---

	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:
  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

---