---

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


Contents:
  berries and bitterness (Dick Dunn)
  SNL false ad (Greg J. Pryzby)
  Addition to Guinness recipe (30-Sep-1991 0922)
  wet hopping (Russ Gelinas)
  Beer in big APple (Eric Rose)
  Grinding flaked barley, lager vs ale malt for dry stouts (Stephen Russell)
  How to do a seminar on different hop flavors and aromas (Stephen Russell)
  brew?pub (Russ Gelinas)
  I brew, therefore I am. Picky German grammar post ;-) (Fred Condo)
  Misc info regarding Hop bitterness (larryba)
  Manch. AHA notes (Russ Gelinas)
  annealing bottles (Chip Hitchcock)
  Hop stimulation of Yeast (George Fix)
  Re: Ice Chest Lauter Tun / Dumping All Sparge Water (Russ Pencin)
  Fermenting fruit - LONGISH (Conn Copas)
  NITROSAMINES (Jack Schmidling)
  On 734 (Jeff Frane)
  Kegs, backflow valves, tap cleaning (hersh)
  Barleywine and Yeast (Doug Dreger)
  Re: Banana Beer, oh no (Steve Kirkish)


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


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

Date: 30 Sep 91 02:19:45 MDT (Mon)
From: rcd at raven.eklektix.com (Dick Dunn)
Subject: berries and bitterness

(I hope this gets out...I've been getting HBD erratically, compensated by
several copies of the ones I get.)

There have been various comments about using berries vs long aging times to
get things mellowed out fit to drink.  I've done a bit of experimenting
with some meads which suggests a simple aid:
	Get the leftover berries out of the fermenter asap.
As soon as you get enough of a krauesen to lift the berries to the top,
skim them off.  If you broke them up a bit when you added them, they'll
mostly be done fermenting.  You won't get quite as much color as if you
leave them in for another week or two, but you'll also get something
drinkable a lot sooner, and it will mature to a better mead.

I've had two recent meads bear this out--one raspberry/blackberry, the
other boysenberry/raspberry.  Both were quite drinkable (although still
young-tasting) within a couple weeks of bottling.  One is still/sweet, the
other dry and slightly carbonated.  This was quite a welcome revelation to
me, as I like the berry melomels but hate the long maturation times.
 ---
Dick Dunn    rcd at raven.eklektix.com   -or-   raven!rcd
	...Do you want software patents, or a software industry?  Pick one.

Return to table of contents


Date: Mon, 30 Sep 91 8:46:29 EDT
From: virtech!gjp at uunet.UU.NET (Greg J. Pryzby)
Subject: SNL false ad

I was wondering if anyone saw the Saturday Night Live beer ad on Saturday
(9/28).

In case you missed it, it was a parody on the bikini-clad ads. The beer
was Smidtt (?) Gay. And instead of females, it was men in speedos. A
nice twist to show just how stupid the ads regular beer ads are.

- -- 
Greg Pryzby  uunet!virtech!gjp
Virtual Technologies, Inc.
Herbivores ate well cause their food didn't never run. -- Jonathan Fishman

Return to table of contents


Date: Mon, 30 Sep 91 06:23:02 PDT
From: 30-Sep-1991 0922 <hannan at gnpike.enet.dec.com>
Subject: Addition to Guinness recipe

tony at spss.com (Tony Babinec) writes re: guinness formulation/recipe

Last time I brewed a stout, I followed the recommendation of adding 
a cup of ground wheat to the wort, specifically to give the brew a 
creamy head, sort of like Guinness on tap.  It worked nicely.

Ken

Return to table of contents


Date:    Mon, 30 Sep 1991 10:16:58 -0400 (EDT)
From: R_GELINAS at UNHH.UNH.EDU (Russ Gelinas)
Subject: wet hopping

  Was that *the* George Fix?  Anyway, my method of mixing hops with vodka (and
water) to add to the fermenter, as a "wet hop" mixture, also included gently
heating the mixture, and letting it cool overnight.  How warm?  I don't know,
but *not* boiling.  I'll measure the temp next time; it's heuristic right now
(am I using that term correctly?).  The combination of alcohol and low-temp
pasteurizing should (hopefully) help eliminate infection.  The heat should also
help extract more of "the good stuff".  The mix is also *strained* into the 
fermenter.  What this does is allow you to re-use the yeast slurry from that 
fermenter, without having to deal with loose hops.  Siphoning is easier too.

  Now the caveat is that I've only done this 3 times.  One time I let the 
hops/vodka/water mix boil by mistake for maybe 5 minutes, and most of the 
volatiles boiled away.  The other 2 times were very successful.  As they say,
your mileage may vary.

Russ Gelinas
OPAL/ESP
UNH
(insert acronym here)

Return to table of contents


Date: Mon, 30 Sep 91 10:18:24 EDT
From: Eric Rose <rose at aecom.yu.edu>
Subject: Beer in big APple

Can anyone recommend stores in New York City with large selections of
premium-type beers (Anchor, Chimay, etc.)?

Also, this being the season, are there any beer-type festivals going on
in the near future in the NY area?

peace & yeast,

- -- 
            Eric Rose
            Albert Einstein College of Medicine
            1300 Morris Park Avenue
            Bronx, NY  USA

     Disclaimer:  All opinions expressed herein are the official positions of
     the Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Yeshiva University, Bronx
     Municipal Hospital Center, the American Medical Association, the City of
     New York, and Albert Einstein himself.

Return to table of contents


Date: Mon, 30 Sep 91 11:11:18 EDT
From: srussell at snoopy.msc.cornell.edu (Stephen Russell)
Subject: Grinding flaked barley, lager vs ale malt for dry stouts

Howdy, brewfreaks!

Seeing references to Guinness recipes and so forth brought some questions to
my mind:

(1)	When making stouts, recipes often call for the addition of 9-10%
	flaked barley.  This being a pretty laminar substance, it often leads
	to slow sparges.  A friend of mine who brewed a stout over the weekend
	did something fairly radical and (to my thinking anyway) creative:
	he dumped the flaked barley into his Corona grain mill and ground it
	up!!  Not real fine or anything, in fact, at a slightly less fine 
	setting than for the rest of the grain.  Have any of you all done 
	this??  What do you think of this idea?

(2)	Along these same lines...I too noticed in Eckhardt's book that Guinness
	uses pale ale malt.  Dave Miller in TCHoHB calls for *lager* malt in
	his Dry Stout recipe on the grounds that the proteins in flaked barley
	require breakdown by proteolytic enzymes that have been destroyed by
	the higher kilning of pale ale malt.  What gives here?  Is Miller being
	overly anal?  If I use pale ale malt will those proteins remain in my
	beer and thereby result in a cloudy Guinness? :-)  If I *do* use
	lager malt, will I cleave proteins that might have added to the creami-
	ness of the beer?

IBU ERGO SUM,

STEVE

Return to table of contents


Date: Mon, 30 Sep 91 11:12:28 EDT
From: srussell at snoopy.msc.cornell.edu (Stephen Russell)
Subject: How to do a seminar on different hop flavors and aromas

I have volunteered to conduct a seminar for my brew club on the differences
in aroma and flavor imparted by different hops.  I do plan to serve some well-
hopped beers but would like to boil up some "hop teas" for comparison as well.

My questions:

a)	should I add any dried malt extract to these teas or just use H2O?
	also, how much DME, water and hops should I use? (leaf only)

	--my thinking here is that this might be a more realistic emulation of
	beer AND that the extraction of hop oils might be different in wort 
	than in water BUT that this might interfere with the hop aroma/flavor.

b)	should I boil them at all?  if so, how long?

	--Jean Hunter suggested that we bring the hopped solution to a boil 
	and then turn the heat off to compare aroma, then resume the boil for a
	while (10 min or so) and then turn it off to compare flavor.

If this is a stupid idea (or just not the best one), please steer me to a 
better technique for accomplishing my goals.  Which are, simply put, to help 
members of my club (myself included) learn the distinctions in flavor and 
aroma of different hop varieties.  I plan to have Cascades, Willamette, 
Fuggles, E. Kent Goldings, Hallertauer, Tettnanger, Northern Brewer and Saaz.

advTHANKSance!

IBU ERGO SUM,

STEVE

Return to table of contents


Date:    Mon, 30 Sep 1991 11:23:26 -0400 (EDT)
From: R_GELINAS at UNHH.UNH.EDU (Russ Gelinas)
Subject: brew?pub

   I tried a Maine brewpub again this weekend, and it will be the last time.
The pale ale was *sour* and sickeningly fruity, and flat.  The bitter was
still fermenting; it was throwing off incredible amounts of DMS.  It too was
sour, 'though not as bad.  Bleah!  Both brews were crystal clear, however.
Obviously, they're catering to the tourist who wouldn't think of drinking a
cloudy beer (and has no idea what beer really tastes like).  The odd thing is
that there were a number of locals drinking the stuff, when right down the
street there's a bar with an amazing selection of imports!  There's still
a lot of educating to be done re. beer and the average consumer.

   Hmmm, I was in Portland, ME.  Isn't there someone out near Portland, OR 
that feels that *all* brewpubs are tremendous?  Florian, are you listening?

Russ Gelinas
acronyms, acronyms, acronyms  

Return to table of contents


Date: Mon, 30 Sep 1991 10:11 PDT
From: Fred Condo <CONDOF at CGSVAX.CLAREMONT.EDU>
Subject: I brew, therefore I am. Picky German grammar post ;-)

Bill Crick writes:

>Ich Brau! Dewegen Ich Bin!

That should be:

Ich braue, deswegen bin ich!

Braue is pronounced BROW-uh. And notice that deswegen has an "s" in it.
I know this is picky, but, you know, German is a very STRICT language :-).

Return to table of contents


Date: Mon Sep 30 10:20:37 1991
From: larryba at microsoft.com
Subject: Misc info regarding Hop bitterness

The following are some correspondence with George Fix regarding measuring Hop
Bitterness. I thought it would be of general interest.

>From: George J Fix <gjfix at utamat.uta.edu>

Iam constantly amazed by how much kettle utilization varies amoung
different brewers.In fact,I am amazed by how much my own KU has varied
over the years with changing circumstances.As far as Ican tell the following
are the most important factors:
   (i)The type of boiling equipment,and in particular the temp.
       and pressure that is maintained.
   (ii)The actual alpha-acid level of the hops that are added.
   (iii)The type of hop,i.e.,cone,plug,or pellet.
   (iv)The hop contact time.
   (v) The wort SG and pH.
There are formulas out there which can be used to compute
corrections, however in my brews the predictions they yield tend to
miss the mark, often by wide margins.Darryl is working on
improvements, and he can always be counted on for coming up with
something interesting.In the interim I have been depending on direct
measurement(described below).

To cite one example,last Jan. I purchased some Saaz plugs(Cosby+
Baker) which were rated at 3.03% alpha.I had them measured and found
that the actual alpha was 2.55%.Ihad them measured 4mos. later and
found that the alpha level had fallen to 2.51%.Iused the two data
points with linear extrapolation to estimate alpha levels until new
hops were purchased.

Since I have never used plugs before I had the additional task of
finding the KU Iwould get from them. To do this Idid the following
pilot brew last Jan. and had the iso-alpha-acids of the wort measured.

      vol. of wort=1 liter
      SG=1.048
      pH=5.2
      hops added=5grms.(Saaz)=5000 mg/l
      hop alpha=2.55%
      total alpha added=127.5mg/l
      contact time=30 mins.
      BU(measured)=26.8mg/l
      KU=26.8*100/127.5=21%
It has been my experience that the 21% is a good KU for any plug so
long as the contact time, SG,and pH are close to those cited.For
different choices of these parameters additional measurements are
needed since the KUs will likely change.In addition, seperate
measurements are needed for pellets and cones.I have had iso-alphas
measured from wort samples of full scale brews and the predictions
based on my KUs l have always been within 5% of the measured data.

I seem to lose around 4% of the iso-alphas in the fermentation.If
oxygen pickup in storage and filling are kept low,then additional
loses are minor. However,if oxygen pickup is not kept low,then major
loses can occur.

The alpha assay for hops is simple.Hard resins are extracted with
methanol; soft resins are then extracted with petro. ether;finally,
alphas are determined by titration with lead acetate.Most hop dealers
have the necessary materials to do the analysis .They will typically
do it for free if you buy hops >from them or at a nominal cost
otherwise.

The iso-alpha analysis of wort(or for that fact beer)is also simple
but requires special eqipment.It is a bit more expensive,but
fortunately it does not need to be done often.As noted above the
numbers can be used forever for any fixed combination of the
parameters (iii)to(v) cited above.Siebels of Chicago will do the
analysis for you.They first extract iso-alpha-acids with iso-methanol.
The concentration is then determined by its absorbance with light.The
iso-methanol will actually extract resins other than iso-alphas. That
is why results are quoted as "bitterness units" than mg/l of iso-
alpha-acids.These two numbers ,however, rarely differ more than 2%.


I asked just what is "contact" time...

>From: gjfix at utamat.uta.edu

Thanks for your e-mail.If it is not inconvenient,then Iwould be
pleased to have you post our correspondence.

By contact time I meant the time the hops were boiled.You are right,
however,the time at simmer after the boil is over and before the hops
are removed is important.It should be noted for any sample that is
going to measured, for the KU will be affected.

I have found that the wort SG is a big issue for hop utilitization.
The correction factors in Zymurgy seem ok for the range 1.050-1.060.
They ,however,have proven to be highly irratic above 1.065.

The effect of pH is likely weaker ,especially in the range 5.0-5.6.It
could be a factor outside this range.For example,a 15% drop in KU was
reported worts made from a "sour mash" at pH=4.7 compared to wort at
pH=5.2.

I feel that a good pH meter is a worthwhile investment.However, for
most purposes the paper stips should be fine.

Best wishes!



Return to table of contents


Date:    Mon, 30 Sep 1991 13:51:21 -0400 (EDT)
From: R_GELINAS at UNHH.UNH.EDU (Russ Gelinas)
Subject: Manch. AHA notes

  Has anyone read the AHA notes from the conference in Manchester this year?
How about a list of contents/authors?  I was wondering if it's worth the 
$20 or so.  $20 would buy 2 of the specialty books instead.....

Russ G.

Return to table of contents


Date: Mon, 30 Sep 91 12:46:37 EDT
From: cjh at vallance.HQ.Ileaf.COM (Chip Hitchcock)
Subject: annealing bottles

> Whether oven sanitizing will weaken the bottles depends entirely 
> on how quickly they are heated *and* cooled, if it is done gently(slowly) 
> enough the glass will end up _slightly_ more annealed than before. 

I doubt that a home dishwasher holds heat long enough or high enough to do
any significant annealing. My recollection from touring several Swedish
glass works last summer is that their annealing ovens cool the glass from
~1000 to ~500 F in ~24 hours. I'd say that anyone using a dishwasher as a
sanitizer should plan to leave it closed at least an hour after the cycle
is over and hope that the glass is cool enough that it won't be stressed by
room-temperature air. You could try running just a few bottles with a load
of dishes (the thermal mass of a full load is probably significant) and see
whether they're warm if you wait .5, 1, 2... hours before opening, or you
could run a probe---now that you've got a thermometer that reports to the
outside on the termperature inside your refrigerator, want to try the same
thing for your dishwasher?

Return to table of contents


Date: Mon, 30 Sep 91 13:27:55 CDT
From: gjfix at utamat.uta.edu(George Fix)
Subject: Hop stimulation of Yeast

Conn Copas' observation that dry hopping increases
yeast activity seems to be both correct and interesting.
I conjecture that a major mechanism comes from hop particulate
matter serving as nucleation sites for CO2 evolution.It is
known that CO2 counterpressure tends to restrain yeast growth and
other metabolic activity.Having more of it removed,and at a greater
rate,surely is stimulatory to yeast.

In the early 80's a large English brewing company(Allied)reported
serious problems wih their fermentations after changing over to a
high gravity brewing system.They ultimately solved their problems
by increasing the amount of oxygen in their chilled wort,and by
increasing the amount trub carryover.They concluded that trub was
a yeast stimulant.

In a later follow up study the Allied results were confirmed.However,
it was shown that the major yeast stimulation came from trub particles
serving as CO2 nucleation sites in a manner described above.Since the
effect is purely mechanical,the second study concluded that any type
of particulate matter will achieve the same effect.This has been my
experience as well.

I have never been a fan of trub carryover,since it contains a large
amount of fatty acids which can be big players in beer stalling.Letting
particulate matter from hops serve as a stimulant(along with O2)seems
like better option when the yeast we are using need extra stimulation.
 


Return to table of contents


Date: 30 September 1991 12:38:13 pm
From: pencin at parcplace.com (Russ Pencin)
Subject: Re: Ice Chest Lauter Tun / Dumping All Sparge Water

Well,  I waited to answer both of these requests because I didn't want to be
redundant with other folks.
I have been using an Igloo Ice chest with slotted pipe for a Lautern for over a
year now ( 24+ batches ).  The inside of my Igloo has buckled in many places,
but has never cracked and has not affected the process in any way.  I sparge at
170 degrees and, as with Florian,  I dump the entire 4 gallons of sparge water
in at one time.  Now let me expand on my process so no one misunderstands.
Taking some advice from both Nancy Vinyard and Anchor Brewing Co.,  I first
carefully recycle the first runnings until I get a reasonably clear runoff into
a large glass jar,  at the point that the run-off is clear I COMPLETELY drain
the first runnings from the Igloo tun into my boiler.  I then block the run-off
hose,  and pour the entire4 gallons of 170 degree sparge water into the Igloo
Tun, then merrily stir the grains and water for about 3 minutes.  I let this
sit for another 10 minutes to allow resettling.  After settling,  I begin the
glass jar run-off and recycle until I get very clear wort from the drain.  At
this point I let the run-off go into the boiler.
Please don't ask me what "efficiency" I'm getting,  I don't worry about such
thangs [sic],  but I usually get around 1.054 for 6 gallons of wort in the
boiler for 10 lbs of 2 row kladges.
I'm very happy with this method, and never have had a stuck mash since
employing it.
The wort is sparkling clear and there is no evidence of astingency from
"over-sparging".  If you'd like more info mail me directly.  If there is enough
interest,  I'll post the summary.

Russ 

Return to table of contents


Date: Mon, 30 Sep 1991 15:19:13 +0000
From: Conn Copas <C.V.Copas at loughborough.ac.uk>
Subject: Fermenting fruit - LONGISH

Second time lucky ...I've noticed a few posts about problems with fruit
beers recently, so given that it is harvest time, I thought I might hold
forth. I have zilch experience making fruit beers, but thought a
winemaker's perspective could be useful. Lambic gurus, please stand ready
to correct as necessary.

An initial decision one faces with any fruit brew is whether to press the
juice or ferment the pulp. White wines conventionally employ the juice
only, whereas red wines employ the pulp method in order to extract the
colour and tannin which are expected in that style. Some fruits are so
difficult to juice that pulp ferments are the only option, even for a white
wine style. When pulp fermenting high tannin fruits such as apples, pears
or elderberries, no more than 2-5 days contact is recommended. Presumably,
a situation analogous to sparging exists, in that sugar will be extracted
preferentially before the tannin, but overdoing it can cause problems.
Those fruits often contain enough tannin in the juice alone to give the
wine sufficient 'bite' or 'zest', similar to what hops do for beer. The
pulp is meant to be pressed gently for similar reasons. Incidentally,
broken kernels from stone fruits can also cause odd flavours, as well as
being a good source of organic cyanide I believe.

Winemakers necessarily ferment the fruit during the primary, because the
fruit provides a large amount of sugar and nutrient. In a brewing context,
I can also think of some good reasons for retaining this practice. First,
pulp ferments benefit from a twice daily stir to wet the crust and promote
extraction. Also, straining pulp from the brew invariably involves much
sloshing about, and the brew may not recover from that degree of oxidation
at a later stage. Second, pulp can decompose with age to produce off
flavours, with the maximum recommended contact time in wines being 2 weeks.
Third, if one is using a pectin digesting enzyme (which is a standard means
of reducing hazes and aiding extraction in most fruit wines), it is
inhibited by the presence of alcohol. Generally, I would add that it is
good practice to establish the chemical environment of a brew at an earlier
rather than later stage, with that environment partly being controlled by
the duration of the pulp ferment. Whilst there could be concerns about loss
of fruit volatiles during the primary, the alternatives are probably worse.
Considering the fragrance of some rieslings or sauternes, the effects of
the primary ferment can't be all that bad.

For the same reasons, oaking is probably best carried out in the primary.
The directions that accompany my particular brand of granules claim that a
smoother result is obtained when added sooner rather than later. I suspect
that there is better utilisation in the turbulent conditions of the
primary, even if the duration of contact is less than in the secondary.

There seems to be a bit of confusion regarding strong flavours which take a
long time to mature out. The two main possibilities are tannic astringency
and acidic sharpness. Tannin mellows with aging, and this process can be
accelerated by fining with gelatine. As far as I know, there is no
practical home testing system beyond the human taste bud. Acidity mellows
less appreciably with age, so it is important to adjust it before bottling
if necessary. Most berries and stone fruits contain a mixture of citric and
malic acid, with human tastes being able to tolerate higher levels of the
latter. It is occasionally possible for the malic acid to be converted to
the less sharp lactic acid if suitable microorganisms are present, but
don't count on it. Somewhat unintuitively, taste relates better to
titratable acidity than to pH. That is, it is possible for fruit juice to
have a large total acid content yet only have a moderate hydrogen ion
concentration, due to the weakness of organic acids. As a general rule, the
worse the season or the less mature the fruit, the higher the level of
acidity and the lower the level of sugars. Most berries are highly acidic.
Although tartness is often a desirable characteristic of fruit beers, it
could still be necessary to reduce acidity by stirring in chalk or a
solution of bicarbonate. Doing this scientifically requires a home acid
test kit containing alkali, indicator, test tubes, etc. 

Now for some controversy. Winemakers seek a limited amount of oxidation,
obtained either through porous wooden casks or periodic racking. This
encourages alcohols to form aldehydes and carboxylic acids. These
substances may then form fragrant acetals and esters at a slower rate by
further reaction with alcohols, usually in the bottle. Wines are said to
take about 3 months to recover from 'bottling sickness'. How much these
principles apply in the less acidic and less alcoholic environments of beer
is beyond me.

Onto sterility. It's all been said before, but there are few alternatives
to sulphiting. Heat destroys the fruit's natural digestion enzymes, sets
pectin into a haze-forming gel, and increases loss of volatiles. In the
case of apples and bananas, starch hazes are also possible. Freezing won't
kill all bugs, (but is a useful means of softening up some hard fruits,
however). Sulphite has the secondary benefits of preventing oxidative
browning and increasing production of glycerol by the yeast. This a
sweetish substance which increases body and masks the harshness of young
wines. It is a forbidden additive according to the winemakers' equivalent
of the Rheit at *%!. For those who are committed to organic brewing, I would
advise selecting totally unmarked fruit and at least washing it in sulphite
before rinsing with water. It seems to me that there must be a big
difference between adding something which produces volatile sulphur dioxide
in the conditions of a primary ferment, and adding preservatives at
bottling time.

Lastly, for those who have not yet been adventurous enough to try brewing
fruit beers, the students around here have come up with something just as
bizarre. The drinks are known as 'purple nasties' and 'snakebites', and
basically involve various mixtures of lager, cider and raspberry cordial.
Match that, Belgium :-)

Conn V Copas                                   tel : (0509)263171  ext 4164
Loughborough University of Technology          fax : (0509)610815
Computer-Human Interaction Research Centre            
Leicestershire  LE11 3TU                    e-mail -    
G Britain                         (Janet):C.V.Copas at uk.ac.lut  
                     (Internet):C.V.Copas%lut.ac.uk at nsfnet-relay.ac.uk







Return to table of contents


Date: Mon, 30 Sep 91 14:04 CDT
From: arf at ddsw1.mcs.com (Jack Schmidling)
Subject: NITROSAMINES

 
 
 To: Homebrew Digest
 Fm: Jack Schmidling
 
 
 
                    NITROSAMINES REVISITED
 
 I just had a very disconcerting conversation with Roger 
 Bries of Bries Malting, aka Chilton Malting et al.
 
 I had the feeling I was caught in a "Cross Fire" debate with 
 the tobacco lady who claims there is no proof that tobacco 
 causes cancer.
 
 Every question I asked was responded to with a long sermon 
 on everything from the dangers of airline travel to the 
 differences between mice and men.
 
 I was also to be put at ease because the nitrosamines in 
 their malt rarely exceeds 2 ppm with a FDA limit of 4 ppm.
 As it was my nickel, I persisted in interrupting with "but 
 what malting process does Bries use"?
 
 When I finally got tired of listening to him and got 
 downright rude, he declared that he does not divulge the 
 actual process.
 
 In a previous conversation with Mary Ann Gruber of the 
 Chilton Malting subsidiary, she told me that crystal malt 
 was made using the "indirect" process but the others were 
 made with the "direct" process.
 
 In my limited research, I have learned that sprouting grains 
 produce a "nitrosamine precursor" that is turned into 
 nitrosamine, when heated in an environment with cumbustion 
 by-products.  i.e. gas fired kilns or the kitchen oven.  
 This is what is known as the direct process.  The reaction 
 is particularly vigorous in a moist environment such as used 
 to produce crystal malt.
 
 She also informed me that the grain cured in the direct 
 process is "sulphured" before kilning.  They are soaked or 
 sprayed with sulphur dioxide.  This, I have been told, 
 reduces the nitrosamines to below the FDA standard.
 
 In the indirect process, the grain is heated through a heat 
 exchanger, steam or electric heaters and nitrosamines are 
 not produced or are greatly reduced.
                         
 I went away from the conversations with Bries Malting, with 
 the very strong impression that, if not the entire industry, 
 at least Bries is trying to prevent a festering wound from 
 turning to gangrene.
 
 Switching from direct to indirect would require an enormous 
 investment and essentially put them out of business.  It 
 seems apparent that the nitrosamines in crystal malt could 
 not be brought to "acceptable" levels without changing 
 process but I assume that, as a specialty malt, the volume 
 is small enough, that they could sustain the cost.
 
 My guess is that the FDA limit was a negotiated number that 
 took all of the above into consideration, with only minimal 
 concern for the actual human health aspect.
 
 The other side of the issue that indicates some hope is the 
 fact that, in the 70's when nitrosamines were first found in 
 beer, none were found in Coors.  I believe that Coors uses 
 the indirect process for reasons probably related to their 
 expansion during the time when the new process came along 
 and had nothing to do with nitrosamines.  They just got 
 lucky.
 
 We were then told by the industry/media that the FDA jumped 
 in and everybody changed their process to meet the new 
 standards.  We now know that, to most malters, this simply 
 meant "sulphuring" their grain.
 
 Well, that's as far as I have gotten to date.  I am not 
 suggesting the we start drinking Coors but I do think that 
 we need to do a lot of poking in some dark places to find 
 out who is doing what.
 
 I would instantly switch to a malt brand that uses the 
 indirect process and/or publishes the nitro content, at the 
 expense of more money or inferior beer.  At least, I would 
 like the option to make that decision.
 
 If anyone out there has any info or can help in this 
 crusade, I would love to hear from them.
 
 Jack 
 
 
 
 

Return to table of contents


Date: 30 Sep 91 19:52:34 EDT
From: Jeff Frane <70670.2067 at compuserve.com>
Subject: On 734

I only got to read HD #732 today, so this is late:

To Russ Gelinas, I checked on the cold water wash with Dave. He sez there isn't
any problem about shocking the ale yeasts (actually, ale yeasts are only shocked
by pictures of Jesse Helms). Viable yeast apparently goes into suspension
because it is more bouyant than dead yeast or trub. He sez.

On #734

According to a lecture I sat through at Great Western Malting, bugs in the malt
is not a good sign. (Oh, really!) What it is is a sign that the moisture content
has gotten above the safe level. It is important to keep the grain well
protected physically, but apparently bugs and molds aren't much interested in
grain until the moisture content rises above 5%. At that point, look out! If
anyone is getting buggy malt from their homebrew supplier, they should
definitely take that as an indication of poor handling and shop for another
source.

Did I mention here that Great Western is now selling both their pale malt
(Klages) and their line of Hugh Baird British specialty malts by mail? I don't
know what their prices are exactly, but do know that their Klages by the box is
very hard to beat. Address is P O Box 469, Corning CA 96021. Number is (916)
824-3888.

As "grumpy" sez, Liberty Malt Supply in Seattle has an astonishing array of
malts, including something like 5 different wheat malts. !!

To Ken Ellinwood:

Dave tells me that Sierra Nevada is a particularly cold-resistant yeast strain,
even though it's a British ale yeast originally. I don't think you should worry
unless the fermenter had been at that temperature for days. Did the fermentation
actually cease?



Return to table of contents


Date: Mon, 30 Sep 91 19:48:25 EDT
From: hersh at expo.lcs.mit.edu
Subject: Kegs, backflow valves, tap cleaning


       For people running multiple kegs off of one CO2 cylinder, how do
       you stop things (deadly microbes say) from migrating from one
       keg to the other?  Are there check valves between the regulator
       or manifold, and each keg? 

I always thought that bacteria couldn't grow in a CO2 environment,
but perhaps this is just a "momily". Maybe Jack will help us here...

 - JaH

Return to table of contents


Date: Mon, 30 Sep 91 22:43:07 PDT
From: Doug Dreger <dreger at seismo.gps.caltech.edu>
Subject: Barleywine and Yeast



Hello,

I've just racked my barleywine into the secondary and it tastes great
and is more filling, but I have a few questions.  First, it only took
2 days to ferment (from 1.090 to 1.017  at 80F).  I used the american
ale yeast because Great fermentations recommended it for a barleywine
over a champaign yeast.  Since the SG is so low I don't think
the yeast has been killed off, but is it possible with continued
aging the yeast will die?  Second, is this the same yeast that Sierra
Nevada uses in their Bigfoot Barleywine?  Depending upon the
consensus or experience based on the first question, should I
bottle as usual, or add some yeast?  I do have a keg but I am
worried about tying it up.  Maybe I should keg the BW and 
buy another used keg to keep my regular brews in.

Also I remember some discussion about counter pressure fillers
and that there were some to avoid.  Which is the recommended type
and where can they be found ?

Doug

Return to table of contents


Date: Mon, 30 Sep 1991 21:39:15
From: kla!kirkish at Sun.COM (Steve Kirkish)
Subject: Re: Banana Beer, oh no


In HBD #732, Hans Lindberg writes about banana odors...

>Let me start be saying that I'm a beginner so don't laugh.
>I read in HD#731 somthing about banana tasting beer, and that that means
>the brew has gone wrong. That worries me, because I have my first batch
>brewing right now, and it's been bubbling off a pleasant smelling
>banana like scent from about half a day or so after it started bubbling.
>It's an extract brew, Muntons Traditional Bitter. It said on the can
>that it should brew at 18 to 21 deg c, but I had a hard time keeping
>the temp down at first (I overlooked one radiator) but it never was more
>than 22 degs in the room. From the second day or so the temp has been
>around 20 deg c. Have I messed it up completely?

Well, I'm not much more than a novice at this game myself, but that won't
stop me from putting in my $0.02 worth.  I've brewed two batches recently,
one using Dry Malt Extract (DME) and one using "liquid" malt extract, but
both used Edme Dry Yeast.  Because it was getting *very* late both evenings,
and because I still apply primitive cooling means, it was taking forever to
cool the wort before pitching the yeast.  Well, I ended up pitching both
times around 78 degF and got normally wonderful smells from the fermentor,
but no bananas.  However, I wound up with a banana smell when I popped the
cap off the bottle due, I believe, from the slightly higher pitching temp (I
imagine it took a loooong time for the 5 gallons to cool further.)  I
understand that yeast wil give off various esters at elevated temperatures,
so that's probably the story.

So, what happened?  Well, the taste wasn't really affected, and after a few
weeks in the bottle, the banana scent is no longer noticeable.  And, most
importantly, the beer tastes great (not just IMHO :-)  Moral, as always:
Relax, Don't Worry, and give it a go! 

- -- Steve Kirkish,  sun.com!kla!kirkish


Return to table of contents



End of HOMEBREW Digest #735, 10/01/91
*************************************
-------

---