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


Contents:
  Syphons (hjl)
  Re: coors light and vinometer (Donald P Perley)
  Priming ("Dean Roy" )
  London -- Breweries???? (wiehn)
  siphoning (James Dipalma)
  Re:  Woodruff (Jeff Mizener)
  Easy sterile yeast transfer (Josh Grosse)
  Jones, set mash, etc (Jack Schmidling)
  copper; woodruff (Pierre Jelenc)
  Keg fermenting (Mitch Gelly)
  re:bringing brew from Europe (Paul Andrews)
  RE: Bringing beer back, igloo cooler (James Dipalma)
  Baking bottles (Phillip Seitz)
  Re: Cooling Wort ("Spencer W. Thomas")
  Re:Sierra Yeast, Jim Busch (jim busch)
  First Timer Question (Lester Paul Diamond)
  Airstat in a freezer? (George Kavanagh)
  Re: Using Cara-pils (David Resch)
  Sierra Nevada Yeast ("Rad Equipment")
  A plea for <= 80 character lines (Jon Binkley)
  RE: Propane/NG indoors (Paul dArmond)
  Baking Bottles ("Rad Equipment")
  labelling (Geoffrey Sherwood)
  Re: The Novice Revisited (Richard Stueven)
  Re: Sassafras for Root Beer (Richard Stueven)
  Hartford Brewery, Bock Beer (JKL)
  no subject (file transmission) (stevie)
  Chicago Tribune Article (stevie)
  Re:  Ice to cool wort (Bruce Hoylman)
  Re: B-Brite (Bob Gorman)


Send articles for __publication__ to homebrew at hpfcmi.fc.hp.com
  (Articles are published in the order they are received.)
Send UNSUBSCRIBE and all other requests, ie, address change, etc.,
  to homebrew-request@ hpfcmi.fc.hp.com
Archives are available via anonymous ftp from sierra.stanford.edu.
    (Those without ftp access may retrieve files via mail from
    listserv at sierra.stanford.edu. Send HELP as the body of a
    message to that address to receive listserver instructions.)
**Please do not send me requests for back issues!**
*********(They will be silenty discarded!)*********
**For Cat's Meow information, send mail to lutzen at novell.physics.umr.edu**


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

Date: Thu, 27 Aug 92 11:28 EDT
From: hjl at gummo.att.com
Subject: Syphons

Starting syphon:  Sterilize hose. Stick enough hose in liquid to be
syphoned so that a length greater than twice the distance from the
surface of the liquid to the top of the container is submerged.
With sterilized fingers (however), fold the hose double (above the
top of container) and pinch the fold between thumb and forefinger,
thus entrapping a length of air (or whatever gas was in the hose)
and enough liquid to reach from the surface over the top of the 
container and down the outside to a point below the liquid level.
Withdraw the hose from the container until the liquid level
is above the top of the container. Fold and pinch the hose at the
liquid level (you may release the first pinch at this point). 
Insert the free end of the hose into the receiving vessel. 
Withdraw the hose from the liquid being careful to keep the end
below the surface. Bring the pinched fold down outside the container
to a point below the surface of the liquid in the container.
Release the pinch. The syphon will start. This process is trivially
simple if the container is full but requires some dexterity if
the liquid level is low. Practice with water. Play with length
of submerged hose until you're comfortable. Smooth motions work
best. 

Regarding bubbles in syphon: Bubbles forming at junction of syphon
"cane" and hose have been addressed. (Pinch the bubble and it goes
away) My experience is that when bubbles form in syphon hoses used
alone, they occur at the point where the hose contacts the edge of 
the vessel being drained. I believe this happens because the hose
flattens at this spot, thereby constricting the flow, locally 
increasing the velocity of the liquid, and therefore, the turbulence
(same flattening, albeit less, occurs at the bend in syphon "canes").
The agitation thus produced drives the carbon dioxide out of solution.
To prevent this one needs to keep the hose round. A short length of
garden hose (~8 inches) slipped over the syphon hose and positioned
at the edge of the container stiffens the system sufficiently
to avoid the problem.

Hank Luer

Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 27 Aug 92 13:19:16 EDT
From: perley at easygoer.crd.ge.com (Donald P Perley)
Subject: Re: coors light and vinometer


What the Light ad didn't mention is that for many brands the "light" beer is 
just the regular beer watered down a bit (I don't know for SURE about Coors).
So the "concentrated Coors light" being tanked around may in fact just be the
normal Coors beer.


On vinometers:

What they measure is sort of a balance between specific gravity and
surface tension.  The implicit assumption is that the alcoholic fluid
has been fermented dry. fine for dry wine, but for beer or sweet wine,
it won't read correctly.  Dry wine has a specific gravity in the range
of .998 or so, while finished homebrew is often around 1.010 (and
varies a lot).


 -don perley

Return to table of contents


Date:         27 Aug 92 14:04:17 EST
From: "Dean Roy" <DEAN at alpha.uwindsor.ca>
Subject:      Priming

    Pardon me if this topic has been discussed before but I am new to
HBD and to brewing.
    I've just racked my first batch of brew into the secondary
fermenter and I am beginning to wonder about bottling and priming.

    What's the best way to mix the priming sugar into the fermented
beer before bottling?

    According to Mr. Papazian's book the sugar syrup should be poured
into a carboy and then the wort siphoned on top of it. Will this
method mix the sugar in well enough or should the beer be stirred
afterwards?
  --------------------------------------------------------------------
  | Dean Roy                        |  Email: DEAN at ALPHA.UWINDSOR.CA |
  | Systems Programmer              |  Voice: (519)253-4232 Ext 2763 |
  | University of Windsor           |  Fax  : (519)973-7083          |
  --------------------------------------------------------------------

Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 25 Aug 92 14:24:58 EDT
From: wiehn at evax.gdc.com
Subject: London -- Breweries????

I'm off to London for 8 days early next month and would like to tour a local
brewery or two while there.  Does anyone know if there are any breweries open
to the public for tours in London???

While I'm there can anyone suggest some good pubs to try??  Which local brews
should I try -- which should I avoid??

Thanks!!!

John Wiehn
Email: WIEHN at EVAX.GDC.COM

Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 27 Aug 92 16:57:39 EDT
From: dipalma at banshee.sw.stratus.com (James Dipalma)
Subject: siphoning



	Hi All,

		There has been considerable discussion in this forum and RCB
	recently regarding procedures for handling of siphon tubes, surgical
	gloves, etc.  I'd like to relate an experience from a high school biology
	course.
		The course instructor came in one day with a culture containing
	some kind of common bacteria (I can't recall which kind, this happened
	almost 25 years ago).  She placed some of the culture on an sterile petri 
	dish with no growth medium, and put it aside.  The next day, examination
	of the culture under a microscope revealed the culture was completely
	dead, as there was nothing in the petri dish on which it could feed.
	She then took another sample of living bacteria from the original,
	healthy culture, and placed it in the palm of her hand for one minute.
	She scraped the culture off her hand, and placed it on a slide.  This
	culture was almost completely dead, there were only a few cells
	remaining that were left alive!
		The lesson for that day was that human skin contains a natural
	bacteriacide that protects us from all those airborne micro-nasties that
	we all go to such great lengths to keep out of our beer.  It's what enables
	us to live in the air without being ill constantly.
	
	DISCLAIMER:
	I have absolutely no background in medical science, but I did observe this
	firsthand.  I have also brewed over 200 batches of beer in the past seven 
	years, and have never had an infection that was the result of touching
	siphon tubes with my hands.  I even start my siphon by forming an "o-ring"
	over the end of the tube with my thumb and forefinger, for the purpose of
	avoiding direct contact with my mouth.  Now, I would'nt recommend racking
	beer after changing the oil in the family car, but I feel as long as
	brewers keep their hands clean, touching a siphon tube will not cause an
	infection.  IMHO, wearing surgical gloves, etc., qualifies as excessive
	worry.
		If there are any net.brewers with training in medicine/biology out
	there that know more about this than I do, perhaps they would care to
	comment.

                                         Cheers,
                                          Jim





Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 27 Aug 92 16:53:43 EDT
From: avalon!jm at siemens.siemens.com (Jeff Mizener)
Subject: Re:  Woodruff

	From: Alan Mayman <maymanal at scvoting.fvo.osd.mil>

	After sampling a May wine from a local winery I was very
	impressed with the flavor of Woodruf(f?).  If anyone has
	used this herb before in mead or beer...
	
In Berlin people drink Berliner Weisse, a sour-tasting Weizenbier,
out of glasses that could best be described (with my limited eloquence)
as a half of a small fishbowl or an half-sphere ice cream sundae
glass.

Into this (IMHO unpalatable) beer they introduce one of two additives:

	Raspberry Syrup (red)
		or
	Woodruf Extract.

Its being neither "Hopfen" nor "Malz" would preclude its being used in
German beers.  I don't like the stuff, but it is "interesting".

Cheers,
	Jeff
	jm at sead.siemens.com

Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 26 Aug 92 18:30:32 EDT
From: jdg at grex.ann-arbor.mi.us (Josh Grosse)
Subject: Easy sterile yeast transfer

Avoiding infection during yeast culturing on plates or
slants is imperative.  Several methods are used to reduce
the chance of infection, such as:

     o    working very quickly, so that plates and slants
          have a minumum exposure to the environment

     o    making multiple plates or slants at the same time,
          to increase the chance of successful transfer

     o    wearing a mask and/or hat

     o    wiping down the work area with 200ppm chlorine.

Truly sterile transfer is not easily accomplished in the
home environment without building a sterile box.

Here's a simple, cheap, easy way to build a sterile box,
without needing any skill or special materials whatsoever(my
requirements).  The only tools required to build it are
scissors and tape.  This box design came from a friend who
uses one to culture orchids instead of yeast, but the
requirements are the same.

Ingredients:

     Cardboard box
     Aluminum foil
     Plastic wrap (eg: Saran)
     Plastic dishwashing gloves (eg: Playtex)
     Spray bottle
     Chlorine

To sterilize equipment and materials going into the box, use
whatever you use to sterilize slants and plates, such as:

     Canning jars (eg: Mason)
     Pressure canner (15 minutes at 15 psi)

Building your sterile box:

  1. Cut all four of the top flaps off the box.
  2. Cut down two sides at an angle to make a work area
     opening, leaving a lip on the bottom, like so:

          Side View                     Front View

          |------\                      |         |
          |       \                     |         |
          |        \                    |         |
          |         \                   |         |
          |          \                  |         |
          |           \                 |         |
          |            |                |---------|
          |------------|                |---------|

  3. Line the inside with aluminum foil.  Leave no cardboard
     exposed.
  4. Tape your plastic wrap to the back of the box, so that
     it drapes over the opening you've cut.


When you sterilize your slants and plates, also sterilize
your transfer equipment, such as loops or eyedroppers (the
latter for making slants from Wyeast).  Do this by sealing
them in canning jars (with a little water) prior to pressure
canning 'em.  Also, can a plain jar of sterile water to use
as a rinse.

Put on your gloves, place all equipment inside the box, and
spray 200ppm chlorine onto the box walls, floor, the plastic
wrap, and the exterior of all your slants, tubes, canning
jars, and the gloves themselves.

Dip anything that comes in contact with your yeast samples
in the sterile water to rinse off the chlorine prior to
opening it.

Tada!  It's not a thousand dollar sterile hood, but it beats
the kitchen table and allows you to work a little more
slowly..Also, if the box gets ratty from use it's real easy
to make a new one.
- -----------------------------------------------------------------
Josh Grosse                              jdg at grex.ann-arbor.mi.us

Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 27 Aug 92 17:00 CDT
From: arf at ddsw1.mcs.com (Jack Schmidling)
Subject: Jones, set mash, etc

 
 To: Homebrew Digest
 Fm: Jack Schmidling
 
 >To: FRANK at VA5549.Colorado.EDU (Franklin R. Jones)
 
 Mail to you is bouncing.  Please send postal address.
 
 >From: thomasf at deschutes.ico.tek.com (Thomas D. Feller)
 
 >Ok, now about my second all grain brew. I got a stopped sparge,
 
 >I used the grain mill at my local homebrew store and I believe I got too
 fine a crush and this caused my mash problems... So the point here if you 
 have a poor flow rate look to the crush first and not the size of the holes 
 in you manifold.
 
 If it was a roller mill, designed for malt, it is not likely your problem.
 
 I hate to sound like a broken record but my guess is that your mash cooled 
 off.  To resolve the question, you need to check the temp of the mash from 
 top to bottom.  The bare minimum is to take a reading of the run off.
 
 I do not think the hole size is very important because it is the husks that 
 do the filtering.  The holes just keep the husks from clogging the spigot. 
 What is probably happening is that your thick mash, which consists mainly of 
 sugar and starch is turning to glue because of the temp and glogging the 
 holes.
 
 The solution is hotter sparge water.  My system is no doubt different from 
 yours but (in spite of all contrary advice) I use boiling water and my runoff 
 is only around 140 to 150F but that is aparently enough to prevent glue 
 formation.
 
 >From: wegeng.henr801c at xerox.com
 
 >A friend of mine (who is a home winemaker) has told me about a device called 
 a "vinometer" which is used by winemakers to determine the amount of alcohol 
 in their wine....  My friend claims that he has tested his vinometer
 with whiskey and other alcoholic beverages of known alcohol strength, and 
 it`s always been correct.
 
 >Has anyone ever heard of this device?
 
 Sure.  Most brew/wine shops carry them.  They work very well but, 
 unfortunately, only on dry wine and booz.  They are totally useless for beer.  
 Mine says about 7% no matter what kind of beer I put in it, even NA.
 
 js

Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 27 Aug 92 22:12:13 EDT
From: Pierre Jelenc at cunixf.cc.columbia.edu
Subject: copper; woodruff

In HBD # 956, Tom Feller is getting problems with copper in his brew.
Copper is quite poisonous, and can cause severe disorders, especially
colic, diarrhea, and vomiting (and that's at low doses). I would
recommend using the contaminated brews as slug bait.

Copper is not such a problem at the beginning of the brewing process
(copper kettle, lauter tun, chiller, etc) because yeast uses some copper
for growth, and most of the rest precipitates into the trub as complexes
with tannins.  Once the beer has cleared, however, any additional copper
will stay in solution.

Alan Mayman asked about woodruff. There was a long discussion on the
subject last year in the Beer Forum on Compuserve. From a German friend,
I learned that woodruff has to be gathered early, as it just flowers,
for best aroma. Then last summer, while visiting my parents in France, I
found out that my father has a fairly nice patch of it in the back of
the garden. It is a very unprepossessing plant with round leaves, the
kind one would never pay attention to, although it is said that the
little white flowers are very pretty.

The aroma of woodruff is that of coumarin, and it is the basis of the
green syrup that the Berliners put in their Berliner Weisse when they
are not putting raspberry.

Pierre



Pierre Jelenc                        pcj1 at cunixf.cc.columbia.edu 
                                    Columbia University, New York

Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 27 Aug 92 11:54:39 CDT
From: gelly at persoft.com (Mitch Gelly)
Subject: Keg fermenting

Greetings,

Our mail got held up, and I just received two HBD's today, so the following
may be slightly dated....

In one of Jacks previous posts... [ sorry, can't remember the issue # ]

 >  Friday's Chicago Tribune had a great article on homebrewing.... [good!]
 
    [ ... deletia ... ]
 
 > What was even more peculiar was that the third picture was indeed of a 
 > MALTMILL, but it was cropped in such a way that all one could see was the 
 > hopper full of grain and the logo carefully excluded.
 
 > Now this normally would not bother anyone except that there was no shortage 
 > of plugs in the article for gizmos for sale and places to buy, associated 
 > with others in the article.
 
 > Do I detect a conspiracy?
 
I would suspect not a conspiracy, but whether the editor of the Tribune has
a USENET account, or reads the HBD .... ;-D

Okay, now the real reason I'm here today. I was wondering if it would be
possible to ferment in the primary as normal, and before the fermenting is
complete rack into a 5 gal. soda keg, seal up, and let the ferment finish
in there. 

I realize you'd probably have to time it right, but would that not eliminate
the need to prime? Would the finishing ferment provide the carbonation? Am
I risking death and dismemberment if I do this too soon?

Has this been beaten to death before? :->

Cheers,

  Mitch

- -- 
   - Mitch Gelly -     | ... upon being captured or killed, my employers
software QA specialist |     will disavow any knowledge of me or my posts ...
    and zymurgist      | 
 - gelly at persoft.com -  | this .sig will self destruct in five seconds .....

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 09:44:27 -0400 (EDT)
From: Paul Andrews <PANDREWS at HPB.HWC.CA>
Subject: re:bringing brew from Europe

re: bringing beer back from Europe.
I don't know about Europe.. but I used to live in Texas about 3
years ago and would visit my friends back in Toronto on a regular
basis.  I had NO problem bringing back large amounts of beer!  I
recall one time clearing US customs at the Toronto airport and they
asked the usual questions.. how long staying  etc.. when I was
asked if I had anything to declare... I simply unzipped my hockey
bag I had to carry my junk onto the plane and showed the customs
guy the 24 king cans of Molson Export I had.  He just looked at it
and said " I guess it's real hot in Texas"  and stamped my
passport!  (mmm....memories of the Shiner Brewery... Shiner Texas..
just outside of Austin)..
Paul Andrews: Health and Welfare Canada, Ottawa, Ontario
pandrews at hpb.hwc.ca

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 28 Aug 92 10:23:37 EDT
From: dipalma at banshee.sw.stratus.com (James Dipalma)
Subject: RE: Bringing beer back, igloo cooler


	Hi All,

	In HBD#957, Chuck Cox writes:

	>>It is extremely rare taht
	>>returning Americans get their bags opened.

	>I have to strongly disagree with this statement.

	  I have to go along with Chuck on this one, I have traveled extensively
	in Europe, Mexico, and the Carribean, always on a civilian passport.
	I have always breezed through customs when entering another country,
	the only times I was ever searched was re-entering my own country.
	Chuck is also correct that Boston is horrible.  I was searched there
	because I was carrying a single bottle of gin through for a 
	travelling companion.  You get one bottle duty free, so I had'nt
	put it down on the declaration form.  I was detained for 20 minutes
	while they searched through three suitcases full of dirty laundry.
	Poetic justice, I suppose.
	  Another horrible re-entry point is at the Mexican border at San
	Ysidro.  The pinheads down there think that if you're young, male,
	and carrying a bag then you are obviously smuggling drugs.  Our
	tax dollars at work. *SIGH*

	  Sorry for turning this into soc.politics or alt.drugs, gang, I did
	actually have a brewing related question.  I recently aquired an
	Igloo 10 gallon round cooler, which I'd like to use for both mashing
	and sparging.  The problem is the spigot is one of those push button
	types.  I had planned to remove the spigot, bore out the hole with
	a hole saw, and replace it with the plastic tap from my existing
	lauter tun.  A friend advised me that it's difficult to reseal these
	coolers once the original spigot is removed.  He suggested I cut the
	end off the original spigot and replace it with a small threaded
	brass faucet.  The problem is it's not obvious where to make the cut.
	The push button portion meets with the spout where the liquid comes
	out, I would have to cut it absolutely flush with the outer wall of
	the cooler to get a round hole.  Anywhere else along the spigot, and
	the hole would be oblong, and would'nt take a threaded tap without
	leaking.
		Anyone else done this? (Kevin, I know you're out there).  Any
	advice would be appreciated.


                                             Thanks,
                                              Jim


                                         Cheers,
                                          Jim





Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 28 Aug 92 14:13 GMT
From: Phillip Seitz <0004531571 at mcimail.com>
Subject: Baking bottles

Recently an HBD reader inquired about sanitizing bottles, and one
respondant described his process for heat sanitizing.  In summary,
this consisted of cleaning the bottles, covering them with a 2" x
2" aluminum foil "cap", and then baking them for 1.5 hours at
400 degrees.

I use an identical procedure, with the exception that I bake at
200 degrees for about half an hour.  To be exact, I fill the 
oven and close it, turn on the heat, and turn it off after half
an hour.  As I understand it, sanitizing requires 170 degree
heat, with a contact time of about 15 minutes.  200 at 20 minutes
or so therefore already has a fudge factor built in.  I've never
had a problem with a contaminated bottle.

I might also add that sanitizing with the aluminum cap on means
you can leave the bottle unfilled for some time without losing
your sanitary state.  I'm too nervous to let my baked bottles
sit for weeks, but I have done bottles the day before bottling.
This is particularly convenient when you'll be bottling at
someone else's house--you can show up with two cases ready to
go.  (Note: remove the aluminum foil before bottling!)

My thanks to the infamous Mr. Pete, brew-devil of the great
Northwest, for suggesting this technique.

Last thoughts: I can fit a case of bottles into my oven.
At 200 you can remove the bottles relatively quickly, and they
don't take too long to cool--I've baked my bottles, set them
out, and bottled within about 45 minutes.

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 28 Aug 92 10:41:18 EDT
From: "Spencer W. Thomas" <Spencer.W.Thomas at med.umich.edu>
Subject: Re: Cooling Wort

Why chill your wort before the primary?

In no particular order:

1. You can pitch sooner.  (Reduces infection risk.)
2. You can do a full-volume boil (helps with hop utilization -- you
   can use less hops, and reduces caramelization).  Note that with
   all-grain brewing you have to do a full-volume boil.
3. You get the "cold break" in the kettle (if you use an immersion
   chiller) instead of in the fermenter.  Reduces trub volume in the
   fermenter and generally makes for a cleaner ferment (IMHO).
4. You have less risk of oxidation when transfering the wort from the
   kettle to the fermenter.  In fact, you can aerate during the
   transfer or immediately after (or before, I suppose).  At a
   minimum, oxidation will darken your wort.  It can also lead to
   off-flavors (Note to potential flamers: I said "It CAN ...", not
   "It WILL".
5. I pitch the yeast into the brew kettle while the trub is settling.
   This way it (presumably) gets to use some of the nice proteinaceous
   material in the "break", but it doesn't sit on it throughout the
   whole fermentation.
6. You don't risk cracking your carboy with hot wort.

=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, 28 Aug 92 10:50:16 EDT
From: jim busch <busch at daacdev1.stx.com>
Subject: Re:Sierra Yeast, Jim Busch

 Steve Kennedy wrote this in a recent digest:


> From: Steve Kennedy <kennedy at ranger.enet.dec.com>
> Subject: Yeast in SN's bottles/Foxx Equip
> 
> Through another homebrew forum I was told that according to Dr Martin Shiller
> of The Yeast Culture Kit Co., SN yeast out of the bottle is not the same as
> their brewing yeast. According to him, SN cold filters the beer and then adds
> a special conditioning yeast when they bottle.  Therefore what you get form
> the bottle isn't what SN uses for brewing.  That said, I've heard people 
> have made brew using this "special conditioning yeast" with good results.
> 
> 

 I thought I needed to clarify this since I am the network access for 
 Dr. Schiller.  I just got off the phone with martin and we cleared up
 this confusion.  We had a discussion a while back about different 
 breweries that ferment with one yeast and condition with another.  The
 obvious ones that come to mind are Bavarian HefeWeizens (top fermented
 with a single cell culture from Weinhenstephan that produces Banana
 esters and copious anoumts of phenolics due to the production of
 4-vinyl guaiacol, filtered and repitched with a flocculant lager
 strain) and Belgium Ales (fermented with almost any mix of strains and
 often conditioned with another strain).  Somehow this concept got 
 confused with the process that Sierra Nevada employs.  Sierra brews 
 all of thier excellent ales with the same strain, an ale yeast that
 apparently originated from Narragansett (sp?).  After primary 
 fermentation is complete, the beer is filtered (I believe they sterile
 filter) and force carbonated in the bright beer tank.  The carbonation
 level is above 2 atmospheres (about 90+% of the final carbonation).
 After this stage, the beer is primed with about 4 pounds of the SAME
 ale yeast per 200 BBls.  This is an incredibly small amount of yeast
 for bottle conditioning and would not work well without the previous
 force carbonation of the product. This yeast then produces the final
 carbonation level desired.  This method has numerous advantages over
 traditional krausening in that the initial product filtering helps
 to maintain quality control (remove any fermentation affected yeast 
 cells, provide a sterile environment) possible fermentation modified
 stage allows the brewery to only add a minute amount of yeast (ever
 noticed how little yeast sediment is in a Sierra product?)
 
 Hope this helps clear up the confusion.  Look for an upcoming post
 So, the yeast many of us culture from the Sierra bottles is actually
 the same yeast as that used in the fermentation, just healthier.
 Dont forget to culture up 1 liter for all five gallon starters.

 on my Counterflow, parallel-chiller from hell!

 Jim Busch
 busch at daacdev1.stx.com


Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 10:43:19 -0400 (EDT)
From: Lester Paul Diamond <ld0h+ at andrew.cmu.edu>
Subject: First Timer Question

I started my first brew on Tuesday night.  I think I did everything
right so far.  By Wednesday morning my airlock was bubbling away.  The
thing is that by Friday morning the bubbling appears to have stopped. 
It may be bubbling slowing, but I didn't stand around to check.  There
may be nothing wrong, but I've never been down this path before, so I'm
not sure.  Any advice or reassurances would be appreciated.

Also, I'll be bottling next week, and I'm a bit concerned about
sanitizing the bottles.  I was going to use Chlorox in a large barrel
and soak the bottle for a short time, then take then out and empty them.
 Ater that I was thinking of running them through a rinse and dry cycle
in my dishwasher.  Would this be OK?  What if I just rinsed the bottles
by hand and allowed them to drain upside down for a while?

Thanks in advance.  I'm excited about this first round.
 
Lester 

Return to table of contents


Date:         28 Aug 92 09:56:57 EST
From: George Kavanagh <GEORGE.KAVANAGH at office.wang.com>
Subject:      Airstat in a freezer?

I have an unused chest-type freezer that would be perfect for fermentation if
I could control the temperature.  Years ago I rigged it up with a "cold roo
thermostat to keep quantities of beer cool for parties, and it worked well
enough, but the temp. varied quite a bit. ( I rigged up 2 muffin fans in a
platform on the floor of the freezer to keep the air circulating on the theory
that very chilly air would collect at the lower levels.)  I have heard
"Hunter Airstat" mentioned on the HBD: how closely will it regulate temp. in
such a freezer??  Does anyone have experience in this area?  Also, where can I
get said Airstat device, if it is recommended??  Thx -gk

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 28 Aug 92 09:01:16 MDT
From: resch at craycos.com (David Resch)
Subject: Re: Using Cara-pils

Tim McNerney writes:

>Seeing as how I am interested in trying new stuff in my beer, I picked up
>some cara-pils on my last visit to the homebrew store.  Upon consulting
>Papazian I learned that cara-pils needed to be mashed, but that it 
>contained no enzymes itself.

I don't believe that cara-pils malt has to be mashed.  Cara-pils (dextrin malt)
is produced in much the same way as crystal malt, but kilned at a much lower
temperature so as to impart little or no color.  The process used to produce
crystal and dextrin malt essentially "mashes" the grain in the husk.  The malt
is held at a temperature near the upper limit of the saccharification range in
a 100% humidity environment for a period of time and then kilned.  Thus, the 
starches in the grain are converted primarily to dextrins which is exactly what
we want in order to add body, head retention, a little residual sweetness, etc.
to our beer.

A while back there was quite a debate in this forum as to whether these dextrins
will be converted to simpler sugars during mashing and whether or not mashing
negates the effect we are trying to achieve by adding them in the first place.
As always many of us have our own opinions on this topic...

As for throwing in a chicken beak and the heart of a cow killed at a full moon
along with the Cara-pils, I always do this.  Doesn't everyone?  ;^)

Dave

Return to table of contents


Date: 28 Aug 92 08:36:40 U
From: "Rad Equipment" <rad_equipment at rad-mac1.ucsf.EDU>
Subject: Sierra Nevada Yeast

Subject:  Sierra Nevada Yeast                   Time:8:12 AM     Date:8/28/92
Steve Kennedy writes:

>Through another homebrew forum I was told that according to
>Dr Martin Shiller of The Yeast Culture Kit Co., SN yeast out
>of the bottle is not the same as their brewing yeast. According
>to him, SN cold filters the beer and then adds a special 
>conditioning yeast when they bottle.  Therefore what you get form
>the bottle isn't what SN uses for brewing.  That said, I've heard
>people have made brew using this "special conditioning yeast" with
>good results.

This is partially correct. I have it from Steve Harrison at the brewery that
they do filter their Pale Ale and then introduce yeast for culturing in the
bottle. The yeast which is used is a washed version of the same yeast used to
ferment the ale in the first place. So, while it isn't the exact yeast which
fermented that particular batch, it is the same yeast strain.

As long as we're talking SN yeast, Steve also told me that they do not re-use
the yeast which goes into Bigfoot or Celebration Ale. They use the same yeast
as for the Pale Ale but find that after the yeast gets through the higher
alcohol fermentations of the other two products it mutates and behaves "very
strangely". The yeast is dumped after these seasonal beers are brewed.

This discussion was prompted when I tried to brew a Celebration clone using
yeast from 3 bottles of last years' Celebration Ale. The yeast behaved like
lager yeast in that it never formed the typical SN pancake, nor much of any
foam on the surface of the primary. The beer came out fine, but I wouldn't do
it again because of the unpredictability of the yeast. Other brewers I have
spoken with have had similar experiences when trying to culture from Bigfoot
bottles.

I use SN yeast (from bottles) for all of my ales and have never had a problem.
I take the dregs from 3 bottles and put them into a 1200 ml wort at about 1.035
with 1/8 teaspoon of nutrient. The starter is ready for use in 4 - 5 days. My
10 gallon primaries take off within 6 hours.

RW...

      Russ Wigglesworth              CI$:      72300,61
|~~|  UCSF Medical Center            Internet: Rad Equipment at RadMac1.ucsf.edu
|HB|\ Dept. of Radiology, Rm. C-324  Voice:    415-476-3668 / 474-8126 (H)
|__|/ San Francisco, CA 94143-0628


Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 28 Aug 92 09:49:20 -0600
From: Jon Binkley <binkley at beagle.Colorado.EDU>
Subject: A plea for <= 80 character lines


Just a friendly reminder that some of us read the Digest on
antiquated equipment.  My piece of sh** terminal, for example,
doesn't even wrap lines properly, so any line over 80 chars.
is hopelessly garbled.  I missed much of two very interesting
articles in today's digest.

Thanks for your consideration!!

Jon Binkley

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 08:31:34 -0700 (PDT)
From: Paul dArmond <paulf at henson.cc.wwu.edu>
Subject: RE: Propane/NG indoors

In HBD 579, Steve Anatasi asks about relative merits and safety of propane
vs natural gas.  For indoor use, **good ventilation** is very important. 
In a closed space, a burner can snarfle up a lot of the oxygen and replace
it with CO2 and (to a much lesser extent) carbon monoxide.  This doesn't
bother the beer, but it might make you ill.  Assuming the burners are
working properly, there isn't much difference in the exhaust gasses from
the two fuels.

There is a considerable difference in safety, if you have a gas leak. 
Propane is heavier than air, tends to flow and pool like invisible
gasoline.  Propane also has a much wider explosive mixture % with air.  If
you are going to use propane indoors, test all your gas joints with soap
solution to be sure they are leak-free.

Another Great Moment in Brewing History:  I once had an exciting adventure
with an indoor propane leak.  A supply hose for a burner on a bench-top
developed a leak.  My spark lighter ran out of flint after I had opened
the tank valve.  I turned the gas off at the burner, but this left the
leaky hose still going.  Because I had opened the valve without lighting
the gas, there was some gas odor.  I walked across the room, got a new
flint and went back to the burner.  I opened the burner valve and
WHOOOMMMP!! 

Suddenly I had the entire benchtop aflame, with the flames spilling off
the edge of the counter like a Niagra Falls of fire.  As the fire hit the
floor, it flashed the pool of propane that had collected around my feet. 
It was all over in the blink of an eye (now missing eyebrows).  I was VERY
surprised.  I was very lucky that I hadn't dithered any longer getting the
flint for the lighter.

Propane does not need to be enclosed in order to be explosive.  A friend
of mine once watched his boss get tossed twenty feet by a propane
explosion in an open storage nook on the outside of a building.

All these horror stories aside, many homes and trailers use propane for
heat and cooking.  I have two burners that I use for brewing.  Propane is
less expensive to get started with, is more expensive per BTU.  NG costs
less to use and more to install.  Use good ventilation and test for leaks.

Paul de Armond -- Coor's Rocky Mt. VA sounds like intent to deceive....


Return to table of contents


Date: 28 Aug 92 09:02:38 U
From: "Rad Equipment" <rad_equipment at rad-mac1.ucsf.EDU>
Subject: Baking Bottles

Subject:  Baking Bottles                        Time:8:57 AM     Date:8/28/92
David Klumpp outlines his method of sanitizing bottles in the oven. I have been
using a similar approach.

I use Anchor bottles and clean them as they empty, then soak them overnight in
a mild bleach solution just prior to bottling. I then rinse with a jet-washer
and hot tap water. Differing from Dave, I heat the rinsed, but still wet,
bottles to 350 degrees and hold for 30 minutes. I figure the steam action
produced helps a bit. I then allow the bottles to cool slowly to prevent
cracking. I bottle as soon as the bottles are cool enough to handle. I warn you
that I don't bottle too often. Perhaps a batch of barleywine and a holiday
batch each year. Nevertheless, barleywine from 2 years ago is still clean and
beast-free.

RW...

      Russ Wigglesworth              CI$:      72300,61
|~~|  UCSF Medical Center            Internet: Rad Equipment at RadMac1.ucsf.edu
|HB|\ Dept. of Radiology, Rm. C-324  Voice:    415-476-3668 / 474-8126 (H)
|__|/ San Francisco, CA 94143-0628


Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 28 Aug 92 09:07:24 -0700
From: sherwood at mv.us.adobe.com (Geoffrey Sherwood)
Subject: labelling

Well, everybody else has posted their labelling strategy; might as well join
the fun.  I used the dots like several other posters, white ones mostly (cause
they didn't have colored ones in my earlier bottling days).  I would take a
date stamp and stamp the bottling date on all of them, then write enough
description above and below the date to identify it.  M/F Amber, HT was a
common one (Munton & Fison Amber, Halletauer hops).  Sure, it took a few
minutes to write out 50 of these, but really not very long.  When I was at
max production I was about 7 batches ahead, drinking 5 or 6 of them at once.
I would never have kept a cryptic batch number straight, but a simple
'IH Bitter' (Iron Horse Bitter), 'Georgie Brown Ale' or whatever meant I --
and my guests -- always knew what we were getting.
	Geoff Sherwood

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 28 Aug 92 09:49:01 PDT
From: gak at wrs.com (Richard Stueven)
Subject: Re: The Novice Revisited

>Then there is the Peculiar Pub located on Bleeker St. in Greenwich
>Village

That's "Peculier", as in "Old".  Eight million bottled beers at least.

Last time I was there, they threw me out.  My crime:  being there by
myself, instead of with a crowd of drunken posers.  That was probably
six years ago; maybe things have changed since then.

gak

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 28 Aug 92 09:54:52 PDT
From: gak at wrs.com (Richard Stueven)
Subject: Re: Sassafras for Root Beer

>Note that this product contains a carcinogen (according to earlier
>posts). USE AT YOUR OWN RISK!!!

Will you guys knock it of about sassafrass already?

EVERYTHING IN THE WORLD is a carcinogen!

We're all going to die anyway...let's have a little fun on our way.

Jeez.

gak

Return to table of contents


Date: 28 Aug 1992 11:43:01 -0600 (MDT)
From: JKL <JLAWRENCE at UH01.Colorado.EDU>
Subject: Hartford Brewery, Bock Beer

   Recently I was on vacation in southern RI and managed to make a
side trip to Hartford and The Hartford Brewery (on Pearl St., I
believe).  My husband, 2 small children and I arrived about 2:30 pm
on a Tuesday, and the place was virtually deserted.  The service
was mediocre, at best, even with only 1 other customer.

   Also, I didn't even like the beer!  It's very possible that my
tastes are too pedestrian, and the beers offered a bit exotic.  Has
anyone out there tried these three (I got a sampler) and could tell
me what it is that I tasted that I didn't like?  For you hopheads, I
think they were all VERY strongly hopped . . .

    Kolsch           OG 1.038      very hoppy, golden color
    Pitbull Golden   OG 1.042      even more hoppy, golden
    Bacchus Ale      OG 1.062      dark brown, carmelized flavor,
				      slightly sweet, burned(?)

All 3 were moderately carbonated, and all seemed to me to have an
unpleasant bitter aftertaste.  They were brewing an IPA that day,
but I couldn't wait around for it to be ready ;-).

   Thanks to all those who sent me suggestions for breweries in that area.
Sorry this is the only one I got to.

   From the Longmont (Colorado) Daily Times-Call, L.M. Boyd's column:

	Q.  Why is a goat always used as a symbol for Bock beer?
	A.  Bock is the German word for goat.  It was only in March that
		the Germans made that bock beer, and according to the 
		old astrological tables, March was the goat month.


 - JKL

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 28 Aug 92 14:21:24 CDT
From: stevie at spss.com
Subject: no subject (file transmission)

A number of people who are not from the Chicago area have asked me off-line
about the recent Chicago Tribune article on homebrewing.  It's true I had
some quibbles with Jack Schmidling's comments on it, but on one thing we
agree completely -- the article was great.  In fact, it's certainly the best
I've ever seen on our avocation in the general press.  Homebrew clubs and sup-
pliers might very well want to use this as an introduction to the uninitiated.

With that in mind, I would be pleased to provide copies to interested parties.
There is no charge.  I'd consider it a public service.  Just reply to me 
directly at the Internet address below.  Please DO NOT send responses to the    
Homebrew Digest.

Cheers!

 +------------------+---------------------------+---------------------------+
 |  Steve Hamburg   | Internet: stevie at spss.com | "Life is short, and so    |
 |  SPSS Inc.       | Phone:    312/329-3445    | are some brewers."        |
 |  Chicago, IL     | Fax:      312/329-3657    |                           |
 +------------------+---------------------------+---------------------------+

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 28 Aug 92 14:23:25 CDT
From: stevie at spss.com
Subject: Chicago Tribune Article

A number of people who are not from the Chicago area have asked me off-line
about the recent Chicago Tribune article on homebrewing.  It's true I had
some quibbles with Jack Schmidling's comments on it, but on one thing we
agree completely -- the article was great.  In fact, it's certainly the best
I've ever seen on our avocation in the general press.  Homebrew clubs and sup-
pliers might very well want to use this as an introduction to the uninitiated.

With that in mind, I would be pleased to provide copies to interested parties.
There is no charge.  I'd consider it a public service.  Just reply to me 
directly at the Internet address below.  Please DO NOT send responses to the    
Homebrew Digest.

Cheers!

 +------------------+---------------------------+---------------------------+
 |  Steve Hamburg   | Internet: stevie at spss.com | "Life is short, and so    |
 |  SPSS Inc.       | Phone:    312/329-3445    | are some brewers."        |
 |  Chicago, IL     | Fax:      312/329-3657    |                           |
 +------------------+---------------------------+---------------------------+

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 28 Aug 92 13:24:03 MDT
From: Bruce Hoylman <bruce at advtech.uswest.com>
Subject: Re:  Ice to cool wort


I've done on the order of a dozen or so mostly extract brews with,
getting fancier and fancier with adjuncts as I begin to understand the
process.  A co-worker who got me interested in brewing showed me how
he cooled the wort by dumping it into a food-grade plastic primary
that was filled with ~10lbs of ice.  Nothing special ... just ice one
can purchase at the grocery store!  He's always done it that way, and
that's the way I've done it too.  I've not had *any* problems with
this process to date, and I've really put some interesting beers
together in the process.  I find that the ice brings the wort done to
temperature VERY quickly.

I don't plan on changing my methods of wort chilling at this point.
Maybe if I get more into all-grain brews (which I have ambitions of
doing once I get bored with extracts) I'll change, but I'm more than
satisfied with my current process and what comes out, namely a brew
that I can call my own and one that is superior to most that can be
purchased over the counter.

Just my 2 bits worth.

Peace.

Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 17:19:54 EDT
From: bob at rsi.com (Bob Gorman)
Subject: Re: B-Brite

In HBD #953, Bob Gorman asks about B-Brite vs. non-chlorine bleach.

To which Pierre Jelenc replies;

> "Sodium percarbonate" is the common name of a molecular compound of
> sodium carbonate and hydrogen peroxide, that for practical purposes
> behaves like hydrogen peroxide itself.
> 
> Sodium perborate in non-chlorine Clorox is another "active oxygen"
> compound, this time truly the salt of a peracid.
> 
> Peracids and peroxides all act similarly, by oxidizing organic materials,
> especially proteins in the case of sanitizers.

Ok, that was great!  Now let's see if we can put this into practical
terms.  I could therefore _assume_;

1) That non-chlorine bleach could be used in place of B-Brite as a
   _cleaning_ agent.

2) That non-chlorine bleach could be used in place of B-Brite as a
   _sanitizing_ agent.

Does this make sense?

Can anyone offer more insight into the wonders of B-Brite vs.
non-chlorine bleach?

Thanks,

- -- Bob Gorman                   bob at rsi.com           Watertown MA US --
- -- Relational Semantics, Inc    uunet!semantic!bob    +1 617 926 0979 --

Return to table of contents



End of HOMEBREW Digest #958, 08/31/92