---

	FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
		Digest Janitor: pbabcock at hbd.org


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

          Northern  Brewer, Ltd. Home Brew Supplies
Visit http://www.northernbrewer.com  to show your appreciation!
               Or call them at 1-800-681-2739

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


Contents:
  unclear wort (leavitdg)
  Safale US-56 (Scott Birdwell)
  More on counter-flows ("Peed, John")
  Coke flavors ("Reif and Angie Hammond")
  Response: FOY 2005 - Andrew Jepeal ("Rob Moline")
  Response-FOY, 05- Mike Racette ("Rob Moline")


* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
*           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!   *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
*  Thank you, Drs. Cone, Fischborn, Waldrop, Lemcke, &  *
* Powell! Fortnight of Yeast Question Sumbission is now *
* closed.  Please save further questions for next year. *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

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.

LOOKING TO BUY OR SELL USED EQUIPMENT? Please do not post about it here. Go
instead to http://homebrewfleamarket.com and post a free ad there.

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.

JANITORs on duty: Pat Babcock (pbabcock at hbd dot org), Jason Henning,
                  and Spencer Thomas



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


Date: Wed,  3 Aug 2005 05:40:57 -0400
From: leavitdg at plattsburgh.edu
Subject: unclear wort


I am uncdertain, Aaron, but think that if I were in your situation, I would 
increase the boil time by 1/2 hour or so, just to see if you need more hot 
break?  I use Marris Otter a lot and have not noticed this, but then too, I 
usually do a 2 hour boil, due to low btu flame.

Happy Brewing!
Darrell


Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 3 Aug 2005 11:28:47 -0500
From: Scott Birdwell <defalcos at sbcglobal.net>
Subject: Safale US-56

Thomas T. Veldhouse asked about anyone with experience with Safale  
US-56?

"I was wondering if anybody cared to share their experience with Safale
US-56?  How closely do you think it compares with WYeast American 1056
or WhiteLabs WLP001?  Was the attenuation as good as the original
"chico" yeast?

I am experimenting with this yeast and using it for a Chinook IPA and I
want to see if this yeast can really perform."

We've been selling this product for about a year now (repackaged from  
bulk and labelled as West Coast Ale Yeast).  We've had good luck with  
it and think you will be impressed with it.  Not ready to give up my  
White Labs California Ale or Wyeast 1056 American Ale yeast for it,  
but the price is right and it does ferment quickly as do most dried  
yeasts.  It attenuated very well on the test batch we brewed.  Good  
luck!


Scott Birdwell
DeFalco's Home Wine & Beer Supplies
Houston  TX
www.defalcos.com



Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 3 Aug 2005 13:48:18 -0700
From: "Peed, John" <jpeed at elotouch.com>
Subject: More on counter-flows 


To those who don't rigorously clean their counter-flow chillers, I would
strongly advise pumping a PBW solution through it in a closed system and
having a look at what happens to the color of the solution.  I use two
quarts of hot tap water with two teaspoons of PBW - a fairly average
concentration, I think - and circulate it for several minutes after each
brew session (this is done after a backflush with hot tap water until
the water runs clear).  If I start by recirculating plain water, the
water stays clear.  When I first add and mix in the PBW, the water
starts to turn slightly grey-ish, as is normal for a PBW solution.  But
before I even get all the PBW dissolved, the liquid starts to turn
yellow-ish.  The more finishing hops I use in my beer, the more yellow
the water turns.  This tells me that counter-flow chillers should be
carefully cleaned after each use, and I know of no substitute for PBW
(TSP doesn't do nearly as well).  

Before each use I recirculate Star San through the chiller for about
half an hour; I never have seen any off colors.  I tried recirculating
iodophor through the copper chiller, but noticed that the solution would
turn clear within five  minutes or so, no matter how many times I
refreshed it.  Odd!  I decided to stick with Star San.

Storage is another issue.  Some fill the chiller with iodophor and cap
the ends.  I used to bake mine at 250 degrees for an hour to get it
completely dry.  If you store it damp, mold could be a problem.

As for counter-flow versus same-direction flow, I'm not sure I ever made
the mistake with my convoluted copper counter-flow chiller, but for some
reason I really had trouble hooking up the water lines correctly when I
first got the Therminator counter-flow plate chiller, and the difference
in performance is staggering.  With the Therminator, if you hook up for
same-direction flow, it can take half an hour to chill what you could do
in five minutes if you hook up for counter-flow.

John Peed
Oak Ridge, TN



Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 3 Aug 2005 18:01:10 -0400
From: "Reif and Angie Hammond" <arhammond at comcast.net>
Subject: Coke flavors

Considering the taste effects of water on beer, maybe the reported taste
differences in Coke are due to water variations.

Just a thought,
Reif Hammond
Durham, NH




Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 3 Aug 2005 19:54:19 -0500
From: "Rob Moline" <jethrogump at mchsi.com>
Subject: Response: FOY 2005 - Andrew Jepeal

From: "Andrew Jepeal" 
Subject: Fortnight Of Yeast, 2005


Hello FOY panel.

First let me say thanks for participating in FOY. We may not say it
enough, but it is greatly  appreciated.

My questions concern sulfites and brewing yeast. I started making wine
before I started brewing so I am comfortable with using sulfites.

1) Do brewing yeast have the same resistance to sulfites as do
commercially available wine yeasts?

Response:
I have not seen any definitive work comparing the two groups of yeast to
their SO2 resistance. Most yeast have a mechanism to handle some SO2.
They can build up some resistance to SO2 over a period of time.  I have
seen some spoilage yeast such as Zygosaccharomyces grow in 1000 ppm SO2.
This was in a grape juice storage at room temperature waiting to be
concentrated. In the range of 30 to 100 ppm SO2, that is usually
associated with the wine industry, the SO2 is usually lethal to the
bacteria and inhibitory to the yeast. If it is inhibitory long enough it
can become lethal.

The effectivenes of SO2 is directly related to the pH. SO2 at 3.0 pH is
10X as effective as it is at 4.0 pH. It is the molacular SO2 that
counts.

For your interest there are some strains of yeast that produce up to 100
ppm SO2.

Clayton

There appears to be some differing opinions in the brewing world if
sulfite solution is effective in sanitizing brewing equipment. I
normally make a solution using 12.5 grams of Pot. Meta. in 1 liter of
water. Any comments on the effectiveness of this solution in sanitizing
equipment? Specifically;

2) Would any brewing yeast be able to survive in a solution this strong?
3) Would any spoilage organisms you're aware of be able to?

Response:
12.5 grams Pot. Met. / liter. (over 7000 ppm SO2) is really hitting the
organisms over the head with a sledge hammer. I am not sure what pH that
would be and what would be necessary for you to get the 0.8 ppm
molacular SO2 that is required to kill. Contact time and temperature are
important.  Complete kill is much more important to the brewing industry
than it is to the wine industry.

I wish that I had an absolute answer for you.  If I had to hazzard a
guess, I would say that 7000 ppm SO2 plus heat plus contact time would
do the job especially if the solution is on the acid side.

I would be concerned about the SO2 released into the air.

Clayton 

4) Any comments concerning it's effectiveness compared to other
sanitizing
solutions used in brewing (Idophor, Star San, etc.)

Response:
Idophors are satisfactory.  I prefer acid sanitizers.  They not only
kill but remove any film that might be left from an alkaline cleaner. A
little heat helps.  They also leave the surface in an acid condition
which minimizes later contamination.
Clayton

We use peracetic acid in the lab and it works very well. It usually
comes in a 5% solution and the concentration to be used (after dilution
2-5 ml /L) is 100-250ppm. One advantage of peracetic acid is that no
rinsing is required,(which might be a problem with your very high SO2
concentration you are using) just drain the vessel properly. Peracetic
acid breaks down into acetic acid and oxygen, which are both not toxic. 
Tobias

- -- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.338 / Virus Database: 267.9.9/62 - Release Date: 8/2/2005



Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 3 Aug 2005 19:59:00 -0500
From: "Rob Moline" <jethrogump at mchsi.com>
Subject: Response-FOY, 05- Mike Racette

From: "Mike Racette" 
Subject: Fortnight Of Yeast, 2005

Can you please discuss the advantages/disadvantages of pitching onto an
existing yeast cake (assuming the cake, and previous beer, smelled and
tasted clean). Specifically, I have seen it argued that while there may
be obvious advantages such as no starter prep, less cleaning, and
perhaps a shorter lag time,  there may be negative effects created due
to too many old or dead yeast cells, or perhaps maybe even problems with
over-pitching? How might using an existing yeast cake affect the taste
and quality of the resulting beer.

Response:
Tobias may have a better answer, since he works with pitching almost on
a daily basis. My feeling is that pitching into an existing yeast
defeats the assurance of uniform quality and fermentation kinetics that
the brewmaster has when starting each time with a batch of new yeast.
You never know how many dead cells, stressed cells, mutated cells and
damaged cells that you have in the existing yeast. You would never know
at which repitching cycle would be best to pitch into unless you have
extensive laboratory data.

Clayton

- -- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.338 / Virus Database: 267.9.9/62 - Release Date: 8/2/2005



Return to table of contents

---