---

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


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

          Your Company Name and Contact Info Here!
  Visit http://hbd.org/sponsorhbd_table.shtml for more info!

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


Contents:
  Re: uh-oh, ya got him started... ("-S")
  RE: purging ("-S")
  RE: Yeast ranching ("Steve Jones")
  Brewing with Sugar, citrus vs cidery (John Palmer)
  Brewing software ("Dave Draper")
  Yeast Ranching and Pressure Cooker (val.dan.morey)
  my barleywine (Ed Jones)
  Link of the week - Jan 17, 2004 (Bob Devine)
  Re: Motorizing a JSP MaltMill ("Richard Schmittdiel")
  sparge arm? (Stan Gammons)
  dropped rubber stopper in carboy - should I be concerned? (Dave Clark)
  Pressure Cookers and Cerial Mash, MCAB (Bill Tobler)


* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
*           The HBD Logo Store is now open!             *
*            http://www.hbd.org/store.html              *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
*  Suppport this service: http://hbd.org/donate.shtml   *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
*   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@hbd.org or read the HBD FAQ at http://hbd.org.

JANITOR on duty: Pat Babcock and Spencer Thomas (janitor@hbd.org)



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


Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2004 00:20:55 -0500
From: "-S" <-s at adelphia.net>
Subject: Re: uh-oh, ya got him started...

Wes says,

> I did stress the point that "light" beers in Australia are LOW alcohol,
NOT
> low calorie

Mea culpa - I misread.

==

> He stated all yeast cells contain invertase,
> however the quantity of invertase varied greatly between strains (of
> yeast). In the 36% sucrose ferment scenario he said there would be
> insufficient invertase to invert the sucrose and the yeast would have to
go
> off and produce the necessary extra invertase to "complete" the job.

That's an erroneous understanding of enzymes.   Enzymes are catalysts, and
their amount determines RATE, not AMOUNT of source or product catalyzed.
Your explanation is inconsistent with basic facts.

Let's consider the rate.  Given that many brewing yeasts will convert 3P of
sucrose in 20 minutes, another  yeast that produces a fraction of 1% of this
amt of invertase would be require to leave any residual sucrose after a
normal fermentation period.

Far more likely, and well described in the literature, is than worts with
high levels of fructose, glucose or hydrolyzed sucrose exhibit catabolite
repression which, in the extreme case, halts fermentation.

=====

> We
> discussed the optimal conditions for invertase and confirmed my belief
that
> pH 4.5 and 50C were the ideal - certainly not a very healthy temperature
> for a brewing yeast!

First - there is no such thing as optimal or ideal temperature unless the
time period of the observation is also noted.  Unspecified temperature
optima haven't been used in enzymology lit for approximately 60 years, nor
the pro brewing lit for many decades.  This implies a serious
misunderstanding of basics by your source.

The pH optima of 4.5 is consistent with fermentation conditions, given
invertase's broad pH activity curve.  To quote
http://greenwoodhealth.net/np/invertase.htm
"contrary to most other enzymes,[yeast] invertase exhibits relatively high
activity over a broad range of pH (3.5--5.5), with the optimum near
pH=4.5.".  Invertase remains quite active over the entire pH range from
unpitched wort to beer.  Furthermore yeast invertase is extremely stable
over a wider pH range yet, and at higher than normal fermentation temp (30C)
for periods of days. http://www.jbc.org/cgi/reprint/263/18/8827

====

> Sorry Steve, but I am dead right about the costs. I am talking about the
> Aussie market - you are talking about the US market and they are not the
> same.

NO ! Wes made up a fallacious sources for my data - and didn't even bother
to look. The figures I quoted are "World refined sugar prices" from the spot
market.
http://www.ers.usda.gov/briefing/sugar/Data/Table02.xls  .  In late 2003 the
delivered price to Europe was about 9.5 cents/lb and the DELIVERED price of
Australian refined cane to Asia was about 10.3c/lb.  These figures have NO
RELATION to the US domestic price (round 24c/lb - elevated due to tariffs
and price supports).

Price distortions plague the sugar trade.  The US has sugar price supports &
tariffs which raise domesic prices and make beet production tenable - all
for domestic consumption.  The EU has farm subsidies which allow beet sugar,
at a production cost of 28+c/lb to be exported on the world market for
around 10c/lb !!   The EU combined is the largest sugar exporter on the
planet and it's completly uneconomic.   World sugar price is vastly
depressed due to this sort of market manipulation.

It is estimated the WORLD sugar production cost averages 15c/lb, whle world
HFCS averages 13c/lb.   Both are sold internationally at a depressed
10c-11c/lb.  While the US domestic cost of HFCS is a reasonable markup from
13c/lb, sugar is vastly higher.

Oz exports some 4M tons of cane sugar on the world market at world market
prices around 10c/lb.   Their cost of production is over the world average
15c/lb and is highly subsidized and internally trade is taxed.  If the
brewing industry could pay world market price for sugar (which is below
production cost) then that is most attractive.  Otherwise HFCS (or cheaper
glucose syrup) is clearly more attractive as adjunct.

==========

> Talk to the
> brewer and he will tell you that there is no cost advantage today in using
> sucrose syrup over malt even if he could,

1/ What is sucrose syrup ?  That's new to this discussion.

2/ Sucrose more expensive than malt - that's unlikely unless you guys have
radical price supports.  You can get Brazilian sugar delivered to Russia for
11 cents a pound (and that's 100% extract).   Malt would have to cost
~7.7c/lb ($4.25US/25kg) to match that.  *Maybe* you have a sugar price
subsidy as high as the US and the price is 24c/lb.   Can you really get malt
for  for a matching $9.25US/25kg (minus the cost of mashing) ?   That's
cheap, tho' possible *if* your price supports are very high and your malt
prices very low.

3/ Aside from Mexico starch hydrosylate tarrifs and barriers are rare and
price is almost always competitive.

Based on economic considerations alone - starch hydrosylate is far cheaper
than sugar or malt.

==

> These plants are strategically located in each
> state to be able to service the various state based breweries. There is no
> way adjunct suppliers can compete when they have to haul their product
from
> one side of the country to the other, [...]

Oh c'mon - I suppose they  grow the malting barley on the north side of
these plants and put up breweries on the south side to avoid shipping costs
too ?  This proposition  is ridiculous unless Oz has the worst
transportation infrastructure on the planet.  It costs around 3c/lb to
deliver sugar from Brazil to Russia by bulk ship.   I just used an online
calculator (http://www.freight-calculator.com/apxocean.asp) to see it would
cost me 4.6c/lb to ship *one* 60k-lb container load of palletized malt from
Chicago to Brisbane !   If you can't ship bulk rail across Oz for pennies
something is very wrong.  Energy to dry malt costs more than shipping it
halfway around the planet.

===

Just to get back to basics - I have no doubt that simple sugars in high
ratios impact flavor and fermentation- that's not at issue. There is
certainly a case to be made in favor of low DE hydrolyzed starch for added
dextrin body in beer.   My point is only that off-citrus flavor is not
directly attributable to high sucrose level and theories to explain it
remain unsupported speculation.

Aside from mutants without invertase, I see nothing in the literature
searches that suggests that sucrose inversion among brewing yeast is ever
anything but rapid.   If you can find Andy Walsh, he posted on this topic to
HBD a number of years ago - using rapid sucrose inversion as a quick test of
yeast viability as I recall.  If you can ID (and I can find) a supposedly
low-invertase yeast I'd be more than willing to test it's performance
against others.

Wes - let's take this pricing issue off-line.   I'd really like to hear
about Aussie wholesale  market prices - but it's not really Hbrewing I
think.

thanks,
 -Steve




Return to table of contents


Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2004 00:59:11 -0500
From: "-S" <-s at adelphia.net>
Subject: RE: purging

Leo Vitt asks,

>Question:  HOW do you get that last tiny bit of air out of the keg?

Most of my cornies have the more domed plastic lids w/ the relief valves in
the top.  Easy to fill w/ the valve out.  Otherwise you can fill to the
extent possible and add  enough CO2 to displace the small air-pockets before
CO2-displacing liquid.

>Next question:  Which is a bigger problem;  A tiny bit of air, or a
>tiny bit of sanitizer mixed into the beer?

Someone used to have a website where he demonstrated that a significant
amount of iodophor was undetectable in beer.  Hard to believe but I guess
that's why it's no-rinse.

 -S




Return to table of contents


Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2004 08:21:37 -0500
From: "Steve Jones" <stjones1 at chartertn.net>
Subject: RE: Yeast ranching

Good morning, Campers!

I've been yeast ranching for about 7 years. I got started
back when I brewed extract, and belonged to a 'kit of the
month' club. I bought blank agar slants from Grape &
Granary, and innoculated them from my Wyeast smakpak from
the kits. Over the years since I have accumulated 22
strains, and have begun making my own slants.

One problem that can occur is condensation in the slants.
The Agar media will begin gelling as the temperature drops
to about 40 or 45C. Allowing the boiled media to cool to
around 50-55C before pouring and capping the slants will
minimize the condensation that forms.

I just made a batch of 100 slants (13 x 100 mm) last week
Here is how I do it for 3.5 ml media in each slant:

350 ml water
10 gr DME
boil vigorously
chill (to precipitate trub) and strain thru coffee filter
add 5 gr Agar flakes, stirring as you add them.
boil again (very susceptible to boilovers), keeping it
topped up to about 350 ml
let cool down to about 50-60C
pour into culture tubes in rack and cap the tubes

Pour about 1 - 1.5" of water into the pressure canner. Add
some kind of rack so that your test tube rack is above the
water level. Set rack into pressure canner on it's side,
propping it up a bit so that the tubes are on a slant. I
used an 8" length of 1/2" OD copper tubing. With valve open,
heat until steam steadily shoots out of the valve. Close
valve, bring up to 15psi for 20 minutes. Allow to cool, but
be sure to open the valve when the pressure hits zero to
prevent a vacuum from forming.

For information on lab procedures check out the Brewing
Science Institute (http://www.brewingscience.com/). They
have a great online handbook that explains lots of different
procedures. The also sell media and plates - I just bought a
bottle of prepared sterile media and 30 sterile disposable
plates so that I can plate out my 22 strains to check for
any contamination.

Steve Jones
Johnson City, TN [421.8, 168.5] AR
http://hbd.org/franklin




Return to table of contents


Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2004 07:45:14 -0800
From: John Palmer <jjpalmer at altrionet.com>
Subject: Brewing with Sugar, citrus vs cidery

I have gotten behind on my HBDs and just caught up with the sugar 
thread this morning.
My first question is to Steve, you say there is an "obvious" difference 
between table sugars made from beets vs. cane?
I wish I had read that last weekend because I was just back home in 
Midland last weekend (tacked on to a business trip) and could have 
smelled the sugar bowl. Out here in California, every thing is cane 
sugar. Maybe I can have my Mom mail me a bag of Big Chief so I can do a 
side by side.
When I was researching my Brewing With Sugars article recently, the 
sugar industry web resources stated that table sugar is so highly 
refined that there was no difference in taste between cane or beet 
sources and I accepted that. Be interesting to verify that for myself.

Secondly, define citrusy flavors from high sucrose worts versus cidery 
flavors. I am familiar with cidery but have not tasted anything I would 
describe as citrusy. I don't suppose this is a translational 
difference? like skunky versus catty flavor for light struck beers?

I recently did a side by side brew where I had 3 Coopers Draught Ale 
extract kits, 2 new -from the same lot, and one that was 3 years old. I 
made one of the new kits with 1 kg of table sugar, and one with 1 kg of 
dry malt extract. The old kit was also made with 1 kg of dry malt 
extract. All were fermented with new packets (same lot) of Coopers dry 
yeast.
The New kit made with 1 kg of Sugar had the most cidery character, not 
as bad as some I have had, but definitely there in smell and taste. The 
Old kit made with 1 kg of extract had a pronounced apple
fruitiness to it, but not exactly cidery. The New kit with 1 kg of 
extract had no excessive fruitiness to it. Tasted pretty normal.

John Palmer
john at howtobrew.com
www.realbeer.com/jjpalmer
www.howtobrew.com - the free online book of homebrewing



Return to table of contents


Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2004 09:02:51 -0700
From: "Dave Draper" <david at draper.name>
Subject: Brewing software

Dear Friends,

Andy from Hillsborough asks about brewing software, and specifically the 
newer version of Suds.  I've used Suds for many years, and finally 
upgraded from v. 4 to the latest version mid-last year when I restarted my 
brewing ops here in the Land of Enchantment.  I'm quite happy with it.  

One of its features I have adopted is its inventory pages, replacing the 
Excel sheet I used to have to update by hand. Very convenient.  I get very 
consistent results in bittering, gravity, and color from the algorithms it 
uses  (and in particular hop utilization is editable so you can fine tune the 
IBU calc  for your own system).  After a few mashes, I arrived at a value 
for thermal mass for use in the mash calc module (mine turns out to be 
0.5) and since then I hit my temp targets spot on using the calculated 
infusion amounts and temperatures.  There is, however, one bug currently 
present: if using metric units (which any rational, sane person would be 
doing :-)) and doing a third infusion, the amounts of water calculated are 
wacky.  This was the case even for the second infusion when I first got my 
v. 6 (simple unit conversion error), but an email to the author Mike Taylor 
had that resolved within hours, so I expect the same will be true when I 
get around to bringing this to his attention too.  I recall that during the 4.0 
days when Mike was first adding the ability to choose between various 
sets of hop utilization values, there were a bug or two in that which I 
came across, and he fixed those instantly too-- a friendly and responsible 
software author for my money.  

Bottom line, I like it a lot, its user interface suits my style and I can count 
on getting what I'm aiming at when I rely on its calculations.  Standard 
disclaimers apply, I own no stock, just a satisfied customer, blah blah 
blah.  

Cheers, Dave in ABQ
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
David S. Draper, Institute of Meteoritics, Univ New Mexico
David at Draper dot Name
Beer page: http://www.unm.edu/~draper/beer.html
 ...I drink cool ale... ---Kirk Fleming






Return to table of contents


Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2004 10:15:02 -0600
From: val.dan.morey at juno.com
Subject: Yeast Ranching and Pressure Cooker

There certainly nothing wrong with using a pressure cooker to sterilize
slants and plates.  However, I believe the risk is low with plates and
slants.  Unlike canned starters, plates and slants are in an aerobic
condition.  Maximum yeast growth occurs best in aerobic conditions. 
Canned starters are essential void of air (oxygen), and is in a vacuum. 
The steam produced during canning displaces the air and when it cools the
lid seals preventing air from entering the jar.  It is the spores
produced in the absence of air that form toxin.  See link below:

http://ohioline.osu.edu/hyg-fact/5000/5567.html

Pressure cooker for canned starters, ABSOLUTELY in my opinion.  Pressure
cooker for plants and slants, questionable.  After all, how many of us
pressure can our beer?  I would call beer a low pH food.

Prost!

Dan Morey
Club B.A.B.B.L.E.  http://hbd.org/babble
[213.1, 271.5] mi


Return to table of contents


Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2004 13:26:00 -0800 (PST)
From: Ed Jones <cuisinartoh at yahoo.com>
Subject: my barleywine

For this year's barleywine I used Nottingham yeast. That was the first
time I've ever used dry yeast. I pitched three 11gram sachets into 5
gallons of 1.120 BW. I checked the gravity today and it was 1.026. Wow!
It has been 16 days since I brewed it. Add me to the ranks of dry yeast
fans. I was afraid I'd have to pitch some champagne yeast to finish but
that clearly isn't necessary.

Mr. Wibble, one of the packs I pitched was from you, back when you sent
us a free sachet of dry yeast. I promised I'd post an update. It's too
early to say much about taste, but I think it'll be just fine. 

However, I'm thinking I should have gone for a little more IBUs. My
BU:GU ratio is about 0.33 (39 IBU). According to Daniels in "Designing
Great Beers" Bigfoot is around 0.75 BU:GU (80 IBU for 1.106 GU), which
I find too high for my tastes.

I'm thinking after I let the BW age for about a year I'll try adding
some of that isomerized hop extract one drop at a time in a glass of BW
to determine the BU:GU that works for me.

Ed

=====
Ed Jones - Columbus, Ohio U.S.A - [163.8, 159.4] [B, D] Rennerian

"When I was sufficiently recovered to be permitted to take nourishment,
I felt the most extraordinary desire for a glass of Guinness...I am
confident that it contributed more than anything else to my recovery."
  - written by a wounded officer after Battle of Waterloo, 1815



Return to table of contents


Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2004 15:25:06 -0700
From: Bob Devine <bob.devine at worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Link of the week - Jan 17, 2004

Some beer & health links:

Beer belly? Sorry, it isn't from beer says a study:
  http://www.phs.utoronto.ca/courses/beer_obesity.pdf (original research 
paper) <http://www.phs.utoronto.ca/courses/beer_obesity.pdf>
  http://www.realbeer.com/news/articles/news-002041.php (short review)

But it might be from your genes:
  http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/low/health/2636509.stm

And beer can be part of a healthy diet:
  http://www.canoe.ca/HealthNews/980205_jones.html

Science marches on!  An anti-aging beer is on the way
  http://www.xtramsn.co.nz/health/0,,7998-2987222,00.html

Bob Devine


Return to table of contents


Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2004 16:26:32 -0800
From: "Richard Schmittdiel" <schmitrw at earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: Motorizing a JSP MaltMill

Bill at No Spam notes that motorizing a JSP MaltMill does void the warranty.
True enough.  But a visit to the JSP site
(http://schmidling.netfirms.com/barebone.htm) clearly shows photos of his
mills having been motorized.  Makes me think that it's a CYA on his part, and
that the mill is plenty sturdy enough to work just fine behind a motor.  I
just recently wrapped up a project to motorize my own JSP mill.  Now I'm
dieing to brew again so that I can see how well it works.

For the record, here's how I did mine:
I used a Chicago Electric 1/2" variable-speed drill, #47991-VGA  at  $29.99 from
HarborFreight (www.harborfreight.com) and a spider coupling #6408K14 with hub
6408K95  at  $23.66 from McMaster-Carr (www.mcmaster.com) to motorize my JSP
mill.  Some scrap pieces of lumber, a bit of 3/8" steel bar, and a little time
spent with the Skillsaw
and the paint brush, and voila, a motorized malt mill.

Photos available upon request via private email.

Rich Schmittdiel
Possum Holler Brewery
in Southern California



Return to table of contents


Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2004 20:12:25 -0600
From: Stan Gammons <s_gammons at charter.net>
Subject: sparge arm?

I just started making beer using the all grain method. My first batch
was an Oatmeal Stout and it turned out pretty well considering it was my
first attempt. Slowly pouring the hot sparge water over the grain a
quart at a time is the way I sparged the first batch. As everyone know,
that is a pain.  I've seen the Phil's sparge arm and was wondering how
well it works?  Has anyone made something similar, rotating or
stationary that works just as well?  I've thought about making a
circular shaped sparge arm and using a Gott or Rubbermaid cooler with a
ball valve on it as the HLT.  Anyone else made something along these
lines?  If so, how well does it work?





Return to table of contents


Date: Sun, 18 Jan 2004 09:33:41 -0500
From: Dave Clark <wurly153 at stny.rr.com>
Subject: dropped rubber stopper in carboy - should I be concerned? 

In my hurry to get beer into a carboy and off to the hockey game I 
pushed a rubber stopper down into the carboy full of beer.  Will the 
rubber effect the beer?  Should I rack it over into another carboy or 
just leave it alone?   I'm inclined to leave it alone.  I feel the risk 
of contamination is probably higher then any effect the runnber will 
have on the beer.  other opinions?   Dave



Return to table of contents


Date: Sun, 18 Jan 2004 19:18:33 -0600
From: Bill Tobler <wctobler at sbcglobal.net>
Subject: Pressure Cookers and Cerial Mash, MCAB

Hi everybody!  Hope everyone had a good weekend. I seem to remember someone
(Jeff?) posting last year about doing a cereal mash (cornmeal/Polenta and
malt) in a large pressure cooker.  I'd like to try this and was looking for
some information on water ratios and cooking time.  Was there any scorching
problems?  Any and all info will be instantly absorbed.

Anyone planning on going to the MCAB this year?  http://hbd.org/mcab/  It
looks like it should be a good time.  I'm trying to swing a free ride on the
company shuttle to Midland and then spend the weekend.  Our club will have
four beers entered and it would be nice to have someone there to pick up the
medals. :=)  Cheers!!

Bill Tobler
Lake Jackson, TX
(1129.7, 219.9) Apparent Rennerian

I wonder how far Warren, Michigan is from (0,0)?



Return to table of contents

---