---

	FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
		Rob Gardner, Digest Coordinator


Contents:
  Sanitation and water (doug)
  BTU Ratings (Mike Fertsch)
  Yeast pitching (Patrick Stirling)
  Very long secondary fermentation (Stuart Crawford)
  BTUs (Ed Falk)
  San Antonio brewery info (BROWN)
  Re:  sterilizing & kegging (John Polstra)
  Problem with digest format -- cannot burst reliably. (Chris Shenton)
  Other sources questions (Chris Shenton)


Send submissions to homebrew%hpfcmr at hplabs.hp.com
Send requests to homebrew-request%hpfcmr at hplabs.hp.com


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

Date: Tue, 14 Nov 89 06:43:39 EST
From: hisata!doug at gatech.edu
Subject: Sanitation and water

Some thoughts on recent comments about water and sanitation.  I have had a 
lot of trouble with my homebrew kicking into a late fermentation, resulting 
in gushing after being in the bottles for 3 or 4 months.  Many of my beers 
have a slight sour flavor, which I think is caused by lactobacillis.  (Can 
someone more knowledgeable confirm this?)  I have tried repeatedly to be as 
clean and sanitary as I can, but my results are mixed.  Some beer is 
delicious, some has the slight sour flavor, and a few batches gush.  Only 2 
of 13 batches have been completely undrinkable (so far).
 
I asked my friend Robert for advice.  Robert is an electronmicroscopist/
microbiologist/chemistry professor/homebrewer.  He pointed out that the 
usual homebrewer's sanitation practices are just that:  sanitation, not 
sterilization.  He advised sterilizing with a 1:3 bleach/water solution (I 
still don't make it this strong).  He said NOT to rinse, that you just 
recontaminate, unless you're rinsing with sterile water.  Once the bleach 
solution dries, he says it's mostly inactivated.  Also, if you've 
sterilized equipment used while boiling the wort, the organics in the wort 
should neutralize the bleach.
 
As far as tap water goes, it is usually quite contaminated, and you're 
running a risk using it.  He claims even distilled water isn't guaranteed 
to be pure, and bottled spring water can have lots of critters swimming in 
it.  The only way to be sure is to boil it in a pressure cooker, 
essentially autoclaving it.  If you can't do this, at the least it should 
be boiled 10 mins.
 
So I made two batches of beer on 10/21, one all-grain, and one 
grain/extract.  I sterilized everything with a very strong bleach solution, 
I boiled every drop of water 30 mins (but not in the pressure cooker), I 
repeatedly scrubbed my hands with hexachlorophene, I even heated the 
carboys--slowly--in the oven to 300 degrees.  (Robert assured me that would 
also do in any residual chlorine.)  The yeast was rehydrated in sterile 
water before pitching.  (A highly recommended practice.)  Both batches got 
off to a flying start, fermenting nicely.  The grain/extract finished 
working and was bottled on 11/4.  The raw beer tasted great, without a hint 
of bacterial sourness.  The all-grain batch, however, is still slowly 
working.  I've got a very bad feeling about this!  This is typical behavior 
of an infection.  With all I did to insure cleanliness, I have just one 
more suspect....
 
THE YEAST!  The latest issue of "Zymurgy"--a marvelous issue, BTW--points 
out in a couple of articles how contaminated package yeast can be, as well 
as how limited its viability is, depending on storage conditions.  Both 
batches were made with Edme dry yeast.  The last, gushing batch was made 
with Munton & Fison.  I'm strongly considering culturing my own (see 
"Zymurgy" again).  Does anyone have any experience with this?  Is it a 
pain?  Is it worth it?
 
BTW, Robert is a nice guy and brews good beer.  (He uses a little instant 
coffee in his porter.  You couldn't identify it if you didn't know what it 
was, but it adds to the "dark" flavor.)  However, he's something of a 
perfectionist (to be polite), and I would take his advice with a grain or 
two of salt.  But I was desperate, so followed his advice.  Also, he has 
offered to take some of my gushing beer to the lab and culture it to let me 
know what got in it!
 
Doug Allison
UUCP: ...!gatech!hisata!doug

Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 14 Nov 89 09:38 EST
From: Mike Fertsch <FERTSCH at adc1.adc.ray.com>
Subject: BTU Ratings

Guy Ruth asks about BTU's and batch size:

> With a little calculation, I was able to figure that a minimum heat source
> should put out approx. 15,000 BTUs.  I used the following figures: 

>       31 gallons  at  approx. 8#/gallon
>        1 BTU to raise 1# of water 1 degree F
>        temperature change of 60 degrees to achieve boiling
>     =======
>     14,880 BTUs

I think 15,000 BTU's are way too little for boiling 31 gallons of wort.
Missing from these calculations are any thermal losses.  If the kettle is
perfectly insulated, and no heat escapes from the lid, 15,000 might be enough.
 I believe stoves are rated in BTU/hour.  WITH NO THERMAL LOSSES you will get
your water to 200+ degrees in an hour.  It has been a long time since
thermodynamics class, but also missing is the energy necessary to bring 212
degree water to 212 degree steam.  (I recall the 'delta-H' of transformation
being 10 kcal/mol - I can't convert this to BTU's, but I believe this is
significant.)  A 15,000 BTU burner will NEVER get 31 gallons to boil. 

I have friends who use Coleman-type propane burners (available from a sporting
goods store) rated at 26,000 BTU.  They are great for boiling six or seven
gallons of wort.  They heat the wort in a hurry (<20 minutes) at full
throttle, and keep a moderate boil going when throttled back. 

Personally, I use a 120,000 BTU propane burner.  It sounds like a jet engine. 
It was marketed at a "Creole Cooker";  I cook Creoles in it :-) 120,000 BTU is
way overkill for 6 gallons of wort!  Even throttled back, I have difficulty
controlling the boil.  I suspect that it would be sized 'just right' for 31
gallons of wort. 

I have another colleague who brews in 25 gallon batch sizes.  He uses an
industrial kitchen stove.  He got it from a restaurant.  I don't know its BTU
rating. 

Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 14 Nov 89 08:59:06 PST
From: pms at Sun.COM (Patrick Stirling)
Subject: Yeast pitching

I've tried several methods of adding yeast to wort: sprinkling the dry yeast,
rehydrating it in warm wort, and rehydrating in warm water. I haven't found
any appreciable difference.  Rehydrated yeast should be better on paper,
because that way you'll find out if the yest is OK before it's too late! Also
the yeast gets a head start and should get going faster. 

I have also pitched at temperatures varying from 70F to 100F. At higher temps
(>80 or so), the fermentation sometimes (usually!) ends prematurely, at around
"half" the SG (e.g. 1.050 -> 1.025), but at the proper temp it ferments to
closer to 1/4 SG (1.050 -> 1.013). 

I don't like the idea of stirring, it sound too risky to me, and slooshing in
a cup or so of rehydrated yeast should cause plenty of turbulence by itself.
You wouldn't want those little yeasties to get spread out and lonely in all
that wort after all, would you?! 

Oh, about Guy's BTU calculations. There's no time in the BTU's because it
doesn't matter how slowly (or fast) the heat is added - 1BTU raises 1lb water
1F, period. So you have to add 14,880BTU to get your 31 gal to a boil from
about 150F (your 60F raise). Stoves should be rated with BTU and time, e.g. a
15,000BTU/hr stove would take an hour for your set up. Unfortunately I have no
idea whether 15k BTU/hr is a table top range or a blast furnace! 

patrick

Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 14 Nov 89 10:22:22 PST
From: Stuart Crawford <stuart at ads.com>
Subject: Very long secondary fermentation

Despite being urged to "Relax, don't worry, have a homebrew", I'm a bit
concerned about the batch that is currently undergoing secondary fermentation.
This batch (a San Francisco Steam style) is being held at a relatively constant
60 degrees farenheit, and contains a *lager* yeast.  The primary fermentation
was vigorous, and I transferred to the secondary fermenter after about 4 days.
What worries me is that after 3 weeks in the secondary fermenter, there is
*still* a gentle, but constant, stream of bubbles emerging... indicating that
fermentation is not complete.

Isn't this a rather long secondary fermentation---even for a lager yeast?
Thanks in advance,

			Stuart

Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 14 Nov 89 10:56:45 PST
From: falk at Sun.COM (Ed Falk)
Subject: BTUs

> 
>     14,880 BTUs
> 
> The one thing missing from the calculation that I'm very interested in
> is a reference to time.  For all I know I could be heating the kettle
> several hours to achieve a rolling boil.  If I were to get a burner
> that's too hot, I wouldn't want to start a melt down either.  Can
> anyone help?

1 BTU = 1055 joules
14,880 BTU = 15.7e6 joules

1 joule = 1 watt*sec.

So for example, a 1000 watt heater would take 15,700 seconds = 4.3 hours.

Note that that's just to bring the water up to boiling point.  It takes
another 971 BTU/lb = 240,800 BTU/31gal = 70.5 hours to actually boil it all
away. 

Also, you have to cool it afterwards.  I suppose commercial breweries use heat
exchangers. 

Return to table of contents


Date:     Tue, 14 Nov 89 15:25 EST
From: <BROWN%MSUKBS.BITNET at CORNELLC.cit.cornell.edu>
Subject:  San Antonio brewery info

I'm going to be in San Antonio, TX in a few weeks.  Are there any interesting
brewpubs or local beers I should not miss?

Thanks,

Jackie Brown        Bitnet: Brown at msukbs

Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 14 Nov 89 09:45:27 PST
From: polstra!jdp at hplabs.HP.COM (John Polstra)
Subject: Re:  sterilizing & kegging

> I have been sterilizing my bottle caps in chlorine for 7 years now
> with no problems.

Man, that's paranoia!  Fifteen minutes should be *plenty*  :-)

-- John Polstra               jdp at polstra.UUCP
   Polstra & Co., Inc.        ...{uunet,sun}!practic!polstra!jdp
   Seattle, WA                (206) 932-6482

Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 14 Nov 89 14:11:57 est
From: Chris Shenton <chris at asylum.gsfc.nasa.gov>
Subject: Problem with digest format -- cannot burst reliably.

I am  using vm to read  the homebrew digests  and  am having  problems bursting
them. It thinks things like peoples  signatures  and other separators beginning
with a dash at the left margin are message separators. Example:

	<text of message>
	--
	<your signature here>

gets  burst into two messages; the  <your signature here> has  no   headers, so
appears to have no text. I asked vm's author for help, and here is his reply:

Kyle Jones writes:
> Chris Shenton writes about digests:
> > Is there a standard message digest delimiter, a proper number of
> > dashes, etc?  Or is vm looking for any number of dashes at the
> > beginning of a line, terminated by a newline?

> RFC 934, "Proposed Standard for Message Encapsulation", specifies that
> any line whose first character is `-' and whose second character is not
> ` ' (space), is to be considered a message separator.

> When a RFC 934 conformant digest is created, message lines beginning
> with `-' are supposed to be prepended with "- ".  The digest bursting
> agent will strip these characters before presenting the message to the
> user.

So it appears that any line beginning with a dash -- not followed by a space --
will act as a message  separator; this happens *a lot*  in signatures, but also
when people use a line of dashes to set off their recipes, etc.

Would you be able to add this prepended ``- '' to  the offending lines? I don't
know  how many  other mail-reader bursting algorithms fail  to work without it,
but I don't see how they really could at all  in the present state. Does anyone
else have this problem? I'm losing a lot of good info! Thanks in advance.
_______________________________________________________________________________
	     It's a good thing these lines don't start with ``-''
Internet: chris at asylum.gsfc.nasa.gov (128.183.10.155)       NASA/GSFC: Code 735
UUCP:     uunet!asylum.gsfc.nasa.gov!chris                  Greenbelt, MD 20771
SPAN:     PITCH::CHRIS (DECNET)                                    301-286-6093
===============================================================================

Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 14 Nov 89 09:52:59 est
From: Chris Shenton <chris at asylum.gsfc.nasa.gov>
Subject: Other sources questions

Ed Falk writes:
> Where can I get empty bottles?  My friends are just about tapped out
> and when I go to bars and ask them, they just look at me funny.

I've had good luck at a local chili house which serves good beer. That doesn't
really help, but they also serve bad beer in returnable longnecks. For the
price of the deposit, and the guarantee of a sample of the next batch, I get a
couple cases, with the handy stackable, luggable cases. I've never been able to
get more than 4 cases at a time, but I guess they want me to come back and buy
more chili...  Not the most simple or reliable, but the price is right.

I have had some luck at bars and art-openings obtaining mass quantities of
champagne bottles (New Year's Eve is not that far away!). Great for mead, wine,
and not bad at all for beer.

I've priced Grolsch-style bottles (rubber gasket around ceramic cap) at canning
and gourmet places and they're prohibitive, especially in the quantities I
need.

Return to table of contents


End of HOMEBREW Digest #303, 11/15/89

---