---

	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:
  Beer diets 2000 ("Alan Meeker")
  Head Start Alt yeast (Jeremy Bergsman)
  leaching tannins (Kurt Goodwin)
  Mike's Irish Moss question ("Sean Richens")
  Re: Luddites (phil sides jr)
  French wine (John Wilkinson)
  Lab Rat Questions (Biergiek)
  (no subject) (John Wilkinson)
  Re: Fermentation Temperature (Ant Hayes)
  Slightly OT: deleading pewter flask (Dan Cole)
  Tannin extraction in late sparge ("Alan Meeker")
  Burleyisms ("Alan Meeker")
  WHY would you refit with THESE costs??!? ("Brett A. Spivy")
  GMOs (Mark_Ohrstrom/Humphrey_Products)
  pH at end of sparge ("Philip J Wilcox")
  Hey, now... (Some Guy)
  Re: kegging (Jeff Renner)
  Hats of to Whitelabs WLP500 Trappist Ale Yeast! (Darrell Leavitt)
  munich and low extraction ("Czerpak, Pete")
  No future (jliddil)
  Re: German Beer (Fredrik Stahl)
  priming kegs and RIMS heating ("Stephen and Carolyn Ross")
  GM foods, Safety, Early Racking (RCAYOT)
  Co2 /Nitrogen mix ("Don Van Valkenburg")
  RE: Fermentation Temperature (LaBorde, Ronald)
  re: Old Peculier recipe (Michael Kitt)
  ok, I lied... (Robin Griller)
  Beer Gas (Richard Foote)


* 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 21:50:37 -0500
From: "Alan Meeker" <ameeker at welchlink.welch.jhu.edu>
Subject: Beer diets 2000

In December Matt Smiley wrote in part:
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------
 ...A common misconception is that the body burns calories like a furnace,
liberating the maximum thermodynamic value from all sources. This is an
oversimplification. Amino acids (proteins) and lipids (fats) are used for
many non-energy processes in the body, such as manufacturing structural
cellular components, hormones, etc. When the body is forced to make glucose
from proteins and fats, it ends up with much less energy than if the
nutrients were metabolized in the most efficient way. Calories from foods
are calculated by simply burning them in a calorimeter. The human metabolism
has much more complex methods of handling them, and these processes
sacrifice efficiency for the sake of versatility.
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------

OK, here are some useful facts to keep handy for diet discussions (Source is
Bowman and Rand's textbook of Pharmacology and Devlin's Textbook of
Biochemistry with clinical correlations):

Energy contents (heats of combustion) for the three major components of
food:

Protein = 2.25MJ/100g  =  5.4kcal/g
Carbohydrate = 1.65MJ/100g = 3.9kcal/g
Fat = 3.9MJ/100g = 9.3kcal/g

This represents the absolute amount of energy potentially obtainable from
these food sources. These were determined by burning these to completion in
a true bomb calorimeter. These represents the absolute upper limits.

Now, here are the Atwater values which attempt to take into account the fact
that our metabolism of these foods is less than 100% efficient:

Protein = 1.7MJ/100g  =  4.1kcal/g
Carbohydrate = 1.6MJ/100g = 3.8kcal/g
Fat = 3.7MJ/100g = 8.8kcal/g

So, while protein loses the most caloric value due to incomplete/ineffecient
utilization as an energy source it is still virtually equal in caloric value
to carbohydrate on a per weight basis. Also, note that these values are in
fact the values usually quoted for caloric contents for these food
components:  4 kcal for protein, 4 kcal for carbohydrates, and 9kcal for
fats. These are not the values derived from bomb calorimetry.

I still maintain that the ballance between  calories in/calories out  is a
pretty good indicator of whether or not you will gain/lose weight in the
long run. While the metabolic pathways are complex indeed, the basics are
pretty simple. There are only a few fates available to the food we eat. It
wiill either be used for energy, be used to build body infrastructure, or
will not be utilized at all and will be excreted in the urine or feces.
That's about it. We can't violate any physical laws here-  matter can
neither be created nor destroyed. If we swallow it, it's gotta go somewhere.
There is nothing that special about protein. Remember that it will all be
broken down and absorbed as amino acids and that these are for the most part
convertable to glucose. Here's a relavent quote from Devlin's Biochemistry:

"The average adult in this country consumes far more protein than needed...
The excess protein is simply treated as a source of energy, with the
glucogenic amino acids being converted to glucose and the ketogenic amino
acids being converted to fatty acids and keto acids. Both kinds of amino
acids will of course eventually be converted to triacylglycerol in the
adipose tissue... Thus for most of us the only body building obtained from
high-protein diets is adipose tissue."

This makes sense - that excess amino acids will simply be treated as an
energy source and either burned or converted to fat and stored if the total
caloric intake (all sources) exceeds the body's energy needs. The only other
places it can go is to make (non-fat) body mass or not be utilized and
excreted.

How much of the dietary protein can we expect to be utilized for maintenance
of body structures/ protein components, etc? "Assuming adequate calorie
intake and 75% efficiency of utilization, which is typical of the mixed
protein in the American diet, the recommended protein intake is 0.8 g per kg
body weight per day. This amounts to about 58 g of protein per day for a
72-kg (160 lb) man."  ..."The average American currently consumes 99 g of
protein."

Dave Burley wrote in part...
- ------------------------------------------------
I have read comments here to the effect thatcalories are calories and it
doesn't make any
difference what you eat. Sorry, but the18th century concept that your body
is a
Parr Bomb Calorimeter ( thermochemicalapparatus in which calorie content is
measured by burning under oxygen pressure)is not correct. Your body
apparently does
not choose to process everything you eat( except perhaps carbohydrates). I
once
read that if this model were correct, then byeating just one carrot a day
beyond your
calorie output, you would weigh 1200 pounds at 75 years old.Obviously this
model is incorrect.
- ------------------------------------------------
No, the alternative is that your "factoid" is what is incorrrect which is
indeed the case here. Carrots(raw) have an energy content of 0.3MJ per 100g
wet weight (taking the Atwater factors into consideration). This translates
into 71 kcal/100g. Now, I've just gone and weighed an average sized carrot
and it weighed about 25 grams. Thus, an average carrot has about 18 kcal of
dietary energy available in it. Compare eating this extra carrot per day
with eating an extra 100 kcal per day. If you eat 100 extra kcal/day above
and beyond what you need for general maintenance then you will gain 10
pounds of fat after one year. For the case of an extra carrot a day
therefore, you will gain a maximum of 1.8 pounds per year. Assuming you are
doing this for your entire life to age 75 this only allows for a weight gain
of 135 pounds; not the ridiculous value of 1200 you "remember reading" Dave.
I'd admonish you to start taking the excellent advice you recently posted to
check your facts before posting such nonsense. As you said yourself, you
might actually learn something!

 -Alan Meeker



Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 04 Jan 2000 18:59:50 -0800
From: Jeremy Bergsman <jeremybb at leland.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Head Start Alt yeast

Head Start AKA Aeonbrau (sp?) was a homebrewer's yeast supplier run by Dr.
Brian Nummer.  I really like the Alt yeast they sold.  Unfortunately, I just
went to my freezer box and my master vial is missing!  Yesterday I threw out
the last plate from 3/99.  Ouch!  If anyone has this yeast stored somewhere
I'd be very grateful for 1 or more cells sent my way.  Name your price.  A
contact for Brian Nummer would be appreciated too, just in case he can be
convinced to crack the freezer for an old customer.
- -- 
Jeremy Bergsman
jeremybb at stanford.edu
http://www.stanford.edu/~jeremybb


Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 04 Jan 2000 22:03:16 -0500
From: kurt at greennet.net (Kurt Goodwin)
Subject: leaching tannins

Paul writes:

"With regard leaching tannins in low gravity runoff, I just dont think
that this has been the case (or even begins to qualify as a common
occurrence). Also dont forget that the supposed leaching of tannins
actually having an impact on the final quality of the beer is even more
questionable than whether the tannins leaching or not."

Your basic point is right, anecdotal evidence is not scientific proof. 
And as I said before, I don't pretend to know whether what I percieve as
being a puckery taste is due to tannins, or anything else.  From a
homebrewing perspective, it's hard to see any strong benefit to
squeezing the last 3 maltose molecules out of the grain bed on the one
hand, whereas there's some risk of picking up less than desireable
flavors from sparging too long.

The scientific question is mildly interesting, but us engineer types
will probably continue to throw in an extra 1/2 pound of malt and stop
the sparge a few minutes earlier.  Minimal added cost for possibly low
payoff with no real downside risk.

The pros must care more about how close they can come to the edge.  Any
body want to fess up experience in the barrels and barrels range?

Kurt Goodwin


Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2000 21:22:54 -0600
From: "Sean Richens" <srichens at sprint.ca>
Subject: Mike's Irish Moss question

I wouldn't worry about getting Irish Moss into the primary fermenter. 
Sure, it will all be stirred up by fermentation, but the objective of the
finings is to turn small protein particles (smaller than yeast cells) into
big protein/sugar particles (at least as big as yeast cells).  It will just
settle out later rather than sooner.  

The charge on the proteins will get stronger as the pH drops during
fermentation, so I expect there won't be any dissociation.  I don't notice
any trouble with it, anyway.

Has anyone ever made the same (more or less) recipe with and without Irish
Moss or Break Brite and noticed any difference?

Sean



Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 05 Jan 2000 00:02:49 -0500
From: phil sides jr <psides at carl.net>
Subject: Re: Luddites

Dave Burley typed:

>I didn't call anyone a Luddite. But, Robin,
>if the shoe fits...

I was thinking "Unabrewer" but Robin's brevity threw me ;-)

Phil Sides, Jr.
Concord, NH
- --
Macht nicht o'zapft ist, Prost!




Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 04 Jan 2000 23:30:03 -0600
From: John Wilkinson <jandjwilkins at earthlink.net>
Subject: French wine

Although I agree with much of what Dave Burley has to say about GM
products and protectionism, I have to say I have yet to taste an
American red wine equal to a decent Bordeaux, or even a good Chianti. 
Yhe only California reds I have tasted that might compare to moderately
priced Bordeaux were several times the price.  I have tasted nothing
from the U.S. so far that is anywhere close to a classified growth
Bordeaux.  Of course, this is my own preference and I know there are
people who probably know more than I do of wine who praise California
reds.  For me, there is no comparison to Bordeaux.  And a Reserva Ducale
Chianti beats any U.S. red I have had.  If Dave or anyone else knows of
a U.S red in the league with a good Bordeaux, Chianti, or Barolo, let me
know.  At a comparable price or not.

>The Appellation Controllee is a classic
>example of market control in which the
>volume of wine entering the market is
>controlled by a strict acreage limit and
>to the benefit of a few powerful chateaus
>who were in political control in the
>1850s.  Only the developments in the 
>US which ignored French "terrior" 
>arguments proved we can make better
>wines. Now French winemakers are
>racing to catch up. But they didn't
>for over a hundred years, because 
>it was not to their benefit. The result:
>crappy wines from France for most
>wine drinkers. It is changing today
>because of technology
>improvements.

John Wilkinson - Grapevine, Texas


Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2000 00:53:11 EST
From: Biergiek at aol.com
Subject: Lab Rat Questions

Hello Ladies, Gentlemen, & the vermin from Western, MI.  I need some
expertise from the lab:

1)  What is the function of wort pH versus temperature? (, i.e., if the wort
pH is 5.8 at 80F what is the pH at 150F, etc.)

2)  I am interested in zinc chloride, not as scarry as it sounds, its just
a fetish with me.  What I would like to know is if I add 1 gram of this stuff
in 1 gallon of water what is the yield of zinc and chloride ions in ppm?

If you are real nice to me I will tell you why.

Don't know about you, but I have enjoyed JackS and Zymie in the
thunder dome, all we need now is for Burley to wear a black and white
striped shirt and Dr. Pivo to MC the fight: "get ready to
rumbllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll
llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllle"!

Thanks,

from the chemistry impaired,

Kyle
Bakersfield, CA


Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 05 Jan 2000 00:03:53 -0600
From: John Wilkinson <jandjwilkins at earthlink.net>
Subject: (no subject)

Don Van Valkenburg wrote:

>Here is a method I have used with success to make a port.
>- ---I'll get to the method, but first the story---
>I have been making wine a couple years now and always reluctant to toss the
>skins after pressing as my process is not extremely efficient and there is a
>lot of juice left in the skins.    I add sugar/water (or honey/water) back
>on top of the skins and do a second fermentation, and wine, albeit of lesser
>quality.   This  second wine became the perfect candidate for
>experimentation.  It was a drinkable table wine, but not something I would
>enter into a contest.

This sounds like what the Italians call Grappa, except Grappa is
distilled.

John Wilkinson - Grapevine, Texas


Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2000 08:43:15 +0200 
From: Ant Hayes <Ant.Hayes at FifthQuadrant.co.za>
Subject: Re: Fermentation Temperature

Doug McCullough said,
"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."

I had a similar experience recently. I am using a yeast that has a range of
8C to 11C (46 to 52F). Unfortunately my unmodified brew fridge only goes up
to 6C. I gave it a try anyway, as ambient is currently about 25. Much to my
horror, the temp of the beer after 2 days was sitting around 12. Fridge
interior ambient was at 6.

Ant Hayes


Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 05 Jan 2000 06:09:56 -0500
From: Dan Cole <dcole at roanoke.infi.net>
Subject: Slightly OT: deleading pewter flask

I hope everone will forgive me for this slightly OT question, but has
anyone tried the standard brass deleading method on pewter? 

I received a nice pewter whiskey flask, but it came with instructions to
not leave any alcoholic beverage in it for more than 24 hours. Looking in
the company's catalog some they offer are deleaded, but that description is
notably missing in the description of this flask (which is the reason for
the 24 hour limit, I am sure).

Will the peroxide and vinegar solution work on pewter (remove the lead and
not cause any other damage)?

Thanks,
Dan Cole
Roanoke, VA


Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2000 08:14:45 -0500
From: "Alan Meeker" <ameeker at welchlink.welch.jhu.edu>
Subject: Tannin extraction in late sparge

Louis Bonham  responds to Paul's questions regarding tannin extraction:

> 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.

Is the critical parameter here pH? I maintain my sparge pH around 5.5-6.0 so
as to limit the extraction of tannins but I haven't really seen any good
(scientific) data as to how protective this actually is.

Also, I'm a bit confused by your "10X relative to wort gravity figure."  The
way I read this it sounds like the concentration of polyphenols is staying
relatively constant while the suger concentration falls with sparging thus
the 10X relative increase. I'll have to check the Lewis table. If
polyphenols themselves were being extracted at a rate 10X higher than they
were in the early sparge then the later comment you make - that the majority
of tannins come out in the first runnings - doesn't make sense because it
would mean that each gallon of late sparge has the polyphenol equivalent of
/10 gallons/ of first runnings!

> 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.

I must say, the more I hear/think about the no-sparge method the more
attractive it becomes...

 -Alan Meeker




Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2000 08:26:56 -0500
From: "Alan Meeker" <ameeker at welchlink.welch.jhu.edu>
Subject: Burleyisms

Robin Griller and Ken Schramm take Dave Burley to task for his outrageous
statements/behavior on the HBD. Watch out you guys! Burley's response to
similar comments I made recently was to threaten me with a lawsuit!!
Apparently he is "keeping a file" on me. Whatever. I simply don't have the
time to respond to all the bizarre statements he makes. The best I can do is
to warn people to take whatever he says with a HUGE grain of salt...

 -Alan Meeker (graciously accepting contributions towards my legal defense
fund)



Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 05 Jan 2000 08:19:00 -0600
From: "Brett A. Spivy" <baspivy at softdisk.com>
Subject: WHY would you refit with THESE costs??!?

in HBD # 3212, Sandy Wrote:

Costs will vary but mine were as follows

Hydro test to 3500 psig US$ 15
Machining               US$ 15
New CO2 vale            US$ 30

If you are going to spend $60 on a bottle plus another $40-$50 for a
regulator and guages, that's like a $15 savings and a LOT of work.

If your extinguisher is one of those posh looking ones that used to hang

in my old high school (they were brass or crome with lots of stamping
and looked great polished-up), I'll send you $15 and my UPS account
number.  You can ship me the collectable and go buy yourself a tank.

Brett A. Spivy
Stolen Cactus Brewery
(thinking one of those old brass fire extinguishers would look rather
smart hanging in the pool room)



Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2000 09:46:54 -0500
From: Mark_Ohrstrom/Humphrey_Products at humphreypc.com
Subject: GMOs

Will the creators of GMOs assume *personal* responsibility/liability for
their creations?  Or, will they take the usual route of lobbying our
esteemed lawmakers to limit their liability, as done by the nuclear and
software industries?  I sense another cost shift to the citizen coming ...

The technology is powerful, the risk/benefit analysis incomplete (but
trending toward Our risk/Their benefit), the potential consequences are
huge, and the understanding is tenuous.  Doesn't give me a warm fuzzy ...


Mark (Developing that "Brewsters"/PgDn Twitch) in Kalamazoo

GMOs: Another Great Idea From the Same Folks Who Gave Us
     Kudzu and Nuclear Power and Love Canal and DDT and Y2K and ...




Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2000 10:05:42 -0500
From: "Philip J Wilcox" <pjwilcox at cmsenergy.com>
Subject: pH at end of sparge

Bret and others have been discussing tannins and pH. I thought I would like to
take this discussion back a step to where it might be of more use to the General
Digest population, not to mention myself...

Santa gave me a pH meter for Christmas. A few more brain cells in my stocking
would have been helpfull during my last brew. I accidently acidified my Bohemian
Pils sparge water (Culligan) to a pH of 3.7 Oops. I diluted as much as I could
and got it up to 3.9. (arhg) The pH of the final run off was 5.2 and the pH of
the full kettle volume was 5.3.  I gave a collective Whew!  and went about the
rest of the brew. I forgot

What potential damage did I create? If a higher pH causes extraction of tannins
and the such, what does going below the recommended 4.8 minnimum mark do for
your sparge?

What is the recommened technique for adding the typical 88% lactic acid to your
sparge water to reduce its pH?

Phil Wilcox
Poison Frog Home Brewery
32 miles west of JR




Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2000 10:20:00 -0500 (EST)
From: Some Guy <pbabcock at hbd.org>
Subject: Hey, now...

Greetings, Beerlings! Take me to your lager...

Hey, now folks! Let's lighten up. Things have been getting a wee bit
personal lately. This any way to enter 2000?

Please: if you wouldn't say it to one's face, don't say it in on the
Digest. It just lessens it for us all...

 -
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: Wed, 5 Jan 2000 09:23:07 -0500
From: Jeff Renner <nerenner at umich.edu>
Subject: Re: kegging

"Dan Michael" <dmichael at avuhsd.k12.ca.us> writes:
> I am about to experience my first kegging experience.

>1.  when I prime my beer and put it into the keg
> should I give it a blast of co2,
> how much?

I like to purge the keg in a non-anal fashion by hooking the CO2 up to the
beer out fitting and just flush it from the bottom up that way.  I us
fairly low pressure so I get a minimum of turbulence in the keg and a
minimum of mixing.  I like to think that I'm pushing all the sir out from
the bottom.  Of course it isn't perfect.  If I am being anal, I fill the
keg with water, seal it and push the water out with CO2.  Now I have a
sealed keg full of CO2.  Then I fill it from the keg that I've cleverly
used as a secondary by pushing it with CO2.

However, before you prime you keg, read on.

>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.

I never prime my kegs.  I just carbonate with the CO2 from the tank.  That
way I have no (or little) sediment, so I can transport the keg.  It also
adds no additional alcohol from the priming - that's good in my mind.  If
I'm in no hurry, I just attach the gas at maybe 10 psi (at serving temp for
an English ale, 52-55F) and wait a few days or a week.  I check the
carbonation level by dropping the pressure to a couple psi or so and try a
bit.  I lower the pressure so the beer doesn't decarbonate on serving so I
can check more accurately.  When I'm in a hurry, I turn the pressure way up
to 30 psi or even more and shake.  Over time I've learned from the rate of
gas flow how long to do this.  I keep turning the pressure down and
listening.  This works well even for higher carbonated styles like
pilsners.  Since they are colder, the CO2 goes in faster.  Here is where
I've often been anal about purging the keg.  I've gone from secondary to
carbonated beer in less than an hour.  And, to repeat, I get fine bubbles
and great head retention.

Often I seal the secondary keg before the fermentation is quite over and
then transfer carbonated beer in a closed system to a purged and sealed
serving keg.  And sometimew when I'm being lazy and know that I'm not going
to move the keg, I just seal up the secondary and leave the beer there the
whole time.  I might not do this if the beer is going to be on for a long
time.  In that case, I like to get rid of the sediment to avoid yeast
autolysis.
>
>What is the best way
> I am having trouble getting
> the liquid and gas fittings off
>to replace the o-rings and sanitize

I use ball locks, but there are tools made for pin locks.  You can just cut
slots in sockets.  I sterilize in a pressure cooker after I've disassembled
and cleaned the fittings.  There are parts that you can't get to.

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, 5 Jan 2000 07:01:21 -0500
From: dleavitt at sescva.esc.edu (Darrell Leavitt)
Subject: Hats of to Whitelabs WLP500 Trappist Ale Yeast!


  I recently brewed a high gravity Trappist Ale, from the slurry from a
previous batch of "Trappist Light" (is there really such a thing?), which
came out at 3.78 ABW, and I was pleasantly surprised that it had fermented
out all/ nearly all the way.  I had prepared a rehydrated packet of Mountmel-
/// I mean Montrachet/// wine yeast as I transferred into the secondary, just
in case the gravity was too high...I wasn
't interested in having a 'cloyingly sweet' brew (as others on this list have
previously referred to such "mistakes"),....but I did not have to use it as
the final gravity HAD come down to 1.01!  I was very pleasantly surprised,
and therefore wish to say : Hats off to Whitelabs wlp500! That's one heck
of a yeast!

  Now I will present the recipe, so that those here who know lots more than
me might comment upon the technique, ingredients, or my surprise:

3 gallons of water into pot (20 qt kettle, so I usually have to do a partial
boil, and at times add water to the carboy after chillin')

Strike temp around 160 F

Took temp up to 148 F for 60 minutes beta rest

Took temp up to 158 F for alpha rest

INgredients included:
8 lb Franco-Belgian Pils (from North Country Malt Supply)
4 lb Halcyon
1/8 cup Black Malt
1/2 lb Brown sugar (in the boil)
1/4 lb Wheat DME (in the boil)
4 oz Malto-dextrin (in the boil) [I had no dextrin malt and wanted to increase
the body some way..]

Recirculated until somewhat clear (I am never sure just how ling to keep doing
this...ie until all of the little "floaties" as I call them disappear, or just
until most of them do)

Sparged with about 3 1/2 gallons 170 (about) F water.

used 1 oz Northern Brewer  at  start of boil.
     1 oz Fuggles  at  30
     1 oz Saaz  at  15

hops were 8.6, 4.5, and 3.4 % respectively.

The first runnings were 1.15
The original gravity, 1.095, after adding about 3/4 gallon of water to the
carboy (all I could get in without risking blow over), was the reason that I
was both concerned and later pleased with the performance of the yeast.

I pitched slurry (about 1 1/2 - 2 inches thick from a 1/2 gallon growler)..I
suppose that this is about 400-500 ml?

I tried to keep, and was succesful, the temp between 160 and 164 F.

I named this batch "Coachmen's Brew", after the description of a Trappist
Double in one of Papazian's books...but I wonder if the alc content (maybe
nearly 9 percent) should qualify it as a Tripple?)

I tasted it as it went into the secondary and while the alc was evident, to me
it did not overwhelm the wonderful flavor of the Trappist yeast...

I will bottle this in 12 oz, rather than 16 oz bottles due to the gravity of
tthe situation...sure wish I had 6 or 8 oz bottles.
Any comments upon the recipe, or the technique would be greatly appreciated. I
have few brewers near me so a lot of what I do is without much
"guidance"...and by the way I did not take the pH....usually I do, but didn't 
this time.
 ..Darrell
<Terminally INtermediate Home-brewer>


Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2000 10:40:14 -0500 
From: "Czerpak, Pete" <Pete.Czerpak at siigroup.com>
Subject: munich and low extraction

It seems that the general thoughts on German Munich malts are that they
perform slightly less impressively that normal base malts.  I also have read
that people like to use a low temperature mash (<152F) or multi-rest mash.

If I mashed at 154 to 156F using a single infusion and my normal water-grist
ratio of about 1 qt/lb, would these numbers cause me troubles when compared
to HBD experience with Weyermanns dark munich?

Thanks for any info.  Happy Holidays.

Pete Czerpak
Albany, NY


Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 05 Jan 2000 08:49:08 -0700 (MST)
From: jliddil at VMS.ARIZONA.EDU
Subject: No future

I bleleive the jackson belgian beer book can be found at the vanberg and
dewulf web site.


> 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.  

But hey at least they make us think and question. :-) And as always page
down.  
> 
> Dave, the general public is suspicious of capitalism, the chemical
> industry, the car companies and the government for one reason:  
> we have been burned.  

Yea, I think communism or socialism wouldbe way better (it's a joke)

> Hooker Chemical, Dioxin in our fish, Thalidomide, Car companies 

Actually thalidomide was only a problem in Europe.  Because of FDA stuff
it never got approved here.  and even now getting it approved for cancer
treatment has been a real pain.  check pubmed for information and sited
sources.

> 
> 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 

Well to look at it in a totally nihlistic way, humans have only been in
existance for a blip in the time continuum (unless of course you are a
creationist) so BFD if we last another few years and die. The futures
uncertain and the end is always near.

Jim Liddil North Haven, CT



Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2000 17:00:57 +0100
From: Fredrik Stahl <Fredrik.Stahl at math.umu.se>
Subject: Re: German Beer

Sorry, I am a bit behind on my HBD reading. I just had to comment on Jack's
question on German Beers in HBD #3190:

>She liked Wurzburger Hofbrau  Pilsner but could not find the brewery when she
>was in Wurzburg.  Anyone know where it is? And what is the connection between
>this and the Hofbrau Haus.

I've visited Wuerzburger Hofbraeu twice, the last time was this summer. It
is located in the outskirts of Wuerzburg (surprise!), but as far as I
remember it is a bit hard to find. I think it is on the eastern side of the
river Main. It is not a very exciting visit, the brewery being very
high-tech, so there's mostly closed systems with stainless equipment and
machinery. Visiting breweries in Bamberg is much more fun...

I don't care very much for their Pilsner, though it's a decent "eurolager",
I guess. They make one of the best hefeweizens though, Julius Echter, IMO.
It varies a bit, but it's wonderful at its best. Also, you must try their
"1643" if you get the chance. It's a well-hopped pilsener with wonderful
hop aromas and a big round maltiness. Yum!

On the other hand, don't forget to sample the delicious Franken wines while
you are there. There is nothing like a good Spaetlese trocken from Franken!

/Fredrik Stahl, Sweden




Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2000 10:58:09 -0600
From: "Stephen and Carolyn Ross" <rosses at sprint.ca>
Subject: priming kegs and RIMS heating

Hi beer lovers,

Dan Michael" <dmichael at avuhsd.k12.ca.us> asks about priming his kegs.

I have never primed my kegs, so I can't do a comparison between primed and
force carbonated kegs. But I sure enjoy hassle free consistent
carbonation -what a change from bottling!  The only reason I would not force
carbonate is if I were to attempt a "cask" conditioned ale in my SS cornys-
an attempt that would be a tad oxymoronic perhaps, but still fun to do.

CO2 is so cheap and force priming with a regulator gives consistent levels
of carbonation and minimizes sediment. YMMV. Also, there is no waiting
period. I can dispense beer almost immediately if I'm willing to agitate the
keg, or the next morning (beer for breakfast!) if I'm feeling lazy.

For something completely different, I am attempting to connect my email
program to my RIMS so I can heat the mash with flames from the HBD.  I'm
sure it would cut my energy costs substantially, and it appears to be a
self-renewing sustainable resource...

cheers!

Stephen Ross
Saskatoon, SK
"Vitae sine cerevesiae sugat."



Return to table of contents


Date: 05 Jan 2000 10:52:02 -0500
From: RCAYOT at solutia.com
Subject: GM foods, Safety, Early Racking

     I tried to stay out of the GM food discussion, but I just can't!  The 
     con-GM food argument has gone "prove to me it is safe"  well, has 
     anyone EVER proven anything SAFE?  I think not!  Beer, is it SAFE?  I 
     think not!  Think of all the DUI accidents caused by Beer!  Come on 
     folks, to say that GM foods are not good, just look at many poorer 
     parts of the world, they still use DDT to control pests!  Now some 
     would think that the judicious use of pesticides is preferable to the 
     "Dangerous Practice" of inserting a gene for the BT protein that makes 
     catepillars get diarhea!  Personally, I believe there are so many 
     other things that can and do go wrong with our food supply that we 
     don't know about, the worry over GM foods is really hype!  As for the 
     Bovine Growth Hormone (BGH), a natural hormone that exists in milk.  
     How can one object that it is not safe?  I suppose thqt if you drink 
     two glasses of milk a day instead of one you would get twice as much 
     BGH, is that cause for alarm?  Should we limit the amount of milk we 
     drink because of the naturally occuring BGH?  The REAL concern about 
     BGH was the increased use of antibiotics because cows treated with BGH 
     tended to get SLIGHTLY more teat irritation.  How much more 
     antibiotics?  Are they safe?  Are antibiotics used by others in the 
     food industry?  We've had that discussion....   Look I don't give a 
     rats ass about the introduction of GM foods, they help agribusiness, 
     make our food more bland and uniform, and make money for investors.  
     On the other hand, american farmers are being shut out of European 
     markets so the French and others can subsidize thier inefficient farms 
     to preserve a way of life in rural France.  which is, I guess 
     something they can do if they choose, but PLEEAASSEEE don't believe 
     that the hype spewed by the opponents of GM foods are in it for 
     anything more altruistic that the makerrs of the GM products!  Nobody 
     has a clean motive here, certainly not one that is looking out for 
     YOUR health!  (A bit cynical no?).  
     
     No wfor the beer content:  I have used the early racking practice 
     often, I don't have any quantitative data on the subject.  I think the 
     benefit of trub during fermentation can be overcome with oxygenation 
     if using a high quality all grain wort.  I think it may be especially 
     beneficial if you are re-pitching yeast that has not been washed, 
     drawn off from a cylindroconical in layers etc.  The dead yeast, trub 
     etc that can be carried into the beer with the wort, and the pitching 
     yeast will settle fairly rapidly.  By transfering the beer of the 
     sediment early, you can leave behind a lot of garbage, and carry over 
     only the active yeast that reamians in suspension.  This will also 
     help clean up the yeast for the next pitching etc.  Usual problems 
     with the practice might be contamination and aeration which can be 
     guarded against using simple precautions.
     
     Roger Ayotte 



Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2000 09:03:39 -0800
From: "Don Van Valkenburg" <ferment at flash.net>
Subject: Co2 /Nitrogen mix

MIKE BRANAM writes about using CO2 and Nitrogen.

I have checked into this with the gas supplier that supplies a local British
style pub that pours about 15 English ales, Guinness etc.   They push ALL
their beers with the same Co2 and Nitrogen mix.

The mix does not make any difference (carbonation level) to the ales such as
Bass and Fullers that use a standard tap.  As a matter of fact they come out
appropriately low in carbonation with a fairly high head pressure.

The reason I was told they use the mix was so that they can use a higher
pressure without overly carbonating the beer. Bartenders like to have the
beer come out sufficiently fast so it doesn't take forever to pour a pint.
Nitrogen does not go into solution.

Further, I was told by the distributor that supplies the gas;  it requires a
special valve that mixes the gas.  This valve has a dip tube that goes to
the bottom of the cylinder.  Nitrogen and Co2 are of different weights and
one settles to the bottom - I think Co2. Thus if you could find a gas
supplier that is willing to put both gasses in the same cylinder (they don't
do this), and used a standard valve, the gasses would not come out in a mix.

The actual dispensing valve is what creates the turbulence that cases the
Guinness effect.  I have seen several clubs with this type of tap at the S.
Cal Homebrew fest.  I don't think they were using any nitrogen to push the
beer.

I once tried to simply push a stout with pure nitrogen and noticed no
difference at first.   The beer was first carbonated with a Co2 cylinder.
But when the keg got low, the beer actually started to go flat!

Don Van Valkenburg
www.steinfillers.com






Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2000 11:02:31 -0600 
From: rlabor at lsumc.edu (LaBorde, Ronald)
Subject: RE: Fermentation Temperature

From: Doug.A.Mccullough at bridge.bellsouth.com

>...I taped a digital thermometer to the outside
>of the fermenter with the metal probe resting against the outside of the
>stainless fermenter...

I did the same thing to a glass fermenter, but used a bunge cord instead of
tape.

>I am finding that fermentation significantly increases the wort
temperature.

Yes, that surprised me at how much 5 - 10 F over what I previously thought
my fermentations were. I first began to notice this when I purchased a
couple of those stick on chemical thermometers, which by the way, are
accurate, or at least close to the digital thermometer to within 1 to 1.5 F.
I think this has improved my beers by a noticeable amount.


>...For example, take my oatmeal stout...

Great! Send it to me right away  :^)

 ========

News flash! - This has not been confirmed yet, but I just discovered what
may be a handy carboy drier/drainer. I have seen a carboy placed upside down
onto a corny keg with the lid removed.  The keg was the type with rubber
covering the whole top, like most that are around. I will have to try this
and see if it works as well as it looks.

Ron

Ronald La Borde - Metairie, Louisiana - rlabor at lsumc.edu
http://members.xoom.com/rlabor/



Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 05 Jan 2000 12:07:49 -0500
From: Michael Kitt <mkitt at mnsinc.com>
Subject: re: Old Peculier recipe

Here's my Old Peculier recipe. My father-in-law, Roy, is from Harrogate,
Yorkshire. He says it tastes like the original.

6 lb Light extract
1/2 lb  Chocolate malt
1/2 lb Roasted barley
1 lb Turbinado sugar
4 oz Unsulphured molasses (added late in the boil)
1 1/2 oz Fuggles hops pellets (4.8% a.a.) - 60 minutes
1 pk London Ale Yeast - Wyeast 1318
2 oz Lactose (boiled in water and added to secondary during racking from
primary)

Steep grains in water at 155 degrees F. for 30 minutes.
Bring wort to boil, then add extract, sugar, hops.
Boil for 45 minutes, then add molasses (or treacle if you can find it).
Boil another 15 minutes. Cool. Pitch yeast, etc.



Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2000 12:49:23 -0500
From: Robin Griller <rgriller at chass.utoronto.ca>
Subject: ok, I lied...

Hi all,

Ok it turns out that wasn't my last post on the subject. Sorry, but there
was an article in the Toronto Globe and Mail (front page) yesterday that
was just too interesting. Apparently a nonapproved Monsanto gm seed was
accidentally crossed with an approved one, then sold to Canadian farmers,
and planted by at least two farmers before anyone realised. They then had
to convince farmers to return the seed and/or plow the crop. One farmer
refused and it took time to convince him. When they weighed all the seed
they got back, it turns out not all of it was returned. Monsanto says the
discrepancies (of 1,000s of lbs of seed) were due to 'weighing error'
rather than missing seed. They then dumped all this seed in land fill (the
article didn't say whether they did anything to prevent it from growing
and spreading first). The government and Monsanto say the seed isn't
dangerous, but, then, as Ken Schramm pointed out yesterday, they would say
that wouldn't they?

Robin



Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 05 Jan 2000 14:08:30 -0500
From: Richard Foote <rfoote at mindspring.com>
Subject: Beer Gas

MIKE BRANAM writes:
>
>
>     
>     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

I recently got a 20 lb. tank of beer gas (mixture of N2 and CO2).  Nitrogen
tanks are used for beer gas. They differ from CO2 tanks in that they have a
threaded female fitting at the top of the tank.  This makes the female
fitting on the CO2 regulator incompatible.  You can still use your CO2
regulator if you buy an adpater for about $10.  I got mine where I bought
the beer gas--Holox.  I traded in my 20 lb. CO2 tank for the Nitrogen tank
filled with beer gas.  I think the beer gas cost about $18.

You'd be better off using a Guinness style faucet.  It has a small
stainless disc with four pin holes through which the beer is forced to
flow.  Apparently, this is what foces the N2 into soln to whip up the
Guinness head we all know and love.  Other beers may benefit from the use
of beer gas.  Many commercial draft systems, especially long draw, use beer
gas (or at least some measure of N2) because the increased operating
pressures required to push beer to the tap would overcarbonate the beer if
CO2 alone were used.  It also, as we know, increases head retention and
gives a certain smoothness to mouthfeel. 

Rick Foote
Georgia Yankee
Whistle Pig Brewery




Return to table of contents

---