---

	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:
  Fraunce's Tavern/Weyermann's dark Munich malt (MVachow)
  Paulaner clone? or a close second? (spostek)
  Real CP Fillers vs "El Cheapo" CP Fillers (The Artist Formerly Known As Kap'n Salty)
  Re: kegging (Gary Melton)
  GMOs (Demonick)
  Re: Thalidomide-FDA (Jim Liddil)
  Rats! (Mark_Ohrstrom/Humphrey_Products)
  Real Fermentation temperature ("John Elsworth")
  Yield from Extract (CALNZAS)" <Tony.Ackland at comalco.riotinto.com.au>
  Zinc,  pH - lactic  acid ("Alan Meeker")
  carrots and grains of salt (Dave Burley)
  early racking (Ken Pendergrass)
  how do you measure the last runnings? (Bryan Gros)
  WPL 500 yeast, pewter, and small bottles ("Sean Richens")
  California Wine is Fine! (Brian Kuhl)
  B Brite (ALABREW)
  Fw: Nitrogen Dispensing at SoCal Homebrew Fest ("Don Van Valkenburg")
  Hop utilization with a low horsepower CF chiller? (William Macher)
  Posting rights, Mixed gas bottle (Pat Babcock)
  You say tomato, I say tomacco! (Peter Owings)
  HBD Fund Raiser: AllAdvantage.com (Pat Babcock)
  Malt mill ("Alex MacGillivray")
  RE: Beer diets 2000 (Bob Sheck)
  Hop loss ("Brian Dixon")
  re: Feelings on early racking (John_E_Schnupp)
  Re: Inconsistent carbonation (KMacneal)
  RE: CO2 Shipping.... ("Kelly")


* 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: Thu, 6 Jan 2000 09:26:07 -0600 
From: MVachow at newman.k12.la.us
Subject: Fraunce's Tavern/Weyermann's dark Munich malt

	Caught a little page 8 article in my hometown rag yesterday that
mentioned the closing of Fraunce's Tavern in New York City.  This haunt of
Wall Street money jocks has been in operation since the mid-18th century and
was George Washington's favorite pub.  The tavern's early history is covered
in great detail in Gregg Smith's Beer in America, a fun, informative read if
beer history turns you on.  

	Pete inquires about a single infusion mash at 154-6 for Weyermann's
dark Munich.  Pete, I just finished brewing up a bag of this malt.  I brewed
an alt, a doppelbock, a 50/50 Munich/2-row Christmas beer, and an export
lager.  I went into the project with a little bit of info from Weyermann's
web page.  I took Weyermann's claim that their malts are highly modified as
equatable to the kind of no-brainer extraction I get from my house 2-row,
Great Western.  The all-Munich alt, mashed at 150 for 90", had a
disappointing extraction around 70%.  I usually hit 75-80% at that temp on
straight-up pale ales with Great Western 2-row on my picnic cooler set-up.
The doppelbock was a single decoction on which I missed my 154 final rest
and had to add boiling water.  Nevertheless, I got a little better
extraction than on the single infusion, around 72%.  For the Christmas beer,
I decided not to mess with mash temps or add extra rests betting on the
2-row to aid in conversion.  This bet paid off; I got about 76% extraction
and, most importantly, one of the best beers I've brewed in quite a while. I
banked on the same principle with the export which was about 30/70
Munich/pils malt and got the same 76% extraction.  The final results of my
experimentation (i.e. fiddling around unscientifically with a bag of malt)
were that this malt is not as well modified as domestic 2-row, yet it is by
no means temperamental; 154 and perhaps higher mash temps work better than
the lower temps I can get away with on domestic 2-row based beers; because I
dumped in a lot of boiling water, a thin mash might have hurt the final
extraction in my doppelbock; a sizeable proportion of 2-row in a recipe
seems to ameliorate whatever limited finnicky enzymatic characteristics the
Munich has; all the beers dropped clear quickly, the major reason I didn't
bother with multi-step mashes; finally, and most importantly, it was all
worth it as every one of these beers has a rich malty quality that I've
never gotten before with aromatic malt and other adjuncts.  The doppelbock
wound up on the high end in terms of gravity for a bock, but it's rich,
raisiny, chocolatey flavors and deep reddish brown color were doppelbock all
the way.  All of these flavors were attributable to the Munich as the recipe
otherwise contained a little crystal and no other adjuncts.   

Mike
New Orleans, LA


Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2000 10:37:25 US/Eastern
From: spostek at voicenet.com
Subject: Paulaner clone? or a close second?

I'm fairly new to brewing (4 batches) and
have taken one step past all-extract brewing
to extract with specialty grains and unhopped
malt extracts with my latest American Pale Ale.
Could someone suggest a good Paulaner Weizen
clone recipe?  I have read in previous posts
that Wyeast 3068 is the best to use to obtain
that true to form bananna flavor.  Please
pass any you have along it would be greatly
appreciated.

spostek at voicenet.com


- ---------------------------------------------
This message was sent using Voicenet WebMail.
      http://www.voicenet.com/webmail/




Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 06 Jan 2000 15:42:27 GMT
From: mikey at swampgas.com (The Artist Formerly Known As Kap'n Salty)
Subject: Real CP Fillers vs "El Cheapo" CP Fillers

Anyone ever had any experience comparing the performance of real CP
bottle fillers to just jamming a tube onto the end of a picnic faucet
and just filling the bottle very slowly with very cold beer? I'm
considering the purchase of a CP filler, but am wondering if it's
really necessary.

Michael Owings -- Chairman, Allan Meeker Defense Fund
$1.43 and counting


Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2000 08:08:04 -0800 (PST)
From: Gary Melton <meltongl at yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: kegging

Jeff Renner said (on carbonating in kegs):

> 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.

I have a comment and a question about this.  I recently bought some
kegs and went to the local fire extinguisher company to get a CO2
tank.  He sold me a used tank and asked if I wanted to get a
regulator.  I had been looking online, but figured I would avoid the
wait and get it from him.

I brewed a batch and began reading up on kegging.  I was in a hurry,
so I decided to try the "turn up the pressure and shake" method.
After shaking a while, I turned the pressure down.  I was horrified
to see the beer go up the gas tube and start bubbling out of my
regulator.

After that I did some more reading and learned of the benefits of
one-way check valves.  Obviously, my regulator did not have one.  I
was surprised how infrequently they were mentioned in the literature.
 

So my comment is, if you are starting to keg, make sure your
regulator has a check valve, and if it doesn't, buy one separately to
put in your line.

My question is, is my regulator ruined?  I would assume it would be a
constant source of infections, so I have planned on scrapping it.  Is
there anything I can do to clean it?  If not, does anyone have a use
for a contaminated regulator?

Thanks for any help.

Bud Melton
meltongl at yahoo.com
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger.
http://im.yahoo.com


Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2000 08:44:04 -0800
From: Demonick <demonick at zgi.com>
Subject: GMOs

Much of the discussion - way OT - concerning genetically modified
organisms has taken the following distrustful, motive besmirching,
science-bashing tone:

From: Mark_Ohrstrom/Humphrey_Products at humphreypc.com
>GMOs: Another Great Idea From the Same Folks Who Gave Us
>     Kudzu and Nuclear Power and Love Canal and DDT and Y2K and ...

(I am not singling out Mark with my ire.  There is no ire here.
I'm simply using his comment as a representative sound bite.)

I don't really want to get into a religious discussion, and I even
hesitate to point out that the same "people" bringing you GMOs are the
same "people" who brought you indoor plumbing, sewage treatment,
calculus, light bulbs, radio, antibiotics, AZT, chemo-therapy,
bone-marrow transplants, bypass surgery, insulin, human growth
hormone, flu vacines, oil and sludge eating bacteria, blood
coagulation factors, blood coagulation inhibitors, space travel,
communications satellites, cellular phones, personal computers, VCRs,
CDs, DVDs, the Internet (including this forum) microwave ovens,
convection ovens, aviation, plastics, and high-yield farming to
support the 6+ billion of us.

I work for a company that creates and uses GMOs extensively.  For
example, the strain of brewer's yeast that includes the human gene for
insulin which allows the manufacturers (Eli Lilly and Novo-Nordisk) to
quite literally brew insulin.  Before the use of GMOs to brew insulin
people used extracted cow or pig insulin which always risked a whacko
immune response, or extracted human insulin if you couldn't tolerate
the animal products.  All of these extracted insulins ran the risk of
viral contamination, a risk absolutely eliminated by using the GMO
produced product.

Back in the 1980s MOST, yes, MOST, hemophiliacs died of AIDS due to
tainted blood products.  Whether through the use of whole blood or
extracted clotting factors MOST hemophiliacs contracted AIDS and are
now DEAD through no fault of their own.  The reagents used in the AIDS
and HepC tests were developed and may still be produced by GMOs.  
This means that you, yes YOU, can get a life-saving transfusion
without fear of AIDS or HepC.  YOU can get bypass or open heart or
appendix surgery without fear of AIDS or HepC.

Back in the mid-80s my company was using GMOs to investigate Factor
VII, a blood clotting factor.  At the time many hemophiliacs were
developing life-threatening immune responses to the extracted animal
and human clotting factors that they required to stay alive.  One such
young gentleman was in the throes of a terrible bleed that had been
progressing for many days.  He had built up anti-bodies to the
extracted products then available.  Nothing would control his bleed
and there was no doubt that he was dying, and would be dead within
hours or days.  We had produced human Factor VII in GMO'd yeast.  By
inserting the human gene for Factor VII into brewer's yeast we had
convinced the yeast to produce and excrete Factor VII which could then
be extracted from the cell-free media and purified.  Quickly getting
all of the requisite permissions (no mean feat when a guys life is
measured in hours) the gentleman was treated with our purified Factor
VII.  He quickly recovered and survived to this day.  A few months
after he had fully recovered he visited our little company to thank us
all personally.  There was not a dry eye in the place.  He epitomized
the reason that we were in business, why many of us had left
comfortable positions to create this personally risky, hare-brained
biotechnology company.

Such GMOs are now being used to produce human growth hormone, a bunch
of anti-viral proteins, wound healing proteins, blood coagulation and
coagulation inhibitor proteins, a bunch of industrial enzymes (enzyme
washed jeans), and numerous others.  Technology developed with GMOs is
used in forensic science to clear or convict (DNA testing).  It's used
to diagnose and treate disease.  It's used to produce household
products like laundry detergent, and industrial raw materials.

Erythopoietin, EPO, is a human protein, again produced in GMO'd yeast
that stimulates the production of red blood cells.  Obvious for the
treatment of anemia, it is more widely used for kidney dialysis
patients.  Red blood cells get banged up and wear out quickly in
dialysis machines.  The use of EPO means that people with compromised
kidney function that require dialysis, whether permanent or temporary,
can tolerate more and longer treatment, making them feel a lot better
and thereby greatly increasing their quality and length of life.

TPO, thrombopoietin, while not yet a commercially available product is
a protein, again produced by GMO'd yeast that stimulates the
production of platelets.  Platelets are required for blood to clot and
for some healthy immune responses and wound healing.  They are a high
turnover cell type, particularly sensitive to chemo and radiation
therapy during cancer treatment.  The number 1 reason for incomplete
courses of chemo and/or radiation treatment in the treatment of
various cancers is a dangerously low platelet count.  These patients
bleed into the elbows and knees resulting in huge, ugly bruises.  The
chemo/radiation treatment must cease, whether completed or not, or the
patient will bleed to death.  The future use of TPO for these
unfortunate people will mean that their cancer treatments can go full
course, and more people will survive the disease.

I got a million of 'em.

The point is, the same hubris that caused man to have the audacity to
think that they could shit indoors and simply flush it away rather
than squat bare-assed over a trench in the snow and live with the
subsequent disease from contaminated water, has powered all of human
progress.  Being a scientist involved in the endeavor to better the
human condition, I take serious offense at being characterized as
greedy, money-grubbing, corporation as god, f**k the consequences and
the people, do anything for a buck kind of guy.

I AM NOT.  No one at my company and no one that I know in the industry
is that kind of guy.

The ultimate point of what I do is to help people live better lives.  
A lesser point is, in fact, to make a buck, without which, no such
progress would be possible, and the earth could only support a few
hundred million of us living in the mud, cold, dying very young, and
suffering mightily while alive.

My suggestion to all those morbidly concerned about GMOs is to not.
Ignore Jeremy Rifkin, fasten your seat belts, stop smoking, eat your
vegatables, take your antioxidants, cherish the Bill of Rights, take
joy in your loved ones, take comfort in the religion of your choice,
and have a home brew.  Which, by the way, unless you are using a cake
of baker's yeast was brewed with a GMO.

Domenick Venezia
Computer Resources Manager
ZymoGenetics, Inc.
Seattle, WA
demonick at zgi dot com




Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 06 Jan 2000 11:46:14 -0500
From: Jim Liddil <jliddil at vms.arizona.edu>
Subject: Re: Thalidomide-FDA

- --On Thursday, January 06, 2000, 5:50 AM -0800 "H. Dowda"
<hdowda at yahoo.com> wrote:

> Jim,
> 
> Seems thalidomide was approved in the USA specifically
> for use in pregnantwomen...hummm, will have to check
> that.  I know we have thalidomide babies (now MOL
> middle aged), in US.  Maybe they weren't born here.
> 
> Harold Dowda 

I was not completely right about the approval of thalidomide.  But it seems
all the birth defects were outside the united states.  but I guees my real
point was that it is important not to take things as the gospel.  do a
little research.  And I suppose there are people out there who think prozac
led to columbine.  

"The drug thalidomide has a long FDA history. Thalidomide was approved in
Europe in 1957. A US marketing application was reviewed by the Agency in
1960 and was not approved because of concerns about neuropathy
associated with use of the drug. While the Agency was awaiting answers
to these concerns, the link between thalidomide use and an epidemic of
congenital malformations (phocomelia and other organ defects) occurring
in Europe was recognized and the drug was withdrawn from marketing. The
tragedy played a part in the debate around the 1962 amendments to the
Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act that resulted in specific
effectiveness requirements for drugs. "

http://www.fda.gov/cder/news/thalidomide.htm
http://www.pnc.com.au/~cafmr/online/research/thalid2.html
http://www.fda.gov/cder/news/thalinfo/default.htm

Jim Liddil  


Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2000 12:45:48 -0500
From: Mark_Ohrstrom/Humphrey_Products at humphreypc.com
Subject: Rats!

> Ladies, Gentlemen, & the vermin from Western, MI

Hey!  I resemble that remark!


Mark (If I Knew I'd Be a Brewer, I'd Have Paid Attention in Chem) in
Kalamazoo




Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 06 Jan 2000 13:30:17 EST
From: "John Elsworth" <jdelsworth at hotmail.com>
Subject: Real Fermentation temperature

The recent posts on the elevation of temperature during fermentation, 
reminded me of a question I had been meaning to post for a while.
Does the optimum fermentation temperature that is quoted for yeast strains 
refer to the room temperature or the average temperature in the primary?  I 
put this question to WYeast a while ago, and the e-mail response indicated 
that the recommended temperature referred to the actual temperature in the 
fermentor. Can anyone confirm this?  If true, the room temperature ideally 
should be significantly below the cited temperature.  Of course, the 
elevation during fermentation will be most pronounced during the time of 
most vigorous activity, so that the 5-10 degrees rise which has been 
mentioned probably lasts only a day or so. Perhaps a thermocouple immersed 
in the primary could be linked to the room temperature thermostat to achieve 
optimum temperature during the whole fermention period!

John Elsworth
Hamden, CT
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com



Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2000 18:50:08 -0000 
From: "Ackland, Tony (CALNZAS)" <Tony.Ackland at comalco.riotinto.com.au>
Subject: Yield from Extract

Gents,

I've read that theoretically, sugar will yield 51.1% ethanol, which
translates to around 48% for practical means, eg 1kg of sugar will produce
approx 0.48L of alcohol.

What is the expected yield from malt extract ? 

Tony


Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2000 14:43:36 -0500
From: "Alan Meeker" <ameeker at welchlink.welch.jhu.edu>
Subject: Zinc,  pH - lactic  acid

Kyle asks about ZnCl:
- -------------------------------------------------------------------
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?
- -------------------------------------------------------------------

OK.... let's see here, 1 ppm (w/v) is 1 mg/liter. There are 3.785 liters to
a U.S. gallon. So.... if you add 1 gram to 1 gallon (love these mixed units
Kyle!) that's 264 mg per liter final concentration or ...... Tah Dah! 264
ppm in your 1 gallon.

I'm gonna make a wild guess here and say you're thinking of adding this as a
yeast nutrient?? If so, then a recommended amount (MBAA handbook) errrr
correction - amount required by the yeast is 0.2 - 0.5 ppm of zinc. This
isn't counting the amount of zinc already present in your wort which will
vary with water source/treatment, type(s) and amounts of malts used, etc...
The ranges given for an "average" 12deg Plato all-grain wort are 0.1 - 0.15
mg/liter (0.1 - 0.15 ppm). It turns out that zinc availability also varies
depending on whether or not you remove trub but more on this later...

Note also that the 264ppm I calculated above is for zinc chloride not just
the zinc. Since zinc represents only 48% of the total weight of the zinc
chloride the actual zinc concentration in your solution will only be 127
ppm.

I hope I calculated all this right!

 -Alan



Philip Wilcox asked about phorphoric acid:

- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
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?
- -------------------------------------------------------------------------
Probably no damage. The pH of the run-off is fine so it probably went OK. I
think the concern would be what the pH of the actual mash was. If it was too
low then it could result in inactivation of the various enzymes, notably the
amylases which could lead to low efficiency and perhaps eventual starch haze
(just guessing about the starch haze). If your brewing water is close to the
oft quoted optima of 5.2 - 5.5 then the mash has a great capacity to "set
itself" into the correct range due primarily to the reaction of  malt
phosphate compounds and metal ions in the water - especially calcium and
magnesium. If you started at 3.9 that's a ways off but it probably set up
OK. How was your S.G.?

I don't know if there is a recommended technique for using lactic acid but
since you now have a pH meter you are golden! I use lactic to acidify my
sparge water. It only takes about a ml or two (maybe half a teaspoon) per
6-7 gallons of preboiled Baltimore tap water to get the pH in the 5.5 - 6.0
range. I'm using pH papers to measure this, you'll get much more accurate
readings with your meter.

 -Alan Meeker
 Baltimore







Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2000 14:59:14 -0500
From: Dave Burley <Dave_Burley at compuserve.com>
Subject: carrots and grains of salt

Brewsters:

Alan Meeker proved my point that 
your body could not possibly utilize
all that you eat, as though you are
a Bomb Calorimeter.. If you go back
you will find I did not quote anyone,
but used an example to make a point.
There is no way I could ever retrieve
everything I have ever read, so I said
so in my note.  Point is I was correct
that what we eat is not what our body
consumes, and Alan's carrot weighing
and approximation of caloric content
example proved that.

So the basic theory of calorie counting
as a dieting method is incorrect in its
strictest definition.

That was my point, not that you would
gain 135 pounds or 1200 pounds if you
ate one extra carrot a day beyond your
caloric needs.
- -------------------------
I did caution Alan in a private memo
to be sure to distinguish between
slander and comment when he made
threats to me to publish his personal
feelings toward me in the HBD, as 
though they were truths. Being 
forewarned by his threat,  I reminded
him that his comments were on file and
that he should be careful.

I would say that to anyone.

Also, be sure you consider the
source when Alan publishes anything
about me. Frankly, I don't know of
anything I ever did to Alan personally.
I can only guess it is because I question
his broad brush theories ( liike yeast
growth and dieting) and just do not
accept them 100% without discussion.

In other words, I take everything he
says with a grain of salt and he finds
that irritating. I'm guessing. No more
on this subject here.

The sad part is I like Alan and his
contributions.
- ------------------------
I also suggest that everyone
always take everything that I say
and what others say with a grain of salt.
The GM situation is a good example
of not enough of us questioning.

I thought I made a mistake once,
but I was wrong. {8^)
- -------------------------
Now let's get back to beer and
remember we are all here because 
we like beer and to brew it.
- --------------------------

Keep on Brewin'

Dave Burley


Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 05 Jan 2000 18:02:01 -0400
From: Ken Pendergrass <kenp794 at earthlink.net>
Subject: early racking

Re early racking

I follow the suggestions of Miller.  All of his books are great
especially so for beginners.  He was able to get me up and running very
quickly in all grain brewing.  Anyway what I do is rack my wort into a 5
gal. vessel after cooling with an imersion cooler. I then pitch all my
yeast and rack into whatever fermentation vessel I intend to use
sometime the next day.  I pitch a 1/2 gal. yeast culture. And have never
had a lag problem. I think of flocculation as what happens to yeast
cells after they become dormant not while there active. Racking at this
time will not rack off the yeast.  I don't know if my image of
flocculation is correct scientificly but it is working for me.
Ken
Ypsilanti,MI




Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2000 15:28:42 -0800 (PST)
From: Bryan Gros <blgros at yahoo.com>
Subject: how do you measure the last runnings?

Much debate about when to stop sparging and the 
dreaded results of sparging too far.

But on a practical level, Jeff and others, how do
you measure the gravity of your final runnings?
Whether you stop at 1.012 or 1.010 or 1.005?

I mean, I guess I can use a steel pitcher and
put the runnings in an ice batch, but it still
takes a few minutes to cool down and get a
gravity reading. Do you have a handy sachrometer
or something? Or do you stop sparging while you
figure out how close you are to your intended
stopping point?

Or do you do like me and sparge until you've got
enough wort and then measure the final runnings
to see what it was?

  - Bryan
    Oakland, CA
    Organizer, National Bay Area Brew Off 2000
    http://www.valhallabrewing.com/dboard/babo2000.htm
    Get your entries in before Jan 22!

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger.
http://im.yahoo.com


Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2000 18:04:24 -0600
From: "Sean Richens" <srichens at sprint.ca>
Subject: WPL 500 yeast, pewter, and small bottles

Darrell had good experiences with WPL500 yeast - I gather from the guesses
and inside info here and there that the first-line "trappist" yeast from
each supplier is usually believed to be Chimay.  I used a culture from a
bottle in a "millenial stout" and it went from 1.090-odd to 1.011.  It also
made my best-ever mild ale OG 1034.

Yeasts might have evolved under human care to do specific jobs well, but
it's really worth using those yeast cakes to investigate what they might do
under other conditions.

I got a really nice German pewter stein for Christmas.  I put it on my wish
list after we had a wasp infestation this summer which made me realize what
that lid is for.  Is there a metallurgist who could add a comment about
drinking beer from pewter (it does have a long history) or should I just
drink faster?

Finally, I heard (and saw) that Coca-cola is coming out in a "nostalgia"
issue of glass 8-oz bottles.  Sounds ideal for those millenial stouts, etc.
 Time to buy a bottle of rum for my favorite rum-and-coke drinker.

Sean



Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 06 Jan 2000 16:22:48 -0800
From: Brian Kuhl <brian.s.kuhl at intel.com>
Subject: California Wine is Fine!

John Wilkinson writes:
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.

Hi John,
Here are a few names to look for. These are easily rated top notch in a world
standard not just France...
Bryant Family
Caymus
Chateau Montelena
Harlan Estate
Diamond Creek
Groth
Joseph Phelps
Opus One
Screaming Eagle
Araujo
And my favorite...Beringer Private Reserve!

CU,
Brian Kuhl
Sacramento, CA




Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 06 Jan 2000 19:03:09 -0600
From: ALABREW <alabrew at mindspring.com>
Subject: B Brite

John wrote,
First time using B Brite.  Didn't know it was
JUST a cleaner.  Thought it was a sanitizing agent.

I contacted Crosby and Baker just last week about this.  Without
ruffling feathers by posting his response, Seth Schnider
<mailto:CBLtd at att.net> reported to me that B Brite is also a sanitizer
but because of FDA regs. about certification and the cost involved, they
only market it as a cleaner even thought it also has sanitative qualities.
- -- 
ALABREW Homebrewing Supplies
http://www.mindspring.com/~alabrew
Birmingham, AL
Home Beer and Wine Making Specialists



Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2000 17:50:24 -0800
From: "Don Van Valkenburg" <don at steinfillers.com>
Subject: Fw: Nitrogen Dispensing at SoCal Homebrew Fest


Received this private email on the subject of Nitrogen/Co2.  The sender says
it's ok to post.
So Here it is----


>Don,
>
>I saw your post on the HBD and thought I would send you an email.  I
>don't subscribe to the HBD (so I can't post) but I read it regularly.
>
>Your info on mixed gas (CO2/Nitrogen) is correct in that the gasses do
>not remained mixed in the cylinder.  It is not however the valve itself
>that does the mixing but rather the tube attached to the valve.  This
>tube has several tiny holes down the sides of it so that gasses are
>drawn from various levels within the cylinder simultaneously allowing
>some consistency in the mix of the gas as it is used. Without the mixing
>tube the carbonation level (which is dependent on the CO2 in the mix)
>would be erratic.  Without a certain level of CO2 in the mix your beer
>will indeed go flat.
>
>The valve required for mixed gas is different than the valve normally
>used for CO2.  Mixed gas is at much higher pressure than CO2 (about
>2,000 psi) which makes a high pressure valve necessary.  I have heard
>from brewers in other parts of the country who have had their normal CO2
>cylinders (with standard valve) filled with mixed gas but I'm assuming
>it was a partial fill (thus lower pressure) or safety regulations aren't
>as stringent as they are here in California (ALWAYS a possibility).
>
>I have a supplier in Riverside (recommended by the local Guinness
>distributor) who set me up with a small cylinder, high pressure valve,
>mixing tube, and an adapter for my regulator.  I use a mix of 75% Nitro
>and 25% CO2.
>
>Due to the higher pressure a regulator rated for such use must be used -
>most CO2 regulators for beverage dispensing are not rated for mixed gas
>use.  Some regulators offered for mixed gas use have a male fitting and
>connect directly to the high pressure valve - others have a female
>fitting and require an adapter (the high pressure valve has a female
>connection as opposed to the standard valve used for CO2 which has a
>male connection).
>
>I would think that you should be able to find someone in your area to
>provide the mixed gas - after all, I found one way out here in
>Riverside.  I'm sure that there are plenty of pubs that use pre-mixed
>gas (although the larger ones will buy straight nitrogen and mix it with
>CO2 on site).
>
>For the record the stout served by the Inland Empire Brewers at the
>SoCal Homebrewer's Festival was conditioned and served with a
>nitorgen/CO2 mix and I believe several others were as well.
>
>Wassail,
>
>Steve Dunkerken
>Webmaster - Inland Empire Brewers



Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 06 Jan 2000 22:19:42 -0500
From: William Macher <macher at telerama.lm.com>
Subject: Hop utilization with a low horsepower CF chiller?

HI All,

I suppose this is a simple question...

 ...But here goes anyway.

I made my counter-flow wort chiller from materials at hand, 
which were relatively small ID copper tubing about 50 feet 
long and a piece of garden hose. Actually turned out pretty 
nice looking, as I wrapped it around a corny keg. The tubing is 
5/16 OD, which gives me about 0l25 inch inside diameter. It also is 
pretty efficient at cooling the wort. But it is SLOW.

The relatively small ID, along with the long length, results in 
my inability to pump through the chiller at more than about 1 
liter per minute. I think the fact that the chiller is about 6 feet 
above the pump also takes away from the flow rate somewhat.

What I have noticed is that my beer seems to be much more 
bitter than it used to be before I started 10 gallon batches and 
counter flow chilling. Prior to building my new system, I 
made five-gallon full boil batches, and used an immersion 
chiller.

I have been gradually cutting back on my hop additions as the 
result.

Because of the slow movement of the wort out of the boiling 
kettle, I fear that things have changed a lot in my process, 
and that I may be getting different hop utilization rates from what I 
used to when I cooled the wort with the immersion chiller. 
This would be, in my mind, because the wort sits in the kettle 
at very near boiling temperatures for up to 40 minutes, as it 
waits for the pump to push it through the chiller. With the immersion
chiller the entire wort moved away from boiling temperatures as a unit
rather quickly.

It it possible, or likely, that my bittering hops remain bittering 
hops, and that my flavoring hops become additional bittering 
hops due to this long period in the boiling kettle, after flame 
out, but before chilling? At best, can I expect my aroma hops to 
be flovor hops? 

My suspicion is that I may need to use a hop back to get back 
to a reasonable bittering-flavor-aroma profile. And perhaps delay hop
additions somewhat. Add bittering hops 30 minutes before end of boil,
flavor hops at end of boil...aroma hops in the hop back?

Is my thinking on, or off, track? Is there much difference how 
the hops react to the wort at rolling boil versus near-boiling 
temperatures? Are aroma hop additions still possible with my 
current system if they sit under cover in my kettle at near-boiling
temperatures for this long a time?

As always, and guidance is highly appreciated. I guess I could build
a new, faster-flowing chiller, but I don't really want to...

Happy Brewing!

Bill Macher   Pittsburgh, PA   USA






Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2000 21:48:34 -0500
From: Pat Babcock <pbabcock at hbd.org>
Subject: Posting rights, Mixed gas bottle


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

In a note to Don Van Valkenburg, Steve Dunkerken writes:

> > I don't subscribe to the HBD (so I can't post)

Popular misconception, but please note that you do not have to SUBSCRIBE to 
the HBD in order to POST to the HBD. We monitor the queue up front to 
filter the spam out, so such a posting restriction is unnecessary. Cool, 
huh?

Per the CO2/N2 mix discussion, Steve's description is dead on for the most 
part.   But let me relate my experience.

As readers of the now-dearly-missed Brewing Techniques may recall, I 
developed a draft system utilizing a cold plate and a cube refrigerator to 
cool the serving stream rather than refrigerating the kegs. The cold plat 
requires a 35 psig driving pressure, and the kegs are stored at room 
temperature. The required pressure, ovver the long term, would 
overcarbonate the beer if it was pure CO2, so a mix is required.

The gas bottle that drives this system was converted from a simple CO2 c  
ylinder. It was converted at the welding shop where I get it filled. They 
put in a dip tube and replaced the safety release on the valve. Oh, and 
they slapped a Nitrogen label over the Carbon Dioxide label. All told, I 
think it was $18 to "convert" it. I still use my Taps-Rite regulator on it. 
No adpaters required - it's still the same valve. Noticable difference is 
that the primary side is now at 1200 rather than 800 psig (or thereabouts - 
memory is hazy and it's been a while since I had to worry about this...) 
when the tank is freshly filled. Keep in mind that this mix at this 
pressure in a 20# tank weighs NOWHERE near 20# :-)

That's it!

 -
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: Thu, 06 Jan 2000 22:03:29 -0500
From: Peter Owings <peteo1 at mindspring.com>
Subject: You say tomato, I say tomacco!

All this gm posting and nobody has mentioned the latest "Simpsons". Homer
mixes tomato seeds, tobacco seeds, and some nuclear waste and grows some
Tomaccos! They're red on the outside and brown on the inside. They taste
like dirt but you can't stop eating them. And people say there's nothing
good on tv......
Pete Owings
Limestone Brewing
Ellicott City, Maryland














Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2000 22:31:38 -0500
From: Pat Babcock <pbabcock at hbd.org>
Subject: HBD Fund Raiser: AllAdvantage.com

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

Well, the proof is in the pudding! About 45 of you took us up on the 
AllAdvantage "viewbar" fundraiser for the HBD server fund. I'm please to 
announce that, for doing nothing more than I usually do, we have received 
our first check from AllAdvantage!

They now have a Mac bar in Beta, and have programs running in Australia and 
some of Europe. If you don't mind giving up a small portion of your browser 
while surfing the net, go to www.alladvantage.com and set etx-293 as your 
referrer. You'll get paid for surfing the net, and the HBD will get a dime 
for every hour you spend surfing. For anyone you refer, we receive a 
nickel. Check out http://hbd.org/alladvantage.html for more info.

 -
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: Thu, 6 Jan 2000 18:16:06 -0900
From: "Alex MacGillivray" <sockeye at worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Malt mill

Does anyone have an adjustable roller  mill that they would like to sell
to me? I'd like one that I can motorize, but I'll take a manual one too.

Thanks in advance,

Alex MacGillivray

Brewbeer at usa.net



Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2000 00:54:11 -0500
From: Bob Sheck <bsheck at skantech.net>
Subject: RE: Beer diets 2000

I think all you people are full of TRUB!

I been walkin this planet for 50+ yrs and I gotta
say that all your scientific measurements are for naught-

Pull your heads outta the books and look around you- at
the other humans- some fat, some thin, some just right.
And then look at what they eat! Sure, the fat ones, you
most likely to see at the buffet line or Pizza joint, 
maybe the fast food hole (Please, a DIET soda with that 
order of BIGGY fries never ceases to amuse). .  .

But you must remember there is MUCH more to this than
a simple caloric measure. Some of us are blessed with 
a HIGH metablolism and short plumbing- they can't 
absorb all the fat producing nourishment and are
skinny as a rail no matter what they eat (their
arteries are probably more of a tell-tale of their
health than body mass, BTW).

Some of us more unlucky <?> individuals who have 
extremley Looong plumbing that is very adept at 
absorbing every molecule of fat producing food.

And then there are some of us who eat whatever the hell
they want but have also included an unusual amount of fiber
and blow all the charts off!

We're all different, and we all assimilate substances
much differently than any labratory measurements will
be able to discern in the foreseeable future. 

So this ree-dick-you-less thread has absolutley no
place in this venue. If you want to continue to
beat this dead-horse on this fourum, knock yerselves
out: I will just <continue to> hit the delete key.


Thankyou

Bob Sheck

bsheck, me-sheck, abednigo! Greenville, NC 
email:bsheck at skantech.net or see us at:
http://www.skantech.net/bsheck/
(252)830-1833
- -------------
"Madness takes its toll -- Please have exact change!"
- -------------


Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2000 02:34:10 -0800
From: "Brian Dixon" <briandixon at home.com>
Subject: Hop loss

Anyone other than me kept track of SG points lost to hops in the kettle?  I
believe the mechanism is simply the fact that wet hops don't drain out
completely during the siphoning process and therefore keep wort trapped in
them.  As an example, I just got through brewing another big Scotch Ale
(140-Shilling Wee Heavy) tonight and the OG in the kettle was 1.122 (whew!),
but after racking to the primary through my usual Chore Boy, and topping off
to 5 gallons, the OG had dropped to 1.103.  There were 6 ounces of hops in
this batch ... necessary because for a 45 minute boil, the utilization is
only about 13% to 14% and I know from experience that you need from 60 to 80
IBUs (calculated) to balance the big malt profile of these beers.  Believe
me!  Even though it sounds high, this rate of hopping will seem "just in
balance" and not overhopped at all!  Anyway, back to the hop loss.  In 5
gallons, the pre-siphon total points was 5*122=610 pts.  In the fermenter, I
got 5*103=515 pts.  That's a total loss of 95 points, or in other words,
about 16 points per ounce of hops in the batch.  Going a step further, that
equates to 2.1 ounces of the 1.122 wort stayed in each 1 ounce of hops.
Seems about right I guess.  I guess the moral of the story is that if you
want to hit a particular OG in the fermenter, then you ought to estimate the
lost specific gravity due to wet hops hanging on to the wort when you
siphon.  Am I the only person to figure this stuff out?  I hate giving up
hard-earned points to the hop slop!

Brian




Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2000 03:23:19 -0800
From: John_E_Schnupp at amat.com
Subject: re: Feelings on early racking

Calvin says:
>My usual procedure was to brew an all-grain batch after work,

Then Darren wonders:
>Wow!!! Its a strictly saturday job for me. I couldnt even
>imagine starting an all grain when i arrive home from work!

Must be that Darren has a M-F 8 hour first shift job and that
Calvin is fortunate enough to have a night shift job.  Ahh the
beauty of night shift.  I work a 12 hour night shift and get
home from work around 8:00am.  I don't brew during the middle
of my work week but I've often brewed a batch on when I get
home from my final night shift.  It makes for a long day, but
it's not too bad  and if I leave the clean-up till the next day
I can even sneak in a nap before the wife gets home from work.

John Schnupp, N3CNL
Dirty Laundry Brewery (temporarily closed)
Colchester, VT (moving to Georgia, VT)
95 XLH 1200




Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2000 07:58:29 EST
From: KMacneal at aol.com
Subject: Re: Inconsistent carbonation

In my experience, the only thing I can agree with Mr. Burley on is that it 
sounds tedious and the priming sugar should be boiled in water before adding 
to the beer.  I've been bottling using a priming bucket for years and have 
not encountered inconsistent priming or problems associated with oxidation 
(and many of these beers have been judged in competition).  My dispersion of 
the priming solution appears to be sufficient -- I add the priming solution 
to the bucket and siphon the beer on top of it.  Occasionally I'll give the 
bucket a swirl after all the beer is in.  I will gently with a spoon when I 
am splitting a batch between mini kegs and bottles (mini kegs require less 
priming sugar -- after filling 2 kegs I add additional priming sugar solution 
and stir gently).

I would suggest to Chris that he check the cleaniness & sanitation of his 
bottles.  If some are gushers and others are not well carbonated, it may be 
that some bottles were contaminated and the batch as a whole had not been 
given sufficient time to carbonate.

Keith MacNeal
Worcester, MA

In a message dated Wed, 5 Jan 2000 14:45:50 -0500, Dave Burley 
<Dave_Burley at compuserve.com> writes:


 Brewsters:
 
 Chris has experienced inconsistent carbonation using a bottling bucket. 
 
 I suggest you make up your priming sugar solution in a cup of boiling 
solution ( not
 a cup of water). I uise a pyrex measuring cup , put in the sugar, add water 
and boil.
 A teaspoon of this in each bottle will give you 48 bottles properly primed.
 It will also take less time than a bottling bucket. It may sound tedious, 
but it works
 well and is fast. Takes me a couple of minutes. Bottle directly from the 
carboy.
 
 A bottling bucket improperly stirred will give this problem of 
inconsistency. It is also
 something else to clean and sanitize and if your beer is flat, you can 
incorporate a
 lot of oxygen as you transfer your beer into it and especially if you stir 
well, as you must. >>


Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2000 08:03:36 -0600
From: "Kelly" <kgrigg at diamonddata.com>
Subject: RE: CO2 Shipping....

Why not just stick it in your car?  We carry ours around like this all the
time to each others house when their tanks are out....

Kelly


You said:
- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
- ----
 -Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2000 14:47:28 -0500
 -From: "Santerre, Peter  (PRS) - CPC" <PRS at NA2.US.ML.COM>
 -Subject: Co2, Gravity, Flames

 -Co2 Shipping:

 -I have a 5# Co2 cylinder that I use for my corny keg set up.
 -Well moving time has come (from a small studio apartment to
 -a 3 bedroom 2 bath house, I'm quite excited.)  My dilemma is how
 -to get my Co2 Cylinder to the new location.  The moving company
 -says they wont move it, and I /don't think/ I'm supposed to
 -ship it via UPS or whatever.  Does anyone have any experience
 -or suggestions on this subject?






Return to table of contents

---