---

	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:
  Smithwick's (Jeff Renner)
  brewing on a scale/chilling on a stirplate (Lou.Heavner)
  early hops -- A possible problem ("Peter J. Calinski")
  Re: ham and orange zest (Jeff Renner)
  p-cooking decoction/ m-wave decoction?? (ALAN KEITH MEEKER)
  Brewster (Dave Burley)
  Canning empty jars ("Christopher Farley")
  No sparge (James Scott Johnson)
  Mushroom corks ("Christopher Farley")
  The State of the HBD. (Rod Prather)
  Homebrew Publicity Campaign ("Dan Cole")
  Nitex (R) meshes (MICHAEL WILLIAM MACEYKA)
  Advice for next years Hop Growers/ Hop Garden Woes (WayneM38)
  Attenuation (John Wilkinson)
  zymurgy (Jim Liddil)
  Thermo Electric Coolers ("Peter J. Calinski")
  Rouge YSB Clone. . . ("Galloway")
  pump it up (Jim Liddil)
  Brewing on a scale? (David)" <drussel3 at ford.com>
  Phytic Acid (AJ)
  Exponential growth (CALAMIDA Alessandro)
  Hoppiest Beer on the Planet? (ALAN KEITH MEEKER)
  Hops, when to harvest and why do we dry them? (Ian Smith)
  ? size of mash in a five gallon cooler? (J Daoust)
  Home Canning ("Alan McKay")
  barley wines and imperial stout recipes ("Czerpak, Pete")
  Drying hops ("Rich, Charles")


* 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: Thu, 5 Aug 1999 09:30:32 -0400
From: Jeff Renner <nerenner at umich.edu>
Subject: Smithwick's

"Todd Carlson"<<carlsont at gvsu.edu> is >trying to formulate a clone for
Smithwicks Export Ale (Canadian 

>     version)


and has been checking the archives.  From what he reports, it looks
like he's read some of my previous posts.  I've never brewed
Smithwicks, and hadn't tasted it until last month in Ireland.  It was
too cold and over carbonated for my tastes, and I wasn't that
impressed, but then, I've been spoiled by real ale.  Of course, I had
only a few sips before paying more attention to the Guinness before
me.


>     Should I use pale ale malt or is the munich malt a good idea?


I like the idea, but only if you use very pale extract (see below)

>     Is 3 oz roasted barley too much?


That's 3% or so, so it sounds good.  Again, use a pale extract.


>     Would I be better off using an amber ME (I usually use
Northwestern)?


No, use a pale,  Your Munich malt and especially the roasted barley
will give enough color.


>     Should I add aroma hops in the kettle at the end of the boil or
dry 

>     hop or both?


No dry hops - it hasn't any of that character that I could tell.


>     Irish or Scottish yeast?


I'd say Irish, just because it's an Irish ale, but I didn't get any
butteriness.  Maybe it was too chilled.

>     Is 29 HCU = 29 EBC?


Don't know.  It was a pale amber, as I recall.


>     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


Your pH will be plenty low from the roast barley, so I think you'll be
fine.


>     Recommended mash temp, or doesn't matter for only 2 lbs?


Not a big deal - I'd go for low 150's and not sweat a few degrees
either way.


Good luck.


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: Thu, 5 Aug 1999 08:28:37 -0500
From: Lou.Heavner at frco.com
Subject: brewing on a scale/chilling on a stirplate

     From: Matthew Comstock <mccomstock at yahoo.com>

     >>>>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,

     Not entirely goofy, but I don't think it would work.  The SG is
     density and I imagine the liquid level is changing as much or more
     than the mass.  Plus you have solid biomass forming which is supposed
     to mostly settle out and not be a part of the liquid density.

     Another somewhat goofy thought for public ridicule...  Anybody ever
     put their kettle on a stir plate during the chilling operation.  Seems
     like a good way to get some movement around the immersion chiller and
     may even act like a whirlpool.  I suppose it would take some luck to
     have the stirrer end up centered over the magnet and it may not be
     able to overcome the layer of break and begin spinning.  Anybody have
     any ideas about whether this could be something worth pursuing?

     Cheers!

     Lou Heavner - Austin, TX
     the Lagniappe Brewery - something extra in every sip


Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 5 Aug 1999 09:25:35 -0400
From: "Peter J. Calinski" <PCalinski at iname.com>
Subject: early hops -- A possible problem

My hops are also seem to be ready weeks earlier than last year but I am
afraid I have a problem.  Both my Fuggles and Northern Brewer seem to be
low on aroma and lupulin.  Compared to last year (which was the first full
year that I was growing hops) very few of the petals have any yellow
lupulin on them.  Just a few are partially coated near the stem.  Last year
they were heavily coated and most of the petals seemed to have some lupulin
on them.

When I compress a flower with my fingers, very little aroma is released. 
If I continue to roll the flower, my fingers will get sticky but still
there is still little aroma given off.

I picked a few and dried them to see if they would develop more aroma but
it didn't seem to help.

I have been holding off picking them hoping they might develop more.  I
don't have any way to measure the alpha acid content of these hops.  I am
concerned that the hot and dry weather may have effected the
acid/flavor/aroma profile adversely. 

Does anyone know if:

a) Visual evaluation of lupulin correlates with hop acid/flavor/aroma?

b) Aroma at picking time correlates with acid/flavor/aroma in the brew?

c) Hot, dry weather (I did water but not consistently because I was
traveling) can effect the production of hop character?

d) Are there some easy ways to evaluate these hops?

e) Am I being anal and I should just pick, dry and bag the stuff?

Thanks in advance.

Pete Calinski
East Amherst NY
Near Buffalo NY
0 Degrees 30.21 Min North, 4 Degrees 05.11 Min. East of Jeff Renner




Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 5 Aug 1999 10:57:34 -0400
From: Jeff Renner <nerenner at umich.edu>
Subject: Re: ham and orange zest

MVachow at newman.k12.la.us writes


>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.<<snip>


A different kind of zester consists of a row of about eight tiny (1
mm?) steel rings (on a handle) that cut ribbons of the zest which you
can then dice.  I like this kind.


>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.<<snip>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've tasted this "stale lunch meat" in several wits brewed with dried
Curacao orange, but inconsistently.  Spencer Thomas brewed them.  I
don't know what produced it, but I've not had it in wits where I
replaced the orange peel with fresh ginger.


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: Thu, 5 Aug 1999 11:38:44 -0400 (EDT)
From: ALAN KEITH MEEKER <ameeker at welch.jhu.edu>
Subject: p-cooking decoction/ m-wave decoction??


This p-ccoking decoction thread reminded me of my last two wheat beers. I
didn't have a good sized pot handy for heating the decoctions I'd planned
(also was afraid of the dreaded scorch monster) so I performed MICROWAVE
DECOCTION. It worked great. I used the temp probe function to hit and maintain
my temp steps. Was quick easy and painless. has anyone else had any experience
with this method? An added benefit for me was that microwaving resulted in
very little if any darkening of the decocted mash therefore helping to keep my
wheat beer lighter in color. 

 -Alan Meeker

Today's Shakespeare brewing/beer quote:

SIR JOHN  ([drinking, then] speaking to Bardolph) Take away these chalices. Go
brew me a pottle of sack, finely.

BARDOLPH  With eggs, sir?
 
SIR JOHN  Simple of itself. I'll no pullet-sperms in my brewage. 
____________________________________________________________________________




Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 5 Aug 1999 12:05:45 -0400
From: Dave Burley <Dave_Burley at compuserve.com>
Subject: Brewster

Brewsters:

The following isn't about beer, but this was sent to me
because it is about "Brewster" the rooster.

" My uncle was in the fertilized egg business when
I was young. He had several hundred young layers,
called pullets, and 8 or 10 roosters whose job was
to fertilize the eggs.
 

My uncle kept records, and any rooster or pullet
that didn't perform well went into the pot and was
replaced. Now this took an awful lot of time. So
when my uncle saw a set of eight tiny bells that
each rang a different tone, he promptly bought
them. He hung a bell on each rooster's neck
and went and poured himself a homebrew. 


Now he could sit on the porch and sip while
filling out an efficiency report on the roosters
by listening to the different tones of the bells
and marking down each encounter. 


My uncle's favorite rooster was old Brewster.
A very fine specimen he was, but his bell did
not ring all morning. Uncle went to investigate. 


Several roosters were chasing pullets,
bells a-ringing. Brewster had his bell in his
beak so it couldn't ring. He'd sneak up on a pullet, 

do his job and walk on to the next one. 


Uncle was so proud of Brewster he entered
him in the county fair. Brewster was an overnight
sensation. They awarded him not only the 

No Bell prize but also the Pullet Surprise. "
 


Keep on Brewin'


Dave Burley

Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 5 Aug 1999 11:50:52 -0500
From: "Christopher Farley" <chris at northernbrewer.com>
Subject: Canning empty jars

Charles Rich writes:

> 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.

What do you do to prevent the half-filled jars and the "empties" from floating
in the canning pot?

Christopher Farley
Northern Brewer, Ltd.
Saint Paul, Minnesota
www.northernbrewer.com
(800) 681-2739




Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 05 Aug 1999 12:48:57 -0700
From: James Scott Johnson <JaScJohnson at worldnet.att.net>
Subject: No sparge

After reading the post by Louis Bonham on revisiting no sparge brewing.
I went and read his article in BT.  I am going to use his method on my
next brew and have a question.
Looking at his No-Spage ESB he used 27 pounds of grain and a total of 10
gallons of water.  In the article it says that he drained 6.5 gallons
(about 85% of the first runnings) into a kettle.
My question is, according to Ray Daniels in Designing Great Beers -
Grain weight in lbs. x 0.2 = Gallons of water retained by grains - so 27
pound of grain will retain 5.4 gallons of water, if this figure of Ray
Daniels is correct only 4.6 gallons of wort could be collected, where
did the other 1.9 gallons come from?

Scott Johnson



Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 5 Aug 1999 12:24:55 -0500
From: "Christopher Farley" <chris at northernbrewer.com>
Subject: Mushroom corks

Does anybody know how those mushroom-style corks on fancy bottles of Belgian
beer are formed? Judging from the printing on the corks, it looks like they
originated as a completely cylidrical cork. My guess is that these cylindrical
corks were simply moistened, inserted half-way, and wired down. Then, with
time, they subsequently "mushroomed out".

Am I right, or are these indeed special corks? Has anybody successfuly
packaged beer in this way? Where'd you get the corks, wires, & caps?

Christopher Farley
Northern Brewer, Ltd.
Saint Paul, Minnesota
www.northernbrewer.com
(800) 681-2739




Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 05 Aug 1999 12:42:17 -0500
From: Rod Prather <rodpr at iquest.net>
Subject: The State of the HBD.

Well, I must say, the attitude of the HBD has gotten a bit mellower
recently.  This is the way it should be.  It seems to me that there are
actually two basic camps of home brewing and for that matter brewing in
general.  They is the art, craft group who rely on recipes, history, general
science and trial and error data to produce flavors and styles.  Then we
have the scientific brewer who looks at brewing history and processes then
attempts to disassemble the processes and define it in blocks of data and
books of scientific theory to produce a controlled chemical process.  The
outcome is, in general, the same.  A tasty, drinkable, alcoholic beverage.

No disrespect to either group, but we can all learn from each other.  The
correctness of scientific process and the accidents and departure of trial
and error can go hand in hand.  

Can't we just,,,,,, get along.   :~) It appears that we can...


Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 05 Aug 1999 14:26:56 -0400
From: "Dan Cole" <danc at carilion.com>
Subject: Homebrew Publicity Campaign

Since someone asked about the HPC, I e-mailed Stephen A. Mallery Publisher
of BrewingTechniques asking him if there was an update available.

His reply is posted below (reprinted WITH permission).

Dan Cole
Roanoke, VA
- ------------------------------------------------------------
5 August 1999

HPC Update

The Homebrew Publicity Campaign (HPC) is closing in on completion of its
primary goal -- the production and distribution of a prime-time quality
30-second TV ad spot that promotes the idea of home brewing to the general
public.  Thanks go to all sponsors, who alone have made this project
possible.  In alphabetical order they are:

Advanced Brewing Technology
Briess
California Concentrate (Alexanders)
Cascadia Importers (Coopers)
Crosby & Baker
Five Star
HWBTA
LD Carlson
Vinotheque
Wine-Art

Here's a brief status report on the project:

First, I should probably clarify the nature of the project.  Earlier this
year, BrewingTechniques offered up the concept for the HPC to the
wholesalers and manufacturers, seeking sponsorship support for a
publicity/promotion outreach campaign on behalf of home brewing and
winemaking, focusing on making people aware of the hobby and directing them
to their local homebrew retail shops. Ten companies responded to our call to
action (see list at the end of this letter), and thanks to their vision and
support we incorporated this new nonprofit entity and are moving forward
with the plan.

The primary thrust of the campaign is the production of a
prime-time-quality 30-second TV ad spot, which we will make available to
retailers for just the cost of duplication plus S&H (about $20). This ad
spot is designed to increase awareness of home brewing and winemaking among
the general public. Retailers can air it on local cable network channels
(ESPN, A&E, Discover, CNN, etc.) for as little as $18-25 per spot; a
reasonable presence can be scheduled for a few hundred dollars. Cable
advertising is cheap because you pay for broadcast distribution only in your
immediate market. The biggest barrier to TV advertising is, in fact, the
production of the ad itself, which the HPC has covered. The HPC will supply
retailers a copy of the master tape, which includes room at the end for a
"tag" that directs viewers to their store.

During the HWBTA meeting in Sacramento in May, all HPC sponsors who were
present met to discuss script ideas.  After a productive discussion, one
script was selected for final development.  We will begin shooting the piece
Thursday, 12 August.  We'll need some time for postproduction work, so the
tape should be ready for distribution in about three weeks.  The timing
makes the tape available for use just as the fall season gets under way.

Also part of the HPC plan, we commissioned the writing of a booklet that
explains the best marketing options available to homebrew retailers. It
discusses radio as well as TV and includes detailed recommendations for
specific schedules and programs. This booklet makes a great planning tool
for anyone interested in using the HPC-sponsored TV ad spot, but also is
useful to anyone who is simply interested in exploring the various
advertising options for their store. We are offering this booklet for free
to any retailer who wants one; we sent a mailing out about two weeks ago
with the offer and a postage-paid reply card.  Response has been strong. If
this report reaches any retailer who did not receive that mailing, please
contact us at 1-800-427-2993, or e-mail kristina at brewtech.com.  The booklet
is in production and is nearing completion.  We expect to roll out a booklet
mailing in the next two weeks.

This is an exciting opportunity to try something new to spark interest and
activity in home brewing and winemaking.  Thanks to the sponsors for making
it possible.

Cheers!

Stephen A. Mallery
Publisher, BrewingTechniques


Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 5 Aug 1999 14:41:53 -0400 (EDT)
From: MICHAEL WILLIAM MACEYKA <mmaceyka at welch.jhu.edu>
Subject: Nitex (R) meshes

Howdy All,

	I have come across several large rolls of various mesh sizes of
something called "Nitex (R)."  I would love to use this for various filtering
applications in brewing, such as lautering, straining pre- and post-boil.  I
have found specs for nylon mesh, which would indicate its suitability, but
what of "100% polyamide nylon" as this product describes itself?  Did I fall
asleep during organic chemistry when they said nylon is a polymer of
amide-linked units?  Amide linkages would seem to be acid unstable, but nylon
is supposed to take things pretty well.  Any one have any ideas about the
suitability of this stuff in boiling wort, mashing, dry hopping?


Mike Maceyka
Baltimore, MD

Embarassed that I don't know as much chemistry as Alan Meeker thinks...




Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 5 Aug 1999 16:23:03 EDT
From: WayneM38 at aol.com
Subject: Advice for next years Hop Growers/ Hop Garden Woes

From: "Sieben, Richard" <SIER1 at Aerial1.com> writes:
Subject: Hop garden woes
<<As to scale infestation, I am not familiar with it.  What is it exactly and
what does it look like?>>

Scale insects are difficult to control on edible plants. Systemic 
insecticides are used on ornamental crops and are effective. Not 
available/advisable for edible plants. The visible armored adult fixes on the 
plant and produces crawler stage scale insects which are difficult to see. 
The crawler stage moves to infest new areas.  Adults also feed on the plant 
and produce a sticky honey dew mess.  They can do a lot of damage. There are 
hard scale and soft scale types (most common). Soap will kill the crawler 
stage, but has limited effect on the armored adults. The entire plant must be 
covered with multiple applications to catch new hatches. If caught early, it 
can be controlled.

As this years back yard hop crops mature and more stories about insect and 
disease infestation stories pop up here on the HBD, a quick reminder to hop 
growers.  The first step in starting out fresh for the 2000 crop is to clean 
up all debris and remove it from your hop garden area this fall.  

For those interested in biological controls and botanical based sprays for 
next year 
try the following site:  (all disclaimers apply... satisfied customer since 
1985)

www.rinconvitova.com


Wayne 
Big Fun Brewing
Milwaukee
 




Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 5 Aug 1999 17:28:27 -0500
From: John.Wilkinson at aud.alcatel.com (John Wilkinson)
Subject: Attenuation

Dave Burley pointed out that differences in attenuation probably would vary
with their flocullation rate and that makes sense to me.  I suppose the percent
attenuation quoted in the yeast specs must take into account the flocullation
characteristics of the yeast.  This, I suppose, would presume the yeast would
not be roused.  I don't bottle but I wonder about possible carbonation
differences in bottle conditioned beers according to the rate of attenuation,
if the same priming was used for all beers.  It seems it could vary widely if
attenuation rates vary from 67 to 75 percent, as per Wyeast.  With a 1.050 OG
beer wouldn't a difference of 67 to 75 percent attenuation result in an FG
difference of 1.004 or about 1 degree Plato?  That is way beyond (5 to 10 times)
the range suggested by DeClerk.  Isn't it quite a bit larger than the SG
addition of priming sugar?  Would an unroused Wyeast 1968 beer with apparent
attenuation of down to 64 pct primed the same as a 1028 beer with up to 77 pct.
attenuation be overcarbonated and/or the higher attenuated beer under
carbonated?  That might be a difference of 1.0065 or about 1.6 deg. Plato for
a 1.050 OG beer.  Or what about a beer with the same yeast that might vary,
according to Wyeast, from 64 to 72 pct in the case of 1968, giving an FG
difference of 1.004 or about 1 deg. Plato.  If Clinitest (honest, I am not
being Dave's shill) measured all fermentable sugars it might show this
residual sugar difference but if the beer stopped at that point before, would
it start up again after priming and stop at the same amount of residual sugar
or keep going to the lower attenuation level and be overcarbonated?  Seems a
curious situation to me.  I guess I am glad I keg instead of bottle.

John Wilkinson - Grapevine, Texas


Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 05 Aug 1999 21:21:52 -0400
From: Jim Liddil <jliddil at vms.arizona.edu>
Subject: zymurgy

Once upon a time soneone mentioned this and I sort of blew it off.  So it
is true.
Once upon a time the AOB let the trademark to the name zymurgy lapse. makes
you wonder......
http://www.angelfire.com/tx/reachme/NAMBLA.html 




Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 5 Aug 1999 22:26:57 -0400
From: "Peter J. Calinski" <PCalinski at iname.com>
Subject: Thermo Electric Coolers

For those that are interested, the August issue of the tabloid "Nuts and
Volts" has an article on building a Thermo Electric Cooler. It can be solar
powered no less, how's that for irony? The sun that causes the heat creates
the cool.

I saw the Nuts and Volts in the magazine rack at Borders book store.

I'm not affiliated with either Nuts and Volts or Borders (or any other
entity for that matter).

Pete Calinski
East Amherst NY
Near Buffalo NY
0 Degrees 30.21 Min North, 4 Degrees 05.11 Min. East of Jeff Renner 


Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 6 Aug 1999 00:24:44 -0400
From: "Galloway" <galloway at gtcom.net>
Subject: Rouge YSB Clone. . .

Greetings All,
    Does any one have any information regarding the Pac-Man strain of yeast
found in the Rouge beers? Is there anything similar that is available to
homebrewers? I know it is proprietary in nature, and don't want to mash any
toes or disjoint any noses, but living in Beer wasteland, where Bud is
indeed king, good beers are a rare find indeed and we are forced (BooHoo) to
make our own. When I can get my shaking hands on the very occasional six
pack it's right at $9.00, yet another reason to fire up the kettle. . .  I'm
using the Wyeast 1187 (Ringwood) in my YS "Wanna" B batch #1. The Quest
continues. . . . . . . . ..

Regards,
Dave Galloway
Coon Bottom Brewery
Chattahoochee, Florida



Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 06 Aug 1999 08:13:55 -0400
From: Jim Liddil <jliddil at vms.arizona.edu>
Subject: pump it up


From: "John Robinson" <robinson at novalistech.com>

>The second problem is a little more serious.  Clever lad that I am I 
>decided to setup shop in the garage.  This wouldn't be a problem 
>except that the septic outflow runs across the garage ceiling....I 
>would like to setup a sink in the garage, but any waste water is 
>going to need to be pumped up hill if it is to go into the septic 
>system.


Having just done a similar thing in a basement I'll relate what I did.
Home Desperate sells a sump pump made for basement sinks or washers.
Little Giant also makes a version.  You plumb it and it can pump something
like 60 gallons/hr at 10 feet of head.  I did all the plumbing my self
after getting advice from a local plumbing contractor.

Jim





Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 06 Aug 1999 08:19:08 -0400
From: "Russell, D. A. (David)" <drussel3 at ford.com>
Subject: Brewing on a scale?

> 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?

I would think the accuracy of a scale to accomplish this would be quite
cost prohibitive for the homebrewer, if it would work at all.  A better
idea would probably to capture the volume of CO2 that is created. 
Simple method, inverted in water graduated container...
- -- 
David Russell
Ford Motor Company, Dearborn MI


Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 06 Aug 1999 12:34:26 +0000
From: AJ <ajdel at mindspring.com>
Subject: Phytic Acid

 Alan wrote:
> AJ revives the recently deceased phytin thread!

It was never dead. Just aestivating!

Alan found my phytic acid pK numbers puzzling. I have an explanation
though it mustn't be taken as gospel by any means. Nor should anyone
assume that my pK values are spot on. I think the important result from
my experiment is that the observed pK's do essentially fall into three
groups which are close to, but not quite, the pK's of phosphoric acid
for which the first pK is 2.12. The close phytic acid pK's I measured
are 1.11, 1.62, 1.87, 1.91. 1.93 and 2.97. The second pK of phosphoric
acid is 7.2. The close pK's for phytic acid are 5.98 and 7.49. The third
pK of phosphoric acid is 12.44 and the phytic acid pK's close to that
are 9.62, 11.59, 12.10 and 12.68.

The pK of a proton is a measure of the energy required to remove it from
its acid. Phosphoric acid, HOP(O)(OH)(OH) is electrically neutral. When
the first proton (H+) is removed it leaves behind an ion with a single
negative charge: HOP(O)(OH)(O-). The energy required to remove the
proton is that required to separate the positively charged proton from
the negatively charged ion which attracts it. When the second proton is
taken from the ion it must be dragged away against a double negative
charge, HOP(O)(O-)(O-) and thus it takes more energy (pK2 = 7.2 vs. pK1
= 1.11 i.e. almost 7 times as much energy).

In phytic acid a corner is HCOP(O)(OH)(OH) with the carbon bound to two
other carbons at adjacent corners. The first proton is pulled away from
a corner with a single negative charge (and yes, I did have a + sign in
my last post on this subject - a goof): HCOP(O)(OH)(O-). Similarly to
the phosphoric acid case the second proton is pulled away against a
double negative charge: HCOP(O)(O-)(O-) so that if the corner were
isolated I'd expect the pK's of phytic acid to be essentially the first
two pK's of phosphoric acid. But the corners are not isolated and I
think it is the charge distribution over the molecule as protons depart
that "spreads" the pK's.

Recall Agranoff's model of the molecule as a sea turtle swimming up. Its
head and front flippers point up as does its tail. Its rear flippers
point down. These body parts represent the side of the carbon ring at
which phosphate groups are found. On the other side of the ring are the
hydrogens. At the tail we have a phosphate group and two adjacent
hydrogens. The hydrogen's electrons will be more closely bound to the
carbon than to the hydrogens so that they will have slight positive
charge. This positive charge may offset some of the negative charge in
the region of the tail when a proton is pulled off the tail. This would
lower the energy required to remove the proton to some finite (but not
infinite distance) and is my explanation as to why we see a pK as low as
1.11 (by my estimate). In fact I estimate 5 of the pK's as being less
that the first pK of phosphoric acid. My values are doubtless in error
somewhat but I think the basic observation that some of the pK's are
less than that of phosphoric acid are valid. Repulsion by hydrogen atoms
may not be the only effect. Shielding of the tail from the flippers by
the "body" (carbon ring) may also be at work.

Alan asked whether the phytic acid I used could be contaminated or have
hydrolyzed (to inorganic phosphate). I doubt the latter because if that
had occurred I'd expect to have seen pK's closer to those of phosphoric
acid and certainly none less than the smallest pK of phosphoric.
Contamination - possible I suppose but the material came from Spectrum (
a reliable manufacturer in my previous experience) and the label only
lists water and phytic acid as the components. It is interesting to note
that the composition is given as "40 - 50% w/w". I assume, but do not
know, that the uncertainty in weight has to do with uncertainty in water
of hydration.

As for the other pK's once the first proton is away from each phosphate
group I'd expect to see the remaining pK's higher because of local
attraction from negative charge and I do. What I find a little
surprising is that three of the remaining pK's are close to phosphoric
acid's pK3. I'd have expected the remaining 6 to be spread somewhat but
to be spread around pK2 (as only 2 are). I suppose that as second
protons are removed from each phosphate the local negative charge or the
negative charge as seen from moderate distance must build to the point
where it's more difficult to pull a proton away.

As to the source of the acidification here's what I believe, at my
current level of understanding the mechanism to be:

1. Phytin hydrolyzes to calcium/magnesium ions plus phytate ions. At
distilled water dough in pH (5.8 or so) 6 protons would be gone (and a
few of a 7th):

CaPhytate  + H2O --> Ca++   +  Phytate(-6) + H2O

2. In the presence of phytase the phytate  hydrolyzes releasing Pi
which, at pH less than 6 would be mostly singly deprotonated though some
will be doubly and even triply (tiny amount) so. Some phosphoric acid
will also be present (tiny amount).

Phytate(-6) + H20 ------> 6H2PO4- + myo-inositol

At mash pH most corners are HCOP(O)(OH)(O-) and at hydrolysis

HCOP(O)(OH)(O-) + H2O ----> HCOH  +   H+   +   -OP(O)(OH)(O-)   --->

HCOH   +  HOP(O)(OH)(O-)

i.e. the water's proton  _will_  be taken up. Again remember that each
carbon is bound to 2 others also bound to H and OH.  The protons are not
labeled as "the one with pK1", "the one with  pK2". The pK depends on
the charge remaining when the proton is removed. Thus the oxygen newly
charged at hydrolysis is no different from the one already charged by
deprotonation of the phytic acid before hydrolysis. Whichever one of
these happens to pick up a proton gains 7.2(RT) units of energy (second
pK of phosphoric acid) and as mash pH's are in the mid 5's all but less
than 10% of  -OP(O)(OH)(O-) will pick one up.

3. In the presence of excess calcium the (PO4)---, even though present
in only tiny amounts will form hydroxyapatite and precipitate out. This
upsets the equilibrium  causing monobasic phosphate to convert to
dibasic phosphate, and  dibasic phosphate to convert to tribasic
releasing hydrogen ions. These are the source of the acidulation in
mash.

mH2PO4-  + nCa++  --->  iCaH(PO4)  + jCa2(PO4)3 +   kH+
                                     -----------   -----------

Note that I've shown precipitation of both monbasic and tribasic calcium
phosphates and have used arbitrary stoichiometric coefficients. In fact
it is hydroxyapatite which is the predominant precipitant.

This is consistent with the usual description of how calcium acidifies
mash but it is certainly not the whole story. M&BS mentions the reaction
of up to four calcium ions with phytic acid itself as an additional
source. The mechanism must be similar to that outlined above for
inorganic phosphate. At mash pH most of the phytate is heptabasic   but
there is some octabasic. This takes 4 calcium ions and presumably
precipitates thus upsetting the equilibrium causing conversion of
heptabasic to octabasic with release of protons (hydrogen ions). Now
that I have pK's I can potentially do some calculations but I will spare
the readership if I do. Probably time to go back off-line if further
discussion is desired. Again, anyone who want's to be copied in any such
should let me know.
- --
A. J. deLange
Numquam in dubio, saepe in errore.




Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 6 Aug 1999 16:47:55 +0200 
From: CALAMIDA Alessandro <alessandro.calamida at fiat.com>
Subject: Exponential growth

In HBD #3103 Stephen Alexander wrote:

>Bryan Gros says ...

>>Someone posted:
>> if you manage to keep the yeast in the logarithmic growth
>>phase (not allowing it to switch to alcohol production)

>Don't know who 'Someone' is (another damnable pseudonym no doubt)  but
>he/she is very wrong.  Most fermentation (and so alcohol production) occurs
>during the 'log' or 'growth' or 'exponential' phase.   The yeast ferment
>sugars at a high rate during their growth phase as their primary energy
>source.  When growth ceases during the 'stationary' phase the energy
>requirements also drop drastically and the fermentation then just putts
>along *very* slowly. 

OK, that 'Someone' is me (no pseudonym). See HBD #3096.
I think I could have used a better phrase to synthesize what is written in
the web site http://www.yeastlink.com .

Perhaps my sentence should read:
"if you manage to keep the yeast in the logarithmic growth phase and (at the
same time) not allow it to switch to alcohol production...". 

I apologize for my bad English.

Anyway, for those of you who are too lazy to visit the web site, I think it
is better to quote some intersting excerpts of the original text:

- ----------------------------------
"2. Logarithmic Phase

This is the phase where most of the yeast growth rapidly occurs. The phase
is characterized  by a logarithmic increase in the number of yeast cells.
To accomplish this, it is necessary to  optimize the nutrient supply, the
oxygen supply, and growth temperature.  The target  of yeast propagation is
to optimize the cell increases in this phase.  Because the yeast is
continuously consuming oxygen, its supply has to be optimized.  If the
oxygen supply is  insufficient, yeast will produce alcohol and CO2 instead
of new cells.  Additionally, less vital  cells are produced.  The metabolism
of yeast is temperature-dependent.  With an increase  of temperature, the
growth rate improves.  Therefore, propagation is conducted at higher
temperatures than those of normal fermentation but still lower than the
optimum for yeast  growth."

 .....


"THE ESSENTIAL ELEMENT OF ECONOMIC AND EFFICIENT YEAST PROPAGATION IS THE 
PRODUCTION OF CELL MASS WITHOUT THE PRODUCTION OF ALCOHOL.  THE FIRST 
PREREQUISISTE IS AERATION, THE SECOND IS THE GRADUAL ADDITION OF WORT.  IT
IS VITAL TO FEED ONLY AS MUCH WORT AS IS REQUIRED BY THE YEAST CELL.  AN 
EXCESS OF MORE THAN 0.4 % GLUCOSE AT ANY TIME WILL TRIGGER THE YEAST TO 
PRODUCE ALCOHOL.  IN THEORY, UNDER IDEAL CONDITIONS, LESS THAN ONE GRAM OF 
YEAST WILL PRODUCE MORE THAN SEVERAL TONS IN FOUR OR FIVE STEPS AND A 
TOTAL FERMENTATION TIME OF 72-96 HOURS."

(Sorry for the capitals, It is written this way in the site, I think to
emphasize the idea).

 ....

"Glucose levels in a all-malt wort are in the approximate range of 1% - 1.5
%.  Brewer's yeast has a metabolic effect where the yeast will respond to
glucose levels above 0.4% with or without the presence of oxygen by
metabolizing the sugar through fermentation rather than respiration. 
If the yeast propagation is aerated and the culture is fed incrementally
with sterile wort at a rate that the yeast metabolizes the glucose to keep
the level of this sugar in the propagation below 0.4%, the yeast will stay
in a respiratory or growth state.  A similar process is utilized in the 
production of baker's yeast although molasses is utilized instead of
brewer's wort.  Under these circumstances, far more energy is available to
the yeast cell than under fermentative conditions and far more yeast is
produced while less alcohol is produced.  The yeast produced from this 
method are in highest growth phase(log phase) and can be pitched at a
dilution rate of 1:100 or higher.  The volume of the propagation medium is
1% or less of the batch total."

- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
- ----------------------
I find these ideas very interesting, don't you?

Anyway, it seems to me that there is no real contradiction between what is
reported in the YeastLink site and what Stephen Alexander wrote. It is true
that both yeast growth and alcohol production take place during the
logarithmic phase. They are just saying that, with the appropriate
procedure, it is possible to minimize (inhibit?) alcohol production and
maximize yeast growth.
Does it sound reasonable?

See you,

	Alessandro

- --------------------
Alessandro Calamida
Turin (Italy)



Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 6 Aug 1999 10:54:59 -0400 (EDT)
From: ALAN KEITH MEEKER <ameeker at welch.jhu.edu>
Subject: Hoppiest Beer on the Planet?


So, Mike Maceyka and I were having a conversation with a friend of ours who's
father is a major hop-head. She mentioned in passing that he had "never had a
beer hoppy enough for his tastes." This included such hoppy beverages as our
beloved Victory HopDevil! Mike and I looked at each other - the gauntlet had
been thrown down, were we up to the challange? You bet! For laughs, here is
the recipe we came up with:

6# Marris Otter
3# Weisheimer Munich
1# Flaked wheat
0.5 # Briess caramel 60
0.5 # DWC Aromatic
0.1 # Paul's chocolate

now, for the hops:

1. First wort hopping with 
	4 oz Galena pel (13.4% !) 
	0.5 oz N. Brewer pel (7.4%)
	2 oz cascade leaf (5.5%)

2. 3 oz Cascade pel (5.3%) at t-90'

3. 1 oz Saaz plug (3.5%) at t-60'

4. 2 oz Styr. Goldings plug (4.5%) at t-50'

5. 1 oz Saaz plug (3.5%) at t-40'

6. 1 oz Cascade leaf (6%) at t-30'

7. 1 oz Saaz  plug (3.5%) at t-20'

8. 1 oz Cascade leaf (6%) at t-10'

9. 1 oz Saaz plug (3.5%) at end of boil.
- ----------------------------------------
Needless to say, this needed a LOT of straining to get a wort even REMOTELY
close to clear going into the fermentor (S.G = 1.065)

Our guest was coming to town soon so we pitched 3 pkg. rehydrated, slightly
stepped-up Nottingham dry yeast, fermented at 66-70deg F.

In a few days it was racked to a secondary, another pkg of Nottingham was
added plus 2 oz. Cascade hops. secondary temp = 62 deg F.

Then, as if that weren't enough, at bottling we made a hop tea by boiling
about an ounce of Cascade pellets for 20' then turned off the heat and added
another 1 1/4 oz to steep 15 min. Filtered all this through a coffee filter
into the bottling bucket and away we went....

The result? In Mike's words, "Stunning." This is the first time I've tried a
hop tea at bottling and much of the character of the tea was evident in the
beer's aroma - that smell of hops boiling in the kettle was well preserved.
Interesting. 
The beer ended up (not surprisingly) with HUGE hop profiles in the
aroma, taste, and in terms of bitterness - though actually, I was surpriesd
that it wasn't even more bitter. Perhaps we were reaching the solubility
limits for the alphas?? The really surprising thing was that there were in
fact easily detectable malt flavors coming through all those hops! In fact,
it reminded us very much of a very hoppy but /mature/ barleywine! Cool,
because this beer was only about 4 weeks old when we were drinking it -
Instant Barleywine!! 

As an added bonus, our guest enjoyed it very much. Would be interesting to get
an IBU reading on this beer.

 -Alan & Mike (currently being fit for Wonderbras)










Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 6 Aug 1999 09:29:34 -0600 
From: Ian Smith <isrs at cmed.com>
Subject: Hops, when to harvest and why do we dry them?

How can I tell if my hops are ready to harvest? I was told that they should
feel like paper. Does this mean that they sound like paper when squeezed?
Also the lupin should be bright yellow. How bright should they get? I do not
want to harvest immature hops nor do I want to harvest hops that are too
dry. HELP!

Also, why do we go to all the trouble of drying the hops. I realize that the
"big boys" do it to improve shipping since hops are 70%+ water. What happens
if I just freeze them wet? Will they stale? I know I will have to
recalculate my hop additions due to increased moisture content. Instead of a
recipe calling for 1 oz dry I would have to add 4 oz or whatever. Is drying
necessary to get the hop flavor we are all so accustomed to? Seems to me
that wet hops would be "fresher" or "better" or did I miss something?

I remember reading in the HBD last year about a "grassy" taste associated
with fresh hops. Is this true? Do we dry them to eliminate the grassy aroma?

Cheers

Ian Smith
isrs at cmed.com <mailto:isrs at cmed.com> 



Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 06 Aug 1999 08:29:29 -0700
From: J Daoust <thedaousts at ixpres.com>
Subject: ? size of mash in a five gallon cooler?

does anyone know how large of a mash one can do in a five gallon cooler.
I use 1.1 qts of water per pound of grain, and by the math , can fit
pounds worth of water into the cooler. But, how much space will the
grain take up?? Any ideas,formulas would be appreciated.  Jerry Daoust



Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 6 Aug 1999 08:31:00 -0500
From: "Alan McKay" <amckay at nortelnetworks.com>
Subject: Home Canning


For the free version of a "How To", simply go here :
http://www.foodsafety.org/
and so a search on "Home Canning"

cheers,
 -Alan

- --
Alan McKay
OS Support			amckay at nortelnetworks.com
Small Site Integration	613-765-6843 (ESN 395)
Nortel Networks		All opinions expressed are my own



Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 6 Aug 1999 14:03:27 -0400 
From: "Czerpak, Pete" <Pete.Czerpak at siigroup.com>
Subject: barley wines and imperial stout recipes

With the end of summer approaching, I am looking forward to a return to
brewing more frequently since the household heat index will be a lot
lower.  I am interested in trying some new, and hopefully proven,
imperial stout and barley wine recipes, that I'll brew soon and
hopefully be drinking by mid-winter.

Can some people share some of their favorite recipes?  All-grain
prefered but extract plus specialty are ok too.  Its about time to be
thinking of such heavy brews again.

Posted or private email are ok also.

Thanks,

Pete Czerpak
Schenectady, NY

pete.czerpak at siigroup.com


Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 6 Aug 1999 12:34:01 -0700 
From: "Rich, Charles" <CRich at filenet.com>
Subject: Drying hops

In HBD #3103 Jeff Schroeder asked about over-drying his hop flowers.

Last September Jon Betterley and I visited a Yakima hopfarm (see
http://hbd.org/hbd/archive/2827.html#2827-1) and I solved my over-drying
problem after seeing the professional practice.  It was pretty simple.

After drying, let them "rest" in the open for about an hour or so simply to
take back up a little moisture (or maybe it lets moisture redistibute back
to the petal attach points)  then package them.  The result felt just like
the big guys' product and the flowers stayed well intact afterward.

Hope that helps,
Charles Rich




Return to table of contents

---