Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #1132
This file received at Sierra.Stanford.EDU 93/05/03 00:20:22
HOMEBREW Digest #1132 Mon 03 May 1993
FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
Rob Gardner, Digest Coordinator
Contents:
RE: What's up with Jim Koch (Jim Beauvais - CONTRACTOR HRIS)
RE: Nottingham yeast (Jpetty)
Freshops phone # (OIT_JAMES)
Nitrogen solubility (Ed Hitchcock)
NEW PRODUCT ANNOUNCEMENT (Jack Schmidling)
On-line brewing resources (MCGLEW, RAY)
YO' MOMILY (tmr1)
Re: Trappist Coors? (John Adams)
Re: mash channeling (Carl West)
Scotch Ale Caramel/Defense of Koch ("Manning, Martin P")
AHA National Homebrew Competition, Western Region Round 1 (Steve Dempsey)
New brewsheet now available in the HBD archive (Dave Shaver)
A little more help (mARK wITTEMAN)
beer bends/mashing questions/long draft runs/Koch animosity (korz)
Compressed files/Extraction rates (SWEENERB)
Texas Beer Sights & Tastes, Farnsworth Yeast (William M. Seliger)
help with 1st time partial mash (Peter Maxwell)
plans for the 'malt mill tm' (Robert Schultz)
Want Supplies (Getting Started) (Charles Boesel)
Tour of Canada Malting. (Herb Peyerl)
Cornelius Kegs (drose)
Send articles for __publication_only__ 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, BUT PLEASE NOTE that if
you subscribed via the BITNET listserver (BEER-L@UA1VM.UA.EDU),
then you MUST unsubscribe the same way!
If your account is being deleted, please be courteous and unsubscribe first.
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 don't send me requests for back issues - you will be silently ignored.
For "Cat's Meow" information, send mail to lutzen@novell.physics.umr.edu
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 93 07:25:33 EDT
From: Jim.Beauvais@East.Sun.COM (Jim Beauvais - CONTRACTOR HRIS)
Subject: RE: What's up with Jim Koch
Dan writes,
Can someone tell me why Jim Koch's name and products seem to be MUD on
this network. I just read a real caustic message about him and I
remember several about six months ago along the same lines. What did he
do?
Dan Philbrick
DANP@URSUS1.URSUS.MAINE.EDU
Well he name is MUD for some of us because he has LOTUS syndrome, i.e.
he wants to sue people.
He has tried to sue the Boston Beer Works a new brewpub in Boston who
used the name boston in their name. He says people will try their beer
not like it and it will hurt his sales. Well, ask people on the street
who makes Samual Adams Boston Lager, and i will be it ask 10 people
maybe one will say The Boston Beer Co.
Being unsuccessful at sueing the Boston Beer Works he then proceeded to
bring suit against Commonwealth Brewery for having the name Boston on
their neck label, well Commonwealth was the first brewer/pub in Boston
so why not use the name.
Since this did not work he brought another suit against Boston beer
works. This time it seems to have ended. BTW he lost again.
If you support small startup breweries and don't like the way big business
tries to squeeze the small guy. Don't BUY Samual Adams, it seems like a
good reason to boycott a product.
This is written up in the Yankee Brew News, last issue of 1992 i think,
titled: The Boston Beer Wars..
Cheers
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 93 7:28:54 EDT
From: Jpetty@PICA.ARMY.MIL
Subject: RE: Nottingham yeast
Thanks to all who responded to my Nottingham yeast question. The consensus
is that this is a slow starter and a higher pitching rate may get it going
sooner. My batch did start shortly after I posted the problem and is perking
away. The temp was also a few deg cooler than I thought contributing to the
slow start.
------------------------------
Date: 30 Apr 1993 09:01:58 -0500 (EST)
From: OIT_JAMES@VAX1.ACS.JMU.EDU
Subject: Freshops phone #
Freshops
36180 Kings Valley Hwy.
Philomath, OR 97370
503-929-2736
------------------------------
Date: 30 Apr 1993 10:04:09 -0300
From: Ed Hitchcock <ECH@ac.dal.ca>
Subject: Nitrogen solubility
tmr1@hotlg.att.com (sorry, don't know your real name) responded to my post:
>As a SCUBA diver, I would like to clarify the term "the bends" or as it
>is also know as "decompression sickness" (DCS). DCS is caused by dissolved
>N2 coming out of solution from the blood, muscle and other fluids and body
>tissues when a diver ascends too rapidly. This forms tiny bubbles that
>cause neurological and physiological damage to the body.
>
>Although diatomic nitrogen (N2) is a very stable element and is relatively
>inert at low temperature and pressure, it is easily dissolved in fluids
>such as blood, water or beer. I can't say if or why it causes a good head
>on beer, but I can say that it will dissolve in it.
Once more for those of you who've nissed this in the past:
According to my CRC Handbook, the solubility of certain atmospheric gases
in cold water at sea level (101.3 KPa):
Oxygen: 4.89cc
Nitrogen: 2.33cc
Carbon dioxide: 171.3cc
Nitrogen may easily be disolved, but only to the saturation point,
which is very low. Thus if the pressure drops (a diver rising from the
depths, Guinness leaving the spout) to 1 atm, any amount on N2 greater than
2.33cc/100mL will bubble out of solution, causing DCS ("the bends") or a
lot of tiny bubbles which rise and make a nice creamy head. As for why we
don't get the bends from oxygen bubbling out of solution, well, I don't
know the relative solubilities of O2 and N2 at higher pressure. I can
say we have a physiological transport system for oxygen, so that most of
the O2 in the blood is bound to haemoglobin and not simply in solution.
CO2 in solution undergoes a chemical reaction, and exists (at least in part)
as carbonic acid. As such, CO2 comes out of solution slowly, producing the
initial foaming which settles down to gentle bubbling.
Don't drink and dive.
ed
___
/ \ \ Ed Hitchcock +<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>+
| 0 \ Dept of Anatomy & Neurobiology + Drink +
| > Dalhousie University + Noise / Make +
| 0 / Beer Wasteland + Beer +
\___/ / ech@ac.dal.ca +<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>+
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 93 08:21 CDT
From: arf@genesis.mcs.com (Jack Schmidling)
Subject: NEW PRODUCT ANNOUNCEMENT
ANNOUNCING THE EASYSPARGER
The EASYSPARGER provides a continuous supply of hot sparge water from any
water tap. No more need to anticipate your sparge water requirements in
advance, just shut off the EASYSPARGER when you have enough. It is the
perfect companion to the EASYMASHER and just about any other lauter system.
Send email for details, price and delivery. Include postal address if you
would like a complete catalog.
Jack Schmidling Productions
4501 Moody
Chicago Il 60630
(312) 685 1878
js
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 93 09:00
From: RMCGLEW.BUSSYS@mhssmtp.mdso.vf.ge.com (MCGLEW, RAY)
Subject: On-line brewing resources
I just looked at the on-line brewing resources from the listserv. As
an avid user of the GEnie system I'd like to put a plug in for it.
I've been on it for over a year and enjoy it quite a > bit.
For users with local nodes there is no charge other than the
$4.95 monthly fee (most people have local nodes), for others
they can use Sprintnet to access GEnie for about $2/hr.
NO advertisements per page! Well organized topics (hey, I started
some of them).
Downside, there ridiculously high Internet charges
makes reception of the HBD too expensive!
Now that I have been "Martinized" I have absolutly
no affiliation etc, etc, etc.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 93 09:21 EDT
From: tmr1@hotlg.att.com
Subject: YO' MOMILY
In the Homebrew Digest #1131, Jack Schmidling uses the term "momilies" in
the following message on mash temperatures:
>Contrary to popular opinion and probably one of the many momilies that keep
^^^^^^^^
>extract brewers from taking the plunge into all grain is the perceived need
>for precise temperature control for a "successful mash". If by a successful
>mash we mean producing a good beer at a nominal extract yield, I suggest that
>you can achieve that even if your mash temp wanders randomly between 150F and
>160F for 30 minutes or more.
I haven't been able to find this word in any dictionary. I have seen this
word used before. Could it be that the author really wanted to say
"anomaly"? Or is this a slang term used in homebrewing lingo?
Tom Romalewski
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 93 08:48:42 -0600
From: John Adams <j_adams@hpfcjca.sde.hp.com>
Subject: Re: Trappist Coors?
Hey I can imagine getting your PhD in brewing at one of the finest schools
in the world. Studying in a country where some of finest beers are produced.
Meeting some of the most knowledgable people in the industry/acedemia and
when you're all finished...
...going back to the states to make Coors!
BTW he's a homebrewer.
John Adams
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 93 11:21:45 EDT
From: eisen@kopf.HQ.Ileaf.COM (Carl West)
Subject: Re: mash channeling
Unlike the usual sort of channeling, I would expect channeling
in a mash to put you in contact with future spirits.
Jack's not the only one that can't pass one up every now and then.
Carl
------------------------------
Date: 30 Apr 1993 23:37:49 -0600
From: "Manning, Martin P" <manning#m#_martin_p@mcst.ae.ge.com>
Subject: Scotch Ale Caramel/Defense of Koch
In defense of Jim Koch, he has done something that no one else except maybe
Fritz Maytag has done, and that is to produce some interesting and characterful
beers which have displaced some of the imports in pubs, restaurants, and even
grocery stores nation-wide. His marketing tactics are rather aggressive, but
maybe that's what it takes to be heard among the large domestic and imported
beer marketeers (Anchor has succeeded in a much quieter, more dignified manner,
though). If Koch has told a few white lies, or miss-represented himself, he is
not the first to do so in the promotion of beer sales, nor will he be the last.
The point is that he is helping significantly to awaken the public to the
diversity in the world of beer which has been all but lost in the American
market. I don't think anyone can argue that Koch's products are not of the
highest quality, and generally representative of the style which they purport
to be. The glaring exception to this, of course, is the ridiculous Cranberry
"Lambic".
************************************
In response to the inquiry by Tom Leith about caramel flavor in scotch ales, I
suggest that the addition of some of the Belgian (DeWulf-Coysens) "Special B"
caramel malt is what is wanted. This is a very dark caramel malt which, as
mentioned in Pierre Rajotte's Belgian Ales book, is produced specifically for
brewing (Belgian) Scotch Ales. It is available from several homebrew shops at
outrageous prices, about $1.30 per lb, usually. Bulk-buyers can get it for much
much much less.
MPM
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 93 10:44:33 MST
From: Steve Dempsey <steved@longs.lance.colostate.edu>
Subject: AHA National Homebrew Competition, Western Region Round 1
AHA National Homebrew Competition
Western Region 1st Round
[ The length of this posting is intended to inform folks
in the region of significant changes for our site over
past years. I know a number of people who have refused
to participate when a number of problems started to
appear over the last couple of years. We have tried
to address these by changing the way the competition
is organized and run.]
The first round of the AHA NHC for the western region
will be held Saturday, June 5 and Sunday, June 6 at
the Wynkoop Pub and Brewery in downtown Denver,
Colorado. Judging sessions will run approximately
9:30am-12:00pm and 1:30pm-4:30pm each day. We will
also have space available at the pub Saturday evening
for socializing and potential extracurricular activities
still in the planning stages.
We expect some 800 entries to arrive and will need
many judges and stewards to complete the judging on
schedule. Participation of every available judge
is essential to the continuing success of this
competition.
Some significant changes will be implemented this year
over previous first round sessions held in Boulder.
Organizers from each of the four major regional sites
have been working together to ensure uniform procedures
are used everywhere.
The first major change for us is registration for judges.
We plan to schedule sessions in advance so judges will
know their responsibilities for attending a specific
session to judge a specific style. In the past, one
could simply show up at any session, gather in groups
of two to four judges, pick out a flight of beers, and
have at it. While this offered great flexibility, it
also presented the organizers with great anxiety in
guessing how many sessions would be required and how
many judges would show up -- and if the judging would
actually be completed in time.
Large competitions such as the Blue Bonnet, the GABF
Professional Panel Blind Tasting, and several prior
NHC 1st and 2nd rounds at other sites have all used
this format successfully. In order for it to work,
judges will need to contact the organizers with their
availability and preference for judging specific
styles (see below). BJCP judges and registered clubs
and retail suppliers will receive detailed information
mailed on April 30.
All experienced judges including BJCP registered judges,
professional brewers, industry consultants, and any
other individual with experience at large regional or
national competitions is encouraged to judge. Beginning
judges who have experience at one or two local competitions
are also encouraged to participate as apprentice judges,
and will be placed on a panel with more experienced
judges. Anyone else wishing to participate is welcome
to help with stewarding duties. A steward is responsible
for maintaining order at the table by assisting judges
with supplies, etc. and has the opportunity to observe
the judging process and even sample some of the beers,
but leaves the evaluation of the entries to the judges.
One of the best ways to start learning about judging
is to work as a steward and watch what goes on without
having the responsibility of evaluating the entries.
The second major change this year will be the method
for selecting entries qualifying for the final round.
In the past, we have tried to go by numeric scores alone.
The first round held in Chicago in 1992 used a two-tier
approach: all flights of a particular style are judged
simultaneously and a few of the best entries are
collected by a leading judge. These contenders are
gathered quickly and passed to a second panel of
judges including one judge from each of the first
groups. These judges decide which entries will
advance to round 2. This two-tier system overcomes
problems with skewed or inaccurate scoring by any
panel of judges, and comes much closer to accurately
determining the best beers from categories with
large numbers of entries.
Judges and stewards may register by e-mail to:
<steved@lance.colostate.edu>
Please use a subject of "NHC". Include your name and
phone number(s), a postal address if you are NOT on the
BJCP or club mailing list, and indicate at least three
or four beer styles you feel best qualified to judge.
Once we know the judging schedule, you will be contacted
by phone and/or e-mail to confirm the styles and sessions
you will work. If e-mail does not go through, call me at
(303) 491-0630 [day] or 482-1403 [evening]; you can leave
a message with the above information at either number if
I'm not in.
================================ Engineering Network Services
Steve Dempsey Colorado State University
steved@longs.lance.colostate.edu Fort Collins, CO 80523
================================ +1 303 491 0630
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 93 12:09:08 CDT
From: shaver@zeppelin.convex.com (Dave Shaver)
Subject: New brewsheet now available in the HBD archive
Over the last year I've been working on a new brewsheet for keeping
track of my batches. Stephen Hansen was kind enough to add it to the
archives. My sheet is very similar to the existing brewsheet in the
archives created by Chris Shenton, but it has a few more bells and
whistles.
I used FrameMaker to create the sheet, so both MIF (Maker Interchange
Format) and PostScript versions are available. FTP users can get them
from the archive on sierra.stanford.edu as:
/pub/homebrew/docs/brewsheet2.mif.Z
/pub/homebrew/docs/brewsheet2.ps.Z
Listserver users should request them with:
get homebrew brewsheet2.mif
get homebrew brewsheet2.ps
Happy brewing,
/\ Dave Shaver
\\ CONVEX Computer Corporation, Richardson, TX
\/ Internet: shaver@convex.com UUCP: uunet!convex!shaver
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 93 10:38:45 -0700
From: l200-cu@garnet.berkeley.edu (mARK wITTEMAN)
Subject: A little more help
To all HOMEBREW Readers:
About three weeks back, I posted a request for help on my homework -- more
specifically, I was looking for lists of California Microbreweries, info on
the families or styles of beers, and info on the "objective" description of
beer.
The response I've gotten has been stupendous. In all, about 30 people
responded and everybody was wildly helpful even though they were obviously
dealing with an ammateur. (Meaning me.) I wasn't able to respond to
everybody individually, so I hope this will suffice as a thank you.
But aside from expressing my gratitude, I must make one more request. About
two weeks back, a fella from AHA offered to e-mail me some info on beer
judging and how to become a licensed beer judge. I meant to save his
message and respond with my own message asking that he please send it my way --
it's just the sort of thing I need. But, as you can probably guess from
the tone of this request, I lost the message.
If the author of that message, or anyone else for that matter, could e-mail
me the aforementioned information, I'd be, once again, ever so grateful.
Sorry to fill the HOMEBREW screens with my personal projects. I'm not
a HOMEBREWER, but subscribing to this newsletter has convinced me that
some day, when I'm no longer a starving student, I will give it a shot.
Thanks for entertaining my request.
========================================================================
o
* o
*
mARK h. wITTEMAN 0000000000 STOUT
00000000000 BITTER
MLIS Student 0========== IPA
University of California 0|. . |===| PORTER
Berkeley 0| . : | || PILSNER
0| . . | || BOCK
l200-cu@garnet.Berkeley.EDU | . | || RAUCHBIER
| . .|===| SAISON
(Note that the first character in my |. . | WEISSBIER
address is a lower-case 'L,' not a one.) | : | BARLEY WINE
~~~~~~~~~~
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 93 13:44 CDT
From: korz@iepubj.att.com
Subject: beer bends/mashing questions/long draft runs/Koch animosity
Tom writes:
>Although diatomic nitrogen (N2) is a very stable element and is relatively
>inert at low temperature and pressure, it is easily dissolved in fluids
>such as blood, water or beer. I can't say if or why it causes a good head
>on beer, but I can say that it will dissolve in it.
It is my understanding that although N2 may be soluble in beer, it is *MUCH*
less soluble than CO2, which is why it is used by Guinness to dispense at
high pressure without uncontrollable foaming.
*******************
Drew writes:
> I am planning to brew the following two batches this weekend.
>
>1) Imperial Stout
> Desired Yield: 5.5gallons@.1075
Note that this is at the low-gravity end of the Imperial Stout range.
My last one had an OG of 1120.
> Hops:
> Boil: 60 IBU Chinook (1 hour)
60 IBU of Chinook may be a bit abrasive. Many HBDigesters have reported
harsh bitterness from excessive use of Chinook hops. As high alpha hops
go, I use Nugget, which I find much more pleasant even at high hop rates.
Make sure you aerate well. High gravity ferments mean that the yeast
are going to need a lot of oxygen.
>1) In the past, I have made my own roasted barley by toasting milled 2
>row klages at 350F for 15 minutes. The beer came out *very* cloudy.
>Any ideas how to avoid this?
You were making roasted malt (Brown, probably) not Roasted Barley. Roasted
Barley is made from *unmalted* barley. I don't know why the beer was so
cloudy unless you roasted *all* the grain in the batch and denatured all the
enzymes -- but then the starch test would have been positive forever.
>2) When a yeast's attenuation percentage is listed, is that
>%(fermentable sugar) or %(total sugar)
It's apparent attenuation (actual attenuation is much less, but alcohol is
thinner than water, so it gets thrown off). Say for a 75% apparent
attenuation, if the OG is 1.050, the FG you can expect would be about 1.0125
((1.050 - 1) * (1 - 0.75) + 1 ) = 1.0125.
^ ^^^^^^^^ ^
| | |
| | This is because you're putting the water back
| |
| This is because you want to know what gravity
| is left, not what was taken away.
|
This is because the water won't be attenuated.
>
>3) How can one determine the fermentable/unfermentable ratio *prior*
>to mashing? What percentage fermentables can I expect at 158F mash?
>At 148F mash?
I'm sure you know the answer to this question, but all this talk of
fermentables and unfermentables tends to make things seem complicated.
Prior to mashing the malt is virtually all starch, so it's 0% fermentable
and 100% unfermentable. I don't know about the exact numbers, but last
night, I was re-reading George's article on Evaluating Yeast in the 1992
AHA Conference Proceedings and he mentions 65% fermentable wort if mashed
at (I believe) 154F. Is that right George? Did your source for those
numbers perhaps have other temps and percentages too? Of course these
would all be thoretical ideals because of variations in grains from year
to year and maltster to maltster, no?
>
>4) I have never gotten the iodine test to go negative in less than 2
>hours in the 153F-156F range. The top of the mash may test negative
>for starch, but upon stirring, the test will go positive. I always
>wait untils the stirred mash tests negative. I also tend to get very
>alcoholic, thinner bodied ales. I would prefer a fuller bodied lower
>alcohol (4.5% desireable) brew. Should I be stopping the mash before
>the test goes negative?
No, no, no. If you want a fuller beer, you want a more dextrinous wort.
Mash at a higher temperature, approaching 158F. Don't linger at the
low-temp end of the saccharification temperature range (148F) or you will
convert too many dextrins into fermentables. 2 hours seems quite long.
I suspect either that your pH is off, your water chemistry is impeding
the enzymes or your thermometer is off and you're actually mashing at
145F.
>
>5) I prime with 1.5qts 1.040 sweet wort for bottling. THis is roughly
>equivalent to 3/4cup corn sugar. Should I increase this for the stout
>due to the high gravity?
1075 is not really that high, but I used 1/2 cup corn sugar for priming
my 1120 Imperial stout and it carbonated quite well.
**********************
Dennis writes:
>
>I haven't yet resolved with my spouse the issue of space in the kitchen
>fridge for a beer keg, but I thought up this compromise the other day:
>
>How about putting the keg and CO2 tank in the basement and running a 1/4
>inch line up through the kitchen floor into the fridge, then through a
>steel cooling plate and a tap? This way, a single glass of beer would be
>cooled enough, and for a group, you could put the cooling plate into a tub
>of ice.
>
>My major concern is that I'd have to crank up the pressure to get a good
>flow through about 12 feet of tubing, then the brew might be two gassy when
>it's finally dispensed.
You're right, it would be quite gassy. You're right about needing a lot
of pressure to push the beer that distance, but the *real* culprit for
needing high pressure is head (the change in height that you will have
to push the beer up). It's all quite involved, but not too complicated
to figure out. I suggest you pick up the 1992 AHA Conference Proceedings.
In there, you will find an article by Dave Miller which will give you all
the formulas and step-by-step instructions for figuring out what you need
to do to make your system work. HINT: the key will be using a bigger
diameter hose.
*****************************
Dan writes:
>Can someone tell me why Jim Koch's name and products seem to be MUD on
>this network. I just read a real caustic message about him and I
>remember several about six months ago along the same lines. What did he
>do?
Koch's entrance onto the HBD doo-doo list was thanks to his suing the
Boston Beer Works brewpub for trademark infringement. This apparently
was done for no other reason than to get some publicity since beer
drinkers with enough taste to tell the difference between Bud and Sam
Adams certainly have enough intellegence to tell the difference between
Boston Beer Works and Boston Brewing Company. Not only did Koch sue
in a lower court (which ruled in favor of BBW), but took the case to
a higher court (which rules again in favor of the BBW). Hence the
"starve a lawyer... boycott Sam Adams" motto was born.
A second reason for our hatred of Koch is due to his misuse of the
appelation "Lambic" which he used on a weak Cranberry Beer, that I
guarantee was not made by spontaneous fermentation as a true Lambic
must be (in the vicinity of Brussels, no less).
Koch's recent ads in the Chicago area (the ones where Koch says he started
the microbrewing revolution) would have probably been ignored by us HBD'ers
if not for his "beating up" on a upstart brewpub which has far better things
to worry about than court appearances.
All of this is too bad. Frankly, I think that Sam Adams makes some of the
best beer that is available nationwide and at a reasonable price. His
ads (incorrect as they may be) have, indeed, made inroads into changing the
average American beer-drinker's taste. I would much rather see every second
customer at a liquor store carrying a case of Sam Adams than Budweiser or
Miller or Coors (as I see today), if only Koch would stop this litigative
nonsense and stop with the false advertising. A public appology would be
nice too...
Has anyone mentioned that Koch should have called his Doppelbock "Litigator?"
Al.
------------------------------
Date: 30 Apr 1993 13:53:39 -0600 (CST)
From: SWEENERB@msuvx2.memst.edu
Subject: Compressed files/Extraction rates
Pardon my ignorance, but...
What program do I need to decompress the files with the '.Z' extension in
the Sierra.Stanford archive? Is this some type of Unix program? Our system
here at Memphis State is a DEC VAX to which I can download to either a PC or a
Macintosh. Are there programs available on these platforms to decompress
these archives? Please email soon as my account here may be taken away next
week when our semester ends. N_ts!
Also, I brewed my first all-grain batch last week and some questions about
extraction rates have been bugging me ever since. I used 9 lbs of grain total
(7.5 lb klages, .5 lb cara-pils, .5 lb dark crystal malt, and .5 lb wheat malt)
and got an OG of 1036, which computes out to about 20 pts/lb/gal. This seems
low compared to some of the extraction rates I see bandied about on the HBD.
However, when I went examined some of the receipes in the Winners Circle
section of Zymurgy I computed rates between 19 and 28 pts/lb/gal, with an
average of about 24. Even these supposedly very good beers--I mean they placed
in a national contest so they must be good, right?--were lower than the 30-35
pts/lb/gal rates I often see quoted on the HBD. So what gives? Rates, I
assume are related to the grain crush, the type of grain, pH, and the mashing
and sparging methods and temps. (My grains were Corona crushed, with a single
infusion mash in a picnic cooler with 3 gals h20 at 154 degrees for 90 minutes
- --with the first runoff at an OG of 1070, then sparged with 3.5 gals of 170
degree h20 @ 5.4 pH.)
I guess my question is, are higher rates necessarily better, since these winning
beers had lower extraction rates. Or are these lower extraction rates just
more common in the homebrewing community and therefore more likely to win at
contests? What are the disadvantages to having too high extraction rates, if
any? Are there other factors affecting the extraction rate than those listed?
Are there any glaring errors in my mash/sparging procedures? How do you know
when your grain crush is adequate? What is the air speed velocity of a fully
laden African sparrow?
There, I feel much better now. Thanks for letting me unload.
Bob Sweeney
Memphis State University
(901) MSU-4210
_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 93 11:17 CDT
From: akcs.wseliger@vpnet.chi.il.us (William M. Seliger)
Subject: Texas Beer Sights & Tastes, Farnsworth Yeast
I will be travelling to Texas in early May to spend some time in
San Antonio, Austin and Houston. I am interested in Beery sights and
tastes in all three cities. Private email to the following addresses
would be best.
Thanks in advance,
Bill Seliger
wseliger@chinet.chi.il.us -or- akcs.wseliger@vpnet.chi.il.us
p.s. Does Paul Farnsworth only do business via mail or does he take
house visits for yeast pickups???
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 1993 13:37:02 -0800 (PDT)
From: Peter Maxwell <peterm@aoraki.dtc.hp.com>
Subject: help with 1st time partial mash
I'd like to augment my to-date extract-only brews with a partial mash. My
plan is to use the oven, set at 150, and heat the mash on the stove top
prior to putting it in the oven. My question relates to the initial
heating. Everything I can remember reading about mashing talks about
heating water to a higher temperature so that it comes down to the correct
temp when the grain is added.
Why can't I put the grain in cold water and heat it all up together? This
seems obvious, but what am I missing?
A second question relates to use of a manifold for sparging. When is the
manifold put in? After mash-out (where I presume I'd have to stir
everything up to get it on the bottom of the pot) or is it in the pot the
whole time?
Thanks in advance for any help.
Peter
------------------------------
Date: 30 Apr 1993 16:15:13 -0600 (CST)
From: Robert Schultz <Robert.Schultz@usask.ca>
Subject: plans for the 'malt mill tm'
Jack/brewing community:
Does any one have plans/pictures of 'A' or _THE_ malt mill (tm) that
they are willing to post. I don't really have a problem with the cost of the
malt mill, but by the time one gets it to Canada with exchange and customs and
duty I am looking at over to $300 CND.
Being 'mechanically inclined' and access to a machine shop, I would like
to attempt to build my own mill, and incorporate some (most?) of the design
which Jack has apparently honed.
Greatfully....
Robert Schultz
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 29 Apr 93 17:53:34 PST
From: cboesel@diablo.uu.holonet.net (Charles Boesel)
Subject: Want Supplies (Getting Started)
I'm looking to start homebrewing, but really don't want to spend
a lot $$ on the supplies. I would like to know if anyone has used supplies
they would be willing to sell to me. If so, send me e-mail.
Cheers,
Charles
- --
charles boesel @ diablo creative | If Pro = for and Con = against
cboesel@diablo.uu.holonet.net | Then what's the opposite of Progress?
+1.510.687.3119(work) | What else, Congress.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 1 May 93 22:04:31 MDT
From: Herb Peyerl <Herb.Peyerl@novatel.cuc.ab.ca>
Subject: Tour of Canada Malting.
Today; our brew club (Marquis de Suds) had a tour of the Canada Malting
facility and I thought it would be of interest to people on hbd.
I don't remember a lot of details since there was a certain amount of
imbibing going on...
It started with us meeting the Head Maltster who took us into one
of the malting "houses". He explained that they currently have 4
houses with a total output capacity of ~500 tonnes/day (I'm presuming
metric tonnes). They're currently building a new house which
will allow them to shutdown 3 of the current ones and it is of a
european design which is apparently more efficient. It will allow
them to layoff half of their staff (they gave the staff a 1 year
notice of this and have allocated $3000CDN to assist the staff in
training for new careers. ($3000/person)).
We looked at the steeping silos where the barley is brought in;
steeped with water to facilitate washing of the grains. This is
done in several cycles which are determined by the production manager.
The current batch was a 6-6-10-8-6-7 steep/aeration cycle. This
works like so:
6 hours of wash
6 hours of aeration
10 hours of wash
8 hours of aeration
6 hours of wash
7 hours of aeration
A wash consists of pumping water into the bottom of the silo until
it overflows into an overflow reservoir and then letting it sit.
Aeration consists of draining the water and pumping air through
the silo from the bottom.
The cycle is determined by several factors:
a) customer spec (protein solubility; color; etc)
b) The characteristics of the grain shipped.
i) They use a strain called "Henning" (sp?)
ii) Each batch of grain is different due to the farm season.
>From there; the grain is drained into what they call a "piece"
which is basically a large (200yds long) concrete fenced off
area where it sits to germinate at a depth of about 3 feet. It
sits there with air flowing over it and through it (from the bottom)
until the germination is at the level they expect (I believe this
is about 15 hours)..
The grain is then dropped into a spray room which was a very damp
loud place and I was unable to hear exactly what the purpose of this
was...
>From there the green-malt is transferred to the kilning piece
where it sits for another period of time to kiln according to
colour again. The temperature varies also according to the
level of diastatic potential that is required by the customer...
That's basically where the tour stopped. My main interest aside
from the general process was in the machinery used. There is
a large concern for excessive handling of the grain so as to minimize
crushing of the husks. However; if during the aeration and
germination stage; the grain isn't mixed then aerobic heat gets
too high and this affects germination. So the trade-offs are
there and are treated seriously.
Points of interest:
A) there were bags of sulphur outside the grain house and it
was explained to us that grain tends to have "DNMA" (sorry)
which apparently is carcinogenic so the sulfur is introduced into
the flame of the kiln-burners and burnt. Apparently the
sulfur binds to the DNMA and reduces the levels substantially
The sulfur is used at a rate of .2 to .6 Kg / tonne depending
on the grain and even the amount of air-pollution in the
area at the time (I guess smog contributes to the DNMA levels).
Maybe one of our resident chemists can explain this further.
B) They use a naturally ocurring growth hormone to encourage
germination. Again; depending on the batch of grain; some are
more sluggish than others. Specifically the 6 row tends to be
more sluggish than the 2 row. (Labatts uses a 50/50 mix of 2/6
row whereas Molsons is 100% 2 row.). Apparently the customers
know that a growth hormone is used but they don't want to "hear"
about it... ie "I don't wanna know". It occurs naturally in the
grains anyway apparently; they're just increasing the amount.
C) Due to the high humidity (upto 100% relative); approximately
every three weeks they spray the humid areas with a bleach solution
to keep the mold and fungii at bay.
D) They use approximately 800,000 gallons of water a day
which they treat according to spec. Our fine city isn't normally
a water-sensitive area (ie: We have plenty and it's very GOOD!).
E) They use the heat generated by germination and steeping to
pre-heat the water in order to conserve energy and control the
temperature of the grains.
F) They don't have "extra" bags of malt hanging around. :-(
G) 20% of their grain comes from the Hudderites in our area.
After the tour; we went to the coffee room and all partook of
homebrew. Someone (A German member of our club) brought a
keg of Wheat beer which the Maltster and his asst thought
was just fantastic until someone used the "W" word. :-)
Apparently they've tried to malt wheat and rye but they just
soak up water and turn into a mush really easily with the
husks falling right off. So; they just stick to barley. They
don't do any specialty grains since that's too small a market
for their operation. (Each piece holds approximately 10 tons
of barley). They are apparently capable of producing color
up to 3.0 but most of their orders are in the 1.6-1.9 lovibond
range.
Well; sorry for the lack of detail. I hope some of you found
this of interest. If you ever get a chance; I'd suggest you
try to take a tour of a malting facility. It's eye-opening.
"I was early to finish | hpeyerl@novatel.cuc.ab.ca <Reply-To> | I brew |
I was late to start, I | peyerlh@cuug.ab.ca | there- |
might be an adult, but | #define JANITOR "Network Anal-yst" | fore I |
I'm a minor at heart." | JANITOR, NovAtel Communications Ltd.| AM. |
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 2 May 93 15:00:52 -0400
From: drose@husc.harvard.edu
Subject: Cornelius Kegs
Hello:
After 6+ years of homebrewing, I am getting ready to move away from
bottles and into draft. It looks like the cornelius system is the way to go.
I have a source for the equipment, but kegs are $40 a piece, and this sounds
steep to me. I would welcome any information anyone can offer on where you
got your kegs, how much you paid, the pros and cons of reconditioned kegs
verses as-is used ones, and the exact type of keg which is preferable (I
have some vague notion that their are "ball-type" and "pin-type" setups,
or something of this ilk), I would appreciate this. As these probably
qualify as FAQs, the answers may not be particularly edifying to the HBD
readership as a whole, it might be best to email me directly
(drose@husc.harvard.edu). Thanks.
d.
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #1132, 05/03/93
*************************************
-------
