HOMEBREW Digest #3213 Wed 05 January 2000

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

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

  Feelings on early racking (Calvin Perilloux)
  tannic materials and sparging (Louis Bonham)
  Re:Old Peculier Recipe Clone sought (Anthony and Mary Ann Tantillo)
  Head? (John Penn)
  Re: Too much head ("Brian Dixon")
  Early Racking QDA (Eric.Fouch)
  Inconsistent Carbonation (Chris Palmer)
  Re:  Too much head (Jeff Renner)
  Re: tannins (Jeff Renner)
  Isn't it ironic? ("Alan Meeker")
  re luddites, gullibility, and insults (Robin Griller)
  WORDMIXER (The Holders)
  Tannins? Tannins?! I gotcher stinkin' tannins! (Pat Babcock)
  kegging ("Dan Michael")
  tannins & final gravity (Bret Morrow)
  Fermentation Temperature (Doug.A.Mccullough)
  Books (Nathan Kanous)
  keg type? (Doug Mansfield)
  CO2 / Nitrogen Mix (MIKE BRANAM)
  Crappy Wine From France? ("Nigel Porter")
  Tannins and Sparging (Dave Burley)
  Enough already, Dave ("Ken Schramm")
  Unsanitized but Cleaned Fermenter ("MAS, JOHN C. [FND/1820]")
  re: Genetically Modified stuff (Lou.Heavner)
  Free 12 Oz bottles ("Jeff")
  Final Run-off SG (Jim Bentson)

* Beer is our obsession and we're late for therapy! 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 FROM THE E-MAIL ACCOUNT YOU WISH TO HAVE SUBSCRIBED OR UNSUBSCRIBED!!!** IF YOU HAVE SPAM-PROOFED your e-mail address, you cannot subscribe to the digest as we canoot reach you. We will not correct your address for the automation - that's your job. The HBD is a copyrighted document. The compilation is copyright HBD.ORG. Individual postings are copyright by their authors. ASK before reproducing and you'll rarely have trouble. Digest content cannot be reproduced by any means for sale or profit. More information is available by sending the word "info" to req at hbd.org. JANITORS on duty: Pat Babcock and Karl Lutzen (janitor@hbd.org)
---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2000 04:03:50 -0500 From: Calvin Perilloux <peril at compuserve.com> Subject: Feelings on early racking (Brian Dixon wonders if he should be concerned about racking from a settling tank to the primary fermenter after 8 to 24 hours, and whether this affects the yeast by removing it from the trub/fatty-acids.) I had wondered the same thing a couple of years ago when I was following a similar procedure. My reasons were partly for trub removal and partly for further oxygenation. (I couldn't find the handy Liquid Bread item or even oxygenating stones in Australia at the time, and the usual sources I knew in the States wouldn't mail order overseas, so all that waited until a friend made the trip there to the Land of Brewing Gadgets.) My usual procedure was to brew an all-grain batch after work, pour it slowly into the "settling tank" to oxygenate it a bit, pitch half the yeast into the settling tank, and then go to bed. The next morning I would then transfer it in a thin dribble to the primary fermenter, thus picking up maximum oxygen, and then pitch the rest of the yeast. I'd take a bit of trub with it, but not much. The result was a fairly clear wort at the start of fermentation with very, very little trub. And despite any theoretical concerns, I had no problems with healthy, active fermentations. (This begs the question of why I held off on pitching all the yeast at first, and I have to admit that I was not energetic enough to experiment with pitching it all early, especially given some of the highly flocculating strains I tended to use, like Wyeast 1968, so I wanted enough yeast in there at first to get a hold on it, but not to lose it all when I transferred. Since my results were good, I felt no need to alter the method, though curiosity remains as to whether what I was doing made complete sense.) I don't know how I'd have felt about a 24 hour rest with all the yeast pitched at first, since in warmer temperatures that might have let the yeast get well underway in the fermentation, and introducing extra oxygen then might not have been a great idea, not to mention further risk of losing a fair bit of my active yeast that might well be stuck in the mass at the bottom of the settling tank. But the six (or eight) hour "rest" I used and the subsequent further oxygenation had no apparent bad effects at all on the final beer. To the contrary, they seemed quite clear and clean in the end and were often award winners. If what you're doing works well (and the comp judges agree) then keep at it and don't worry! Calvin Perilloux Staines, Middlesex, England Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 04 Jan 2000 05:37:45 -0600 From: Louis Bonham <lkbonham at hbd.org> Subject: tannic materials and sparging Paul Niebergall again questions the theory that excessive sparging is bad because it leaches excessive tannins / tanninoids: > In lieu of an anecdote being repeated enough times to be > beyond a reasonable doubt, scientific information can be > useful. So, where is all the scientific evidence that > lautering below 1.010 leaches tannins that have a negative > impact on beer? It *is* there, if you look for it. You can start with Lewis & Young, Brewing (Chapman & Hall 1996), which is pretty widely available. At p. 95, you'll find charts (summarizing their lab data) which depicts the relative levels of wort gravity and polyphenols (and other things) during the sparge. The relative levels of polyphenols and wort gravity remain fairly constant until wort gravity goes below about 6 P (SG 1.024), at which point the relative polyphenol levels begin to rise dramatically. (Not coincidentally, pH and mineral compound levels also start to rise dramatically at this point.) By the time you get to SG 1.010, the polyphenol levels (relative to wort gravity) are over *ten times* as high as they were at the beginning of the sparge. Stated differently, if you took samples of first wort and oversparged wort from the same mash, diluted the first wort to the same gravity as the oversparged wort, and then measured the polyphenol levels, you'd find that the polyphenol levels in the oversparged wort was ten times that of the diluted first wort. And for this reason I'd wager that most folks would in fact find that the oversparged wort tasted more like tea than the diluted first wort. As Steve A. has pointd out, from a purely quantative perspective most of the tannic materials are in fact extracted during the main mash and are contained in first runnings. However, it is pretty well established that, relative to wort gravity levels, the harder you sparge, the more tannic materials (as well as fatty acids and mineral compounds) you'll get. Does this increase in tannic materials matter? I have theorized that this is the reason why "no sparge" beers are consistently judged to taste better and maltier than equivalent gravity sparged beers. In the experiment I did for my BT column a while back, the total polyphenol levels of the sparged beer *were* significantly higher than the beer made solely from first runnings. Granted, this is n=1, but there it is. Louis K. Bonham lkbonham at hbd.org Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2000 06:58:40 +0000 (/etc/localtime) From: Anthony and Mary Ann Tantillo <tantillo at ichange.net> Subject: Re:Old Peculier Recipe Clone sought Try the Zymurgy Special Issue from 1994 p102. Also, the Cat's Meow has at least one clone recipe in category 9. Tony Tantillo tantillo at ichange.net Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 04 Jan 2000 09:12:06 -0500 From: John Penn <John.Penn at jhuapl.edu> Subject: Head? Marv mentions Too much Head... Sounds like you may be confusing Head and Carbonation. Head is the foam that remains on the top of the beer. A good head will last a long time like a good Guiness. Carbonation is the excess CO2 escaping from the beer. If you look at your glass and look at the rate of bubbling you get an idea of carbonation. Carbonation and head are not the same thing. A common mistake of newbies is to bottle too early or not to aerate enough so that the Final Gravity is high because not enough healthy yeast were around to ferment the beer. Both of these mistakes result in "gushers", over carbonated beers. They may not be overcarbonated at first (1-2 weeks) but they gradually get overcarbonated over time especially if the yeast were not aerated enough. Another cause of gushers is contamination. This may be hard to recognize but results in a ring around the top of the bottles and a degradation in flavor with time. Levels of comtamination and results vary. Are you sure you just don't have overcarbonated beer? Or is it really Head? Head will stay foamy for a long time, Almost definately requires a partial mash to get a good head. Kit beers do not usually have any "head". FYI John Penn Eldersburg, MD Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2000 06:06:58 -0800 From: "Brian Dixon" <briandixon at home.com> Subject: Re: Too much head Marv Pozdol writes: > I am not into the grain mashing etc that most of you are doing. I am still > using kits and do not intend to go into mashing in the near future. Lately, > my American Amber and American Lite have too much of a head. Lots of foam > in glass and sometime the head "eases" out of the bottle. What may cause > this? Marv, Without knowing more, such as whether or not your other beers do this too and what the starting/finishing gravities are, I can think of three possible causes for your over-carbonation: 1. Priming. How are you priming your beer? Corn sugar? Careful to use the right amount (typically 3/4 c.) and not too much? 2. Bottling too soon. Are you sure you are not bottling too early? Once the final gravity is stable, it doesn't hurt to wait another couple of days to make sure. 3. Infection. If everything else is right, it's possible that a minor infection got going in the bottles. Various infections are able to metabolize more complex sugars and/or starches than beer yeasts and produce CO2 as a side effect. The usual symptom is over-carbonation ... but you often lost the simple proteins and what not that you need for forming a nice head too, e.g. gushing or over-carbonation and a lack of head retention is more typical of an infection. Is your beer's head retention ok? Brian Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2000 10:30:00 -0500 From: Eric.Fouch at steelcase.com Subject: Early Racking QDA Brian asks: I've often considered racking after about 8 to 24 hours into a primary ferment to take the wort off the bulk of the trub, but hesitate because I've read that the fatty acids in the trub are beneficial to the yeast. It just seems 'good' that the primary would only be exposed to good clean yeast sediment once the growth period of the yeast is over, and I believe (if memory serves) that the fatty acids are only helpful up through the finish of the growth period. Thoughts? If I want to try a first racking that is to take place as soon as exposure to the trub (non-yeast sediment portion of it) is not helpful anymore, then when should it take place? Is this a good idea, or a bad idea? Why? I'm interested to see the HBD expurts go at this one. I would like to prime the pump with some hearsay and unsubstantiated information: In conversations with a local head brewer (a Seible graduate) we discussed fermentation, yeast management and the like. The world according to him: Yeast management: You want to pitch at the rate of 1 million yeast cells per ml per degree plato. This should cause four generations of yeast growth before the yeast population reaches ideal fermentation population. This allows the yeast to adjust to the wort conditions, but not form too many unwanted reproduction related compounds. I will defer any lewd commentary at this point. Use the clearest run off possible: Clear run off from the mash tun, clear trub free run off from the brew kettle. While cold break will cause a faster fermentation, he contends that fermenting with trub adversely affects flavor and shelf life. He claims to have the published reports that document these findings. He also advocates racking off the yeast in the primary soon after fermentation has begun. I cannot substantiate these claims, although some of them make sense to me. In my case, I feel my taste buds may not discern the flavor differences that my or may not be produced changing over to some of these processes. Eric Fouch Bent Dick YoctoBrewery Kentwood MI PS- Sounds like your aspirin beer may be a binge drinkers dream! It may take care of the morning after hangover! Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 4 Jan 100 11:03:35 -0500 (EST) From: Chris Palmer <crpalmer at ux7.sp.cs.cmu.edu> Subject: Inconsistent Carbonation The last batch of beer that I bottled had unbelievably inconsistent carbonation. Some of the bottles were over carbonated (not to the point of exploding, but for the style) and some were flat or nearly flat. I was hoping to figure out the cause before I bottle my next batch... I boil corn sugar in water to sterilize it. Add it to the bottling bucket and siphon the beer from the secondary to the bottling bucket. I try to not overly aerate the beer and assume that the steady flow from the siphon will mix the sugar and beer. As you might guess, the only theory I have at this point is that the sugar was not evenly distributed. I have ruled out: - all bottles stored under the same conditions - all bottles filled to (approximately the same level -- ie, it's not a matter of less filled bottles being more carbonated) I'd prefer email responses and will summarize to the list if there is any interest. Thanks, Chris. Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2000 10:51:04 -0500 From: Jeff Renner <nerenner at umich.edu> Subject: Re: Too much head MarvPozdol at aol.com writes: >I am not into the grain mashing etc that most of you are doing. I am still >using kits and do not intend to go into mashing in the near future. Pay no attention to the man behind the screen. In other words, don't be intimidated - you can make fine beer without mashing. I suspect lots of lurkers also don't mash. It's just that many of the most enthusiastic brewers do two things because of their enthusiasm - mash and post to HBD. So the mashers are probably over-represented. >my American Amber and American Lite have too much of a head. Lots of foam >in glass and sometime the head "eases" out of the bottle. What may cause >this? This can be from two conditions (and more causes) - either the beer has too much carbonation or it it holds its head more than usual. I suspect it is the former. The most likely cause (assuming you didn't mis-measure your priming sugar) is bottling before the beer is done fermenting. Did you change yeasts? Is your fermenting area colder than it was? Are you using genetically modified ingredients? It can also be caused by contamination by wild yeast or bacteria that continue to metabolize complex sugars. Does the beer taste extra dry or thin bodied or even off flavored? The remedies are obvious- make sure the beer is done fermenting, weigh priming sugar if possible, and be extra careful with your sanitation. 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: Tue, 4 Jan 2000 11:01:28 -0500 From: Jeff Renner <nerenner at umich.edu> Subject: Re: tannins Here is some additional anecdotal observation about tannins in last runnings. I generally stop runoff at about 1.012. My pH hasn't risen at this point because I'm careful about water chemistry. It tastes merely watery and not very sweet. Then when I'm cleaning up, I drain the rest of the liquid off the grains, usually 2-3 gallons from an 8 gallon batch. This has been sitting on the grains perhaps another hour, and it always tastes astringent - I assume from some tannin-like substance, whereas the earlier last runnings did not particularly. I haven't taken the SG or pH of these runnings. Perhaps they are so low in sugar that any tannins are not masked by sugar (strong tea tastes less astringent with sugar), or perhaps more tannins are extracted by sitting that extra hour. I don't know. 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: Tue, 4 Jan 2000 11:19:58 -0500 From: "Alan Meeker" <ameeker at welchlink.welch.jhu.edu> Subject: Isn't it ironic? Dave Burley wrote: > Get some facts on a subject before > you make up your mind. Just because > you don't know something, doesn't > mean it is not known. Do some research. > It won't hurt as much as you might fear. > Maybe it won't be as much fun as > criticising without facts, but you will be > able to make intelligent decisions > about your life. Quite the ironic statement. Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2000 11:21:11 -0500 From: Robin Griller <rgriller at chass.utoronto.ca> Subject: re luddites, gullibility, and insults Hi all, Preface: this is my last post on the subject, so fire away. Apologies for taking up space, but we must have the right to defend ourselves against gratuitous insults. I normally try to be polite and avoid insults etc., but, frankly, I've had enough of Mr. Burley's insults and bad manners, so my (hopefully) usual restraint may not be present here. To put it bluntly, Dave seems incapable of having a discussion without throwing gratuitous insults at people. For example, Dave says he didn't call anyone a luddite; well look again Dave, your original post on gm called people who oppose gm luddites *in the title*! Since you obviously consider 'luddites' bad, the fact that you put luddite in the title of your original post on the matter was clearly meant as an insult. If you can't tell when you are posting insults, maybe you should consider asking someone more astute than yourself to read your posts before you send them. This is, of course, typical of Dave's approach, as he demonstrates in his response to me. Rather than dealing with the issues at hand he calls people luddites, gullible, etc. I pointed out the distinction between demonstrating something dangerous and demonstrating something safe. Does he respond to this issue? No. I pointed out that he had set up false dichotomies between whatever new technology comes up and no technology. Does he respond this? No. What does he do? He insults people. He simply presumes that if he hasn't read or seen any evidence for something, it doesn't exist and if it doesn't exist, anyone who disagrees with him is simply an ignoramous. He presumes that if he doesn't get the point being made, the person making it must be an idiot. He even descends to the repulsive tactic of insulting a whole nation of people, simply because they won't let his beloved u.s. corporate masters sell their nasty crap in their country without first demonstrating its safety. The nerve of these people! Then we get extended nonsense and drivel about French wine and beeer; ever had a decent Bier de Garde, Dave? Oh, I forgot, if you haven't seen it yourself, it must not exist. Of course, unlike all that awful French beer, America produces huge volumes of wonderful Budweiser, Coors, etc. On to some of the substantive issues, Dave can't even tell the difference in environmental damage between a single bus carrying forty people and forty cars carrying one each. Hmmmn. In addition, back to the cows, it isn't of course milk that is the problem, but putting hormones into cows to increase production; while I can't off hand provide the evidence myself, according to television and print news reports I have read, there is ample evidence that (1) these productivity increasing techniques have very nasty impacts on the health of the cows and (2) the hormones carry through to the finished product. Personally, I don't want to feed such *potentially* dangerous crap to my son, unless it can be conclusively demonstrated that it is safe. I guess because Dave hasn't read such reports, the evidence doesn't exist. As I said, this will be my last post on the subject as it is utterly pointless trying to debate an issue with someone who does not respond to your actual post, instead simply insulting anyone who has the nerve to disagree with him. In terms of gullibility, Dave, it must be a relaxing life to believe whatever powerful corporations like Monsanto want you to believe. Very sad. Robin Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 04 Jan 2000 08:55:51 -0800 From: The Holders <zymie at sprynet.com> Subject: WORDMIXER Well, I guess I was right. Jack just can't let this die, so neither can I for now. I'd hate to disappoint all my fans ;^). Quote from Jack: "Nice try but even if I was wrong I would have to acknowledge my mistake." Jack, one thing I've come to realize is that you will NEVER be wrong in your own mind. The point I was originally making before you completely twisted this thread into something else was: If you're going to make a blanket claim about something, be prepared to back it up with more than verbal evasion. Here is a quote from your original post about your MASHmixer (lower case- HA, HA!): "have a system that does everything a RIMS is supposed to do and actually work the very first time." There is no possible way that you can prove that your system will do EVERYTHING a RIMS is designed to do, because there is no such thing as a universal RIMS. Every brewing system, whether is be an extract or all grain system, has its own unique characteristics. To take a blind potshot at people who enjoy tinkering AND brewing just doesn't make any sense Jack. Certainly you spent time tinkering with your gadgets you so shamelessly plug here. Why can't you just admit that your system is what it is, and others are what they are, and quit trying to convince yourself that everything you do is the greatest? Your mixer is just as subject to a power failure as any electro-mechanical system out there. You also use a pump in your brewing operation. I know this because I was the one that recommended the speed controller to you. I suppose you probably would recommend a horse and carriage, or maybe a coal fired steam engine rather than my truck, as the truck might experience some sort of failure over the years. I am not afraid of the coming of the industrial revolution, and you shouldn't be either Jack. Jack, you have quality products, but products alone do not carry a whole tune unless left to speak for themselves. I know that you will either dissect this post and have us talking about trademark law again, or you will let it die with the realization that maybe two people can be right at the same time. There is more to being right than "it all depends how you define______". I intend to let it die. I would like to thank all my fans ;^) Now back to our regular program. Wayne Holder AKA Zymie Long Beach CA *coming soon* http://www.zymico.com Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2000 11:51:35 -0500 From: Pat Babcock <pbabcock at hbd.org> Subject: Tannins? Tannins?! I gotcher stinkin' tannins! Greetings, Beerlings! Take me to your lager... Yet another astringent extraction anectdote - much to Paul's chagrin: In my former life as a home brewer (not sure what I am at the moment), I was a bit of a gadgeteer. One of my gadgets was a "Y" at the outflow of my mashtun. One part of the "Y" went to the brew kettle, the other to the drain. Once upon a time, about five years ago, I was merrily completing the sparge for an expected-to-be-delightful, triple-decocted hefe-weizen. Seeing the hot gravity drop to my target of 1.000 at ~160'F (which leaves about 1.022 at 60'F behind...), I happily switch open the "Y" to the drain, and began preparations for the boil. Once the grain bed was drained (and the volume of boiling kettle mysteriously higher than I remembered it, the hand met the forehead at incredible speed - the "whap!" heard around the world! I FORGOT to close the "Y" to the kettle! Being of indominatable spirit, I plunged relentlessly onward and completed the brew, extending the boil to get back to the desired gravity. The resulting weizen was of lovely color, bountiful carbonation, and as nasty as all hell. You could detect cloves and various other esters (the handiwork of the Weihenstephan yeast so lovingly pitched into the batch), and the body of the beer was appropriate to style, but there was a nasty, drying quality to the batch. Oddly, I found that if enough lactic acid and a touch of acetic acid was added, it made a most enjoyable plambic. Also, if the sediment was undisturbed at the pour, it was almost tolerable (hardly the fitting the style of a hefe if you can't stir the sediment, though). Tannins? I can't say. Astringent? Yes. "Tannic"? Yes. If there is any scientist nearby capable of analyzing the slop to see whether there is a bounty of tannins in the beer, some of it remains in my cellar to date. I'd venture a guess, though, that the runoff gravity dropped below 1.010... - See ya! Pat Babcock in SE Michigan pbabcock at hbd.com Home Brew Digest Janitor janitor@hbd.org HBD Web Site http://hbd.org The Home Brew Page http://hbd.org/pbabcock/ "Just a cyber-shadow of his former brewing self..." Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 04 Jan 2000 08:56:59 -0800 From: "Dan Michael" <dmichael at avuhsd.k12.ca.us> Subject: kegging Ok this I am sure is a repeat. I am about to experience my first kegging experience. I have a few pin lock kegs. 1. when I prime my beer and put it into the keg should I give it a blast of co2, how much? 2. after it has conditioned what do I do to drink it. (It's a english pale ale) What is forced carbonantion, do I do that? or do I attach co2 and drink, This process I am unclear about. Thank you in advance Dan What is the best way I am having trouble getting the liquid and gas fittings off to replace the o-rings and sanitize thanks again Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 04 Jan 2000 12:18:50 -0400 From: Bret Morrow <bret.morrow at yale.edu> Subject: tannins & final gravity Greetings, Glad to see Phil Yates back at the mash tun/computer. It was my understanding that the extraction of tannins into the wort occurs more frequently at the end of the sparge not because of the diminished gravity, but because of the increasing pH. Dave Miller discussed this in one of his book. Therefore tannin extraction would occur with more alkaline sparge water and with mashes that contain less dark grains. These roasted grains can help keep the pH of the mash at the end of the sparge down. When I brew a paler brew, I generally add some lactic acid to the later half of the sparge water. This has dramatically reduced the astringent taste in the last runnings. For what it is worth, it has not appreciably changed the taste or clarity of the finished beer. Bret A. Morrow Hamden, CT Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2000 11:31:47 -0600 From: Doug.A.Mccullough at bridge.bellsouth.com Subject: Fermentation Temperature When I moved from glass carboys to a 12-gallon cylindroconical stainless fermenter, I lost the ability to see the fermenting wort. As an alternative means of monitoring fermentation I taped a digital thermometer to the outside of the fermenter with the metal probe resting against the outside of the stainless fermenter. I am finding that fermentation significantly increases the wort temperature. For example, take my oatmeal stout with an initial gravity of 1.063. The ambient temperature in my basement is currently 64 degrees F. The wort was at about 74 degrees when I pitched yeast. At high krausen about 24 hours later, the fermenter was at 73 degrees. After 78 hours of very active fermentation the sg had dropped to 1.021 and the fermenter temperature to 69 degrees. That stout is not yet finished, but previous batches returned to ambient basement temperature a week or so after pitching. We all know fermentation generates heat. I wonder how many of us have ever measured just how much heat is generated in our own systems. My current thinking is that if the recommended fermentation temperature for a strain of yeast is no more than 73 degrees, I should not attempt to ferment in my basement if the ambient temperature there is over 64 degrees. Any thoughts? BTW, the stainless fermenter is a joy and worth every penny. Doug McCullough Birmingham BrewMasters Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 04 Jan 2000 11:40:04 -0600 From: Nathan Kanous <nlkanous at pharmacy.wisc.edu> Subject: Books Hi All, I was just checking the old web for Michael Jackson's Great Beers of Belgium. Although I looked on-line, I intend to walk into one of the bookstores here in Madison to buy it. However, I found different books with the same ISBN. One shows a book cover with Michael and is listed as 3rd edition with 348 pages published in August '98. The other shows a cover with beers (no Michael), is 3rd edition with 244 pages and was published in September '98. Each has the same ISBN (0762404035). What's going on? Which book is "the" book? Any thoughts? nathan in madison, wi Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 04 Jan 2000 12:55:27 -0500 From: Doug Mansfield <mansfield at cns.ohiou.edu> Subject: keg type? Happy New Year All. I am a recent homebrewing enthusiast, and thanks to John (Homebrew) Schnupp found my way to your forum. A friend recently gave me a 1/2 barrel US_Sankey keg to use in my homebrewing. Reading through the archives, I found that it may not be the best way to keg beer. But regardless, I now have the keg and some fittings. My question: I have two fittings (that I thought were for Sankey kegs). One has a picnic faucet on it and the other a hand pump. The bottom, where it would twist into the keg, is about half the size as my other sankey level style coupler. Does anyone know what keg type these might fit? Thanks, Doug Mansfield Return to table of contents
Date: 04 Jan 2000 13:03:28 -0500 From: MIKE BRANAM <Branam.Mike at bei.bls.com> Subject: CO2 / Nitrogen Mix Hi guys, I have a draft system at my house and have been using it for years. I have recently been kegging my own homebrew and using the draft system. I have been hearing alot about CO2/Nitrogen mix like they use for Guinness Stout. Will that work with my regulator, faucet, and CO2 tank. Will it make a difference in other beers like New Castle or Bass. Mike Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2000 18:21:13 -0000 From: "Nigel Porter" <nigel at sparger.freeserve.co.uk> Subject: Crappy Wine From France? Sorry to be off beer topic, but I couldn't help but reply to Dave Burley's comment on French Wine. I know there is no great love between us Brits & the Frogs, but in my opinion they do make some of the finest wines in the world. I have drunk my fair share of New World wines, but still find myself drawn back to the French. Nigel Brewing (and drinking wine) in Guildford Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2000 13:21:33 -0500 From: Dave Burley <Dave_Burley at compuserve.com> Subject: Tannins and Sparging Brewsters: I basically agree with Paul Niebergall's position that anecdotal evidence is always questionable. However, the rationale of stopping the sparge at SG>1.010 has basically nothing to do with tannin extraction just because the SG is less than 1.010. This is some sort of rule of thumb that really doesn't apply in many cases. What should be the center of focus is the pH of the sparged liquor. As the sparging continues, the pH normally rises as the buffers in the wort are diminished ( and I guess the rationale for giving an SG as the control point). It is the rise in the pH which brings about the increased solubility of these weak organic acidic substances like phenolic tannins contained in the grain husks. You also have to wonder what happens to these tannins as they enter the wort at pH of 5.3-5.5 or so. Likely they precipitate or react with protein and come out of solution anyway. So it may not even be an important issue. You can leach down to 1.001 if you want to as long as the sparging liquor has a low pH ( or added acid) such that the pH of the sparged liquor stays below pH = 5.6 or less. Alkaline waters which are unadjusted will produce tannic sparged solutions at SGs higher than 1.010 if the pH of the sparging liquor is high. Keep on Brewin' Dave Burley Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 04 Jan 2000 13:40:35 -0500 From: "Ken Schramm" <schramk at resa.net> Subject: Enough already, Dave OK, I've sat by and read enough of Dave Burley's commentaries that stray far from the subject and berate others. Dave, your comments come across to me as obnoxious, condescending and rude. Quote you : Get some facts on a subject before you make up your mind. Just because you don't know something, doesn't mean it is not known. Do some research. It won't hurt as much as you might fear. Maybe it won't be as much fun as criticising without facts, but you will be able to make intelligent decisions about your life. End quote. Dave, you would do well to heed your own advice. Countless times in this forum, you have shot off your mouth (keyboard) without doing the research you need to back yourself up. You speak for others ("it won't hurt as much as you might fear" : how do you know what they fear?). You have used classic radio talk show host argumentation techniques, playing wild and loose with the "facts" to meet your arguments, and saying "there is no evidence" of thus and such when there is plenty if you look about. You have been called for this folly and have not apologized or recanted. Your continued ranting only builds a greater mound of evidence as to your dogmatic, closed minded stance, and erodes your future credibility. Dave, the general public is suspicious of capitalism, the chemical industry, the car companies and the government for one reason: we have been burned. Love Canal, Three Mile Island, cigarettes, Hooker Chemical, Dioxin in our fish, Thalidomide, Car companies resisting seat belts and pollution controls. Above ground nuclear testing, Agent Orange, X-raying our feet for our shoe sizes, feeding domestic animals back to domestic animals for feed. Time after time, our government and our industry have taken our money and said "don't worry, we'll look after your best interest," when we should have been worrying a lot. When there is a profit to be made, business goes off half-cocked, and the public pays the price later, in lives or tax dollars or lost homes or a polluted environment. Ford claims to be environmentally conscious, but builds a gas guzzling, environmentally disaterous Excursion. It's greed. The media is not the source of the lies, Dave (cigarettes don't cause cancer. The public just isn't interested in automotive safety. Agent Orange poses no significant health threat. There is no such thing as global warming: see the pattern?). They are just like tuna following a shrimp boat. If you know there is going to be food by the boat, that is where you hang out. Industry hides all it can, but eventually gets caught. The way it seems to me is that humans have a history of terribly irresponsible use of this planet. If we can look back at 7000 years of mass extinctions and environmental devastation and not feel that we need to look at changing some of our behavior patterns (like starting to use mass transit, and moving toward solar energy, sustainable farming techniques, and most importantly population control), then we will continue to denude the planet until we are the species on the end of the threshold event. If we've been here for 10,000 years, why can't we start to think that far into the future? We are going to look like total idiots to our future generations. Especially if we unleash some GM species that throws the whole mess out of kilter, like the sea lamprey did to the Great Lakes (yes, humans did that one). History shows that we humans are masters of the unforeseen consequence, but for some reason, every new generation thinks that it is beyond that phenomenon. Seemingly every time we try to second guess nature, we get it wrong. Dave, I don't hold that you should be censored or eliminated from the forum. But your rants make the whole experience far less enjoyable for me. Some suggestions: stick to brewing (yeah, I know I broke that one myself, but I hit boiling). I really like your posts about brewing. You know quite a bit. Speak for yourself, stay away from false dilemas and negative option arguments, avoid the insults, and do a little homework yourself (find out about prions, for example, and learn how spongiform encephalopathy works). If you can't abide those tenets, maybe you could keep your diatribes out of the main channel. Have at me. I have a thick skin. George De Piro, it's great to see you post again. Ken Schramm Troy, MI I have no idea how far I am ideologically from Jeff Renner Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2000 15:48:53 -0600 From: "MAS, JOHN C. [FND/1820]" <john.c.mas at chi.monsanto.com> Subject: Unsanitized but Cleaned Fermenter Newbie(?) question. Brewed a batch of wheat beer. First time using B Brite. Didn't know it was JUST a cleaner. Thought it was a sanitizing agent. Beer still in Fermenter about to transfer to secondary. This is my second batch of beer. My first was 5 years ago. What might be the Best case / Worse case senarios for this batch?? Thanks! John jcmas at usa.net Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2000 16:50:20 -0600 From: Lou.Heavner at frco.com Subject: re: Genetically Modified stuff I don't have a problem with GM materials, but I am probably not going to rush out and buy them. Jim Layton touched on the reason as have others. I don't try to clone Bud or Miller or Coors, but not because I don't like them. Rather, it is because they are readily and inexpensively available. I tend to make experimental or uncommon styles and have developed a preference for some but not all of them. I also garden and I don't grow iceberg lettuce, green bell peppers, or slicing cukes because they are also readily and inexpensively available and usually as tasty as the ones I grow. I tend to grow more unusual vegetables and have developed a preference for some but not all of them. And I don't like eggs, no matter how they were produced or prepared. When considering GM products like vegetable seeds, you should consider what was the goal/benefit of the genetic manipulation and whether that is of interest to you. Super sweet corn is a good thing! Tomatoes which sacrifice flavor in order to be easier to harvest, handle, and store are not a good thing for me. I practise IPM and grow a small garden, so pesticide tolerant seeds are of no benefit to me. Same thought process works for modified hops, barley, or yeast. If a GM choice is available, pick it because it improves your beer or brewing experience in some worthwhile way, not because it is new and somebody else finds it beneficial. If I was trying to make a living growing vegetables or making beer or doing something else which might involve GM material, I might make a different choice. A lot of GM has focused on increasing production yields, especially with disease resistance. As we brew our beer, we will vote with our wallets for the malt and hops we want, GM or not. Our vote may not be as big as A-B's, but if we can perceive a difference worth paying for, there will be somebody willing to supply our needs. I understand the balance of nature debate and try to encourage diversity of flora and fauna. But species have been coming and going for years. I am just as glad that some things like smallpox virus and dinosaurs are extinct. Wouldn't mind seeing the demise of a few other pests like HIV, kudzu, and fire ants. I am confident that consumers will ultimately get what they want unless government gets involved and gets in the way. There are enough independant cusses out there to ensure preservation of genetic diversity. Seed savers exchange is one example that was listed. I am also confident that the same people who develop new technology with some negative and unintended side effects will find ways to overcome the same. It is difficult to take comfort in a government bureacracy that pays farmers in the fertile midwest not to grow crops and at the same time subsidize irrigation and farming in the arid southwest. Lou Heavner - Austin, TX Reveling in the multitude of styles, methods, and ingredients available for homebrewing in the new year! Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2000 21:29:46 -0500 From: "Jeff" <jeffi at chesapeake.net> Subject: Free 12 Oz bottles Thanks to the collective for the information contributed to this forum, it has made me a better brewer in a short period of time. I have a number of cases of 12 oz brown bottles taking up space in my basement. Free to a good home. Otherwise off to the recycling center. You pick them up. I am located in Southern Maryland, Calvert County. I have given up bottling in favor of corny kegs. Contact me by email. Jeff jeffi at chesapeake.net Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 04 Jan 2000 21:38:29 -0500 From: Jim Bentson <jbentson at longisland.com> Subject: Final Run-off SG Recently, there has been some discussion about the recommended "low limit" for lauter runoff specific gravity. Many homebrew texts cite this as 1010 to 1012 and Steve Alexander and Paul Niebergall have been debating this point with Paul feeling some statements are anecdotal rather than scientific evidence. For what it is worth I will give two interesting statements that relate to this issue from Malting & Brewing Science 2nd Ed. My intent is to present some statements and data from recognized texts with no comment one way or the other . 1) On page 350, in Table 11.8 titled "Comparison of brewing practices" , the S.G. of the last runnings are given as 1004 for Britain , 1004 for Continental Europe and 1008 for North America. This table is given along with the statement that "last runnings tend to affect flavor and head retention adversely". 2) On page 273 it states, "The last runnings are rich in oxidizable polyphenols, but most oxidized polyphenols emerge in earlier wort fractions". Tannins are polyphenol complexes but I am not enough of a chemist to know whether this statement supports tannins at the late stage or not. In addition, Fix in "Principles of Brewing Science" discusses the issue of tannin extraction during sparging on page 120 and points to a number of causes. Fix says the following of the sparging process: "Sparging. Unless care is taken, considerable amounts of husk derived phenols and protein-tannin complexes can be extracted into the wort and passed on to the beer. Extraction tends to be proportional to the amount of sparge water used. Since the pH of the runnings tends to increase with extraction, maximal levels of sparge water can be checked by pH measurement. Conversely, the high pH of alkaline water itself stimulates extraction. Finally, the extraction rate increases very rapidly above 74 to 76 deg C, so it is important that temperature be controlled during the sparge. In fact the sensitivity of phenol-protein extraction to temperature has led to some interesting experiments where the lauter was carried out at 1 deg C" It is interesting that Fix does not seem to mention low SG as a cause of Tannin extraction. Jim Bentson Return to table of contents
[Prev HBD] [Index] [Next HBD] [Back]
HTML-ized on 01/05/00, by HBD2HTML version 1.2 by K.F.L.
webmaster at hbd.org, KFL, 10/9/96