HOMEBREW Digest #5492 Sun 01 February 2009

[Prev HBD] [Index] [Next HBD] [Back]

		Digest Janitor: pbabcock at hbd.org


                 Sponsor The Home Brew Digest!
     Visit http://www.hbd.org/sponsorhbd.shtml to learn how
    Support those who support you! Visit our sponsor's site!
********** Also visit http://hbd.org/hbdsponsors.html *********

DONATE to the Home Brew Digest. Home Brew Digest, Inc. is a 
501(c)3 not-for-profit organization under IRS rules (see the
FAQ at http://hbd.org for details of this status). Donations
can be made by check to Home Brew Digest mailed to:

HBD Server Fund
PO Box 871309
Canton Township, MI 48187-6309

or by paypal to address serverfund@hbd.org. DONATIONS of $250 
or more will be provided with receipts. SPONSORSHIPS of any 
amount are considered paid advertisement, and may be deductible
under IRS rules as a business expense. Please consult with your 
tax professional, then see http://hbd.org for available 
sponsorship opportunities.

  sugar ("Bill & Sara Frazier")
  Aluminum kettle (Fred Scheer)
  How much increase in alkalinity as CaCO3 should 1ppm CaCO3 cause ? (Kai Troester)
  Sugars ("A. J. deLange")
  11th Annual UKG Drunk Monk Challenge (John Kleczewski)

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * The HBD Logo Store is now open! * * http://www.hbd.org/store.html * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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. 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: Mon, 26 Jan 2009 00:14:19 -0600 From: "Bill & Sara Frazier" <bsfrazier at att.net> Subject: sugar A desire for sugar syrups for use in beer has been mentioned the last few days. I noticed on the More Beer and Northern Brewer web sites Belgian sugar syrups for sale...evidently new products for the home brewer. However, the syrups are currently out-of-stock. These may be interesting to use instead of plain table sugar. Bill Frazier Olathe, Kansas USA Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2009 18:55:12 +0000 (UTC) From: Fred Scheer <fredscheer07 at comcast.net> Subject: Aluminum kettle HI: A friend of mine got some time ago one of this Turkey Fryers, 30 qt, Aluminum. Now, he made fish fry in there three times. He cleaned it very well, I can't see any spots in the kettle. I have no experience in homebrewing in Aluminum kettles. Any advise is appreciated? Cheers, Fred Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2009 18:44:31 -0500 From: Kai Troester <kai at braukaiser.com> Subject: How much increase in alkalinity as CaCO3 should 1ppm CaCO3 cause ? A few weeks back I decided to write another brewing water calculation spread sheet. The formulas were mostly taken from the literature and existing spread sheets. Then I decided to add a cation (positively charged ions) to anion (negatively charged ions) balance check just to see if the water profile that I created made sense. This is when I noticed an imbalance when creating brewing water from scratch by using distilled water and salts. The resulting water should not show an imbalance and every cation should have matching anion. But it was showing an imbalance when chalk was used. So I gave the fomulas used for chalk a closer look. And found that 1 mol (a unit that is proportional to the amount of molecules/ions of a particular substance) of CaCO3 was assumed to add one mol of bicarbonate to the water. And that in most spreadsheets and calculators the bicarbonate contribution was later used to calculate the alkalinity as CaCO3. But that didn't seem right. If CaCO3 adds only one bicarbonate, it also needs to add one hydroxyl ion (OH-): (1) CaCO3 + H20 -> Ca2+ + HCO3- + OH- Since this would liberate hydroxyl the pH of the water would need to rise. If that is not happening then chalk can also be dissolved in the presence of CO2 (2) CaCO3 + H2O + CO2 -> Ca2+ + HCO3- + HCO3- In this case each mol of chalk would add 2 moles of bicarbonate. Yet another reaction is possible in the presence of acid and free protons (3) CaCO3 + H+ -> Ca2+ + HCO- (4) HCO- + H+ -> H2O + CO2 If neither of these reactions hapen the chalk won't dissolve. And that is clearly happening in brewing: If you add chalk to the brewing water it just turns the water cloudy and it will eventually settle. But does it really matter if the chalk dissolves or not? No. Because the bigger picture is that we added the chalk to give the water+chalk mixture more "alkalinity" I.e. acid buffering capacity. That acid buffering capacity is needed to reach a targeted mash pH once the malt, and with it acid buffers, has been added. At that point reactions (3) and (4) can take place. Whichever reaction is happening (1)..(4), chalk can neutralize 2 equivalents of acid and for all intents and purposes 1 ppm of chalk should therefore raise the alkalinity by 1 ppm as CaCO3. But that is not what most water treatment spreadsheets assume. They assume that 1 mmol/l CaCO3 adds 1 mmol/l HCO3- (bicarbonate) which drops one negative charge on the floor and caused the imbalance that I noticed. And then they go ahead and convert the ppm HCO3- to alkalinity as ppm CaCO3 by multiplying with the factor 50/60. In the end the addition of 1 ppm CaCO3 raises the alkalinity by only 0.5 ppm as CaCO3. This certainly seems wrong and I thought I had it all figured out until I decided to confirm this theory with an experiment. The experiment is seemingly simple. Make small mashes with 3 different waters that are supposed to have the same residual alkalinity and test their pH. The first water (A) would be reverse osmosis water and serve as the control. The second water (B) would be reverse osmosis water with chalk and calcium chloride added such that the added residual alkalinity is 0 if the chalk contributes 2 alkalinity equivalents. The 3rd water (C) has chalk and calcium chloride added such that the added residual alkalinity is 0 if chalk contributes only one alkalinity equivalent. Whichever water that causes a mash pH to match the RO water mash pH the closest would have used the correct formula for alkalinity contributions by chalk. Here is a summary of the waters used: * water A: reverse osmosis tap water * water B: RO water + 80 ppm CaCO3 + 290 ppm CaCl2*2H2O; this increases the Ca2+ content by ~110 ppm o if 1ppm CaCO3 adds 1 ppm alkalinity as CaCO3 then the water's residual alkalinity (RA) increases by 0.0 over the RO water's RA o if 1 ppm CaCO3 adds 0.5 ppm alkalinity as CaCO3 then the water's RA decreases by 2.2 dH (German Hardness) or 40 ppm as CaCO3 * water C: RO water + 150 ppm CaCO3 + 150 ppm CaCl2*2H2O; this increases the Ca2+ content by ~110 ppm o if 1ppm CaCO3 adds 1 ppm alkalinity as CaCO3 then the water's residual alkalinity (RA) decreases by ~4.4 dH or 80 ppm as CaCO3 o if 1 ppm CaCO3 adds 0.5 ppm alkalinity as CaCO3 then the water's RA remains unchanged compared to the RO water 200ml of each water were taken and heated to ~64C in the microwave. Then 50g of crushed pilsner malt were added to each water sample and stirred in. The mashes were occasionally stirred and a 15ml sample was taken from each mash after 5 min and cooled to 22C when it was measured with a pH meter. The results were surprising: * mash A : pH = 5.76 * mash B : pH = 5.69 * mash C : pH = 5.77 According to these results the chalk added only 0.5 ppm alkalinity as CaCO3. And the pH shift for mash B is even in the range that would have been expected from the 2.2 dH RA drop. According to Kolbach the shift is 0.03 pH units for each dH which would be 0.066 and the results show ~0.07. I couldn't believe it and started to ponder why that would be the case. Why is the added CaCO3 only neutralizing 1 equivalent of acid and not 2? Maybe it has something to do with the chalk not being dissolved. So I conducted another similar experiment. This time between a control, water with suspended chalk and water with dissolved chalk. The chalk would be dissolved with CO2 which is brought into solution through shaking. Here is what I did. I added 0.24 g chalk and 0.88g calcium chloride to 1.5 l of reverse osmosis water. This is twice the salts added to water B in the previous experiment because I wanted to pronounce the effect of the residual alkalinity difference. I then shook this water and the added salts in a 2l soda bottle until the calcium chloride was dissolved. Immediately after shaking, without giving the chalk a chance to settle, I poured off 200ml for sample B. I then removed another 300ml in order to increase the head space. This headspace was then filled with CO2 and the bottle closed. When I started shaking the bottle, it immediately contracted which was a sign of the CO2 going into solution. After some shaking I let the bottle sit until the water became crystal clear again. This was not the result of the chalk settling but it being dissolved in the water. I then took 200ml of that water for samle C: * water A: reverse osmosis * water B: RO + 160 ppm CaCO3 + 580 ppm CaCl2*2H2O o RA = -4.4 dH or 80 ppm alkalinity as CaCO3 if chalk adds 1 alkalinity equivalent o RA = 0 dH or 0 ppm alkalinity as CaCO3 if chalk adds 2 alkalinity equivalents * water C: water B + CO2 o RA = -4.4 dH or 80 ppm alkalinity as CaCO3 if chalk adds 1 alkalinity equivalent o RA = 0 dH or 0 ppm alkalinity as CaCO3 if chalk adds 2 alkalinity equivalents I then heated both samples to 68C, added 50g crushed pilsner malt to each and rested (with occasional stirring) them for 10 min. After that I took 15 ml samples and cooled them to 20-21C: * mash A : pH = 5.67 * mash B : pH = 5.47 * mash C : pH = 5.66 So it appears that dissolving the chalk in the mash water changes its alkalinity potential. undissolved chalk has less alkalinity potential than dissolved chalk since mash B showed a much lower mash pH which could only have been the result of a lower RA than the 2 other mashes. But why is this? Does not all the chalk dissolve in the mash as commonly assumed? And if yes why is that? And would it always be 50%? Shouldn't there be enough acid for this to happen via reactions (3) and (4)? Return to table of contents
Date: Sun, 01 Feb 2009 09:37:56 +0000 From: "A. J. deLange" <ajdel at mac.com> Subject: Sugars Despite having retired I find myself sitting on the patio of a hotel in Mauritius which is a big cane sugar producer and when the waiter put the sugar bowl with "Dry Demerrara Sugar" and "Raw Sugar" in front of me I was reminded of the recent discussions. FWIW, from the packets, "Demerara is a golden sugar with a large sparkling crystal, a crunchy, sticky texture and a rich aroma due to the presence of the cane molasses enrobing each crystal." and for the raw sugar "This granulated raw sugar retains all the rich flavor and the natural elements intrinsic to the sugar cane". They are both about the same color but the Demerrara crystals are perhaps a little larger (1 x 0.5 x 0.5mm approx) and more regular (the raw stuff looks ground). They taste about the same. As for their use in beer, the local brew (Phoenix) certainly has a lot of it in it and is, IMO, pretty good stuff. A. J. Return to table of contents
Date: Sun, 1 Feb 2009 11:05:49 -0600 From: John Kleczewski <john.kleczewski at gmail.com> Subject: 11th Annual UKG Drunk Monk Challenge The Urban Knaves of Grain announce that the Drunk Monk Challenge 2009 will soon be upon us! The competition is sanctioned by the American Homebrewers Association, and is a qualifying event for MCAB and the Midwest Homebrewer of the Year circuit. The competition is scheduled for March 13 and 14, 2009, to be held at Walter Payton's Roundhouse in Aurora, IL. As in previous years, the DMC features the Menace of the Monastery, a special category consisting of styles which are monastic in origin: Belgian Blonde, Dubbel, Tripel, Pale, Strong Golden and Strong Dark Ales, as well as German Doppelbock. Awards for all categories will be announced following the MOM and Best Of Show judging. There will be 2 separate categories for BOS: Beer and Mead/Cider. Rosette ribbons featuring our famous 'Drunk Monk' will be awarded for 1st, 2nd and 3rd places for each category. Special ribbons will be awarded for 2nd and 3rd BOS and MOM, and engraved plaques will be the prizes for 1st BOS and MOM. Of special note is that the winner of the Beer BOS will have the opportunity to assist in the scaling up and brewing of their award-winning recipe at Walter Payton's Roundhouse, of Aurora, IL. Please see rules for details. Drunk Monk Challenge entries are $7 for the first entry, and $5 each additional entry. Menace of the Monastery entries are $5 each. Entries will be accepted between February 28 and March 7. There are several drop off locations in the Chicagoland area. Entries can be shipped to: The Drunk Monk Challenge, c/o Walter Payton's Roundhouse - America's Brewing Company, 205 North Broadway, Aurora, IL 60505, ATTN: Mike Rybinski NO DROP OFFS ALLOWED AT THIS LOCATION! Full details, rules, entry forms, etc. can be found at the UKG website: http://www.knaves.org/DMC/index.htm Good luck and thanks! Return to table of contents
[Prev HBD] [Index] [Next HBD] [Back]
HTML-ized on 02/01/09, by HBD2HTML v1.2 by KFL
webmaster@hbd.org, KFL, 10/9/96