---

	FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
		Digest Janitor: janitor@hbd.org


***************************************************************
       THIS YEAR'S HOME BREW DIGEST BROUGHT TO YOU BY: 

          Northern  Brewer, Ltd. Home Brew Supplies
        http://www.northernbrewer.com  1-800-681-2739

    Support those who support you! Visit our sponsor's site!
********** Also visit http://hbd.org/hbdsponsors.html *********


Contents:
  Re: some painless water chemistry (long) (Jeff Renner)
  Re: Club Yeast Banks (Jeff Renner)
  RE: 15.5 gallon batch ("Houseman, David L")
  15.5 Gallon batch ("Bridges, Scott")
  Water Chemestry without pain (Perez)
  Squirrels, hop relatives and H2O2 (Pat Casey)
  Brewpubs near Mesa AZ ("George Krafcisin")
  parts for running CO2 line into fridge? ("Jorgensen, Jens")
  RE: Club Yeast Banks ("Vernon, Mark")
  Re: Club Yeast Banks ("Pannicke, Glen A.")
  Cheapest suppliers...? ("Ralph Davis")
  Re: Clearing the Smoke (Stacy)" <sgroene at lucent.com>
  'spuriments .... ("Steve Alexander")
  Unibroue/Chimay??? (RiedelD)
  Sanitation Problems ("Tom Byrnes")
  Schlenkerla Rauchbier (smoked beer) and False Bottom ("Boris")
  clearing smoke... (David Harsh)
  equipment for the serious brewer... ("John Todd Larson")


*
* Show your HBD pride! Wear an HBD Badge! 
* http://hbd.org/cgi-bin/shopping
*
* 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 cannot 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.

JANITOR on duty: Pat Babcock and Karl Lutzen (janitor@hbd.org)



----------------------------------------------------------------------


Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 08:44:16 -0500
From: Jeff Renner <JeffRenner at mediaone.net>
Subject: Re: some painless water chemistry (long)

At 6:19 AM -0500 12/20/01, Neitzke, Arnold wrote:
>I read your article this morn and was confused by the following,
>
>bicarbonate, carbonate, chloride, sulfate, etc.  This confused me no
>permanently hard water, and carbonate and sulfate waters.  I then
>
>
>Maybe the HBD cut this up or you mistyped?

Thanks for careful reading.  It should have read:

This confused me no end when I first began brewing and read of 
temporarily and permanently hard water, and carbonate and sulfate 
waters.

I wonder what else got chopped?

Jeff
- -- 
Jeff Renner in Ann Arbor, Michigan USA, JeffRenner at mediaone.net
"One never knows, do one?"  Fats Waller, American Musician, 1904-1943


Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 09:27:21 -0500
From: Jeff Renner <JeffRenner at mediaone.net>
Subject: Re: Club Yeast Banks

Surely the problem the yeast company is complaining of is the selling 
of the yeast with their name attached.  In other words, if you sell 
yeast as Irish Ale Yeast, no problem.  If you sell it as Wyeast 1084 
or White Labs WLP004, then they have a legitimate gripe in my mind. 
You are trading on their name, even if it isn't commercial.  And they 
have to defend their names every single time with legalese stuff if 
they want to retain the exclusive right to their name.  That's what 
Xerox, Kleenex, Band-Aid, Scotch Tape, etc. all do, and what Thermos 
and Macadam failed to do.

The easy solution is to make yeast available by descriptive name 
(i.e., "Irish Ale Yeast"), at least whenever you are doing this 
publicly, like the club newsletter.  You can identify the source if 
asked privately.  This is, after all, what the companies themselves 
do.  They don't sell the aforementioned yeast as Guinness yeast, even 
though we all know it is (or think we know).

I don't think anybody needs to get their shorts in a knot over this.

Jeff
- -- 
Jeff Renner in Ann Arbor, Michigan USA, JeffRenner at mediaone.net
"One never knows, do one?"  Fats Waller, American Musician, 1904-1943


Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 08:35:37 -0600
From: "Houseman, David L" <David.Houseman at unisys.com>
Subject: RE: 15.5 gallon batch

Gil Milone asks about making a 15.5 gallon batch.  I suppose he's asking
about 15.5 gallons because he wants to fill a standard 1/2 barrel keg.  Well
if you have 1/2 barrel kegs, you've got a great fermenter.  A kettle too but
that's the topic for another discussion.  You can pull out the center piece
of the keg, rinse the keg well, and steam sterilize it by boiling some water
in the keg.  Of course to end of with 15.5 gallons you'll need a larger
kettle and fermenter.  The solution here is do what large breweries do, make
multiple batches.  If your fermenter is big enough but not the kettle then
you can make two (or more) batches and ferment in the same container.  If
your fermenter is not big enough, ferment in multiple batches and rack to
the single serving keg.  Keep in mind that you can make less volume of a
higher gravity beer and add [pre-boiled, O2 scrubbed] water to the completed
beer to bring the gravity to the desired point; again what larger commercial
breweries do.

Dave Houseman
SE PA




Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 08:39:25 -0500
From: "Bridges, Scott" <ScottBridges at sc.slr.com>
Subject: 15.5 Gallon batch


Gil writes:
>Has anyone every undertaken brewing a half keg batch? I'm contemplating
>making a 15.5 gallon batch. I'm not really sure how to go about it though,
>because I do not have a fermenter or kettle that big.
 
Probably very few homebrewers ever venture to this size batch.  I have a 3
vessel system using converted 15.5G sankey kegs for hot liquor tank, mash
tun and kettle.  The mash tun could handle the grain required for this size
batch, but the kettle is undersized.  Leaving room in the kettle to avoid
boil-overs, the most I ever put in the kettle is about 14 gals, and I have
to be careful at that.  Assuming a gallon or so loss to evaporation, plus
hops/break material at the bottom and the realistic maximum output from my
rig is about 12-12.5G.  I'd guess that you need a kettle sized at about 20
gallons to end up with the 15.5 gallons that you are proposing.  This takes
a more serious capital investment.  

Of course, it's not unusual for me to run 2 brews through the system
consecutively on brew day and end up with 20 gallons (2 X 10G batches).  You
could do that, and blend the final product in the keg if you seriously
needed to fill up a 15.5 gallon keg.  Personally, I don't normally want to
make that much beer of one style.  I'd rather split it up into 2 smaller
batches and have different beers to drink.

Scott
Brewing in Columbia, SC



Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 10:01:22 -0500
From: Perez <perez at gator.net>
Subject: Water Chemestry without pain

Jeff

Thanks for an informative but still somewhat painful post.
I am a brew water dummy (some would say a bigger dummy than
that, but that is for another post).  As I am studying for
the bjcp exam I continue to pass the water chem section due
to the piercing pain it causes in the back of my eyeball.
For those of us who haven't taken chemistry in 20 years or
so, and didn't pay much attention then, your explanation
does help.  If your target audience is guys like me, then
take the advice from your kids, and dumb it down just a
little.  But I would fear you would lose the more
experienced reader.  Oh, screw 'em, they already know this
stuff anyway.  Do it for the brew dummies!

Thanks

Dave Perez
Hogtown Brewers (Though they may kick me out after this
post)
Gainesville, FL



Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 02:29:42 +1100
From: Pat Casey <patcasey at iprimus.com.au>
Subject: Squirrels, hop relatives and H2O2

I am so disillusioned by the discussion about squirrels, youse (excuse
the dialect) mean that they are not the cute, cuddly and conversational
critters as portrayed in the Disney/Warner Bros cartoons? Here birds are
the problem; one method has been to leave ethanol soaked baits which
when consumed leave the birds unconscious, they are then painted lurid
colours in water based paints. The rationale is that the bird will wake
up with a terrible hangover, and on account of its new colours will be
ostrasized by the rest of its flock and so will be severely discouraged
from munching on the crop in question again. I have no idea how this
would work with squirrels, but I can imagine a hung-over home-brewer
ostrasized by the spouse squinting out of the back screen door at an
equally hung-over and ostrasized squirrel with a certain amount of
empathy.

One of the major offenders as far as marauding birds goes is the galah,
a species of cockatoo. In many areas above ground telephonic cabling
and the like must be made galah proof. There is a traditional Australian
recipe for galah stew, as their meat is tough like that of squirrels it
can probably be easily adapted. For each galah take two stones and boil
together, boil until the stones are soft, boil for another two days then
add the vegetables and condiments, boil for another two hours, discard
the galahs and eat the remainder.

Nathan Kanous wrote,
"Hmm....what's
botanically related to hops, smoked like tobacco (roll your own) and
known
to have been put in beer?  No, we won't go there.  Happy Holidays to all

and to all a good beer."

He omits a further similarity: in both cases it is the seedless females
which is prized.

But while on the subject of hop relatives and traditional Australian
cuisine, the kangaroo makes fine eating, although domestically it is
somewhat frowned upon. The very low fat content means that some special
techniques are required, ie coat or marinade in olive oil before frying
or grilling. Alternatively, coat in olive oil, wrap in aluminium foil
and roast to rare/medium. Done as a casserole with red wine and
mushrooms is also good.

As for my earlier questions about aquarium air pumps and H2O2, the set
up of pump and filter made from a White Labs yeast vial containing
cotton wool dampened with H2O2 has worked well with a not quite pale
pale ale (Maris Otter 3850g, light crystal 150g and chocolate 20g, 67
degrees C, UK Goldings pellets, Styrian Goldings plug and NZ Styrian
Goldings flower to 37 IBU, and WL Burton yeast). Bottled unprimed after
a week, tasted after a further week, I would be extravagant with praise
if it were not my own beer. A vigorous fermentation after a lag of about
3 hours, and lots of yeast skimmed for furhter use. No off-flavours
detected.

I will try an experiment in the next few weeks. Make up some extract
wort, a litre in each of 3 bottles (sake bottles Glen), aerate one
straight with nothing in the vial, aerate one with only cotton wool in
the vial, and aerate one with cotton wool dampened with H2O2 in the vial
and see what happens.

To quote Nathan K. again,
"Happy Holidays to all and to all a good beer."

Whaddya mean snow in December, it's the middle of summer!

Pat






Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 09:38:51 -0600
From: "George Krafcisin" <gkrafcisin at mindspring.com>
Subject: Brewpubs near Mesa AZ

One might also try the Satisfied Frog in Cave Creek.  Kind of a tourist and
kid's place, but decent beer, as I recall.

SWMBO and I have given serious thought to leaving Chicago's winters for the
Phoenix area.  We've even looked at homes in the Carefree/Cave Creek area.
Since homes in the Valley of the Sun don't come with basements (something I
just don't understand), one of our selection criteria has been an air
conditioned room to hold all my brewing gear.

What is the homebrew culture like in Phoenix?  Somehow I don't think yeast
will thrive at 115 degrees, although a cold lager in July would probably be
close to heaven.  Also, I would feel guilty about using my simple immersion
chiller, dumping 50 gallons of water to cool 5 gallons of wort.  I know, I
can brew indoors in an air conditioned room, and use a counterflow chiller,
saving the water for my Mesquite trees.  But somehow, the whole enterprise
feels unnatural.

Are there any of you out there who brew in the desert?

George Krafcisin
Glencoe, IL



Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 10:03:21 -0600
From: "Jorgensen, Jens" <jens.jorgensen at tallan.com>
Subject: parts for running CO2 line into fridge?

I've got a fridge with a tap on it for dispensing beer. I've been 
keeping my CO2 tank in the fridge with the kegs but commentary on the 
list and better judgement suggests that I keep the tank outside the 
fridge. I would like to be able to use the same quick-disconnects that I 
use on ball-valve kegs just to keep everything the same. I guess what I 
need is some sort of shank that will go through the fridge wall (not to 
worry, this fridge's side walls do not have anything in them other than 
insulation), then some rings to hold the shank there and then the 
quick-disconnects to screw onto those. Now where to find these parts? 
Would such things exist? I was thinking that if I knew the 
specifications of the threading for the disconnects that are on the kegs 
themselves I could search after a shank fitting those specifications. 
Has anyone done this before and can point me towards a supplier of the 
right parts?

- -- 
Jens B. Jorgensen
jens.jorgensen at tallan.com



Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 09:12:04 -0600
From: "Vernon, Mark" <mark.vernon at pioneer.com>
Subject: RE: Club Yeast Banks

First I want to assure everyone that this is not a 'Troll' post...yes we did
indeed receive a 'cease and desist' letter from a Yeast Supplier. Second I
would like to thank everyone for their comments and offers of support and
assistance. 
Our first step is to contact the Yeast Supplier and verify what our friendly
Homebrew shop owner told them we were doing...for all we know he said we
were refilling their containers and selling them as new!!! We never even
advertised it on our website everything was word of mouth and e-mail to
members only. I think that once we describe our procedure the company will
realize they were fed bad information.
We are a new club with a lot of beginner brewers, and are just trying to get
people to take the next step from dry yeast to live cultures. We are not
trying to drive our local shop out of business - however he has lost my and
several other members business. We are just trying to advance the knowledge
of our fellow brewers. 
I don't want to release the name of the supplier or the store just yet.
Until we talk to the Yeast Supplier and make sure they really are as big a
jerks as their letter makes them seem...if they are I will let EVERYONE know
who they are.
Have a good safe and happy holiday.....

Mark Vernon, MCSE, MCT
Sr. Network Engineer
Global Infrastructure
Pioneer, A DuPont Company
EMail:Mark.Vernon at Pioneer.com

The person who says it cannot be done should not interrupt the person doing
it.
- -- Chinese proverb




- -----Original Message-----
From: Jeff Renner [mailto:JeffRenner at mediaone.net]
Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2001 8:27 AM
To: homebrew at hbd.org
Cc: Vernon, Mark; Joel Plutchak; Chad Clancy; Marc Sedam; Rob Dewhirst;
Paddock Wood Customer Service
Subject: Re: Club Yeast Banks


Surely the problem the yeast company is complaining of is the selling 
of the yeast with their name attached.  In other words, if you sell 
yeast as Irish Ale Yeast, no problem.  If you sell it as Wyeast 1084 
or White Labs WLP004, then they have a legitimate gripe in my mind. 
You are trading on their name, even if it isn't commercial.  And they 
have to defend their names every single time with legalese stuff if 
they want to retain the exclusive right to their name.  That's what 
Xerox, Kleenex, Band-Aid, Scotch Tape, etc. all do, and what Thermos 
and Macadam failed to do.

The easy solution is to make yeast available by descriptive name 
(i.e., "Irish Ale Yeast"), at least whenever you are doing this 
publicly, like the club newsletter.  You can identify the source if 
asked privately.  This is, after all, what the companies themselves 
do.  They don't sell the aforementioned yeast as Guinness yeast, even 
though we all know it is (or think we know).

I don't think anybody needs to get their shorts in a knot over this.

Jeff
- -- 
Jeff Renner in Ann Arbor, Michigan USA, JeffRenner at mediaone.net
"One never knows, do one?"  Fats Waller, American Musician, 1904-1943


Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 11:53:52 -0500
From: "Pannicke, Glen A." <glen_pannicke at merck.com>
Subject: Re: Club Yeast Banks

Mark Vernon wrote about yeast culturing:

>The reason I ask is that our local homebrew shop owner heard about this (we
>did not try and hid it), called one of the big yeast suppliers and had them
>send a letter threatening us with legal action, if we did not "Cease and
>Desist" selling "their" yeast. They also threatened to stop selling their
>yeast to him (the homebrew shop) because, supposedly, we purchased our
>source yeast from him (some we did, some we did not).
>So what is the opinion of the group? Are these types of yeast
>exchanges/banks legal? Ethical? Can I give a buddy the yeast cake from the
>batch I just brewed or am I 'stealing' the yeast from the supplier? 

Unless the the manufacturer holds a patent on that particular strain, has
genetically modified the strain or if you are selling the yeast labeled with
their tradename or trademark, I seriously doubt that they could win any
legal action.  Then again, I am not a lawyer.  But they will probably tell
you the same.

I, for one, would not support the homebrew shop anymore.  I would discourage
purchases from the shop by the club and find an alternate supplier
(Internet).  What the owner did was a sneaky and under-handed attempt at
protecting their sales.  He is trying to force you to buy only from him.
While I firmly believe in supporting your local homebrew shop, I also
believe in the buyer's right of choice.

As for the manufacturer, I would like to know who it was.  They should be
exposed to this large homebrewing community as I am sure that they keeps
tabs on our discussions and will be embarrassed to have their name
associated with this poor business practice.  We should send a clear message
to them this kind of anti-competetive behavior will not be tolerated.

I culture yeast and am enlarging my yeast bank every time I brew a new beer.
It's a hobby within a hobby.  As a general rule I impose on myself I don't
mention my "other hobby" to my local shop owner mainly out of respect for
his business.  He works hard to provide the best for his customers and it
would be akin to telling him that I shop elsewhere.  He is not only my local
retailer, but a good friend.  Yet I still need to buy yeast to either aquire
new strains or to recover from an infected culture or failure.  The homebrew
shop and the yeast manufacturer will still make their money from me and most
know this.  But maybe these two in particular won't.

Glen A. Pannicke

glen at pannicke.net          http://www.pannicke.net
75CE 0DED 59E1 55AB 830F  214D 17D7 192D 8384 00DD
"We will make no distinction between the terrorists who committed these acts
and those who harbor them." - President G. W. Bush




Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 14:05:54 -0500
From: "Ralph Davis" <rdavis77 at erols.com>
Subject: Cheapest suppliers...?


I just brewed a 5 gal.  batch of double bock--using a grain/extract recipe
which cost me around $50!  The Muntons DME alone was $22 for 6 lbs!!!
(=$3.67/lb.) Although I personally like my supplier, it just costs too
much--I could nearly buy a couple cases of Optimator for that...

For an extract/grain brewer like me--not quite ready (or willing) to do
all-grain brewing, where are the cheapest suppliers?

Ralph W. Davis
[6699, 91.9] Rennerian

"Beer is living proof that God loves us
and wants us to be happy."   -Benjamin Franklin





Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 14:44:14 -0500
From: "Groene, Stacy B (Stacy)" <sgroene at lucent.com>
Subject: Re: Clearing the Smoke

If you are looking for a really nice smoked beer recipe using Weyermann
malts, you might also look to their web page.  There are recipes for various
styles of beer, and the Smoked Mild recipe was developed by Ray Daniels
himself.

I brewed a variation of this recipe (scaled down to a 10 gallon batch) and
took 1st at the Ohio State Fair competition in 2000 and qualified for 2nd
round AHA this year.

The english version of the Weyermann page is:
http://www.weyermann.de/englisch/frames_nn.cfm

Click on "news & events" and "recipes"

Happy Holiday's

Stacy Groene
Columbus, OH


Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 14:46:15 -0500
From: "Steve Alexander" <steve-alexander at worldnet.att.net>
Subject: 'spuriments ....

Doc P writes of some interesting tests ...

>This final beer had a bizarre "solventy" taste and aroma that I found
>fairly objectionable but others seem not to mind much.
>
>Now there is one contributor here who sees Clostridial infections luking
>around every corner, and I thought "what if he's right?"

I think it was Spencer Thomas who made the more probable ID as ethyl
acetate, an esters with a solventy flavor.  Of course the H2O2 might impact
yeast ester production, but how exactly isn't obvious(seldom is).  I'd still
like to hear if your solvent flavor matched acetone as you originally said
or ethyl acetate.

>Another thing that speaks against this odd solvent flavour being
>infection produced was that it did not intensify with age

If it's acetone I'd look harder for the source of infection.  I have gotten
clear acetone aromas in vinegar fermentation with no obvious sources of
infection.  It stops developing if air is omitted so ....

===================

I've been up to a few experiments of my own but haven't had time to report
back.

Fermenter Geometry -

As a reminder, the issue of this once hotly debated topic was the conjecture
that a fermenters with 1:1 height to width ratio was somehow inherently
superior to taller fermenter geometries and that these suboptimal geometries
resulted in sluggish fermentation and unresolved diacetyl.

I brewed a Koelsch with WY2565 back in late June, aerated and pitched the
wort in the common kettle, then split the wort into a glass carboy, a nearly
filled corny keg and a half filled corny keg. All fermenters were topped
with CO2 and fermented with fermentation locks (closed fermentation).  After
the fermentation was complete the beers were primed and bottled.  Priming
was accomplished with same rates of the original wort saved in a frozen
state.  Some of the carboy and full corny beers were kegged as well.

Personally I'd never been able to distinguish the full carboy fermented and
full corny fermented beer.   After 4 weeks I started personally sampling the
bottled beers and found that the half filled corny beer had not fully
fermented the priming sugars.  This was confirmed with comparative
Clinitests.  The beer from the half-filled corny did eventually fully
carbonate, but retained a higher level of esters that distinguished it from
the other two.

I have over a period of months had 13 other people triangle taste the 2:1
corny beer versus the 1:1 carboy beer.  Of the 13 only 5 correctly
identified the "different" sample - far short of the number needed to show a
significant difference.

So what ?  Well the fact is that fermenter geometry at the HB scale is not
sufficient to create significant difference in this case.  Perhaps other
yeasts would have problems, but there aren't any good reasons to believe
this.   If you have problems fermenting beer in corny kegs it's worth
considering that the trouble may not be fermenter geometry.

What happened to the half filled corny beer ?  Why was it slow to carbonate
?  My hunch is that this fermenter with it's shorter height allowed more
yeast to sediment before priming.  I added no yeast at priming so perhaps
the yeast concentration was lower.

 fwiw

 -S





Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 15:06:15 -0500
From: RiedelD at pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca
Subject: Unibroue/Chimay???

C.T. writes:

"session, a few of us hung out for a while with the Uni-guys (They liked my 
witbier!  The former brewer of Chimay liked my wit!  Is that just the
coolest"

Huh?  The brewer of Chimay (former or not) would be a Trappist monk.  No?
Are you saying he quit the Order, packed up his hydrometer and moved to the
suburbs of Montreal?

Dave Riedel
a little confused in Victoria, Can.






Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 15:12:16 -0500
From: "Tom Byrnes" <kmstfb2 at exis.net>
Subject: Sanitation Problems

 I bottle condition beers with 3/4 cup of priming sugar in two cups boiled water
put in priming tank and siphon beer on top of it. Then bottle. I've had 2 of
the last 4 batches not carbonate. Never had this problem before. Only difference
is that I changed sanitizers. Questions:

1. Has anyone had problems with carbonation following santizing by one step.
Does it matter that the bottles were not completely dry on the inside.

2. Could the caps be bad?

Any help would be Appreciated. It sucks to work hard on a beer only to have
it flat. Thanks Tom


Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 21:45:56 +0100
From: "Boris" <deMesones at terra.es>
Subject: Schlenkerla Rauchbier (smoked beer) and False Bottom

G. Zellman Wrote:

> A side note: I was told by this brewmaster, that all beers from malted
> barley (with no exception) up to the beginning of the industrial
> revolution
> were smoked beers, as all malt was kilned (is this the right word for
> the
> drying and roasting process?) on open fires up to that point. Makes
> sense to
> me.

Whilst studying to get a German braumeister title and working at
brewpubs in the city of Berlin I heard several times the same argument.
Afterwards, I read it as well in some US brewing literature (sorry, I
don't remember in which book).

However, this theory does not make too much sense to me. Whenever I
malt barley for my mini brewery (in Madrid) I do sun drying-kilning. It
is a rather simple process and very cheap. I believe most pre
industrial societies used the same method in summer time. Once they had
tried a brew without smoke, I am sure they did their most to try to dry
their malts without smoke in winter as well, which i think is pretty
easy to do.
The problem would be if suddenly rains, but that's just an excuse for
another -special- brew.

If I am not wrong there is very good book written in German language
called -Urbock: Bier Jenseits von Hopfen und Malz- (translated somewhat
like: Urbock: beer beyond (before) hops and malt) which mentions sun drying
in
ancient cultures as well.

By the way, I am trying to build a professional false bottom using some
information I was given in the German forum and I have a few questions.
Theory says slits have to be 0,7-1,2 mm wide and the total open area
approximately between 8 and 20 percent. Why such openings? My last
false bottom had an open area of almost 50 percent and the only problem
was that the first runnings had to be sent back a little time longer
and the outflow had to be regulated more precisely avoiding sudden cuts.


What is the point in having a total open space of 8 per cent in
comparison to one of 20 per cent?
What could be the advantages or disadvantages bearing in mind that the
outflow is controlled? Could all be related to the performance of the
mill?

Merry Christmas to all

Best regards

Boris de Mesones
Madrid - Spain
www.cerveceria.info




Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 18:41:40 -0500
From: David Harsh <dharsh at fuse.net>
Subject: clearing smoke...

Ray Daniels <raydan at ameritech.net> says:
> Dave Harsh incorrectly states that Schlenkerla is now made with just "30-40%
> smoked malt."  The proportion of rauch malt remains the same in the classic
> Marzen-style beer.  Perhaps he has confused the original with the
> Schlenkerla Weizen beer which was recently imported in to the US.  

No, I haven't confused the Marzen with the Weizen, or the Ur-bock, for
that matter.  

Apparently my information on the grain bill was wrong and I stand
corrected.  (I'm assuming Ray's data on the grain bill is first hand) 
There's still no doubt on my palate that Schenkerla doesn't have the
same intensity of smoke flavor it used to.  Does anyone know why?  I
know I've discussed this with some friends (who are both Master BJCP
judges and certifiable beer geeks) and they agree.  Anybody else notice this?

 -----
BTW, thanks for all the info on Unibroue 10 - I'll just keep nagging my
local beer people (across the river in Kentucky, of course) and maybe
they'll get it in just to shut me up.  After all, man cannot live by
BigFoot alone.

Dave Harsh						Bloatarian Brewing League
Cincinnati, OH



Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 17:07:14 -0800
From: "John Todd Larson" <larson at amazon.com>
Subject: equipment for the serious brewer...

Fellow homebrewers:

I ran across the following "yard sale" at the Anderson Valley Brewing
Company web site. Check it out if you are into serious equipment (like a
30Bbl fermentor).

  http://www.avbc.com/Yard_Sale/yard_sale.html

Todd Larson
Bainbridge Island, WA
larson at amazon.com




Return to table of contents

---