Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #0946
This file received at Sierra.Stanford.EDU 92/08/12 23:47:05
HOMEBREW Digest #946 Wed 12 August 1992
FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
Rob Gardner, Digest Coordinator
Contents:
Re: Why mash-out? (Andy Phillips)
heat transfer properties of wort (Vote Libertarian in '92!)
Re: Ken Johnson, the lamest (JLIDDIL)
Houston hotspots (Mary E. Hall)
O-Rings (Chris Estes)
c02 purity (card)
O-Rings... (continued... SORRY!) (Chris Estes)
softer gentler water (Frank Tutzauer)
What's the deal? (SSIEGLER)
Yeast Temperatures and Amounts (GEOFF REEVES)
2 hour sparging (GEOFF REEVES)
Hop Plugs and Pellets, What's the difference (GEOFF REEVES)
Brewing Science Vs. M & B Science (glenn raudins)
Re: all malt vs. extracts (korz)
yeast culturing (James Dipalma)
Re: Cider (korz)
Flurry of "break" material. (bryan)
Re: mashtuns/chillers/lipids (korz)
2 pot boils (Glenn Anderson)
Brewpub plans for Ann Arbor, MI (Arthur Delano)
Cider (Jay Hersh)
parallel chiller (Pierre.Jelenc)
oring challenge (donald oconnor)
Apologies for duplicate posting (Andy Phillips)
Hop Vine Yields? (smc)
truncated digests (PGRAHAME)
Bleach and SS, holes, Minneapolis (Andy Leith)
co2 purity (card)
Fermenting mead (Michael L. Hall)
Stainless Steel corrosion (Bob_Konigsberg)
Bleach sanitation (Brian Smithey)
truncated digests (Frank Tutzauer)
Mash - Hot Water Heater (Scott James.)
Send articles for __publication__ to homebrew@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@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@novell.physics.umr.edu**
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 10 Aug 92 11:41 GMT
From: Andy Phillips <PHILLIPSA@LARS.AFRC.AC.UK>
Subject: Re: Why mash-out?
There's been a lot of correspondence on the HBD recently about
the stability of enzymes at different temperatures (eg. on
whether mash-out at 170F kills amylases), and the effect of mash
thickness on the wort. I have access to a literature database
that I periodically search for brewing references. One paper I
pulled out and subsequently sent off a reprint request for was
by Robert Muller (Brewing Research Foundation, Redhill, Surrey,
England), entitled "The effects of mashing temperature and mash
thickness on wort carbohydrate composition" (Journal of the
Institute of Brewing (1991) Vol 97, pp85-92). The author is
interested in producing normal gravity, but low fermentability
worts for low alcohol beers. His results can be summarized as
follows (I won't attempt to reproduce his graphs in ASCII).
At 65C [149F in old money], the half life of alpha amylase is 42
minutes; that of beta amylase is 15 minutes. Thus, after 30 min
at 65C, there remains 62% of the alpha amylase activity and 25%
of the beta amylase. At 80C [176F], both enzymes are less stable:
the half life of alpha amylase is about 13 minutes, that of beta
amylase about 6 minutes. The loss of beta amylase at both
temperatures is exaggerated by the fact that there is much
more alpha-amylase activity present to start with: the total
potential activity of alpha amylase at 65C is 88g of starch
hydrolysed per gram of [pale] malt; in contrast, the total
potential activity of beta amylase is about 3.5g of maltose produced
per gram of malt. The loss of beta amylase due to temperature
denaturation will therefore be more significant than loss of
alpha amylase.
This loss of beta amylase results in a higher proportion of
malto-dextrins, which are non-fermentable (at least with ale
yeasts: modern super-attenuating strains, such as used for diet
beers, are less choosy). A mash carried out continuously at 80C thus
produces a wort which is only 20-30% fermentable, compared with the
65C wort which is about 80% fermentable.
Using this data, it's possible to draw the following conclusions
about the consequences of a 30min "mash-out" at 170F [77C]:
1) Beta amylase may be almost completely destroyed, but 25% of
the alpha amylase activity will survive (and will be more active
at the higher temperature).
2) This alpha-amylase may break down any starch remaining in the
mash, preventing starch haze in the final product (but increasing
the malto-dextrin content, and so increasing the sweetness and body).
3) The main purpose of mash-out is probably to aid in the flow
of the sugar solution from the husks (as suggested previously),
due to the decreased viscosity of the wort at the higher
temperature.
And now I have a question: why do unmalted grains such as wheat and
rye have to be gelatinized (cooked) before mashing? I just made a
batch of bitter with 2 lbs of flaked rye, forgot to gelatinize it,
but got a sensible yield: about 85% of the maximum possible. Any
have a hard, scientific explanation for this?
Sorry this went on so long.
Andy
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 10 Aug 92 08:43:33 CDT
From: smith%8616.span@Fedex.Msfc.Nasa.Gov (Vote Libertarian in '92!)
Subject: heat transfer properties of wort
hey--
After checking my fluid-mechanics textbook (Intro. to Fluid Mechanics,
Janna, 2nd ed.), it appears that beer wort's viscosity is going to be
within 1% of that of water at a given temperature. A good initial
value to use is that of water at 100 degF, which is approximately
1.4 x10^-5 lbf*s/ft^2. Density is within 1% as well, but you can be
exact with that since you have a hydrometer. I would expect specific
heat to be about 1-5% higher than that of water, which is 1 Btu/lbm/degF.
Since few heat transfer correlations are accurate to within 20%, I would
not worry too much about the exactness of wort measurements.
One thing to remember in wort-through-a-tube chillers is that the
viscosity is going to increase as cold break forms, causing a reduction in
flow rate. By how much? Good question. If people send me accurate
measurements of flowrate, temperatures, tubing sizes/configurations etc.,
I will make a stab at producing an empirical calculation of The Wort
Chiller, but no promises....
James Smith
smith%8616.span@fedex.msfc.nasa.gov
"Someone let the dogs out, they'll show you where the truth is"
p.s. Would you bickerers keep it in email? We don't care if you
count coup or not. Better yet, save the NSF some dough and
chill out....
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 10 Aug 1992 8:31:07 -0700 (MST)
From: JLIDDIL@AZCC.Arizona.EDU
Subject: Re: Ken Johnson, the lamest
Obviously, Ken is full of "bullshit". Is he a master brewer? Has he won
numerous awards for his fine beers? Has he won Homebrewer of the Year? Is
he a certified Judge? If not then he is LAME
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 10 Aug 92 09:39:47 MDT
From: meh@cygnus.ta52.lanl.gov (Mary E. Hall)
Subject: Houston hotspots
I'm going to Houston on business next week (8/17-8/21). I know that
brewpubs are illegal there (I grew up in Dallas), but can anyone
recommend someplace that I just shouldn't miss while I'm there?
I'll be near the I-10/Hwy 6 intersection.
BTW, is there anything new in Dallas?
Mary Hall
Lost Almost, Near Mexico
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 10 Aug 92 11:45:42 -0400
From: cestes@argos5.DNET.NASA.GOV (Chris Estes)
Subject: O-Rings
Just a comment here... It seems to me that for O-Rings have sparked a bit
of a problem here. For $1.50 you can buy a new one - why argue about it?
If you like coke-flavored beer, then en
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 10 Aug 92 11:22:37 EDT
From: card@apollo.hp.com
Subject: c02 purity
From New England Beer Club Digest
>> There have been some questions about CO2 purity. Although I am
>>not aware of any contamination problems with CO2...I am aware that there
>>are atleast 3 grades of it; industrial, beverage and analytical. Of course
>>you can figure out what use beverage grade is rated for, with analytical
>>being the purest for scientific purposes. Industrial is the lowest quality
>>and used for fire extinguishers and other non-food grade needs. I personally
>>fill my tank at a beverage supplier to insure getting a known good CO2
>>for dispensing beer. Not sure if the industrial is acceptable, but its
>>seems like a gamble to me.
>>
>> Also, a beverage supplier also told me that CO2 tanks can build up
>>with oil (that apparently occurs as part of the CO2 manufacturing process.
>>He suggested that after many refills, you can purge the oil by standing the
>>empty tank upside down overnight. The next day, open the valve (with no
>>regulator attached) with the tank still inverted. The remaining CO2 will
>>blow out any oil that has accumulated in the tank.
>>
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 10 Aug 92 11:50:02 -0400
From: cestes@argos5.DNET.NASA.GOV (Chris Estes)
Subject: O-Rings... (continued... SORRY!)
As I was saying... If you like coke flavored beer then by all means drink
it. If a buck and a half won't put you in the poor house and you'll be
happier with a new O-ring, then do that. But I don't think O-rings are
anything to warrant a signifigant philisophical discussion. Its interesting
to hear everyone's ideas and personal techniques, but sometimes I wonder
about the contents of the HBD... Perhaps we need the "Homebrew Debate Digest"!
-Chris Estes-
Dont forget: Morton Thiokol O-Rings don't hold pressure
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 10 Aug 1992 12:06 EST
From: Frank Tutzauer <COMFRANK@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu>
Subject: softer gentler water
In HBD 944, Phillip Seitz asks how to get soft water. About 6 months ago, I
picked up a great little book called, "The Pocket Guide to Bottled Water."
It's written by Arthur von Wiesenberger, and published by Contemporary Books
(Chicago, 1991, ISBN 0-8092-4056-4). I think the book is aimed at yuppies,
but brewers can profit from it too. When I wanted soft water, I used Great
Bear Natural Spring Water, which was the softest I could get locally. The
book gives these numbers for Great Bear:
Ca 0.53
Bicarb 18.3
Sulphates 2.41
Mg 0.7
Na 2.85
Chlorides 0.93
The figures are ppm. The beer turned out fine.
- --frank
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 10 Aug 1992 12:15 EST
From: SSIEGLER@LANDO.HNS.COM
Subject: What's the deal?
What's the deal?
As a new homebrewer, I need this net. It is an invaluable source
of information. The constant bickering that seems to be going on
is a real turn off for a new-b, like myself. What am I to do if
I have a real problem, like exploding bottles? (I am having this
problem, if anyone wants to help.) I certainly wont post a question
for fear of someone's retaliation or offending someone -- quite frankly
it scares the post-beer-product out of me.
(Where did the term 'Flame' come from, anyway? )
Might I suggest that attacks of this nature be sent to the person who
offended you. (You know, if someone ignores your e-mail, they are
going to ignore the posting here. I, on the other hand, don't know
enough to.)
I really thought that Home Brewing's most important rule was
Relax. Dont Worry.
(OK, maybe it really is 'Sanitize', but I'm sure Relax is high up
in the rules).
-Stuart Siegler
"Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean there aren't people out to get you"
(hl)
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 10 Aug 92 10:55:11 -0600
From: 105277@essdp2.lanl.gov (GEOFF REEVES)
Subject: Yeast Temperatures and Amounts
> >From: gkushmer@Jade.Tufts.EDU
>
> >Maybe I should re-hydrate the Red Star package and dump some of
> >it in the one-gallon carboy? I could get a mason jar, sterilize
> >it, and put the majority of the yeast in that in my fridge.
>
> From: m14051@mwvm.mitre.org (John DeCarlo)
>
> I hear this from new brewers all the time. As far as I know,
> even for mead, the more yeast you pitch the better off you are,
> since it reduces the lag time during yeast reproduction.
>
> Can anyone point me to a reference that describes the typical
> yeast reproduction activity for homebrewers? (Something like:
> 1) Throwing in one packet of yeast scenario--fifteen minutes for
> yeast cells to rehydrate and acclimate, twenty minutes for yeast
> population to double once, doubles twenty times before
> fermentation begins, lag time of 7 hours.) You see, I have no
> idea how long it takes the yeast to double in population, how
> much yeast you have in 5 gallons before fermentation begins, or
> how much yeast you might expect in a dry yeast packet (which
> itself might have only 30% viability), a Wyeast packet, a pint
> starter at kraeusen, etc.
>
>
I concur that, within reason, there is no such thing as pitching too
much yeast. They Zymurgy Special Issue on Yeast is an excellent
reference for the things you are wondering about. I don't have
it here so I can't answer these questions directly. I seem to recall
that it was considered ideal to pitch about 2 million active yeast
cells per milliliter of wort! and that with this pitching rate
the yeast population would double an average of 2.5 times.
Another interesting yeast "fact" was that the yeast became active
most quickly if pitched into 90!F wort (or hydrated in 90!F water).
This makes me wonder about chilling the wort down to <65!F for a
cold break. I typically cool to 70!-85!F. In my recent Pale Ale
experiments I've been pitching 12g packets of Whitbread Ale Yeast
which have given me starts in less than 2 hours which I suspect
may be due to these warmer temperatures.
Geoff Reeves
Atomic City Ales
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 10 Aug 92 10:56:31 -0600
From: 105277@essdp2.lanl.gov (GEOFF REEVES)
Subject: 2 hour sparging
In HBD# 940, Tom Feller asks:
>How could it take 2 hr to run water sparge water through your
>grain bed unless the sparge was stuck(set mash?).
James Dipalma answers:
> Two hours seems a little lengthy to me as well, but it is
>certainly possible.
Terry Foster suggests in his book (either "Pale Ale" or "Porter"
I forget) that 2 hours is the _appropriate_ time for a sparge and
that the flow should be adjusted to achieve this elapsed time.
However he also mentions that this is not necessarily pratical for
home brewers. Jim, let us know how your experiment goes though!
Geoff Reeves
Atomic City Ales
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 10 Aug 92 10:57:23 -0600
From: 105277@essdp2.lanl.gov (GEOFF REEVES)
Subject: Hop Plugs and Pellets, What's the difference
> From: beb@pt.com (Bruce Buck)
>
> I've been brewing for several years and have always used hop pellets.
> Now there seems to be a lot of discussion about hop plugs. What exactly
> is the difference between the two? What are the advantages and disadvantages?
>
Hop pellets are ground up compressed hops. Hop plugs are unground compressed
hops. Both can usually be found in vacuum bags or nitrogen filled bags
so they stay fresher longer than loose hops. Hop pellets are easy to
work with but can be difficult to remove because they are ground so fine.
I prefer hop plugs because they are easy to remove and, I admit it,
simply because they look like hops once they have soaked in the
wort for a while and loosened up. It really would be a great innovation
though if they made the plugs small enough in diameter to fit through the
neck of a carboy. That problem is leading me to dry hop in my keg for the
first time this batch. This may turn out to be a good technique anyway -
as others have pointed out.
Geoff Reeves
Atomic City Ales
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 10 Aug 92 12:49:26 CDT
From: raudins@galt.b11.ingr.com (glenn raudins)
Subject: Brewing Science Vs. M & B Science
How good are the following volumes? I understand that one set is used at
UC at Davis and the other supplemental at the Siebel Institute.
Brewing Science: Volumes 1-3 from Academic Press Inc
Malting and Brewing Science: Volumes 1-2
from Chapman & Hall, 1982
Also, could someone send me information and/or a contact person to obtain
information on the courses/degrees offered by UC at Davis, in the brewing
area (Fermentation Science).
Glenn Raudins
raudins@galt.b11.ingr.com
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 10 Aug 92 14:24 CDT
From: korz@ihpubj.att.com
Subject: Re: all malt vs. extracts
There are many styles of beer for which excellent brew can be made with
extracts and some for which at least partial-mashing is almost necessary
to make a true-to-style batch. The lighter-colored and lighter-bodied
styles that *require* a malt nose, IMHO, are the ones hardest to make
excellent without mashing at least part of your grains. I've made
several stouts that were excellent without mashing, I just used extract
and steeped the roasted barley and black patent malts in the water as
I brought it to a boil. On the other hand, when I judged bocks in the
first round of the National Competition, very few of the beers in my
flight had the requisite malt nose. Although I did not check the recipes
of the malt-nose-deficient brews, I think it's a fair assumption that the
ones that had no malt nose were extract brews. Now I really wish that I
would have checked. Its one of the added benefits of judging.
One argument for going all-grain instead of extract is the additional
control that you get when you mash the grain yourself. I contend that
there is an equal if not greater variablity available to the brewer by
using various brands of malt extract. Each extract maker uses different
mash temepartures and profiles and if you experiment enough, you can
learn which are the more-fermentable brands and which are the more
dextrinous and which are poorly made (and create 6 inches of trub in your
fermenter). Another thing to consider is that the technology available
to the extract makers is well advanced of that which we have in our
kitchens. Among the brands to which I have narrowed my usage, I've found
great consistency.
Therefore, my position on this topic is that you can make very good beer
in all styles without mashing and you can even make excellent beer in
some styles without mashing, but for some styles, mashing the grain yourself
is virtually necessary to achieve excellence.
Al.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 10 Aug 92 15:56:35 EDT
From: dipalma@banshee.sw.stratus.com (James Dipalma)
Subject: yeast culturing
Hi All,
As part of the never-ending quest for improvement of my beer,
I've decided to try my hand at yeast culturing. I have read Roger
Leigstad's book, "Yeast Culturing for the Homebrewer", and believe
I have the basic idea. I have seen several posts over the past
few months from people who have grown pure cultures from single
yeast cells, isolated the S. delbrukii strain from Wyeast 3056, etc.
It is these net.brewers that I ask the benefit of thier experience.
I have located a source for glass petri dishes, pipettes, slides, etc.
What other equipment will I need? If a micro$cope is needed, what
power of magnification?
I have access to the libraries of some local colleges. Which texts
are recommended?
Procedural info on identification and isolation of different strains,
propagation techniques, etc., would be appreciated.
Peering over the edge of a deep, dark abyss,
Jim
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 10 Aug 92 15:03 CDT
From: korz@ihpubj.att.com
Subject: Re: Cider
First off, I must say that I've never made hard cider, but my comments on
the subject of yeast and sugar are of a philosophical nature unrelated
to the source of the sugars.
js says:
>Date: Wed, 5 Aug 92 10:14:26 CDT
>csrd.uiuc.edu (Brian Bliss)
>Subject: yeasts/grain bag source
>>I have an apple tree outside my apartment and I was wondering how to make a
>hard cider. A friend has one of those juicer machines and I was thinking
>that would be a good way to get the juice from the apples but where do you go
>from there.
><don't use red star champagne yeast (ale yeast will
>make a sweeter product).
>That advice depends on a few variables not the least of which is the sugar
>content of the juice. Most juice needs to have sugar added just to get
>enough alcohol to preserve it and the high tolerance of champagne yeast would
>not even enter the equation of most straight juice. It would run out of
>sugar before even ale yeast got tired.
Not all sugars are fermentable by every yeast. Lactose is not fermentable
by any of the Saccharomyces yeasts and thus can be used to sweeten cider
(or beer or mead, for that matter) without having to kill the yeast with
alcohol content.
>Secondly, one can always add sugar to adjust the sweetness after fermenting.
If mean adding sugar at bottling, this implies that you've somehow killed or
filtered out the yeast or else the yeast will go at the new sugar. Adding
sugar at serving time seems heritical, but it *is* the traditional way of
serving Faro (a Belgian Lambic style which is incredibly sour from welcomed
lactic acid bacterial activity).
Al.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 10 Aug 92 13:29:42 PDT
From: bryan@tekgen.bv.tek.com
Subject: Flurry of "break" material.
All this talk about cold break material got me to thinking about something.
I do (90%) full wort boils in a 10 gallon brewpot and use a counterflow
chiller. Usually 8 to 9 gallon batches, all grain. After I am finished boiling,
I put the finishing hops in the brewpot and put the lid on for 30 minutes.
Then I siphon through the counterflow chiller. The wort coming out of the
chiller is a murky brown color, (for a pale ale). Between the time I pitch
and the time the yeast takes off, 3 to 4 inches of "fluffy break" material
will settle into the bottom of the carboy, then when the yeast takes off,
it all gets mixed back up together again. It usually take a week of so
before the fermentation has settled down to the point that the wort clears
again. At this point, the material is more compact and is only 1 to 2 inches
in the bottom of the carboy. I rack into the secondary at this time. It is
usually within 10 S.G. points of being finished.
I figure this is probably hot and cold break material, though I do get
around a quart of hot break in the bottom of the brewpot. Any comments about
this "fluffy break" that gets stirred up during primary fermentation?
Also, thanks to those who posted the good technical articles in Mondays
digest, you know who you are and you know which parts were the good ones.
Bryan Olson
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 10 Aug 92 15:56 CDT
From: korz@ihpubj.att.com
Subject: Re: mashtuns/chillers/lipids
Micah writes:
>Unless I misunderstood, several HBers are useing the round vertical
>type ice chests as lauter vessels,that is something to sparge in.
>Since these industious brewers have gone to the trouble of putting
>a false bottom in the cooler why not use it as you mash tun as well,
>these things are certainly well insulated.
Some do, however, this system lends itself only to single-step infusion
mashes or decoction mashing, unless you've got an immersable heating
element. Upward-infusion (i.e. temperature-controlled) mashing is
usually done in a Bruheat-type masher or stovetop and then transfered
to the lautertun. Note also, that "round" is not a pre-requisite. I've
seen many square ice chest lauter tuns.
> On to wort chillers, I am planning to build a newer, and I hope
>better immersion chiller. The basis of my idea is that with a 1\2 inch
>copper line with tap water running thru it picks up from the wort about as
>much heat as is possible in the first nine feet. And so I intend to
>build a chiller that uses 4 circuts each 12 ft long in parallel made
>of 1\2 inch copper. I will have to use a manifold on both the inlet and
>outlet and will probably add some temperature sensors and water pressure
>guages, in hope that these may give some way to optimize the delta T by
>varing the flow rate. Anybody try anything similar? If so please post
>the pluses and minuses. Thanks
I think the idea is sound, except I would offer that you should use a
smaller diameter tubing (I used 3/8" OD) and see how many feet have
efficient heat transfer. Apparently, you have the math or patience to
determine this and I would like to know what the efficient part of the
length is on a 3/8" OD tube. However, I think Paul's post earlier in
HBD944 supports your multiple tube theory.
Since I've got your attention, Micah, could you post some references
for your early June post regarding lipids in beer. I was facinated and
want to read more about them. Thanks.
Al.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 9 Aug 1992 20:00:00 -0400
From: Glenn Anderson <glenn.anderson@canrem.com>
Subject: 2 pot boils
I'm wondering what adjustment would be required to my hop rate, if
any, when using two pots to boil 5 gallons instead of one.
Assuming that I boil 2.5 gallons in each pot and hop only one of the pots.
I'm using the AAU system described by Miller in TCHoHB, would the utilization
be the same as if I boiled and hopped the entire volume?
I'm guessing not, simply because of the volume of wort present to dissolve
hop resins into.
I would appreciate any comments/calculations anyone could share.
.....GA
- ---
þ DeLuxeý 1.21 #11377 þ Brewer fails CRC - More bottles than caps
- --
Canada Remote Systems - Toronto, Ontario/Detroit, MI
World's Largest PCBOARD System - 416-629-7000/629-7044
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 10 Aug 92 17:15:46 EDT
From: Arthur Delano <ajd@itl.itd.umich.edu>
Subject: Brewpub plans for Ann Arbor, MI
This article appeared in the Ann Arbor News (10 August 1992,
Monday), page C1 . I've condensed it greatly, mostly removing
information not immediately relevant to the subject and general
info about brewpubs which i suspect the average homebrewer knows
about. A fuller version is on alt.beer and rec.crafts.brewing...
Sorry, but i cannot provide the article number.
- ------------------------------------------------------------------
Couple plans pub that offers home brew
By Dave Wilkins (News staff writer)
Barry Seifer and Jennifer Kirscht want to brew and serve specialty
beers in downtown Ann Arbor.
If their well-researched business plan can overcome a string of
obstacles, Grizzly Peak Brewing Co. could, by next spring, be
Michigan's first brewpub.
They also plan to stock a full bar, offer both burger-and-ribs
fare and upscale dining, have an 80-seat banquet room, add a
rooftop beer garden, and sell contemporary home furnishings in a
third-floor loft.
Brewpubs, however, are prohibited in Michigan. That's one of
the more daunting obstacles facing Seifer and Kirscht.
On Jan. 1, they formed a corporation: Seifer & Kirscht Inc.
Last month, they bought the Cracked Crab building.
They have hired an architect and a lobbyist, who is pushing a
bill that would allow brewpubs to operate in Michigan.
Still on the list of things to do:
+ Find investors for the venture, which may cost up to $1.3
million.
+ Hire a properly schooled brewmaster
Another hurdle: neither Seifer or Kirscht have restaurant or
bar experience. They will hire experienced people, they say.
Michigan's liquor laws specifically separate the manufacturing,
wholesaling, and retailing of alcoholic beverages -- and,
therefore, prohibit brewpubs.
Seifer and Kirscht are counting on House Bill 5407, which would
allow brewpubs to operate in the state under strict limits.
The bill has passed the House and is now in the Senate's State
Affairs, Tourism and Transportation committee.
There is no formal opposition to the bill, McKinney says. It's
supported by the state Commerce Department and the Michigan
Restaurant Association. The powerful Michigan Beer and Wine
Wholesalers Association is neutral.
If the bill doesn't pass, Seifer and Kirscht say they will move
ahead with their restaurant and bar, and perhaps brew their beer
at another site or contract with another brewer.
[Any typos are mine -- AjD]
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 10 Aug 92 17:43:54 EDT
From: Jay Hersh <hersh@expo.lcs.mit.edu>
Subject: Cider
Jack replies to someone who advises use of an ale yeast instead
of red star champagne yeast for cider
> That advice depends on a few variables not the least of which is the sugar
> content of the juice. Most juice needs to have sugar added just to get
> enough alcohol to preserve it and the high tolerance of champagne yeast would
> not even enter the equation of most straight juice. It would run out of
> sugar before even ale yeast got tired.
>
> Secondly, one can always add sugar to adjust the sweetness after fermenting.
>
> Thirdly, one usually will add lots of sugar to make a higher alcohol apple
> wine and ale yeast would produce an undrinkably sweet wine.
I'm not sure what you're saying here. I have used Red Star Champagne, Red
Star Epernay, and Whitbread Ale yeasts in Ciders. I have always had to
fortify them somewhat so that they did not ferment out too completely,
as the apple sugars are highly fermentable, though the Ale yeast will
tend to quit earlier than the Champagne yeast.
I personally do not like sweetening after fermentation, and would rather
choose the right yeast and level of fortification so that the final
product ends at a desirable gravity.
My personal favorite ciders were produced with the Ale yeast, or the
Epernay. I thin keither of these are easier to work with than the
Champagne yeast in terms of acheiving a desirable final gravity
JaH
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hopfen und Malz, Gott erhalts
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 10 Aug 92 18:35:41 EDT
From: Pierre.Jelenc@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu
Subject: parallel chiller
In HBD #944, Micah Millspaw mentions planning to build a parallel
immersion chiller with four 12ft lengths of 1/2 inch tubing, and asks
for comments.
I made something similar, with two 20ft pieces of 3/8 inch copper
tubing. The tubing was first held together with string and tape, so as
to be coiled side-by-side , then it was shaped so as to bring both
inlets and outlets to two T compression fittings, the inlet one going
to a quick-disconnect fitting to the tap, and the outlet to a similar
quick-disconnect to the sink. The advantage is that the construction
is all metal up to the joints, and thus can be boiled thoroughly for
sanitizing. The in and outflow plastic tubings are then connected and
the water started in seconds, without heat damage to them.
This construction allows me to cool 5 full gallons to water-temperature
plus 5 degrees F in a bit less than 15 minutes. The wort must be
stirred slowly to optimize heat transfer.
Pierre
Pierre Jelenc pcj1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu
Columbia University, New York
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 10 Aug 92 12:46:29 -0500
From: oconnor@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (donald oconnor)
Subject: oring challenge
okay guys. rather than continue on along this "is too, is not"
discussion about orings and soda let's have a little experiment
to put a little substance behind the opinions.
here's the experiment. i have what i think most would call a
light lager (9 lbs vienna malt and some saaz hops) that's been
sitting in a used keg for about 5 weeks now. it was the first
time i had used the keg and i did nothing special at all to clean
either the keg or orings. i.e., i simply rinsed the soda out with\
warm water and cleaned the oring and lid with warm water, then
soaked the keg in a weak bleach solution before filling with the\
beer. i am willing to ship a bottle of this beer to
several people who have been claiming that old orings will ruin
the beer. all they have to do is taste and smell the beer and
tell me what kind of soda pop was in the keg before the beer.
i will even tell them that it was either coke, root beer, or
dr. pepper. i personally doubt that anyone will be able
to detect any hint of any soda pop whatsoever let alone
claim that it has 'ruined' the beer, but we shall see.
Now who should be the judges. I must insist that kinney baugham and
al korz be 2 of them since they seem the most insistent. others
i would like on the panel are al richter, john rose, glenn tinseth
and the person who wanted to send me an old root beer oring whose
name i can't seem remember. there was another gentleman who posted
to the digest last friday expressing his experience who would be
a good choice as well. It will cost about 3 bucks each to ship
these out so i'm not inclined to send one to everyone reading the
digest but i think i have room for a couple of more. So these
people should simply email me there postal address and i will send
off a bottle in the next day or two. I don't use a counterpressure
bottle filler but i've had good success filling bottles with a piece
of vinyl tubing attached to the end of the picnic faucet as
someone suggested on the digest some time ago. when you get your
bottle do whatever you like to determine which soda pop (root beer,
coke, or dr. pepper) was previously in the keg and just email me the
answer. i will post the results to the digest after receiving all of
the replies.
So there's the challenge. let's see if kinney b and al k are really so
sure of their previous statements that an old oring will 'ruin'
a light lager.
by the way, if al korz' address contains words with more than 4 letters
someone may wish to help him out. based on his personal email to me
i can assure you he needs no help with the 4 letter words. he's
mastered them all.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 11 Aug 92 10:25 GMT
From: Andy Phillips <PHILLIPSA@LARS.AFRC.AC.UK>
Subject: Apologies for duplicate posting
Very sorry, but you may have noticed that I sent a double posting
of my tome about amylase temperature stability. This was because
the connection between the US and UK was down, and my first
posting (last week) generated no response from Rob's mailer, so
I waited three days and re-posted. Apologies to all those
who waded through the second posting with a strange sense
of deja vu.
Andy
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 11 Aug 92 09:46 EDT
From: smc@hotsc.att.com
Subject: Hop Vine Yields?
Reading about all the lucky homebrewers with their own hop vines has
made me curious. What kind of yield do you get from a hop vine, in
ounces, once you've dried the hops? E.g., is it 6 oz, or 6 lbs?
If I dedicate about 10' of a small garden along the side of a house
to hops, what could I expect for a total crop?
Steve Casagrande
smc@hotsc.att.com
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 11 Aug 1992 10:17 EDT
From: PGRAHAME%BENTLEY.BITNET@mitvma.mit.edu
Subject: truncated digests
In HBD 945, Dave Bircreports receiving a truncated digest on August 6.
The same thing happened to me, too. Dave, the digest is not really
truncated, which is evident from the fact that your directory will show
that it's a long file. The cause of the problem will not show up in
Wordperfect, nor--I suspect--would it in other wordprocessing formats.
The problem is simple: a control-Z code was entered in the text at line
200. The software interprets this as "end of the file" thus creating
the appearance of truncation. I could not discover this bug with "Reveal
Codes" presumably because it lies "outside" the file as read by the
software. However, the solution is simple. Just go into the file with
DOS EDLIN or a similar editor, and DELETE line 200 (there is nothing on
it but Control-Z). Then SAVE the file. Magically, the whole file will
now be readable.
Salut,
Peter Grahame pgrahame@bentley.bitnet
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 11 Aug 92 09:58:30 CDT
From: andy@tonga.wustl.edu (Andy Leith)
Subject: Bleach and SS, holes, Minneapolis
Jack posts details (#945) of an experiment that he did to determine
whether or not bleach will corrode stainless steel. He didn't have
an empty keg to use in the experiment. Some time back I got lazy and
left a cornelius keg of mine sitting with the bleach sanitizing
solution in it. The following week I kegged an IPA and when I
pressured up with CO2, a thin stream of pale ale spurted across the
kitchen from a tiny pin hole in the side of the tank.
So if you leave bleach solution in your keg for a long enough time
(> 1 week) it probably WILL corrode the keg regardless of what intuition
may say to the contrary.
If anyone has any safe ideas on how to repair a pin hole in my keg I
would be most grateful.
I would also like to know of any brew shops, brew pubs, clubs, or
homebrewers in the Minneapolis area, as I am moving there from St. Louis
in a couple of weeks
Thanks
Andy Leith andy@wups.wustl.edu
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 11 Aug 92 10:54:21 EDT
From: card@apollo.hp.com
Subject: co2 purity
FYI From New England Beer Club
/Mal Card
>>
>>
>> There have been some questions about CO2 purity. Although I am
>>not aware of any contamination problems with CO2...I am aware that there
>>are atleast 3 grades of it; industrial, beverage and analytical. Of course
>>you can figure out what use beverage grade is rated for, with analytical
>>being the purest for scientific purposes. Industrial is the lowest quality
>>and used for fire extinguishers and other non-food grade needs. I personally
>>fill my tank at a beverage supplier to insure getting a known good CO2
>>for dispensing beer. Not sure if the industrial is acceptable, but its
>>seems like a gamble to me.
>>
>> Also, a beverage supplier also told me that CO2 tanks can build up
>>with oil (that apparently occurs as part of the CO2 manufacturing process.
>>He suggested that after many refills, you can purge the oil by standing the
>>empty tank upside down overnight. The next day, open the valve (with no
>>regulator attached) with the tank still inverted. The remaining CO2 will
>>blow out any oil that has accumulated in the tank.
>>
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 11 Aug 92 09:47:22 MDT
From: mlh@cygnus.ta52.lanl.gov (Michael L. Hall)
Subject: Fermenting mead
Hank Luer writes:
>Regarding fermentation of honey to make mead: About eleven years
>ago I bought five gallons of wild-flower honey, diluted it to a
>specific gravity of 1.1 (wine strength), added acid blend (tar-
>taric, citric, malic) to .9% and sprinkled in five sachets (5g ea)
>of dry montrachet wine yeast. This produced about 25 gallons of
>liquid. It was January and both the water and the fermentarium
>(New Jersey cellar) were cold. I waited. Nothing happened.
[goes on to mention trying several other things, finally adding
some grapes and being successful.]
The thing that you were missing in the first trial was yeast
nutrient. Normally, brewers don't have to worry about this,
because it is contained in the ingredients (malt or fruit).
However, if you are making a straight mead (no fruit, only
honey), then you need to add yeast nutrient yourself. Yeast
nutrient can be as simple as ammonium chloride, but there are
also various brand names available on the market that different
people swear by. Any good book on making mead should have a
discussion of this.
Mike Hall
hall@lanl.gov
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 11 Aug 92 09:33 PDT
From: Bob_Konigsberg@3mail.3com.com
Subject: Stainless Steel corrosion
In HBD # 945 Jack Schmidling writes about his chlorine/stainless steel
experiment.
I've had corrosion problems with stainless especially where it is of
cheap(er) quality. The first stock pot I had was ok, but I left the lid
on, with liquid (no chlorine) overnight, and the next morning, the lid
was covered with rust flowers and pitting. In two cases our stainless
tableware (an inexpensive set) has developed similar marks.
FWIW, it seems that the mixing of ingredients in the stainless alloy is
not always as good as it should be, and lumps (crystals??) of straight
steel/iron are left in the material so that the chromium oxide (whatever
form) does not form a complete seal on the material, hence the rusting.
None of the high quality stainless stuff I've bought has ever shown any
of these problems, so it goes back to "you get what you pay for" or if
not, then take it back to the store.
BobK
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 11 Aug 92 10:48:53 MDT
From: Brian.Smithey@Central.Sun.COM (Brian Smithey)
Subject: Bleach sanitation
>>>>> In HBD #945, JKL <JLAWRENCE@UH01.Colorado.EDU> writes:
> In HB943, Jeff Frane writes:
Jeff> Change them both, why don't you. If you're sanitizing with the right
Jeff> concentration of chlorine you shouldn't have to rinse at all, and you're
Jeff> pretty much defeating the purpose by throwing that water onto your
Jeff> sanitized surfaces -- try using boiled water if you feel a need to
Jeff> rinse.
Jane> OK, I'll bite. What's the "right" concentration of chlorine? I
Jane> thought you had to rinse until there wasn't any more smell. Won't any
Jane> chlorine left on the equipment kill all the good stuff? (I'm currently
Jane> using 1-2 Tbl. of chlorine bleach per 1 gal water.)
This was covered a while ago on the HBD, I think Bob Jones and
George Fix went back and forth on it a bit. I seem to remember
the final outcome being that 1/2 c. of grocery store bleach
per 5 gallons of water was sufficient to get the chlorine level
to the 200 ppm or whatever concentration it was that will
sanitize. I've been using this concentration with 30 minute
contact times and no rinsing for about 4 or 5 batches now, and
haven't noticed any problems -- my yeast takes off ok, and I
don't notice any off-flavors from the bleach treatment. I am
very careful to pour out every bit of chlorine/water that I
can, which usually requires tipping the carboy upside down
several times with several minute "rest" periods in between,
to allow the drops to run down the side and pool in the bottom
of the carboy. The pools pour out easier than trying to shake
the drops out.
If you want to convince yourself that the beer flavor isn't
being affected, take it to your local homebrew club and have
some guinea pigs taste test it for you (Hi Dave!). Or enter
it in a competition that will provide feedback and check what
the judges say. Or drink it yourself, and if you're happy
then it works.
A quick run of "units" shows 16 tablespoons per cup, so I'm
using 8 tablespoons per 5 gallons. Your 1-2 Tbl. per gallon
(5-10 Tbl. per 5 gallons) is right in the ballpark.
Brian
- --
Brian Smithey / Sun Microsystems / Colorado Springs, CO
smithey@rmtc.Central.Sun.COM
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 11 Aug 1992 13:11 EST
From: Frank Tutzauer <COMFRANK@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu>
Subject: truncated digests
About these truncated digests. I think what happens is sometimes a stray end-
of-file marker gets put in. For example, I use WordPerfect to write my posts,
which I then save as ASCII and upload to the Vax for mailing. The problem is
that WordPerfect puts an EOF at the end of the file, which I then strip out
using my Vax editor. Sometimes I forget, though, and then depending on the
software you use to read the digest, you may or may not get truncated at the
EOF I left in. My software (Browse) ignores the end-of-file, so the digest
looks ok to me, but other software respects the EOF, hence truncation. Even
if you get someone to email you another copy, until the EOF is stripped,
you'll still get truncated.
Now let's just hope I remember to take the end-of-file out of THIS post.
- --frank
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 11 Aug 92 11:12:26 MDT
From: scojam@scojam.Auto-trol.COM (Scott James.)
Subject: Mash - Hot Water Heater
Last time I suggested the idea of mashing with a modified hot water heater.
After some investigation, here is what I've discovered...
1. Hot water heaters are insulated with 1~3" glass. This would be a real
pain to cut through.
2. They heat upto 180F, but with a variance of +/- 20F. The stability comes
from the thermal isolation of that thick glass barrier.
After talking with this owner/operator of a local heating business, we started
talking about possibilities. They ranged from using a kiln(!!) with a temp.
controller to keep a steel vessel at a constant mash temperature to using a
pot wrapped with nichrome wire as the heating element, all encased in some
kind of insulation.
To me, this almost sounds like building a nuclear powered baby-bottle warmer.
It could be done, but why so expensive?
I'm currently using a 50 qt. coleman cooler with added hot water... draining
through a copper tube with slits cut into it with a hack saw. I keep getting
stuck sparges, but I think it's because the brew shop I use to grind my malt
uses an old coffee mill--I get lots of flour.
Oh well, I just wanted to keep you posted about ideas and progress (or lack of)
- --=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--
Scott James (N0LHX) scojam@Auto-Trol.COM
Ham - Guitarist - HomeBrewer - Pilot Auto-Trol Technology
- --=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #946, 08/12/92
*************************************
-------
