HOMEBREW Digest #3102 Thu 05 August 1999

[Prev HBD] [Index] [Next HBD] [Back]

		Digest Janitor: janitor@hbd.org
		Many thanks to the Observer & Eccentric Newspapers of 
		Livonia, Michigan for sponsoring the Homebrew Digest.
				URL: http://www.oeonline.com

  P-cooking decoctions (CMClancy)
  More phytin words... (ALAN KEITH MEEKER)
  No-sparge revisited ("Scholz, Richard")
  early hops (ALAN KEITH MEEKER)
  donning the science hat (ALAN KEITH MEEKER)
  "Classic Beer Style" Remainders (Donald Beistle)
  50 qt pot ("Paul Valdiviez")
  Desired Temps (Rob.Green1)
  Yeast Aging (Jeremy Bergsman)
  New user's guide (ALAN KEITH MEEKER)
  No subject given ("Todd Carlson")
  More starters stuff ("Rich, Charles")
  Attenuation (Dave Burley)
  The Truth ("Brian Rezac")
  Bell's Two Hearted Ale Recipe ("BeerGeek")
  Re: Eric Panthers Idea Of Brewing? ("Eric Panther")
  Dry Yeast ("glyn crossno")
  MCAB II is Scheduled In St. Louis (RBoland)
  Science/art/religion (Steve Lacey)
  Brewing on a scale? (Matthew Comstock)
  Re Whirlpooling (RobertJ)
  Re: Backyard hops (Jeff Renner)
  Re:Innovations (Matthew Comstock)
  1st and 2nd runnings ("Sieben, Richard")
  Hose Length (RCAYOT)
  Hop garden woes ("Sieben, Richard")
  Oxygen in Mash Liquor (Dave Burley)
  Chiller suggestions ("Charles T. Major")
  ham and orange zest (MVachow)

* Beer is our obsession and we're late for therapy! * The HBD now hosts eight digests related to this and a few other hobbies. * Send an email note to majordomo at hbd.org with the word "lists" on one * line, and "help" on another (don't need the quotes) for a listing and * instructions for use. * 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: Tue, 3 Aug 1999 10:56:27 EDT From: CMClancy at aol.com Subject: P-cooking decoctions I am really interested in the recent thread related to p-cooking mash in lieu of traditional decoctions. In fact, this thread made me wonder if one could p-cook a bunch of jars of mash or runoff to be stored and added to later batches. This would save the decoction step for these batches yet possibly lend the desired character. Has anyone considered or tried such a technique? If so, would it be better to p-cook and store only runoff or a thick portion of the mash? Any ideas on how well the canned "decoction" might keep? With all of the recent talk about pressure cookers for starters and decoctions, it looks like they may become a more popular tool for the average home brewer. I use mine for homegrown veggies and cooking stews/soups as well - novel idea, huh? Chad Clancy Mechanicsburg, PA Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 3 Aug 1999 11:51:34 -0400 (EDT) From: ALAN KEITH MEEKER <ameeker at welch.jhu.edu> Subject: More phytin words... AJ revives the recently deceased phytin thread! BEWARE **** SCIENTIFIC CONTENT ***** LUDDITES PAGE DOWN NOW!! * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * AJ, your results are very interesting but also very puzzling! Free phosphoric acid has three pKa's ~1-2, ~6.7, AND ~12.7 Since the pKa's are not disturbed greatly upon formation of the monoester (the case for phytic acid) I would've expected two predominant "families" of pKa's from your measurents, namely approx 6.7 and approx 12.7 (the oxygen with pKa ~1.0 having been "used up" in the formation of the ester to inositol). The strange thing is that you got MANY pKa's ranging all the way from ~1 to 12.7 So, what is going on here? My first thought is that the phytic acid solution you used may not have been pure - what was the source? My second thought is that your sample may have undergone a fair amount of hydrolysis, thus resulting in free phosphoric acid in your sample which would at least explain the many pKa' around 1 - 2. An aside, the oxygen atom will be NEGATIVELY charged following deprotonation, not positively charged. Finally AJ, you may remember that we'd debated whether or not the action of the enzyme phytase would lower pH simply as a consequence of Pi liberation (your point of view) or was strictly a byproduct of calcium phosphate precipitation (my point of view). Well, I think you were right after all! In looking into the reaction I'd assumed that during the hydrolysis, the components of the split water (H+, OH-) would both be consumed (therefore no net gain or loss of protons) but this isn't the case. Mike Maceyka pointed out to me that, since this newly liberated phosphate oxygen is the one with the pKa ~1-2 it will NOT pick up a proton during the hydrolysis reaction (at least certainly not at any /reasonable/ mash pH!).... Doh!! Mike, guess that Chem degree did come in handy after all. -Alan meeker Baltimore MD Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 3 Aug 1999 12:02:57 -0400 From: "Scholz, Richard" <RScholz at refco.com> Subject: No-sparge revisited Dear Collective, With the resurgence of the no-sparge discussion, I thought I would chime in with an account my last couple of no-sparge / batch-sparge brewing. After last years article in BT by Louis B. and the discussion it generated here. I started no-sparge brewing as a way to shortening the brewing day. I mash in a 10 gal. Gott cooler with an EM (tm) and collect into a 15 gal. boiling pot. The ESB I made as my first no-sparge brew became an ESB when my extraction efficiency was ~55% not the 50% I pre-calculated? ( I figured a bitter was a good starting type since low OG becomes an Ordinary, on target is a Special and a high OG is an ESB ) I just mash as usual and then pump in just boiled water onto the grain bed and recirculate until clear and then drain the mash tun until about 6gals are collected. This saves about at least an hour of sparging and seems to give an extra malty flavor note to the brews. I continued to use the 55% efficiency and hit the target OG on the next few batches, but the last batch I did, I used a cereal mash added to the main mash. The main mash (~18lb) was doughed in at 140 F and a side pot of 1lb of cracked oats and 1lb 60L crystal was slowly raised to the boil with 2 gallons of water (less water and you make oatmeal). After 30mins it was added to the main mash that stabilized at 155Fand held for ~45mins. Then the sparge water was dumped on top and recirculate until clear, then collected 6 gals. I was looking for a 1.067 OG but got 1.082 OG this works out to be an extract efficiency ~62%. My questions to the collective are these: Why did the cereal mash ( almost like a single decoction ) improve the efficiency significantly? Was it the 30mins at 140F added to the mashing process? Was it the gelatinization of the starch in the oats? Was it just the longer mashing time ( usually 1hr )? Any thoughts? TIA - ---- Richard L Scholz Brooklyn, NY (624.2, 102o Rennerian) Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 3 Aug 1999 12:17:42 -0400 (EDT) From: ALAN KEITH MEEKER <ameeker at welch.jhu.edu> Subject: early hops People have been mentioning early harvests, well add my name to the list! My hops were ready for harvest weeks ago. Have Liberty, Mt Hood, and Perle growing here in Baltimore Md. We've had tons of heat and drought conditions but the hops have been well watered (took plenty of tug and war with the hose. for some reason, my wife thinks the watering of ornamental flowers is as important - go figure). This is VERY different behavior compared to last year. Also, there are tons of new flowers just budding so I'll be getting a second harvest as well! -Alan Meeker Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 3 Aug 1999 12:18:16 -0400 (EDT) From: ALAN KEITH MEEKER <ameeker at welch.jhu.edu> Subject: donning the science hat - ------------------------------ But Brad, they WERE DOING SCIENCE!! Their instrumentation (hairy arm) was just a bit less precise than today's (thermometer) >"Q. How did house brewers know what temp. to mash at before the >invention of thermometers? >A. If the water was just too hot to stick your hand in, you've >reached strike temperature! >Some times you just have to look at brewing without the >science hat on...." -Alan Meeker Baltimoron Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 3 Aug 1999 12:17:27 -0400 (EDT) From: Donald Beistle <dbeistle at arches.uga.edu> Subject: "Classic Beer Style" Remainders Calling All Tightwads! During a recent trip home to SE Wisconsin I visited Half Price Books, my favorite new and used bookstore, and discovered piles of remaindered "Classic Beer Style" books. Half Price Books is a small national chain with two locations in metro Milwaukee and two or three in Madison as well as some in Texas and Arizona. Both Milwaukee locations had Volumes 1 "Pale Ale," 2 "Continental Pilsener," 4 "Vienna/Maerzen/Oktoberfest," and 5 "Porter" in stock. The Brown Deer Rd. store had ten-or-so of each and was selling them for $3.98. The Bluemound Rd. store had at least twice as many copies of each book and was selling them for just $2.00. I have no idea if the Madison stores have these books in stock, but anyone living in or around Dane county might want to take a peek in either the Half Price Books located in one of those little satellite malls next to East Towne Mall or their original location on (I think) Odana Rd. just off the beltline. Half Price Books does not take orders or ship books, so you'll actually have to visit one of their stores to take advantage of their great prices--but any excuse for a road trip to Milwaukee or Madison is a good one! Maybe some enterprising homebrewer or club could act as a proxy for interested parties living outside of Wisconsin. Please note that I have no commercial interest in this business and am providing this information strictly as a kind of preaching to the tightwad choir. Prost! Gelaered Ealu a.k.a. Donald Beistle Athens, Georgia Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 3 Aug 1999 10:44:29 -0700 From: "Paul Valdiviez" <brewpab at iwon.com> Subject: 50 qt pot I found a great price on a 50qt stainless steel pot. Is 50qt (12.5 gal.) big enough for a 10 gal. boil. Private emails okay. Paul Valdiviez Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 3 Aug 1999 13:43:07 -0400 From: Rob.Green1 at firstunion.com Subject: Desired Temps Hi Beer Guys and Gals, I haven't noticed any discussion about beer temperature lately, and was wanting to know what temperature is the optimum for any given beer style? i.e. what temp should an Alt be served at as opposed to the best temp for a bitter, or Brown Ale, or Porter, or Wheat? It appears that some beer styles seem to have their character hidden by serving at a cold temperature but as it warms in the glass seems to 'blossom' with different flavors and character. I guess what I'm looking for is a thread where everyone posts their personal preferences for any given style. I myself like to have my German Alt dispensed at around 45 degrees F and an Irish Red Ale I make dispensed somewhat colder at about 40 degrees F. Keeping in mind that CO2 volume is a function of pressure and temperature, you may want to post your regulator setting as well as your temperature, if you keg your beer. Again what I'm asking for is personal preferences not guidelines, I can read those from a book. Live to Brew, Brew to Live Rob Green Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 03 Aug 1999 11:13:50 -0700 From: Jeremy Bergsman <jeremybb at leland.Stanford.EDU> Subject: Yeast Aging In support of the pointy-haired form of the HBD I would like to alert people to a somewhat interesting article at: http://www.pnas.org/cgi/content/abstract/96/16/9100 It contrasts prolonged periods in stationary phase with reproductive aging. - -- Jeremy Bergsman jeremybb at stanford.edu http://www.stanford.edu/~jeremybb Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 3 Aug 1999 14:42:27 -0400 (EDT) From: ALAN KEITH MEEKER <ameeker at welch.jhu.edu> Subject: New user's guide - ------------------------------ Kevin Elsken wrote to new users: >I know that there are many new home brewers out there who are reading >the HBD who are looking for useful and practical tips on how to make >beer at home. As a new brewer, it can be difficult sometimes to decide >what aspects of the crafts are the most important to master, and which >aspects can be largely ignored with little critical effect on the beer. >Trust me, you can make very good, excellent, tasty, "your friends will >love it" beer without doing the above. I have done it over 20 times >myself. Well newbies get used to this. There are indeed many variables that can impact the quality of your final beer and, as a new brewer, it is in fact nigh on impossible to figure out which are the most important to control. Here's the deal - if you read the books, magazine articles, and HBD you will find many things to worry about and to lose sleep over. Confusingly, whenever someone focuses on a potential problem I can almost guarantee that there will be at least one person saying "Well, in my experience, this is not a problem" or "I've never paid attention to this but I make great beer..." etc. How can there be so much conflicting opinion out there? What's a new brewer to do? Consider the following possibilities: 1. The "problem" is really not a problem at all. Corrections are a waste of time/effort/money. 2. The problem does exist and can be corrected but will not result in a substantial improvement in your beer. 3. The problem exists and impacts significantly on the final beer's quality. People who claim otherwise don't appreciate how much better their beer could be. (they are making "good" beer or "great" beer but could be making awesome beer!) 4. The problem is context-dependent, that is, it is only a problem for certain brewers or at certain times depending upon details such as the type of equiptment they use, environmental conditions, peculiarities of their technique, etc... I'm sure all 4 of the above come into play, but if I had to put my money on one of these I'd bet on #4. For instance, there is currently a classic example of one of these discussions taking place on the HBD - namely, whether or not to use a secondary fermenter. There has been (and will likely continue to be) discussions concerning the relative merits of this technique, some say it is very helpful, while others say it makes no difference or even makes worse beer. Plenty of anecdotes will appear, along with reports of "experiments" conducted. However, the basic question will remain unresolved. This is almost certainly a "category 4" problem. The question - "Whether or not to use a secondary?" can't be answered with a simple "Yes" or "No." The real answer, the best answer for most of these questions is - "IT DEPENDS." It depends on a whole host of variables, for example: How long do you usually let the primary go? Someone who would leave the beer in the primary for a month or two may find racking early to secondary beneficial because he is getting away from the bulk of the yeast which would otherwise cause negative flavors due to autolysis. Here too, yeast strain, condition of the starter, fermentation temperature, wort gravity, and aeration could all impact the yeast's vitality making them more or less prone to autolyze which in turn can allow racking to be beneficial or not. How is your technique? The process of racking to secondary itself is a potential source of introduction of spoilage organisms or oxygen that may cause staling. Perhaps some people that find secondaries detrimental to the quality of their beer are contaminating their beers in the process. Again, a whole host of variables come into play, such as when to rack - if you go early the yeast may still be quite actuive and in suspension in large numbers, able to quickly metabolize any oxygen introduced during the racking. My point is, that making beer is a complex process with MANY variables, and that many of these are interrelated. You can almost never rely on blanket statements. WHAT DOES OR DOES NOT WORK FOR ONE PERSON MAY NOT APPLY TO YOU AT ALL! Your mission, should you choose to accept it, is to learn as much as you can and then see for yourself how well it applies to your own unique brewing situation. Trust no one (not even me). Good Luck Jim Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 03 Aug 99 15:44:36 -0500 From: "Todd Carlson"<carlsont at gvsu.edu> Subject: No subject given I'm trying to formulate a clone for Smithwicks Export Ale (Canadian version). I searched the HBD archives and found that this question has come up several times with no satisfactory recipes posted. I surfed the web and asked around a few places and came up with the following information. Michael Jackson says that this ale tastes "bigger than its recipe would suggest". Another page says it is very soft at first but develops in sweetness and a hint of treacle toffee dryness. The OG is 1.048 and made from a highly modified pale ale malt and roasted barley (3%). The bittering hops are Challenger, Northern Brewer, Borthdown, and Target. Fuggles and Goldings are added for aroma and something (maybe Fuggles) for flavor. The color is 29 EBC and bitterness is 20 IBU. The yeast may be of scottish origin (McEwan's or Younger's, and produces some diacetyl. Wyeast Irish Ale was suggested. Using the Beer Recipator I came up with this. for 5 gallons partial mash recipe: 2 lb Begian Munich Malt 3 oz Roasted Barley 6 lb light malt extrat 0.5 oz fuggles and 0.5 oz goldings (60 min) 0.5 oz fuggles (15 min) 0.5 oz fuggles and 0.5 oz goldings (0 min) Wyeast Irish Ale Yeast color is 29 HCU (15 SRM) bitterness 20 IBU OG 1.055 Here are some questions: Should I use pale ale malt or is the munich malt a good idea? Is 3 oz roasted barley too much? Would I be better off using an amber ME (I usually use Northwestern)? Should I add aroma hops in the kettle at the end of the boil or dry hop or both? Irish or Scottish yeast? Is 29 HCU = 29 EBC? Any water treatment in order? our water is from Lk Michigan and will have some, but not too much permanant hardness (Ca) left after pre-boiling Recommended mash temp, or doesn't matter for only 2 lbs? Thanks for the tips - I'll post the final recipe and results when available. Topic Two - there has been some discussion of yeast starters. If the info on the Yeast-Link web page is to be believed, wouldn't you get a better yeast starter from aerated 5% (1.020) wort than anaerobic 10% (1.040) wort, even without the incremental feeding? It would be a simple experiment - set up the two cultures (same volume) and innoculate with the same amount of yeast. When fermentation has subsided, chill to settle the yeast and see if there is a difference in the size of yeast cake. Maybe I'll try it when I get set up to brew the Smithwicks clone todd Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 3 Aug 1999 13:24:15 -0700 From: "Rich, Charles" <CRich at filenet.com> Subject: More starters stuff > Along with the many good tips contrinbuted by Pat Babcock, Rich, Eric et > al. I'd like to add that I find it's useful to keep on hand some > pre-canned sterile "empties" and some quart jars half-filled with sterile > water. > > The half-filled jars are useful for capturing yeast cakes, the empties, > well they just surprise me by being there for different things when I need > them, like splitting a starter for a friend, recieving yeast from a > brewery, etc.. > > When canning "empties" put a little water inside to generate steam. I use > about half a teaspoonful. > > After canning these and my starters, and after removing the canning rings, > I put a new plastic baggie over the tops, like a codom, to help keep dust > off, then they're good for storage in the worst conditions. The baggie is > useful later too as a protective cover for handling the lid. > > After racking beer out of the fermenter (under a plastic baggie lid with a > CO2 bleed to keep outside air from entering the carboy), I pour out the > last bit of beer from the carboy and pour in the freshly opened jar of > water. Swish everything around and pour it back into the still sterile > jar. Since it was half-filled it has room for the additional yeast. > > I handle the lid from outside the baggie so I don't touch the lid or jar > directly. I spritz the lid and stuff inside with iodophor in a spray > bottle before opening and let stand a few minutes for contact time. I'm > sure the technique can be improved but it's pretty painless and improves > the sterile quality of the work. Never had one go South yet! > > Good luck, > Charles Rich > > PS: I've tasted canned starters over 6-years old and they were still very > fresh with no evidence of spoilage. Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 3 Aug 1999 17:27:21 -0400 From: Dave Burley <Dave_Burley at compuserve.com> Subject: Attenuation Brewsters: John Wilkinson asks the question ( my paraphrase) "Do yeast affect the attenuation? If they do, doesn't this mean there is fermentable sugar left in the less attenuated beers?" Answer? Yes. See my disussion on secondary maintenance in a recent HBD and using stirring and the like to maximize the fermentation of these residual sugars. Why? Different strains of yeast flocculate in response to various factors. One of the often unappreciated aspects of consistent beer brewing is the management of residual sugars. Choice of a yeast will affect not only the taste and aroma of the beer from the esters and such, but the level of unfermented sugar can be different and be dependent on handling techniques during brewing. In fact, DeClerk believed that all brewers yeasts would ferment to the same level of attenuation if the fermentation were agitated in some manner. On the subject of attenuation limit in Volume 2 (Analytical Methods) p 371 DeClerk says: "A number of brewing chemists still hold the view that the value of the attenuation limit varies with the strain of pitching yeast. This is not so and all strains of Saccharomyces Cerevisiae will give precisely the same value for the same wort, provided, of course, that the determination has been properly carried out; a fact that has been proved over and over again." As John points out, some yeasts will ferment some of the higher oligoisaccharides and some of the simpler sugars and therfore, some minor differences are to be expected, but these are often minor compared to residual fermentable sugars left in beer under normal commercial fermentation and handling conditions. I believe DeClerk was aware of these differences. But in brewed beers these differences are small. Taxonomy of yeasts have changed and yeast desribed as "brewing yeasts" has narrowed, so it is likely DeCLerk is even more right today. Later,(p 444) DeClerk comments : "A well attenuated beer should not give a difference greater than 0.1-0.2 degPlato between the present gravity and the attenuation limit." Do I think all beers should be well attenuated? Not necessarily, but as a brewer you should know how to measure and control it so you can get the beer you want, consistently. Keep on Brewin' Dave Burley Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 3 Aug 1999 16:31:20 -0600 From: "Brian Rezac" <rawhide at oneimage.com> Subject: The Truth Paul Gatza on 7/21/99 10:39 AM said: >>I terminated Brian Rezac's employment from the AHA yesterday. I have known Brian since the first time he came in to the homebrew shop after his wife Nancy bought him his start-up kit. We are friends and will continue to be. >> Paul must have been very torn to "have to" fire such a "friend". Well they say you can't believe everything you read...The truth is that I have never brewed a batch of beer from a kit, starter or any other. Ever. I have nothing against kits, I just haven't brewed from one. My wife, who's name actually is, Nancy, has never bought me one single ingredient of any of the batches that I've brewed over the years. Ever. What Paul states above, never took place. Paul must have made it up thinking that you were gullible enough to believe it. My mother has a saying, "Show me your friends, and I'll tell you who you are." I find Paul's last sentence the most slanderous of all. I took a little time off to rest from all the work that I wasn't doing at the AHA and reflect on my next step. But now I'm back. I have been trying to "take the high road" and refrain from commenting as I know some may dismiss it as rantings of a disgruntled former employee attempting to "exact a pound of flesh." But, I very much want to stay in the brewing industry. To do so, I feel that my hand is forced to defend against the slander of my name and reputation. However, I have the utimate defense, the truth. I will be posting soon. Brian Rezac Homebrewer rawhide at oneimage.com "You may write me down in history With you bitter, twisted lies, You may trod me in the very dirt But still, like dust, I'll rise." - Maya Angelou, Still I Rise Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 3 Aug 1999 22:04:05 -0500 From: "BeerGeek" <beergeek at flash.net> Subject: Bell's Two Hearted Ale Recipe Anyone out there have an all grain recipe for Bell's Two Hearted Ale? Specifically, I am interested in the hops/hopping schedule. TIA, Kevin beergeek at flash.net Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 4 Aug 1999 12:30:40 +1000 From: "Eric Panther" <epanther at somelab.com> Subject: Re: Eric Panthers Idea Of Brewing? Phil and Jill ask: >Are you seriously going to tell us the above ideas and God knows >what else you have read is actually incorporated into your brew day? > Hell no! I don't even drink beer! Haven't you folks out there heard that beer is bad for you? Eric Panther. Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 03 Aug 1999 21:59:08 -0500 From: "glyn crossno" <crossno at tnns.net> Subject: Dry Yeast I split (as usual) a recent soy CAP. 5 gallons in glass used EDME, 3.5 gallons in plastic EDME, and 3.5 gallons in plastic windsor. Both of the EDME had a foam cap 9 hours after pitching. Windsor no foam at 18 hours. EDME appeared to finish first. Both yeasts were bought at approximately the same time and treated the same way. Both were rehydrated before pitching. At bottling, 9 days later. EMDE glass 1.011, plastic 1.009. Plastic always finishes lower??? Windsor 1.008. The Windsor is totally clear. The EDME is cloudy for 3/4 of the glass carboy and syphons cloudy from the plastic. With the EDME still in suspension it has a yeast taste. More on tasting later. The soy left no flavor I can detect at this time. Glyn Crossno Estill Springs, TN - -- The Surgeon General said nothing about smoking the competition. Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 4 Aug 1999 00:15:41 EDT From: RBoland at aol.com Subject: MCAB II is Scheduled In St. Louis The St. Louis Brews are pleased to announce that the Second Annual Masters Championship of Amateur Brewing (MCAB II) now has a date and location. MCAB II will be held March 24-26, 2000 at the Hampton Inn Union Station, 2211 Market Street, St. Louis, MO, 63103. Mark your calendars and make your reservations now! A block of rooms has been reserved for us at a group rate; please mention MCAB when you call the Inn at 314-841-3200 for reservations. Following the example set by MCAB I, the program will include a high quality, results-oriented technical conference in addition to the championship judging. Of course, the awards ceremony and party will include great prizes, great food, and a wide variety great homebrew. This year, there will be more opportunities to rub shoulders with the best in the field as both the technical conference and the judging will be held at the Inn. We're also setting the stage for a private tour, on Sunday, of the big guy's pilot brewery. Union Station is a beautifully rehabilitated train station that is now home to many interesting shops, restaurants, and bars. It has been an anchor to the redevelopment of midtown St. Louis. The Hampton Inn is located three blocks west of Union Station and three blocks from St. Louis's oldest and newest microbreweries. The newest is located in the Station itself. As you can imagine, there are a zillion details to be addressed and things to be arranged before March 24. Additional information will be published as it becomes available. In the meantime, we welcome any comments and suggestions brewers may have; please send private e-mail to rboland at hbd.org. Please visit the MCAB and St. Louis Brews web sites for information about the event and our club. Addresses are http://hbd.org and http://www.stlbrews.org. The most important things for you to do right now are to clear your calendar, make hotel reservations and travel arrangements, and set your sights on St. Louis and MCAB II. We'll see you there! Bob Boland - Organizer John Sullivan - Head Judge and Program Chairman Luanne Naski - Head Steward Mark Naski - Prodding, Loose Ends, and Everything Else Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 4 Aug 1999 18:07:54 +1000 From: Steve Lacey <stevel at sf.nsw.gov.au> Subject: Science/art/religion Hear! Hear! to John Wilkinson's post in #3101. So, we make a few mistakes in the laundry/kitchen/garage that serves as the sacred brewery (there is religion to be considered too you know). If we can't discern the difference at tasting time, it doesn't matter. If we can, it does. Home brewing is trial and error. We apply and refine methods and techniques gleaned from all manner of sources from Charlie P. to Dr P. to -S to the old bloke over the back fence. Calling home brewing science is like calling farming science. Science is basically hypothesis testing. It has taken place to establish many of the relationships which are applied in the production of a crop of wheat, barley or beer. But producing the crop or the brew is not science, nor is delving into the scientific literature to improve our knowledge of the processes involved. Applying that improved knowledge is not science. Is engineering a science? To me, science is practiced in laboratories, greenhouses, fields, forests, at the telescope, in the oceans, at the computer terminal .... etc etc but not in the kitchen/garage/laundry! What goes on in these hallowed places is a much nobler and genteel activity. I'd prefer to call it craft. A hobby. A passion. My reason for existence (sorry, getting a bit carried away)! Leave science to the scientists - including the brewing scientists who have the laboratories and resources to truly test hypotheses about relationships between the myriad of brewing variables. Whilst I respect the deep chemical and physical knowledge that goes into many of the more technical posts of the HBD, even these should not be thought of as science. At their best, they are very helpful for understanding the various processes involved and what effects you might get if you change a certain practice during brewing (enzymatic activity is a good example). At their worst, they are just techno-babble of no practical interest to anyone. But there is room for all on the HBD. I suppose, in conclusion, I hope I have assisted in putting the case that brewing/homebrewing is NOT science. It is underpinned by science, but anybody who has common sense and half a brain can do it, and with persistense, do it very well. I therefore submit my "data point" that it is either craft or art. Now, which one could it be.........? (It could possibly, in extreme cases, be religion. I mean, who hasn't offered the odd prayer or incantation after a particularly long lag or accidental splashing of the hot wort?) Keep on brewin' Steve Lacey, Brewin' in Sydney, Aust and about to go and whack Phil and Jill around the head at our monthly brew club meeting. Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 4 Aug 1999 04:58:02 -0700 (PDT) From: Matthew Comstock <mccomstock at yahoo.com> Subject: Brewing on a scale? Ok this is a goofy thought. <GTA>. During the fermentation, the specific gravity is dropping, mass is floating out of the carboy as CO2, could we monitor the fermentation by placing the carboy on a scale? Better than sticking our grubby hands in to get a hydrometer sample. Probably couldn't tell the difference between 1.012 and 1.014, but.... Matt Comstock in Cincinnati. _____________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Free instant messaging and more at http://messenger.yahoo.com Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 04 Aug 1999 08:09:42 -0400 From: RobertJ <pbsys at pbsbeer.com> Subject: Re Whirlpooling Jay Spies wrote ... I'm currently in the process of designing a homebuilt heat-exchange recirculating mash brew system, and was going to incorporate a whirlpooling feature in the brew kettle. Here's how it would go. The brew kettle would have a 1/2" ball valve mounted in the lower side for a drain, with no internal piping (i.e.: just a hole on the inside). The outflow of cool wort will have the ability to be directed past a pump, and then up to the side of the kettle about 2/3 of the way up, where it will go through the keg wall and make a 90 degree right urn.... ____ If the expense of an addtional pump and/or fittings to use your existing pump is not a problem such a system will work fine. I incorporated a silar design in an earlier brew kettle, which was used with a CF chiller. It worked fine but I viewed it as overkill. About 4 stirs with a spoon is enough to get 13 gals of wort moving and get the hot break to the center. If you use an immersion chiller, keep in mind, after a while, you will run cooled wort through a pump that has unsanitized fittings. Great place for bacteria to grow unless you clean fittings before each use. Bob Precision Brewing Systems URL http://www.pbsbeer.com Manufacturer of 3 Vessel Brew Systems, HERMS, SS Brew Kettles, SS hopbacks and the MAXICHILLER (fastest CF chiller available) Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 4 Aug 1999 09:27:45 -0400 From: Jeff Renner <nerenner at umich.edu> Subject: Re: Backyard hops Joel Plutchak <plutchak at ncsa.uiuc.edu> wrote: >The weird thing is that while talking to MI brewers/growers >at the Michigan Brewers Festival a week or so ago, they said >they were just now getting little hop-baby burs. Southern >Michigan weather isn't *that* much different from northern/central >Illinois, is it? No. I've got lots of maturing Cascades. Can't imagine what they were talking about. Fortunately, we've had lots of rain here - no drought. I give the vines no special care - just mulch with some of my spent grains during the winter. They grow like weeds. But, just to show how much weather can vary in a short distance, Columbus has a 24% water deficit for the year according to this am's Weather Channel, and it's less than 200 miles SE. (Directions to Columbus from Ann Arbor - south 'til you smell it, east 'til you step in it.) ;-) 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: Wed, 4 Aug 1999 06:30:35 -0700 (PDT) From: Matthew Comstock <mccomstock at yahoo.com> Subject: Re:Innovations I recently suggested compiling a list of innovations found here and in your own brewery. Um, most of the things I could think of putting on such a list can be found in the library at http://brewery.org. However, I think there are a lot of small things that I've read here on the hbd that aren't discussed there, like adding a DME to sparge water to lower pH, or using an inert gas manifold to transfer beer to a secondary under an argon atmosphere (kidding). Anyway, check out the Brewery. If you think of something else to add, I can add it to my list and post a compilation if anyone else is interested. Matt Comstock in Cincinnati _____________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Free instant messaging and more at http://messenger.yahoo.com Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 4 Aug 1999 09:01:59 -0500 From: "Sieben, Richard" <SIER1 at Aerial1.com> Subject: 1st and 2nd runnings Paul Valdiviez asked about procedures for making a double batch: Well I have done this a couple of times myself and was pleased with the results. Have some dry malt extract on hand to boost gravity up if you need it, but I just collected 6 gallons for my 'Pussycat Dopplebock' and boiled it down to 5 gallons. (Pussycat because it was strong enough to make you purr!) and since I was happy with the gravity I didn't need to add any DME. I continued the sparge for the next 6 gallons for my 'small beer', which I knew would need a boost, to which I added 3 lb. of honey and 36oz of maple syrup. (Ok, since it was just the juice of the Pussycat dopplebock mash and it was sweetened, it became 'Sweetened Pussy Juice', now that's good eatin!) The second runnings were weak enough that I still needed to add DME to get my desired gravity. I was not trying to make a particular style with the second runnings, just a very nice beer. By the way, the maple syrup ferments all the way so it really adds little if any flavor ;-( but the honey flavor did come through ;-) Anyway, it was a great way to get a double batch with one mash procedure. The big question for you is whether or not your mash tun can actually hold enough grain to make a barleywine. You may well have to add malt extract just to get the required gravity for that, unless you are going to make a smaller batch of barleywine, like 3 gallons. Rich Sieben Island Lake, Illinois 42deg 16min north 88deg 12min the other way that is perpendicular to the first. Return to table of contents
Date: 04 Aug 1999 08:20:08 -0400 From: RCAYOT at solutia.com Subject: Hose Length Steve is trying to make some excuses: "Then Roger mistakenly thinks I have made an error ... >but I see a problem waaaay in the beginning: > > "dP = L (in feet) * 0.56psi + 0.43 psi [ 1/4" ID tubing, 2.5 > fl.oz/sec ] (where the 0.43 psi is the kinetic term)" > > You have an equation which contains a sum of factors with different > units, No Roger. The original equations were, as usual, unitless (not dimensionless) and I *explicitly* deleted the unit and dimension from the 'L' factor when I wrote "(in feet)". which is a convention more widely used than writing "L/ft". If you prefer then read the equation as "dP = L * 0.56psi/ft + 0.43 psi" that's fine too. There is no error in my previous post." Excuse ME? If you don't put the units in Explicitly, then the coefficients don't work do they? for instance, if they are really unitless, then will the coefficients work for any dimension of L? NO NO NO, the drop in pressure would not be for instance 0.56psi per light year or something would it? Please, the equation does NOT work without units. Period. as for the V squared, hey, I just said I didn't see it, now I do, good for you, you can do algebra, and since you can, I don't understand your insistance that you were correct? Puzzling... Roger Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 4 Aug 1999 09:39:21 -0500 From: "Sieben, Richard" <SIER1 at Aerial1.com> Subject: Hop garden woes Tidmarsh Major asked about an organic source of potassium, I had the same problem last year and I scored a small 1# box of potash at the local Ace hardware store. It was enough for 3 applications to my 11 hop plants, two last year and one this spring. It has been very hot here this summer and I think having the lower leaves die back is actually normal, but I pull them off to the 3 foot level anyway during the spring so as not to promote downey mildew. It's the plant level over 6' that really produce most of your hops anyway. As to scale infestation, I am not familiar with it. What is it exactly and what does it look like? Rich Sieben yep, still 42x16' and 88x12' Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 4 Aug 1999 10:50:24 -0400 From: Dave Burley <Dave_Burley at compuserve.com> Subject: Oxygen in Mash Liquor Brewsters: Paul in Vermont wants to know how long he has to boil 5-8 gallons of water to get an acceptable drop in oxygen. Do you mean chlorine? If you mean oxygen, don't worry about it. It is only ppm in room temperature water. Just avoid splashing or pouring your hot mash and wort through air where oxygen pickup can occur. In either case of oxygen and (unstabilized) chlorine simply bringing to a full boil should eliminate these dissolved gases. Keep on Brewin' Dave Burley Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 4 Aug 1999 10:00:04 -0500 (Central Daylight Time) From: "Charles T. Major" <ctmajor at samford.edu> Subject: Chiller suggestions Greetings, all! Given the long cooling times with my immersion chiller and 75F tap water, I'm contemplating moving to a counterflow wort chiller (probably using Philchill fittings and the copper coil from my immersion chiller). I'd like some suggestions on cleaning & sanitizing. (warning: inconsistent mix of US and metric measures to follow) I'm thinking of rigging up a 1-liter soda bottle with some 5/16" tubing through the cap to use to flush the chiller with a cleaning (1 tbs Electrasol dissolved in 1 L hot water) and then sanitizing solution (either Starsan or iodophor: Wort chiller exit tube (3/8" Cu) | | || || | | 5/16" vinyl tubing | | __| |__ | | | | Bottle cap with 1/4" hole |__| |__| | | | | / | | \ / | | \ / | | \ /______|___|______\ | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |___________________| 1L Soda bottle with cleaning/sanitizing solution Squeeze bottle to push solution into chiller; release to drain. Squeeze bottle and plug inlet of wort chiller to soak. Remove plug to drain. Repeatedly squeeze and release bottle to flush. A table in a recent HBD shows that 3/8" tubing holds 3/4 oz. per foot, so a 25-ft chiller should hold 18 oz., and thus a 1L bottle should have plenty of solution to fill and drain a 25-ft chiller (but a 50-ft chiller will need a 1.5L bottle). I've also read of some people who run anywhere from a couple of quarts to a gallon of hot wort through the chiller to sanitize before turning on the cooling water. Any comments? What about storage: dry, or filled with sanitizer? I'd also like suggestions for the hose from kettle drain (EZMasher in my case) to chiller inlet. I think that the vinyl tube I use now to fill my fermenter with cool wort won't stand the heat of near-boiling wort going into the chiller. Cheers, Ted Major Birmingham, Alabama Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 4 Aug 1999 10:07:31 -0500 From: MVachow at newman.k12.la.us Subject: ham and orange zest David Campbell inquires about the difference b/w orange zest and orange peel. One creates orange zest with a raspy kind of grater obtainable at the cooking gadget section of your grocery store or at Williams Sonoma where they'll let you pay about 8X as much. This device allows you to get mostly the orange-colored exterior part of the fruit wherein the desired flavors for beer (or pies, or marmalade, or marinades, etc.) are contained. The peel, by contrast, also includes the white, pulpy portion of the fruit. Some brewers contend that this pulpy part of your basic Florida navel orange will impart a kind of "hammy" flavor to a wit beer. I encountered just such a flavor in half of a batch of wit I brewed with satsuma (indigenous Lousiana variety) peels in the late portion of the boil. The first keg, tapped about three weeks after brewing, was tasty, nice spicy yeast zip complemented by lots of citrusy coriander and orange. The second keg of this beer was over two months old when tapped, three months old when the keg was dry. This second keg had a distinct, rather unpleasant hammy flavor, not right up front, but in the after taste. The second keg of the beer also lacked the citrusy zing that the first keg had. I have brewed lager beers with whole navel oranges and lemons in the secondary that did not contain this flavor. I suspect that the boil extracts undesirable flavors from the pulp that, in combination with the spicy flavors of Belgian yeast, conjure an unfortunate taste association with ham for the beer drinker. Dried Curacao orange peel reputedly contains the bitter citrusy zing that complements the spicy Belgian yeast so well and does not impart the undesirable hammy flavor. I will definitely brew my next wit with it. Mike New Orleans, LA Return to table of contents
[Prev HBD] [Index] [Next HBD] [Back]
HTML-ized on 08/05/99, by HBD2HTML version 1.2 by K.F.L.
webmaster at hbd.org, KFL, 10/9/96