---

	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:
  Wyeast Thames in a Scotch Ale? ("Brian Dixon")
  shameless plug (Biergiek)
  Koelsch: another AHA style problem? (Ted McIrvine)
  Sanitizing Beer Bottles (Richard S. Kuzara)
  CO2 Tanks ("Todd Goodman")
  California State Fair Competition (Robert Arguello)
  RE: Used Corny kegs (Robert Arguello)
  Boiling/BU/S.G. Samples/DO (AJ)
  Re: 55 gallon drum & Alan's post (Scott Abene)
  17th Annual Oregon Homebrew Festival 5/22/99 ("Mark Kowalski")
  Capping bottles and head problems (NOT from drinking homebrew!!) ("Bill Tobler")
  Sour Mash (Keith Busby)
  Re: Definition of a good lawnmower beer (Jeff Renner)
  This is my brother Darryl and this is my other brother Darryl. (bkhegemann)
  re:Sanitizers and bugs (and beer stone) ("Dr. Pivo")
  Re: hop-free beer (Jeff Renner)
  Alternative calcium salts (ThomasM923)
  Some questions from a neophyte (FridayMtn)
  Re: What is a good substance for making SG samples ("Brian Dixon")
  enzyme stability (sedam)
  sulfury lagers (sedam)
  Cooling Wort (Dan Listermann)
  more on astringency (Laurel Maney)


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

2000 MCAB Qualifiers: Spirit of Free Beer! Competition 5/22/99
(http://burp.org/SoFB99); Oregon Homebrew Festival 5/22/99
(http://www.mtsw.com/hotv/fest.html); Buzz-Off! Competition 6/26/99
(http://www.voicenet.com/~rpmattie/buzzoff)

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, 23 Apr 1999 20:35:00 -0700
From: "Brian Dixon" <mutex at proaxis.com>
Subject: Wyeast Thames in a Scotch Ale?

Just brewed Noonan's 140-Schilling Scotch Ale (OG 1.125 ... gulp!) and I
used Wyeast Thames Valley yeast.   My actual OG came out at 1.110.  My FG
came out at 1.042, for an attenuation of 61.8% ... not too bad for a Scotch
ale.  A bit lower than I wanted, and lower than I usually get, but I blame
that on the fact that I cheated on Noonan's recipe.  Instead of doing the
double mash (which I *will* do next time), I did a single mash and bumped
the gravity with a blend of John Bull light and amber extracts, trying to
match the ratio of 2-row to Amber malt that Greg recommended.  I oxygenated
with my Oxynator, and had treated the water appropriate for a Scotch ale, so
I know that there were no health issues for the yeast.  Mash was at 156 F
rather than the 158 F that Noonan recommended.  I suspect the short
attenuation was due partially to this, but probably mostly due to the
extract ... every time I use extract (alone or in a 'bumped up' mashed grain
brew), it does NOT attenuate predictably ... sometimes I get good
attenuation, and sometimes I don't.  My all-grain brewing always works very
predictable (another reason to avoid extract.)

Anyway, how does this attenuation align with your experience, assuming
you've brewed a high-gravity brew like this one?  Could be that the yeast
isn't alcohol tolerant enough ... but for the Scotch Ale style, this is
fine.  The ABV came out at 9% in spite of itself...

How does the Thames turn out in other brews?

Brian




Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 23 Apr 1999 23:42:36 EDT
From: Biergiek at aol.com
Subject: shameless plug

I have some homebrewing stuff that I am auctioning on ebay, go to the url if 
you are interested:

1)  10 Gallon Stainless Cornie Keg
http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=95074585

2)  5 Gallon (21 qt) Stainless Kettle
http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=95076710

3)  Anheuser Busch Muenchner Commemorative Tap Handle
http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=95082742

4)  Beck's Brauerei, Bremen,  Germany, Tap Handle
http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=95087475

5)  Electric Water Heater - 3000W 120V Under-Sink Type
http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=95070202

I wasn't sure if mentioning this on the HBD was proper netiquette, so I 
decided to consult with Fred Garvin.  Besides being a male prostitute, Fred's 
day job is Dean of the Bent Dick School of Business, Kentwood Campus.  Here 
is what Fred had to say,"Ya, what the hell, if Schmidling and Listerman can 
shamelessly plug their wares on the HBD I don't see why you can't."  Thanks 
for the advice Fred.

Kyle
Bakersfield, CA
way west and left of the homebrewing epicenter of MI



Return to table of contents


Date: Sat, 24 Apr 1999 01:07:19 -0700
From: Ted McIrvine <McIrvine at ix.netcom.com>
Subject: Koelsch: another AHA style problem?

Al, I've been grumbling about the AHA descriptions for some time.  For
example, I suspect that you would agree that chocolate malt and crystal
does not belong in a Doppelbock, DMS is ok in many German lagers, and
that Alt and Munich Dark should have Munich malt as the primary grain in
the grain bill.  And we know that the AHA descriptions of strong Belgian
ales are incorrect.  (I may not always spell Tripel correctly, but I
know what should be in one!)

Let us hope that the AHA gets their style description correctly.  As I
said, I've never had an authentic Koelsch from Cologne and all I have to
base my knowlege of the style is what I taste at Goose Island and Broad
Ripple.  Nice beers, but the best specimen that those of us who haven't
been to Koln have tasted.

Cheers
Ted

I wrote:
> >My favorite Koelsch is Goose Island Koelsch.  I've never had an
> >authentic Koelsch from Cologne, but the Goose Island is a very good
> >match for the descriptions that I've read.  It has a delicate malty
> >flavor with a slight trace of noble hops.

And the wise Al Korzonas responded:
> 
> It might match the descriptions well, but I don't believe that the
> descriptions have been accurate.  None of them have mentioned DMS,
> which I feel is present in all the best Koelsches I tasted in Koeln.
> I like Goose Island's "Summertime" which is billed as a Koelsch,
> but if I was given it blind and asked to pick what style it is, I don't
> think that I would say Koelsch... I think I'd say "Blonde Ale."
> 
> Koelsches are grainy, rather assertively bitter and crisp.  Their balance
> starts out slightly bitter and rises towards the finish.  There were some
> without the mild DMS aroma, but these were the blander ones.  The
> best, in my opinion (Gaffel, Peters, Reissdorf, Gilden, Muehlen and
> Paeffgen) had an unmistakable DMS aroma, not unlike that of a mash
> tun full of spent Pilsner malt.  Really!
> 
> Al.
> 
> Al Korzonas, Lockport, IL
> korz at brewinfo.com
> http://www.brewinfo.com/brewinfo/


Return to table of contents


Date: Sat, 24 Apr 1999 06:26:02 -0600
From: rkuzara at wyoming.com (Richard S. Kuzara)
Subject: Sanitizing Beer Bottles

For bottling my last two batches, I sanitized my RETURNABLE beer bottles
(previously cleaned when originally emptied) by rinsing them in household
water and then baking them in the oven for 30 minutes.  For the first "bake"
(first batch bottled) I used a temperature of 275 degrees and one or two of
the 54 bottles broke.  For the second bake (next batch), I used a lower
temperature of 250 degrees and about 10 of the bottles broke - a serious
depletion of my prized returnable bottles.  Now I am about ready to again
bottle and I guess I will have to go back to the bleach soak and the triple
water rinse and not loose any more bottles to the oven.  The oven procedure
was easier and faster (if it worked).  Question, has anyone been successful
sanitizing in the oven and what is wrong with my procedure or what is the
suggested oven procedure?  Thanks.




Return to table of contents


Date: Sat, 24 Apr 1999 10:09:20 -0400
From: "Todd Goodman" <tsg1 at earthlink.net>
Subject: CO2 Tanks

In HBD #3013 Phil <poregan at ix.netcom.com> from Tampa, FL writes:
> Any advice on acquiring a CO2 tank? 

and Karl Keyes <karl.keyes at gwl.com> wrote:
> Any info on good
> prices on CO2 tanks would also be appreciated.

I would recommend talking to a local beverage company (Coca Cola or
Pepsi, for example).

They'll rent a tank (usually for a small deposit) and then just swap
tanks when you need more CO2.  No worrying about the high cost of
purchasing or hydro testing your tanks.

I tried local places for Coke and Pepsi and my least favorite of the
two wouldn't do it unless I got a local restaurant to let me use their
account and have it delivered to the restaurant.  The other place set
me up with an account and took a $40 deposit.  I was told that they're
not supposed to allow CO2 tanks in private vehicles (for obvious
reasons I suppose, who wants a CO2 tank missle launched at them in
the fast lane on the highway?) so that may be why the other place
wanted to deliver to a local restaurant.

Regards,

Todd Goodman
The Cave Brewery
Westford, MA


Return to table of contents


Date: Sat, 24 Apr 1999 07:16:37 -0700 (PDT)
From: Robert Arguello <robertac at calweb.com>
Subject: California State Fair Competition

PRESS RELEASE:

The Gold Country Brewers Association, (GCBA),  and the 
California State Fair are sponsoring the Seventeenth Annual 
California State Fair Home Brew Competition.

The competition is open to all home brewers of at least 21 years
of age and who are residents of the state of California. 
Beers must be made in the home for private, (non-commercial), use.

Entries must be received between April 1, 1999 and May 15, 1999.
All entries will be kept in cold storage until final judging on June 27,
1999.  Judging will follow the official 1998 BJCP style guidelines.  All
BJCP beer  and mead categories will be judged.  The BJCP style guidelines
can be seen at  http://www.bjcp.org/style-guide.html .

Competition information and entry forms are available on-line at:

http://www.calweb.com/~robertac/comp.htm

Rosettes will be awarded for 1st, 2nd and 3rd place in each category.
Rosette and Golden Bear Trophy will be awarded for the "Best of Show".

Interested judges are invited to register.  JUDGES CAN REGISTER ONLINE at:

http://www.calweb.com/~robertac/form.html

OR, E-mail Dave Sapsis at GCBA at ns.net if you would like to serve as a judge
at the competition. 

Best of luck!

Robert Arguello
California State Fair Home Brew Competition Coordinator
Gold Country Brewers Association
robertac at calweb.com
(530) 759-1006



Return to table of contents


Date: Sat, 24 Apr 1999 07:26:42 -0700 (PDT)
From: Robert Arguello <robertac at calweb.com>
Subject: RE: Used Corny kegs

ON, Thu, 22 Apr 1999 08:51:18 -0600
"Keyes, Karl" <karl.keyes at gwl.com> asked:

>I recall seeing a website that had used corny kegs (pin and ball type) for
>$14.  I'm interested in getting a keg system but funds are somewhat limited
>now and less expensive alternatives would be appreciated.  Any info on good
>prices on CO2 tanks would also be appreciated.
>Also, any comments as to the condition of St. Pats used corny kegs? 
 

The website you refer to may be: 

http://www.calweb.com/~robertac/keg.htm

Full handled (moulded) corny kegs at $14.00 each AND Single handle
(bakelite) corny kegs at $11.50 each or $44.00 for four.





********************************************************************     	
Robert Arguello <robertac at calweb.com>
Corny kegs - ProMash Brewing Software
http://www.calweb.com/~robertac
********************************************************************



Return to table of contents


Date: Sat, 24 Apr 1999 14:32:55 +0000
From: AJ <ajdel at mindspring.com>
Subject: Boiling/BU/S.G. Samples/DO

Jeff Beinhaur  posts the following about his water and asks for comments
about boiling it:

    Alkalinity - 50-100
    Hardness - 100-210

At the lower extreme (Alk 50, Hard 100 ) residual alkalinity is only 25
and there should be no need to decarbonate the water (except for Boh.
Pils, etc.) nor is it likely that simple boiling would result in
appreciable decarbonation (only half the hardness is temporary). At the
upper extreme(100, 210) residual alkalinity is a little over 50 which is
a bit higher than desired but not so high that a little extra dark malt
shouldn't be able to take care of it. It's not a certainty that boiling
would precipitate anything under these circumstances either. Does it? If
not, why boil? If the water is chlorinated (not chloraminated) a quick
boil will drive off the chlorine but so will letting it stand over
night. If it is chloraminated, boiling for an hour or more will be
required. You can dispose of either chlorine or chloramine with Campden
tablets (see latest BT). If it is really decarbonation that is sought,
you can use pickling lime (canning supplies part of super market) to
drop much of the carbonate without heat but time is still required.
Further details upon request.

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

George De Piro asked about possible interferences in ASBC MOA Beer-23A
(bitterness by UV absorbtion). The MOA itself documents possible
interference by "...certain preservatives such as n-heptyl
p-hydroxybenzoate and sorbates, and possibly some brewing adjuncts or
coloring agents..." so yes, there are potential interferences in
commercial brews. In homebrew it's less likely they'd be found.

Recap of the method to make comments which follow meaningful: Beer is
acidified with HCl and added to iso-octane with a drop of octyl alcohol
(anti-foaming agent) in a 50 mL centrifuge tube. The tube is vigorously
shaken for 15 minutes during which time the iso-humulone is extracted
into the octane. The octane is separated from the beer by standing or
centrifugation and the absorbance measured at 275 nm. Official ASBC
bittering units are 50 times the absorbance in a 1 cm path.

George wondered about yeast. If separation of the phases was complete
then the yeast should be in the bottom with the beer and none should be
in the gasoline. This will be especially true if phase separation was
aided by centrifugation.

Tip: Many beers (if not most) form an emusion-like substance during
shaking with the iso-octane. Getting this stuff to go to the bottom
requires a super-centrifuge. The wimpy little used clinical units
homebrewers and microbreweries buy just won't do the job without a
little help. Centrifuge for a couple of minutes. Stop the centrifuge and
then disrupt the surface of the "emulsion" which will be seen to be like
slush (ice-water slurry) with a pipet tip. The semisolid material breaks
right up and it appears as if the liquid is being squeezed out of the
slush as this is done i.e. it's like when you step in slush and see
water in your footprint. Now return to the centrifuge for a couple more
minutes. You should have a clear  iso-octane layer or at least enough to
pipet off a mL for the cuvet.

I assume George checked things like the calibration and linearity of the
instrument, that the 2,2,4 -Trimethyl pentane is spectrophotometric
grade, that the octyl alcohol doesn't appreciably increase the
absorbance of the octane and so on. One thing I did note in George's
description of the procedure was that he mentioned 1 mL of 1 N HCl. It
should actually be 3 N. If this wasn't a typo and 1 N was actually used
I suppose that might make a difference.

As for repeatability I'd say half a BU is good enough for the brewing
industry. Was a mechanical shaker used? If not I'm not at all surprised
at 0.7 BU variation. That correponds to 0.014 absorbtion units. Some
people call the equivalent of 0.010 absorbtion units a rough measure of
the sensitivity (though the MDL is smaller and is determined by
measurement) of a method so 0.7 variation doesn't seem that wild.

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

Pete Calinski asked for a recommendation as to what is a good substance
for making specific gravity samples. In brewing I can't immagine
anything better than that which Dr Plato himself used: cane sugar.
Tables of specific gravity of sucrose solutions of various compositions
are found in lots of brewing books, the CRC handbook, etc.

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

I'm not quite clear on Al K's request for DO measurements. I think the
intent is to see how much O2 enters a fermenting wort through the
surface. If I put deaerated water in a container and expose it to the
atmosphere after a very long time I will find the water saturated i.e.
at a DO level commensurate with the barometric pressure on that day (the
meter compensates for this) and temperature of the water (the meter also
takes this into consideration). It will read 100%. With fermenting beer
the situation is very different. The beer is not in equilibrium with
atmospheric air because CO2 is evolving and blanketing the surface. The
effectiveness of this blanket depends on how vigourous the fermentation
is and on the nature of any draughts to which the fermenter is subject.
If a top flocculating yeast is in use we'll also have the protection of
the yeast cake. Any O2 which does enter the beer will be consumed by the
yeast so that PaO2 in the beer will always be much lower than the air
equilibrium value. We can probably consider the beer oxygen free - a DO
meter would certainly read very low. The only experiment I can think of
at this point would be to deaerate some water and place it in a
container where it is exposed to some air circulation. The rate of flow
of O2 from the air into the water as a function of Pa O2 difference can
be determined from the DO time history and the value at 1 atmosphere
difference calculated. This would approximate the flow into a beer with
viable yeast were it not blanketed.  Would this be useful information? I
may already have some data of this sort.

- --
A. J. deLange
Numquam in dubio, saepe in errore.




Return to table of contents


Date: Sat, 24 Apr 1999 07:36:55 -0700 (PDT)
From: Scott Abene <skotrat at yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: 55 gallon drum & Alan's post

Hey all, 

Alan McKay has this neato habit of posting what seems to be private
email so here is my response to his. 

Alan, 

If you want to risk a burner collapsing out from under 425 pounds of
boiling liquid well... You can win this one. I ain't chancing it. 

I have this serious fear of 3rd degree burns.

 -Scott


===
ThE-HoMe-BrEw-RaT
Scott Abene <skotrat at mediaone.net>
http://skotrat.dynip.com/skotrat (the Homebrew "Beer Slut" page)

"This Space Currently for Rent... Inquire within"
_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free  at yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com



Return to table of contents


Date: Sat, 24 Apr 1999 09:07:15 -0500
From: "Mark Kowalski" <mkowalski at proaxis.com>
Subject: 17th Annual Oregon Homebrew Festival 5/22/99

Heart of the Valley Homebrewers present the 17th Annual Oregon Homebrew
Festival at the:

Benton County Fairgrounds
110 SW 53rd Street
Corvallis, Oregon
Saturday, May 22, 1999 9:30 AM

Special Guest Speakers Fred Eckhardt and Al Haunold - the inventor of
Willamette Hops!

Judging for the 28 Recognized AHA Beer, Mead and Cider Styles

NEW: Additional judging and judge training session Friday, May 21 1999 7-10
PM

All entries (including online entries) must be received and registered by
the deadline of 5:00 pm, Monday, May 17, 1999. No exceptions!

Entrants are strongly encouraged to send or bring their entries to:

Oregon Homebrew Festival
c/o Corvallis Brewing Supply
115 Jackson St.
Corvallis, OR 97330

Other drop off sites can be found at http://www.mtsw.com/hotv/fest.html

Introduction

The Heart of the Valley Homebrewers invite you to participate in the
seventeenth annual homebrew festival, the longest running event of its kind
in Oregon. The focus of the event will be a judging of homebrewed beer
sanctioned by the American Homebrewers Association (AHA) and the Beer Judge
Certification Program (BJCP). In addition, the club will host a festival to
promote awareness and knowledge of various beer styles, provide
opportunities to share information about the homebrewing craft, and
encourage interaction between homebrewers in a social atmosphere. This
year's activities will include several displays, a raffle, and the
opportunity to meet and talk with some of the best and most experienced
homebrewers anywhere!

Masters Championship of Amateur Brewing (MCAB)

The 17th annual Oregon Homebrew Festival is a Qualifying Event for MCAB II.
First place winners in 18 Qualifying Styles will be invited to submit
entries into the MCAB II finals competition to be held in St. Louis in 2000.
For more information please see the MCAB web site at
http://www.hbd.org/mcab.

Winners will be announced at approximately 5:00 PM the day of the
competition. Ribbons will be awarded for first, second, and third place in
each category. The winner of Best of Show will receive a gift certificate or
other prize appropriate to the occasion. Judges reserve the right to not
award all ribbons in any category if entries are judged to not be of
sufficiently high quality.

For any additional information, on-one entry, drop off points, forms, etc.
or to volunteer some time for this competition see

http://www.mtsw.com/hotv/fest.html

or contact the competition organizers:


Lys Buck			Joel Rea			Herky Gottfried
Competition Organizer	Director of Judges		Registrar
1208 NE Lafayette		115 Jackson St.		3920 NW Jameson Dr.
Albany OR 97321		Corvallis OR 97330		Corvallis OR 97330
(541) 928-3531		(541) 758-1674		(541) 757-8009
yoone at ucs.orst.edu		cbsbrew at peak.org		herkyg at cv.hp.com



Return to table of contents


Date: Sat, 24 Apr 1999 13:06:14 -0500
From: "Bill Tobler" <WCTobler at brazoria.net>
Subject: Capping bottles and head problems (NOT from drinking homebrew!!)

Hi all,    
    Well, I'm still at it after 4 months and 6 brews behind me. (And having
fun doing it!!) I went to all grain and kegging after the 4th one.  It
didn't take long to figure that out.  This may be old news to all or most of
you, but I'm going to tell you anyway.  I've been using mostly Beck's
bottles to bottle with lately, and noticed that the caps weren't on very
tight.  I thought I had a problem with my capper, (a hand capper someone
gave me, not the bench model)  But when I put a cap on a 12 oz. Grolsch, It
went on real tight. I looked a little closer at the bottles, and the glass
ring that the cappper pushes against on the Becks bottle is almost a 1/4"
higher than the Grolsch, therefore not capping very tight.  Something to
look out for. I'm throwing out all my Becks bottles. I only bottled 24 beers
in the Becks, and the rest in 1 pint Grolsch bottles.  Here comes my second
problem.  The carbonation was just beer-ly good enough for me, but there was
no head. NONE.  Ah, must be the bad capping job.  So I cooled and opened a
pint, which have the flip-up top, and the carbonation was about the same,
and maybe a trace of a head, but nowhere near my kegged beer.  This was my
first all grain beer.  The beer was an IPA.  The mash temp was about 152F at
the start, 90 min. later about 148F. Sparge temp was 170F.  I'm using a 5
gal Rubbermaid cooler with a false bottom.  Most everything else is normal. 
60 min boil, 2L starter, in primary for 6-7 days, 14 days in secondary, 1
week in bottle. 3/4 cup priming sugar.  I did not mash out.  Maybe the low
mash temp hurt the head?  Well, I'm sure I'll get some good help here, I
always do.  Thanks in advance.  
    I'm headed out to California, San Luis Obispo/Morro Bay area next week
to play.  There is lots of good wine, but how about some good 
Micro-brewerys?  Private e-mail welcome.  Thanks again


To Better Brewing,
Bill Tobler
Lake Jackson, Tx.


Return to table of contents


Date: Sat, 24 Apr 1999 15:24:39 -0500
From: Keith Busby <kbusby at ou.edu>
Subject: Sour Mash

I have just brewed my first sourmash beer and got a few points extraction
lower than usual (target was 1.056, actual 1.051). Does lactobacillus
inhibit extraction or starch conversion? I kept getting what looked like
positive reactions on the iodine test too, but gave up mashing after 2 1/2
hrs. (30 mins at 122, 2 hrs. at 155).

Keith Busby


Keith Busby
George Lynn Cross Research Professor
Center for Medieval and Renaissance Studies
University of Oklahoma
780 Van Vleet Oval, Room 202
Norman, OK 73019
Tel: (405) 325-5088. Fax: (405) 325-0103


Return to table of contents


Date: Sat, 24 Apr 1999 15:14:37 -0400
From: Jeff Renner <nerenner at umich.edu>
Subject: Re: Definition of a good lawnmower beer

"Harry Ewasiuk" <shogun at ccinet.ab.ca> asks:

>Being new to homebrewing, I have heard the expression "lawnmower beer". What
>is it and what defines a good example of this? I am getting thirsty thinking
>about this...;-)

It means a light, usually pale, thirst quenching beer that hits the spot on
a hot summer afternoon (I suppose summer is about a week long up where you
are) when you've been mowing the lawn.  Something that also wouln't
endanger your safety operating machinery.  A standard commercial North
American lager would be an example of this, but we homebrewers can make
beers (lagers or ales) that are just as refreshing but that have more
flavor.  My personal choice would be a light Classic American Pilsner (CAP).

It's easier to brew a lawnmower beer with all grain, but there are some
very pale extracts.  I'd keep the gravity no higher than 1.042, bitterness
24 IBU maximum, if making an ale, use a fairly neutral yeast (such as
Chico/American liquid or Nottingham dry).  Mash at a low temp for good
fermentability, or if using extract, avoid Dutch dry extract as this is not
fully fermentable.  A good choice for liquid extract would be Alexander's
(also sold by William's under their label).  Heresy here - using 10-20%
corn sugar (or rice if mashing) can make it drier and more refreshing.

Jeff

 -=-=-=-=-
Jeff Renner in Ann Arbor, Michigan USA, c/o nerenner at umich.edu
"One never knows, do one?"  Fats Waller, American Musician, 1904-1943. 




Return to table of contents


Date: Sat, 24 Apr 1999 22:41:38 -0500
From: bkhegemann at computerland.net
Subject: This is my brother Darryl and this is my other brother Darryl.

AlK offers some useful suggestions on cloning a prize winner from 
a published recipe.  I guess my own experience follows more 
closely the results of the Great HBD Palexperiment.  There we see 
"experienced amateur brewers" using identical ingredients, 
following specific instructions as to process, and producing 
"...widely disparate results in things like bitterness, final gravity, 
pH, and CO2 levels..."  

I myself have brewed numerous stouts using a standard 7# pale, 
1# roasted, 1# flaked, Wyeast 1084 recipe and might generously 
call them cousins.  Twins? Clones?  Well.....  I will say the more 
recent are much better than the distant past due in large part to 
things I've picked up here.  I feel like I even understand (woo-hoo!) 
some of the brewing science behind Al's suggestions.  

My point isn't that replication is impossible -- okay, it is for me. 
Doh! -- it's that it appears that one has to go to great lengths to be 
able to achieve it.  If I had that kind of energy, I'd be using it to 
steal the boss' job.  

Thankfully, it's fairly easy to make good beer and with a little 
knowledge (Thanks, HBD collective!), it's possible for me to make 
great albeit-never-exactly-the-same-twice beer.  




Return to table of contents


Date: Sun, 25 Apr 1999 14:05:44 +0200
From: "Dr. Pivo" <irv at wireworks.se>
Subject: re:Sanitizers and bugs (and beer stone)

Joe Rolfe wrote regarding a nice industrial schedule for sanitizing
using first a caustic, and then an acid flush (plus further options).

I thought it was very well stated (except some confusion about the word
"pathenogenic"... this just means "harmful" and one has to state if you
mean "pathenogenic to the beer" of which there are tons of things
floating around which are, or "pathenogenic to people" of which there
are likewise tons of things floating around, but they don't grow in
beer).

As an aside - before septic sytems, and when shallow wells were in use,
the great spread of beer making and drinking may well have been that it
was "a clean drink", where the local drinking water supply (-ies) could
well be polluted by the run off of human and animal refuse.

I thought it would be worthwhile to add that there is another rationalle
for Joe's caustic/acid rinse cycles.

This is also the industrial means of combating "beer stone".

Beer stone is just the little hard dry deposits that are left behind
from any aspect of the beer making.  You might see them as a brown
miscolouration in the bottom of your corny, walls of plastic fermenters,
or siphoning hoses.

Beer stone is divided into "inorganics" (principally carbonates... the
same stuff as the white fuzz on your faucet if you have high carbonate
water), and "organics" the brown coloured stuff from your beer which I
imagine is a collection of all kinds of chemically neat stuff.

Industries don't want that stuff accumulating in their systems, as when
they build up, they can cause a porous seat for bacteria to grow (no
good), and if allowed to accumulate enough, can even cause flow
problems.

The industrial solution for this is "acid for the inorganics, caustic
soda for the organics"... the same as the sanitizing cycle.

Since most industrial stuff is made of stainless, the acid of choice is
often "Nitric acid" since it is what is called a "reducing acid" , and
"pickles" the stainless, giving it a corrosion resistant surface.

So the caustic/acid sanitizing cycle is sort of "two birds with one
stone" - killing bugs, and removing beer stone.

In industrial applications, where you might be turning three brews
through your system in a day, and you've no control over your product
once it leaves the gate, attention to these details can be very
important.

While I heartily reccomend these kind of stringent measures to
commercial production, once I'm at home, I have long since stopped
worrying about, or trying to remove beer stone.  I kind of like that
brown colour... lets me know they've been used to a good purpose.

It hasn't punished me yet.  My brewing vessel and cornies I might give a
caustic "heating" once or twice a year (production circa 1500 litres),
my plastic primary fermenting vessels and syphon hose, just keep getting
browner.

What I do, is invert the fermenters and squirt them off as soon as I'm
finished with them, make sure there are no solids still hanging on, and
leave them inverted to dry.  I figure I've had a healthy yeast culture
there to begin with, and using this technique the only thing that would
be left there is residues of the same.

I then give them a quick rinse with a dilute Hydrogen Peroxide solution
immediately prior to use, swish it around and let it be "wet" a few
minutes, invert again and squirt off, then right them and start filling
with wort.

In a real pinch, I've skipped the H2O2 rinse, and just squirted the
stuff off while still inverted a last time before using.

When you have the stuff at home, and can keep an eye on it right up to
the time it is consumed, it really is amazing how tolerant beer is.

If you rinse your stuff off right after using, and don't leave old beer
or wort lying on surfaces, it is really surprising how much you can
reduce your sanitizer consumtion.

When I first started brewing I used to get the odd infected batch and it
was EXTREMELY frustrating, and made me adopt the very rigorous and
ritualistic methods often suggested here.  This is probably not a bad
way to start out to "guard yourself".

With time, you might find as I, that attention to simple hygeinic
procedures is the most important of all, and you can begin
"rationalising away" certain ritualistic sanitizing procedures without
punishment.

Then again, some people might feel more comfortable with all that
cleaning and sanitizing, and I guess they should just keep on doing it.

I know I have broached a somewhat "holy subject" here: "Are you trying
to tell newbies that they shouldn't sanitize?!"... but it works for me.

Dr. Pivo


Return to table of contents


Date: Sun, 25 Apr 1999 08:13:26 -0400
From: Jeff Renner <nerenner at umich.edu>
Subject: Re: hop-free beer

"George De Piro" <gdepiro at fcc.net> wrote:

>Jeff Renners Domesday ale was brewed without
>hops, relying on the astringency of the oat malt to
>balance the sweetness.  It was not noticeably
>infected when I tasted it at the MCAB.  Theres
>one real-life data point for you.

Well, actually, I don't think there is much astringency, planned or
unplanned (I didn't plan on it), so right now it's pretty out of balance to
the sweet side.  OG 1096, FG(?) 1.036.  Bottled in 7 oz. nips with very
little air space and no priming sugar, so it has very little carbonation
(just a faint "pfst" when opened).  It's rather like a sweet sherry, or
maybe alcoholic prune juice. ;-)  It reminds me of Adam's Triple Bock.  I'm
hoping that with much age (like years), it will become interesting.  There
is no infection evident at this time, but a lacto sourness could actually
be nice.  I have that in my old ale "solera."

Jeff

 -=-=-=-=-
Jeff Renner in Ann Arbor, Michigan USA, c/o nerenner at umich.edu
"One never knows, do one?"  Fats Waller, American Musician, 1904-1943. 




Return to table of contents


Date: Sun, 25 Apr 1999 08:33:22 EDT
From: ThomasM923 at aol.com
Subject: Alternative calcium salts

Al Korzonas wrote about using other calcium salts in hbd #3013:

"Calcium phosphate is all but insoluble, so that cans that idea.  Calcium
lactate is slightly more soluble (three times, if memory serves) but
is still not very soluble..."

Now that the subject of alternative calcium salts has been brought up again, 
I'd like to resubmit an unanswered question I posted on 3/11/99:

"[In searching for calcium lactate at a health food store], I found some 
other calcium supplements that I am curious about. I hope that some of the 
chemists among us can comment on them. One was calcium glucanate and the 
other was chelated calcium (amino acid chelate). Can anyone hazard a guess as 
to what these chemicals would do in a mash?"

Thomas Murray
Maplewood, NJ


Return to table of contents


Date: Sun, 25 Apr 1999 09:57:36 EDT
From: FridayMtn at aol.com
Subject: Some questions from a neophyte

Hello brewers,
	My first batch is brewing and it would appear that I'm already in 
trouble.  Hopefully one or more of you will be able to help me out (if I'm 
actually in NEED of help!).
	1.  My Cooper's Lager Extract has finished its primary and I racked 
it to a 5 gallon carboy approximately twenty-four hours ago.  Here's the 
first query:  The primary was bubbling at a rate of about once every 
ten-fifteen seconds when I racked it after six days.  Now, in the secondary 
fermenter, it's only bubbling about once every two minutes.  What's up?  Have 
I "killed" my yeast?  Is it appropriate to have such a small amount of 
activity?  My fermentation is taking place in an area that remains between 65 
and 68 degrees.
	2.  I "built" my first batch using Cooper's extract and corn sugar.  
When I stopped at another brew supply place yesterday, the owner told me I 
was screwing up, that I should only be brewing this stuff with dried malt 
extract instead of corn sugar.  Was he right?  
	3.  The same guy mentioned above sold me two pounds of English Amber 
Dry Malt to use with a can of Dortmunder Style Lager extract with a "smack 
pack" of Wyeast #2308 Munich yeast.  Are those a good combination?
	4.  When I got home from that shop (some seventy miles!), I looked at 
the bottom of the can and noted that the Dortmunder extract should have been 
used by June, '98!  Should I be concerned?  Will it be usable? 
	 I hope these questions aren't too fundamental for the mostly expert 
brewers I've been reading on the digest.  My hope lies with the frequent 
mention that this digest is aimed at a wide range of brewing expertise, from 
chemists and scientists to people like me, who simply want to learn how to 
brew a decent beer.
	Thanks for the help any of you may wish to provide.

 -jt-

(John Terrell)
Boiceville, New York
Way up in the Catskills where the water be fine!  :-) 

	


Return to table of contents


Date: Sun, 25 Apr 1999 08:33:30 -0700
From: "Brian Dixon" <mutex at proaxis.com>
Subject: Re: What is a good substance for making SG samples

>I want to make samples of liquid with different specific gravities in the
>range from 1.000 to 1.150 or so.  I am looking for ideas for the substance
>to mix with water.  I don't want to use malt or corn sugar because it is to
>sticky.  Table salt is to corrosive.  What would be a good "salt"?  One
>that rinsed off easily would also have advantages.
>
>Each sample would be about 250 ml.  It would be nice if the substance was
>such that I  could accurately predict the resulting SG from the weight of
>the added substance.  I suppose that would leave out substances that absorb
>water or are combined with water.

The problem with making samples like this is that, as you say, you want to
use something that you _know_ you can weigh and combine with water and get a
predictable gravity (weigh the proper amt of your substance, then add water
until the solution reaches the correct weight.)  This basically constrains
you to substances that you find listed in texts like the CRC Handbook of
Chemistry, e.g. sugars and salts.  If you want to avoid corrosiveness and
stickiness, then you'll have to look through the tables and consider each
compound individually ... I can't make any recommendation offhand.  Maybe
one of the chemists around here can make recommendation.  If you do use the
CRC Handbook, then look at in Section D for the subsection called
"Concentrative Properties of Aqueous Solutions: Conversion Tables."  The
column labeled "A% by wt" is actually degrees Plato, while the column
labeled "D" with both a superscripted '20' and a subscripted '20' is
Specific Gravity.  You'll have to interpolate to get the exact SGs that you
want.  Then use the Plato column to figure out your solution, e.g. 100 grams
of a 10 degree Plato solution uses 10 grams of your selected compound plus
enough pure, degassed water at 20 C to make 100 grams of solution.
Personally, I use Sucrose (Table 88) if I'm making standards for calibrating
brewing hydrometers.  You can't use dry malt because the sugar mix is
unknown.  Salt solutions provide a surface tension/meniscus different than
what wort (a sugar solution) provides.  Sucrose is not malt sugar, but it's
as close as you can get (as far as I know) using the CRC tables.

Brian




Return to table of contents


Date: Sun, 25 Apr 1999 13:48:25 -0400
From: sedam at bellsouth.net
Subject: enzyme stability

Steve Alexander replies to my original post about sugars "trapping"
water...
<snip>
I agree completely *BUT* starch and
particularly amylopectin molecules trap water much more effectively than

simpler sugars - so enzyme stability should decline due to this factor
as
the mash proceeds - not increase.  There are other factors like
substrate
stabilization and product inhibition and stabilization at work here
too.  <snip>

I'm not sure this is true.  In a past life I did a lot of work with
purified enzymes and their stability in industrial processes.  The
enzyme supplier (who shall remain nameless) stabilized their enzyme
preps with sorbitol (a sugar) and some basic antioxidants.  I was trying
to get beta-amylase to digest some starch more rapidly, and took the
enzyme prep and dialyzed it with distilled water.  The sugarless enzyme
prep was remarkably more active, but stability was seriously affected.
Considering it was digesting a pure starch suspension the stability was
not positively affected.  No, this wasn't a mashing situation so take it
with a grain of salt (or sugar).

Another important aspect of enzyme stability is the existence of
sufficient cofactors.  Alpha-amylase is stabilized by the existence of
calcium...yet another reason to make sure your water chemistry has
sufficient calcium in it (>50ppm).

 -Marc
Brouwerij Zuytdam



Return to table of contents


Date: Sun, 25 Apr 1999 14:04:32 -0400
From: sedam at bellsouth.net
Subject: sulfury lagers

Need a little help here.  I'm a relative newbie to lagers and recently
brewed a Maibock and a German pilsener.  They were both pitched with the

Wyeast 2278 (Czech pils) yeast from a big starter (yeast cake from a 2.5

gallon previous ferment), were aerated using 1 min of pure oxygen with a

SS stone, and fermented at 48F for two weeks.  I then transfered them
to the secondary fermenters and did a 2-day diacetyl rest at 62-65F.  I
realize this is very high for a d-rest, but NC isn't really cold right
now and my wife is nice enough to permit a chest freezer in our spare
bedroom.  Anyhoo, they went into the lagering phase by reducing the
temperature 10F per day until I got the temperature down to 34F, where
they currently rest.  After 5 days lagering under 5psi, I took a sample
to see if it had hit terminal gravity...it had, but the beer was really
sulfury.  I mean REALLY sulfury.

The question:  Lagering is being done in a corny under 5psi and is,
therefore, totally closed.  If I vented the headspace every day or two,
would it speed the removal of the sulfury notes?  I have to serve this
beer in two weeks and want to speed up the maturation process a bit to
ensure it's clean tasting when it's served.  Suggestions?



Return to table of contents


Date: Sun, 25 Apr 1999 15:43:55 -0400
From: Dan Listermann <72723.1707 at compuserve.com>
Subject: Cooling Wort

Al Korzonas ( korz at brewinfo.com) writes:

<Well, actually, Clark asked whether or not it's okay to pour hot wort
into cold water.  While I agree with Dave that pouring hot wort through
a strainer (or splashing hot wort in general...) will lead to problems,
I have long recommended to beginners to *GENTLY* pour hot wort into cool
water.>

This reminded me of a very common problem found by extract brewers,
especially those who follow directions published in most brew books.  
These
directions tell the brewer to pour their boiling wort into a fermenter 
with
cool water in it or to add cool water to the fermenter after the hot wort

has been poured in.  From a thermodynamic point of view this is very
inefficient.  They are starting out with a small thermal mass ( say 2.5
gallons) with a high temperature differential in a conductive vessel. By
pouring it into cold water, they now  have to cool a large thermal mass,
with a low temperature differential ( about 110 F) in an less conductive
vessel.  This operation can take 5 hours.   I feel that it is
thermoldynamicaly backwards.  It is far easier to remove BTUs from a 
small
thermal mass with a large temperature differential in a conductive vessel

and then mix it in with the rest of the water.  This can be done in about

30 minutes.  I can see no advantage to pouring the hot wort into cool 
water
and attempting to cool this now very warm wort to pitching temperatures. 
 I
tell my customers to cool the pot to about 100 F and then pour it into 
the
fermenter with the water.  Usually this is safe pitching temperature.   
Not
only is this proceedure faster and safer than the typical brew book
directions, but it also does not provide much time for contamination
problems to develope and eliminates hot side aeration issues.

Dan Listermann  dan at listermann.com       or    72723.1707 at compuserve

Return to table of contents


Date: Sun, 25 Apr 1999 23:56:02 -0500
From: Laurel Maney <maney at execpc.com>
Subject: more on astringency

Al is certainly right when he cites phenolics in beer as a source of
astringency, and I didn't mean to give the impression that sulfates are
the only source.  But seriously, there are many references in the
literature to other sources, including sulfate ion, melanoidins and the
amino acid proline, very early oxidation and abnormal levels of higher
alcohols.  These observations were based on actual sensory evaluation,
so I don't think we can just dismiss them.

I like to use calcium sulfate as a reference for astringence because
it's otherwise flavorless, easy to get, and easy to use.  It gives me
the drying sensation that I was trained to recognize as astringent in
beer and water.  Of course my favorite and most memorable training on
astringence was eating too close to the skin of a persimmon, so Al's
grape skin example would certainly do it for me too.

I'll disagree with him on the subject of sulfates, though, with a
respectful "de gustibus, non disputandum est"  (hey, I'm open to
corrections on the Latin - it's been way too many years).

Laurel Maney
Brewing Program
Milwaukee Area Technical College





Return to table of contents

---