CT (jim liddil)
  Big Brew '99 recipe ("Brian Rezac")
  preserve my hop rhizomes for 1 year? ("Brigham, Dana")
  co2 tank dilemma ("Anthony & Julie Brown")
  kegging freshness ("Anthony & Julie Brown")
  Flavor and Serving Temperature (Matthew Comstock)
  Reported Water (AJ)
  Re: questions on priming and bottle cappers ("Sieben, Richard")
  re: Siebel ("Spies, Jay")
  Fred weighs in.... (Eric.Fouch)
  Siebel (WayneM38)
  diacetyl confusion ("Nathaniel P. Lansing")
  Gravity fed real ale. (Jay Hammond)
  KEG Enterprises (a.k.a. Stainless in Seattle) ("Marc Sedam")
  DC brewpubs/Michael Jackson event ("St. Patrick's")
  sanitizers (JPullum127)
  Re: Extra High Extraction Rate ("Nigel Porter")
  Sanitizing with lactic acid (mike rose)
  Carboys, Carboys, Carboys . . . ("Brett A. Spivy")
  Sanitation and septic systems (Paul Haaf)
  Re: TSP ("John Palmer")
  Tri-Sodium Phosphate availability (pbabcock)
  plato (JPullum127)
  Maximum Rims Return Temperature Target? ("William W. Macher")
  Re: Mash times ("Paul Smart")
  Schaarbeek Cherries ("Grant W. Knechtel")


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

Enter the Spirit of Free Beer! Competition 5/22/99. Details at
http://burp.org/SoFB99. 2000 MCAB Qualifier!
Enter the Buzz-Off! Competition 6/26/99.  Details on the HBD Competition
Calendar for June 1999 (http://hbd.org). 2000 MCAB qualifier!

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: Mon, 12 Apr 1999 15:39:27 -0400
From: Dave Burley <Dave_Burley at compuserve.com>
Subject: Long mash, dextrins and mouthfeel

Brewsters

Bret Morrow did an excellent experiment in which he
determined that alpha amylase continued to be active
longer than the typical 90 minute mash.  The point is,
any starch or high MW carbohydrates can still be
chopped down in a longer ( like an overnight) mash.

The real questions is what about the beta amylase?
 If there is still beta around then these "dextrins" could
be reduced to sugars and fermented. This higher
alcohol content could change the charactrer of the beer
versus one in which the shorter mash time was used. 

Bret's experiments confirm the lifetime of alpha
amylase indicated in the literature.  As an HBDer
pointed out recently, some years ago AlK and I argued
this point about beta amylase's lifetime at 158F.
Based on the literature and my experience it was
concluded ( if it ever was) that even beta emylase
has a finite lifetime at high mash temperatures.
I mean, if not, why would professional texts list 158F
as being as appropriate mash temperature?.

However, it is a basic principle of mashing that
the shorter lifetime of beta amylase at higher
temperature is what gives rise to the temperature
dependence of the dextrin content of beers.
What then of the lower mash temperatures?
Beta lives longer and can be active for many hours
at these low mash temperatures to produce a
virtually dextrinless beer if carried to extremes.
The worst case would be one in which the mash
was brought to a low saccharification  temperature
and then allowed to cool ( ala overnight). Dave Line
at least had a temperature control on his Bruheat. 


What is too often ignored when discussing the lifetime
( which is a theoretical number often measured
under non-mash conditions) is that as the mash
temperature goes up, the conversion speed of the
substrate of BOTH ( or should I say all)  amylases
increases.

Now, how does this relate to Bret's experiment which
stated purpose was to find out if a long mash
produced a thin beer or not.  The presumption
( as I inferred) in his proposal is that fewer HMW dextrins
as a result of long lived alpha would somehow
reduce the body and produce a "thin" beer.

It will come as a surprise to some that the dextrin
content of a beer is NOT what determines the body
or mouth fullness of a beer.  


M&BS -p 600, 1ed 


"..."body".  This ill defined beer property is thought
to be related to the concentration of macromolecules,
principally proteins and melandoins, in the beer.
Dextrins which were implicated earlier are known to
have little effect"

I accept this, however, it also seems that for a given
grist, a low T mash will give higher alcohol content
in the beer and may in high OG beers produce an
"alcoholic" beer which may have some of the
charactertistics of a thin beer.  Overnight mashes
of high OG beers may tend in this direction.
- -------------------------------
I agree with Mark Wilson that an overnight mash takes
longer in terms of total time BUT if you work late, don't
have a weekend schedule that permits it and the like
but can devote say from 8pm to 12 pm ( some people
DO take two or more hours to get home after work -
at least in the Northeast) for two nights or such then
you too can brew. It is a compromise, but it can be
done.  Better to stay with minimashes and use extracts
IMHO. But most of all just brew.

>I haven't read any of Charlie P.'s books for years so
don't remember much of >his advice.

Most of it wasn't very good, like pouring hot wort through
the air ( see picture), using a carboy for a primary,
short mashes, bad iodine test method ( first ed) and
the like. He did begin the collection of data on brewing
supplies and analyses which had been ignored in earlier
hobby books. Luckily, I learned independently from
professional texts and British hobby books before I
ever read a CP book.

>  I'm going on personal experience.  i.e., when I
switched from 1hour sac. rests to 15-20 min., similar
recipies did not show much difference in extraction
efficency when using shorter sac. rests; I average around
>75-80% efficiency.

OK. But there are well understood reasons why you
could have gotten the result you like, but not for the
reasons you assume.  You still haven't addressed
the major question - milling efficiency. When I
changed over to double milling ( as I have described
in the HBD) my points went to low-mid nineties. I
had been using the longer mash times used by
professionals and still getting low effficiencies,
so mash times is not the only determining factor in
efficiency and therefore your conclusions are not
well founded based on your present data.
Remember that saccharification is not the only thing
that is happening in brewing and it does take longer
to do some reactions than others, especially those
sequential ones.  There is a reason the professionals
take longer. If 15 minutes were enough they, of all
people, would use it.

>It's like the no-sparge argument; even if extraction is
less efficient using >a shorter mash, I'm getting
getting better beer in less time.

People are getting better beers with no-sparge because
they are higher OG and have not exracted some of the
phenolic negatives from the grain. The buffers in the mash
control the solubility  of these compounds.  As the pH rises
as in a "natural" sparge when the soluble content of the mash
is removed, these phenolics are extracted and detract
from the maltiness of the beer. However, pH
control during sparging makes this a non- result, IMHO. 


> The reason I started shortening my mash times was
not to save time, but to get more body and mouthfeel
from my beers; less time for the enzymes to break the
sugars into >smaller sugars means more of both. 


If your real reason for operating a short mash time is
to get more dextrins, there is a better way and that is
to operate at a higher mash temperature.  Try a mash
at 158F and see if you don't like that better.

Mouthfeel is due to the proteins present ( see my above
quote and comments)  not the dextrins as some claim,
and you apparently believe.  Operating at a high mash
temperature will denature the proteolytic enzymes and
may give you a better mouthfeel. Try it.

>At any rate, sounds like an experiment waiting to happen.
Brew the exact
same beer, same mash temps, different mash duration.
 And, I'll try and dig
>up some comparisons in efficiency, etc. from my brew log.

OK, but as I said, efficiency is mainly determined by
the crush.  Dextrins by the mash temperature. Soluble
protein content by the maltster and low temperature
holds. I really don't see any reason for anyone else
to do this experiment, but I do suggest you do this for
your own satisfaction as long as you include a high
temperature mash as part of your scheme.

I disagreed  with your statement that all books which
had been written on the subject of mash times  were
wrong because you made a few good beers with a
short mash time ( remember you said 5 -15 minutes). I still do.

Keep on Brewin'

Dave Burley

Return to table of contents


Date: Mon, 12 Apr 1999 14:53:44 -0500 (CDT)
From: BrewInfo <brewinfo at xnet.com>
Subject: Hop Oil

Jeremy writes (a long time ago):
>As mentioned, the processed NA beer could be dry hopped, or late hop or dry
>hop essences added (e.g. www.hoptech.com) to replace lost hop aroma
>components.

I bought some HopTech East Kent Goldings Hop Oil a while ago.  It was
something like $15 for a little (1/2 oz?) dropper bottle.  I immediately
tried it on a decent IPA (which I wanted to dryhop, but didn't have
the time) but couldn't get it to work.  First, I tried the recommended
amount... no hop aroma that I could detect.  Then I tried double the
recommended amount... still no hop aroma.  Finally, I tried four times
the recommended amount... faint hop aroma, but I would not mistake it
for East Kent Goldings (note: I'm a pretty experienced BJCP judge, so
it's not like I don't know hop aroma when I smell it).  Then I looked
at the IPA... it had little flocs of whitish material suspended in the
beer!  They looked like dead Sea Monkeys(tm)!  Even the recommended
amount gave me these flocs.

I was told by the retailer that he kept the oil refrigerated and I
received it via UPS the next day.  I too kept it in the fridge until
use (1 day).

So, has anyone had success with these hop oils from HopTech?  Did you
get this turbidity also?  Did it smell anything like actually dryhopping
the beer?  How did the beer do in competition?  Did the judges praise
the hop aroma?

I guess it's better than if it looked like *live* Sea Monkeys ;^).

Al.

Al Korzonas, Lockport, IL
korz at brewinfo.com
http://www.brewinfo.com/brewinfo/


Return to table of contents


Date: Mon, 12 Apr 1999 17:12:36 -0400
From: "Philip J Wilcox" <pjwilcox at cmsenergy.com>
Subject: Known Alcohol Levels




From: Philip J Wilcox at CMS on 04/12/99 05:12 PM

My collection of beer literature doesn't have much to say about percise
alcohol levels of Anheuser Busch products. I spent an hour or so this
weekend trying to track down the Alcohol % of US produced Budwiser. I may
have passed the master brewer exam on the BUD web site, but I didn't come
away with the answer I was looking for. Does anybody else out there know?
Is there a list of known alcohols in commercial examples I did not uncover
in my HBD Search???

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: Mon, 12 Apr 1999 17:25:27 -0400
From: jim liddil <jliddil at vms.arizona.edu>
Subject: dr pivo/hops in CT

Dr Pivo wrote:

>But should a homebrewer propagate the acceleration of this process?

This is an excellentpoint.  Homebrewing isnot about making money and shelf 
stable beers.  Mass homogenization is bad!  excellent posting.

I got some advice on growing hops in connecticut already.  Can anyone else 
provide input about pests and diseases in the area?  How soon can I plant 
here?

Jim Liddil



Return to table of contents


Date: Mon, 12 Apr 1999 19:46:08 -0600
From: "Brian Rezac" <brian at aob.org>
Subject: Big Brew '99 recipe

Fellow HBDers,

I have received a few suggestions for improving the extract version of
the Collaborator Milk Stout recipe that we will be using for Big Brew
'99.  I am running these recipe versions past those who have already
registered to participate in Big Brew '99, but I would like to get
your input as well.

To refresh everyone's memory, the problem with the original extract
version of the recipe was that we were using 1 3/4 pounds of flaked
grains, oats and barley, without any enzymatic malts.  You can still
find the original all grain and the uncorrected extract versions of
this recipe at the Big Brew '99 webpage,
http://www.beertown.org/bigbrew99 .

The dilemma was that for Big Brew, we wanted to have a version of the
recipe for homebrewers at all levels of brewing skill and experience.
The solution/compromise that we've come up with is to provide two
extract versions of this recipe.  Here's what we came up with.  Please
take a look at these versions and let me know what you think.

(Changes are marked with an asterisk, *.)

Collaborator Milk Stout
==================
We would like to credit Jeff Brinlee, Jeff Langley, and Ken Bietschek
for the original recipe, Widmer Brothers Brewing Company and the
Oregon Brew Crew for the conception and fruition of Collaborator and
Bob McCracken for spearheading this amazing project.

Extract/Partial Mash Version
- ---------------------------------------
Ingredients for 5 U.S. gallons

*  3.5 lbs. Pale Malt Extract
*   2 lb.  Pale Malt
    1 lb.  Wheat Dry Malt Extract (55%)
    1.5 lb.  Caramel Malt (60L)
*   1 lb.  Belgian CaraPils Malt
    5 oz.  Black Patent
    12 oz.  Roasted Barley
    12 oz.  Flaked Oats
    1 lb.  Flaked Barley
    1 lb.  Lactose (added to Kettle)

   1 oz.  Centennial, 10.1% alpha (75 min)
   1/2 oz.  Willamette, 5.1% alpha (5 min)

With this version, we will explain that a mash is required with the
pale malt, flaked oats and flaked barley.


Extract/Steeped Grains Version
- --------------------------------------------
Ingredients for 5 U.S. gallons

    5 lbs. Pale Malt Extract
*   1 lb.  Pale Malt
    1 lb.  Wheat Dry Malt Extract (55%)
    1.5 lb.  Caramel Malt (60L)
*   1 lb.  Belgian CaraPils Malt
*   5 oz.  Black Patent
    12 oz.  Roasted Barley
*   0.5 lb.  Flaked Oats
*   0.5 lb.  Flaked Barley
    1 lb.  Lactose (added to Kettle)

    1 oz.  Centennial, 10.1% alpha (75 min)
    1/2 oz.  Willamette, 5.1% alpha (5 min)

With this, the steeped-grain version, we will suggest a slow steep
for, at least, the pale malt and flaked grains.
- ---------------------

One of the nice things about Big Brew '99 is that all the participants
have email and we can change things relatively easy.  We hope to have
the website updated with the new versions of the recipe by April 15th.
If you have any comments or suggestions, please email them to me as
soon as you can.

Thanks for your help and input!  I encourage all of you to participate
in Big Brew '99!

 - Brian

E Pluribus (Br)Unum!  -   {From Many, One (Brew)!}
http://www.beertown.org/bigbrew99

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



Return to table of contents


Date: Mon, 12 Apr 1999 22:39:25 -0400
From: "Brigham, Dana" <dbrigham at nsf.gov>
Subject: preserve my hop rhizomes for 1 year?

OK - I have two hop plants doing well in the ground here in central
Maryland.  This is their 3rd year, and I've already got 18" of fast growth.

*BUT* it looks like I will need to sell the house in a few months and may
not have a place to plant my hops until 2000 - so how can I dig these babies
up and preserve them intact for a year?  I don't have an option of planting
with a friend/relative for a year....

Please respond via email to:

dbrigham at nsf.gov

Thanks!!!

Dana Brigham
National Science Foundation
dbrigham at nsf.gov


Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 13 Apr 1999 05:13:50 CSTCDT
From: "Anthony & Julie Brown" <brown32 at web1.ecol.net>
Subject: co2 tank dilemma

I am going to start kegging my beer soon and can't
decide what size co2 canister to purchase.  I can
get a 5# for $35 or a 15# for $50.  The 5# would fit
in the frige better but the 15# is more economical.
Any suggestions as to which one would serve me better.
Plan to have 2 kegs tapped at a time.  HELP!!


Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 13 Apr 1999 05:17:51 CSTCDT
From: "Anthony & Julie Brown" <brown32 at web1.ecol.net>
Subject: kegging freshness

I am going to begin kegging soon and was wondering
if anyony knows how long a pressurized and refrigerated
keg of homebrew will keep.  Will it go bad faster than
bottles or lose carbonation at some point.  

Anyone know how long a keg will retain carbonation
after disconnecting from the co2 tank??  I am hoping
that I wont have to find out since I am sure I
will be drinking more now knowing that the beer I
will have in my hand will not mean one more bottle to
clean and sanitize....


Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 13 Apr 1999 04:49:37 -0700 (PDT)
From: Matthew Comstock <mccomstock at yahoo.com>
Subject: Flavor and Serving Temperature

Greetings
I remember someone discussing this earlier this year
but for the life of me, I can't find it in the
archives....  What gives with the flavor/serving
temperature relationship?  Why does my beer taste
poorly at fridge temps, like after an overnight stay,
but taste great if only slightly chilled.  I don't
think its a 'frozen tastebud' thing either.  SOP now
is to take a chilled bottle out of the fridge 15-30
min before drinking to let it warm up.  Now I have to
convince friends that my warm beer really does taste
better warm.
Matt Comstock in Cincinnati

_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free  at yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com



Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 13 Apr 1999 12:35:28 +0000
From: AJ <ajdel at mindspring.com>
Subject: Reported Water

Dave Burley wrote:
>Thirdly, if you will read the books I have read, they all
>seem to list the water analysis of the locality. The major
>INCORRECT assumption is that this is the water used
>as the brewing liquor.

Another major incorrect assumption is that the reports in the books are
correct. Most of them are demonstrably wrong. Add up the charges and
calculate the pH required for balance. Often this will be 10 or 11.
Alternatively assume a pH like 8.4 and calculate the charge imbalance.
It is often a couple of milliequivalents/L.
- --
A. J. deLange
Numquam in dubio, saepe in errore.




Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 13 Apr 1999 07:40:54 -0500
From: "Sieben, Richard" <SIER1 at Aerial1.com>
Subject: Re: questions on priming and bottle cappers

Dawn Watkins asked about how much priming sugar to use in bottles of cider.

Well, I never made a cider, but I have primed a 'few' batches of beer and
would recommend that you don't bottle prime, but batch prime instead.
Unfortunately I prime with dried malt extract and I don't recall how much
corn sugar to use, maybe 3/4 cup for 5 gallons?  Others will surely jump in
on that if it's wrong, and even if they don't, just look it up in any
homebrew book.  You also asked about corn syrup, I don't have a clue if this
is ok to use.  you can get corn sugar at a homebrew/wine supply store.

Black beauty capper?  I have use it and it works fine.

Your final question was if you can brew less than a 5 gallon batch, yes you
can, but why?  The beer will keep a long time if you keep it fairly cool.  I
have had beers taste fine after 11 months, unrefrigerated.

Good luck, 

Rich Sieben

Brew forth and swill no more
(or insert your favorite witty phrase here)


Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 13 Apr 1999 09:10:23 -0400
From: "Spies, Jay" <Spies at dhcd.state.md.us>
Subject: re: Siebel

All -

In #3003, Jethro announces the willingness of Mr. Siebel and staff to answer
our questions, and encourages us to personally thank him for doing so...

I know that I will, and I personally feel that all of us should do the same,
whether we plan to ask questions, read the responses, or simply PgDn.  This
is an almost unique opportunity for us to get direct feedback from the folks
at Siebel...free of charge.  Big kudos to Jethro for making the inroads to
facilitate this...you are truly an asset to the brewing community.

So write in, and thank those guys...and thank Jethro...

Jay Spies
Wishful Thinking Basement Brewery
Baltimore, MD


Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 13 Apr 1999 09:36:00 -0400
From: Eric.Fouch at steelcase.com
Subject: Fred weighs in....

HBD-
Fred wants to try his hand at answering a few questions:

From: "P.J. Reilly" <preilly at exis.net>
Subject: Extra High Extraction Rate

PJ-
One thing to not lose sight of in high gravity brewing/dilution is your hop
rate.  Hopefully, you noticed your higher than expected gravity while it was
in the brew pot and hopped accordingly:  While diluting to a lower effective
OG is fine, be aware that you are also diluting your bitterness (I wonder if
this would work on my wife?).

From:  Dan Cole
spending an additional $50 for one with the spigot, I decided on one
of the weld-free setups. Just drill a hole and use the included
compression fitting and the spigot.

Any advice?

Here in The Craft Corner, we routinely put weld-free side drains in 5 gallon
pots, 15 gallon kegs and 55 gallon drums of K-Y.  I just go down to Ace
Hardware and pick up a 3/8" ball valve with 3/8" male flare fittings on either
end.  Drill the appropriate sized hole in the side using a step drill
(Unibit).  On the inside, I like to use fitting the has a 3/8" female flare to
3/8" male compression.  A few washers and a roll of Teflon tape from the Bent
Dick Toolbox, and the bulkhead seals up fine.


From:  Steve Gibbs
there any consensus as to good or bad points in having a long mash (ie.
degradation of proteins etc.) or has the addition of a decoction in my
process potentially helped in the problem areas?
Happy Brewing

Steve, I don't think there is much of a problem with doing overnight mashes
(hell, I almost did one myself!), but I think there is a problem with a post
overnight mash decoction:  You are sure to have liberated some extra starches
from the decoction, and added them back to a mash where the enzymes have all
pooped out.  I doubt many enzymes survived the overnight mash.
Speaking of overnight mashing, I was in the park the other night and....

Sorry, that's all the time Fred has for todays HBD.  I've sent out to the back
forty to give the hop shoots a nice Epsom salt soak.

Eric Fouch
Bent Dick YoctoBrewery
Kentwood, MI




Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 13 Apr 1999 10:38:41 EDT
From: WayneM38 at aol.com
Subject: Siebel

<< Date: Sun, 11 Apr 1999 23:58:11 -0500
From: "Rob Moline" <brewer at isunet.net>
Subject: The Jethro Gump Report...Siebel 

<<snip>>
For a 2 week period, from May 17th through the 28th, 1999, Siebel
instructors will be reviewing your questions to the HBD .....and answering
them......
<<snip>>
Personally, I have hopes that this will go so successfully, that it might
be repeated in future years. (Maybe an annual Siebel fortnight/or week?)
I also have hopes that it might encourage some of you to become students at
Siebel. If you can learn 1% of what they have to offer, you will indeed have
learned much. I know I have a long way to go to get to just that much, but
hopefully, you will be a better student than I!
	BTW, the Siebel Web Site is   www.siebelinstitute.com ...
	And if this news meets with your approval, I would invite you to drop 
a
quick note to Mr. Siebel at info at siebelinstitute.com to thank him. Please.
Cheers!
Jethro Gump>>

Two thoughts regarding the above news:

Are your going to establish an informal question format for questions to be 
answered by the Siebels Staff? I was fortunate to have a tour of the facility 
last month by the teaching staff.  They were all willing to answer as many 
questions as time permitted. For every question that they answered, I had two 
more. The HBD queue will certainly be over the 47K limit for quite some time 
afterwards.

The 1999 Siebel Course Catalog points out that attendance fell for regularly 
scheduled 1998 courses.  They suggest that depending on this years (1999) 
enrollment, some classes could be eliminated or only offered every second or 
third year. I hope that Siebels participation on the HBD can somehow help 
them to continue to provide the range of services they have in the past. They 
have 127 years of experience teaching brewing technology and some of that 
info is shared here on the HBD.

Now if IIse Shelton could just sample some of my homebrews 
online..............

Wayne
Big Fun Brewing
Milwaukee


Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 13 Apr 1999 10:59:29 -0400
From: "Nathaniel P. Lansing" <delbrew at compuserve.com>
Subject: diacetyl confusion

I think I see where the debate over diacetyl popped up.

In #3000 Dave says,
 "Diacetyl in lagers *is* considered a fault as it can be  

present in large quantities in lager due to a pediococcus
infection, but  it and the pentane dione is normally
present in low quantities ( if the above referenced
table is correct) as I have indicated._Diacetyl should
not be considered a fault in low concentrations._" (emphasis mine)

Probably another reader saw red before he really finished reading the 
first
sentence. Perhaps a better wording would have been..."Diacetyl in
lagers_may_
be considered a fault when present due to a pediococcus...."
Even then I would need to ask; is the diacetyl the fault or the 
pediococus
infection?
  What is a fault anyway? Isn't acetaldehyde a fault? but isn't the
distinctive
character of Mudweiser? then it can't be a "fault", but I wouldn't want 
it
in
my CAP. Anything can be considered a fault when out of context and out of

style.
Seven % alcohol in a Berliner Weisse would be a fault, but alcohol is
certainly
not generally considered a fault.
  I can see someone jumping to argue the point of "diacetyl in a lager is
 a
fault." I hear too many judges whose vocabularies seem to consist of two
words;
"diacetyl" and "phenolics." Stripped of phenolics _most_beers would taste

very
flat and one dimensional, but diacetyl has its' place. 

  My peave is that in that same mindset, someone thinks diacetyl in a CAP

is 

a fault. Lets look at history; lager brewing was in its' infancy at the
turn of
the century. Diacetyl wasn't even a word then. Refrigerated brewing was
also
in its' early stages. Do you really think the brewers would manipulate
their
process to minimize diacetyl production? They didn't even know what it 
was.
In a CAP diacetyl is not a defect. This beer has a slight "corn 
sweetness"
(not exactly but that is how it is best described) so who here doesn't
butter
their corn to "richen" it a bit? Someone with the "no diacetyl in lagers"

frame of mind insisted the BJCP not allow diacetyl in the CAP 
description.
This may also come from the mindset of the "AHA guideliines are all 
wrong."
That one being one of the newest is certainly not "wrong." Dr. Fix worked

with Jeff Renner and Peter Garofalo and me to get that one description
correct. Mindset in brewing is a very bad thing, it leads to a 
de-evolution
of beer. The big brewer's have successfully managed to remove any 
"cloying
maltiness", "lingering bitterness", any "possibly offensive to _someone_"

character from beer. And look where that left us.
  I will leave you with a quote from Pierre Celis, "Just when you think
you know all you need to know about brewing, it is time to go back to the

beginning and start shoveling out mash-tuns again."
 Oh heck, here's one from me, "Read 3 different books on brewing and 
you'll
come up with 6 different opinions."

Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 13 Apr 1999 11:57:41 -0400 (EDT)
From: Jay Hammond <jhammond at bryant.edu>
Subject: Gravity fed real ale.


Has anyone ever toyed around with a corney keg so that the beer can be
drawn by gravity alone?
Some pubs in England serve pints out of kegs which are kept on their side
and the ale is drawn out of a spiget at the lower end of the front side.
Also in England, the homebrew shops sell plastic kegs that are operated by
gravity and adjusted by an adjustable intake for the air to enter into.
Is there any real benefit to this method? I believe that this is method of
serving "Real Ale" and would like to try it myself here in the US of A.
I have the CO2 set up but want to try something new.Any suggestions or
comments will be appreciated either of the discussion
page or by e-mail.



Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 13 Apr 1999 11:58:19 -0400
From: "Marc Sedam" <marc_sedam at unc.edu>
Subject: KEG Enterprises (a.k.a. Stainless in Seattle)

Does anyone know if this company is still in existence (they supply a wide
range of stainless steel mashing-related equipment).  I've been trying to
place an order with them for a week, but no one returns voice messages,
e-mails, or answers the phone.  The website looks new, but the lack of
communication is very strange.  If anyone in the Seattle area has info I'd
appreciate it.

Thanks.
Marc



Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 13 Apr 1999 10:29:10 -0500
From: "St. Patrick's" <stpats at bga.com>
Subject: DC brewpubs/Michael Jackson event

I will be traveling to Washington DC this Thursday thru Sunday,
accompanying my husband who is sitting on an advisory board for
the National Science Foundation. I'll be staying about a block from the
NSF. Could someone send me a list of brewpubs or otherwise good drinking
holes near there?

Also, I would like to plug our Grand Opening Party with Michael Jackson.
It's Saturday, May 15.  I have commitments from 18 Texas breweries from
all over the state to bring beer--it's free and lasts from 2-8 pm.  There
is also a Michael Jackson Tutored Tasting at 3 pm.  Tickets are $15 and I
don't have many left but Michael will be around all day to chat and sign
books etc. This is really an event for homebrewers, I have not and will not
advertise it to the general public.  Everyone is welcome, well almost
everyone :)

There is also a brewers only reception for Michael on Friday evening. Most
of the Texas brewers are coming but any brewers from outside Texas are
welcome as well.  Give me a call or email if you would like to come.

Lynne O'Connor
St. Patrick's of Texas
Brewers Supply
http://www.stpats.com
stpats at bga.com
 512-989-9727
 512-989-8982 facsimile


Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 13 Apr 1999 12:48:19 EDT
From: JPullum127 at aol.com
Subject: sanitizers

how long will iodophor diluted to 12.5ppm and stored in an airtight bucket 
stay potent?


Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 13 Apr 1999 18:05:24 +0100
From: "Nigel Porter" <nigel at sparger.freeserve.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Extra High Extraction Rate

>Date: Mon, 12 Apr 1999 08:25:21 -0400
>From: "P.J. Reilly" <preilly at exis.net>
>Subject: Extra High Extraction Rate
>
>
>Well, the Easymasher was everything Jack said it was. I now have a five
>gallon batch of Porter just about to finish fermentation, that was
>intended to have a OG of 1.054 but finished out at 1.073. I'm ready to
>bottle but don't know what to do exactly to delute this beer without
>ruining it.
>
>I've read that a high gravity beer should not be diluted by more than
>30% so I thought I would comply with that by adding my primimg sugar (or
>molasess in this case) with that much water and then bottling it.
>
>What do you think? Am I headed in the right direction?
>
>Thanks for your time,
>P.J. Reilly

Hi There,

I've been lurking here in the UK for a while and just had to respond to
this.

What is the problem with a 1073 Porter? Whenever I make Porter I aim for
1065 - 1070, which as far as I know is the gravity that this type of beer
used to be made to in the 'good old days'.

I'd say bottle away and enjoy a fine high gravity beer.

Nigel Porter
Guildford, Surrey (30 miles SW of London)





Return to table of contents


Date: Sat, 01 Jan 2000 13:44:14 -0800
From: mike rose <mrose at ucr.campuscw.net>
Subject: Sanitizing with lactic acid

 Out here in So Cal its popular to brew orange blossom pale ale
this time of year. Throw a quarter pound of blossoms in the boil
for 1 minute. Any more than 1 minute and you extract too much
bitterness. (harsh bitterness not a malt sweetness/hop bitterness
type of thing) My goal is to try and dry hop with the blossoms.
This poses hugh sanitation problems. Some questions

    1) Would it be possible to sanitize the orange blossoms using a
water/lactic acid solution at room temp with a very low pH?

    2) If  possible, what pH should I adjust to?


    3) Would 1 pint of the water/lactic acid solution override
(I don't know the proper term)
the buffering ability of the already fermented beer? ( 5 gallons)

    4) If the above is not possible, is there another way to sanitize
orange blossoms? (besides heat or acid)
                                Thanks in advance,  Mike Rose   Riverside,  CA
                                mrose at ucr.campuscw.net












Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 13 Apr 1999 10:22:49 -0500
From: "Brett A. Spivy" <baspivy at softdisk.com>
Subject: Carboys, Carboys, Carboys . . .

Hello All,
I recently posted a request for information about what equipment you
would buy if you had to start all over again.  I received over thirty
responses by email and I appreciate each one.  I did not realize that so
much of what I have used to make wine with could be used for brewignas
well.  I have decided to "put together" my own two stage, glass, brewing
kit.  Finding carboys reasonbly priced (I kept seeing prices like $25.00
plus shipping) proved to be a challenge.  I have found a distributor of
mexican laboratory glass that will sell direct to me for $12.50 each for
a 6.5 gallon carboy.  The catch is that I have to buy 10 of them.  I
only need (or want) three.  If anyone wants one, email me at
baspivy at softdisk.com  and give me your mailing address with ZIP code so
I can estimate shipping costs.

Thanx . . .
Brett A. Spivy




Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 13 Apr 1999 14:50:20 -0400
From: Paul Haaf <haafbrau1 at juno.com>
Subject: Sanitation and septic systems

I'm sure not everyone brewing has city sewer, whereas you can dump
anything that doesn't rot out or clog your drain pipes.  What do the
brewers with septic systems do with their used sanitation fluid of
choice?  I go to great extremes to not let my iodophor mix and my
chlorine water go down the drain.  Since they are designed to kill off
microbes, which your septic tank depends on, how do other brewers dispose
of their spent liquids?  I toss mine on my driveway or where I have
unwanted vegetation, but it doesn't seem to hinder plant growth.  All
this siphoning and lugging of buckets is bothersome.  Of course, I'm only
looking for serious replies, if that's possible  Considering some posts
of late, that may not be a reality.  TIA.
Paul Haaf
They're coming to take me away, Haha - Napoleon XIII

___________________________________________________________________
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com/getjuno.html
or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]


Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 13 Apr 1999 11:59:59 -0700
From: "John Palmer" <jjpalmer at gte.net>
Subject: Re: TSP

>Joy asks if TSP is still TSP, and comments that the rumor mill says that
PBW (Five Star Aff. Co.) is just sodium carbonate.

There is a common product (here in California) called TSP in big letters in
a cardboard box. It is sold at Home Depot and Von's grocery store AND it is
NOT Tri-Sodium Phosphate.  In fact it even says Contains no phospates. The
TSP stands for Totally Superior Product, and it is your average sodium
carbonate cleaner, just like Arm and Hammer Super Washing Soda.  I really
don't know if true Na3PO4 is still available.

And contrary to the rumor mill, PBW is sodium PERcarbonate and sodium
metasilicate plus a few other additives. It is much more effective than
sodium percarbonate alone. By the way, these are cleaners, not sanitizers. 
Five Star, the maker of PBW, has a web page at http://www.FivestarAF.com

Hope this helps,
John Palmer
Palmer House Brewery and Smithy 
http://realbeer.com/jjpalmer/


Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 13 Apr 1999 14:42:02 -0400 (EDT)
From: pbabcock <pbabcock at mail.oeonline.com>
Subject: Tri-Sodium Phosphate availability

Greetings, Beerlings! Take me to your lager...

John Palmer states:

> I really don't know if true Na3PO4 is still available. 

It is - it just depends on _where_ you are. Phosphates have been banned in
many states as a major pollutant on inland waterways due, particularly, to
phosphated laundry detergents. I can still buy it here in MI at the
hardware (though I have to admit to not having checked in quite a
while...).

See ya!

Pat Babcock in SE Michigan         pbabcock at oeonline.com
Home Brew Digest Janitor           janitor@hbd.org
HBD Web Site                       http://hbd.org   
The Home Brew Page                 http://oeonline.com/~pbabcock/brew.html
   "Just a cyber-shadow of his former brewing self..."



Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 13 Apr 1999 15:41:36 EDT
From: JPullum127 at aol.com
Subject: plato

i'm a little confused about the term plato. is there a formula to convert 
specific gravity to plato and vice versa?


Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 13 Apr 1999 14:48:47
From: "William W. Macher" <macher at telerama.lm.com>
Subject: Maximum Rims Return Temperature Target?

Hi All,

I know this is a simple question, perhaps one I should be 
able to deduce on my own, but knowing how I sometimes 
miss the obvious, here goes...

As I mentioned in a couple previous posts, I have a newly 
built steam-injected rims that has two batches under its belt.  
After some modifications it appears I am able to get 
satisfactory recirculation rates.  I estimate between 1.0 to 
1.5 GPM from the start, but I have not measured this.

What is the desirable maximum temperature of the wort 
being returned to the mash tun?

For my second batch on this rims I limited the return 
temperature to 168-170 F. range.  I could get more, but was 
concerned about tannin extraction and possibly denaturing 
enzymes.  

Limiting temperature in this way limits how quickly I can
make transitions from one point to another. For a given 
flow rate I certainly could jump from one temperature to
another more quickly if my return wort was at 190, rather
than 170.

Limiting the return temperature also increases the time to 
get to mashout temperature of 168, because the delta T 
drops as I approach 168, and I must cut back on steam 
input to avoid overshooting my self-imposed target.

What are other rimsers doing along these lines?  What is 
the maximum recommended temperature for the returned 
wort?  I'll bet I could go to 175 without problem, at least 
when the average tun temperature was on the low side.

I am not sure what the maximum temperature attainable on 
my system is,  other than steam is self-limiting at about 212 
degrees F.  My goal is not maximum temperature anyway, 
but rather maximum heat transfer from my steam source to 
the mash tun.  What I try to do is to get maximum 
recirculation rate while limiting the temperature of the 
return to a safe value.  I just do not have any idea what the 
maximum safe value is, and have probably set a limit that is 
too conservative at 170 F.

I see the rims return wort differntly than an infusion of
boiling water, since no mixing is done and the returned wort
in my system remains in a kind of stratified layer that
gradually works it way downward through the mash. In other
words, the delta T I have across my steam injector is the
same as what exists across the mash itself.  The grain at
the top of the filter bed is close to the temperature of
the returned, heated wort.

Any and all comments/recommendations highly 
appreciated!

Bill

Bill Macher    Pittsburgh, PA   USA






Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 13 Apr 1999 17:22:27 -0400
From: "Paul Smart" <pablo at maine.rr.com>
Subject: Re: Mash times


Mark Wilson wrote:

>The reason I started shortening my mash times was not to save time, 
>but to get more body and mouthfeel from my beers; less time for the 
>enzymes to break the sugars into smaller sugars means more of both

I think it is not so much *mash time*  as it is *mash temp*. I think that at 
least one reason you are getting more body from a shorter mash is that 
you get a more dextrinous product at the high end of the temp range 
(158F?), and a thinner, dryer product at the lower end of the temp range 
(152F?), shorter mash = less temperature drop, so your mash doesn't 
fall into the lower range, or is there for a shorter time. This *may* 
explain why some beer has higher FG than others, given similar OG.

That said, a higher start temp and higher finishing temp on the mash 
should add the body you are looking for in your beer.

+Pablo+
Pablo's Brewing Company, South Portland, Maine


Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 13 Apr 1999 14:42:55 -0700
From: "Grant W. Knechtel" <GWK at hartcrowser.com>
Subject: Schaarbeek Cherries

I have a gardener friend willing to plant Schaarbeek cherry tree(s) for me 
if I can come up with some stock to plant.  We were unable to find a 
listing in any of her botanical references.  Any of you Lambicophiles out 
there know:

1.  The proper botanical name for the Schaarbeek cherry?

2.   A US source for planting stock?  This would simplify getting stock 
past agricultural inspection/import restrictions.

3.  Any comments on the liklihood of successfully growing these cherries 
essential for the production of true Kriek pLambic?  Alternatives?  
Preferred soil and weather characteristics?  We would be growing in 
western Washington state, where the climate should be similar to Brussels, 
with perhaps lesser temperature extremes.

We are of course aware that this needs long-term commitment in order to 
bear fruit, much less produce any decent Kriek.  Private email replies OK 
if you can't reply in public ;-}  Will post reply summary if there's 
enough response to justify it.  TIA and Prost!

 -Grant
Neue Des Moines Hausbrauerei
Des Moines, WA, USA


Return to table of contents

---