---

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


Contents:
  Klever Komeback for Familials (TSAMSEL)
  Family Odor Problems (J.R. "BoB" Dobbs)
  Re: New brews (to me...) (Dean Cookson)
  Food grade materials (Ross Haywood)
  Re: Stankbrew (Jason Goldman)
  What bad odor? (Ford Prefect)
  Foul odors (ingr!b11!mspe5!guy)
  STUFF if Jack! (S94TAYLO)
  Brewing smells -> Ale-imony (wbt)
  Re: Foul Odors (Brian Davis)
  Removing Labels (Mark J. Easter)
  Father Knows Best (Norm Pyle)
  Transporting Homebrew (BOEGE)
  STUFF (Jack Schmidling)
  Crushed Mail Order (C.R. Saikley)
  Re: Homebrew Digest #777 (December 09, 1991) (C2NT010)
  Decoct, not halfcoct (Jay Hersh)
  Sour mashes & such like (Jeff Frane)
  STUFF (Ha! just kidding) (Russ Gelinas)
  Re: soda kegs (Alan Edwards)
  RE: Mashing one day, boiling the next (Stan Foster  at MSO)
  Re: grain mill / STUFF (Eric Simmon)
  old yeast (Russ Gelinas)
  Re: Legal beer imports II (Paul Jasper)
  Grain Mill (DAMON_NOEL/HP0800_08)
  undercarbonation - causes and fixes ??? (rich)
  Subject: Beer "additives" (Richard Stueven)
  Well, excuuuuuuse me! :-) ("Dr. John")
  Corsendonk (James Hensley)


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:    Tue, 10 Dec 1991 7:03:16 -0500 (EST)
From: TSAMSEL at ISDRES.ER.USGS.GOV
Subject: Klever Komeback for Familials

  Now to MAKE your family appreciatew the exquisite aromatics of brewing,
roast some chiles in the oven (for Mexican food , natch) and ask them the
rhetorical question; "Would you rather your eyes burn or smell malt and
hops?"
  This works....(;-)
   Ted

Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 10 Dec 91 8:54:36 EST
From: bob at gozer.MV.COM (J.R. "BoB" Dobbs)
Subject: Family Odor Problems

Thus spake the prophet Bhoddy Ohdorr:

    People who brew love the smell of their work.

    People who do not brew hate the smell.

    People who complain about the smell should have their beer mug taken
    away.

    Divorce your wife, sell the kids, Relax, Don't Worry, Have Another
    Homebrew.

:-)

- -- 
Rhais Ahroni, Holy Scribe of the Church of The SubGenius

Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 10 Dec 91 08:51:43 EST
From: Dean Cookson <cookson at mbunix.mitre.org>
Subject: Re: New brews (to me...)


John Pierce writes about Frank Jones IPA and Catamount Amber.

An info point is that both beers are made by Catamount.  Last time
I was up at the brewery in White River Junction they told us that
Frank Jones, Post Road, and Bier de Guarde (sp?) are all brewed by
them under contract.

I've also heard that the guy who owns the Portsmith Brewery (brewpub in
Portsmith, NH.) started by having Catamount contract brew for him, raised
a couple of million dollars, and then opened the brew pub.  And that
the pub is CLEARING several hundred thousand $$$ a year.

WAAAAAA!  I wan't my own brewery!!!! :-)

Dean


Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 10 Dec 91 09:35:03 EST
From: roscoe at sunwise.UWaterloo.ca (Ross Haywood)
Subject: Food grade materials

  There has been some discussion in the last few weeks over the
suitability of various materials for the construction of brewing
kettles, lauter tuns etc.  
  I constructed a stainless steel brew kettle with standard
copper immersion heaters and an associate assures me that
I will most certainly expire in the near future due to the
ingestion of ?copper sulfates??. It seems to me that commercial brew
kettles were all copper in the past I reply. Not so says he-
they were copper outside but stainless inside.
  Other materials that have been mentioned in this forum are
silver solder, and galvanized sheet metal (I'm reasonably sure
that galvanized is a no-no).
  So,  who out there has the definitive answer on the selection
of materials for beer making equipment?
Ross.

Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 10 Dec 91 08:52:05 -0700
From: Jason Goldman <jason at gibson.sde.hp.com>
Subject: Re: Stankbrew

Before I brewed my first batch, a friend warned me (and my non-beer-drinking
wife) that the whole house reeks when you brew.  So, when I got ready to
start my first batch, I chased my wife off for the day.  I thought that it
made the house smell a lot like hoppy molasses.  So, what's the problem?
Well, about that time my wife came in and her first response was, "I thought
the house was supposed to smell bad, what happened?"  I do know plenty of
people who hate the smell (they're wrong) but fortunately, my wife isn't
one of them.

I'm planning a basement brewery anyway for *my* convenience.

Jason
jason at gibson.sde.hp.com

Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 10 Dec 91 08:00:18 -0800
From: sag5004 at yak.boeing.com (Ford Prefect)
Subject: What bad odor?

Jim White writes:

>Now, I happen to like the smells of roasting barley, boiling hops, and
>fermenting beer.

I have solved the problem by not having a family, and inviting *true*
friends to come over and help brew (somebody needs to clean out the 
mash tun).  Now I am the first to admit that there are drawbacks to
this approach.  Nobody complains about the smells, although I had a 
neighbor ask what I was making in such a big pot :-)


stuart galt                          boeing computer services
sag5004 at yak.boeing.com               bellvue washington
(206) 865-3764                       or home (206) 361-0190
#include <standard/disclaim.h>
I don't know what they say, they don't know what I say...

Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 10 Dec 91 9:52:59 CST
From: ingr!ingr!b11!mspe5!guy at uunet.UU.NET
Subject: Foul odors

Scott Welker writes:

> Anyone out there love the smell of something they hate the taste of or 
> vice versa?

    I won't say it, I won't say it, I WON'T say it!  Whew, that was close.

    I got a couple of email responses to my keg question from Digest #777
(thanks!) and I found out something interesting as well.  The local Pepsi Cola
distribution warehouse has gone entirely to the "bag-in-box" method of housing
their syrup.  They no longer have ANY kegs at all.  I waited too late!  Also,
none of the restaurant supply places in town have used soda kegs either.  They
all said "the soft drink company usually supplies those for you".  Still, I 
*did* find a source for kegs...

- --
Guy D. McConnell                   
"All I need is a pint a day..."




Return to table of contents


Date:     Tue, 10 Dec 91 11:28 EST
From: <S94TAYLO%USUHSB.bitnet at VTVM2.CC.VT.EDU>
Subject:  STUFF if Jack!

        Building a grainmill is NOT rocket science, nor is it even close
to brain surgery.  You take two plates that grind when moved against each
other, maybe hooking one up to a power take-off or a crank.  THAT'S IT,
Jack.  Some of us are just interested in how you put YOUR two plates
together and connected it to a drive.
        Your unwillingness to share your ideas and innovations because
you might not get rich shows everyone that you are just an arrogant guy
who brews beer, not THE GREATEST HOMEBREWER IN THE WORLD.

Al Taylor
Uniformed Services University
School of Medicine
Bethesda, Maryland

And if I do become a brain surgeon some day, I'll gladly tell anyone
how I fixed that tumor.

Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 10 Dec 91 11:35:09 EST
From: wbt at cbema.att.com
Subject: Brewing smells -> Ale-imony

> From: zentner at ecn.purdue.edu (Michael Zentner)
> Subject: boilover & thermodynamics
 
> > The most obvious reason for the boil over is that the liquid
> > is too hot.
> >
> > If one simply turns the flame down when nearing the boil
> > point, a most amazing thing happens.....
> > stop a boil over.
> 
> ... Boiling water is boiling water, and, except in the
> case of either high pressure or serious, fast overheating boiling water 
> will be at whatever temperature atmospheric pressure by you will allow...

"Too hot" implies "at too high of a temperature" in common use.  Mike is 
correct; the wort boils at whatever temperature it boils at, and you 
can't exceed that temperature.  A boilover doesn't happen because the wort
is "too hot."

What I believe was meant, though, is that the rate of heat input to the
wort was too high.  Since the temperature can't rise, the wort boils
faster and therefore evolves steam at a higher rate; more bubbles per
second.  That's bound to aggravate an inpending boilover.  A more correct
way to state this is "the liquid is being heated too quickly."

That's why leaving the lid on a kettle (reducing heat loss from the top)
tends to cause boilovers; it eliminates a source of heat loss and thus
increases the boiling rate.  Adding cold water can stop a boilover by
absorbing some of the extra heat in the wort, reducing the boiling rate.
If you have a gas burner, turning down the flame is an option; those of us
using electric burners will find it easier to move the pot partially off
the burner to slow the boil until the foam has subsided.

Stirring and skimming are another approach; they break up the surface film
so that the escaping steam doesn't form bubbles,  and burst the bubbles
already formed.  combines both the mechanical and thermal approaches.

> From: "Justin A. Aborn" <jaborn at BBN.COM>
> Subject:  Family Odor Problems
> 
> I have the same problem with my wife.  She complains bitterly
> about the smell of brewing.  When I brew she shuts herself in the
> bedroom with the TV and the cats.  

This is a problem?  If you could bottle this scent millions of men would
beat a path to your door!  8-)

 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Bill Thacker       AT&T Network Systems - Columbus            cbema!wbt
Quality Engineer      Network Wireless Systems       wbt at cbnews.att.com


Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 10 Dec 91 08:16:21 pst
From: Brian Davis <brian%mbf.uucp at ics.uci.edu>
Subject: Re: Foul Odors

Scott Welker asks:
	Anyone out there love the smell of something they hate the taste 
	of or vice versa?

Yes!  Coffee.  The smell is heavenly, but I can't stand the stuff.

Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 10 Dec 91 08:54:34 PDT
From: Mark J. Easter <easterm at ccmail.orst.edu>
Subject: Removing Labels

          I submitted a comment a week or so ago about environmental
          and health considerations in label removal.  My memory has
          been known to fail me in the past, so I decided to actually
          test again (perish the thought!) the label removal procedure
          that I advocated, that of soaking or boiling the bottles.
          Here's the results:

          Overnight soak in cold water in the bathtub:  I put
          in about four tablespoons of mild detergent in a solution of
          cold water.  The technique removed or softened all bottle
          labels except Dos Equis.  The sample bottles included Bud
          long necks, Henry Weinhardts, (Long Live) Guiness Extra
          Stout, Sierra Nevada Pale Ale, Michelob long necks, and a
          few miscellaneous others.  The Michelob and Bud bottles had
          to be scrubbed a little bit.  Washing in mild detergent
          removed all traces of the glue.

          Boiling the bottles:  I was able to put almost a case of
          bottles in my canning boiler.  After filling them all up
          with water and topping off the boiler, I put it on a high
          flame.  The water reached boiling temperature in about 25
          minutes.  I boiled for 20 minutes, and then left the lid on
          and let them soak overnight.  The sample included all of the
          above.  The results were nearly identical, except that I did
          not have to wash all of the bottles in detergent- the glue
          had come off of about 1/2 of the bottles.  I had to scrape
          labels off of a few bud and michelob bottles.

          Seems like the soak technique might be the most economical
          and least energy-intensive.  Has anybody else had similar
          experience?

          Thanks to all for comments I got in direct EMAIL on the last
          submission.


          Mark Easter
          Easter at fsl.orst.edu


Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 10 Dec 91 09:21:23 MST
From: pyle at intellistor.com (Norm Pyle)
Subject: Father Knows Best

TSAMSEL at ISDRES.ER.USGS.GOV writes:

>  Notes: How does one brew all-grain with out interruption and still have a
>familial unit?
>  I hope this batch turns out OK...

I've been wondering this myself, as this has thus-far prevented me from
taking the plunge.  Sometimes extract brewing is a big enough stretch for my
familial unit...

BTW, its nice to know so many of you out there have families :-).  This last
digest reminded me of the Cheers song for some reason.
Cheers!
Norm "Where's that Beer?" Pyle

Return to table of contents


Date:     Tue, 10 Dec 91 12:09 EDT
From: <BOEGE%UORHEP.bitnet at CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU>
Subject:  Transporting Homebrew

Greetings,

        How long will bottled Barley Wine remain drinkable?  In Papazian's book
there is a mention of 25 year aging periods.  If I were to seal a case of Barley
Wine up in light-proof wrapping and store it in a closet, would it be vinegar,
evaporated, or sentient when I opened it a year later?  2?  5?

        I hope that somebody provides an answer to Dave Ballard's question
regarding Beer, UPS, and the US Government.  I will be flying from NY to MN for
part of my Winter Break.  If I bring a case of homebrew in my carry-on, will I
be allowed onto a commercial flight?  I certainly don't feel like making a gift
of my brew to airport security.

Cheers,

Steven J. Boege

        "Is a fool on the throne relieved of all responsibility merely
        because he is a fool?"          Milan Kundera


Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 10 Dec 91 11:36 CST
From: arf at ddsw1.mcs.com (Jack Schmidling)
Subject: STUFF

 
 To: Homebrew Digest
 Fm: Jack Schmidling
 
 From: zentner at ecn.purdue.edu (Michael Zentner)
 Subject: boilover & thermodynamics
 
 >Changing the flame on your stove will not change the 
 temperature of boiling water.
 
 Poor choice of words but I suspect most people will 
 understand that if you reduce the heat [under the water] you 
 will reduce the chances of a boil over.
 
 >  While changing your flame intensity, you may increase or 
 decrease the rate of boiling, the temperature remains the 
 same.  It is true that a lower rate of boiling will make 
 less foam less quickly, and you may avoid boilover this way, 
 but it has almost nothing to do with temperature.
 
 It has to do with the RATE of temperature INCREASE.  I one 
 approaches the foam over point with a reduced flame, it will 
 not foam over.  After a gentle boil is achieved, full heat 
 can be applied without a boil over.
 
 >Solution:  I don't worry about boilover anymore, becaue I 
 boil 5 gallon batches in a 10 gallon pot.  Plenty of time to 
 catch the mess before it oozes over the edge.
 
 Yeh, except that I am so greedy that as soon as I got my 10 
 gal kettle, I started increasing the batch size.  I now put 
 8 gals of wort in my ten gal pot.
 
 I never actually had a boilover until this weekend.  It was 
 60 out and I mis-calculated the time and was was in the 
 wrong place at that critical moment.  
 
 From: "Justin A. Aborn" <jaborn at BBN.COM>
 Subject:  Family Odor Problems
 
 >I have the same problem with my wife.  She complains 
 bitterly about the smell of brewing.
 
 The solution to the problem here seems pretty obvious .  
 Need a good lawyer?   Sounds like grounds to me.  :)
 
 From: Brew Free or Die!  09-Dec-1991 1423 
 <hall at buffa.enet.dec.com>
 Subject: Re:  STUFF
 
 >First off:  Jack, could you please use more descriptive 
 subject lines for your posts?  Rob Gardner asked that this 
 be done way back in the beginning of HBD.  It makes 
 searching for previous posts, and archiving by subject, much
 easier.  You've used "STUFF" for a subject line about 15 
 times now, and when I'm looking for something you wrote in 
 the past, I don't know which "STUFF" it was.
 
 I also responded by saying it is a problem without a good 
 solution.  My mailer only allows a one word subject.  In the 
 interests of saving bandwith, I typically respond to several 
 topics in each posting.  No matter which one I chose for the 
 subject, the others would be lost in a search.  The only 
 alternative is Misc and this seems equally problematical.
 
 When I post an original article, it ALWAYS has an 
 identifying Subject.  
 
 Sorry, suggestions would be more helpful than just repeating 
 the criticism.
 
 
 >You advocate boiling the liquid under the false bottom as a 
 means of achieving decoction mash.  I only skimmed through 
 Noonan's book, but I recall him writing that one must boil 
 what he referred to as the thickest part of the mash each
 time.  Do you know why he claims that the thickest mash 
 portion be boiled, and what would be the difference in 
 boiling just the thin mash under the false bottom?
 
 Well, far be it from me :) to criticize the work of an 
 expert but one of the things I dislike the most about 
 Noonan's writing is his lack of clarity on many issues.  
 After reading parts over many times, I go away totally 
 confused.  In this case, he gives equally reasons for 
 boiling both the thick and the thin mash but the 
 circumstances for doing which are cloudy enough to make it 
 meaningless.  
 
 Furthermore, as I actually do a thick mash decoction, the 
 fact that some of the thin mash is boiling seems to cover 
 both bases.
 
 >Anyway, I left the runnings covered overnight in my 
 kitchen, and boiled, cooled, and pitched the next day.  I've 
 called this batch Procrastination Porter, and I taste no 
 obvious defects.  There's a letter to Professor Surfeit in 
 the latest Zymurgy asking the very same thing, and Surfeit 
 recommends against doing it, claiming nasties will take up 
 residence in the wort.  I believe that's true, but how many 
 of those nasty will survive a 90 minute boil?
 
 Premusming further that, the mash was over 150 degs, when 
 covered for the night.  How would they get in, in the first 
 place?  I could believe a chemical reaction could affect the
 taste, but infection?  Bah!

js
ZZ


Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 10 Dec 91 11:39:57 PST
From: grumpy!cr at uunet.UU.NET (C.R. Saikley)
Subject: Crushed Mail Order

From: joshua.grosse at amail.amdahl.com

>And, C.R. Saikley writes:

>>Another option is to have your supplier crack your grain. A decent
>>homebrew shop will have a two roller mill, which should give you a
>>much better crush than a Corona can. It usually costs no more than
>>4-5 cents/pound extra to get your grain cracked, and some suppliers
>>will do it free. Cracked grain doesn't keep well, so you'll want to
>>brew ASAP after milling. If you live in an area where you must mail
>>order your grain, having it pre cracked is not a good idea.

>Interesting.  I've no easy access to a homebrew shop that has a mill.
>As I live in an area with homebrew stores that don't offer milling
>service.   Andy (ak35+ at andrew.cmu.edu) recommends mail-order precrush.

Imagine that, homebrewers actually _disagreeing_ on methods!! :-)

Let me clarify what I meant in the original posting.

I'm sure that with proper treatment by conscientious suppliers and 
shippers, mail ordering cracked grains is possible. If you've found 
a source that can reliably get precrushed grains to you in good 
condition, and you're satisfied with the results, more power to you. 
If you haven't yet identified that source, beware that shipping cracked 
grains is a risky proposition. Given that crushed malt doesn't keep 
well, and that shipping exposes it to unknown conditions, you may not 
be happy with the results. Time, temperature, and moisture all take
their toll. 

Perhaps someone out there has identified a good source for mail order
precrushed malt. Anyone???

CR

Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 10 Dec 1991 14:39 EST
From: C2NT010 at FRE.TOWSON.EDU
Subject: Re: Homebrew Digest #777 (December 09, 1991)


Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 10 Dec 91 14:46:06 EST
From: Jay Hersh <hersh at expo.lcs.mit.edu>
Subject: Decoct, not halfcoct


>Not to ramble on and on, but I know from two experiences (one
>intentional and the other, er, otherwise) that boiling grains does lead
>to obvious and disastrous off-flavors.  On the other hand, Noonan is a
>fairly on-the-ball kind of guy and he recommends decoction mashing - not
>to mention several hundred years of German tradition.  What's the deal?

Unless I missed the boat, you don't boil the grains, you bring them to a boil, 
i.e. you heat them to just before boiling, then add them back into the mash.
While still a higher heat less astringency will be created while enzymatic 
activity in at least that portion of the mash will be de-activated.
Also from what I understand you end having brought 1/3 - 1/2 of the mash to a 
a boil, but not all at once, but rather in steps, so that only a small portion 
of the grain is actually de-activated at any one time. This still leaves plenty 
of grain with active enzymes throughout the entire mash.

 - JaH


Return to table of contents


Date: 10 Dec 91 14:57:21 EST
From: Jeff Frane <70670.2067 at compuserve.com>
Subject: Sour mashes & such like

There has been a thread here about mashing one day, and then boiling the wort on
the following day. Several people have commented that either a decoction mash or
the wort boil would sterilize the wort and protect from off-flavors. As Jay
Hersh notes, this is essentially the procedure for achieving sour mashes, and
even one day is enough to start the process given the correct temperatures.
What's important to note is: boiling will kill microorganisms but will not kill
off-flavors (or toxins for that matter) already introduced into the brew by
those microorganisms. And, no, this doesn't mean that every single batch of beer
with a one-day lagtime between mashing and boiling will produce sour beer, just
that it considerably increases the odds of spoilage.

On Corona mills: You would be amazed at how frequently these show up a garage
sales and flea markets for about $10, putting them well within the reach of most
brewers. With care, they will produce a very nicely cracked grist. It's true
that they can be motorized--although I've never felt the need, since it takes me
about 20 minutes to crack enough grain for a 10-gallon batch by hand--but a
friend who used a drill to power his says that the plates no longer run smoothly
against each other but instead wobble. A roller mill is a great thing but $200?!
You'd be better of spending the money on a SS kettle or on more malts!

On pasteurization, etc.: I think this idea has been pretty well dismissed by
everyone here. The State of Oregon used to have a law requiring pasteurization
of beer (which was pretty much ignored by people like Sierra Nevada, not to
mention Cooper's, Chimay, etc.). The battle over dismissal of this OLCC rule was
led by (ta da!) Coors, who had obvious interests in repeal. I think you will
find that most laws about alcohol content, etc. in beers are state laws and that
the federal BATF gets involved in other silly rules. Such as not being able to
use the word "Christmas" on an alcoholic beverage or not being able to use
someone's name on the label unless a picture accompanies it. ??!!

I'm intrigued to follow the discussion of boilovers. Most of the solutions seem
pretty sensible; I've used most of them at one time or another. Turning down the
heat just as the first, violent surge occurs helps a lot, as does stirring with
a long spoon at the same time. What interests me most, though, is that no one
has mentioned an increase in activity when hops are added. I've never seen a
concise explanation of this phenomenon but have observed it in countless brews.
I've always warned new brewers not to walk away from a boiling kettle,
*particularly* if they've just tossed in some hops. Anyhow, virtually every
boilover I've ever witnessed or heard of had to do with inattention. Best not to
wander off too long no matter what's going on with the boil.


Return to table of contents


Date:    Tue, 10 Dec 1991 15:16:26 -0500 (EST)
From: R_GELINAS at UNHH.UNH.EDU (Russ Gelinas)
Subject: STUFF (Ha! just kidding)

   First, bad news.  My favorite brew glass, purchased from the Boston
Wort Processors at the AHA conference this past summer, was broken today 
by my mother-in-law.  Bummer.  To be truthful, it's amazing it survived
as long as it did, but still.......Geez, I wonder what the ol' bat will get
me for xmas ;-)

  I just obtained a used Coke keg.  Everything I know about kegs I've learned
from this digest, and of course I haven't paid all that much attention, since
I didn't have a keg.  What would be nice is if there was a "howto keg"
write-up, with, for example, what to replace, how to clean, how to fill,
how to carbonate, how to serve, how to store, and what not to do. I know all 
of that info has been in the HD at some point.  Has anyone put it in any
sort of order?  There's nothing about it in the archives; would be a nice
thing to have there, though.

Russ Gelinas
ESP
UNH

Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 10 Dec 91 12:20:53 PST
From: rush at xanadu.llnl.gov (Alan Edwards)
Subject: Re: soda kegs

Ken Weiss (krweiss at ucdavis.edu) wrote in HBD #776:

| On a more serious topic, I've noticed that Pepsi and Coke are both phasing
| out the 5 gallon stainless kegs for syrup dispensing in favor of cardboard
| boxes with plastic bladders.

They started switching over several years ago.  I worked at a Carl's Jr
in Central California in 1984 and 1985 when they started using the boxed
syrup system.

|                              This would seem to indicate a coming glut of
| used soda kegs. Anyone noticed supplies increasing and prices dropping? If
| not, we need to re-evaluate the whole concept of supply/demand economics.
| Me, I'm gonna go hang around the back door to the local Pepsi bottler and
| see what's in their dumpster...

Since the switchover to boxed syrup is most likely a very slow trend,
I wouldn't expect any surge of surplus kegs, unless you happen to know
of a specific supplier who is switching to the new system.

 -Alan
 .------------------------------------.
 | Alan Edwards: rush at xanadu.llnl.gov |      Member: The Hoppy Cappers
 |     or: alan-edwards at llnl.gov      |      homebrew club, Modesto, CA
 `------------------------------------'

Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 10 Dec 91 12:25:28 PST
From: Stan Foster  at MSO <foster at rumor.enet.dec.com>
Subject: RE: Mashing one day, boiling the next

I have saved mashed wort in the fridge overnight and boiled the next day, or 
even after two days, a couple of times with no (apparent) ill effects. The saved 
wort smells like vegetables (cooked cabbage) but the boiling and/or fermentation 
process has always driven off any strange smells leaving me with clean beer. 
I've only ever done this with ales and only when there was no other option. 

Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 10 Dec 91 15:31:32 EST
From: simmon at eeel.nist.gov (Eric Simmon)
Subject: Re: grain mill / STUFF

>From Jack Schmidling:

(regarding posting info on building grain mill)

 >Past experience says that a long posting would have been 
 >received with little enthusiasm, by enough readers, that the 
 >whole objective would have been lost in endless flames.
 
 >If you took the trouble to send for the information offered 
 >through email, you would now know how it was made.
 
 >However, as I happen to have a foundry and machine shop in 
 >my basement, it is a little like asking a brain surgeon how 
 >he fixed that tumor.
 
 >js
 
I believe that the readers of this mailing list would not mind a long posting
as long as the posting is useful information with a high signal to noise 
ratio.  Several other people have shown interest in this topic and have 
requested instructions.  Since I happen to have access to a machine shop
and furnace (I am sure other readers have access to the required equipement
also), I think it would be useful for you to post info.

Your analogy is incorrect, it is like one brain surgeon asking another brain surgeon how he fixed that tumor.

relax, don't worry, have a homebrew 

Eric Simmon

simmon at eeel.nist.gov
- --------------------
REGAL LAGER - It's not just a beer it's a palindrome!   


Return to table of contents


Date:    Tue, 10 Dec 1991 15:55:20 -0500 (EST)
From: R_GELINAS at UNHH.UNH.EDU (Russ Gelinas)
Subject: old yeast

  There's an article in the New York Times (Monday?), about Keith Thomas,
an Englishman who cultured the dregs of a bottle of ale that was recovered
from a ship which had sunk in the English Channel in 1825!!!!!  He's using
it in a commercial porter (Flag Porter).  He also uses only organically
grown malt, no pesticides, etc.  Sounds like quite a character.  Any of
you HB'ers across the pond ever hear of the guy?

Russ G.
ESP
UNH

Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 10 Dec 1991 10:48:53 PST
From: paul at melody.Rational.COM (Paul Jasper)
Subject: Re: Legal beer imports II

On 9 Dec, 23:28, <S94WELKE%USUHSB.bitnet at VTVM2.CC.VT.EDU> wrote:
> Subject: Legal beer imports II
> 
> In HBD 771, I asked for examples of beer imorted from Germany that
> did not conform to the Reiheitsgebott.  Thanks to John DeCarlo and
> Chip Hitchcock, who pointed out MOST beers are modified before being
> sent from Germany (by adding noxious chemicals).  Their sources were
                               ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> Miller and a Sam Adams ad, respectively.  

Well, there you have it, then...  This sounds just like the rest of the
utter nonsense that Jim Koch talks in his radio adverts.  Like where
he claims Sam Adams brews in weeks what "the leading import" brews in
"three hours".  As homebrewers we must all know that no one can
possibly brew anything in as little as three hours.  Not even the Dutch
or the Japanese have perfected explosive fermentation, to my knowledge.
He also talks about how they won first prize at the GABF three years
in succession as if these were the most recent three, neglecting to
mention that the last time was in 1986 (or maybe 1987, depending on whether
my memory serves me correctly).

Since hearing Jim's advertising campaign, I've actually been avoiding
drinking Samuel Adams beers.  Having my intelligence insulted in this
way certainly does not endear me to his company or their products...

And as for Miller... that's like believing General Motors if they told
you that the wheels drop off Toyotas at speeds above 30 mph.

>                                           You learn something every
> day.  I think the filtration of Japanese beer leaves the issue open,
> because the beer could be unnecessarily pasteurized to comply with US
> law.  Now I'm even more curious.
> 
>-- End of excerpt from <S94WELKE%USUHSB.bitnet at VTVM2.CC.VT.EDU>

Shame on you for spreading such malicious gossip!

- -- 
- -- Paul Jasper
- -- RATIONAL
- -- Object-Oriented Products
- --

Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 10 Dec 91 15:17:29 mst
From: DAMON_NOEL/HP0800_08%hpcsee.col.hp.com at col.hp.com
Subject: Grain Mill

This is a first submission on this quaint system and I don't like the odds of
success...but
I can offer some ideas on a grain mill.  I built one for home use using pretty
simple techniques.  All aluminum, and using a junk gear drive motor (slow but
it can turn the house) double roller crusher, does 1# per min.  At first I used
a 1/2 drill motor which worked if you started the drill before loading the grain
and kept it going.  If was a lot faster than the gear unit.  The advantage of th
e crusher over the grinder is that the grain husks are not shreaded and do not
contribute to off flavors.  You also get guaranteed 100% grain cracking and in
addition, relatively few "fines" are generated.  As a result yields are high and
the grain bed is quite uniform. I have never had a stuck bed as I did with a
Corona on occasion.  There is a minimum of machine work involved, cutting plate
aluminum, drilling and tapping, a bit of lathe work on the rollers.  I don't
know what a machine shop would charge to do the work, but alternatives are the
local high schools and community colleges offering shop courses.  A bit of
barter for a case or two with either a student or the instructor might turn the
trick...it worked for me.  I'll be happy to furnish sketches to interestd folk,
just send a SASE.
Noel Damon
P.O. Box 7050
Colorado Springs, CO 80933
No charge, no commercial
cheers

Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 10 Dec 91 18:21:11 EST
From: rich at trevor.att.com
Subject: undercarbonation - causes and fixes ???

I recently brewed an extract-based pale ale type beer.  Three
weeks after bottling, there is still very little carbonation
in the beer.  I am trying to figure out what went wrong as well
as how I might repair the current batch.

Some of the details of this batch include:

  - used Wyeast American yeast (first time I used Wyeast)

  - in primary for 5 days

  - in secondary for 2 1/2 weeks

  - used 3/4 cup priming sugar (no, I did not forget it)

  - added 1 T. of dissolved knox gelatin before bottling

  - added 1/2 gal of boiled water before bottling to
    increase volume to 5 gallons. The water was cooled for
    a while before adding it to the beer, though it 
    may have still been quite hot. I didn't check temperatures.
    I've done this before and given the small(?) volume of water 
    added, I didn't think it would be a problem.

  - the bottles were well rinsed after sterilizing them with
    a mild clorax solution.

I remember seeing something on this digest once before about
beer sitting in the secondary too long and leading undercarbonation.
Anybody know anything about this?

Even though this beer isn't too bad flat, might anyone be able
to suggest how I can fix the current batch to make it better?

Thanks for your help,
/rich kempinski

(rich at trevor.att.com)

Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 10 Dec 91 15:42:00 PST
From: Richard.Stueven at Corp.Sun.COM (Richard Stueven)
Subject: Subject: Beer "additives"

In HBD #775, I asked:

>Truth, Fiction, or Urban Legend:
>
>	All beers imported into the US are required to be pasteurized
>	and/or to have chemicals such as _formaldehyde_ added to them.

A number of people pointed out what I should have seen as obvious:
that if the beer were pasteurized or had such nasty chemicals added,
nobody would be able to culture the yeast from the bottles!

Thanks to all who responded...I can't wait to taste the beers that I'm
going to collect from the bets I made.

Richard Stueven       AHA# 22584 |----------|
Internet:       gak at Corp.Sun.COM |----GO----| Disclaimer: I'm not allowed to
ATTMAIL:         ...!attmail!gak |---SHARX--|             have opinions.
Cow Palace: Sec 107 Row F Seat 8 |----------|

Return to table of contents


Date:         Tue, 10 Dec 91 21:30:05 EST
From: "Dr. John" <JELJ at CORNELLA.cit.cornell.edu>
Subject:      Well, excuuuuuuse me! :-)

Greetings all,
  I'd like to start with an apology of sorts, seems that the wording of
my post in #774 was, shall we say, unfortunate in some regards.  I've
worked things out privately with Jack, but want to take this opportunity
to redeem myself publicly, lest any of you are left with the impression
that I am indeed arrogant.
  So, being among the most recently Schmidled (or is that Schmidified :-))
of the HBD'ers, I'd like to offer a few thoughts as to how we might
steer the HBD back to the kinder and gentler digest of old.  Unfortunately,
it seems that I fell into the trap that all too many posters have lately,
namely adopting a somewhat belligerent tone in responding to what I
perceived, and still perceive in part, as factual errors, or
inconsistencies, in a couple of Jack's postings.  I'd like to suggest
that any of us who are tempted to fire off responses to Jack, or anyone
else for that matter, that could be construed as inflamatory take the
time, and expend the effort, to choose our words more carefully.  I submit
that the digest will be much better served if we all take the time to
send out well-reasoned, and carefully-written, postings, rather than simply
cranking up our blowtorches.  Hell, Jack might even come around if we
tone things down; though I'm not exactly suggesting he'll become affable,
or anything like that, for to do so would most likely cause my veracity
to be seriously questioned :-).
  In the interest of helping start the process, at least in a small way,
I'd like to restate the gist of my posting in #774.

  Jack Schmidling, in #764 in your second "STUFF" posting, you suggest that
if the boiling of the liquid under the false bottom in a direct-fired mash
tun could be controlled, one could thus achieve the benefits of a decoction
mash.  Then in #771 you refer to boiling an unspecified number (which,
based on my mashing experiences, I infer to be a small number) of quart-
sized portions of the mash as decoction mashing.
  Both of these approaches seem contrary to the decoction procedures
which Noonan elucidates in "Brewing Lager Beer."  Regardless of what any
of us thinks about Noonan's grasp on his material, the fact remains that
his book is, to my knowledge, the only thorough English-language treatment
of decoction mashing, and, in my experience, his procedures do work.
I encourage you to read, or reread as the case may be, Noonan.  When
you do, you will note, on page 109, that Noonan states, in no uncertain
terms, that by boiling the liquid portion of the mash you will likely
be decimating your mash's enzymes, rather than achieving the desirable
results of a decoction mash.  As to the quart-sized portions, I assume
that during a one hour conversion rest you will only need to reset your
mash temperature 2, or at most, 3 times, and thus would not be boiling
enough of the mash to accomplish what you would if you did a decoction
of the size necessary to boost the temperature from protein rest to
conversion rest.  If you have other sources of information on decoction
mashing, I, and I assume a few other HBD readers, would be grateful
if you would post the references and help us expand the information
base on which we can draw.

  I hope, and expect, that this partial recantation will be sufficient
to rekindle the discussion of decoction mashing without igniting any
flames.  As a practitioner of traditional brewing techniques, when I
can find the time and gain the acquiescence of my family, I am always
interested in learning of other brewers' approaches, in hopes of
garnering some useful information to improve my own brewing procedures.
  In closing, I'd just like to observe that flaming is a two-way
street.  If each of us practices some self-restraint on our pyromaniacal
tendencies we can, before long, restore the digest to its past glory.
Ooogy wawa,
Dr. John

P.S.  I'd still like to know what you all think about using Klages in
      a single temperature infusion mash.  I'm thinking about doing so
      this Friday night, and would like to hear of any experiences
      along these lines that anyone cares to recount.

Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 10 Dec 91 20:15:32 PDT
From: jpaul at barge.sd.locus.com (James Hensley)
Subject: Corsendonk


I am sitting here drinking some Corsendonk monk's pale ale.  It is quite
the complex brew.  Very strong and flavorful, I don't think it would be
possible to guzzle this beer in under any circumstances.  It has the yeast
in the bottle.  I got a gift pack with a bottle of the pale and a bottle
of the brown trappist ale.  Also included was a glass and coasters.  All
this for $12.  On the coasters is some (French? Belgian) writing:

FERMENTEE EN BOUTEILLE - I guess this is "fermented in the (this) bottle.
AMBACHTELIJK BIER - Abbey beer?
MET LENEVDE GIST - With Suspended??? yeast? 

These are just stabs in the dark; I'm no linguist.  These guys make a great
beer, though!

Please post if you know the meaning of these phrases.   This bottle has
yeast at the bottom.  Anybody ever culture it?  

James
jpaul at locus.com

- -- 

jpaul at locus.com  | ..ucsd!lccsd!jpaul   :  all views expressed are mine.
All those moments will be lost, in time, 
like tears in rain -- Blade Runner


Return to table of contents



End of HOMEBREW Digest #779, 12/11/91
*************************************
-------

---