---

	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:
  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

---