HOMEBREW Digest #3943 Fri 17 May 2002

[Prev HBD] [Index] [Next HBD] [Back]

		Digest Janitor: janitor@hbd.org


          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 *********

  Siebel Response: Yeast propagation ("Tobias Fischborn")
  RE: Monitoring CFC outflow temp (Bill Tobler)
  Tomato Sauce (Martin_Brungard)
  Siebel Response: Hop Isomerization Temperature "Floor" ("Keith Lemcke")
  Siebel Response: Oxidation ("Keith Lemcke")
  Beer is good for you? ("Partner")
  Re: Monitoring CFC outflow temp?? (Jeff Renner)
  Re: Monitoring CFC Output Temp. (RBoland)
  what's with all the "Siebel Week" postings??? (Robert Marshall)
  CFC Temp Monitoring, The Northern Part of Michigan (mohrstrom)
  plastic cooler for mashing ("Laura Barrowman")
  RE: Yeast for CAP (Wyeast 2112 at low temps) (Paul Shick)
  Middle-Of-The-Bottle Sediment ("McCracken, Matthew B")
  Siebel Week - Gott coolers at high temperature ("Jason Henning")
  Re: Another CAP yeast question (Jeff Renner)
  RE:homebrew to micro ("Joseph Marsh")
  Siebel Week (Bill Wible)
  "The Whole Nine Yards" (Bill Wible)
  Re: Another CAP yeast question (Richard Seyler)
  Siebel Week ("Schneider, Brett")
  Fwd: FW: Yeast passaging ("Tobias Fischborn")
  Hop Bag Use ("Paul Stutzman")
  Siebel Response - Mike Dixon - Yeast Viability under pressure ("Tobias Fischborn")

* * 2002 Bay Area Brew Off entry deadline is 5/20/2002 * Details: http://www.draughtboard.org/babopage.htm * * 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: Wed, 15 May 2002 19:29:05 +0000 From: "Tobias Fischborn" <fischborn at hotmail.com> Subject: Siebel Response: Yeast propagation Steve asked...... Date: Fri, 10 May 2002 10:41:10 -0400 From: "Jones, Steve (I/T) - Eastman" <stjones at eastman.com> Subject: Siebel Week: Yeast propagation First, thanks to you all for fielding our questions. I've been yeast ranching for about 4 years now, and have recently modified my process to make it easier. I have acquired a stir plate, and made up a quantity of 10 ml tubes with agar, and a like number with 4 ml wort. The agar was made using 350 ml water, 10 gr DME, 5 gr Agar flakes, and 1 gr Yeast Nutrient. All were autoclaved. I have 20 strains on slant, and here is my process to grow enough yeast for 10 gallons of wort: Evening 1: Agitate tube containing 4 ml wort to aerate. Add to the agar slant containing the yeast. Allow to grow 2 days. Evening 3: Boil 4 oz DME and 1 liter water in a 2L flask for 20 minutes, chill in sink. I prepare a work space by suspending a 2 x 2 piece of cardboard about 18" above a countertop, and misting the area with isopropyl alcohol. Then I dip a flamed inoculation loop into the slant and inoculate a new slant. Pour contents of slant with yeast into the flask. Place on stir plate at highest setting and run continuously. Evening 5: Refrigerate flask Morning 6 (brewday): Make up another liter of wort as above, or use wort previously pressure canned for this purpose. Decant most of the liquid from the culture and add the fresh wort. Place on stir plate just long enough to mix well. Pitch into fermenters about 6 hours later. For lagers, repeat day 3 & 5 to increase quantity of yeast. I grow the inoculated slant for about 3-6 days at room temp until a good layer of yeast is visible, then refrigerate for future use. I figure that this qualifies as 'reculturing' the slant to make it good for another 6 months. Every 6 months I reculture the slants that weren't used the last 6 months. I don't perceive any negative affects since I changed my process, and generally make pretty decent beer, but I still have a few questions: 1. Does the fact that I use a stir plate negate the drawbacks of stepping up from 4 ml to 1000 ml? Forbes: Perhaps, especially as you give it two days. Propagation of yeast is often okay with an inoculation as small as a 50th or 100th of the new volume, but normally we would not go further than that 2. Does the process of decanting the liquid and adding fresh wort remove the chances of harming my beer by adding oxidized starter wort? Is this necessary? Tobias: Decanting the liquid is good. The "propagation" wort is not only oxidized but contains all the undesirable flavours(higher alcohols, esters...), which are produced at forced fermentations. 3. Can I extend the time for reculturing past 6 months? How long until there is danger of mutation? Forbes: If you are only keeping your slants refrigerated then 6 months is normally the maximum time you would like to leave before re-freshing your stock. 4. Am I introducing any unforeseen factors that may have a negative impact on my beer? Tobias: No, your system looks fine, as long as you take all measures to avoid contaminations. 5. I have had trouble retaining the banana/clove characteristics of the Weihenstephan weizen yeast from a slant. Is this normal? If not, what might I be doing wrong? Tobias: No, this is not normal!!! The yeast should keep its ability to produce banana/clove flavour. During my time in Weihenstephan I was responsible for the culture collection and we never noticed this with the yeast. You will not necessarily smell it on the slant but you should smell it in your fermentation. 6. I've found this to be much easier and less time-consuming than the normal process of stepping up thru 10x increases. What is your overall opinion of this process? Forbes: To me your process is okay. The less chance you have for contamination the better, but you seem to be very aware of this fact. Thanks again for taking the time to answer our questions. Steve Jones Johnson City, TN [421.8 mi, 168.5 deg] Apparent Rennerian http://hbd.org/franklin Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 15 May 2002 14:31:00 -0500 From: Bill Tobler <wctobler at sbcglobal.net> Subject: RE: Monitoring CFC outflow temp Darren Miller wrote, "I have just brewed my first batch using a counterflow chiller. My question is..What is the best way to monitor the output temperature of the wort?" <snip> I have the same problem Darren. I monitor the temp of the wort going into the fermenter, and won't pitch until I get it cool enough. Sometimes I will attach another 25 foot coil of tubing to the outlet of the CFC, which is submerged in a ice bath, to get the wort down to pitching temps. This is still a hit or miss solution. The only other control I have is the speed at which I drain the wort. Most times I end up letting the full fermenters sit in the fridge for 4-10 hours to cool down. Jeff Renner has a good idea. After the boil, he circulates the wort through the CFC and back into the kettle until it gets down to pitching temp. Of course, you can only get the wort as cool as the tap water, then you would have to chill the tap water to get the wort temperature down any more. He also aerates and pitches in the kettle, then transfers into the fermenters. I think this will be my new approach pretty soon. Bill Tobler Lake Jackson, TX (1129.7, 219.9) Apparent Rennerian Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 15 May 2002 16:26:55 -0400 From: Martin_Brungard at URSCorp.com Subject: Tomato Sauce In my decidedly unscientific research on beer pairings with food, I've come to the conclusion that very few beers pair well with a tomato sauce based foods. I enjoy red wines with various Italian foods. The acid and tannins of the wine seem to complement the tomato sauce and its acidity. Does anyone have a suggestion for a beer style that goes well with this type of food. Martin Brungard Tallahassee, FL Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 15 May 2002 14:28:18 -0700 From: "Keith Lemcke" <klemcke at earthlink.net> Subject: Siebel Response: Hop Isomerization Temperature "Floor" Mark: It is doubtful that there is a definitive answer to the question of hop utilization! The standard answer to such questions starts with: 'It depends.....'. The factors, besides boil time, that effects brewhouse hop utilization are: wort gravity, hop form (pellets, whole cones, extracts,..), wort pH, hop addition schedules, vigor of the boil, time in the whirlpool or hot wort tank, efficiency of trub (break) removal, etc., as well as what happens to the beer in the fermenter, and treatments (if any) during filtration and storage. One of the problems when talking about bitterness in general and hop utilization in particular is that most homebrewers cannot afford to have their beers analyzed to tell them how bitter they really are once they are ready to drink. This is a standard thing that commercial bottling brewers do so they know the performance of their brewhouse (and the rest of the process) in terms of utilizing the alpha acids in their hops. If you can taste your beers for bitterness against known standards then it is possible to get a 'ballpark' bitterness figure for your beer. This becomes increasingly difficult if you have very bitter beers because the taste buds become 'saturated' and it becomes very difficult (some professionals say impossible) to accurately judge the bitterness of beers once they get above the 35 - 40 IBU range. The other problem is that most commercial brewers do not publish their bitterness figures although many are accurately reported by organizations such as the AHA, IBS, etc. Having said all that you are right that utilization depends on the time hops are in the boil but there is utilization taking place in the whirlpool as the wort waits to be cooled. Most large commercial brewers make no (or little) allowance in their utilization calculations for the time of addition. The reason for this is due to their addition schedules. Some brewers will add all of their hops in a single addition about and hour before the end of boil so utilization is obviously the same for all of the hops. My guess is that most of the world's brewers still use a variation on the classic three hopping routine. This means that as soon as the boil starts they add about 10 - 15% of the hops to help suppress foaming (1st hopping), an hour before the boil ends they add 60 - 70% of the hops (2nd hopping), and then shortly before the end of the boil they add the remaining hops for aroma (late or 3rd hopping). In this classic way of hopping you can see that the vast majority of the hops are in the boil for at least an hour and the 3rd hopping is a small percentage of the total. It seems that the majority of the isomerization of the alpha acids in the boil takes place fairly quickly on a sort of decreasing scale so there is relatively efficient bitterness utilization even of late addition hops and this continues to some extent in the time from the end of boil until cooling finally takes place. I have seem in the enthusiast literature some extremely complicated formulas for calculating hop utilization rates and although it seems like an interesting intellectual exercise I think for all practical purposes it is not worth the time - unless it is backed up by a test of the beer. As you can see this is not the definitive answer! Kirk Annand, Siebel Institute <<Date: Mon, 13 May 2002 14:05:32 -0400 From: mohrstrom at humphrey-products.com Subject: Siebel Week Question: Hop Isomerization Temperature "Floor" In quest of a definitive answer to this question ... Hop utilization (bitterness) in recipe formulation is dependent on the time the hops are in the boil. The question is: when (at what temperature/condition) does utilization or isomerization cease? This has ramification for the type of chiller used (immersion v. counterflow) where the greater portion of the wort may be held at 200+degF for some time while chilling. is there a suitable method to account for the additional bitterness (if any). Thanks to the Siebel Staff (I'll get to meet you all when I win the scholarship - no need for the rest of you to enter ...) Mark in Kalamazoo>> Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 15 May 2002 14:30:22 -0700 From: "Keith Lemcke" <klemcke at earthlink.net> Subject: Siebel Response: Oxidation Troy: In your example there will be some oxidation of the beer since the air in the headspace that is drawn in to the fermenter will be absorbed into the beer as the partial pressures of the gases above and in the beer seek to equalize. If you want to make sure that there was no oxidation you could use carbon dioxide (at very low pressure!) to cover the beer surface as you draw off your yeast. If you were transferring to another container it is relatively easy to flood it with carbon dioxide before transfer. Whether this is a serious problem or not depends on the type of beer and the brewer's final use for the beer. If it is consumed relatively quickly then I do not think it is much of a problem. If the beer is being filtered and bottled then it might be more of a concern since oxidation taste effects become more apparent over time. If it is bottle conditioned then the concern is far less since the yeast will use any oxygen that it added during the bottling process and the slight damage that may have occurred in fermentation and storage will probably have a minimal effect, especially if the aging takes place at the cold temperatures that you describe. As a general comment the concern over beer oxidation can be carried to extremes. Many of the world's 'classic' beers were originally brewed in ways that were not concerned about oxidation's effects. In fact it is probable that some of the flavor characteristics of these beers were a result of oxidation! Since oxygen is seen today as a dire enemy of beer quality there is very little discussion about possible positive taste effects with certain styles of beer. The homebrewer is fortunate in that they can experiment with this on a small scale and see whether there may be some styles where some oxidation is OK. The presence of yeast in most homebrewing situations is one of the great protections against oxidation's effects. The modern concern over oxidation has really been the result of its obvious negative taste effects as the vast majority of the world's beers become lighter in body and taste. In many of these beers there is no place for any off flavors to hide! We also know more about the subject and the large brewers can afford the technology to keep oxygen pickup to a minimum - from raw material handling to the final container. Kirk Annand, Siebel Institute - ----------------------------- <<<Date: Mon, 13 May 2002 16:25:48 -0700 From: Troy Hager <thager at hcsd.k12.ca.us> Subject: Siebel Week Thanks to Rob for this great opportunity! Another question about oxidation (CSA): I have a CCF and usually draw trub and yeast off the bottom at different periods during fermentation. When I do this, I remove the airlock and replace it with a trap of sterile cotton. Because it is a sealed container when I draw liquid out the bottom I suck air in from the top. In the primary phase of fermentation this is of no concern because 1) there is a thick protective head of foam on the surface, and 2) any air sucked into the headspace will be pushed out by CO2 blowoff. But if yeast is harvested when the primary is finished, the air that enters will undoubtedly react to a certain extent with the surface of the beer. On the homebrew level with a relative large surface area to volume ratio in the fermenter is this a concern? I know time and temp. are probably major factors here so let's take a situation: Lager primary of 10 days at 50F. On day 12 draw off yeast while dropping the temp. 2F/day to 32F. Lagering at 32F for 15 days in the fermenter before racking to a purged keg. We are talking about 15-18 days at low temps with quite a bit of oxygen (air) in the headspace. This would also apply to those who rack to a secondary carboy after the primary is over. I know that we all go to great lengths to keep air out of the headspace when we bottle... what about in the fermenter after primary fermentation is finished? Many thanks. Troy Hager Hillsborough, CA >> Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 15 May 2002 19:07:10 -0500 From: "Partner" <Partner at Netdirect.net> Subject: Beer is good for you? Today's headline on MSN.com Drinking beer could reduce the risk of cancer, strokes and heart disease, Germany's brewers federation said Monday, hoping to inspire the country's youth to head for the beer garden rather than the gym. Here is the story if your interested. http://www.msnbc.com/news/751602.asp?pne=msn Now second part of my message and I can use some help with this. I do not want to slam SABCO. but I'm now waiting 8 weeks to receive MY Brew Tragic. The last couple of weeks I've been hearing their waiting for a new PID/PLC , because the one they had/got was bad. Sunday I decided to make my Full Moon Wit. I had started a 10 gallon mash and went thru the step's of a 100, and a 126 deg. rest. and then had to STOP. Monday was out of the question to do any type of mashing or brewing and I was hoping for miracles. Perhaps I felt everything would be ok, if the Brew Tragic arrived Monday and I got it set up and could continue both my mash and the boil. I don't know why I did this..... The grain bill included 2 LBS. of Flaked oats... :) .. Monday morning, the Oats had assorbed all the moisture and swelled and pushed the lid of my mash tun, up 2 inches. The mash was 1/2 inch below the top once I had incorporated everything as it was. When I arrived home from work, my Wife mentioned that it smelled Sour. My Nose is shot, I can hardly smell anymore, comes with Age... you young people don't laugh-- you'll get there someday also. I could smell the sourness, and She mentioned it was the Oats that probably made it sour as fast as it did. The latest Zymurgy Mag. mentioned a few soured beers. I ended up Tuesday dumping $40. of grain in my garden for fear of making a style i might not like and also upset that I tried to beat the postman. Hopefully my Brew Tragic will be here in 2 weeks, ( total 9 weeks waiting) and I can begin to modify it as it needs, new electronics', sparge arm, mash tun jacket, counterflow chiller. Perhaps even from RIMS to HERMS. Gentleman and Ladies, the question I pose to you is ... since I had begun a soured mash.. what might I had continued, to make a style of beer? Byron Rennerian coordinates 206.9, 212.1 -apparent That makes it South of Chicago and North of Memphis, in the heart of the Blues. P.P.S. I have just about finished making my own Malt Mill. As soon as I get the parts back from being metal treated I will redo my web page and start putting up pic's there. I am a Toolmaker by trade and I made a mill with a one knob adjustment that opens and closes 3/16 inch with 1/2 turn of a knob. I'm quite proud of the thought I put into this. Stay tuned,. and greetings to everyone. Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 15 May 2002 23:12:48 -0400 From: Jeff Renner <JeffRenner at comcast.net> Subject: Re: Monitoring CFC outflow temp?? Darren Miller <darren.miller at adelaide.edu.au> asks >What is the best way to monitor the output temperature of >the wort? I use an immersion chiller now, but when I used a counterflow chiller, I just stuck the sanitized stem of a dial thermometer in the outflow. I've seen fancier setups with a tee for the thermometer, but this simple method worked. I could adjust the temperature by increasing or decreasing the flow of the wort and/or the cooling water. Jeff - -- Jeff Renner in Ann Arbor, Michigan USA, JeffRenner at comcast.net "One never knows, do one?" Fats Waller, American Musician, 1904-1943 Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 15 May 2002 23:33:36 EDT From: RBoland at aol.com Subject: Re: Monitoring CFC Output Temp. I have a very simple system for monitoring the wort temp from my counterflow chiller. I poked the probe of a small dial thermometer through one wall of the vinyl outlet tubing. I control either the hot wort flow (with a variable speed pump) or the cooling water flow (with a clamp in the outlet side) to control the temp of the chilled wort. I leave the thermometer in place when I'm sanitizing. I pump iodophor through the chiller and all associated tubing before use. Bob Boland St. Louis, MO Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 15 May 2002 21:43:21 -0700 (PDT) From: Robert Marshall <robertjm1 at yahoo.com> Subject: what's with all the "Siebel Week" postings??? Just a quick question. What's with all the posts that have the subject of "Siebel Week" in them? I've seen a ton of them this week, and none of them seem to deal with Siebel. ===== Robert Marshall NNY Brewing Co. (NO, not N. New York, No-Name-Yet!) [6653.5, 339.5] Apparent Rennerian Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 16 May 2002 07:12:38 -0400 From: mohrstrom at humphrey-products.com Subject: CFC Temp Monitoring, The Northern Part of Michigan Darren wrings out his first batch through his shiny new CFC, and wonders > What is the best way to monitor the output > temperature of the wort? Best? Dunno. I made "T" using a barbed hose fitting, and two lengths of PVC tubing, one long enough to hold the tip of the dial thermometer probe in the wort outflow stream (the wort enters from the middle of the "T"), and the other just to hold the rig in the neck of the carboy. I also cut a notch at the top of the thermo tube, and positioned the probe so that it would cause a pressure drop and suck in air for some (cold-side!) O2 enrichment. * * * * Renner sez: > Randy Ricchi <randyr at up.net> writes from somewhere > in Michigan's Upper Peninsula (what we here in > Michigan call the U.P.): Jeff (an Ohio native at that) must have a mouse in his pocket with that "we", 'cuz REAL Michiganders (even the Trolls) call it "da U.P." Hokay dere? Mark in Kalamazoo (actually over Pittsburgh) and on occasion, Eagle Harbor, State of Superior) Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 16 May 2002 07:57:12 -0400 From: "Laura Barrowman" <llbarrowman at hotmail.com> Subject: plastic cooler for mashing Regarding Aaron's question about mashing in a plastic cooler & Gary Grande's recommendation: As for your co-worker's helpful advice, I can gurantee you won't get any estrogens (female hormones) in your beer.... unless you toss her in the mash. I think her concerns were about the solvents used during polymerization. Esthers? Hee! Hee! I wouldn't bother to ask the manufacturer. If it isn't stated on the label that the cooler is for hot liquids all you will see from the manufacturer's is the lid of your cooler as they cover their butts and say someting like "Can't guarantee safety, not tested at that temp, etc." Have you ever drank coffee from a styrofoam cup? Pretty nasty isn't it? It used be (is it still?) recommended for service of hot beverages and you still get hot fastfood sandwiches in styrofoam. I have used a plastic cooler for years and have yet to notice any plastic flavor. Is it safe? Dunno. Plastics/polymers are everywhere in/on our walls, clothes, cars, coating paper Starbucks cups, etc. Sigh... we are all going to die. Laura in Charlotte >>Question: I was discussing how I mash (in a Rubbermaid cooler) with a coworker and she expressed concern about what sort of compounds could be leeched into the final beer from the plastic of the mash tun. According to her, even those plastics that claim to be "safe" for heating can still contribute harmful elements. The harmful element may have been some sort of estrogen, but was definitely something that could cause/contribute to the formation of cancerous cells. Any ideas? I received no replies when I originally posted this to the HBD. Thanks! -Aaron Aaron, > I recommend you direct this question directly to the Rubbermaid manufacturer. Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 16 May 2002 09:50:14 -0500 From: Paul Shick <shick at jcu.edu> Subject: RE: Yeast for CAP (Wyeast 2112 at low temps) Hi all, Richard Seyler (aka Tad) asks about using Wyeast 2112 ("California Common") yeast for a CAP, worried about how it ferments at cool temperatures. Tad, this yeast works quite happily at 50F, as long as you pitch enough of it. I've often done what you suggest: do a "steam beer at 60-65F or so, then put a "real" lager on the yeast cake, running it in at 55F, then putting the carboy into a 50F chest freezer. It ferments very cleanly at 50F, giving a nice malty finish to the resulting beer. However, it's probably not the best yeast for a true CAP, because it emphasizes the malty side of the beer so much. If you want a dry, crisp finish, you'd be much better off with the Czech Pils yeast. If you like malty beers, the 2112 is a very nice choice. Paul Shick Cleveland Hts, OH Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 16 May 2002 07:01:05 -0700 From: "McCracken, Matthew B" <matthew.b.mccracken at intel.com> Subject: Middle-Of-The-Bottle Sediment Hi All: I wrote in a few weeks back about my grapefruity homebrew... Well, now that it's been conditioning a while, I've noticed that the cloudy haze from early in the conditioning has collected into what appears to be sediment. The problem is, it's in the middle of the bottle! I can pour about 1/3 of the (still cloudy) beer before grey/black chunks of this stuff drop into my glass. It's unappetizing to say the least. Furthermore, the small amount of clean beer I can taste before this happens is too thin and highly alcoholic (or so my body tells me). This would be in keeping with the 20 day bubbling fermentation and thick layer of sediment in my carboy. I suspect my Wyeast 1056 was either ravenously hungry or - more likely - I had some rogue yeast in there. Has anyone seen this kind of middle-of-the-bottle clumping before? Is it rogue yeast? Maybe I can try to pawn this off as a new beer style... Wishful thinking I'm sure. Any thoughts? Matthew McCracken Wayland, Massachusetts Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 16 May 2002 10:22:34 -0400 From: "Jason Henning" <jason at thehennings.com> Subject: Siebel Week - Gott coolers at high temperature Hey Brewers- I know more than Gary Grande, I know more than Gary Grande. Well, about Gott coolers at high temperature anyway (http://hbd.org/hbd/CurrentHBD.html#3942-10). When I was checking in to cooler mashing, I dropped Rubbermaid a note about high temperature use. They said the coolers are designed to withstand 170-180F coffee for hours. They did say with extended use at high temps that the walls would disfigure. I've had my Gotts for years and they starting to get some ripples in them. Cheers, Jason Henning Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 16 May 2002 10:31:34 -0400 From: Jeff Renner <JeffRenner at comcast.net> Subject: Re: Another CAP yeast question From: Richard Seyler (Tad) <seyler at arches.uga.edu> in Athens, GA >I have been listening to Jeff R. describe CAPs for years now, and will >finally make one in my next batch. Glad to hear it. It's a great beer. >The yeast that I use is whatever my >local brewpub has at the time. The two lager yeasts that I have to choose >from are a California Common (CC), within the next week, or a Czech >pilsner yeast, available in a few weeks. > >My first question is whether one of these yeasts would be largely >preferable to the other for a CAP. I haven't used either of these yeast, but I would think the Pilsner yeast would be my first choice. But, having said that, I'll have to raise this question about the California common (steam beer) yeast. "Everyone" knows that it produces lager-like qualities at higher temperatures than other lager yeasts. But I wonder. Steam beer was, according to histories, brewed with lager yeasts at cellar temperatures. I've read that by the time Fritz Maytag took over Anchor, then the only surviving steam brewery, in the sixties, the brewer would just go over to whichever other (lager) brewery in SF had yeast available and pick up a bucket for the brew. Now, of course, Anchor is brewed to the strictest standards. But I wonder which of the many lager strains Fritz chose. After all, steam beer is not a lager. As has often been pointed out, it is essentially a pale ale. So, I'll ask, can some one report results from fermenting a lager, especially a clean style like a pilsner, with California lager yeast at 60-65F? Is it really cleaner than an ale yeast at that temperature? how does it compare with other lager yeasts fermented at that temperature. In other words, is it really better suited to warmer temperatures than other yeasts? Maybe so, I'm just asking if anyone has done a "spurment." >would it be better to use CAP dregs to start a CC, or use CC >dregs to start the CAP, or no difference? Good question. I'd be inclined to use the Czech yeast and build up a bigger population of yeast in the CC first, then brew the CAP. Of course, that means you also have drinking beer sooner, since you don't have to lager the CC. Jeff - -- Jeff Renner in Ann Arbor, Michigan USA, JeffRenner at comcast.net "One never knows, do one?" Fats Waller, American Musician, 1904-1943 Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 16 May 2002 09:36:21 -0500 From: "Joseph Marsh" <josephmarsh62 at hotmail.com> Subject: RE:homebrew to micro First good luck with your pub, always need a new brew pub. Second I quit going to one of the local micros because the day bar tender liked to make her own tips. She short changed me any coins and expected a big tip afterwards. Denighed it to her boss of course, he believed her and he lost a customer. Good help is so hard to find. Third be prepared for work. You get all the problems of a resturant AND a pub. Last thing I can help with is to remind you to clean your lines. The local Alcatraze (sp?) served me a er musty here-weise several weeks ago. Good brewing, Joe Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 16 May 2002 12:42:04 -0400 From: Bill Wible <bill at brewbyyou.net> Subject: Siebel Week Thanks for the opportunity to ask these questions! Please talk about mashing, and the difference between 'thin' mash and 'thick' mash, what affect this has on the final beer, and in what styles one is more appropriate or better used over the other. I know that decoctions when pulled should be thick. But if you're doing infusion mash, when do you use one over the other? Maybe there are some malts that thin or thick mash works better with? What is the proportion that is considered 'thick' mash, (1 quart per pound or less?), an what is considered thin? Bill Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 16 May 2002 12:49:34 -0400 From: Bill Wible <bill at brewbyyou.net> Subject: "The Whole Nine Yards" I'd always heard this came from airplane pilots during the second World War. Machine gun ammo belts on WWII aircraft were 27 feet long. So when a pilot emptied his gun on a target, it got "The whole nine yards." Bill Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 16 May 2002 13:55:00 -0400 (EDT) From: Richard Seyler <seyler at ARCHES.UGA.EDU> Subject: Re: Another CAP yeast question Thanks, for your help, Jeff. On Thu, 16 May 2002, Jeff Renner wrote: > From: Richard Seyler (Tad) <seyler at arches.uga.edu> in Athens, GA > >would it be better to use CAP dregs to start a CC, or use CC > >dregs to start the CAP, or no difference? > > Good question. I'd be inclined to use the Czech yeast and build up a > bigger population of yeast in the CC first, then brew the CAP. Of > course, that means you also have drinking beer sooner, since you > don't have to lager the CC. That's a good point. But since I am getting these yeasts from my local brewpub, I don't have to worry much about building the population. Of course, sooner is better, when it comes to beer. As far as the advantages of pitching on dregs go, I do it primarily out of laziness/convenience. It ensures quick starts, but the added bonus is that I don't have to clean the carboys. The problem I have noticed with reusing yeast with successive, different beers is by-product production, when going from stronger to weaker styles. For example, if I use yeast from a cream ale to make a stock ale, no problem. But, using yeast from a high gravity ferment to brew a lighter style (esp. if I have brewed a few big beers with the yeast), I am more likely to get off flavors (notably, diacetyl) in the low-gravity ale. I think that because CAP and CA common are not that far apart in gravities, it wouldn't make a difference. Also, it may be irrelevant for lager strains; I don't know. I am getting a little anxious to brew a CAP, but it sounds like you are favoring the Czech yeast. So perhaps I'll just wait until that yeast is availiable, and brew a CC in the meantime with the steam yeast. Thanks, for pointing out these considerations. - --Tad in Athens, GA <http://www.arches.uga.edu/~seyler/brewsys.html> Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 16 May 2002 15:03:51 -0400 From: "Schneider, Brett" <Brett_Schneider at bose.com> Subject: Siebel Week My thanks as well for the focus on homebrewers again - here's a question about wort aeration: I have a SS aeration stone on the SS dip tube extension plumbed in as an accessory to my oxy/acetylene gas welding system. My question concerns the O2 and yeast addition sequencing: normally I aerate and then pitch, but do this without knowing why I chose this method. Last time I did this was for a helles, and I saw no significant decrease in lag time, and in fact I ended up somewhat under attenuated. What is the best procedure for aerating cold wort and adding yeast? Thanks - Brett Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 16 May 2002 19:41:14 +0000 From: "Tobias Fischborn" <fischborn at hotmail.com> Subject: Fwd: FW: Yeast passaging The question asked by Fred Johnson... Date: Fri, 10 May 2002 07:17:08 -0400 From: "Fred L. Johnson" <FLJohnson at worldnet.att.net> Subject: Siebel Week - Repitching Yeast Rules of thumb abound (and vary) about how many times one can repitch yeast. Opinions among brewers seem to vary depending upon the gravity of the previous wort, the strain of yeast, the degree of flocculation of the strain, etc. There is also occasional mention of how many times a culture of yeast (or mammalian cells) can be "passed", although I've rarely (if ever) heard anything more for the definition of a "passage" than the act of removing the culture from storage, growing it to some degree, and putting an aliquot back into storage, with no explanation of why a cell would be limited in the number of times it can undergo this. I suspect that the more likely reason that yeast are typically disposed of after X brews (you fill in the blank) is that the yeast eventually accumulate objectionable levels of wild strains or bacteria. Correct? Or is there a more fundamental reason that yeast can't be grown indefinitely? So... 1) If a yeast culture is maintained free from contaminating bacteria and wild yeast, can the culture (and its characteristics) be maintained indefinitely (or at least longer than for a half-dozen brews)? If not, why not? Forbes: No! There are two things to worry about from my point of view. 1. You risk building up a population of yeast that may be becoming more and more selected for the environment into which you keep throwing them. This can be bad as may be the character of the beer you are making becomes changed. This may also include a build up of yeast that are resp. deficient. My experience with continuous culture of yeast proved that even although the yeast is genetically identical to the yeast you started with you have selected a group of characteristics that are advantageous to the conditions, this may not equate to good beer. I know of examples where it does. 2. If you are selecting conditioned yeast then you are probably avoiding senescent yeast. As individual cells grow older they lose the ability to reproduce by budding. This leads to cells that can still participate in the fermentation but may not add to new biomass development. The older cells are likely to be lost if you maintain a good cropping regime where you try and crop from the top of your yeast sediment. This may be a problem if you harvest from the cone in a cylindro-conical vessel. Although I do believe discarding the first part of the cone will remove the majority of old/dead yeast. If the yeast is a good sedimenter then the most recently sedimented yeast, is probably the healthiest or youngest. The major problem with reusing the yeast too many times is still going to be from contamination. I know some of some breweries where 10-12 generations is often the norm but they have specific uses for the beer produced. Accumulation of RD mutants is also a factor in discarding yeast. 2) If the answer to 1 is "No, because the yeast mutates", how do the major yeast suppliers stay in business if their precious source is destined to mutate? Forbes: It's not really mutating. Yeast suppliers are not really forcing the yeast into doing too many generations, before they are let loose in breweries. If you want to think of it as re-pitching then for a litre of yeast cream probably two generations (4 days) of propagation has been done. Tobias: yeast producers as well as large breweries with their own propagation systems always start from the mother culture, which is usually kept in liquid nitrogen to avoid any mutations. 3) If the definition of a "passage" is based on anything more than the act of removing it from its storage container and putting it back, what happens with each passage that would bring the culture closer to its "end"? Forbes: The yeast is not really "passaging" as in cell/tissue culture, a loopful of cells is taken from storage and used to produce a seed culture which will then be repitched however many times. The seed may be collected for storage by the brewery and this may constitute a passage. The idea of "passages" is important for mammalian cell culture where after a certain number of generations the cells will become apoptotic and die. If the cells are cancer cells then they will have reached a form of immortality and should be able to "passage" indefinitely. Genetics appears to dictate how long cells can go on reproducing themselves, in mammals their is no parent cell after division just two daughters. With yeast you have the mother and daughter (Bud) until the mother yeast has reached it's budding limit. 3) Finally, what are the practical ways of determining when a yeast has been used (passaged) too many times? I've heard that yeast "lose" their ability to flocculate. If so, why? Some strains are slow to flocculate anyway and never form more than a powdery sediment, so are those yeasts merely mutant forms of the more flocculuant strains? Forbes: This bit I'm less sure about. I think the selection pressures are working against the character you are interested in here. Thus the yeast begins to lose it's ability to flocculate. In other cases it may be that it loses the ability to ferment to completion. On the subject of flocculation. There has been a lot of good work on this subject. In general it is a phenotype. Just having the genetic ability to flocculate does not mean you will flocculate,conditions in the environment will also play a major role in flocculation. If I understand some recent work, flocculation in one lager yeast appears to be a selective process where the ability to flocculate is lost due to partial or complete deletions in the gene responsible for that strains ability to flocculate. Thus you have to return to the slant to start a new propagation, and therefore a new cycle of pitchings in the brewery. In general your questions just reveal that what brewer's are trying to do is control (to some extent) a biological process. Skill and/or experience tells you when to quit with a yeast and start with a fresh batch. Industrial brewers will probably have a set of indicators for when their yeast is done and new yeast is required. I would be willing to wager that their conditions are probably more economic than anything else. Fred L. Johnson Apex, North Carolina USA Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 16 May 2002 12:55:04 -0700 From: "Paul Stutzman" <Paul.Stutzman at airborne.com> Subject: Hop Bag Use I have a couple of questions regarding the use of hop bags during the boil. I've used hop bags for a couple of years now, and it seems that my hop utilization is quite low despite vigorous boiling for 60 to 90 minutes. I am frequently disappointed in the amount bitterness in my final product. I usually up my hopping rate, but it's always been a bit of a crapshoot. Does anyone have a calculation for estimating the inefficiencies associated with using hop bags VS allowing the hops to roam freely during the boil? The only reason I'm using the hop bags relates to my CWC. It has a copper racking tube, and I've had a couple of instances when the tube got clogged by debris in spite of my best efforts at whirlpooling my brewkettle. (I use an unmodified 10-gallon stainless steel pot as my brewkettle.) I'd really prefer to avoid using hop bags altogether. My initial thought was to pour the boiled wort through a strainer, but I'm reluctant to try that, given the ongoing holy war regarding HSA. What do other brewers do to prevent hops from ending up in their chillers? Should I simply switch to pellets and hope that my whirlpooling is effective enough to prevent the hop residue from entering the racking tube? Thank you in advance for your advice in these matters. Paul Stutzman Seattle, WA Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 16 May 2002 20:46:30 +0000 From: "Tobias Fischborn" <fischborn at hotmail.com> Subject: Siebel Response - Mike Dixon - Yeast Viability under pressure Date: Wed, 15 May 2002 08:41:41 -0400 From: "Mike Dixon" <mpdixon at ipass.net> Subject: Siebel Week: Yeast viability under pressure After many discussions about yeast viability as pressure increases with fellow brewers, and having tried a single rudimentary experiment to find the pressure at which fermentation stalls or stops, I wondered what the real answers would be. At what average pressure (psi), if any, is yeast activity during fermentation basically stopped or stalled? Does that pressure vary with different yeast strains and different strengths of wort? If that pressure was set on a vessel at the onset of fermentation, would the wort not ferment? Thank you very much for this opportunity. Cheers, Mike Forbes: Pressure resistance is a yeast strain dependant character. This is often called barotolerance and is normally only concerned with the application of pressure to a yeast culture. When you add this pressure in a fermentation you complicate the picture with CO2, ethanol etc, etc. In general fermenting yeast are more susceptible to stress than respiring yeast, actively growing yeast (either fermentatively or respiratory) are also less resistant to stresses than stationary phase yeast. Thus tolerance to stresses varies even within in a yeast strain.Your yeast is probably getting into the stationary phase when CO2 conc starts to become an issue. If you were applying pressure right at the start I would think that your fermentation should start (Tobias:), unless the pressure is extreme. High Pressure can be used in as a sterilisation method but this is often in conjunction with some other agent (heat), but hear I am talking of massive pressures. Tobias: I do not have a specific number at what pressure the yeast stops fermenting, but there are methods of forced fermentation (high temperature) which use pressure up to 1-2 bar(15-30 psi). The pressure reduces biomass production and therefore the prodcution of undesired fermentation by-products. Usually the fermentation tank is pressurised up to 0,3 bar after the first budding of the yeast and raised to 1,8-2,0 bar after 50 % of attenuation. If you apply pressure right at the beginning of the fermentation, you might not produce enough yeast biomass and end up with a slow or stuck fermentation. Pressure is also used in the traditional, natural carbonisation (Spundung)of beer. Here the pressure used depends on the desired carbonation and temperature. Return to table of contents
[Prev HBD] [Index] [Next HBD] [Back]
HTML-ized on 05/17/02, by HBD2HTML v1.2 by KFL
webmaster at hbd.org, KFL, 10/9/96