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


Contents:
  CAMRA Canada (GARY MASON - I/V/V PCU - 603-884[DTN264]1503  31-Jan-1992 0519)
  SLIMEMOLDS (TSAMSEL)
  Berne Beer? (TSAMSEL)
  Wine via UPS - the hypocrites! (Sean J. Caron)
  Re: To Blow-off or Not? (John DeCarlo)
  RIMS unit plans (Tom Dimock)
  Lager fermentation temp? ("Spencer W. Thomas")
  BBK (Fritz Keinert)
  BBK Tour, HBD #812
  basil beer (James Dee)
  NA Beer - The Schmidling method might work (Jean Hunter)
  UPS shipping ( Brian Kelley )
  Bleach Sanitizing comments (Bob Jones)
  Eric M's porter (Ed Kesicki)
  *Old* style homebrewing (2nd half) (Carl West)
  Re: no-alcohol yeast (David Christian Homan)
  Re: Expensive Beer (David Christian Homan)
  Sanitizing with bleach (Dave Platt)
  Yeast culturing,new supplier (NCDSTEST)
  NA beer, inappropriate tone (Chuck Coronella)
  Blow-off, siphoning, kegging (Warren Kiefer)
  Bell's Prter, CAMRA Canada, no-mouth siphoning (Robert Bradley)
  Re: Toffee notes (korz)
  LIFE'S GOAL (korz)
  LEAD _> HOT WATER HEATER (Bill Crick)
  Quick Survey: Brewclub Members on the HBD (Stephen Russell)
  NY/Ithaca Brewers' Union
  creamy porter problem (Bryan Gros)
  EUREKA, Carbonation (Jack Schmidling)


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: Fri, 31 Jan 92 05:21:11 EST
From: GARY MASON - I/V/V PCU - 603-884[DTN264]1503 31-Jan-1992 0519 <mason at habs11.ENET.dec.com>
Subject: CAMRA Canada

Is CAMRA Canada associated with the original?  One would think so.  One would
also hope - strongly - that those of you who have been bitten would send a note
about your experiences to CAMRA in England.  If you do not wish to do that, 
please give me permission to send them your notes about the subject from HBD.

Thanks...Gary

Return to table of contents


Date:    Fri, 31 Jan 1992 6:51:16 -0500 (EST)
From: TSAMSEL at ISDRES.ER.USGS.GOV
Subject: SLIMEMOLDS

  My daughter (9), wants some more "pets". She has access to slime mold
spores via the program at the local science museum and has been badgering me
to help get her started. Having a degree in Biology, I have no problem 
with slime molds but when i looked at the introductory literature that
comes with the kit (from Carolina Biological, I believe), the critters are
lumped with S. cerevesia!!
  If I were to let the new "pets" into the house, what would be the prob-
ability of infection of my wort. (I understand the "germ theory of disease"
even though my last microbiology class was taken over 20 years ago: I also
looked at the media that these critters are cultured on and you could use
the same stuff as slants for yeast propagation.)
  So am I being paranoid (or what)?
   Ted

Return to table of contents


Date:    Fri, 31 Jan 1992 6:59:40 -0500 (EST)
From: TSAMSEL at ISDRES.ER.USGS.GOV
Subject: Berne Beer?

  A friend is going to Berne , Switzerland in March. Are there any local
brews/breweries worth checking out in that neck of the proverbial woods?
  Ted

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 31 Jan 92 08:25:07 EST
From: Sean J. Caron <CARONS at TBOSCH.dnet.ge.com>
Subject: Wine via UPS - the hypocrites!


i'll second ted wagner's observation! my in-laws live on the north fork
of long island, which lately has had an explosion of wineries (every time
we go down for a visit, two or three new ones have popped up). some of
them even make pretty good wine (the only good thing besides my wife to
ever come out of long island - flames to me, please ;-)
anyway, seems like every once and a while you go buy on "wine shipping day"
and the places are lousy with UPS Trucks! next time they try to reject
my beer, im going to whip out some photos of them loading cases of wine!

Return to table of contents


Date: Friday, 31 Jan 1992 08:39:50 EST
From: m14051 at mwvm.mitre.org (John DeCarlo)
Subject: Re: To Blow-off or Not?

Hi, has anyone compared the volume of trub left behind when not using
blow-off vs. the amount removed by blow-off and then left behind?
I wonder if you end up with more volume either way.  Do you really
lose volume with blow-off?  Just not sure.

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, 31 Jan 92 08:52:28 EST
From: Tom Dimock <RGG at CORNELLC.cit.cornell.edu>
Subject:      RIMS unit plans

The original RIMS unit was designed and built by Rodney Morris and
was breifly described in the Zymurgy Gadgets special issue.  Detailed
construction plans were published by the Maltose Falcons in their
newsletter.  You might try contacting the Maltose Falcons (address in
the Zymurgy clubs listing) to see if you can get a copy of that
issue.  Mine is an Nth generation photocopy, and can't really be
read when copied one more time..   :-(

There is at least one completed unit here in Ithaca, and two more
under construction (including mine :-) ).  The finished unit has
brewed some mighty fine beers, including the Festbier that Steve
Russell and Tom Strasser took a national second place with in the
AHA "Fest is Best" club-only competition.

Good Luck and Happy brewing.

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1992 09:57:30 -0500 (EST)
From: "Spencer W. Thomas" <spencer at guraldi.itn.med.umich.edu>
Subject: Lager fermentation temp?

I've got a bock going in the basement at the moment, and I've been trying
to keep the temperature for fermentation around 45F.  Now I see this
message about Kaiserslauten fermenting around 0C.  So what's the scoop? 
Am I right, or are they (or did our reporter misread their sign)?  It'll
be easy enough for me to cool my ferment, I just have to close the "root
cellar" door tighter.  And while I've got your attention, what is the
recommendation for lagering temperature?

Thanks.

=Spencer W. Thomas 		HSITN, U of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109
spencer.thomas at med.umich.edu	313-747-2778

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 31 Jan 92 09:27:05 CST
From: Fritz Keinert <keinert at iastate.edu>
Subject: BBK


In HBD 814, Sgt John "iceberg" Bergmann <iceberg at sctc.af.mil> writes
Subject: BBK Tour, HBD #812

>>   Yesterday (29 Jan 92) I took a tour of the Bavarian Brewery
>> Kaiserslautern in Kaiserslautern, Germany.
 ...
>> By the way, BBK is also known to the local GI's as Bad Brewery
>> Kaiserslautern, so you can make your own assumptions. 

Kaiserslautern is pretty far from Bavaria. Are you sure it is not
"Badische Brauerei"? Baden (another region in Germany) is a lot
closer. 

>> ...then it's off to the lagering tanks where it ferments for 6-8
>> weeks at under 0' Celcius. (At least I THINK that's what the sign
>>said...) 

That would be below freezing. Maybe that is possible.
- -------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fritz Keinert                             phone:  (515) 294-5223
Department of Mathematics                 fax:    (515) 294-5454
Iowa State University                     e-mail: keinert at iastate.edu
Ames, IA 50011


Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1992 10:40:26 EST
From: James Dee <dee at sbnuc1.phy.sunysb.edu>
Subject: basil beer

In response to Bryan Gros's question about basil beer:

	Your question got through the first time.  I didn't answer right away;
I figured someone else would.  Sorry.

	Anyway, I've never tried basil in beer.  I have, however, used garlic
and ginger (not in the same batch), both of which are aromatic; basil probably
falls in the same category.  Papazian discusses addition of such ingredients in
his book, but here's what I understand:  It's best not to boil these for the
full duration, because all the things that will give the beer its flavor and
smell will evaporate.  Boil them with the wort for about the last ten minutes.
This is essentially what is done with finishing hops; one boils them only for a
few minutes, to give the beer a kind of flowery aroma.

	I'll be interested to hear how your basil beer comes out.  If it's
good, I might try some myself.  Good luck.

						--Jimmy Dee

Return to table of contents


Date:         Fri, 31 Jan 92 10:21:27 EST
From: Jean Hunter <MS3Y at CORNELLA.cit.cornell.edu>
Subject:      NA Beer - The Schmidling method might work

 Upon reading Jack's original post of the NA beer process (basically a
single stage flash distillation at 170 F) I had doubts too, but a little
back-of-the-envelope calculation reassured me that it might work as claimed.
  The trouble with the comments posted to date is that they all proceed from
a bad assumption, that is, that the ratio of ethanol vapor to water vapor
will be equal to the ratio of the vapor pressures of the two components.
In fact, the ratio also depends on the mole fractions of the two components
in the liquid and on molecular interactions between the components in the
liquid phase.  (Also vapor phase interactions, but these are negligible at
atmospheric pressure).   A quick trip through McCabe and Smith's book, Unit
Operations of Chemical Engineering, shows that a dilute solution of ethanol
in water (1 to 3 mole%) gives about a 10:1 concentration factor for ethanol
in the vapor - that is, 1 mole% ethanol in the liquid will produce a vapor
that is about 10 mole% ethanol.  Hence Jack's procedure is far more efficient
than would be predicted solely on the basis of vapor pressure ratio.
   I'll post more on this subject after I have a chance to check out the
DECHEMA vapor-liquid equilibrium data tables and do a few more calculations.
Meanwhile, if Jack will kindly send me a bottle each of the before and after
beers, I will be happy to analyze them on my HPLC and report precisely how
much alcohol was removed.
   Until then, can we bank the fires, please?
Cheers, Jean.
PS:  Clever aphorisms & fancy signature bars waste bandwidth.

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 31 Jan 92 12:01:47 EST
From: bkelley at pms001.pms.ford.com ( Brian Kelley )
Subject: UPS shipping


I don't want to beat a dead horse, but UPS has a rather large book
with packaging and other requirements for shipping various substances.
If you get flak about shipping brew, ask to see what the book says about
alcohol (or beer, which may not be listed but would fall under alcohol).

Back when I was into making sailboards I was shipped (via UPS) the wrong
type of polyester resin.  I asked UPS what I needed to do in order to ship
it back.  They handed me the book and told me to do what it said.   It 
clearly specified everything.  5 gallons was enough to require those 
triangular "Flamable" signs on any truck transporting it, as I recall).   
The book is quite interesting - you'd be surprised at the scope of what is 
listed (corrosives, explosives, etc).  You can ship some really nasty 
stuff by UPS - alcohol is mild by comparison.



Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1992 09:10 PDT
From: Bob Jones <BJONES at NOVA.llnl.gov>
Subject: Bleach Sanitizing comments

Following are a few of my comments on questions raised about my post of
bleach concentration calculations:
Darren-Evans Young asks if using a higher concentration shortens the contact
time? Darren I would quess that killing bacteria is like killing people, if
one bullet does the job in 1 minute then 100 bullets in 1 sec doesn't kill'em
more effectively, One of the reasons for increasing the time is to lower the
concentration, thereby lowering residuals that pass on to you and me.
Richard Childers says he rinses until no smell of chlorine after using a
strong solution of bleach. Rich you really should not be rinsing after you
use the bleach solution to sanitize. There are critters in your tap water
you really don't want in your beer! That is the reason for using low
concentrations of bleach so we don't have to rinse! As for your concern
about your septic tank, do the same calculation I did to arrive at a dilution
factor for your septic tank. I would expect 5 gals of 200ppm bleach dilluted
in hundreds of gallons of water & poop will not be a problem for the poop
patrol in your septic tank.
On another similar related subject I see some you HBDers using the words
sanitize and sterilize interchangeably. You can't sterilize with bleach.
You can only sanitize! To sterilize you need an autoclave.

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 31 Jan 92 09:29:37 PST
From: ek at chem.UCSD.EDU (Ed Kesicki)
Subject: Eric M's porter


I tried to mail directly to Eric M. in Ft. Collins but somehow failed, so
here is my question:

Eric,

	At what temp. did you ferment your porter using the Red Star
lager yeast?  We have been messing with various ale yeasts and hadn't
considered trying a lager yeast for our porters...however, we ferment
at room temp and were wondering if you might have done this batch at
room temp also.  Looking forward to your reply.

Ed Kesicki
San Diego, CA

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 31 Jan 92 10:24:34 EST
From: eisen at kopf.HQ.Ileaf.COM (Carl West)
Subject: *Old* style homebrewing (2nd half)

This is the second half of a piece that seemed longer 
when I was cleaning up after the scanner :)

The following is from the _Scotsman_ [about which I know nothing more, 
_100 Years..._ has no bibliography. "Victorian Scholarship" is an oxymoron. -CW]
as quoted in _One Hundred Years of Brewing_, originally published 
in 1903 as a supplement to _The Western Brewer_. Re-published in 
1974 by the Arno Press which claims no copyright.


The vat was then made ready for brewing. It was a thick.
oaken cask, with a bunghole near the bottom. A handful of
evenly cut straw was taken and one end of it firmly tied up.
The loose ends of straw were neatly spread out, fanwise, and
it was placed inside the bunghole, to act as a strainer when
the wort was run off. The spread ends were bent so as to
lie against the bottom of the vat. The whole was held in
position by a flat, triangular stone, set aslant, its base resting
on the bent straw ends, and its apex holding the tied ends
against the side of the vat, above the bunghole. (This strainer
must have been originated amid great poverty of material. )
When it was adjusted the vat was ready for use.

Some of the malt was then put through a sieve. The part
that sifted out was called " smeddum "--which word Burns
takes occasion to use metaphorically. It was kneaded up into
tiny bannocks, baked on a griddle and eaten. If when baked
the smeddum inside the crust was in taste and appearance
like a thick dark syrup, the malt was good and strong. If not
syrupy, the malt was poor. These smeddum bannocks were
rather tasty, and the entire household judged it necessary to
pronounce on the malt.

The coarse malt from which the smeddum had been sifted
was put into the bottom of the vat next to the strainer, to
prevent it getting choked. The rest of the malt, together with
hot water, was then gradually added. The water had to be
just at the boiling point--called " preening," when full of
bubbles like pin points shooting to the surface.

The malt and water while being added were stirred with
a stick, care being taken to avoid disturbing the strainer.
When the malt was all in, the thickness of the mixture had to
be such as to hold the stick upright of itself for a moment.
The vat was then covered up and left undisturbed for four
and a half hours.

The bunghole was then uncorked, the liquid wort drawn
off and boiled and skimmed in an iron pot till it had shrunk
an inch from its first mark round the pot, when it was poured
into a wooden or earthenware vessel to cool. If boiled too
" sore," its effect on the digestion of ale drinkers was
deplorable.

When tepid, a small quantity of the wort was put into the
kirn, the " barm " added, the kirn covered and left to " work."
This went on for some days, more wort being added as the
fermentation gathered force.

The foam on the ale had a raised peak or " coolie " in the
center. When this " coolie " began to sink, the yeast on the
top of the ale was removed and the home brewed--which its
admirers declared comparable only with champagne--was
ready for use.

The malt left in the vat was again mixed with water,
which was put through the same process, and was almost
equal to the first ale, though sharper in flavor. A third water
was put on, which made a fine mild drink for the everyday
use of children and maid servants. The exhausted home
brewer seldom had patience to take pains with this brew,
which, through the third water, was called " second ale," and
it was often like sour whey.

The time devoted to each stage of the process varied
according to the quantity of malt made, as well as to the
temperature. There was some particular danger, each irre-
trievably spoiling the brew, to be avoided at every step. When,
in addition to all the worry naturally attendant on brewing,
a tax was laid on malt, it was no wonder that home brewing
gradually ceased, and is now unheard of in the land. It says
a great deal for rural perseverance that the contest with gaug-
ers was so long and closely waged.

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1992 13:18:35 -0500 (EST)
From: David Christian Homan <dh10+ at andrew.cmu.edu>
Subject: Re: no-alcohol yeast


    Yeast produces ATP (Adenosine triphosphate - I think), which is the
basic energy source for a cell by a process called "fermentation"
(shocking, isn't it?).  Fermentation occurs under anaerobic conditions,
and, in yeast the waste product is ethanol.  (Fermentation also occurs
in the human body under anaerobic conditions.  Say you do a 500 yard
sprint - your muscles can't utilize the glycolysis and oxidative
phosphorylation pathways effectively - so it uses fermentation instead. 
Here the waste product is Lactic Acid which causes those horrible
cramps.)

    It would seem to me that a no-alcohol yeast would have to produce
some other waste product, and what you would be left with would probably
not taste very good.

    Anyone else know?


 
/************************************************************/
 *  David Homan              |    Gonzo Programming -       *
 *  616 Summerlea St.        |      the trend of the 90's   *
 *  (412)661-4428            |      that will make Hunter   *
 *                           |      S. Thompson proud...    *
 *                           |                              *
 *  <dhoman+ at cs.cmu.edu>     |     (Pick one - they all go  *
 *  <dhoman+ at cmu.edu>        |      to the same place in    *
 *  <dh10+ at andrew.cmu.edu>   |      long run, anyways...)   *
/************************************************************/ 


Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1992 13:20:31 -0500 (EST)
From: David Christian Homan <dh10+ at andrew.cmu.edu>
Subject: Re: Expensive Beer

>>>Unfortunately, I won't be drinking a lot of them, though, as they are $11
>>>a six here in Chicago.
 
>>I used to say the same, but yesterday afternoon I was in a Suburban Chicago
>>club and paid $2.75 plus tip for industrial beer.  $11 a six sounds good to
>>me AND I don't have to sit next to a smoker in my home.  Expensive beer is
>>just a matter of perspective.  I simply go to bars less often now and enjoy
>>better beer (besides -- most bars frown on bringing in your own homebrew).

    Good ole Mr. Smith will run you $56 a case in Pittsburgh.  $11 a six
would be heaven...


/************************************************************/
 *  David Homan              |    Gonzo Programming -       *
 *  616 Summerlea St.        |      the trend of the 90's   *
 *  (412)661-4428            |      that will make Hunter   *
 *                           |      S. Thompson proud...    *
 *                           |                              *
 *  <dhoman+ at cs.cmu.edu>     |     (Pick one - they all go  *
 *  <dhoman+ at cmu.edu>        |      to the same place in    *
 *  <dh10+ at andrew.cmu.edu>   |      long run, anyways...)   *
/************************************************************/ 


Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 31 Jan 92 09:56:29 PST
From: dplatt at ntg.com (Dave Platt)
Subject: Sanitizing with bleach

> Being a clean freak, I like to massively overdose with bleach. I figure it
> also cleans out the lines when I dump it down the drain. I generally add
> about a quarter cup, soak everything for a day or so, then rinse until it
> smells clean, IE, until I can no longer detect bleach. This is pretty easy,
> and doesn't involve wasting much water.
> 
> I would guess that one's nose - and tongue - are more sensitive to extreme
> dilutions of bleach than any other instrument at hand.

The one exception to this rule that I'd be concerned about, is this:  if
you've been working with bleach solutions for some period of time (an
hour or more, perhaps), your nasal passages will have become somewhat
saturated with chlorine vapors, and they'll "numb out" somewhat.  You'll
find it difficult to distinguish between the amount of chlorine remaining
in your rinse-water, and the amount of chlorine still drifting around the
air in the room, and the amount which is sitting in your sinuses.  You
may mistakenly deduce that there's no chlorine left in the rinse water,
because your nose can't detect any difference between the rinse water
and non-chlorinated water.

In order to be sure that there's no significant amount of chlorine left,
you'd probably need to vent out the room (to remove any airborne chlorine)
and then have someone who has _not_ been working with bleach solutions
come and verify that the rinse-water is pure.

There's an unfortunate tradeoff here, though: ventilating the room will
suck in outside air (naturally) which may be full of bacteria and
wild-yeast spores.  If you've just gone to a lot of trouble to sanitize
your carboy, other equipment, and brewing surfaces, this is just what
you don't want to do.

My hunch is that it'd be better to stick with a somewhat weaker dilution
of bleach (in the 2T/5gal range) and use a longer contact time.  This
should sterilize the equipment just as well as a higher concentration,
and would leave less chlorine to be rinsed away.




Return to table of contents


Date:    Fri, 31 Jan 1992 15:35:23 -0500 (EST)
From: NCDSTEST at NSSDCA.GSFC.NASA.GOV
Subject: Yeast culturing,new supplier

My friend, Dr. Martin Shiller, has formally started his yeast culturing
company.  This provides brewers with a brewer and Phd combination who
can supply technical information, cheap supplies and refills to kits
without the problems that come with dealing with the chemical supply
house
and I for one am quite happy to no longer have to pay over four bucks per
brew when an all grain batch is only eight bucks to begin with.
Also, when you culture your own, its clean and you can be assured of
getting  enough cells to actually get a quick ferment (unlike that 50 ml
pack of wyeast :-):-)

Martin currently can supply a complete kit including an alcohol burner,
culture loop, petri dishes, sterile 1 and 50 ml vials of wort (UV cooked
for sure sterility), and solid growth media for slants.  All for about
$25.  He can also supply individual parts/refills if you are already an
expert at this.

Of course, I have no financial interest in this company, I just thought
other people might have had a hard time finding affordable supplies.

You can reach Martin at :
The Yeast Culture Kit Co.
6005 Mustang Place
Riverdale, MD 20737
1-800-742-2110 6-8PM weekdays

Jim Busch

ncdstest at nssdca.gsfc.nasa.gov

DE HOPPEDUIVEL DRINKT MET ZWIER 'T GEZONDE BLOND HOPPEBIER!"

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 31 Jan 92 13:43 MTS
From: Chuck Coronella <CORONELLRJDS at CHE.UTAH.EDU>
Subject: NA beer, inappropriate tone

I took offense to Chip Hitchcock's submission in HBD # 813.  I hope other 
people responded quicker than I, but if not, here is my 2c.

>   I included your entire message, even the signature line. If you don't
>remember what you've been saying, maybe you've had too much of your "NA"
>homebrew.

Damn it, I'm really getting tired of people saying _shit_ in the digest 
regarding J.S.  If you've got a problem with his brewing procedures, say so-
there's no need for this type of response.  KEEP IT TO YOURSELF!!!  The 
entire post was insulting and childish.  (and unscientific, but more on 
that later.)  J.S. is showing to be creative and a good learner.  He also 
has learned much better manners than Chip.

Now, regarding the question of non-alcoholic beer:  To establish my
credentials, let me just say that I am currently finishing my Ph.D. in
Chemical Engineering (and looking for a job, but that's another story
entirely).  I feel qualified to respond to the topic in a general manner. 

Regarding the formula for vapor pressure- I think there is a units problem
in the formula presented by Chip.  Here is a summary from Perry's Handbook
of emprirical data: 

           alcohol T('C)     P(mm Hg)   T('C)  water
                   -2.3       10         12
                    8.0       20         22
                   19.0       40         33
                   48.4      200         66
   (boiling point) 78.4      760        100   (boiling point)
                   97.5     1520        121

The numbers put forth earlier are wrong.  The vapor pressure of EtOH is
higher than the vapor pressure of H2O at all temperatures, but not much. 
For example, at 78'C, p(vap) of EtOH is 760 mm Hg, and for H2O, it's 312 mm Hg.
(I interpolated P(vap) of H2O over a small distance in order to compare at
equal vapor pressures.) 

Therefore, Jack had the right idea.  Raising the temperature of the beer
will tend to drive off the alcohol.  Unfortunately, not much.  If any
Chem.E.'s out there have some time to kill, you could do an isothermal
flash calculation to find the exact vapor concentration, and the residual 
liquid concentration.

In Perry's handbook, J.D. Seader (my advisor, who is most definitely NOT a
brewer) recommends about 60 trays for the binary separation of ethanol and
water.  What Jack has suggested is essentially a single-stage distillation.
Therefore, it's safe to say that the concept of heating the beer will
effect the alcohol concentration only slightly.  This is because the vapor
pressures of the two compounds are fairly close, i.e., the vapor
concentration of the beer is pretty close to the liquid concentrations. 

I hope this sets the record straight.

Anyone know how Coors makes alcohol-free beer?

Chuck Coronella, soon-to-be-unemployed Ph.D.
coronellrjds at che.utah.edu

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 31 Jan 92 11:09:01 -0700
From: oopwk at terra.oscs.montana.edu (Warren Kiefer)
Subject: Blow-off, siphoning, kegging


	Just thought I'd toss my opinions into the ring. The blow-off method
is one of 2 things that vastly improved the quality of my beer. The other
thing being liquid yeasts. The blow-off method seemed to reduce the harshness
of my homebrew. This opinion was derived after a side by side comparison of
the same recipe. I use a one inch tube, stuff it straight into the mouth of
my glass carboy and run it down into a bucket containing water mixed with
sodium metabisulphite. Of course you do lose a bit of beer, but when your
brewing a batch every 2 weeks, you won't even miss it :*).  IMHO, there
is nothing better then watching the foam build up and run out of the tube
into the bucket...
	Onto siphoning, I know this has been mentioned before, but I haven't
seen it for a while but here goes. I boil a quart or two of water before I
get ready to siphon and let it cool. So when I'm ready to siphon all I do
is fill my siphon hose with the cooled water, attach to siphon wand and
drop the siphon hose into the carboy. Works great no infections to worry 
about.
	Question on kegging, I found myself low on CO2 the other night, so
what I did was prime the keg with 1/2 cup sugar, shot 5lbs. CO2 into keg, 
and put the keg in the closet. I usually force carbonate, but since I was
low on CO2, I figured I should try something different :'). Now does
anyone have any idea how long I need to let this sit before it's ready to
tap ??? 
	One more question, a buddy of mine just came home from Alaska, we
want to brew more then 5 gallons at a time, so we need some kind of plans
for a bigger brewery. I know I'v 
(whoops) seen suggestions and ideas on this before in this forum, but I
didn't save any of them (duh!). So let me know. I'm glad to see the flame
wars on the digest have burned out. Happy brewing and lets all just take
a moment to give thanks to the barley growers of America !!!!!!!!!

                                        Warren


Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 31 Jan 92 18:49:01 -0500
From: bradley at adelphi.edu (Robert Bradley)
Subject: Bell's Prter, CAMRA Canada, no-mouth siphoning

Howdy Homebrewers,

Anybody out there had beer from a Michicgan Micro named Bell's?  It's
readily available in the Chicago area.  There's a sediment in the
bottle; I assume there's yeast in the sediment.  My question: has
anybody had any experience culturing the yeast from their bottles?
Porter in particular.

The reason I ask instead of just trying is that there's something a
little funny - a little sour - in the flavour of the beer.  It's a 
black, bittersweet style of porter and it feels quite creamy in the
mouth.  If it's chilled, you don't notice the sourness, and even when
warmish, it's not entirely unpleasant.  Does anybody know (or even be
willing to speculate) what would cause the sourness; particularly,
does it have anything to do with the yeast?

CAMRA Canada: I was on the executive of the Toronto chapter about 5
years ago.  Even then we had trouble rousing the National by phone or
mail.  I'm not sure they ever published more than a couple of
_What's_Brewing_ magazines in any 12 month period.  Worse still,
there was apparently great hatred of CABA among the national executive
(this being, admittedly, hearsay coming from the older members of the
local exec).  We had trouble getting up-to-date members' lists from Ottawa.
New members probably often missed our local mailings and activities
because of slackness at the top.

Finally, Lee Slezak describes in #814 a "no-mouth" siphon starter.
The following works well for me, with no gadgets needed.  I fill
the siphon hose with bleach solution using the mouth method -
I assume the bleach will kill any mouth-beasts - and then never
lose the pressure.  I leave the bleach solution in the hose until
it's sanitized, then rinse through with clear water.  I leave the
hose full of clear water until I begin siphoning.  If you want, you
can even drain the water into a glass as the tube fills with beer
so that you don't dilute your 5 gal. of beer with 3 ounces of water.

Happy Imbolg!

Rob 

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 31 Jan 92 18:24 CST
From: korz at ihlpl.att.com
Subject: Re: Toffee notes

A while ago, Conn writes:
>There is an elusive 'toffee' character in some bitters which I have been
>trying to duplicate for some time. Crystal malt is sometimes reputed to
>give this character, but, for my needs, it doesn't fit the bill; it just
>makes a brown ale style brew.

>
>(a) The brewers are using special sugars...  [edited]
>
>(b) The toffee character derives from boiler conditions...  [edited]
>
>(c) The toffee character is a fermentation by-product (possibly a ketone, a
>la diacetyl). So maybe this aspect could be encouraged (yeast selection ?
>inhibiting later stages of the ferment ?)

I've included all of option c, because I tend to think that diacetyl is
what you're looking for.  It's been quite a while since I tasted draught
bitter so I don't recall the flavors very accurately.  Try racking the
beer off the trub, once early in the ferment and then once again, late in
the ferment, two days after adding finings such as gelatin or isinglass
to precipitate out the yeast.  Separating the beer from the yeast will
increase the amount of diacetyl in the finished beer because the yeast
breaks down the diacetyl it made earlier into a flavorless compound who's
name escapes me.  Good luck and please report on your results -- I would
tend to trust your judgement of the accuracy of your bitter then I trust
my judgement.
Al.

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 31 Jan 92 18:45 CST
From: korz at ihlpl.att.com
Subject: LIFE'S GOAL

I live in the southern suburbs of Chicago.  Here, and in most of the
rest of the Chicago metro area, the three most popular beers are
Budweiser, Miller Lite and Heileman's Old Style.  On summer weekends,
I travel through Indiana to southwestern Michigan where I lay on the
beach and sailboard.  Except for a tiny portion of Chicago called
Lincoln Park and one or two exceptions, every corner tavern in my
normal daily travels carries the BIG THREE and none carry Sam Smith's,
Young's, Boulder, Anchor, Sierra Nevada,... well, you get the picture.

One of the primary reasons for my starting in homebrewing is because of
this reason.  I've even taken to drinking water or club soda in local
bars rather than support the BIG THREE.  This brings me to my LIFE'S
GOAL:

TO HAVE FLAVORFUL BEER BE AS COMMON AS THE BIG THREE ARE IN 1992 IN MY
LITTLE CORNER OF THE WORLD.

My thinking may be a little twisted on this, and you are all welcome to
comment, but it won't change my mind: if I can turn a significant
percentage of people in my area on to homebrewing, it will change the
beer-purchasing profile of my area, and subsequently flavorful beer will
be as common as the American Pilsener style is today.  I've still got
a significant portion of my life in which to accomplish this task and
I think it is a truly noble goal.  Recently, some of you have reported
having the laws changed in your states regarding homebrewing.  Well to
this I raise a glass of homebrew and say, "who says you can't fight
City Hall?"

Cheers!
Al "a man with a mission" Korzonas.

Return to table of contents


Date: 	Fri, 31 Jan 1992 10:52:12 -0500
From: hpfcmr.fc.hp.com!hplabs!uunet!bnr-vpa!bnr-rsc!crick (Bill Crick)
Subject: LEAD _> HOT WATER HEATER

Recently I saw articles from people using water from the hot water
tap in their brewing process. I think this is a VERY BAD IDEA!
I have seen several references (books on tea, coffee, water quality,
articles on lead in water....) that say very distinctly not to drink 
water that comes from the hot water tap. The reason is that if your
plumbing system has coper pipes soldered with lead/tin solder, then the 
hot water can have a much higher lead concentration that the cold water.
The reason for this is the hot water dissolves more lead  that the cold 
water. A secondary factor, is the low volume of a cold water pipe allows
flushing the water that has been sitting in the pipes without running a 
very large amount of water. This isn't true of the hot water system, as 
you need to run more that the volume of the water tank to flush the system
(like >40gallons).
 This was all recently confirmed when a friend installed a water filter in 
his house. Several of the info packages he got on filter candidates mentioned 
 the lead from hot water tap issue!!!

SO DON"T USE HOT WATER FROM THE TAP! LEAD CAUSES ARTIFICIAL STUPIDITY!

As an aside, I don't have a hot water heater in my house. I have a cold water
heater. I find that the water coming out of the cold water heater, or
hot water tank to be plenty hot enough, and don't see a need for a hot water
heater;-)


A recent article presented residue from different concentrations of bleach,
I agree that the lower concentrations are sufficient.
HOwever, the residue calculations don't account for repeated rinsing.
If you assume that rinsing the carboy out with a quart of water, removes 
80-90% of wateever is in the last teaspoon he can't get out, then 
3 rinsings would reduce the concetration by 0.2*0.2*0.2 = a factor of .008
 The 80-90% figure is from high school chemistry lesson on how to 
most effeciently use solvents to clean glassware.
Note I ussually do five rinsings.

Bill Crick 

m
v



Return to table of contents


Date: Sat, 1 Feb 92 15:03:10 EST
From: srussell at msc2.msc.cornell.edu (Stephen Russell)
Subject: Quick Survey: Brewclub Members on the HBD

ARE YOU IN A HOMEBREW CLUB?

Do you mind if people are given your e-mail address for referral?

If the answer to both of these questions is 'yes', read on.

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

I think it would be useful for there to be a listing of the e-mail addresses 
of people in various homebrew clubs, in order to promote club membership,
inter-club activities, and the like.

Now and then people on the net ask "is there a homebrew club in ________?" 
or "any homebrewers from _________ on the digest?" or "what about having 
a get-together with homebrewers from _________?"

I have always been curious as to the club affiliations of those of you
in HBD-land, but have refrained from submitting a posting like this because 
such a request might deluge my mail beyond belief.

Well, in a burst of stupidity and motivation, I decided to bite the bullet. 

If you are in a homebrew club, nationally or internationally affiliated or 
not, and wouldn't mind being the subject of a referral, be it to someone
potentially interested in joining your club or someone looking to inform
your club about an upcoming contest or what-have-you, please send me your
e-mail address and club membership as follows:

On the subject header put your state or province and club name first, such as:
CA/San Andreas Malts or WA/Brews Brothers.  Keep the body of your message 
to your name and e-mail address (no .sig 's, please).

For example:

- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: NY/Ithaca Brewers' Union

Body of message:

Steve Russell	srussell at msc2.msc.cornell.edu   srussell at crnlmsc2
- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I'll have it available for anyone who wants it, just to provide information
on homebrewing clubs to people who might be interested.  If you do *not* wish
for random people to send you e-mail, please ignore this posting.

If you are not a club member but are interested in knowing who are members 
of a club in a given area that are on the HBD, wait at least a couple weeks 
and then I'll post instructions as to what format would be easiest for me to 
deal with.  Probably something like..."Subject: Clubs/NY/all" or 
"Subject: Clubs/NY/NYC".

Thanks,

STEVE

srussell at msc2.msc.cornell.edu 	(internet)
srussell at crnlmsc2		(bitnet)


Return to table of contents


Date: Sun, 2 Feb 92 13:00:38 PST
From: bgros at sensitivity.berkeley.edu (Bryan Gros)
Subject: creamy porter problem

I'm appending my recent HBD post:

 >I recently tasted my all-grain porter (first one) against Anchor's
 >Porter.
 >
 >The big thing I noticed was Anchor Porter is thick, creamy.  Mine
 >is low carbonated, but it does not have that creamy feel.  Any
 >idea how this is achieved?
 >
 
Several people have asked for the recipe.  Let me stress that I don't
feel that this beer is bad, just that I guess it could be better.
(Assuming Anchor is my yardstick)  It was my first all grain brew (and
my first porter).

Alcatraz Porter  (3 gal batch)

4.5 lbs barley
4   oz  wheat malt
8   oz  Munich malt
9   oz  Crystal/Chocolate mixture
4   oz  Black Patent
1/4 cp  molasses
1.6 oz  Cascade Hops (5.8AAU)    \
0.5 oz  Mt. Hood Hops (3.8AAU??) / Bittering
0.4 oz  Cascade   (finish)
  Wyyeast English Ale

1.  Add all grains, crushed, to 6qts water at 55C.  Wait 30 min
2.  Raise temp to 62C (Added 2qts boiling water)   Wait 75 min
3.  Raise temp to 75C.  Wait 5 min
4.  Sparge with 75C water
5.  Bring to boil, add molasses, cascade, and mt. hood hops
6.  Boil one hour
7.  Add finishing hops.  Boil 5 min.
8.  Cool down in sink.  Add yeast from starter.
OG : 54
FG : 10 (after ten days)  all in primary fermenter (5gal carboy)
Primed with 3/4 cup dried malt extract.

It has a good malt flavor.  Next time I would cut back on the
hops some.

But how do I get the creamy feel?  more malt?

Thanks.                                  - Bryan



Return to table of contents


Date: Sun, 2 Feb 92 13:28 CST
From: arf at ddsw1.mcs.com (Jack Schmidling)
Subject: EUREKA, Carbonation

 
 To: Homebrew Digest
 Fm: Jack Schmidling
 
                              EUREKA
 
 One of the first things I did when I got my 10 gal SS kettle was to carefully 
 calibrate it inside and out at one gal levels.  I etched the marks in with a 
 Dremmel and then emboldened them with an indellible marker.   This was to 
 allow me to boil until the wort reached the planned volume and take all the 
 guesswork out of it.
 
 Well, I am not sure what happens in a kitchen but I boil my beer outside and 
 in this cold whether, there is so much steam rising from the surface that the 
 marks are just about totally useless.  The visibility is "zero zero" and no 
 change expected till spring.
 
 I also like to hang a thermometer in the wort so I can turn the heat down 
 before it reaches the boilover stage but the same problem forces me to remove 
 the thermometer to read it.  It is likewise difficult to even see the boiling 
 surface to know what is going on.
 
 Well, my experience as a pilot reminded me that in the worst of conditions, 
 one can always see the runway if one is standing on it.  If I could get my 
 head into the kettle, I should be able to see the markings, IF I could get 
 close enough.
 
 However, a far more practical idea occurred to me and I rushed to the 
 "shipping room" and found a two foot cardboard mailing tube.  I held it to my 
 eye and poked it into the cloud bank and EUREKA, "VFR" (that's Visual Flight 
 Rules).  The markings looked like a runway on a sunny day.
 
 Moral:  Little things mean a lot.
 
 From: man at kato.att.com
 Subject: PSI/Temp chart for force carbonation
 
 >I have the above mentioned chart in my hot little hands right now.....
 
 > My guess is no, but I'm a programmer, not a cellar-master. So, what am I 
 missing ?
 
 Well, I'm not a programmer and all the geek talk about this chart is leaving 
 me out in the cold.  Why doesn't someone just post it instead of talking 
 about it?
 
 For what it is worth, I took someone's suggestion and shook the blazes out of 
 the last batch I carbonated and it was fully carbonated in 24 hrs at 30 psi 
 at around 60F.  I was dumbfounded to see the pressure drop 10 to 20 lbs just 
 giving it a good shake.  I just kept doing this till the pressure stopped 
 dropping and let it sit overnight.
 
 The head is thick and creamy and I doubt that I will ever prime beer again.  
 This one happened to be NA and so it eliminates re-inoculating and priming.
 
 ........
 
 The above is sort of pre-empted by most of the other responses and I just 
 caronated a batch of stout, needed for a party next week, in less than 30 min 
 but another question occurred to me that no one seems to have addressed.
 
 Just how much CO2 does it take to carbonate a 5 gal batch?
 
 How many batches can one carbonate with a $15 refill?  The tank seems to last 
 forever when used just for dispensing but I have no feel for how much is used 
 to carbonate and if it is an economic consideration.
 
 js
 

Return to table of contents



End of HOMEBREW Digest #815, 02/03/92