HOMEBREW Digest #3220 Thu 13 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

  Russ hobaugh's ESB questions ("Sieben, Richard")
  extraction ("Paul Niebergall")
  Henry Weinhard Going Tits Up? (Brad Miller)
  forward: re: moderate alc use and diabetes... (darrell.leavitt)
  Czech Malt/pH meters/Newsletter PDF available ("Philip J Wilcox")
  waving (jliddil)
  Help needed on All Grain ("Mr. Joy Hansen")
  RE: AOB/AHA Representation - For REAL?? ("Houseman, David L")
  CO2 Cylinder shipping (John Lifer)
  Re: Fw: Nitrogen Dispensing at SoCal Homebrew Fest (Spencer W Thomas)
  getting educated ("scott")
  Re: skimming (Jeff Renner)
  7 Stern Brau - Hanf-Bier (Tombrau)
  only bottling a few ("Dan Michael")
  Thirsty for knowledge (spostek)
  Consistency (John Wilkinson)
  Grain Mill Motorization ("BeerLvr")
  SG loss to hops.... ("BeerLvr")
  Iodospor. (jafjmw)
  Comments on B-Brite (Randy Shreve)
  Re: how do you measure the last runnings? (John_E_Schnupp)
  Brewing in gallons, divide recipe by 5? (RRodda5250)
  Snowbank?? what's that?? ("Peter J. Calinski")
  CO2 shipping ("St. Patrick's")
  drinking and brewing (Jeff Renner)
  Hop Teas - Again ("Paul Ward")
  Mash Efficiency Questions ("George W. Miller")
  Diet Root Beer? (Bob White)
  Brewing water pH ("Alan Meeker")
  Rodney Morris Article (FF-SDA)" <Anthony.Altieri at us.millwardbrown.com>
  Human flocculation (Dave Burley)
  Beer food (Nathan Kanous)
  Acadian Brewing closes (MVachow)
  Recipe (Michael Kwiatkowski)
  How do you measure your SG (Jeremy Bergsman)
  Skimming (Dave Burley)

* 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: Mon, 10 Jan 2000 10:01:55 -0600 From: "Sieben, Richard" <SIER1 at Aerial1.com> Subject: Russ hobaugh's ESB questions There are a number of things that could have gone wrong with your brew to get such a low extraction rate. When you mashed in at 153, was that the temp of the water you infused with, or was that the actual mash temperature after infusion (correct answer)? Did the mash stay at this temp? Did you monitor your mash temp and stir every few minutes? If your temperature dropped below about 145 degrees, you would not get a good conversion either I don't think. Insulating your mash tun would help maintain constant temps. You didn't say how much water you mashed in with, I think if you used more than 2 qts/lb, the mash was maybe too thin to get a good conversion. Since this is your first all grain, did you mix up the water with the grains well so that there would be no 'dry' spots in the mash? Sort of rambling here as ideas come to mind.....I assume you got precrushed malt, and if not is the crush good? Maybe the malt had been allowed to absorb moisture before you used it and is 'slack' malt which doesn't give good extraction. I don't know what kind of conditions your seller of malt subjects the malt to. (Believe it or not there are actually still stores out there that keep malt in bins that you just scoop out what you want and this is a really bad idea!) I think 75% extraction is pretty average for most brewers doing a simple infusion mash, and I have gotten up to 93% via decoction mashing and using a picnic cooler. (No flames about extraction rates please, I am using the Suds program to give me efficiency, so if you think that is wrong then so am I). Anyway, yes you can use more grains to compensate or, do your mash, get the wort in the kettle and take a gravity reading, then add some Dry malt extract to bring you up to desired gravity. I keep about 3 to 6 lbs. of dry malt extract on hand for just such 'emergencies'. I don't know the AA % of your hops, but the lower gravity than planned will make the beer unbalanced on the bitter side. The bitterness will decrease with age. Oh, also you didn't mention whether the hops were pellets or whole hops. If a recipe calls for an ounce of whole hops, you need to reduce the pellets by 15% to be equivalent. Hope my ramblings help, Rich Sieben Island Lake, IL Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2000 10:28:14 -0600 From: "Paul Niebergall" <pnieb at burnsmcd.com> Subject: extraction Russ Hobaugh writes about his extraction rates: > 9 lb. Marris Otter > 8 oz British Crystal (50-60) > 11 oz flaked maize > 1 oz British black patent. >Why is my extraction so low? If I am figuring correctly, this was only >about 55%, how can I get that up. I was shooting for an ESB with >a SG of 1.054, and ended up with 1.042. I had a similar experience >with my first ag--an irish stout. First, I am not sure how you are figuring that you are only getting 55% efficiency. For a little over 10 pounds of grain contributing to the sugar content of your wort, a specific gravity of 1.042 works out to about 28.35 points per lb per gallon ((42 points*6.75 gallons) / 10 pounds). This is a completely respectable extraction rate, especially if this one of your first batches and you are using a zapap-style home made device. The most you can get from most grains is in the neighborhood of 34 to 36 points per pound per gallon (ppppg) (I am relying on memory from the Zymurgy Great Grains issue, so I might be off a little). Anyway, dividing your ppppg of 28.35 by the most you can possibly get (35 ppppg - average value) gives you an efficiency of over 80 percent, not bad. Remember that the numbers given for 100 percent extraction (34 to 36 ppppg) are ultimate extraction rates and are only achievable in a laboratory. (In other word you will never get 100 percent efficiency, so dont even try). What you probably did is collect too much wort. I am saying this because the recipe that you cite is probably based on a 5-gallon batch. If you would have boiled the wort down to 5 gallons you would have ended up with an S.G. of about 1.056. Which puts you above you target. Your extraction is fine. >What is an "average" extraction rate (if there is such a thing)? 28 ppppg is fine, 30 is better. Consistently over 30 is outstanding (or the person is lying about their extraction rates - which happens more than you think). >Without buying a RIMS, how can I improve this, or should I be >content with 55%, and count on that and increase the amount >of grain I use to compensate? Lord help us all - another potential Rube Goldberg in the making! Please dont buy a RIMS. Be content with what you are doing and keep going. Maybe add a little extra grain next time or try boiling the wort a little longer to concentrate the sugars that you collected. Your numbers show that you extraction is perfectly o.k. And, it will only get better with additional practice. My only question is why are you starting with distilled water and DME? Use tap water. >Water treatment: distilled water with 1 tsp. of DME/gallon. Paul Niebergall Burns & McDonnell pnieb at burnsmcd.com "Illegitimis non carborundum" Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2000 08:48:20 -0800 From: Brad Miller <millerb at targen.com> Subject: Henry Weinhard Going Tits Up? It seems as if on the 13th of January there will be an auction of everything in the Henry brewery in Portland. It looks like they have a bunch of stuff to get rid off. You can look at the stuff on www.rabin.com and even bid there too. So if you want to get that huge grain elevator no is the chance. Brad Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2000 11:55:07 -0500 (EST) From: darrell.leavitt at plattsburgh.edu Subject: forward: re: moderate alc use and diabetes... From: IN%"wire at incinc.net" 10-JAN-2000 10:31:01.55 Subj: Daily Brief: Monday, January 10, 2000 [deleted most of the news] HEALTH AND MEDICINE FROM THE MEDBRIEF * A recent study suggests that moderate alcohol intake may be associated with a reduced risk of Type II diabetes in men. - researchers at the Cooper Institute in Dallas, Texas, studied Type II diabetes rates in more than 8,500 Texan men to collect data. - found that men who consumed 5-10 alcoholic drinks per week were at significantly lower risk of developing diabetes, compared to either abstainers/infrequent drinkers or heavy drinkers; overall, infrequent or heavy drinkers were at about twice the risk of Type II diabetes, compared to moderate drinkers. - authors note that previous studies have suggested that moderate drinking reduces insulin resistance, in which the body becomes less responsive to the sugar-hoarding effect of the hormone insulin. - the study concludes that up to 24% of incident cases of diabetes in adult men may be attributable to high alcohol intake. - the study is in the journal Diabetes Care (2000;23:18-22). - from the MedBrief; see http://www.medbrief.com/whatis.html (January 7, 2000). [deleted the rest of the news] source: ____________________________________________________________________ This service is a product of Intelligent Network Concepts, Inc. db-admin at incinc.net http://www.incinc.net 576 Maxfield Road, Keswick, VA, 22947 (c) 1999 Intelligent Network Concepts, Inc. All rights reserved. Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2000 12:13:29 -0500 From: "Philip J Wilcox" <pjwilcox at cmsenergy.com> Subject: Czech Malt/pH meters/Newsletter PDF available Hi all, I'd like to say thanks for the wonderfull info on acidifying I got from brewers, Thomas, Plunkard, Meeker, thesssen, Kruse, Marrow, Tobler, and Babcock. I purchased some of the UNDER modified Czech Malt from St. Pats and am now looking into how to properly use it. Has anybody brewed with it yet? What did you do? Would you recommend doing anything different? Im Curious, as Im about to spend another complete Saturday Double Decocting in the garage... The Prison City Brewers newsletter, The Sentencing Guide, is now available in PDF format. Eventually We'll learn how to add it to our web site, but for now, anybody who would like 100-400k pdf every month can email me, and ill stick you on the distribution list. Phil Wilcox Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2000 10:17:52 -0700 (MST) From: jliddil at VMS.ARIZONA.EDU Subject: waving In the article John Palmer and I wrote for zymurgy, we cited a couple of references where a microwave was used to prepare culture media. Specifically: Latimer, J.M., J.M. Matsen, "Microwave Oven Irradiation as a Method for Bacterial Decontamination in a Clinical Microbiology Laboratory, " J. Clinical Microbiology,. As I recall they got about 6 logs of kill. But this is from memory. You can read our article at: http://realbeer.com/jjpalmer/cleaning.html. If I get time I'll try to see what else I can find via medline/current contents. Jim Liddil Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2000 12:37:12 -0500 From: "Mr. Joy Hansen" <joytbrew at patriot.net> Subject: Help needed on All Grain Hi Russ, First of all, you don't need a RIMS to get decent extractions. Although I haven't used the Zap-Zap, I'm confident that your process is OK. Being blunt, your statements regarding water treatment seem way off base? You might consider doing a little reading in any home brewing text. . . ."Water treatment: distilled water with 1 tsp. of DME/gallon" . . . I have no reservations about bumping the sg up with sucrose when the pre boil doesn't attain the desired sg. Or, boiling longer to a smaller volume to accomplish the same thing. Your statement about water treatment suggests that you don't have an elementary understanding of the chemistry of mashing and sparging, only the mechanical process. There's been a lot of discussion, when you can find it among the non-brewing issues, of pH of sparge water and tannin extraction. Not so much to improve the extraction, but to choose a flavor that's acceptable in the finished beer. Not too astringent, not too thin, not too . . . You'll note that extraction efficiency isn't of much importance to the home brewer. If it happens and the brew turns out great, whoopeeeee! Consider the posts concerning "No Sparge" techniques. I recommend that you get any one of the several Fix's books and read up on the chemistry involved. There are other equally good texts available. However, the reference must have a section on water treatment. Another on mashing, and another on sparging. Specifically, study the influence of the calcium ion in the mash, why distilled water is only a good idea to dilute water components, and what the pH of the sparge water should be. e.g. Distilled water may have a pH of near 7 and not have sufficient acidity to overcome the undesirable effects of other mash components to keep the mash pH below 5.5. It's my understanding that the mash must be at the optimum temperature and pH to obtain a reasonable conversion over a reasonable time. When these conditions are met, the saccharification can be complete within 15 minutes and not more than 30 minutes at each rest. The rest temperatures determine the fermentability of the wort. When the mash is pH and calcium content are not met, then the efficiency of the saccharification is poor. BTW, you must know the malt specifications to compensate for variances in the degree of modificaton of protein and starch. Finally, consider that each home brewer's system has an inherent extraction efficiency. It's my gadget frame of mind that resulted in use of a mechanically stirred RIMS. Most home brewers might admit that meeting the temperature, pH, and calcium content of the mash are more important than the type of system employed for all grain brewing. Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2000 12:49:49 -0500 From: "Houseman, David L" <David.Houseman at unisys.com> Subject: RE: AOB/AHA Representation - For REAL?? Rob Wallace asks "A controlling or influencing 'say' or just a "say"...???" plus other remarks omitted. For those of you who have not sat as a board member, the answer is that the Board of Directors has the responsibility to run the organization, For Profit Corporations or Not For Profit ones. The Chairman of the Board does have a great deal of power, however as the leader of the BOD. But not absolute, as some corporate Chairmen have discovered when they have been removed by their boards recently. Could the AOB board replace Charlie? Yes. But that's not the issue really is it? The real issues the board has to wrestle with are it's financial stability and meeting the needs of the members so that the membership can grow. The changes to the AOB board in most likelihood would not be being made if it weren't for Charlie's desire to make the AOB/AHA more meaningful to its members and more viable going forward. No board member in good conscience would join a board simply to "dethrone" anyone. One participates and works to make the organization the best that it can be. If in the process it becomes necessary to make difficult personnel decisions, then there's a responsibility to do so. But that's not the objective that the members (or non-members) have unless they are just carrying grudges. So if anyone wants to become part of the process, join the AHA, run for one of the seats on the Advisory Board that will be up for election by the members, and work for the betterment of the organization. The Advisory Boards will then elect from its ranks members who will then join the AOB Board of Directors where further contributions to the organization can be made. David Houseman Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2000 10:02:53 -0800 (PST) From: John Lifer <jliferjr at yahoo.com> Subject: CO2 Cylinder shipping UPS will ship hazardous cargo, provided you are not a one time customer. (no drop offs, or pickups) See www.ups.com for specifics, but as most of us would be one time customer, this would eliminate using UPS. You could relieve all pressure remove the regulator and designate cargo as empty cylinder. This would be acceptable for UPS shipment. John __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger. http://im.yahoo.com Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2000 13:07:06 -0500 From: Spencer W Thomas <spencer at engin.umich.edu> Subject: Re: Fw: Nitrogen Dispensing at SoCal Homebrew Fest >>>>> "Don" == Don Van Valkenburg <don at steinfillers.com> writes: >> Your info on mixed gas (CO2/Nitrogen) is correct in that the >> gasses do not remained mixed in the cylinder. I've seen this before, but never believed it. Gasses just don't behave that way. BUT... Is the CO2 a gas? Probably not. CO2 can be a liquid below 88F, so at normal room temperature, a significant amount of the CO2 in the tank is probably liquified. The nitrogen is still a gas, so there would be some separation in the tank. For the science geeks: the critical point of CO2 is at 87.9F / 1070.6 PSIA. If the pressure in the tank is 1200PSI, as Pat Babcock indicated, then up to 87.9F, conditions are right in the tank for CO2 to condense to a liquid. Web accessible ref: http://www.weldingsupply.net/carbon.htm =Spencer Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2000 10:09:52 -0800 From: "scott" <Cuckold at cornerpub.com> Subject: getting educated For those of you who may be more interested in GM and it's safety issues visit http://www.fda.gov/oc/biotech/default.htm. It's a good starting place for getting educated. Glen Glen...what's your idea of "getting educated"? For everyone to adhere to your point of view? Thanks, but no thanks. Scott Richland, Wa. Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2000 14:05:35 -0500 From: Jeff Renner <nerenner at umich.edu> Subject: Re: skimming Dave Burley <Dave_Burley at compuserve.com> wrote: >A few years ago , Al Korzonas did an >experiment in which he demonstrated >that it didn't make any difference to >bitterness, skimming or not. This wasn't how I remembered it, so I emailed Al and he replied: At 12:30 PM -0600 1/10/00, Al Korzonas wrote: >I'm not going to be caught up in quite a while (I'm up to about June 1999) >but you are right in that my BT article claimed that skimming produced >similar loss of bitterness (13 to 17% loss) as blowoff. Please post this >correction. 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: Mon, 10 Jan 2000 15:18:59 EST From: Tombrau at aol.com Subject: 7 Stern Brau - Hanf-Bier A friend brought back from Europe a 1 liter bottle of 7 Stern Hanf-Bier. Does anyone have any tasting notes or information on the product? The label says it was bottled on Dec 23, 1999 and is good till Jan 13, 2000. Cheers Tom Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2000 14:10:32 -0800 From: "Dan Michael" <dmichael at avuhsd.k12.ca.us> Subject: only bottling a few ok, can I bottle a few bottles before I keg. I want to send to a competition, and I am going to force carbonate my keg. I do not have a cp bottle filler. I do not have time to go find primetabs. I heard that I could add a tsp. of cornsugar solution to each bottle. Will that work? How much corn sugar should I use? dan Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2000 17:13:04 US/Eastern From: spostek at voicenet.com Subject: Thirsty for knowledge I recently brewed my first batch of extract and specialty grains using unhopped malt extract. I have two questions: After reading some on the subject I was hoping someone could enlighten me on the subject of water treatments. I use filtered water that removes 99% of all the chlorine, etc from the water. Is this enough or should I look to water treatments as a potential way to increase the quality of the beer? Second, after brewing my first batch with hops and specialty grains I was left with about a quart and a half that just would not settle out. The specific gravity of the four and a quarter gallons was right on 1.050, which the recipe called for, and I did not want to top off to five gallons and dilute the beer. I just cried my eyes out while dumping the green slop down the drain. Is there a good way to recover any wort that is stuck in there? A filter? A funnel? Does one work better than the other? Can you actually recover any wort without letting in a lot of the hop residue? Or is it just better to cut your losses and dump it? Thanks for the help in advance. Feel free to respond to the list or direct via e-mail. Both are welcome. spostek at voicenet.com - --------------------------------------------- This message was sent using Voicenet WebMail. http://www.voicenet.com/webmail/ Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2000 19:46:27 -0600 From: John Wilkinson <jandjwilkins at earthlink.net> Subject: Consistency Fred Kingston took me to task for writing (among other things): >How about we get back to brewing and leave the environmentalist and >other political discussions to the proper forum. and then posting my opinions about the subject. I am afraid he has me there. I actually wrote the later post earlier but it was bounced several times for excessively long lines and by the time it was corrected it came in after my post saying we should get back to brewing. That is an excuse but it was still inconsistent of me to try to put my two cents worth in then later suggest everyone else shut up on the subject. Mea culpa. NOW, lets get back to brewing. Or am I being inconsistent again? Whatever, John Wilkinson - Grapevine, Texas Return to table of contents
Date: Sun, 9 Jan 2000 21:10:04 -0500 From: "BeerLvr" <Beerlvr at hrfn.net> Subject: Grain Mill Motorization Well I used my new JSP MALTMILL the other day and made a stout. It worked great but I want to motorize it as the 19.5 pounds of grain took a little while to mill. Can anyone tell me what the optimum speed is and what specific equipment was used to motorize thier MALTMILL? Mike Pensinger beerlvr at hrfn.net Return to table of contents
Date: Sun, 9 Jan 2000 21:14:07 -0500 From: "BeerLvr" <Beerlvr at hrfn.net> Subject: SG loss to hops.... >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 ... Seems to me that the hops were in the wort in the kettle so there should be no difference in the SG from the kettle to the fermenter. Loss to hops sounds suspect to me IMO. Mike Pensinger beerlvr at hrfn.net Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2000 07:45:01 +0000 From: jafjmw at wlsfn.force9.co.uk Subject: Iodospor. Does anyone know if Iodospor is available in the UK? If so, where and how could I get some? Thanks Adam Funk Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2000 18:42:45 -0500 From: Randy Shreve <rashreve at interpath.com> Subject: Comments on B-Brite Just thought I would jump in and post my personal results with attempting to use B-brite as a sanitizer. During my first few batches, I was plagued with almost constant off flavors while using B-brite as a sanitizer. The problem was so large, that I was about ready to give up homebrewing - I just couldn't seem to brew a beer that tasted good. A post to HBD on the subject yielded comments that B-brite was not an "official" sanitizer. I switched to Iodophor, and my off flavor problems immediately disappeared!! YMMV, of course, but I obviously have something in the house that is resistant to B-brite. I think it's great as a cleaner though....no affiliation....yada, yada. Peace and Long Life! Randy in Salisbury, NC at Middle Earth Brewing Co. Presently on tap: Southfarthing Stout, Goblin Cleaver IPA, and Maggot's Farmhouse Porter Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2000 04:35:02 -0800 From: John_E_Schnupp at amat.com Subject: Re: how do you measure the last runnings? Bryan Gros <blgros at yahoo.com> asks: >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? Jeff Renner said: >When I am approaching what I know from past experience (volume and from >tasting the runoff) is 1.012-1.015, I take a sample and stop the flow for <snip> >Now I use a refractometer that takes about 20 seconds What about using a hydrometer that's been calibrated for higher temps? I've thought about getting one for a range that covers sparge temps and one with a range that includes boiling temp. I'm I thinking too simplistic? John Schnupp, N3CNL Dirty Laundry Brewery (temporarily closed) Colchester, VT (moving to Georgia, VT) 95 XLH 1200 Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2000 09:38:08 EST From: RRodda5250 at aol.com Subject: Brewing in gallons, divide recipe by 5? Hi I'm new to brewing (and loving it) and work with extracts only so far. Living in a small apartment I'm interested in brewing up gallon batches of beer. The recipes all make 5 gallons (or more) and I'm wondering if I can safely divide the recipe ingredients by 5 to come up with a recipe for 1 gallon. Appreciate any help out there. Thanks, RRodda5250 at aol.com Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2000 10:03:15 -0500 From: "Peter J. Calinski" <PCalinski at iname.com> Subject: Snowbank?? what's that?? In HBD #3218 Jeff Renner writes: "I take a sample and stop the flow for the few minutes it takes me to cool the sample in a cold water bath or a convenient snowbank." Snowbank? What is that? Where can you buy one? (As I sit here with the skis on my vehicle watching it rain while my ski pass drifts away.) Pete Calinski East Amherst NY Near Buffalo NY Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2000 09:31:45 -0500 From: "St. Patrick's" <stpats at bga.com> Subject: CO2 shipping You cannot ship a cylinder containing CO2. It's quite alright to ship an empty one via UPS. Also, there is no problem with transporting a full cylinder when its laying down, UNLESS it was just filled and is cold. this can cause an ice plug to form in the neck which can result in blowing out the safety relief valve. Lynne O'Connor St. Patrick's of Texas http://www.stpats.com Brewers Supply 512-989-9727 1828 Fleischer Drive 512-989-8982 facsimile Austin, Texas 78728 Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2000 10:36:58 -0500 From: Jeff Renner <nerenner at umich.edu> Subject: drinking and brewing Peripatetic Calvin Perilloux <peril at compuserve.com> writes these days from Middlesex, England: >This will sound blasphemous, but I also found that if I didn't >drink any homebrew (or any brew) while brewing, it seemed to >speed things up. I'll second this blasphemy. It takes all my wits to brew beer as good as I expect. I reward myself with a homebrew when I'm all done cleaning up and the beer is safely in the fermenter. 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, 11 Jan 2000 11:16:41 -0500 From: "Paul Ward" <paulw at doc.state.vt.us> Subject: Hop Teas - Again Before we flamed up over GMO's and how fat a carrot could get in a year (or something like that) there was a discussion going on concerning hop teas for flavor/aroma additions. If I could return us all to that golden day of yesteryear, I had a thought and was wondering if anyone has done the following yet. I bottle using a bottling/priming bucket. My routine is to boil the 4 or 5 ounces of corn sugar in two cups of water, add the still boiling mixture to the bucket and then rack into the bottom of the bucket through the drum tap. This seems to adequately mix the priming solution into the green beer, and lets me pretend to myself that I am oxidizing the beer as little as possible. After the beer is racked, I take the racking cane out of the fermentor, swap the end to the bottling tip and lift the now primed beer onto the counter over the dishwasher door that I use as a bottling platform and go to town. No muss, no fuss. I was wondering if there was a downside to throwing a hop plug or two into the sugar/ water solution while boiling to sanitize. Questions: 1) How long do you steepers steep your hop tea before it's done? 2) Do you use a regular kitchen strainer to separate tea from hops? Is there an oxidation problem with this? 3) Must you steep below boiling temps or is boiling O.K. (seems safer from a sanitation perspective)? 4) Is there a downside to boiling hops in a sugar solution (i.e. change the molecular nature of the sugar such as to limit carbonation, off flavors, etc.)? As you can tell, I'm a lazy brewer (answer to "what type of brewer are you" from another previous thread) and want to combine as many steps as possible. Now to return us to the GMO thread - has anyone considered that yeast have been genetically modifying us for thousands of years? Think about it! Paul in Vermont paulw at doc.state.vt.us Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2000 10:38:20 -0600 From: "George W. Miller" <gmiller at cybermarket.com> Subject: Mash Efficiency Questions After lurking and learning for the past 4 years or so, I've finally finished my 3 vessel RIMS and brewed the first two batches. Now come the questions ;^) The efficiency of the system varied dramatically between the two batches and I'm wondering why? The first batch was 10 gallons. I wanted to make a Scottish Ale, Light 60 and used the following grain bill: 15# Beeston's Golden Promise Scottish Ale - 1.027 potential gravity 3# Crystal 55L - 1.022 PG 3# Caramel 40L - 1.031 PG 0.5# Chocolate - 1.022 PG Mash schedule was 20 min at 104; 20 min at 122; 30 min at 140; 30 min at 158; 10 min at 172; sparged with 6 gallons at 170. The pH at the end of the acid rest was 5.3. Topped off to ~ 11 gallons and boiled for 60 minutes. Anticipated OG was 8.23P, but actually yielded a 14.6 Plato measured after the boil was chilled, which was about 100% efficiency if I calculated it correctly. I was estimating 75% efficiency, so this batch turned out quite a bit stronger than I expected. Not exactly a Light 60! So, on to batch two. Thinking I was on to something I estimated 100% efficiency for this batch. Used the following grain bill to make an American Brown Ale: 13# Schreier Pale 2-row 1.035 PG 1.5# Munich 1.035 PG 1.5# Crystal 55L 1.022 PG 1.5# Cara Pils 1.032 PG 0.5# Chocolate 1.022 PG Mash schedule was 30 min at 104; 30 min at 140; 30 min at 156; 10 min at 168; sparge with 6 gallons at 170. The pH at end of acid rest was 5.5. Topped off to ~ 11 gallons and boiled for 75 minutes. Anticipated OG was 14.65P, but this yielded only an 8.12 Plato after the boil was chilled, which is a 55% efficiency. Quite a difference from the efficiency of the first batch! Is there that much difference in efficiency between grain bills, mash schedules, etc? "Beer is living proof that God loves us and wants to see us happy." - --Benjamin Franklin Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2000 09:16:40 -0800 (PST) From: Bob White <b_white at rocketmail.com> Subject: Diet Root Beer? Has anyone here made diet root beer? I'm interested in making a batch, since I have an extra keg sitting around. I'd like to hear about your experience with various recipes/extracts and how you sweetened it. Off-list response is fine! Thanks, Bob White * Be wary of strong drink - it may make you shoot at tax collectors and miss. RA Heinlein __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger. http://im.yahoo.com Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2000 12:16:56 -0500 From: "Alan Meeker" <ameeker at welchlink.welch.jhu.edu> Subject: Brewing water pH John Wilkinson asked: > > I guess I am a bit confused here. I thought optimal MASH pH was > > 5.2-5.5, not > > the brewing water. My brewing water is <7 and my mash pH is usually on > > the low > > end of the optimum range. I even add chalk to the mash sometimes to get > > the > > pH up to the minimum recommended. If the brewing water is 5.2-5.5 won't > > the > > reactions in the mash bring it below that? > A key factor here is the amount and kinds of buffers present, not just the > absolute pH of the water per se. > > Unless your water is really whacked out the primary buffering compounds > present are carbonates and these are at equilibrium with carbonic acid in solution and CO2 in the air. > > Each buffer system has a decent buffering capacity somewhere within the range of > +/- 0.5 pH units of the buffer's "pKa" and the pKa will be different for > different buffers. > > If I boil my Baltimore tap water the pH goes up to about 8.5 because I have > driven CO2 gas out of solution. This CO2 gas was in > equilibrium with carbonate compounds as well as with carbonic acid. When I > boiled off the CO2 the concentration of carbonic acid decreased thus the pH > rose. If I let the water cool and it is exposed to air it re-absorbs CO2 gas > and the original equilibrium re-establishes itself and the pH drops back > down. > > In the mash the pH is mostly determined by acidifying reactions between > calcium in the brew water and phosphate compounds in the grain. These > reactions naturally drive the pH down to the low 5's. > > The point is that if your brew water is pretty empty of buffers (carbonates) > and has sufficient calcium then the mash will have no problem setting it's own pH. The main reason I add lactic acid to get > the pH to approx. 6.0 is so that I will have acidic water going > through in the sparge. > If you have too much carbonate ("temporary hardness") > then it could act against the pH lowering effects of the mash phosphates. > Likewise, if you don't have enough calcium in your water to react with the > phosphates then you might not hit the proper pH (though the malt itself > carries calcium with it so there may be enough resident calcium to set the > pH up - haven't seen any good data on this). > To remove carbonates you can drop them out of solution by boiling > with calcium before you use the brew water - this is why people add gypsum > (CaSO4) or calcium chloride then boil their brew water if they have a lot of > carbonates they want to get rid of. This is pretty effective and will leave > you with a precipitate on the bottom of your kettle that you can pour off of. The other tricky thing > to remember here is that what you are removing is /calcium/ carbonate in this precipitate > so you will be losing some of the calcium from your water that is needed > later for reaction with grain phosphates (to set mash pH) and is also needed > by the yeast for fermentation. > > -Alan Meeker Baltimore, MD Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2000 12:17:37 -0500 From: "Altieri, Anthony (FF-SDA)" <Anthony.Altieri at us.millwardbrown.com> Subject: Rodney Morris Article Hello All, As a HBD lurker, I've heard much discussion on Rodney Morris' RIMS article. My curiosity has piqued, and I'd like to get my eyes on a copy. Does anyone know where I can obtain a copy online? Thanks, -Anthony. Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2000 12:43:41 -0500 From: Dave Burley <Dave_Burley at compuserve.com> Subject: Human flocculation Brewsters: Richard Sholz in response to SteveA's comment about human population growing to outstrip their enviromment resulting in eventual flocculation says he believes several Millennia of unfettered growth proves that eventually humans will flocculate. Personally, I think too much unprotected flocculation is part of the problem already! - ------------------------------------------------- Russ Hobaugh asks why his extraction efficiency is so low. My experience and others indicates that poor milling is most often the reason for poor extraction, given reasonable grist and mashing conditions. In my experience, HB stores routinely grind too coarsely because it's fast. And if you buy more malt ...... Take a look at the volumes of information on milling in the HBD archives. A RIMS won't help but a good adjustable mill will do wonders if you double crush at ~0.080 in. and ~ 0.060 in. See detailed instructions in the archives. If you eventually want to do RIMS, a proper milling with free flow in the mash is the critical parameter. - ------------------------------------------------- Keep on Brewin' Dave Burley Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2000 12:19:09 -0600 From: Nathan Kanous <nlkanous at pharmacy.wisc.edu> Subject: Beer food I just heard talk on NPR that Burger King is instituting a "no genetically engineered food" policy. Our decision has been made for us and we're all safe now. Could we please get back to brewing? nathan in madison, wi Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2000 13:34:35 -0600 From: MVachow at newman.k12.la.us Subject: Acadian Brewing closes Residents and beer-savvy visitors to New Orleans will be sad to hear that Acadian Brewing is closing. The best craft brewer in Louisiana by my reckoning, Acadian brewed and bottled a pilsner and a marzen. The brewery also produced a helles bock available only on tap. The brewing community here is a bit surprised by the news; about a year ago, Acadian increased production significantly with the purchase of some new fermentation and lagering tanks. The word on the street, however, is that Acadian had, from the outset, suffered from the absence of a money guy. Neither brewmaster Doug Lindley nor president Jim Cronin, a neurobiologist, has extensive business experience. Rumors about the specific causes of the brewery's demise pretty much run the gamut. Only a few facts seem clear: regulars at the brewery's beer garden and other commercial brewers in the city were stunned to find a sign on the door announcing the closure and a list of brewing equipment for sale, and the brewery appears to be out of beer, leading most to assume that the brewmaster and the president planned ahead for closure. My guess it that Acadian falls into that saddest of category of attrition, the visionary brewing operation undone by lack of entrepreneurial experience. Mike New Orleans, LA Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2000 11:46:13 -0800 (PST) From: Michael Kwiatkowski <homebrewman44 at yahoo.com> Subject: Recipe Am looking for a recipe for a light ale with pumpkin and nutmeg in it. Also at what point in the boil should this be added? Should I use cooked or uncooked pumpkin. Thanks all..... __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger. http://im.yahoo.com Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2000 11:56:05 -0800 From: Jeremy Bergsman <jeremybb at stanford.edu> Subject: How do you measure your SG I have a nifty thing in my "brew house." I took ~3' of 1/2" copper pipe, put an end cap on one side and something like a 1/2" sweat / 3/4" FPT on the other end. The volume of this device is enough to float my hydrometer in its test flask, the sweat adaptor is a bit of a funnel. You can probably see where this is going. I brew outside. On a hose bib I have mounted another device. It goes as follows: brass hose bib to some sort of thread adaptor, PVC thread to 3/4" slip, ~3' of 3/4" PVC pipe. This is mounted more or less vertically. The 3' copper bit fits into the PVC bit, but sticks out of end a few inches. I fill the copper bit with wort, slip it into the PVC and turn on the water. Within 10s I have a cool sample for reading. Water just overflows onto the ground. When I'm lautering I don't even bother to stop runoff during each measurement because it's so fast that it's almost real time (maybe 45s total time for collect, cool, pour into test jar, read). (Caution: You must hold the copper device with insulation because the hot wort heats up the copper and then your hand quite well.) I saw a device for sale which used a similar idea, but you could have the hydrometer in the part which was cooled. Unfortunately this was years ago and I don't recall the name. - -- Jeremy Bergsman jeremybb at stanford.edu http://www.stanford.edu/~jeremybb Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2000 15:37:44 -0500 From: Dave Burley <Dave_Burley at compuserve.com> Subject: Skimming Brewsters: Jeff Renner checked with Al Korzonas and I didn't remember the essence of AlK's experiment correctly. In fact, I had it wrong! There is a difference between blowoff and non-blowoff IBUs Al's article in BT ( of which I don't have a copy but thought I was correctly summarizing from Al's HBD description of a few years ago) showed that no blowoff versus loss by blowoff produced the more bitterness. AlK who has been busy with his new family and new house took the time to respond to my questions and gave me permission to include his reply here: AlK: "The experiment that I did was not specifically to try skimming, but rather compared blowoff to non-blowoff. In my experiment, I split a batch into two fermenters that were of similar shape (at least the beer in them would be of similar shape... height and diameter were within a few percent) but one was closed and a blowoff tube affixed and the other was large enough to where the head could rise and fall back into the beer. I repeated it several times and every time the blowoff batch had between 13 and 17% less bitterness as measured by the Siebel Institute (IBU measurement... I'm not sure if it was photometric or HPLC, but I would guess the latter because I also had them test for the quantities of various higher alcohols and esters and this would certainly be done by GC or HPLC). I also had them test for protein content. The bottom line was that while there were small differences in protein, higher alcohols and esters, the differences were negligible except for the IBUs. Since the test was between "force the foam out of the fermenter" and "let the foam fall back in" it is quite obvious that "remove the foam manually" will affect the bitterness also. How much is dependent on how thoroughly you do it. No doubt a small part of the foam falls back in even with blowoff, so it is theoretically possible that you could even have fractionally *more* bitterness loss with skimming, but we humans are far from perfect and therefore, it is more likely that skimming will result in a loss of bitterness somewhere between 0 and 17% relative to letting the foam fall back in. My educated guess is that it is likely to be closer to 17% than to 0%."' While I agree with Al's interpretation and extrapolation. I don't ever recall an experiment in which skimming was demonstrated to be useful in affecting the bitterness of beer. Does anyone else? In my own experience, I have never noticed a difference, but I did not do this scientifically. Didn't compare top and botttom fermenting yeast. Just couldn't see a difference in taste with whatever yeast I tried this with long ago ( which was likely a British brewery top fermenting yeast ) and stopped skimming to reduce the chance of infection. From time to time I do skim to collect yeast and maintain a top fermenting character, thus my suggestion to use a paint edger. I assumed the obvious insolubiity of the "scum" was an indication that it would not contribute to additonal bitterness or "yeast bite" by redissolving. No attempt was made to measure hop bitterness quantitatively. Based on Al's result it is likely there was a difference, but within my ability to notice a significant difference. I probably was not as effficient at foam removal as a blowoff would be.I doubt I did a triangle test or any such thing in those days. These were likely bitters anyway and the senses are usually logartihmic, decreasing in reponse to higher levels. So no apparent difference in bitterness by taste is probably reasonable In my case, much of the "scum" clings to the side of the 5 gallon fermenter as the head falls and is a sort of automatic skimming, I guess, This same circumstance prevails with carboys, as I remember trying to scrub those rings off in my early fermenting days. So, in the absence of other information, I believe my conclusion to not bother skimming, while not necessarily valid for large fermenters, is perhaps appropriate for small fermenters of the size we use in homebrewing, since I don't know if 13-17% IBU difference, with skimming even less, is significant. OTOH, Others have commented on wanting to remove the scum since it tastes so nasty. Keep on Brewin' Dave Burley Return to table of contents
[Prev HBD] [Index] [Next HBD] [Back]
HTML-ized on 01/13/00, by HBD2HTML version 1.2 by K.F.L.
webmaster at hbd.org, KFL, 10/9/96