---

	FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
		Rob Gardner, Digest Coordinator


Contents:
  Brewing conference books (John DeCarlo)
  Re:  Sanitizing Bottles (John DeCarlo)
  questions (Russ Gelinas)
  Re: low-cal soda (Marty Albini)
  Beer Marketing (Slugs) (Forrest Cook)
  please add me to you august mailing list (Jeff La Coss)
  California beer tax proposal (Fred Condo)
  Re:  Homebrew Digest #495 (September 13, 1990) (Mark E. Freeman)
  Re: Baltimore Brewpubs (Chris Shenton)
  Re: Baltimore Brewpubs (Chris Shenton)
  New Amsterdam and F.X. Matt's Brewery (mark gryska)
  Balling Plato (R. Bradley)
  Re: Homebrew Digest #493 (September 11, 1990) (Jay Hersh)


Send submissions to homebrew%hpfcmr at hplabs.hp.com
Send requests to homebrew-request%hpfcmr at hplabs.hp.com
[Please do not send me requests for back issues]
Archives are available from netlib at mthvax.cs.miami.edu


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

Date: Thursday, 13 Sep 1990 07:08:56 EST
From: m14051 at mwvm.mitre.org (John DeCarlo)
Subject: Brewing conference books

>From: GARY  06-Sep-1990 2102 <mason at habs11.enet.dec.com>

>Having just purchased what I thought to be all of the
>transcripts from the AHA conferences, I discovered that there is
>a hole in the offering.  The "Best of" book is 1-5, and the
>individuals start with 7 and go through 9.  Does anyone know
>what happened to 6?  Just curious.

I don't know, I assume it is out of print, maybe?  I have it at
home, but bought it from a local homebrew supply shop.

It is an interesting volume.  The "Volume 6" is hidden and not at
all obvious compared to the other issues.  I have a sneaking
suspicion that it was published first, then demand cause them to
come out with a "Best of" book and continue from there.

Internet: jdecarlo at mitre.org
Usenet:    at ... at !uunet!hadron!blkcat!109!131!John_Decarlo
Fidonet:  1:109/131

Return to table of contents


Date: Thursday, 13 Sep 1990 07:09:47 EST
From: m14051 at mwvm.mitre.org (John DeCarlo)
Subject: Re:  Sanitizing Bottles

>Date:     Tue, 28 Aug 90 15:17 EDT
>From: <BILODEAP%BCVMS.BITNET at mitvma.mit.edu>
>
>Sorry about this, bu tI need to ask:
>
>What is the best *NON-Toxic* method of sterilizing bottles?

I prefer putting the bottles in dishwasher, no detergent, and
using the "heated dry" option after a rinse.  This may not
actually *sterilize* the bottles, but should do at least as good
a job of sanitizing them as a bleach solution.

Internet: jdecarlo at mitre.org
Usenet:    at ... at !uunet!hadron!blkcat!109!131!John_Decarlo
Fidonet:  1:109/131

Return to table of contents


Date:     Thu, 13 Sep 90 10:15 EST
From: <R_GELINA%UNHH.BITNET at mitvma.mit.edu> (Russ Gelinas)
Subject:  questions

Question time. Are we ready? Ok, let's go:

I'm having an *interesting* time brewing a stout. Standard ingredients, with
Wyeast Irish Ale yeast. The yeast package didn't swell very well, and I
couldn't wait any longer, so I pitched it after it swelled to about 1.5".
It fermented slowly, and had no blow-off. After a couple of days it was
bubbling happily, so I let it go. After 3 weeks it was still bubbling every
18 seconds (still in primary). Last night I transferred it to a secondary, and
the specific gravity was 1.040! I don't know the OG, but it would have been in
the 1.060 range. It tasted good, albeit a little sweet. It even had some
carbonation. It didn't seem to be bubbling very much in the secondary, so I
loosened the cap to the water seal, and ZING! it starts bubbling away. AHA!
That explains the slight carbonation; I've had my stout "bottled" in a carboy,
and was forcing the CO2 back into solution. SO, the question(s) is(are): how
has the increased CO2/increased pressure/other factors affected the yeast
population? Should I pitch some more yeast? Or call it a sweet stout and smile?

Hops
- ----
I have a "new" (planted in April) Hallertaur hops plant. It grew very well, and
produced some (less than 10) nice cones. I picked those and used them, but
that was it, no more cones. The plant is still fine. What gives?

I
 -
I've got an infection in one of my batches (bacteria-I had some friends check
it in a bio.lab). This is the batch with the white globules as a ring-around-
the-bottle. It tastes OK (I think), and I hate to throw the whole batch away,
since some bottles have very little sign of infection. So what I did is pour
the beer through a coffee filter, to catch any good size critters. It seems to
work; the beer comes out nice and clear, but also quite flat. The coffee filter
has a nice head, though. Any ideas out there? (other than toss it or drink it
the way it is)

Russ

Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 13 Sep 90 9:08:25 PDT
From: Marty Albini <martya at sdd.hp.com>
Subject: Re: low-cal soda

> From: Dave Sheehy <dbs at hprnd>
> 
> I have been interested in making a lower calorie soda pop especially after
> making a few batches and seeing exactly how MUCH sugar there really is in
> soda pop. Here is an idea I've come up with that I'm going to try on my next
> batch. Fructose tastes 70% sweeter than sucrose (according to some nutrition
> book I read) and they are nearly equal in caloric content. Therefore, if I 
> substitute fructose (available in bulk at my local Raley's) for the sucrose 
> and use 1/2 as much I should end up with about half the calories and a drink 
> that is a little less sweet than 'normal'. 

	Ought to work. A lot of commercial sodas use fructose,
and the only problem I could see is that the result will have
less body. Ever notice how thin diet soda tastes compared to 
regular?

> My main concern is the possibility
> of exploding bottles. If the sugar density is acting as a preservative and 
> preventing the yeast from fermenting then I may be in trouble. On the other
> hand if the lack of nutrients is the controlling factor in yeast activity then
> I should be ok. I am less concerned with flavor differences due to the 
> fructose. Opinions?

	Yeast without nutrients can't reproduce--but they
don't stop eating. They will slowly create more and more CO2
unless something stops them, like refrigeration, irradiation,
chemical attack, or court order.

****WARNING****WARNING****WARNING****WARNING****WARNING****
I'm not a biologist. The above paragraph represents opinions 
based on experience and hearsay. The author reserves the 
right to be full of it.
****WARNING****WARNING****WARNING****WARNING****WARNING****

	Here's what I do to make soda. I boil the water in my
big brewpot, add sugar, stir, bring back to a boil, remove
heat, add extract, and pour the whole mess immediately into a
sanitized keg. I let it cool overnight, chill the next 
morning, and artificially carbonate. Result: four-five gallons
of fizzy soda, no sediment, and no exploding bottles. All for
about an hour's worth of effort.

	If kegging isn't an option, you might try bottling
with a carefully weighed chunk of dry ice in each bottle.

	On the same note, I'm very interested in collecting
recipes for root beer. The extracts I've tried have been
really disappointing, and I'd like to find a "mashing" recipe.
Even a pointer to good extracts would be appreciated.
- --
________________________________________________Marty Albini___________
"To enjoy the flavor of life, take big bites. Moderation is for monks."
phone    : (619) 592-4177
UUCP     : {hplabs|nosc|hpfcla|ucsd}!hp-sdd!martya
Internet : martya at sdd.hp.com 
CSNET    : martya%hp-sdd at hplabs.csnet
US mail  : Hewlett-Packard Co., 16399 W. Bernardo Drive, San Diego CA 92127-1899 USA

Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 13 Sep 90 10:46:37 -0600
From: cook at stout.atd.ucar.EDU (Forrest Cook)
Subject: Beer Marketing (Slugs)


Perhaps Budweiser should change their icon to

SLUGS Mackenzie :-)

I can see it now: "4 out of 5 slugs recommend BUD!"

Forrest Cook
cook at stout.atd.ucar.edu WB0RIO
{husc6|rutgers|ames|gatech}!ncar!stout!cook

Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 13 Sep 90 10:48:10 PDT
From: Jeff La Coss <jlacoss at venera.isi.edu>
Subject: please add me to you august mailing list


 Thanks,

	Jeff

 ===============================================================
| USC/Information Sciences Institute	| Office:		|
| 4676 Admiralty Way			|  213-822-1511 x235	|
| Suite 1000				| FAX:			|
| Marina Del Rey, CA 90292		|  213-823-6714		|
 ===============================================================


Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 13 Sep 90 10:38:43 PDT
From: fredc at pro-humanist.cts.com (Fred Condo)
Subject: California beer tax proposal

In-Reply-To: message from fredc

gak at sun.com asks about the nickel a drink tax in California.

Since the proposed tax you mentioned in HBD 495 is an initiative, you should
be able to get the text from the Secretary of State's office in Sacramento.
You would probably be able to get it from Anheuser Busch or some other beer
industry source, as well, since they are in opposition and have proposed a
competing, 2-cents-a-drink initiative to suck votes away from the nickel tax
proposal. The nickel proposal is Proposition 134.
*...........
 Fred Condo.     Pro-Humanist BBS: 818/339-4704, 300/1200 bps
 INET: fredc at pro-humanist.cts.com     BitNet: condof at clargrad
 matter: PO Box 2843, Covina, CA 91722   Amer. Online: FredJC



Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 13 Sep 90 10:52:30 PDT
From: freeman at idaho.Inference.Com (Mark E. Freeman)
Subject: Re:  Homebrew Digest #495 (September 13, 1990)

   If I remember correctly, a completely unsubstantiated rumor, the cost to
   produce a  beer is only cents.  I think it was less than 10.  The rest
   of the costs are packaging, transportation, taxes and of course price
   mark-ups for every one who touches the product.  With taxes being the 
   biggest percent, and transportation next.  And, as Mike said, packaging
   costs where more than the ingredient costs.

   Can anyone verify or disprove any parts of this rumor?  Or was I just
   dreaming.

It`s entirely believable.  First of all, when you're buying
ingredients wholesale by the ton, things get very inexpensive.  
And it`s not just the beer industry, most products cost *many*
times the value of the raw materials.  I guess alot of people
don't realize how much money is spent on advertising and 
packaging so that that product looks 

Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 13 Sep 90 15:14:20 EDT
From: Chris Shenton <chris at asylum.gsfc.nasa.gov>
Subject: Re: Baltimore Brewpubs

Tom Nolan writes:
> BBC is a German-style Beergarden with a menu to
> match. Both have good brewpub-style beer. 

Unfortunately, BBC has nixed their German food (in favor of the usual
chicken wings and stuff -- why bother?). The beer is still excellent,
however. 

Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 13 Sep 90 15:20:51 EDT
From: Chris Shenton <chris at asylum.gsfc.nasa.gov>
Subject: Re: Baltimore Brewpubs

Tom Nolan writes:
> BBC is a German-style Beergarden with a menu to
> match. Both have good brewpub-style beer. 

Unfortunately, BBC has nixed their German food (in favor of the usual
chicken wings and stuff -- why bother?). The beer is still excellent,
however. 

Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 13 Sep 90 15:36:30 EDT
From: mark at zippy.cs.umass.edu (mark gryska)
Subject: New Amsterdam and F.X. Matt's Brewery

    Regarding New Amsterdam, both the ale and the lager are brewed in
  Utica, NY by the F.X. Matt's Brewing Company. New Amsterdam started
  its life in 1982 as a contract brew by F.X. Matt's for the Old New
  York Brewing Company founded by Matthew Reich.  When he had raised
  enough capital he opened his Manhattan brewery in 1985. However, this
  turned out to be a very expensive operation and he closed his brewery
  in the fall of 1987 and New Amsterdam was contract brewed by F.X.
  Matt's once again. The last news I heard was that F.X. Matt's had
  purchased New Amsterdam from Matthew Reich.

    F.X. Matt's contracts a number of different beers, about a dozen or
  so, which are sold all over this country. Last month our club, the
  Valley Fermenters, conducted a tasting of some of these beers along
  with their brand "Matt's Premium" - an American Pilsner Lager.  We
  wanted to determine whether their beer had a characteristic "house
  flavor" (as some people thought it did) and if so, what was it?

    It turned out that most of these beers were very similar not only
  in flavor but also in color.  The most prominent differences were in
  the hops; some had strong hops aroma and flavor while others were
  less assertive, there was also variance in the type of hops used
  although continental varieties were most common.  The color of these
  beers ranged from copper to golden, the flavors could be described as
  clean, an emphasis toward maltiness and perhaps a bit on the grainy
  side.  The hops were balanced nicely against the maltiness making for
  a very drinkable beer.  As a criticism, I would say that all of these
  beers lacked some character, I felt that there was very little that
  stood out to make them unique.  It seemed that all these beers were
  produced in a very similar manner.  To their credit this brewery was
  one of the first in the country to produce contract brews.

    As a side note: I had been on a tour of the brewery just a week or
  so before our tasting. They have a nice tour with lots of antiques
  and beer memorabilia, it is a family run business and has that feel
  to it.  The tour guides are high school kids so don't expect to
  engage in a lot of technical beer talk, you may be able to arrange a
  special tour if that is what you are looking for.  The brewery also
  produces "Sparkling Ale" as well as "Old English Ale" which are very
  delicious as I recall.  These products are sold only in kegs, when in
  Utica you might find them at Tiny's Grill on the corner of Mandeville
  and State.

				- mg

  Our tasting consisted of:

  Matt's Premium Lager			Manhattan Gold
  Brooklyn Lager			New Amsterdam Ale
  Portland Lager			Dock Street Amber
  Harpoon Golden Lager			Harpoon Ale
  Saranac 1888				Season's Best 1988, 1989

  Note that we did not sample some of the beers that were more likely
  to be on the outside of the spectrum - for instance, Newman's Albany
  Amber or Brooklyn Brown.

  gryska at cs.umass.edu
  mark at zippy.cs.umass.edu

Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 13 Sep 90 16:22:38 CDT
From: bradley at dehn.math.nwu.edu (R. Bradley)
Subject: Balling Plato

First of all, apologies for forgetting to sign my "vexing vortices"
in #494.  And many thanks to Ed Falk for the Douglas Adams reference
in #495.  Dare I venture to suggest that if it takes on the order
of 24 hours for the Coriolus effect to overcome the inertia of spinning
water in a tub, then it won't make much of a difference to the industrious
homebrewer rinsing her bottles?


The real reason for this note is give the formula for mash efficiency.
Most of you probably have 3-scale hydrometers.  We all know what the
specific gravity scale measure (no? Weight of one litre of wort in
kilograms.  Careful, though, it's 1.043 kg., NOT a metric ton and change.)
The potential accohol is just SG re-scaled by about 7.5, for those of
us without calculators.

The (relatively) unknown third scale is degrees Plato (or Balling or Brix).
Quite simply, it measures the percentage, by weight, of dissolved
solids.  However, since it assumes that the solvent is pure water,
it can only really measure this before fermentation.

This is quite neat, since if you multiply the volume (in litres) of
the wort by the SG, you know how much your batch weighs.  Then Mr. 
Plato tells you how much is solid stuff.  That's virtually all sugar...
hops don't amount to much.  Therefore, (grain brewers particularly
take note) you can compute how much of the stuff you started with
actually got in to the beer.

You should expect 60 to 80% of the grist, by weight, to end up in the
wort.  Husk and such accounts for most of what doesn't go through.
The proportion of such insoluble mattrr varies among types of malt
and adjunct.  You can also use the figure to get an idea of how
efficient your sparge is...could be handy, for example, if you're
experimenting with a new sparging technique.


Here goes.  Let:

S = original gravity, specific gravity scale,
P = original gravity, degrees Plato,
V = volume of wort, litres, and
W = weight of grist in kilograms.

Then
              S  V  P
efficiency = --------- .
	       100 W

Suppose a 5 U. S. gallon (18.9 litre) batch used 8 lb. of malt (3.6 kilos)
and had an original gravity of 1.043 (which corresponds to about 11
degrees Plato).  There's about 2.17 kg. of solids in the wort (a shade
less than 5 lb.) and the efficiency is 60%.

If you insist on pounds and gallons, replace the constant in the
denominator by 11.96 (OK, round to 12).  Remember, British and old-
fashioned Canadian subscribers, that's a 3.8 litre U. S. gallon.  The
computation of the constant for 4.4 litre imperial gallons is left
to the reader as an exercise .  That, and a 1000-word essay on "Why 
Canada adopted the metric system and why America should do the same".



Happy calculating, but even happier brewing,

Rob  (bradley at math.nwu.edu)

Return to table of contents


Date: 13 Sep 90 16:25:28 EDT
From: Jay Hersh <75140.350 at compuserve.com>
Subject: Re: Homebrew Digest #493 (September 11, 1990)

Some comments folks. New Amsterdam isn't New to us in the Northeast. Its brewed 
at Matts in Utica who contract brew a number of beers including Newmans Albany 
Amber, Philadelphias Dock Street, One of the maine beers I think Portland Lager,
Commonwealth brewing Co bottled products and a few others. I had an opportunity 
to speak with one of the Matt Brothers. He said that contract brewing has been a
godsend to their brewery which had been shrinking the amount of output (leading 
to available excess capacity) through the late 70s and early 
80s. Matts is known for some of Upstate NY's true swill beers like Utica Club, 
and Matts Beer Balls. The Saranac 1888 is OK, and their XMAS beers are 
respectable amber lagers. Their best brewing is done to someone elses recipe.

Glad to hear the oatmeal stout is going well for patrick. He mentioned blueberry
beers. I had tried a commercial golden colored beer by Thomas Kemper of Oregon I
believe that had a distinct blueberry flavor imparted by a strain of yeast that 
created the right ester. Anyone else ever tried this and have they seen this 
yeast strain out and about??

Rick Z (and others) beer is taxed almost everywhere in the world by % alcohol
(the reason why Irish Guiness is the world's weakest Guinness as Ireland has 
one of the highest alcohol taxes). Tellnig the tax amount would also tip off the
strength, and we can't allow that eh??

With regard to external fridge controls I know lots of people who use them and
none have reported any problems.

 - Jay H

Return to table of contents



End of HOMEBREW Digest #496, 09/14/90
*************************************
-------

---