HOMEBREW Digest #4154 Sat 25 January 2003

[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 *********

  Re: Water Heater Element Mounting -  Ouch! (Robert S Wallace)
  RE: "Soft" wheat?!!! (Brian Lundeen)
  Re: No carbonation in first batch of HB ("Asher Reed")
  re:water/grist ratio + ("Steve Alexander")
  Re:  Diode Installation for RIMS ("Jim Yeagley")
  Yeast Question (Chuck Doucette)
  Yeast Controversy ("Shawn E Lupold, Ph.D")
  LBSH Chatter ("mfrench518 at earthlink.net")
  Corny keg o-ring replacement (=?iso-8859-1?q?Joris=20Dallaire?=)
  re: Pink Lager ("The Artist Formerly Known As Kap'n Salty")
  Evaporation Rate (MOREY Dan)
  Re: question about starters (Demonick)
  OT: Charging People for Air (Jonathan Royce)
  Re: question about starters (Jeff Renner)
  Re: Used 3 Gallon (Jeff Renner)
  various topics...NEW, now with no complaints! (Marc Sedam)
  Colonial Brewery Co., Cold Spring MN (ensmingr)
  Re: business ethics (Robin Griller)
  starters an such ("greg man")
  Re: No carbonation in first batch of HB (Teresa Knezek)
  Yeast book (Arnaud VIEZ)
  Is efficiency affected by mash water:grain ratio? ("Lou King")
  More LHBS Chatter ("Chris Eidson")

* * Show your HBD pride! Wear an HBD Badge! * http://hbd.org/cgi-bin/shopping * * The HBD Logo Store is now open! * http://www.cafeshops.com/hbdstore * * 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. HAVING TROUBLE posting, subscribing or unsusubscribing? See the HBD FAQ at http://hbd.org. 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 or read the HBD FAQ at http://hbd.org. JANITOR on duty: Pat Babcock and Karl Lutzen (janitor@hbd.org)
---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 23:25:14 -0600 From: Robert S Wallace <rwallace at iastate.edu> Subject: Re: Water Heater Element Mounting - Ouch! At 12:22 AM 1/24/2003 -0500, "Dan Listermann" <dan at listermann.com> wrote: >Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 09:00:06 -0500 >Subject: Water Heater Element Mounting - Ouch! > > David Hooper <dhooper at everestkc.net> Writes: > ><Dan, can you go into a little more detail how you set this up? Did you ><drill holes in the sides of the pot and then install the elements? > >I had a welder cut holes for 1" half couplings to be welded to the pot. A >word of warning. Most couplings are NPT. Heater elements appear to be >NSPT ( national straight pipe thread.) NPT will screw on to NSPT, but it >can be a tight fit. NSPT seals on a gasket and must go in deep enough to >do this. Sometimes NPT will get too tight before sealing. I had to buy a >1" NSPT pipe tap. Tapping, even retapping, stainless steel that large is >not easy. >I have not found a good source for NSPT stainless couplings. > >Dan Listermann I also am building an electric HLT (controlled by a thermocouple-sensed Omega temp. controller) and had the same problem of finding the correct fitting. Dan is correct that water heater elements are straight threaded (not tapered). My local plumbing guru (I do essentially all of my own plumbing and he knows me well) told me I needed a 1 inch stainless (304) MERCHANT COUPLING (equals NSPT) - it wouldn't matter if the coupling were a half or full coupling, since I'm having my mig welder fix the keg wall at the center of the coupling; (I drill my own holes in the keg). It took my plumbing retailer a few calls to three different suppliers (even here in the midwest!) but he located the correct part within a day, and three days after my initial request the piece was in my hand!! Cost was about $ 8.50 plus $ 2.00 freight. I don't know who the supplier is, but will make an attempt to find out... As soon as I got the part, I tried every water heater element on the rack in the store that wasn't blister-packed (about 7) and each and every one threaded perfectly, bottoming out on the neoprene gasket. I'll now get a few more holes drilled in the keg (I'm also installing 1/4" NPT stainless couplings for thermocouple and sight glass ports) and will shortly visit my welder to finally complete the electric HLT. Good luck finding the correct coupling - it CAN be done, but like many things, it's not what you know......it's who you know....find a good plumbing supplier and your problems may be solved. Cheers, Rob Wallace Robert S. Wallace, Ph.D. Associate Professor of Botany Department of Botany - Iowa State University Ames, Iowa 50011-1020 U.S.A. Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 00:04:53 -0600 From: Brian Lundeen <BLundeen at rrc.mb.ca> Subject: RE: "Soft" wheat?!!! Jeff Renner mocks my manliness when he writes: > You can grind soft wheat pretty easily in a Corona mill. I can't comment on using a Corona mill, but I thought I would drop a nut trying to hand crank this stuff through my Valley Mill. Needless to say, the next Wit project will wait until I have motorized my mill. Of course, I didn't purchase my wheat through a trustworthy LHBS, but a health food store, instead. It is entirely possible a conversation along the lines of the following took place: Store employee: I got a guy wanting to buy a sack of soft white wheat. Grain sales rep: Yeah, I can get you wheat. Employee: But is it soft white wheat? Rep: (pause) Yeah, sure, the label can say that. Of course, that's just being cynical. Surely a health food store wouldn't provide misleading information about a product it sells. Which reminds me, I'll have to stop in there again soon. I'm running low on gingko biloba and powdered shark's cartilage. ;-) Cheers Brian Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 07:40:32 +0000 From: "Asher Reed" <clvwpn5 at hotmail.com> Subject: Re: No carbonation in first batch of HB Don't worry about it, this is not unusual -- give it 2 more weeks and try it again, you should notice some bubbles by then... Moving the beer to a location that is a little warmer won't hurt -- I'd say, if after a month it is still flat, you might need to rehydrate some dry yeast and add a few drops to each bottle -- or a pinch of dry yeast to each bottle. It is no doubt tedious uncapping, adding yeast, and recapping, but it works most of the time and is better than drinking flat beer or dumping it down the drain. Good luck. >I'm really new to home brewing (I've been enjoying beer for a long time, >just not brewing it). I've got a couple of questions I can't fine the >answers to in any of my brewing books... I brewed my first batch (5 gallons >of malt extract-based Brown Ale) around new years and bottled on Jan >12,2003. OG=1.048, FG=1.018, boiled 3/4 cup corn sugar with 2 cups of water >for 10 minutes and gently stirred it into the beer. It's been stored at >63-66F since then. Just couldn't wait so I chilled and poped a bottle on >Jan. 19 (7 days later) and no carbonation had developed. Did I just not >wait long enough? Should it be stored a little warmer (68-70F) to get the >yeast active? The beer looked very clear when I racked it into my bottling >bucket. Did enough yeast get into the bottles? I'd really appreciate any >ideas anyone has, especially since I have a batch of Pilsner brewing right >now... and will be wanting to bottle it soon... >Thanks, Tom. From Paradise, in the foothills outside of Chico, CA. > Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 03:38:12 -0500 From: "Steve Alexander" <steve-alexander at worldnet.att.net> Subject: re:water/grist ratio + Del, (Nathaniel P. Lansing) writes ... << [water infusion may be used to achieve mashout so] The net effect is a very dilute mash probably exceeding the 6:1 ratio in the foam rest study I had referenced. >> Del - you are confusing two unrelated arguments.. 1/ The total amount of water that passes thru a grist bed should be limited to around 8X as an upper bound to prevent excess leeching of lipids, polyphenols silicic acid etc. 2/ 6X water used in the very thin mash of the experiment you cited will certainly produce different results than any real-world infusion mash at 2.5X. Just because *some* mashouts are diluted (tho' not to comparable 6:1 level) doesn't mean the mashouts begin with the same level of foam potential. The very different thicknesses during the low mash insure the two worts will be different. If you'd like me to repeat why each of these is so and recite the quotation and papers let's do it OFFLINE. << But lets look at the the "suggestion" that we stay slightly below an 8:1 water/grist ratio [..] >> You've misread the statement. You should add water to the boiler and NOT oversparge whenever you are making a low gravity beer. You could run all your water through the gristbed but then you'd damage the beer flavor. When making a high gravity CAP (1.062 - really?) or a barleywine you of course use less water than 8X. No one ever said you must sparge till you've used 8X water/grist. It's an upper bound. << At a cursory glance any rule as too grist/water ratio comes apart. This is why I always gripe loudly when some sort of rule is put out as some sort of gospel that must be followed. >> Nothing came apart but misinterpretation of what was clearly written. You can't fault the rules when you didn't bother to read them or apply them correctly. << It's something that one must figure out by the by the "seat of one's pants" >> The problem with doing things by the seat of your pants is that the results generally belong in the toilet. The formulae for calculating water use have been posted dozens of times and the 8X upper bound is trivially easy to include. It's rudimentary algebra. << So what's the problem with suggesting people try to reach at least 163 F before sparging if they want to improve foam- stand. >> Nothing at all. But you repeatedly implied that no-mashout beers were lacking because they neglected the 163F/71C foam rest. They really aren't lacking compared to other conventionally produced beers. << Now, this part is only slightly argumentative on my part, partly real curiosity; is it enzymatic? [...] Is the glycoprotein formation from larger saccharides and peptides an interrupted Amadori rearrangement? >> The JASC paper you referenced in 2000 suggested the ~71C foam rest was enzymatic and from the glycoprotein molecular weights reported these are not related to any of the Maillard proposed reactions. << And, I thought I had mentioned them actually measuring foam with shaumhaeftvermoegen results at 68C 140cm3, results at 71 C 160cm3. >> There are two accepted methods of measuring foam - NIBEM and Ross&Clark. Both give results in a sort of collapse-time in seconds, not cm3. I interpret "shaumhaeftvermoegen" as a (definitely misspelled) term meaning foam-adhesion (or maybe retention) which sounds right - but the results of 140cc is not reasonable. You'll have to understand the method of measurement to really even understand what the paper is claiming they found. You apparently don't know. This all begs the real question did they compare foam against a conventional mashed control. -S Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 08:14:09 -0500 From: "Jim Yeagley" <jyeag at core.com> Subject: Re: Diode Installation for RIMS Subject: Diode Installation for RIMS Uh, sir, step away from the RIMS and put down the soldering iron......... and while you're at it, put that diode back in your pocket! /removes tongue from cheek Seriously Martin, while I can't proclaim to be an expert, and I can offer no "right way," I don't think a diode would be the proper choice of component to use. Maybe a resistor, but not a diode. Again, I could be wrong, but I'm guessing a diode would create a 60hz buzzer out of your heating element. Your calculations for resistance and power look right. Heatsink? A big resounding YES, albeit to the proper component. You are expecting this component to be able to dissipate at least part of the power meant to come off your element, so there -will- be heat generated. If you have an electric oven, it wouldn't be a bad idea to pull it away from the wall and check out the schematics that are probably plastered to the back panel. You can then see how they handle the temp control, and follow that lead. Sorry to not have a specific answer and/or recommendation, but at least maybe I have added enough doubt? Jim Yeagley Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 05:14:49 -0800 (PST) From: Chuck Doucette <cdoucette61 at yahoo.com> Subject: Yeast Question I am looking for some advice/help on culturing a starter from a bottle of Paulaner HefeWeisin (sp?). I fell in love with this beer recently and am going to attempt to clone it. I would like to use the same yeast that Paulaner uses, assuming that is the same yeast to be found in the bottle. Is this possible? Or does Paulaner use a conditioning yeast other than the one used for promary fermentation? TIA for any help. Chuck Doucette O'Fallon, IL. Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 09:32:54 -0500 From: "Shawn E Lupold, Ph.D" <lupolds at jhmi.edu> Subject: Yeast Controversy My two cents on yeast banks. It's difficult to make two trips to the LHBS in a brewing week. I don't have a grain mill, or space to mount one, so I like to buy and mill my grain as close to brewing day as possible. This usually doesn't give enough time to build a nice yeast starter. With the yeast bank, I can reliably grow a nice big yeast starter and have fresh grains ready to go on Saturday morning. Yeast banks also provide more variety, including yeast cloned from bottles of your favorite commercial beers. This provides the freedom to experimentally mix yeast for fermentation or to use separate bottling yeast without the hassle of repeated 40 mile drives to the LHBS. As far as cost, yeast banks don't really save money. They save time. Believe me; I spend plenty of money at the LHBS without the yeasties. Shawn Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 09:34:40 -0500 From: "mfrench518 at earthlink.net" <mfrench518 at earthlink.net> Subject: LBSH Chatter >Gee Mark (or is it Mark... ), does that mean we all should quit brewing beer >and giving it to our friends... I'd hate to think that I'm taking money out >of my local retailer's pockets, and depriving Anheuser Busch profits that >drive their R&D and new product development... bummer... Gee Bob, that's elegant, eloquent and smooth like silk. That's exactly what I'm saying. Nobody should brew beer but A-B, not me, not you, not anybody. I have full faith and confidence that you'll find a unique and creative use for the Fermenator. ;^) I respect Brian's rabbit argument - at least there's some thought behind it. Brian, you're right, the argument that the yeast is their property would probably not stand up in court. Most of us, though (even in NYC) don't live in the fantasy world proscribed by the courts - we live in the real world. Let's take your assumption that Chris White's lab is basically just a bunch of guys pulling yeast out of beer bottles, cleaning it up and growing pure strains for sale. They do this for a profit. In the real world, White Labs has to turn a profit, or cut product lines or employees until they are profitable. I like having eight English ale strains available with a mouse click, and can't afford the time or money to fly around England harvesting strains. If this business is unprofitable, you will find that over the long haul our selection of yeast will be narrowed down to the best selling strains, and the Platinum series and other esoteric strains will disappear. This is my point - pay the man for his work. I guess that even after 15 years in NYC, I still believe that there's no free ride - you want quality and selection, you pay for it. Or you get government yeast. Maybe it's just the petulant Texan in me. :^D As far as supporting your local home brew shop - no argument there - you basically just restated my premise. Anyway, I think this has been beaten to death - have a great weekend and good brewing! Mark (not Mark) - -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ . Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 09:48:41 -0500 (EST) From: =?iso-8859-1?q?Joris=20Dallaire?= <jorisdallaire at yahoo.ca> Subject: Corny keg o-ring replacement Hello, One small question. I have to replace the o-ring on the gas inlet of some of my cornys. I know my local bar supplies vendor has some, but i wonder if these can be replaced by standard o-rings found at hardware stores? Thank you. Joris Dallaire Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 08:59:26 -0600 From: "The Artist Formerly Known As Kap'n Salty" <mikey at swampgas.com> Subject: re: Pink Lager In hbd #4153 Hayes Antony <HayesA at aforbes.co.za> wrote: > I poured a lager saved over from my phenolic period the other day. It had > developed pink tinges. It was a nice pale straw colour a year ago. Does the > colour change perhaps give a clue as to what was causing the phenol taste in > my beer (4-vinyl guiacol was the best guess)? I guess I _could_ bore you a lot of technical jargon and details of the organic chemistry involved in the transition, but I think the direct approach would perhaps be better in this case: Your beer is gay. My guess is that the long period of time spent isolated in the keg gave rise to introspection and self-discovery. Try to be supportive and accepting. - -- taFkaks ==== Teleoperate a roving mobile robot from the web: http://www.swampgas.com/robotics/rover.html Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 09:18:43 -0600 From: MOREY Dan <dan.morey at cnh.com> Subject: Evaporation Rate Bill Tobler asks: How do these big breweries keep the evaporation rate down below 5%? They must have a partially closed system. My boiloff is up around 15%. That's a good rolling boil uncovered. First, it is a misconception that evaporation rate is proportional to volume. If you only started with a cup of wort, would you expect over 3/4 of a cup after your normal rolling boil? I would expect to see a dry kettle with some heat damage. My normal evaporation rate 1.35 gal/hr. I have measured this several times. I have a kettle loss of 1/2 gallon, so for a one hour boil, I start with 6.85 gallons of wort for my boil. This gives an evaporation percentage of nearly 20%. For a ten gallon batch however, this percentage drops to about 11%. I definitely don't recommend using a percent evaporation constant for recipe formulation especially if you vary batch sizes. Evaporation is a process of mass transfer, similar to heat transfer but instead of being driven by a temperature difference, it is driven by the water vapor pressure difference at the surface of the wort to the water vapor pressure of the atmosphere. So evaporation rate is primarily influenced by kettle geometry, local humidity, and elevation. My observations suggest that the energy transferred to the wort is also an influence, however this is usually controlled to achieve the "proper" boil. The equation for evaporation in a column at constant pressure and temperature is: N = (C*Dab/L)*ln((1-xal)/1-xa0)) where, C is the total molar concentration of "a" (water) and "b" air. Dab is mass diffusivity L is the path length (surface of wort to the top of the kettle) xa0 is the concentration of water vapor at the wort surface. xal is the concentration of water vapor in the local atmosphere. Since wort boiling is not a constant temperature process (temperature difference between wort and air), the constants C, Dab, will be functions of position (height above the wort). We cannot use the above equation to directly solve for the evaporation rate because C and Dab are not constant, but the form of the solution will be the same so we can conclude: 1. Increase the head space in the boil kettle will decrease evaporation. 2. Increased humidity will decrease the evaporation rate. While I studied mass transfer, I do not use it at my job. There is probably a chemical engineer out there that can give a better explanation. I recommend you measure your evaporation loss over several batches and calculate a volume rate per hour and use this for recipe formulation instead of using X% loss. Cheers, Dan Morey Club B.A.B.B.L.E. http://www.hbd.org/babble Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 07:20:14 -0800 From: Demonick <demonick at zgi.com> Subject: Re: question about starters >What if I made a 1/2 to 3/4 gallon starter an poured it into a sanitized 6 >gallon carboy. This will work. The headspace is no problem. The carboy will remain sanitized for 3 days. The only problem is the starter beer. It is difficult to decant the starter liquid out of the carboy. Your carefully crafted grain bill and wort will be "contaminated" by the 3/4 gallon starter. For a 5 gallon batch and a 3/4 gallon starter, the starter would be 15% of the final volume. This would have the same impact as 1.5 lbs of grain in a 10 lb grain bill - a quite significant contribution to the final brew's character. If you have a beer fridge, you can cool the starter and let the yeast flocculate and cake. Pouring off the liquid portion would be easier in this case. Cheers! Domenick Venezia Venezia & Company, LLC Maker of PrimeTab (206) 782-1152 phone (206) 782-6766 fax orders demonick at zgi dot com Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 08:01:25 -0500 (EST) From: Jonathan Royce <jtroyce at earthlink.net> Subject: OT: Charging People for Air Ronald La Borde said: Actually, I think that greedy people would charge for the air we breathe if they could only find a way. To which I say: Actually, I think Nike has already accomplished this. They replaced the foam & rubber that used to be the sole of your running shoe with air, then doubled the retail price. People ate it up. Got to love capitalism. ;-) -Jon Woodbury Brewing Co. www.woodburybrewingco.com Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 10:49:42 -0500 From: Jeff Renner <jeffrenner at comcast.net> Subject: Re: question about starters "greg man" <dropthebeer at hotmail.com> asks: >What if I made a 1/2 to 3/4 gallon starter an poured it into a sanitized 6 >gallon carboy. Waited three days an then pitched the wort on top of the >starter? That would work great. All that extra air is good for the growing yeast. The only problem I would have is that I don't like to include the starter "beer" in my good beer. I make my starters with dry malt extract at 1.030 and a pinch of nutrient, and aerate. That makes good yeast, not good beer. > The thing that bugs me about this idea is the thought of all that extra >head space, could it harm the starter? More air can't be a bad thing right? >And after It ferments the co2 would be like a blanket on top of the starter >protecting the beer, Because co2 weighs more than ambient air is that >correct? More air is good for multiplying yeast (but bad for beer flavor). The CO2 will actually mix with the air in the carboy due to air currents (from evolved CO2 and temperature fluctuations) and Brownian movement over the period of time we are talking about, so I think there will be some O2 in contact with the surface of the starter. But, as I said, that's a good thing. You could even encourage this by taking the stopper out of the carboy and "pouring" the CO2 out. The less than sterile air that replaces it shouldn't be a problem if you don't have a contamination problem in your house. If you do, well, you already had 5.5 gallons of that air in the carboy to start, what's another few gallons? > Problem number two is of course will the fermenter still be sanitized >after 3 days? Should be no problem as long as you don't have contaminants running around and you practice normal sanitary practices. Here's what I would do, though, and have done in the past - make your starter in the carboy but wait until it stops and the yeast has settled out, then decant the starter "beer." Then run your chilled wort in on top of the yeast. 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: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 10:56:44 -0500 From: Jeff Renner <jeffrenner at comcast.net> Subject: Re: Used 3 Gallon "Berggren, Stefan" <stefan_berggren at trekbike.com> asks: >I am on the look out for a used 3 gallon keg(ball lock) or a decently priced >new 3 gallon keg. Does anyone have any leads on >these elusive little monsters? Adventures in Homebrewing http://homebrewing.org/ in Dearborn, MI has pinlock ones for $40. They mail order. I got one that's in nearly new shape and love it. The rest of my kegs are ball lock, so I just bit the bullet and bought a set gas-in and beer-out pinlock fittings. 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: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 11:14:59 -0500 From: Marc Sedam <marc_sedam at unc.edu> Subject: various topics...NEW, now with no complaints! I'm feeling a bit like Khalil Gibran today. ON YEAST STRAINS... I did see the comment about "R&D" and found it amusing. There certainly is some "D" involved in the yeast banking process, i.e. cleaning up the strain, measuring attenuation, making sure it's the "right" strain, etc. Not much "R" though. I gave two strains to Chris because I correctly thought that he would be interested in selling a new product. But an "exclusive" strain of yeast is only exclusive until another yeast rancher gives it out. These are not genetically modified strains and are really more tangible property than intellectual property. ON YEAST STRAINS AND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY (Disclaimer: I'm not an attorney but manage the intellectual property assets of a major research university, so I am at least paid on the expectation that I know what I'm doing.)... The issue at hand is the trademark that any of the individual yeast suppliers use to identify the yeasts, not the reculturing and supply of slants of the yeast in question. If your lab is "offering for sale" WLP833, for example, you can be asked to stop selling the yeast under someone else's name. It's the same reason why the Ayinger yeast is called "German Bock Yeast", as WL doesn't want anyone from Ayinger coming down and saying that WL is profiting off their brewery's name. It's a trademark issue, not a patent issue. The existing strains of yeast available are not patented nor are they patentable. Life forms can be patented (a fairly landmark IP case) but only if their creation "could not have been made but for man's intervention" or some such phrase. At it's simplest, you can patent a life form that you've changed to have useful properties (like a bacteria which can digest petroleum) but not one whose properties you've simply observed. You can patent unadulterated genes from life forms which you observe to have useful properties, but that's another story. Oh, and no one has patented the "human genome". **FAUX-LAWYER MODE ON** Celera Genomics tried to patent DNA fragments during their process of mapping the genome, but the US Patent and Trademark Office ceased to issue patents on these fragments (called expression tagged sequences, or ESTs) since the applications were filed without having any idea what use, if any, the ESTs had...thereby failing to be patentable on both novelty and indefiniteness rejections. **FAUX-LAWYER MODE OFF** My $0.02 on the issue is that yeast banking/sharing is totally OK as nearly all of these strains would not have even been able to be offered for sale if an industrious brewer didn't keep them alive and provide them, directly or indirectly, to the yeast distributors. FWIW, I think the price of fresh yeast is totally reasonable considering that you NEVER hear a complaint about a contaminated batch. ON THE LENGTH OF THE BREW DAY... I've never really understood why it takes people so long to brew. If it's taking you 6-7 hours during the brewday, you probably don't have the right equipment to make your life easier. Assuming I crush the grain and measure out the water prior to the actual brewing day (taking maybe 20 minutes) I can brew up a 10 gallon batch of all-grain beer in just over four hours. If you have the money (and that's a big assumption, I know) here are three purchases that can shave literally hours off your brew day. 1) Cajun cooker-- Boiling wort takes POWER and no kitchen stove is capable of doing the job at a more than barely passable level. I have a 15,000 BTU gas burner on my brand new kitchen stove and it took me nearly an hour to bring six gallons of water to a boil. Any cajun cooker can do the job in about 15-20 minutes. You can find these for $30-40 at any mega-hardware store, sometimes even with a nice (and perfectly safe) aluminum brewpot. 2) Pump-- Many online HB shops carry the mag drive pumps. I asked for one for Christmas one year thinking it would be cool. Now it's indispensable. I let the mash sit for 30 minutes then hook the pump up to recirculate the wort in the mash. Within three minutes the flow is free of particulates and within 15 minutes the wort is crystal clear. Recirculation during mashing helps to clarify the wort, maintain a consistent mash temperature, and permits direct firing of the tun (if you're so inclined). I usually run off the wort at a half gallon per minute and regularly hit 81% efficiency, and higher if it's a decoction. My wort is so clear that I can see the bottom of my 7 gallon brewpot when making a CAP. The pumps are expensive ($120-150, inclusive of fittings and hose), but so very worth it. I also use the pump to pump hot wort through the CFC. To be accurate the pump pulls the wort through the chiller first, so only cooled wort reaches the pump head. 3) Counterflow chiller-- I know that there are many immersion chiller fans, but for my time and water-savings dollar the CFC rules. This is especially true for 10 gallon batches. When chilling I probably run the pump (see above) at about a gallon per minute and the cooling water at a slightly higher rate. I rarely use more than 15 gallons of cooling water total, the first five of which (the really HOT water) is recycled for cleaning the rest of the equipment, with the remainder used to water my trees. I think my CFC was $70. In the periods that the mash is mashing and the wort is boiling you have about 2 hours of true "down time." During the mash I sanitize all of the fermentation equipment and get the yeast ready. During the boil I clean out the mash tun and any other equipment used. It's a busy four hours, but I usually have no more than an additional half hour of clean up afterwards. I should say that although I do now have a dedicated area to brewing complete with water and electrical sources, I could do it in nearly the same amount of time when I was in a cramped apartment. Cheers all! - -- Marc Sedam Chapel Hill, NC Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 12:19:01 -0500 From: ensmingr at twcny.rr.com Subject: Colonial Brewery Co., Cold Spring MN Greetings, A relative, knowing I like beer, gave me a Christmas gift, "12 Greatest Brews of the World". I think it was purchased from Walmart or some such store. The beer labels say they were made by Colonial Brewery Company of Cold Spring, MN. The bottles are very nice, with attractive labels and embossed images of grains and hop cones. That said, all the beers are very disappointing. There was negligible difference -- in color or taste -- between the Cream Ale, Amber Ale, Bock, and Brown Ale. I haven't yet tried the stout, wheat beer, and several others. Although I'm a BJCP judge, I'm not a beer-style-nazi. I simply believe that the advertising of Colonial Brewery Company is horribly misleading. The accompanying brochure for this product says it was developed in consultation with Dr. Joseph Owades of the Center for Brewing Studies, Sonoma, CA. Owades is credited as the inventor of "lite beer". He now seems to have invented "lite cream ale", "lite brown ale", "lite bock", etc. What's next for Owades, "lite imperial stout" and "lite barley wine"? My advice: Stay away from the "Twelve Greatest Brews of the World". They're not. Cheerio! Peter A. Ensminger Syracuse, NY http://hbd.org/ensmingr Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 12:46:57 -0500 From: Robin Griller <rgriller at chass.utoronto.ca> Subject: Re: business ethics Hi all, Eric Theiner says that it would be unethical for him to force someone to do business with him. I couldn't disagree with him more: if, for example, African Americans and Jews are excluded from 'doing business' by, as has happened, banks, golf clubs, etc., then it is highly unethical for anyone to *not* force said businesses to stop such racist practices. I most certainly would favour forcing businesses that exclude people from custom on racial grounds to smarten up if they can't be pushed into bankruptcy. Robin Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 13:25:55 -0500 From: "greg man" <dropthebeer at hotmail.com> Subject: starters an such Wow my idea must have been a hit, I got a lot of posts!!! I'm gonna try this with my next batch. I would suppose the greatest advantage to doing it this way is you could now make starters for an accurate pitching rate. According to ray daniels that would be 1.2 gallons for an optimal starter. (with a 50ml smack pack). I don't know if his numbers are correct because this Is something I'm still learning about. My normal practice is 1/2 gallon for ale's an 3/4 for lagers. This seems to work pretty good with out any extra long lag times. Now some of you mentioned decanting the young beer off the yeast. I've heard this before but was wondering if it really matters all that much? Will it impact the flavor of the beer negatively in some way? After all If you pour the starter in that's more beer for you :) But it does make up percentage wise 10-20% of the final beer..... I guess if you do pour it in you can no longer call it an all-grain beer. Actually I used to make starters out of the grain that I would eventually be brewing with. That worked better than anything I have ever done, but it is time consuming an I got lazy. For those of us that make 1 qt ready starters I say go for all-grain. These kind of starters have much more nutrients in the wort. An my lag times from those beers was sometimes only 2-4 hours!!!!!!!!!(for ales). Seems like the yeast got of to a better start that way, as we all know extract is cut with some sugars. Anyway thanks for the posts Guy's I'll try this idea with the new party-gyle batch I'm doing. I'll let you all know how it comes out!!! " Brewing is much like painting. People may enjoy a work of art, but few see the mistakes. Only the artist truly knows if he has succeeded or failed." ME gregman Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 09:43:11 -0900 From: Teresa Knezek <teresa at mivox.com> Subject: Re: No carbonation in first batch of HB On or thereabout 1/24/03, Tom Okerlund spoke thusly: >stored at 63-66F since then. Just couldn't wait so I chilled and >poped a bottle on Jan. 19 (7 days later) and no carbonation had >developed. Did I just not wait long enough? Should it be stored a >little warmer (68-70F) to get the yeast active? Oooh! A question I can answer with something resembling authority! :-) The yeast should stay at fermentation temperature to carbonate the bottles, since carbonation comes from yeast fermenting the priming sugar. So if you've put your yeast to sleep by over-chilling it, just put the bottles somewhere warm for a couple of weeks and they should wake up and do the job. I keep my cases of bottles in the bathroom closet with my fermenters for two weeks while they're conditioning. After two weeks, you can store them somewhere cooler... personally, I've been leaving them in the closet. - -- Teresa - Two Rivers, Alaska [2849, 325] Appt. Rennerian "It has been my experience that folks who have no vices have very few virtues." -- Abraham Lincoln Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 25 Jan 2003 00:19:23 +0100 From: Arnaud VIEZ <aviez at teaser.fr> Subject: Yeast book Hello happy brewers, Someone mentioned a book by Pierre Rajotte, "First steps in yeast culture". Where is it possible to get it? I could not find it on any homebrew site (or Amazon or BeerBooks etc.). TIA, arnaud at brasserie-du-coin.com (Vitry-sur-Seine, 5kms from Paris, France) Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 20:57:42 -0500 From: "Lou King" <lking at pobox.com> Subject: Is efficiency affected by mash water:grain ratio? Normally I have been mashing with 1.15 qts water:lbs grain ratio, but I wanted to experiment with a higher ratio, and used 1.25 last weekend. Unfortunately, I thought I undershot my mash temp by several degrees, and added another gallon of hot water or so to my 10 gallon batch. (20.5# grain, 6.5 gallons to start, plus whatever I added in a panic). [Tangential interlude: As it turned out, my mash tun thermometer said 148 after adding water, but a glass thermometer indicated 153 -- I need to calibrate the mash tun thermometer, and I don't know how long it has been off -- this is the first time I undershot like this, and I have been using promash for strike temp calibration until now. I am hoping the glass thermometer is accurate as I plan to calibrate the mashtun thermometer using that.] So the first runnings naturally had a lower specific gravity than usual 1.078 SG vs. 1.086 SG the last time I did this recipe. I say naturally, because it seems to me that more water in the mash would produce thinner first runnings. I sparged normally and stopped when I hit 1.012 SG. In the comparison batch I stopped at 1.013, but I'm not sure how much water was in the kettle when I hit this SG to compare the two batches. It seems to me that this path would likely produce less efficiency, and this was the result I saw 72% (OG in kettle pre boil 1.041)with 1.25++ vs 85% (OG in kettle 1.046) with 1.15 (kettle efficiency per promash calculations). Both batches were topped off to 13.5 gallons before measurement. After boil OG was pretty close at 1.048 (1.25++) vs. 1.049 (1.15), which confuses me somewhat. The other difference to remark on: my LHBS was out of American Pale Malt, so I used German Pils for the base malt. 1. Is this kettle efficiency difference to be expected with a thinner mash? 2. Any idea why the post boil OG was nearly the same in the two batches? Lou King Ijamsville, MD Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 25 Jan 2003 03:11:49 +0000 From: "Chris Eidson" <eidsonc at hotmail.com> Subject: More LHBS Chatter Before the LHBS thread dies out, I would like to put in a little plug for my local homebrew shop, Alabrew (NAJASC). The shop is well stocked compared to others I have visited and prices are quite reasonable. The owners are active in the local homebrew scene as well as the HBD, plus they are just nice folks. A good story to illustrate this -- Kim (one of the owners) one time recommended that I go to Northern Brewer for a particular item that he thought was a great deal and would be beneficial to my brewing. I have used some internet homebrew proprietors in the past and probably will continue to do so occasionally in the future, but my first choice is always going to be my local shop. Chris Eidson Birmingham, AL Return to table of contents
[Prev HBD] [Index] [Next HBD] [Back]
HTML-ized on 01/25/03, by HBD2HTML v1.2 by KFL
webmaster at hbd.org, KFL, 10/9/96