Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #0814
This file received at Mthvax.CS.Miami.EDU 92/01/31 03:10:59
HOMEBREW Digest #814 Fri 31 January 1992
FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
Rob Gardner, Digest Coordinator
Contents:
Book on building a small brewery (John S. Link)
no-alcohol yeast (dave ballard)
RE: Expensive Beer (JPJ)
Shipping via UPS (trwagner)
BBK Tour, HBD #812 (Sgt John "iceberg" Bergmann)
Drinking Water (Joe Freeland)
Coffee in beer (ingr!b11!mspe5!guy)
Re: Be wary of CAMRA Canada (MIKE LIGAS)
Beer Across America (Bill Dyer)
Coffee in beer. (Bill Dyer)
Re: To Blow-off or Not? (korz)
SS Fittings?? ("John Cotterill")
pre-crushed grains and basil beer (Bryan Gros)
Anchor Porter (Bryan Gros)
Sanitizing with Bleach (Darren Evans-Young)
*Old* style homebrewing (Carl West)
UPS Problems ("Rad Equipment")
UPS Problems Time:10:12 AM Date:1/30/92
Sanitary Method to Start Siphons (slezakl)
Re: Homebrew Digest #813 (January 30, 1992) (Richard Childers)
Coffee Brew (scott p greeley)
re red star (Eric Mintz)
RIMS unit plans/diagrams/whatever?.. (Al Richer)
More questions on sanitizing agents (Gary Braswell)
FISHMAIL (John R. Vanderpool (NASA/GSFC/STX))
Update on homebrew legalization in Georgia (Ken Dobson)
AHA Structure and Regionalism (Mike Fertsch)
Send submissions to homebrew@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@mthvax.cs.miami.edu
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 30 Jan 92 7:03:30 EST
From: John S. Link <link@prcrs.prc.com>
Subject: Book on building a small brewery
I've heard mention of a book on building a small brewery. I quickly
looked through my latest issue of Zymurgy and could not find anything
about it. Could someone email the title and where I would be able to
purchace it?
Thanks,
John S. Link
link@rsi.prc.com
------------------------------
Date: 30 Jan 1992 8:45 EST
From: dab@pyuxe.cc.bellcore.com (dave ballard)
Subject: no-alcohol yeast
hey now- the recent thread of na beer has reminded me of a question i've been
meaning to ask: Coors claims that their "Cutter" na brew is made from a
special yeast that doesn't produce alcohol. are they using some type of
mutant or something? it doesn't seem like yeast is really yeast if it
doesn't make alcohol, know what I mean??
iko-
dab
=========================================================================
dave ballard "Life may not be the party we hoped for,
dab@pyuxe.cc.bellcore.com but while we're here we should dance."
=========================================================================
------------------------------
Date: 30 Jan 92 09:27:17 EST
From: JPJ@b30.prime.com
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).
This is so, so true... My friends and I like to go to the local "good beer"
store and buy 1 or 2 racks of a mixture (Sam Smith, Sam Adams, Anchor,
etc.) and the tab usually comes to 11-12 bucks a rack. That comes to
roughly 2 dollars a beer. Compare that to a Budilobiken at the local
dives for 2 to 3 bucks and you have a deal. If something is worth drinking,
it's worth paying a little more for. And most of these bars can keep
their "atmosphere".
- Jpj
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1992 09:27:41 -0500
From: trwagner@unixpop.ucs.indiana.edu
Subject: Shipping via UPS
Much to my surpirse, I found a local winery that ships UPS! I
dropped by to do some wine tasting yesterday with my finace. I picked up
one of their flyers. In it, it says that "most of our shipping is done by
UPS..." So, there is something to say about UPS. Maybe there is
something we all don't know about and some of these places do, OR people
are looking the other way, when they know what is going on, while the
senders say "canned goods."
Ted Wagner
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 30 Jan 92 14:23:20 GMT
From: Sgt John "iceberg" Bergmann <iceberg@sctc.af.mil>
Subject: BBK Tour, HBD #812
Hello Folks,
Yesterday (29 Jan 92) I took a tour of the Bavarian Brewery Kaiserslautern
in Kaiserslautern, Germany. The brewery has been in existance for over
170 years, and still conforms to the German purity law (Reinheitsgebot?).
Unfortunately, the brewmaster didn't speak English and our tour guide's
German, while passable, didn't include a lot of beermaking words we're so
familiar with, such as trub and wort, etc., so I think a lot was lost in the
translation. But anyway, they process 4000 Hectoliters every four hours in
their boilers (Big huge copper kettle things..). After converting the barley
to wort, they boil it for 2 hours, then cool it for two hours, 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...)
After Lagering, the beer passes thru a series of filters (cold filtered..)
and then on to the bottling room. This was the Neat part. They are set up
to go from returnables -> final product all in one room. They were process-
ing 36,000 0.33 liter bottles per hour when we were there, and could process
40,000 0.5 liter bottles when set for such. They also had a new keg process-
ing for 60 Hectoliter per hour using the 'new' british kegs, as opposed to the
more conventional barrel types. The Brewmaster said these were easer to clean
and replace than the others, but it took an initial investment of 1 million
Marks to convert the plant, so there aren't many in Germany.
Unfortunatly, there was some misunderstanding about the tour, so we didn't
get any samples... They make a Weizzen, an Alt, Pils, Lite, Bock, und others.
I've tried them elsewhere, and they're nothing to rave about.
By the way, BBK is also known to the local GI's as Bad Brewery
Kaiserslautern, so you can make your own assumptions.
Also Could someone mail me a copy of digest #812? mine got lost in the
ether...
Thanks
Johnny B.
+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+
+ Sgt John S. Bergmann DSN: 480-6738 +
+ Network Systems Consultant +
+ Small Computer Technical Center "And I felt like a pickled +
+ HQ USAFE / SCICT priest who was being flambed." +
+ {iceberg@sctc.af.mil} +
+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 30 Jan 92 08:36:31 -0600
From: j_freela@hwking.cca.cr.rockwell.com (Joe Freeland)
Subject: Drinking Water
With all the discussion on boiling water, I began to
wonder if a person couldn't use store bought distilled water
or drinking water instead. Sure it would cost a minimal amount
of cash, but to me it would be worth it. Also, how about the
difference between soft and hard water ? If the former
was not appropriate, I am looking for suggestions on speeding
up this boiling process, such as boiling ahead and freezing in
milk jugs, etc. I have heard some approaches, but I was wondering
what others do. I am sorry if these questions have been
discussed, I am just a lowly new subscriber.
Joe
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 30 Jan 92 8:39:22 CST
From: ingr!ingr!b11!mspe5!guy@uunet.UU.NET
Subject: Coffee in beer
In Digest #813, jpj asks:
> Greetings, HB's...
>
> I'm sure this question's been asked before -somewhere-, but I'll
> ask it anyways -- I'm interested in introducing coffee flavor into
> my next batch of stout. Can I get away with using instant coffee?
> Should I just add it to the boil, or the secondary? Are there certain
> brands of instant that I should avoid?
> Should I just avoid instant coffee altogether and use real coffee?
I brewed a stout with coffee *and* chocolate back in mid-December and it
turned out very tasty. Here's the recipe:
Mocha Java Stout
or
(Three Passions Stout)
5 Gallons
7 pounds Glenbrew Irish Stout Kit
1/4 pound ( 1 cup ) Flaked Barley
1/8 pound ( 1/2 cup ) Black Patent Malt
1/2 ounce Fuggles hop pellets (bittering - 60 min)
1/2 ounce Fuggles hop pellets (flavoring - 10 min)
4 ounces Ghirardelli unsweetened chocolate
2 cups Brewed Coffee (Monte Sano blend)
1 package WYeast #1084 Irish Stout Yeast
3/4 cup Corn sugar (bottling)
Brew coffee using 2 scoops coffee to 12 oz. cold water.
Steep flaked barley and cracked black patent for 45 minutes. Bring
1.5 gallons water to a boil in brewpot, sparge in grains, and add
extract and boiling hops. Boil for 50 minutes. Add chocolate and
flavoring hops and boil for 10 more minutes. Remove from heat and
carefully stir in coffee. Cool and pour into fermenter containing 3
gallons cold (pre-boiled) water. Pitch yeast. Rack to secondary when
vigorous fermentation subsides. Bottle with 3/4 cup corn sugar.
The "Monte Sano blend" coffee is a mild coffee (sorry I can't remember
exactly which coffees are blended to make this) that I buy locally in a coffee
store. I wanted something mild for the first attempt so as not to overdo it.
This beer turned out wonderfully black and the chocolate and coffee come out
nicely in the aroma and flavor. In spite of the oils in the chocolate, it has
a rich, creamy head that stays with it until the bottom of the glass. The low
hopping rate is due to the fact that both the coffee and the chocolate add to
the bitterness and I wanted their aromas to dominate this beer. It has been
well received by all who have tried it. I called it "Three Passions Stout"
because three of my favorite tastes (from the world of food and beverages
anyway) are chocolate, coffee, and stout - not necessarily in that order.
I have set aside two six-packs of this to see how well it ages (if I can leave
it alone, that is).
- --
Guy McConnell
"All I need is a pint a day"
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1992 09:45 EDT
From: MIKE LIGAS <LIGAS@SSCvax.CIS.McMaster.CA>
Subject: Re: Be wary of CAMRA Canada
> From: Mike Jewison - DDO <jewison@centaur.astro.utoronto.ca>
> Subject: Be wary of CAMRA Canada
>
> A few weeks back someone (I forget who) suggested joining CAMRA Canada ......
> ....... but I would suggest you be wary of CAMRA Canada. I sent them a
> cheque for Cdn$18 in September 1990 and have not received a thing from them;
> no "What's Brewing", no "thank you for joining CAMRA Canada", no nothing
> except for the fact that my cheque cleared the bank shortly after I mailed
> it in.
An all-to-familiar occurence. They took my money and ran two years in a row.
I received one copy of their newsletter in two years of membership at $18 per
year. They haven't returned the queries I left on their answering machine (yes,
I even resorted to long distance calls to check for a pulse). I would not
recommend CAMRA Canada membership to anyone. However, CABA (Canadian Amateur
Brewers Association) is excellent and growing in leaps and bounds. Homebrewers
always do it up with style ;-)
- Mike -
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 30 Jan 92 09:03:55 CST
From: dyer@marble.rtsg.mot.com (Bill Dyer)
Subject: Beer Across America
Since I have recieved a lot of requests for info on Beer Across America
(I mentioned it in my UPS post), I figured I would post the info here
so everyone could benefit from it.
Beer Across America is a Microbrewery of the Month Club. Once a month
you get a shipment of two six packs from two breweries around the
country. Last months selections were:
D.L. Geary Brewing Company's Pale Ale
Mass. Bay Brewing Company's Harpoon Golden Lager
This was my first shipment so I can't comment as to the quality of
the beers they send you, but these first two were very good. The
only thing I don't like about the club is that if you find a beer
you really like, you can't order more. You do get information and
addresses of the Breweries so I guess you could call them and find
out where they distribute. Anyway, the newsletter I got tells me to
pass on information about this club to anyone that is interested so
here it is:
Beer Across America
150 Hilltop Ave.
Barrington, IL 60010-3402
1-800-854-BEER(2337)
Later,
Bill Dyer
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 30 Jan 92 09:14:32 CST
From: dyer@marble.rtsg.mot.com (Bill Dyer)
Subject: Coffee in beer.
Just a quick question, has anyone out there ever put coffee in their
beer? How was it? Last week I was brewing a batch of stout and in
a moment of insanity threw in a half a pound of fresh ground coffee.
I love good stout and good coffee so I figured they must go together.
The problem I have is that there seems to be some wierd stuff floating
on top of the beer (it is done fermenting and will be bottled this
weekend), but I can't see it real clearly through the dirty side
of the carboy. It seems like it may be some residue from the coffee
grounds even though I strained them out before putting the wort into
the carboy. The stuff floating on top doesn't look like the nasty
mold I had a few batches ago, so I hope it is just something to do with
the coffee. Anyone out there had any experience with coffee beers that
could answer some of these questions?
Later,
Bill Dyer
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 30 Jan 92 10:48 CST
From: korz@ihlpl.att.com
Subject: Re: To Blow-off or Not?
John writes--
>>> if you don't use a secondary fermenter, you may well benefit
>>>from having stuff removed during blow-off.
>
>>I disagree. The (alleged) benefits of blowoff are the removal
>>of higher (fusel) alcohols and (from my own obsevations) some
>>hop oils.
>
>Well, I didn't want to get into all of that. Suffice it to say
>without a lot of discussion that there I believe
>that there are no more fusel alcohols in properly made beer using
>a secondary than there are in beer made using blow-off.
>Don't know about hop oil differences.
>
I hope too many of you don't get bored by this thread, but I have been
wrestling with the benefits of blowoff lately (especially as I've
been watching 0.5 out of 5.5 gallons of $40 cherry stout foam into my
blowoff vessel) and I think the debate is healthy.
I don't know how much fusel alcohols are produced by Wyeast Ale yeasts
fermenting at 66F. Maybe it's a negligible amount. Maybe the dry
yeasts I used to use before switching to the blowoff method were the
culprits. Obviously, this concerns me enough to merit running some
tests. I'll try contacting The Siebel Institute and see how much
chemical analysis would cost. (I already have a bet with my grandfather
that my beer is safe to drink -- if it is, he pays the analysis costs,
if not, I do -- maybe this is an opportunity to kill two birds with
one stone.)
Well, I just got off the phone with J. E. Siebels & Sons and found out
about prices of analysis. A taste profile costs $58/sample. A complete
beer analysis (taste + computer + chemical analysis) costs $175, but
does not include the ASBC Higher Alcohols and Esters Test which is
$95/sample. This test provides levels of Ethyl Alcohol, Isopropyl
Alcohol, Isobutynol, Iso-amyl-acetate, Iso-amyl Alcohol, Amyl Alcohol,
Ethyl Acetate and Propynol. Having these tests done is not in my
budget at this time, but being an engineer, I like the quantatativeness
of these tests and that they would settle this matter once and for
all. Wouldn't they? Comments?
Al.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 30 Jan 92 9:41:14 PST
From: "John Cotterill" <johnc@hprpcd.rose.hp.com>
Subject: SS Fittings??
Full-Name: "John Cotterill"
Does anyone know of any mail order pipe outlets that have both stainless
fittings and tubing at a resonable price (for stainless that is)??? I
purchased a great stainless counter pressure bottle filler about a year
ago. It was around $50. I priced all the pieces at a local outlet here and
the total was over $150!!!! I know there is a better outlet out there.
Anyone know where it is?
JC
johnc@hprpcd.rose.hp.com
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 30 Jan 92 10:40:53 PST
From: bgros@sensitivity.berkeley.edu (Bryan Gros)
Subject: pre-crushed grains and basil beer
I sent this before, but don't think it got through.--
How long would one want to keep pre-crushed grains around, assuming
they are sealed pretty well (not necessarily air-tight) in a cool,
dry environment?
What is the problem with old pre-crushed grain, is the yield simply
lower, or do bad flavors (or some other catastrophe) develop?
What is the best way to store pre-crushed grain?
If you were going to make a basil beer, how would you add the basil?
would you:
1. throw some into the boiling wort?
2. steep some in hot non-boiling water, strain, and add the
result to the primary fermentation?
3. throw some into the primary (or secondary); i.e. like dry-hopping?
(would you need to sterilize somehow?)
or 4. some other ingenious method?
Any ideas on how much you would add to a 5 gallon batch?
Anyone want to guess?
Thanks. - Bryan
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 30 Jan 92 10:52:03 PST
From: bgros@sensitivity.berkeley.edu (Bryan Gros)
Subject: Anchor Porter
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?
- Bryan
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 30 Jan 92 13:12:46 CST
From: Darren Evans-Young <DARREN@UA1VM.UA.EDU>
Subject: Sanitizing with Bleach
On Wed, 29 Jan 1992 13:23 PDT, Bob Jones <BJONES@NOVA.llnl.gov> said:
>
>The moral here is that more isn't better! If you want to reduce your input of
>known bad players, keep your bleach solution to a realistic level. I would
>go for a little overkill and use 1T in 5 gals. This should also prolong the
>life of your SS kegs too. All this assumes you keep your equipment clean
>and you are doing a 30 min soak.
>
>Bob Jones
Bob,
Does increasing the amount of bleach reduce the contact time?
Normally, I do a 15 minute soak using 1/4c per 5 gallons.
Darren
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 30 Jan 92 12:30:20 EST
From: eisen@kopf.HQ.Ileaf.COM (Carl West)
Subject: *Old* style homebrewing
This is the first part of a fairly long piece I've scanned in,
on request I'll post the rest of it, in pieces of course.
This is from _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.
HOME BREWING IN SCOTLAND.
The following from the _Scotsman_
[about which I know nothing more, _100 Years..._ has no
bibliography. "Victorian Scholarship" is an oxymoron. -CW]
well describes the
processes of domestic brewing in vogue before the
public brew-house became an established institution:
In whatever manner yeast was introduced, it was ever after
preserved by constant use, being passed from one home
brewer to another in ceaseless succession. If for any reason,
such as scarcity of grain, there was a temporary cessation of
home brewing, the yeast was enclosed in an earthenware or
glass vessel and buried in peat moss till required again. Pres-
ent-day peatcutters, unaware of this practice, are occasionally
perplexed by finding these forgotten jars ("pigs") or bottles
of yeast.
Like most old domestic arts, brewing was a long and toil-
some process. A month elapsed from the time the grain for
malt was put in soak till the ale was ready for drinking.
Thirty-six pounds of grain made about three gallons, or " a
kirn " of ale. Nine pounds more was sometimes allowed for
shrinkage. The grain, which had to be full, round and
unbroken in the threshing, was thoroughly winnowed and
picked over. It was put into a carefully scrubbed out, scalded
and aired kirn, and water poured on it till it was just covered.
A rhyme couplet had it that the malt should stand
Four and twenty hours in steep,
Eight and forty hours in dreep,
but the number of hours was reversed in different parts of the
country.
When the water was poured off, the top of the kirn was
thickly covered with straw, which was fastened down with
meshwork and bands of rushes. Two bars of wood were laid
across the top of a shallow tub and the inverted kirn was set
on this to " dreep." At the end of forty-eight hours the grain
if good, was "cheepin'," i. e., the sprouts just appearing. If
dreeped too long, the malt was dry and useless.
The "cheepin"' malt was then packed in a straw basket,
covered with a thick layer of straw, and allowed to stand two
or three days till it was so sprouted as to be grown together.
If the grains sprouted at both ends, the malt was spoiled.
When each grain had three sprouts at each end the malt was
properly " come." As this germination took place quickly or
slowly, according to temperature, it had to be watched to
prevent it going too far.
The malt was then spread out evenly on the barn floor, a
finger-length deep, and out of any draft. It was turned every
day, underside up and edges to center. This was done till the
grains, on being broken, "could chalk the nail." From ten
days to three weeks brought it to this stage. It was then
ready for the "sweet heap."
It was piled up, covered with woolen cloth, and left so
till it became so hot that a hand could scarcely bear being
thrust into it, and was covered with moisture when with-
drawn, or till an egg could be roasted in it. It took about
three days for the malt to attain this degree of heat. During
the latter hours of this period it had to be watched closely, as
when it reached the proper point of " sweet " heat it had to
be kiln-dried at once, otherwise it lost strength. Hence it
was common to " waulk maut."
The kiln fire had to be perfectly clear and smokeless, and
the drying done slowly and thoroughly. The ale was brown
or pale, as the malt was " sore " or lightly dried. After dry-
ing it was rubbed, fanned and picked again to remove the
dried sprouts. It could then be kept for any length of time.
It was in this state that malt was bought and sold. If the
brewing was to be at once proceeded with, the malt was then
coarsely crushed or ground so that every third grain was left
whole. If ground too fine, the wort thickened and could
not run.
------------------------------
Date: 30 Jan 92 11:32:25 U
From: "Rad Equipment" <rad_equipment@rad-mac1.ucsf.EDU>
Subject: UPS Problems
Subject: UPS Problems Time:10:12 AM Date:1/30/92
In response to Tom Quinn's question on the 1st Round entries received at
Anchor...
I have never heard of any comments originating from the UPS driver(s) when the
entries arrive. I don't work at the brewery, so I have no direct contact with
the UPS types there. I am sure the woman who signs for the UPS stuff would
pass along any comments.
I do ship my own stuff from the same UPS office that services Anchor, and there
I have had problems. I frequently use used Styrofoam boxes, perfect for a
six-pack of Anchor, which I get from the pharmacy here at UCSF. Last fall I
offered to ship some of the Anchor Spruce to those less fortunate around the
country. I took about a dozen of the Styrofoam boxes to my local UPS drop. I
claim the standard "perishable food in glass" on the manifest. This time I got
the third degree from the agent. The result of which led to the insistance
that she be allowed to inspect the packing. Finding bottles of beer, she told
me that "we don't ship alcoholic beverages". I argued that this was not true
(etc, etc) but got nowhere. I ended up taking the boxes to a third party drop
where they don't take things so seriously (tho I understand that the pick up
person from UPS wasn't happy about taking the boxes from them later on).
Now I put the Styrofoam boxes inside plain brown ones and lie on the manifest
as to contents. I have recently seen a UPS stamp on boxes which state
"Alcoholic Beverage Enclosed, Adult Signature Required" (or some such) in red
ink on boxes originating from a wine club here in California. I plan to
investigate the possibility of using this format for future packages. I prefer
the honesty.
The AHA has been trying to get an answer on all this from the home office of
UPS since last year when boxes destined for the Nationals were turned back in
areas of the East Coast. I don't know the status of the discussion at present.
But the "ship to" addresses in the '92 instructions seem to indicate that
deception is still the way to go (ie. NHC 92 c/o Anchor Brewing Co. rather than
zymurgy/wigglesworth c/o Anchor used last year).
RW...
Russ Wigglesworth CI$: 72300,61
|~~| UCSF Medical Center Internet: Rad Equipment@RadMac1.ucsf.edu
|HB|\ Dept. of Radiology, Rm. C-324 Voice: 415-476-3668 / 474-8126 (H)
|__|/ San Francisco, CA 94143-0628
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 29 Jan 92 17:27:14 -0800
From: slezakl@atlantis.CS.ORST.EDU
Subject: Sanitary Method to Start Siphons
Lately there has been a lot of talk of siphoning again. I would agree with
those who discourage the "mouth start" idea. It just adds the unnecessary
risk of infecting the wort with some strange bacteria. The way I do it,
siphon, is what I think a very easy, and sanitary way. This was suggested
to me by the owner of my local supply store. Go to a pharmacy and buy
and anal syringe. They are used for enemas, anyway they look kind of like
this:
-------------\
| \
| \_____________
| _____________
| /
| /
-------------/
This big end is like the handle of a turkey baster and the small end is
hard plastic tube. The tube is the perfect diameter to fit into the hose
of the siphon, and the ball (other end) has enough pressure when squeezed
to start the siphon easily, no matter what what angle or location your
two containers are in. Mine cost about $6.00, the only problem is
that you may have to ask a sales person for help in finding one (I did,
and it was a little embarrasing. But its really no big deal.) I
also have tried using turkey basters but they dont seem to work as well
for me. The tube has to be forced into siphon, and there isnt always
enough pressure to get the siphon started.
Anyway it works well and sanitizes easy (it comes apart). I think it
is well worth it and it works quite well. I hope this helps some of you
people.
Happy Brewing,
Lee J. Slezak
<slezakl@atlantis.cs.orst.edu>
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 30 Jan 92 11:44:53 PST
From: Richard Childers <rchilder@us.oracle.com>
Subject: Re: Homebrew Digest #813 (January 30, 1992)
"Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1992 13:23 PDT
From: Bob Jones <BJONES@NOVA.llnl.gov>
Subject: Sanitizing with Bleach
After a recent discussion with a friend about sanitizing with bleach I
decided to but pencil to paper and thought I would post my results. The
concentration of bleach required to sanitize something is on the order of
50-300 ppm for a 30 minute contact time. These concentrations come from
Micheal Lewis (50ppm) and a Microbiologist (300ppm) friend who works
for Clorox. A concentration of 65ppm can be obtained with 1/2t in a 5gal
carboy of water. 2T of bleach gives 780ppm in 5 gals of water. Assume
you use 2t of bleach and you drain the carboy and leave 1t of residue. If
you then refill the carboy with 5 gals of beer you are diluting the residue
by a factor of 3855. Therefore the 780 ppm residue will be diluted to
.2ppm in the refilled carboy of beer. The 1t of residue seems about what I
get for a hasty dump."
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.
I'd guess my methods work, because my batch is fizzing away happily right
now in the carboy ...
This also peels off eveything organic inside the containers, and keeps 'em
real clean. And the sterile food-grade tub makes a good sterile container
for tubing and corks and the like.
- -- richard
=====
- -- richard childers rchilder@us.oracle.com 1 415 506 2411
oracle data center -- unix systems & network administration
"Anything is possible, if you don't care who gets the credit." -- Harry Truman
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 30 Jan 92 12:27:10 PST
From: spg9052@fred.fred (scott p greeley)
Subject: Coffee Brew
I put 1/4 cup of ground coffee in the mash of a stout once and I never detected
any coffee aromas or flavors in the finished beer. It was a full, dark beer though.
Scott
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 30 Jan 92 12:09:22 MST
From: Eric Mintz <ericm@bach.ftcollinsco.NCR.COM>
Subject: re red star
Chip Hitchcock writes:
Russ Gelinas put in a "clarification" that Red Star \ale/ yeast was
bad but the \lager/ yeast was "clean". This doesn't match the ZYMURGY
lab results [snip...]
To add a data point: I just brewed my best porter to date using RS Lager
yeast. I've used virtually the same recipe with various dried ale yeast
(including RS) and was dissatified with the high attenuation of all of
them and the off flavors (IMHO, RS was probably the worst for off
flavors and aromas). *However*, the RS lager was fairly clean and
seemed to be a little less attenuating (good quality in this
application).
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 30 Jan 92 15:11:24 EST
From: richer@ionic.HQ.Ileaf.COM (Al Richer)
Subject: RIMS unit plans/diagrams/whatever?..
I have read two or three articles describing modifications to a mystical
creature called a RIMS unit. This intrigues me, as I need an alternate method
of producing beer, due to lack of access to my household kitchen for brewing
purposes 8^(...
If anyone could clue me in to the whereabouts of the original article (or
whatever) that diagrams the construction of one of these, I would be most
grateful.
ajr
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 30 Jan 92 8:48:53 CST
From: ingr!b11!rocker!gary@uunet.UU.NET (Gary Braswell)
Subject: More questions on sanitizing agents
To Bob Jones:
I found your calculations very interesting. I was wondering if your friend
from Clorox gave you any indication about what concentration (in ppm) would
actually disrupt the workings of a septic tank? It may be that lower
concentrations would be innocuous, and I can stop making trips outside.
- -------
Gary B.
- --
/*****************************************************************************/
"We'll...do our best to help you port from | Gary Braswell, Systems Engineer
an AT&T version to 4.2 BSD, but porting the| Intergraph Corporation
other way is out of the question if many of| gary@rocker.b11.ingr.com
the Berkely-specific system calls are used.| Engineering Dept.
-M. Rochkind in "Advanced UNIX Programming" | PH. 730-6497, MS CR1105
/*****************************************************************************/
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1992 17:58:12 -0500 (EST)
From: VANDER@NSSDCA.GSFC.NASA.GOV (John R. Vanderpool (NASA/GSFC/STX))
Subject: FISHMAIL
test
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1992 20:50 EST
From: Ken Dobson <MEDKGD%EMUVM1.bitnet@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU>
Subject: Update on homebrew legalization in Georgia
A while ago, I asked one and all to write a Georgia Senate committee to
support homebrew legalization. Since then I have gotten several copies
of letters sent and requests for updated info.
The committee is scheduled to
discuss the bill on Monday morning, 3 February, so it is unlikely that any
more letters will get to them on time.
We want to thank everyone for
answering our call to action. Whatever the fate of our bill, I will post it
on the Digest
Ken Dobson, M.D.
Propagandist
Covert Hops Society
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 30 Jan 92 13:47 EST
From: Mike Fertsch <FERTSCH@adc1.adc.ray.com>
Subject: AHA Structure and Regionalism
Jay Hersh talks about the AHA Nationals and the move to regional first-round
judging:
>AHEM... not being one to pat myself on the back and say I told you so :-), but
>long time readers of the HBD will recall a discussion held several years ago
>caling for the creation of a tiered competition system where winners judged at a
>local or regional site would then be forwarded on to the National Round finals.
Yes, I DO recall - you were one of the first public AHA bashers! That was
a _long_ time ago - before Rob started numbering these digests. You
rabble-rouser!
> time has vindicated those championing such a system.
Yes, but I think that the AHA did that only because they needed to farm out
some of the work; I question whether it is because of an AHA desire to make
the Association more "Democratic" and more member oriented.
>Now if the AHA would only actually let it's members have some real
>representation, say like having an elected Board of Advisors...
My guess that the Board of Advisers is just a gesture to quiet the anti-
AHA sentiment of people like Jay. The Board of Advisers are picked by
Charlie P, and they have no role in setting AHA policy. The Board is just
a few people who happen to have attended ALL the AHA conferences over the
years. It may also be a scheme for the Board to deduct their conference
expenses on their taxes!
I agree with Jay in saying that the AHA has improved its attitude to
members, that they genuinely try to help out in whatever way they can, but
they still have a way to go before becoming a true Association of Homebrewers.
We need a representative board!
Mike Fertsch
Send comments, replies, and flames to mikef@synchro.com, not to the address
in the header!
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #814, 01/31/92
*************************************
-------
