---

	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:
  "fur" on sides of bottles (Aaron Perry)
  US/metric units (John Wilkinson)
  Fat (John Wilkinson)
  Tom's bugs and Pat's stoppers ("Sean Richens")
  Saving Rodenbach Grand Cru (phil sides jr)
  Thermally conductive adhesive ("Dan Schultz")
  Wahl and Henius on eBay (drury)
  Re; Wheat flour (William Frazier)
  Re; Aerating--O2 vs. Shaking (William Frazier)
  Re: aeration/dumb fermenter idea (Joseph Gibbens)
  How To WinThe Town Over- Skunk Style ("Phil & Jill Yates")
  Wyeast cocci and yeast culturing ("Fred L. Johnson")
  bottle fur, %extractvs. %wt., and repitching slurry ("Czerpak, Pete")
  Lactic acid woes/Caladonian Double Dark Ale ("Philip J Wilcox")
  Bottle Fur ("Pannicke, Glen A.")
  Re: Biere de Garde Flavour (Jeff Renner)
  Aeration vs. O2 (Nathan Kanous)
  O2 solubility (RCAYOT)
  re: Aerating--O2 vs. Shaking (Lou.Heavner)
  New mill (kevin m mueller)
  Biere de garde (Jeremy Bergsman)
  Activated Carbon/O2 (AJ)
  Re: Color (Bass Ale) erratum (Spencer W Thomas)
  Mash hopping and problems with late hopping (Brian Lundeen)
  Bung ("Alex MacGillivray")
  Fermentap? ("J. Doug Brown")
  Baker's Yeast ? ("Francois Zinserling")
  Agar as finings (Elizabeth Blades)
  gabf (JPullum127)
  just say no (Jim Liddil)
  Almost Perfect Digital Temperature Controller for Brewing (WayneM38)
  Unmalted Wheat ("Jack Schmidling")
  now we know! ("Thomas D. Hamann")
  Foam Stoppers ("John Slavik")
  Bottle Fur (Dan Listermann)
  Figureing ETOH (Vance J Stringham)


* Beer is our obsession and we're late for therapy!

* Entry deadline for the Mayfare Homebrew Competition is 3/15/00 
* See http://www.maltosefalcons.com/ for more information

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, 08 Feb 2000 23:11:43 -0400
From: Aaron Perry <vspbcb at earthlink.net>
Subject: "fur" on sides of bottles

I'm new to the list (just got my second copy),  but I've been brewing
for about 5 years.
I hope this is not a copywite infringement .  In Charlie Papazian's "The
Home Brewers Companion", He writes on page 100 about noticing yeast
clining to the sides of bottles.
He says he turned up some research form belgian brewers who found that
yeast has the same electrical charge as glass, and is usually repelled.
Sometimes when yeast are deficient in certain nutrients, they take on a
different charge and become attracted to the sides of the bottle.
Hope this solves the mystery for everyone.
Also, why motorize your Valley Mill?  I hand crank mine, even for 11
gal. IPA's It's a great workout!! (where can I get a motor?)

Aaron (no affiliation with Charlie Papazian or Valley Mill) Perry
vspbcb at earthlink.net




Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 08 Feb 2000 22:08:57 -0600
From: John Wilkinson <jandjwilkins at earthlink.net>
Subject: US/metric units

The scurrilous Aleman (his choice of moniker, not mine) wrote:

>Pretty bad really. I mean when you revolted and kicked us out, you didn't
>even have the sense to stick with imperial standards :'> I mean there are 20
>fl oz to the pint not 16! and a pint is 563 (completely arbitrary) ml
>(IIRC).

If I am not mistaken (not entirely unlikely) the Imperial measure was
not well define in 1776.  I think there were numerous versions and the
US (the "colonies") merely adopted a different standard than England.  I
think we may have chosen the correct version, after all.  At least in
the US "a pint's a pound" if not the the whole world round.  I believe
that at the time not even spelling of English words was completely
agreed upon.  Certainly the language diverged.  Hell, here in Texas it
continued to diverge.

John Wilkinson - Grapevine, Texas, USA


Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 08 Feb 2000 22:13:31 -0600
From: John Wilkinson <jandjwilkins at earthlink.net>
Subject: Fat

I don't mean to pick on the Scurrilous Aleman but he wrote:

>OH NO NOT AGAIN!!!!  beer doesn't make you fat, I just gives you big >bones!

It never gives me big bones.  Just the opposite.

John Wilkinson - Grapevine, Texas


Return to table of contents


Date: Mon, 7 Feb 2000 21:39:47 -0600
From: "Sean Richens" <srichens at sprint.ca>
Subject: Tom's bugs and Pat's stoppers

Re. Tom's wild yeast with the pointy ends are also known as *apiculate*
yeasts, which is a fancy way of saying yeast with pointy ends.  You're going
to get a ton of posts (or about 1 tonne because we're metric in Canada)
saying "aha! you've got *Schizosaccharomyces pombe*.  I can't find my
reference, which annoys me no end and for which I apologize.

The species name *pombe* indicates it comes from African homebrew, which is,
shall we say, a culturally acquired taste (made some, started to like it).
It is apparently used commercially to make slightly bad wine from really bad
grapes.  The cocci may or may not be a problem.  I've never looked at a
successful beer  under the microscope, but there's probably a decent
population.  Solve your wild yeast problem, and most of the cocci will go
away too, I figure.

Re. Pat's observation of foam bungs on the flasks giving better propagation,
I've seen them used for growing aerobic bacteria in shake flasks, so I'm
sure better oxygen exchange is the reason.  Foam is a whole lot easier than
the traditional technique of tying up balls of cotton wool in gauze squares.

Sean Richens
srichens at sprint.ca



Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 08 Feb 2000 23:24:36 -0500
From: phil sides jr <psides at carl.net>
Subject: Saving Rodenbach Grand Cru

I never want to have to say "I remember this style of sour Flanders Red
Ales..."  If you haven't already, please take a minute to send an email
to these folks (even if you don't like Lactobacillus) and maybe they
will reconsider...

Reprinted without permission (I think this is an appropriate use) from
RBPMail 6.02:

EDITORIAL: SAVE RODENBACH GRAND CRU
Fans of Rodenbach Grand Cru mounted a vocal campaign in the last two
weeks to save it after reports that Rodenbach might discontinue brewing
the classic Belgian red ale. Even beer drinkers who don't like Rodenbach

Grand Cru -- and more don't than do -- should care just as much. There
is more at stake than a single beer.

It sounds alarmist to suggest that not only a 4-star beer but eventually

a treasured Belgian brewery and perhaps even a beer style might be lost.

The reports are not confirmed, and right now the brewery continues to
craft the beer. Generations of Americans, however, have suffered through

the mainstreaming of beer. Thus when it appears others may be headed
down that ugly road it's hard not to run out, arms waving, yelling, "No,

no! Don't do it!"

The Palm Brewery has made changes since it took controlling interest in
Rodenbach less than two years ago. Now come these reports that it has
already discontinued making Rodenbach Alexander and put the Grand Cru on

a one-year trial.

"Rodenbach has been losing share in Belgium," said Wendy Littlefield of
Vanberg & Dewulf, which imports Rodenbach to the United States and has
not been informed of the rumored changes. "Children are growing up with
Coke, developing sweet tastes and they don't have the palate for these
sour beers." Beer drinkers have always hated or loved the distinctive
West Flanders sour beers. Today, it seems fewer than ever love them.

Littlefield's husband and partner, Don Feinberg, was recently in
Belgium. Palm officials told him they want to concentrate on using the
beer known simply as Rodenbach to build its brand. Rodenbach currently
is a blend of two beers: one stronger and aged from 18 to 24 months, and

the other not quite as strong and aged five to six weeks.

The aged beer, unblended, is bottled as Rodenbach Grand Cru. Clearly,
the future of Rodenbach (often referred to as Rodenbach Classic in the
U.S.) comes into doubt if the older portion of the blend is eliminated.
Michael Jackson describes these West Flanders red ales as "the most
refreshing beers in the world."

"We've been getting calls from bars across the country," Littlefield
said. "It's obvious that people in the states want (the Grand Cru)."
Most learned of its possible demise through the Internet. Dann Paquette,

head brewer at North East Brewing Co. in Boston, began the grassroots
campaign after returning from a trip to Belgium where he was told about
the changes.

In little more than two weeks, his original message was forwarded
thousands of times and copied into numerous newsgroups, inspiring even
more messages. Some have focused on saving the beer, others on attacking

Palm. Littlefield said the attacks are unfair. "There are white knights
and not-so white knights and Palm is one of the good guys," she said.
"Palm and Duvel have really championed the independent breweries."

The Rodenbach Brewery and its Grand Cru are both treasures. Rodenbach's
maturation halls are spectacular; one holds more than 100 oak tuns. One
tun dates back to 1868, many to the turn of the century and it takes
four coopers to maintain them. Oak, multiple yeast strains and multiple
fermentations are the keys to producing Rodenbach's unique beers.

"There isn't a brewery like it in the world," Littlefield said. "Nobody
would open a brewery like it today."

Paquette agrees. He knows that if Grand Cru production were halted, it
likely would not be revived and would be nearly impossible to duplicate
elsewhere. "You don't just start up a new brewery like that," he said.
"Once they stop doing what they are doing the way they are doing it,
it's gone."

Grand Cru isn't gone yet. "It will make a difference if thousands of
emails demonstrate the seriousness of people's affection for this beer,"

Littlefield said. Vanberg & Dewulf will collect any emails sent to its
website (http://www.belgianexperts.com) and forward them.

Many may choose to contact the brewery directly at:
PR at palm-nv.be
Brouwerij Palm N.V.
P.R. Department-Peter Buelens
Steenhuffeldorp 3
B-1840 Steenhuffel
tel: 052/31.74.67
fax: 052/31.23.44

Even if you've never tasted Rodenbach's beers -- or if you have and
hated them -- it is still worth taking the time to write. Have you ever
looked at an old beer ad or picked up an empty bottle from a brewery
long out of business and wondered what the beer tasted like? Maybe it
was lousy, maybe it was great. You will never know.

We know about Rodenbach Grand Cru. Let's hope we never have to wonder in

the future.



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




Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2000 22:18:58 -0800
From: "Dan Schultz" <dschultz at primenet.com>
Subject: Thermally conductive adhesive

Peter J. Calinski was looking for a thermally conductive adhesive:

Try E V Roberts. They should be in the white pages of any big city. Also
http://www.evroberts.com/ . They should have what you are looking for.

For a cheaper route, take ceramic dust and add it into a two part epoxy. Add
it until saturation to the individual parts first, then mix the two. The
question is where to get the ceramic dust. If you have problems finding what
you need, let me know. My company uses some nicely thermally conductive
fillers for thermoplastics and I suspect I could get you 100g or so.

Burp,
 -Dan




Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 09 Feb 2000 17:32:49 +1100
From: drury <drury at zip.com.au>
Subject: Wahl and Henius on eBay

For the Collectors:

http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?MfcISAPICommand=ViewItem&item=254727100

Apologies for spilling the beans to those who were planning to bid.
That probably includes me, but the seller will ship to the US only.

Gil Drury

Sydney, Australia.


Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 9 Feb 2000 06:33:27 +0000
From: William Frazier <billfrazier at worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re; Wheat flour

Seems like I remember, from a George De Piro post, that wheat 
gelatinizes between 125 and 145F.  Since this falls into the
normal mash temperature range, no need to do a cereral mash.

        Bill Frazier
        Olathe, Kansas



Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 9 Feb 2000 06:52:38 +0000
From: William Frazier <billfrazier at worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re; Aerating--O2 vs. Shaking

Pete - I don't think you're all wet, unless you take your hand off the
gallon while you are shaking it.  Al Korzonas seems to agree.  In his book
he says you can reach 80% of the O2 saturation in wort by shaking a carboy
for 4 minutes.  This was about the same as using compressed air for the same
time period.  Using pure oxygen, the same saturation was reached in 1 minute.  

It's pretty simple to rock a large carboy of wort back and forth for a few
minutes to aerate a wort and if you're careful you can keep your hands out
of it.

BTW, A. J. deLange provided the data for this part of Al's book.

        Bill Frazier
        Olathe, Kansas



Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 9 Feb 2000 03:00:41 -0600
From: Joseph Gibbens <jgibbens at umr.edu>
Subject: Re: aeration/dumb fermenter idea

Pete Calinski asked about O2 disolving in water under different 
concentrations.  The reaction O2(gas) <-> O2(aqueous) is affected by the 
partial pressure of O2 for the reaction.  The activity of oxygen in air 
is lower than the activity of pure oxygen.  Thus, the equilibrium amount 
of oxygen that can be dissolved into wort is dependent on the composition 
of the gas used to introduce oxygen to the wort.  The question is, does 
this matter?  I don't know how much O2 yeast needs for a healthy 
fermentation.  (Depends on the pitching rate doesn't it?)   
You can get more oxygen into wort by injecting it with pure O2 but is 
there a point where more oxygenation becomes delterious, and if so, where 
is it?

Ok, here's the dumb fermenter idea.  New Sanke kegs have a very shallow 
cone bottom... Its not enough to get sediment to freely flow.  What would 
happen if the keg were subjected to a slight viabration like a speaker 
next to it playing a constant frequency?  If it works, I could just weld 
a piece of 2" diameter pipe to the bottom of the keg (instead of trying 
to fabricate a cone) to form a sediment well.  This is intended for 
removing hot break and cold break. (counter flow chiller).  I'd love to 
experiment with this one, so ideas are welcome.

Joe Gibbens
 -You know its gone too far when you'd rather sit at home and design 
brewing equipment than go out and have a beer-


Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 9 Feb 2000 22:30:33 +1100
From: "Phil & Jill Yates" <yates at acenet.com.au>
Subject: How To WinThe Town Over- Skunk Style

I think it fair to say I am not the most popular of posters on the HBD. I
seem to have the uncanny ability to upset almost anyone. The fact that Eric
Fouch has never spoken to me since the "Michigan Lakes verses the Ocean"
issue is proof enough. And more recently my personal suggestion to Doc Pivo
that he have himself shot from a cannon to streak across Sydney Harbour as a
New Year's Eve party trick has been treated with a similar response -
silence! And Doc Pivo is not even with us anymore. My track record is
appalling!

But moving to Burradoo I was to remedy all this. Here I planned to be the
nice guy on the block, someone you were pleased to have living next door to
you. No cat swinging, no eating kitchen walls, just a nice guy brewing beer.
Alas, my story follows.

This morning I received a card from the post office marked "requiring urgent
collection" Funny note I thought, never had one like that before. When I
rang to ask what might this be, a stony voice advised "Mr Yates, I don't
know what you are in to, and I don't care, but come and get this stinking
parcel NOW!!!

Those of you who have put up with my crap may recall that last year I
challenged the description of a light struck beer as being "skunky smelling"
on the basis that no one outside the USA had a reference to a "skunk smell".

Well our good friend Mr Ray Kruse was determined to enlighten me. He has
managed to acquire and send a bottle of skunk essence all the way from the
USA to find me (and everyone else!!!) here in Burradoo. Though packed in
paper and endless plastic bags and put inside a large cardboard box, the
smell has permeating out and nearly closed the post office down! I walked
down the street with my treasure and people were jumping off the footpath to
avoid me. Strange thing is it didn't smell so bad to me, though I must admit
I would prefer Fuggles for dry hopping!

Thanks Ray! When I got home with your gift Jill burst into tears and said
she longed for a normal life, something I have apparently never been able to
give her.

And what you have done for my image in Burradoo is unfathomable damage.

Cheers
Phil



Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 09 Feb 2000 07:46:37 -0500
From: "Fred L. Johnson" <FLJohnson at worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Wyeast cocci and yeast culturing

Michael Mackyka recently wrote:

> -Fully half of the Wyeast smak-paks would show a slow growing cocci
> straight out of the bag.  These cocci didn't grow well on YPD plates, but
> they
> grew in the Wyeast starter (aerated)...

This is VERY disturbing.  Has this been confirmed by anyone else?

I have recently begun culturing yeast using continuous aeration and
stirring, continuous infusion feeding, maintaining very low glucose
concentrations in the wort--a strictly aerobic, nonfermenting starter.
I was wondering if this method would hasten the growth of bacteria
resident in the smack pack.

Is this culture method more conducive or less conducive to appearance
of petite mutants than anaerobic, high glucose, fermenting cultures.

Fred L. Johnson
Apex, North Carolina
USA


Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 9 Feb 2000 08:45:37 -0500 
From: "Czerpak, Pete" <Pete.Czerpak at siigroup.com>
Subject: bottle fur, %extractvs. %wt., and repitching slurry

A few folks have mentioned the presence of "bottle fur" in some of their
beers.  rather than a sunlight or temperature induced thing, i would think
that the bottle insides are maybe not perfectly smooth (on a microscopic
level), perhaps due to both cleaning and manufacturing, and therefore the
yeast and other precipitating and settling compounds are more likely to
attach to this pseudo-nucleating site and continue to coagulate and grow
until they are so big that the gravity force on the particle pulls them away
from the glass and drops them to the bottom.  It may be a charge thing too ,
in that the rough spots are charged slightly different than the surrounding
glass.  I do agree with the slight twist of the bottle trick to dislodge
them and drop them to the bottom though.  I tend to do this with my
fermentors as well to drop the yeast sticking to the carboy near the bottom
also into the yeast cake to get a little cleaner beer with less lost volume.

As to the % extract vs. % weight, I can not comment on what the pros do
verses most of us amateurs, however I do believe that it will make a
difference.  The biggest difference is mainly when using dark grains like
roasted, black patent, and chocolate that tend to have a much lower lab
extract than crystal, 2 row, etc.  The difference is extract is about 20-25%
for this comparison.  However the fact that you generally use pretty small
amounts of the dark grains does offset this difference. As long as you
mention or find out your basis, I think you are safest.  When I do post or
email recipes, I try to communicate if my % are weight or extract based.  I
do think that people using weight % is easier to think of, however,
especially in a "off the top of my head" answer to a question type of way.

Kurt asked about how long can you practically wait for repitching a yeast
slurry.  My rule of thumb is about 4 weeks in the fridge.  make sure to
smell your slurry before possibly ruining a batch though.  I may extend this
to about 6 weeks however, I would be sure to restart your slurry then to
make sure its still viable. for example:

I did an IPA late in the summer that the yeast had waited too long in the
fridge (maybe 7 or 8 weeks even).  I restarted it the night before my brew
and it wasn't going by the time I had my brew finished.  I paid George
Depiro a visit for some Nottingham slurry to take care of this little issue
(just in case).  I did decide to let my beer wait until the next morning and
low and behold the starter had taken off and I added this to my now night
old wort.  No problems with infections or off-flavors though.  The moral is,
if you wait to long, make sure to make a starter to get your yeast going
before adding them to your batch. or have some dry yeast around or a
friendly prewery to donate slurry in an emergency......

By the way, I do favor repitching slurry, the most I have ever done is about
4 batches from the same slurry (about 1 batch every week or 1.5 weeks).
Occassionaly I do divide a slurry up.  Also, I am a fan of washing although
its such a pain that I usually pitch the whole slurry though. My last 2
barley wines were from the fourth repitchings of Wyeast 1028 and Wyeast
1056.  Tasted great going into secondary after 10 days of primary.  1.095
down to 1.026 with the W1028 and 1.095 down to 1.020 with the W1056. I'm
about half through the secondary cycles now.  Into the keg with dry hops
soon and then maybe I'll be tasting by springtime.

Regards and hope the comments help.

Current tappings are an american browne ale and 2 versions of IPA (one with
all cascade hops and one with 1/2 munich malt and hopped similar to hop
devil - positively yummY)

Pete Czerpak
Albany, NY  


Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 9 Feb 2000 08:52:41 -0500
From: "Philip J Wilcox" <pjwilcox at cmsenergy.com>
Subject: Lactic acid woes/Caladonian Double Dark Ale

Dear HBD,

At our stout meeting last night someone brought in a bottle of Caladonian Double
Dark Ale. This is a most unusual Scottish Ale. It is very pungent in a way not
familiar to anyone present. It wasn't heather either. I had some of my Heather
Honey there to sample and they weren't all that similar. The bottle said it was
brewed in Edinburg, with only Scottish Malt, Yeast, Water, and they are the last
brewery in Brittian to still use this varity of Hop.  Anyone know anything more
about this beer?

It has been 3 or 4 generations since I have washed my yeast. Since I now have a
pH meter I figure I could now safely do an acid wash. Is thier a proper pH for
doing an acid wash? And how would I prepare it using 88% lactic acid how much
(either in drops or 1/4 teaspoons) and a quart of water?

Please help the Chemically disinclined?

Phil





Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 09 Feb 2000 09:23:53 -0500
From: "Pannicke, Glen A." <glen_pannicke at merck.com>
Subject: Bottle Fur

Dave Burley writes about bottle fur:

>Dan Listerman and I have both
>experienced bottle fur ( i.e translucent
>particles) clinging to the inside of the bottle

This is the perfect explanation of of the pheomenon I witnessed however, my
bottles were coated coated around the entire bottom 1/4 of the bottle and
not to a single side.  The coating fell to the bottom when the bottles were
agitated.  I have only witnessed this in one brew and now I remember the
specifics:

English style barley wine
SG: 1.110
FG: 1.022 (or therabouts)
Primary fermentation using White Labs Irish Ale Yeast (WLP004)
Secondary fermentation using a mixture of White Labs Irish and White Labs
Burton Ale (WLP023)
No fining agents used
The beer endured much rousing over the long secondary fermentation
Conditioned in brown bottles, closed case (dark) in my utility room (warmest
room) for 2 weeks

I believe this is definately a yeast phenomenon which may be attributed to a
combination of the yeast strain and the environmental conditions.  Dave also
mentions charge and that rings a bell about some yeasts which do cling to
the glass walls when they settle out because of charge.  Dusty yeasts?!?  It
would be interesting to see what others have observed.

Glen Pannicke


Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 9 Feb 2000 09:03:21 -0500
From: Jeff Renner <nerenner at umich.edu>
Subject: Re: Biere de Garde Flavour

Graham Sanders <GrahamS at bsa.qld.gov.au> asks for comments on his results so
far on the flavo(u)r of BdG.  I was at Dan McConnell's house (prop. of
Yeast Culture Kit Co.) several years ago when he opened and cultured a
bottle of BdG a neighbor had hand-carried from a brewpub or micro in
Alsace.  It was the finest I ever had.  Don't know if it was because of
freshness or what, and I don't know what results Dan got.  I'd suggest
asking him (mailto:YCKCo at aol.com ).  He probably saved the yeast.  Don't
know about other critters he may have cultured from it.

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, 09 Feb 2000 08:38:48 -0600
From: Nathan Kanous <nlkanous at pharmacy.wisc.edu>
Subject: Aeration vs. O2

A couple of folks have done their best to de-bunk the use of pure O2 for 
oxygenating wort prior to fermentation.  One thing that comes to my mind it 
pitching rate.  If your pitching rate is "low" for homebrew standards, I'd 
bet that pure O2 would be the best alternative.  If you're pitching 
adequate amounts of yeast, then O2 requirements will decrease 
significantly.  So, for the neophyte brewer that is severely underpitching, 
pure O2 will probably have more beneficial effect than for the "seasoned" 
brewer that is pitching a significantly larger amount of yeast from a 
starter.

Bottom line?  It depends on how you brew.  As with a large portion of the 
knowledge that passes my eyes on this forum, it depends on a lot of 
factors.  Just my $0.02.
nathan in madison, wi (home of the Big and Huge Homebrew Competition)


Return to table of contents


Date: 09 Feb 2000 08:35:09 -0500
From: RCAYOT at solutia.com
Subject: O2 solubility

     regarding a recent post:
     
     From: "Peter J. Calinski" <PCalinski at iname.com>
     Subject: Aerating--O2 vs. Shaking
     
     Peter, your analysis is very good except for one thing, the 
     equillibrium concentration for a gas dissolved in a liquid is 
     proportional to the temperature and the partial pressurre of the gas 
     above the liquid!  For air the partial pressure of oxygen is ~0.2 
     atmospheres.  For pure oxygen it is 1.0 atmospheres, so you can get 
     more O2 INTO the wort using pure O2, however, the O2 will diffuse out 
     of the wort and reach its equillibrium with air after a while.  
     Capping with an air lock will keep the atmosphere above the wort rich 
     in O2, and the yeast will utilize the O2 faster than the O2 can 
     diffuse out.  I have read (considering my poor memory...) that an air 
     purge results in ~8ppm O2 dissolved in wort, O2 purge results in 
     ~12-18ppm.  
     
     Roger ayotte



Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 9 Feb 2000 09:02:55 -0600
From: Lou.Heavner at frco.com
Subject: re: Aerating--O2 vs. Shaking


      "Peter J. Calinski" <PCalinski at iname.com> writes a few paragraphs
     arguing that there should be little difference in O2 concentration in
     wort following shaking vs treatment with pure O2 and asks,

     "Am I all wet or is this theory valid?"

     Theoretically valid, I think, except...  The question you have to ask
     yourself, though, is the solution at equilibrium?  And with what?
     That is, do you have O2 concentration gradients in the solution with
     O2 lean "areas" after shaking.  Is it possible to supersaturate the
     solution with pure O2 and how long does it take to reach a stable
     equilibrium with air after the O2 is taken away?  Remember, O2
     concentration at equilibrium will be determined by the O2 partial
     pressure in the gas/vapor phase as well as temperature.  When bubbling
     pure O2, the partial pressure will be greater than 1 atmosphere while
     shaking without pure O2 exposes the solution to ~ .2 atmospheres of
     O2.  I believe AJ (Thanks, btw, for all of your many contributions
     over the years to this forum) did some experiments which indicated
     that you get get about as close to equilibrium with air as possible by
     just pouring the wort back and forth between to containers a few
     times.  I imagine **QDA** a stir plate used with starters probably
     also approaches this depending on the kinetics of O2 uptake by the
     yeast and the geometry of the starter. **end QDA**  I believe his
     experiments also did show a significant increase in dissolved O2
     following the use of pure O2 so the empirical data backs the
     theoretical.  I don't remember if he provided enough data to get a
     feel for the rate at which O2 goes into or out of solution.

     Cheers!

     Lou Heavner - Austin, TX


Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 9 Feb 2000 10:55:44 -0500 (EST)
From: kevin m mueller <kmmuellr at engin.umd.umich.edu>
Subject: New mill

I'm just starting to get into all grain brewing, and my dad was nice
enough to get me a new mill for christmas.  I was wondering if any of you
have had experience with it, and could give me pointers on the best
adjustments or modifications that I could/should make.  Also, what factory
setting gives the best crush.

Its an italian mill made by Marcato, called the Marga Mulino.

Thanks in advance, and feel free to reply directly.

Kevin
kmmuellr at engin.umd.umich.edu                 



Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 09 Feb 2000 08:31:34 -0800
From: Jeremy Bergsman <jeremybb at stanford.edu>
Subject: Biere de garde

Graham writes:

> The evidence to date is 
> (a)  Cork is involved somehow
> (b)  There is some evidence microbes might be involved.
> (c)  Time is a factor

I don't know if I would call (b) evidence but....

In the preparation of doctored beer samples I have encountered beire de
garde flavors from massively oxidizing darker colored beers.  By "massively
oxidizing" I mean pouring out a little beer so as to have 15-20 mL of head
space, purging the headspace with O2, and incubating the beer at ~80C for a
couple hours.  By "darker colored beers" I mean pretty much anything over
10L.  I get massive earthy, musty odors (and other problems) this way.  In
addition to these flavors, Biere de garde will often have the autolysis
flavor (sometimes described as rubbery but that's not how it seems to me)
also common in aged Belgian bottle conditioned beers.  I believe that (a)
the cork and (c) age contribute to heavy oxidation and that (c) and the
bottle conditioning lead to the autolysis.  To me this explains Beire de
garde pretty well.  But then I don't really like them very much....
- -- 
Jeremy Bergsman
jeremybb at stanford.edu
http://www.stanford.edu/~jeremybb


Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 09 Feb 2000 12:03:48 -0500
From: AJ <ajdel at mindspring.com>
Subject: Activated Carbon/O2

Paul Schick commented on heating activated carbon. GAC is reactivated by
heating which does indeed cause it to release that which is adsorbed. If
you have ever reactivitated some (as, for example, from an aquarium
filter) you will know that the aromas released are not pleasant.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Pete asks if he is all wet concerning his take on oxygen dissolution.
He's at least a little moist. Eventually gas will dissolve in a liquid
to the point where the partial pressure of the gas in the water is equal
to the partial pressure in the gas above it. In air, the partial
pressure of oxygen is about a fifth of an atmosphere. If pure oxygen is
used, then the pressure is 1 atmosphere and five times as much oxygen
will eventually dissolve (the mole fraction of the dissolved gas is
proportional to the partial pressure of the gas over the liquid - the
Henry constant expresses the proportionality). Dissolved oxygen meters
usually have at least a scale that reads in % (and another in mg/L). The
value indicated is the percentage of oxygen in the solution relative to
the amount that would be dissolved if the liquid were in equilibrium
with air. If you do the air shaking experiment and use a DO meter, it
will, after enough shaking, read 100%. If you lower an airstone
connected to an oxygen bottle into the carboy and bubble oxygen, the
meter will read above 100%. If you bubble enough oxygen to replace all
the air in the carboy with oxygen the meter will read close to 500%. If
you now go away and then come back and read the  meter after some time
the percentage reading will be seen to be gradually declining as the
oxygen in the carboy diffuses into the air and, accordingly, dissolved
oxygen leaves the liquid to reestablish equilibrium with the air.

The trick with respect to brewing is to get the oxygen level up to about
200% (actually, individual yeast strains have particular levels they are
happiest with) and pitch enough yeast that they will consume the oxygen
before it has time to escape to the air. With a carboy, sealing the neck
with a lock keeps the PaO2 over the wort high for a long time. In a
fermenter, the high volume to surface area ratio prevents rapid escape.
If the yeast are plentiful enough they will consume the oxygen in an
amazingly short time - half an hour in one experiment I did.



Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 09 Feb 2000 13:36:10 -0500
From: Spencer W Thomas <spencer at engin.umich.edu>
Subject: Re: Color (Bass Ale) erratum

I noticed one inaccuracy in my posting.  I said "Finally, unless your
monitor is already gamma corrected (i.e., you're using a
Macintosh. :-)"  Well, Macintosh now has a fancy monitor calibration
panel, which gives you a choice of gamma correction values at the
I sure don't know!)

=Spencer



Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 9 Feb 2000 12:48:36 -0600 
From: Brian Lundeen <blundeen at post.rrc.mb.ca>
Subject: Mash hopping and problems with late hopping

I found the following at the Paddock Wood Brewing Supplies web site, and
wanted to get some feedback from the HBD collective.

(begin)

Here at Paddock Wood, we have been experimenting with Mash Hopping. The hops
are added to the mash, rather than to the wort as in FWH. In this way we
have been able to use pelletized hops and let the mash bed act as a filter.
The hop usage appears to be the same as in FWH, but we have not performed
any technical data gathering or analysis. 

Late hopping means adding the hops for the last 15 minutes of the boil or
even at strike out when the wort is taken from the burner. Actual
chromatographic analysis indicates that hops added at this stage impart
nothing good to the beer, and can even impart off flavors at worst (See De
Clerck and Fix). This observation by two noted brewing scientists is very
controversial, and goes against decades of "official method". 

(end)

Is anyone familiar with the research to which he refers? Is anyone doing FWH
or mash hopping in place of (not in addition to) late hop additions, and how
do the results compare?

Cheers

Brian


Return to table of contents


Date: Sun, 9 Feb 1992 09:58:13 -0900
From: "Alex MacGillivray" <sockeye at worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Bung

Anyone know the size bung needed to fit a sanky keg?



Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 09 Feb 2000 14:13:59 -0500
From: "J. Doug Brown" <jbrown at mteer.com>
Subject: Fermentap?

Hello,
  Has anybody tried a Fermentap?  This is a setup which allows conical
fermentation through an inverted carboy.  Can one easily harvest yeast
from the carboy using this setup?  Does this setup work well for racking
without transferring trub?  Is this system prone to leaking, or other
problems?  Do you fill the carboy in an inverted position, or do you
manhandle and invert the carboy once it is full?   

  Thanks for any information 
   J. Doug Brown
- -- 
		     J. Doug Brown - Fairmont, WV
			Sr. Software Engineer
	         jbrown at mteer.com     jbrown at ewa.com
		www.labs.net/kbrown       www.ewa.com


Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 9 Feb 2000 21:24:04 +0200
From: "Francois Zinserling" <francois at designtech.co.za>
Subject: Baker's Yeast ?

A few mentions have been made about using brewer's yeast for baking. What
about the opposite ?
Could I brew with baker's yeast ? Will it affect sanitization (sanity ??).

Since bread gets baked at temperatures around and above 200 degrees C, the
suppliers of bakers yeast may not be too concerned as to what could be
lurking inside the packets. This may prove too much for a well sanitized
brew.

I appreciate any CH==OO-OH+H2O replies, but plain english will do just fine.
(heh heh)

Beergardens to all ..
Francois in ZA



Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 9 Feb 2000 19:43:20 GMT
From: blades at airtime.co.uk (Elizabeth Blades)
Subject: Agar as finings

 "S. Wesley" 

Wrote in HBD3244

".............................  Looking 
at the brownie pans of Agar and Gelatin side by side got me thinking 
about whether or not Agar might work as a fining agent.  I realize 
that they are very different in their structure one being protein 
based and the other carbohydrate, but it might be worth a try.  I 
would do it myself, but I don't have any beer that needs fining at 
present.  Does anyone have any idea about whether or not this would 
work?"


It does work.

Us veggies use it as a substitute for gelatine in all manner of things 
including finings.


In re baking bread with beer yeast,I do this all the time but IME wine yeast 
works better.


HTH


Liz Blades




Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 9 Feb 2000 15:55:59 EST
From: JPullum127 at aol.com
Subject: gabf

To: JPullum127 at aol.com (JPullum127 at aol. com), acmebrew at juno.com

It is official that the GABF will be Oct. 5-7 at Colorado Convention Center
Hall A. The Marriott will be the host hotel again. See you there.

Paul Gatza (mailto:/paul at aob.org)
Director, American Homebrewers Association
736 Pearl St., Boulder, CO 80302        voice(303)447-0816 x 122
fax (303) 447-2825
Join the AHA at http://www.beertown.org



Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 09 Feb 2000 14:00:44 -0700 (MST)
From: Jim Liddil <jliddil at VMS.ARIZONA.EDU>
Subject: just say no


> 
> Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2000 01:23:15 -0500 (EST)
> From: MICHAEL WILLIAM MACEYKA <mmaceyka at welch.jhu.edu>
> Subject: What's in the bag...
> 
> Howdy,
> 
> 	JIm Liddil thinks that the two "yeast" shapes in Tom Meier's beer are
> in fact two different yeasts.  This may well be, but I would be more convinced
> they were different by the differential staining than the different
> morphologies.  I

Actually staining yeast won't tell you much.  What you need to do is get
single isolates and then due assimilation testing with various carbon
sources.  Along with chekcing for growth on cycloheximide and lysine media
for starters
> 
> 	-A single colony would often show many cell morphologies when
> cultured in liquid, and these would change over time.  Restreaking to singles
> would again show roughly the same set of cell morphologies...
> 

This has not been my experience with normal brewing yeast.  My lambic
cultures are another thing.

> 	-Fully half of the Wyeast smak-paks would show a slow growing cocci
> straight out of the bag.  These cocci didn't grow well on YPD plates, but they
> grew in the Wyeast starter (aerated)...
> 
> 	Planned obsolescence?  Draw your own conclusions.
> 

This is because wyeast qa/qc is marginal at best.  I have found bugs in
wyeast packs and Mr Logsdon does not want to here about it.  Call the
local FDA agent in Seattle and tell them to give Wyeast a visit. I bet
theyed love to see if pathogens are being grown by them. :-)

Jim Liddil 



Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 9 Feb 2000 16:08:29 EST
From: WayneM38 at aol.com
Subject: Almost Perfect Digital Temperature Controller for Brewing

I have been visiting the lab equipment sites that have been posted with 
thermometer recommendations and ran across the following:

Traceable Digital Temperature Controller from Control Company, model # 4130 
(at approx. $120.00)

http://www.control3.com/4130.htm

This same controller is sold by other suppliers, such as Fisher Scientific 
(cat. # 11-463-47A) and VWR Scientific Products (Cat. # 61161-300). The 
digital controller has high/low set points, 3.5 foot sensor cable and 
controls a 110 volt, 15 amp, attached relay switched outlet plug.

My first thought was that I had found the perfect controller for my new 20 
gallon heat exchange RIMS system! Plug in the pump, set the mash temp and the 
controller would turn on the pump/selonoid/heating coil flow as needed to 
maintain mash temps. Accurate within 1degree C.
 
The bad news is that it only has a top high temp range of 140F. Need 170-175F 
for mash out.  I have talked with the sales rep from Fisher and was told that 
others have requested a higher range controller (from Fisher) but the 
manufacturer only produces this model/temp range.

The rep from Control Company (ph. 281-482-1714) was less than helpful and 
they do not have an e-mail address on their WEB site.

This 'off the shelf temperature controller', IMHO, would be a great 
alternative to a PID or wide differential Johnson Controls bulb type 
thermometer for brewing purposes, at least for HERMS type systems.

Any ideas on how to get Control Company to bump up the controller set point 
into brewing temp range or know of a similar design with a brewing friendly 
temp range?

Wayne
Botanist Brewer
Big Fun Brewing
http://member.aol.com/bfbrewing/BigFunBrewing.htm


Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 9 Feb 2000 15:16:28 -0600
From: "Jack Schmidling" <arf at mc.net>
Subject: Unmalted Wheat


From: Frightened Suburban Brewer <zemo at ameritech.net>

>I've also been using a 9.6v drill to power the mill.]

>My first attempt at the factory setting jammed
instantly......

>So Jack, et al, I believe that the adjustability of
my MaltMill was directly responsible for the success
of this brew session.

Don't wish to challenge a happy customer but I suspect if you put the hand crank
back on instead of a cordless drill, you would have had no problem crushing the
raw wheat with a fixed mill.  No problem other than a good workout, that is.

I have curshed bushels of raw wheat with mine at the nominal setting but I drive
it with a real motor, viz., 1/2 hp.

js

PHOTO OF THE WEEK  http://user.mc.net/arf/weekly.htm
HOME: Beer, Cheese, Astronomy, Videos  http://user.mc.net/arf



Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 09 Feb 2000 20:06:17 +1000
From: "Thomas D. Hamann" <tdhamann at senet.com.au>
Subject: now we know!

I just have to share this with the digest,
on Tuesday night I went to a beer tasting 
session at the local inn.   It was run by a 
beer rep and he had 8 different lagers 
and ales for us to taste. One of the first 
questions posed was 'what's lager and
what's ale?'  The immediate answer was 
that the ale yeast sits on top of the beer
and the co2 is released straight into the 
atmosphere and the lager yeast works 
at the bottom and the co2 that rises
through the beer leads to a carbonation 
level that is 6 times higher than an ale!
I bit my tongue and drank and drank.....



Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 9 Feb 2000 19:11:19 -0800
From: "John Slavik" <brewer1 at airmail.net>
Subject: Foam Stoppers

I've been following the foam stopper study and had a quick question.  Pat,
how do you sanitize these stoppers?  Pressure cooker, Iodophor or maybe
another method.  I have a couple of these that I think would work great
while using my magnetic stir plate.  Can anyone report on using this
combination for increased growth of their starters.

John   DeSoto, TX

visit my RIMS Homebrewing page  http://web2.airmail.net/brewer1/



Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 9 Feb 2000 20:44:43 -0500
From: Dan Listermann <72723.1707 at compuserve.com>
Subject: Bottle Fur

Dave Burley writes:

<  I also
speculated at the time that  it might be a
heat related phenomenon, but concluded
that it was actually due to light from a
small window not directly shining on
the bottles producing charges on the
bottle wall or on the particles of yeast
or other trub in these  naturally
conditioned bottles.

I theorized that these charges
were neutralized when the yeast
particles migrated to the bottle wall.
The bottles were green, as I recall.>

When I noticed this interesting phenomenon ( pre - kegging days ) I used
mostly amber bottles that were always kept in cardboard cases in a rather
dark basement.  The area where the fur gathered was never exposed to light.
 I didn't have the presence of mind to note the geographic direction of the
fur.  Perhaps magnetism is at play <G>.

Dan Listermann   dan at listermann.com   72723.1707 at compuserve.com


Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 9 Feb 2000 20:50:36 -0500
From: Vance J Stringham <vancenjeannie at juno.com>
Subject: Figureing ETOH

Undoubtedly,

	A question that if it has been asked once, it has been asked a million
times.  What is the best formula for figuring final alcohol (ETOH)
content in beer.  I realize a truly accurate reading would take a
distiling process.  I have seen a couple of formulas:  Starting Gravity -
Final Gravity (decimals included) and that answer multiplied by 105. 
Another remove the decimals then S.G. - F.G. then multiply that answer
times 7.5.  I find a very significant difference using the same S.G. and
F.G. figures in both formulas.  The true final answer is "what's it
matter"... I just would like to know.  Thanks

Vance J. Stringham


Return to table of contents

---