HOMEBREW Digest #815 Mon 03 February 1992

Digest #814 Digest #816

		Rob Gardner, Digest Coordinator

  CAMRA Canada (GARY MASON - I/V/V PCU - 603-884[DTN264]1503  31-Jan-1992 0519)
  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)
  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