---

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


Contents:
  Re: Sugar in Malt Extracts (John DeCarlo)
  Re: Reusing Yeast (John DeCarlo)
  Re: carbonation (John DeCarlo)
  Re: getting better head (John DeCarlo)
  Re: Homebrew Digest #611 (April 05, 1991) (Steve Thornton)
  Re: Flaked Maize (Marc Rouleau)
  Slow fermentation (Jeff Rickel)
  Lanny H's bottled water technique, CO2 techniuqe, Yeast repitching (hersh)
  yeast nutrition (Pete Soper)
  Places to go in Long Island (Stephen Russell)
  Airlock contents. ("DRCV06::GRAHAM")
  Re: Acid Carboy Source Near Virginia (Marc Rouleau)
  moldy beer (Algis R Korzonas +1 708 979 8583)
  Green Bottles (Jeffrey Marc Shelton)
  More Milwaukee Places (Rad Equipment)
  Multiple Yeast Strains (Martin A. Lodahl)
  More On Repitching ... (Martin A. Lodahl)
  Bees in Homebrew Digest #566 (January 16, 1991) (Christopher Connolly)
  Weizen extract question (flowers)
  Thanks, Catamount Porter and Carolina Bio. ("DRCV06::GRAHAM")
  bottled water (Chip Hitchcock)
  Please add me to the list. (Herb Peyerl)
  test (Madhav M Naik)
  Hydrogen Sulfide... (Dave Beedle)
  % fermentables (Russ Gelinas)
  New Brewery in Buffalo (Stephen Russell)
  amplification (mcnally)
  Keg Carbonation (Adam Birnbaum)
  Goofy wort chiller / advice? ("ASK ME IF I CARE...")


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


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

Date: Fri, 5 Apr 91 09:03 EST
From: BMENK at ccr2.bbn.com

There are only two actual brew-pubs I know of in Minneapolis: one is
called "Taps" and is located in the Riverplace center across the
river from downtown Minneapolis.  The other is called "Sherlock's"
and is located in one of the western suburbs - Minnetonka as I
recall.  Sherlock's certainly has the better reputation, (and
better food as well).  I've only tried one of the beers at Taps,
and found it merely adequate.  I don't remember what it was called,
but it was an average pale ale.  They were in some financial
difficulty last summer/fall and may have succumbed - I haven't
heard.  

There are some other brew-related things worth seeing there though. 
The Summit brewery on University Avenue in St. Paul offers tours
and samples if you call ahead.  They make a delicious pale ale and
a porter, plus some seasonal brews as well.

In New Ulm (about 80 miles southwest of the Twin Cities), Schell's
brewery is worth a visit.  They make some excellent brews - both
under their own name and number of "brewed under license for...."
products.  

The other small brewer in the sate is called Cold Spring and is
located in the town of Cold Spring, 15 miles south of St. Cloud. 
Last I heard they weren't giving tours or samples, but call to be
sure.  Some of their brews are allright, others have the virtue of
being incredibly inexpensive.  

Bobb Menk
BMENK at BBN.COM


Return to table of contents


Date: Friday, 5 Apr 1991 09:04:21 EST
From: m14051 at mwvm.mitre.org (John DeCarlo)
Subject: Re: Sugar in Malt Extracts

>From: Rick Myers <cos.hp.com!hpctdpe!rcm at hp-lsd>

>I quit buying canned extract and now use only dry malt, if I
>don't do an all-grain brew.  You have much better control over
>your brews using dry instead of syrup, as you don't know what
>else is in the syrup besides malt - corn sugar is a common
>additive.

I have heard this before, but have also heard that you are just
as likely to find dried corn sugar in the dry malt extract as you
are to find liquid corn sugar in the liquid malt extract.  Anyone
else with any evidence?  The safest bet is to buy from suppliers
who tell you what is in the extract, such as with Yellow Dog.

Personally, I wouldn't brew without some dry malt extract in the
house, because I can use it in any quantity I want, whether for
priming or during the brew.

However, I really like the 6 lb. boil-in bags of extract.  Every
so often I order a bunch, typically from Williams Brewing (they
tell you what malt went into the extract).  I haven't bought a
can of extract in years (except for Yellow Dog).

Internet: jdecarlo at mitre.org
           (or John.DeCarlo at f131.n109.z1.fidonet.org)
Fidonet:  1:109/131

Return to table of contents


Date: Friday, 5 Apr 1991 09:05:15 EST
From: m14051 at mwvm.mitre.org (John DeCarlo)
Subject: Re: Reusing Yeast

>From: Marc Rouleau <mer6g at fuggles.acc.Virginia.EDU>

>On Mar 29,  8:19am, florianb at chip.cna.tek.com wrote:
>> In any case, re-using the yeast should only be done for 2-3
>> generations.  After that, purchasing a new culture would be
>> advised.

>I hear this a lot, but I've yet to hear a satisfactory
>explanation.  Exactly why/how do yeast "mutate" or "weaken" over
>multiple "generations"?  Wouldn't the weaker yeast suffer a
>competitive disadvantage with respect to the stronger yeast?

I guess there has been plenty of discussion of this already.  Let
me just add that when I toured the Old Dominion Brewery, I asked
about their yeast.  He said that they were surprised to find that
they hadn't had to stop re-using their yeast yet (at that time
they had been brewing weekly for about 6 months).  Every week or
two they took samples and had them analyzed in a lab.

Internet: jdecarlo at mitre.org
           (or John.DeCarlo at f131.n109.z1.fidonet.org)
Fidonet:  1:109/131

Return to table of contents


Date: Friday, 5 Apr 1991 09:05:59 EST
From: m14051 at mwvm.mitre.org (John DeCarlo)
Subject: Re: carbonation

>krweiss at ucdavis.edu

>before bottling.  My priming technique is to make a syrup of
>corn sugar in about 1 pint of boiling water.  I put the syrup in
>the bottom of my 7 gallon carboy and siphon the beer out of the
>secondary (into the 7 gallon carboy with the priming syrup, of
>course).  I then stir for a full minute with the racking tube,
>and proceed with bottling.  I use no fining agents other than a
>bit of Irish Moss at the end of the boil -- nothing that might
>strip yeast out of suspension in the secondary.

My only question would be related to the amount of "head space",
or air between the top of the beer and the cap.  I leave about
1/4 to 1/8 of an inch between the top of the beer and the cap.  I
used to be more haphazard, with about an inch of variation.  This
seemed to cause uneven carbonation within a batch (more head
space, less carbonation).

Could the yeast involved make that much of a difference?

Internet: jdecarlo at mitre.org
           (or John.DeCarlo at f131.n109.z1.fidonet.org)
Fidonet:  1:109/131

Return to table of contents


Date: Friday, 5 Apr 1991 09:06:39 EST
From: m14051 at mwvm.mitre.org (John DeCarlo)
Subject: Re: getting better head

>From: <strahs at murex.bioc.aecom.yu.edu>

> I've been drinking my first batch of beer.  It's a bit thin and
> the head doesn't last long, though it is well carbonated. I think
> I can solve this problem by adding flaked maize to the original
> recipe.  Is this correct?

I don't know, but I have had pretty good success adding some
malted wheat to my recipes to increase the head retention.  So I
usually add a little crystal malt and wheat malt now to my
extract beers.

Internet: jdecarlo at mitre.org
           (or John.DeCarlo at f131.n109.z1.fidonet.org)
Fidonet:  1:109/131

Return to table of contents


Date:         Fri, 05 Apr 91 09:57:58 EST
From: Steve Thornton <NETWRK at HARVARDA.HARVARD.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Homebrew Digest #611 (April 05, 1991)

Lee Katman's theory about ganja in the beer is interesting, but Dragon
Stout, which the original post specifically named, is a fairly widely
available product in the US. It's made by the Red Stripe people, and I
very much doubt that it has ganja in it either in Jamaica or the US.

steve t

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 5 Apr 1991 10:37:50 EST
From: Marc Rouleau <mer6g at fuggles.acc.Virginia.EDU>
Subject: Re: Flaked Maize

On Apr  4,  1:54pm, C.R. Saikley wrote:
> You'll probably get more satisfying results by adding crystal malt or
> carapils. One or two pounds can easily be added to a five gallon extract 
> batch. It is best to avoid boiling the grains, as this can result in
> extraction of undesirable tannins from the husks. One way around this is
> to simply place the grains in your brew water before heating. Then as you 
> are bringing the water to a boil, remove the grains when the temperature 
> reaches 165-170. This should allow you to get most of the sugars, dextrins,
> etc. from the grains and leave most of the nasties behind.

I'd like to add that most people also recommend that you crack the
grains first.  If you don't have a grain mill you can do this with
a rolling pin.  Try not to grind the husks into powder, as that will
result in astringency.  (You'll probably get some powder from the
sugary innards of the grains, but that's of no consequence.)

Crystal malt will add color, sweetness, body, and a caramel note.
Cara-pils will add sweetness and body only.

I suggest that you consider steeping the grains at 168 degrees for
15-20 minutes rather than removing them immediately when the water
reaches that point.  I have removed them by pouring the whole mess
through a wire mesh colander resting on a big bucket.  The grains
end up in the garden, and tea gets poured back into the boiler.

I've not seen any recipes calling for as much as two pounds of
crystal malt.  That certainly doesn't mean that they don't exist
and are not wonderfully tasty, but the ones I've seen all call for
a pound or less.  Also, cracking two pounds of crystal malt with a
rolling pin will take you a long time -- I have found it to be a
rather tedious job.

    -- Marc

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 5 Apr 91 10:06:59 CST
From: rickel at cs.utexas.edu (Jeff Rickel)
Subject: Slow fermentation

In my first batch, I used Red Star Ale yeast.  There was a steady 
increase in seconds per glub, and fermentation was complete in 6
days.  My last two batches I used Whitbread Ale yeast.  In both cases, 
fermentation was vigorous within 24 hours (about 1 glub per second), 
and it steadily slowed to about 1 glub every minute and a half.
In both batches, however, it stayed at this rate for about two weeks
before reaching a specific gravity low enough for me to bottle.
Why is it getting "stuck" at this slow rate?  Low yeast population?
Or is this typical?  All my brews have been partial mashes, all malt, 
room temperature for fermentation about 65-70 degrees.  I think 
I am aerating the wort sufficiently before pitching the yeast, and 
I rehydrate the yeast before pitching.  My fermentation lock is 
the S type if this helps in interpreting my glubs per second figures.

Jeff

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 05 Apr 91 11:50:43 EST
From: hersh at expo.lcs.mit.edu
Subject: Lanny H's bottled water technique, CO2 techniuqe, Yeast repitching



Lanny (and others follwoing this thread) be sure that those are *GLASS*
carbouys. If not I would not adopt this technique. Only certain types of
plastic are rated for containing alcohol. Other types leach carcinogens in
contact with alcohol. I am farily certain that the plastic bottles used by many
bottled water companies these days *ARE NOT* safe for storing alcohol. You
should either use only glass, or contact the FDA or BATF to determine which
types of plastic are safe for alcohol storage and then investigate as to
whether the carbouys (if they're plastic) are safe.

I'd sure hate to see someone inadvertently poison themselves with homebrew.


>     I recently kegged up a batch of wheat beer in my new draft system.
>     I followed a chart of CO2 PSI vs. Temp for different volumes of
>     CO2 for different styles of beer.  At 42 degrees F.  I used 17.5
>     PSI to (hopefully) yield about 2.9 Volumes of CO2 in the beer.  I
>     rocked the keg around for a few minutes while the CO2 was being
>     applied through the down-tube via a beverage fitting.  Four days
>     later when I tapped the keg it was nearly flat!  

Gee that's so scientific. I usually just chill the beer down to 35-40F and hit
it with 25-30 lbs CO2 till you hear it stop flowing. Unhook the CO2 shake it up
like 40-50 times, toss it back in the fridge. I do this 2 or 3 days in a row,
then let it sit in cold store for another 3-10 days (depends on my mood and how
low I am on homebrew). Never had a problem this way, no messy charts to consult
:-) :-)


CR says> I've never investigated the minimum time required to carbonate,
>but I've applied gas on Thursday and had fizzy beer on Friday.

I'd watch out though. I did this once and all my fittings weren't quite sealed
(not me, on my kegs ....) This resulted in leaking away a whole tank of CO2. 
Remeber one thing, we're talking about dissolviong a gas into a liquid so rates
of dissolution (sp?) apply here. The rate is temperature dependent. My
technique puts a higher pressure of CO2 over the beer, one that exceeds the
equilibrium pressure at the beer temp, thus the excess CO2 will dissolve into
tthe beer over time. The lower the temp (up to freezing) the higher the rate at
which the gas will get absorbed into the liquid. By hitting the tank up 2 or 3
days in a row I replace the gas that has dissolved (thus lowering the CO2
pressure over the beer) with more gas and re-establish an overpressure. There
is some practical saturation level at which the beer will cease absorbing CO2.
The last thing I do before tapping is to yank the pressure release valve to let
this overpressure off. Then I hit the beer with a normal dispensing pressure
(say 7-10lbs).

I hope veryone understood that, or at least somebody understood that, I mean
what the heck it works for me.

Just a not on yeast repitching. Before microbiology came into vogue the
standard technique was to pour the new batch of beer into the fermenters over
the top of the yeast cake left by the old batch. While from a scientific
standpoint this may not be optimal it obviously worked well for centuries
(either that or the Brits and Germans were drinking cruddy beer until Louis
Pasteur the Frenchamn came along hmmm......).

JaH
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Disclaimer: Don't have a cow man
It's a window system named X, not a system named X Window.

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 5 Apr 91 12:43:29 EST
From: Pete Soper <soper at encore.com>
Subject: yeast nutrition

In HBD #611 Marc Rouleau writes:

>Please correct me if I have this wrong, but my impression is that
>the aerobic phase is mainly useful in order to get the yeast to
>multiply.  In fact, it's really something of a necessary evil, since

Another critically important use is cell nutrition; yeast can't live
forever on maltose alone. 

>the yeast produce various unpleasant odors and flavors during this
>phase.  Once in an anaerobic state they absorb the off flavors from
>the aerobic phase and start making good beer.

I don't believe this is true.

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 5 Apr 91 14:01:35 EDT
From: srussell at snoopy.msc.cornell.edu (Stephen Russell)
Subject: Places to go in Long Island

Ok, folks, I hate to contribute to the flame, but I am going to western
LONG ISLAND in April, specifically, GLENWOOD LANDING.  Any places to go
for great beer?  I know there are no brewpubs unless I go to Manhattan,
which is out.

Return to table of contents


Date: 5 Apr 91 14:05:00 EDT
From: "DRCV06::GRAHAM" <graham%drcv06.decnet at drcvax.af.mil>
Subject: Airlock contents.

One of the homebrew mail order catalogs I have adds a lot of advice along 
with their product listings.  I have found some of the advice to be good, 
and some pretty bad.  One of the things they recommend is to use a mixture 
of vodka and water in the airlock.  This seems like overkill to me, since 
bacteria cannot travel up a loop anyway.  Has anyone done this and noted any 
different results from just using water?

Hoppy minds want to know.

Dan Graham, WA6CNN
Beer made with the Derry air, (Derry, New Hampshire)


Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 5 Apr 1991 14:11:47 EST
From: Marc Rouleau <mer6g at fuggles.acc.Virginia.EDU>
Subject: Re: Acid Carboy Source Near Virginia

John DeCarlo just emailed me with another lead.  I haven't checked it
out because I already have an acid carboy on order, but perhaps someone
else will find this useful:

On Apr  5,  9:03am, John DeCarlo wrote:
> However, in the interest of completeness, and because I was very
> satisfied, let me mention that I got my acid carboy from Bill
> McLaren, who runs "Cap & Cork".  301-863-6721.  I have no
> association with his business, just a satisfied customer.
> 
> The carboy was shipped to me via UPS, in a very nice styrofoam
> container.  This container is invaluable in storing and carrying
> the carboy.  I would hesitate to use a neck-handle on a full 7
> gallong carboy, but find it very easy to use the handles on the
> styrofoam container to move it about even when full.
> 
> He is a member of BURP, as am I, and he just gave me his card at  a
> meeting.  I called him several times from work, but I think he just
> conducts his business on an ad hoc basis (no answering machine at the
> moment, anyway).  So I haven't confirmed any of this with him, as to
> his present status.

    -- Marc Rouleau

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 5 Apr 91 15:54:35 mst
From: hplabs!hp-lsd.cos.hp.com!ihlpl!korz (Algis R Korzonas +1 708 979 8583)
Subject: moldy beer

CNN had a story on a link between breadmold and cancer.  Does
anyone have more info and does this affect brewing?  I was
cleaning up my directory and found a posting by Eric Roe
entitled "Moldy beer" which reminded me of this.

Still relaxed,
Al.


Return to table of contents


Date: Fri,  5 Apr 91 17:36:27 -0500 (EST)
From: Jeffrey Marc Shelton <js8f+ at andrew.cmu.edu>
Subject: Green Bottles


 
    After reading the various discussions about lightstruck beer, I have
only one question.  Why do people use green bottles?   
 
    I have noticed skunkyness in both Molson and Rolling Rock beer and
generally avoid drinking both of these when not drinking my own brew,
but I had never connected it with the green bottles before.
 
    Do any of the other wave-lengths of light affect beer in other ways
thus making green no worse than other colors such as clear and brown?
 
 
- --Jeff


Return to table of contents


Date: 7 Apr 90 09:21:21
From: Rad Equipment <Rad_Equipment at rad-mac1.ucsf.EDU>
Subject: More Milwaukee Places

        Reply to:   More Milwaukee Places
Just south of the airport, next to the Airport Lounge (local Strip Joint) is
supposed to be the oldest continuously operating tavern in Milwaukee.  I can
not remember the name, but you can't miss the place if you find the Lounge next
store.  Last time I was there (1988) they had about 60 taps.  Many imports as
well as many micros, including 2 or 3 Sprecher brews (Black Bavarian is my
favorite).  The atmosphere can get pretty rowdy depending on what night it is. 
Generally tho, it is a pleasant place to try a variety of brews on most
evenings.

If you are like most homebrewers, considering going pro at some point in the
future, don't miss Sprecher's.  Randy left Pabst (if memory serves) to do his
own thing.  He built his brewery from recycled equipment and is a very
interesting guy to talk with.  Beers are excellent also.  Lakefront is another
"seat of pants" operation.  They were not open when I was in town last, but I
have read many nice things about the guys behind the place as well as their
products.

Hope this helps!

Russ Wigglesworth  <Rad Equipment at RadMac1.ucsf.edu>



Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 3 Apr 91 15:28:53 PST
From: Martin A. Lodahl <pbmoss!malodah at decwrl.dec.com>
Subject: Multiple Yeast Strains

In HOMEBREW Digest #609, Carl West asked:

> 	...nothing I've read says anything about using more than
> one kind of yeast at a time. How about, say, an ale
> yeast with a champagne yeast? I would expect the ale
> yeast to make fairly short work of most of the sugars and
> poop out, whereupon the champagne yeast would be free
> to continue and take the alchohol content way beyond
> what the ale yeast was capable of. Is anything like
> this done? Or would something _bad_ happen?

I dunno, Carl.  Why don't you give it a try, and report back ...

Actually, something like this is frequently done in commercial
brewing.  The examples that come to mind are Pere Theodore's culture
of 5 yeast strains in Chimay, and Whitbread's 3 strains, as
described by George Fix in the "Yeast" special issue of Zymurgy
('89?).  As I recall, two of those three strains acted pretty much
as you describe, one being a rapid starter but getting "stuck" after
the simple sugars were gone, and the other being a slow starter but
quite attenuative.  The role of the third strain seemed to be to
flocculate cleanly, taking the other two with it.

This approach wouldn't be easy to translate into strains available
at the local homebrew store, though I have read of folks making
truly heavy barleywines who pitch an ale yeast first, and then a
Champagne yeast a week or so later.  The problem with pitching them
at the same time is yeast's otherwise desirable trait of "taking
over" its environment.  Whichever strain established itself first
might very well "off" the other strain.

= Martin A. Lodahl   			  Pacific*Bell Staff Analyst =
= malodah at pbmoss.Pacbell.COM       Sacramento, CA       916.972.4821 =
= If it's good for ancient Druids, runnin' nekkid through the wuids, =
= Drinkin' strange fermented fluids, it's good enough for me!  8-)   =


Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 5 Apr 91 15:18:04 PST
From: Martin A. Lodahl <pbmoss!malodah at decwrl.dec.com>
Subject: More On Repitching ...

In HOMEBREW Digest #611, Chip Hitchcock observed:

>pbmoss!malodah at Pacbell.com writes:
>
>>				Commercial yeast production is
>> conducted in aerated media to maximize the reproduction rate, and
>> naturally, the effect of this is to give a significant "edge" to the
>> yeast that can most effectively reproduce in an aerobic environment.
>... 
>> respiratory-deficient strain, called "petit" by Pasteur.  These will
>> not be at the same disadvantage in a culture that is repeatedly
>> repitched and therefore spends most of its life in an anaerobic
>> environment, and over time will become a larger fraction of the
>> total population.
>
>This doesn't seem to make sense biologically. I can see that repitching
>might not select for respiration \as/ \much/ \as/ true aerobic reculturing.
>However, the respiratory phase is where most reproduction happens; this
>would suggest that if you pitch a packet/starter/culture/slurry with a
>certain R/r ratio (where R is normal and r is respiratory-deficient), the
>slurry at the end of fermentation would have a higher R/r ratio unless so
>much yeast was pitched that there was no respiratory phase. The amount of
>time in the anaerobic phase shouldn't matter, since very little
>reproduction happens then (natural selection only works if the survivors
>reproduce).

Father Barleywine said better what I was trying to say.  Your
argument is reasonable, but it assumes the only difference between
the two are the effectiveness of their mitochondria.  If it were
also true, for example, that the respiratory-deficient isolates 
budded more rapidly and survived more budding cycles under anaerobic
conditions than the "normal" strain, the model I presented would
more closely resemble the observed effect.

>Even if r were more attenuative, that should simply mean that R
>would go dormant first---you might get different ratios in different layers
>but most of the recommendations seem to start with stirring up all the
>sediment and saving some of the resulting slurry.

>From what I've seen, what changes with successive repitching is not
the total attenuation, but the RATE of attenuation for a (roughly)
constant pitching rate, which I assume to be due to a smaller yeast
cell concentration in the early stages of fermentation, due to the
slowed reproduction rate.

>   As a tangent to this, I'd note the opinion/experience of several Wort
>Processors that single-cell cultures tend not to be as attenuative as their
>sources until they've gone through a couple of repitchings---suggesting a
>positive correlation between respiration and attenuation?

	... Or an adaptation to the conditions under which the culture
is used.  The commercial literature mentions this effect.

= Martin A. Lodahl   			  Pacific*Bell Staff Analyst =
= malodah at pbmoss.Pacbell.COM       Sacramento, CA       916.972.4821 =
= If it's good for ancient Druids, runnin' nekkid through the wuids, =
= Drinkin' strange fermented fluids, it's good enough for me!  8-)   =


Return to table of contents


Date: Sun, 7 Apr 91 22:30:33 -0400
From: connolly%livy at cs.umass.edu (Christopher Connolly)
Subject: Bees in Homebrew Digest #566 (January 16, 1991)


>jpaul at lccsd.sd.locus.com (James Hensley) writes in HBD 566:
>Something happened, however that struck me as rather odd.  While I was boiling
>the honey, my house was attacked by bees!  Found several in my garage, got them
>out, closed it up, went inside, and found several more there!  Had to do 'em in.
>They were coming in the vent for the fan above the stove.

Ran across this message belatedly the other day, and a friend and I
realized that bees require the sun to navigate by, so even in warm
climates you could probably get away with boiling the honey at night.
Even if they were "woken up" (could they be?) by the honey, they
shouldn't be able to find your house without the sun up.  Just a
thought...

				-CC

Return to table of contents


Date: Mon, 8 Apr 1991 08:31:06 -0600
From: flowers at csrd.uiuc.edu
Subject: Weizen extract question

I've got a can of the Ireks Weizen extract (6.6 lbs).  One set of
directions calls for 1 lb of corn sugar (for 5 gal) which, of course, I
don't want to add.  I also do not want to add any dry malt as it may
imbalance the intended amount of wheat to barly.  I have a 3.5 gal
fermenter and was wondering if anyone thought it would be better to make
the smaller amount?  Would it end up too strong?  Weizens, if I remember
correctly, should propably have a starting gravity of 1.032 - 1.035.  Am I
better off making a 5 gal batch (with no additives) or a 3 gal batch (with
no additives)?

 -Craig  (flowers at csrd.uiuc.edu)


Return to table of contents


Date: 8 Apr 91 10:34:00 EDT
From: "DRCV06::GRAHAM" <graham%drcv06.decnet at drcvax.af.mil>
Subject: Thanks, Catamount Porter and Carolina Bio.

First, many thanks to all who send me copies of the digests 62 and 63.  I 
got four or five copies, and all were sincerely appreciated.

Second, I picked up a sixer of Catamount Porter yesterday.  Had one last 
evening ... delicious!  I am not experienced in many different types of 
beer, and am learning slowly.  Is this a good example of a porter?  Is it 
generally regarded as a good beer?  I loved it, but that might be 
inexperience speaking.  The flavor seems rather complex, going through 
several stages in the mouth.  The lingering bitterness is very satisfying.  

The store had some Sam Adams Doublebok, but my wallet was empty.  Is this 
good stuff?

Third, I received my catalog from Carolina Biological on Friday.  Wow!  
This is the mother of all catalogs.  There is plenty of lab stuff that I am 
going to order, and a lot of stuff I didn't even know I could get too.  My 
wife wants to spend about a thousand dollars from it.  (Maybe I'll send the 
bill to the person who mentioned it in the first place, [grin]).

The only disadvantage is that culture tubes come in quantaties of a hundred 
odd.  I could probably use a dozen or so, but I don't think I'm going to 
have a hundred different slants.  Ah well, at least I can order an organic 
chemistry modeling set, (otherwise known as organic tinkertoys).

Dan Graham, WA6CNN
Beer made with the Derry air, (Derry, New Hampshire)



Return to table of contents


Date: Mon, 8 Apr 91 12:43:48 EDT
From: cjh at vallance.HQ.Ileaf.COM (Chip Hitchcock)
Subject: bottled water

   wrt lhoff at acc.stolaf.edu's suggestions
   1. Bottled water can vary widely. It usually has less chlorine than tap
water, but I'd ask the bottler to be sure. Also, if it really is spring
water (instead of municipal water that's been filtered and dechlorinated---
an association of municipal waterworks says that's a common stunt) the
mineral profile will be different from tap water, so you should get a
complete analysis if you're thinking of adding minerals.
   2. The prices quoted are rather high. I can get 5 gallons of bottled
water at the local supermarket for $3 (in recyclable plastic containers); I
would expect Mpls to be cheaper than Boston, so you're probably paying (in
effect) at least $2 "rent" on the carboy each time in addition to the $6
tied up in the deposit. At this rate, $20-25 for a carboy you own is good
if you think you're going to keep brewing for more than a few batches.

Return to table of contents


Date: Mon, 8 Apr 91 07:36:49 GDT
From: fc.hp.com!hplabs!decwrl!alberta!calgary!ajfcal!blender!herb at hpfcla (Herb Peyerl)
Subject: Please add me to the list.

Please add me to the Homebrewers digest list.

I may not be in your maps so you can get to me by:

...calgary!ajfcal!blender!herb

ADthanxVANCE.

- -- 
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------
UUCP: herb at blender.UUCP   || #define Janitor Administrator
I brew, therefore I am..  || Apollo System_Janitor, Novatel Communications
"I spilled spot remover on my dog and now he's gone..." <Steven Wright>


Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 9 Apr 91 01:30:07 -0400
From: naik at griffin.UVM.EDU (Madhav M Naik)
Subject: test


Could you send me the mailing list about making beer, ale, et.
Thanks.

Madhav

Return to table of contents


Date: Mon, 8 Apr 91 21:15:19 CDT
From: dbeedle at rs6000.cmp.ilstu.edu (Dave Beedle)
Subject: Hydrogen Sulfide...

    Hey all!  Welp, I'm on my third batch and have run into a problem...I
have the smell of rotten eggs (hydrogen sulfide) coming from my beer!  The
Complete Joy of H B'ing says this a a common problem.  What can I expect?
Will the smell go away eventually?  Is my beer gonna taste bad (due to the
Hydrogen sulfide anywauz ;->)?  What?
 
     Also, my last batch, a barley wine using Tom Caxton kits, is still
pretty sweet after a couple of week aging?  Should the stuff get less
sweet?  And if so can I look forward to 12oz glass grenades in my closet?
  
TTFN

- --
  Dave Beedle                                     Office of Academic Computing
                                                     Illinois State University
  Internet:  dbeedle at rs6000.cmp.ilstu.edu                     136A Julian Hall  
    Bitnet:  dbeedle at ilstu.bitnet                           Normal, Il   61761

Return to table of contents


Date:    Tue, 9 Apr 1991 10:42:09 EDT
From: R_GELINAS at UNHH.UNH.EDU (Russ Gelinas)
Subject: % fermentables

Is there any info. available regarding the percent of fermentable
sugar in diferent types of malt?  I never use "recipes", so I don't know
what the FG will be beforehand, but I was thinking there may be a way to
calculate it.

Let's say you have an OG of 1.100, just to make the math easier, and a
type of yeast that will attenuate to 75%.  Then you should get a final 
gravity of 1.025 .  But the yeast will really only eat the fermentable 
sugar.  So if, let's say, 80% of the gravity, or 1.080, is fermentable 
sugar, then the yeast will eat (.75 * .080 ) = .060 of the gravity, which 
leaves a final SG of 1.040.

So, if you know the attenuativeness (?) of the yeast, the percent of
fermentable sugar, and the original gravity, you should be able to
calculate the final gravity.  The actual % of fermentable sugar is the
only missing variable.  Any thoughts?

Russ in Manch.

Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 9 Apr 91 12:29:51 EDT
From: srussell at snoopy.msc.cornell.edu (Stephen Russell)
Subject: New Brewery in Buffalo

Howdy all!
	
	Any of you heading to Buffalo sometime?  Just in case
you are and you get thirsty for good beer, visit the Buffalo Brewing
Company in Lackawanna.  It's owned by the guy who owns the Buffalo
and Rochester Brewpubs, which have been making extract-based beers for
a while.  The new brewery makes all-grain beers using only German malt.
Right now they have their flagship "Buffalo Lager", which is a version
of Munich Helles,  plus a Pilsner, a Weiss (in the Bavarian Weizen style),
and a Bock.  All four are really nice, well-made beers, and you can get them
at stores in the area or at the brewery, which has a restaurant/bar attached.
	To get there, take I-90 to the Lackawanna exit and take Ridge Rd
west ~1 mile.  At the light for Abbott Rd, make a left (south) and go 
~1 1/2 miles.  The brewery is on the left, 1830 Abbott Rd, just before
the road goes under the viaduct.  Awesome beers;  well worth the trip.
Ask about good Buffalo chicken wings while you're there;  why the hell not?
I recommend the Anchor Bar, but have heard that Duff's is great, too.

Enjoy,

STEVE RUSSELL



Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 09 Apr 91 09:36:03 -0700
From: mcnally at wsl.dec.com
Subject: amplification


The other night I was showing a friend of mine the ferocity with which
the Chimay yeast in my latest batch of Berry Hoppy (OK, trite and dumb
I know) Belge-oid Ale was devouring the berries, and he suggested that
it would be neat to amplify the sound of the CO2 bubbling out the tube
in the blowoff bottle.  Having a microphone and digital signal
processor handy, I promptly did so.  It's very rewarding, and I
recommend it to those with the means.

- --------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mike McNally                                           mcnally at wsl.dec.com
Digital Equipment Corporation
Western Software Lab

Return to table of contents


Date:         Tue, 09 Apr 91 14:46:03 EDT
From: Adam Birnbaum <ABIRNBAU at ccvm.sunysb.edu>
Subject:      Keg Carbonation

     There has been some talk lately of difficulties in carbonating
kegs, which caught my eye because I have had two flat batches from
my new plastic Rotokeg.  Papazian says to just let it build its own
carbonation, so I haven't put CO2 in it until pressure falls from
drawing out beer.  Is one in fact supposed to put in more pressure
for a few days before drawing the beer?

Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 10 Apr 91 02:31 EST
From: "ASK ME IF I CARE..." <V057P673 at ubvmsc.cc.buffalo.edu>
Subject: Goofy wort chiller / advice?

In trying to get the most efficient chill possible, I rigged up this for a
wort chiller, but I have some minor questions to people using this.  Sorry if
this one has been hashed recently, but I picked up HBD with #574, haven't got
around to the archives, and feel I should contribute SOMETHING, dammit!

An immersion chiller should be more efficient with a constant flow of water
for heat exchange, plus, I had heard about people doing this.  What I did was
straighten out about a 20' length of copper tubing, and shove it inside about
23' of garden hose, starting at the end I cut off of the garden hose.  Then I
cut a hole in the garden hose about four feet down from the connector end of
the hose, pushed the end of the copper tube through, and made sure there was
about 6" sticking out of the end of the hose and also through the hole I cut.
Then I sealed the hole with RTV silicone, and coiled the whole mess back up
again. Here is a simplistic diagram:

<---3'----><--------------------20'--------------><-6"->
 __      \\  <-- copper tubing
|||\______\\_____________________________________
|||        \\                                    |------  <-- copper tubing
||| _____________________________________________|------
|||/
     ^-- garden hose

  The concept is, to run the syphon right from a lauter-tun (or strainer in a
bucket), through the copper tubing, while running cold water through the
garden hose to achieve a REAL fast chill.  Also, you can easily regulate the
output temperature simply by running more or less tap water through the hose.
I just got done inaugurating this device, and here are my observations:

1)  This thing does NOT need 20' of copper tubing.  Maybe an immersion cooler
might need that length, but I was barely running the tap water, and getting
wort out at ~60F.  I would think 8-10' would suffice.  I may split mine into
two wort chillers.

2)  My question:  Everybody I know who uses a device like this uses a
counterflow, that is, cold tap water running in an opposite direction to the
wort flow.  However, it just made intuitive sense to me to send both in the
same direction: The hottest wort will exchange the heat with the coldest water
and some sort of equilibrium will be reached by the time you reach the end
of the chiller.  Why would the chiller be more effective with counterflow?
Which method makes it easier to regulate temperature?  Enquiring minds just
GOTTA know!

thanks,
 -dr.d

Return to table of contents



End of HOMEBREW Digest #612, 04/10/91
*************************************
-------

---