Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #1522
This file received at Sierra.Stanford.EDU 94/09/09 00:51:04
HOMEBREW Digest #1522 Fri 09 September 1994
FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
Rob Gardner, Digest Janitor
Contents:
2-bucket sparging/2-day brewing/Wyeast 1098 (Scott Keegan)
Beer Transport Laws (Greg Bishop)
Weizen Lautering (Diane Palme)
Re: Fruit beer methods (Mark A. Stevens)
Re: Curing Hops ? (Mark A. Stevens)
worthless posts from lazy brewers (Steve Robinson)
Split the digest or bail out? I'll bail (Mark Evans)
San Jose Business Trip ("John Faulks, Martin Marietta, 8*255-3959")
Insulating kettles (Mike Schrempp)
"classic" green bottles, competition announcement (Spencer.W.Thomas)
Geneva (RLANCASTER)
RE:weizens/iodophors/cranks (Jim Busch)
Artic Ice, High Temp lagering (PSTOKELY)
Expectations over fruit (Schwab_Bryan)
Generic malt/Sanitizing (npyle)
Re: worthless posts from lazy brewers (HBD #1521) (Guy Garnett)
Not a helpful attitude (Tom Baier)
Basic Biology Lesson (COYOTE)
Re: Weitzen Lauter Summary (Erik Speckman)
Peat wood? (Bob Fawcett)
emergency blowoff idea (SPEAKER.CURTIS)
Re: Automatic Sparging (Jeff Berton)
Why insulate lauter? (FLATTER)
******************************************************************
* NEW POLICY NOTE: Due to the incredible volume of bouncing mail,
* I am going to have to start removing addresses from the list
* that cause ongoing problems. In particular, if your mailbox
* is full or your account over quota, and this results in bounced
* mail, your address will be removed from the list after a few days.
*
* If you use a 'vacation' program, please be sure that it only
* sends a automated reply to homebrew-request *once*. If I get
* more than one, then I'll delete your address from the list.
******************************************************************
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.
FAQs, archives and other files 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: Thu, 8 Sep 1994 09:14:39 +1000 (EST)
From: Scott Keegan <scottk@jolt.mpx.com.au>
Subject: 2-bucket sparging/2-day brewing/Wyeast 1098
Another post from my fellow worker.
David Draper wrote:
>Dear Friends, now that my mashing routine is getting relatively well-
>established, I have come up with a couple of questions that I am hoping some
>of you can help me with.
>1. I use one of the drilled-bucket-in-a-bucket sparging setups. I have had
>good advice from several highly knowledgeable net.brewers to underlet the
<snip>
As David is a fellow Eastern Suburbs Brewer (finest brew club in the
country) member and as I'm all-graining away myself these days I'll try
and add the benefit of my experience.
1. I too use a holey bucket and am pretty pleased now that I've got my
grain mill giving a consistent grind. Previously I was getting too many
fines because the grinding plates weren't parallel, and got (you guessed
it) set mashes. I don't underlet. T he primary purpose of underletting
is to prevent a set mash by gently floating the grist to the false bottom.
If the grain is properly milled this ought never happen (ref Miller
TCHOHB, I think). The amount of oxidation caused by the wort falling the
distance between the false bottom and the bottom of the outer
(collecting) bucket which would be saved by underletting would be trivial
compared with the amount caused by simply pouring the mash into the lauter
tun in the first place.
Underletting does add a considerable extra volume which either must be
boiled away if you are to use a reasonable sparge volume, otherwise you
must accept a loss of efficiency.
Slotted manifolds do seem to be a lot less efficient than a non-underlet
holey bucket, and probably less than an underlet one, judging by the
figures I see reported in HBD and elsewhere. I'll take a deep breath here
and say I think that includes Easymash ers as well... (Quick! To the
trenches!....) I have been getting extract rates of about 13 pts/kilo/20
litres which is near enough to 34-35 pts/lb/gallon expressed in American
units (and consistent with what Miller claims as reasonably acheivable. I
fai l to see any advantage to any equipment or technique that takes you
back from this.
2. The big blobs in the left-overnight mash do sound like flocculated
protein break material and as such do not pose a problem. A bigger
problem could be souring of the mash due to overnight contamination by
thermophillic lactic bacteria. Boiling the f ollowing day will kill them
and prevent any further spoilage but if they progress too far they could
still taint the mash overnight. You'll kill the little beasts but the
damage may have been done.
3. How about some responses to my Wyeast 1098 gritties question? The
silence is deafening....
David Fisher
******************************************************************************
David Fisher - Australian Securities Commission - Sydney, Australia
Phone: 61-2-9112707 Fax: 61-2-9112774
Any opinion expressed by the ASC is not necessarily mine.
******************************************************************************
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 7 Sep 94 22:19:44 PDT
From: bishop@magic.geol.ucsb.edu (Greg Bishop)
Subject: Beer Transport Laws
Hello HBDers. I was recently told that transporting beer across state
lines is illegal (specifically across the Utah border). Is this for
real????? If anyone knows about this, I would appreciate any information
that you have.
Private e-mail is best. I will summarize to the HBD in a few days.
Cheers,
Greg Bishop
bishop@magic.geol.ucsb.edu
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 8 Sep 1994 06:28:25 -0500 (CDT)
From: dspalme@mke.ab.com (Diane Palme)
Subject: Weizen Lautering
George asked about weizen lautering. Ok, I am a bit behind in responding,
but I thought I'd go ahead and throw in my $0.02. My brewing buddy and I
made a Celis clone last week and our plan to prevent sticking was to add
rice hauls just before mash-out. Now, we *got* the rice hauls, but no one
(and I mean no one at the store, no books, and no one over at r.c.b) could
tell us what *proportion* to add. <sigh> So, being the daring brewers
that we are, we threw in the whole bag. Yep, that's right, the WHOLE bag.
A pound of rice hauls. George, this is your saving grace. Not only did
the mash not stick, it sparged so fast that our extraction was way low. If
we'd been a little less tired (brain turned off at 10:00 pm) and we'd not
had to go to work in the morning (I have to get up at 5:00 am) we might
have done it. Hell, we *would* have done it. So, where am I going with
this? George, get thee some rice hauls! Oh, and don't use the whole bag.
I think 1/2 a pound might be more appropriate. Does anyone out there use
rice hauls? How much? <help!>
Oh, and one more thing. If you *do* use rice hauls, be sure you're outside
when you taste the spent grains. Them hauls is nasty! <ptoey!> <spit>
D.
- --
Diane Palme, EIT You really think that A-B would
Design Engineer, Special Machines accept my opinions as their own?
Allen-Bradley Co. (414) 382-2617 <sheesh!>
dspalme@mke.ab.com
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 8 Sep 94 08:42:05 EDT
From: Mark A. Stevens <stevens@stsci.edu>
Subject: Re: Fruit beer methods
In HBD 1521, Eugene Sonn (eugene@sccs.swarthmore.edu) asked about
adding fruit to a beer.
We had this discussion a few weeks ago, and at that time I'd quoted
an article by Ralph Bucca that appeared in "BarleyCorn" in which
Ralph said that the "preferred" way of adding fruit was to the
primary (which probably *IS* the time most homebrewers add it).
Al Korzonas pointed out that adding it to the primary probably is
not the best idea since bacteria can live on the skins of the
fruit and you don't have much (if any) alcohol going yet, and
you haven't given the yeast a good head start, so Al suggested
that the secondary is a better point to add fruit.
In Papazian's new "Home Brewers Companion", he talks about
adding fruit and suggests turning off the heat on the wort
and adding it at that stage, letting the fruit steep for a
good 20-30 minutes before transferring to primary. He also
mentions that because bacteria is usually on the skin, that
peeling fruit may be a good idea (of course you're talking
about raspberries, which isn't really practical, but for
things like apples or peaches, it probably is).
In light of Al's comments and Charlie's suggestions, I'd
probably recommend doing what Charlie says, even though
I've done batches where I just tossed fruit into the primary,
especially if it's processed/frozen fruit, which I worry about
a lot less than fresh fruit.
In any case, I wouldn't fret too much, just be aware that
there are some concerns about bacteria, take whatever steps
you're comfortable to deal with it, and let us know how it
turns out.
Cheers!
- ---Mark Stevens
stevens@stsci.edu
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 8 Sep 94 09:19:28 EDT
From: Mark A. Stevens <stevens@stsci.edu>
Subject: Re: Curing Hops ?
Hmm. No follow-ups in today's HBD about the hop drying debate....
Too bad, I didn't think the questions were really settled (at
least not correctly).
The basic idea that Richard Childers (pascal@netcom.com) discussed
in HBD 1518 was to build a hop drying box with vents for airflow
and a light bulb for a heat source.
In HBD 1519, John (the Coyote) Wyllie said this was not the best
idea because the three things that damage hops are oxygen, light,
and heat.
I hope this didn't settle the issue for folks, because I don't think
John is 100% correct, and Richard's idea seems to have a lot of
merit.
In Mark Garetz's book "Using Hops" he talks about how hops are
processed commercially. He mentions that hops are spread on
screens and that the heat is maintained at about 140 degrees F
until the water content drops from something like 80% to
about 8%.
It seems to me that a light bulb in a vented box probably will
get you close to that temperature range. Certainly the airflow
is required during the drying stage to carry away the moisture
and John's concern about oxygen is not right for the drying
phase. The concern about light also seems wrong. We worry about
ultraviolet light (FLUORESCENT bulbs) damaging iso-alpha-compounds
in a finished beer, but I'm not sure it's much of a concern in
the drying phase---especially given that Richard is talking
about an INCANDESCENT bulb, which does not produce light of
the same spectra as a fluorescent bulb. Similarly, given that
commercial practice is to dry at 140 degrees, and that heat
is known to promote drying, a slight heat during the drying
stage seems completely appropriate.
On balance, it seems to me that Richard is on to something that
could work well in practice for many homebrewers who grow their
own hops. I intend to try building a box like Richard describes,
unless somebody comes up with a better idea. (I *DO* kinda like
the suggestion to just put it in an oven with the pilot light
on, but it's hard to do in an all-electric house).
Cheers!
- ---Mark Stevens
stevens@stsci.edu
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 8 Sep 94 09:32:18 EDT
From: Steve Robinson <Steve.Robinson@analog.com>
Subject: worthless posts from lazy brewers
Bruce writes:
> I have a headache coming on from reading some of the drivel sent up here
> continuously by lazy brewers who won't do their own legwork. . . .<snip>
Er, sorry to disagree here, but isn't your point somewhat along the lines of,
"I don't want other people bothering me with questions, I only want to see
information that's useful to me. If you have questions, go bother someone
local with them rather than posting them to the net where I have to be
bothered reading them."
Back when I started brewing, 11 years ago, my college roomates and I started
brewing together. We found a local ice-cream stand that carried the all-you-
need equipment and ingredient kits, and off we went. Needless to say, the
ice-cream stand was useless as a source of information, and at the time the
only brewers that we knew of where each other. Having a resource like the
HBD back then would have been a godsend.
Granted, homebrew suppliers have come a long way since the early 80's, and there
are many more homebrewers out there now to learn from. Also granted that many
of the questions here could be answered by reading Papazian/Miller/Noonan/etc.
However, when some newbie has a question it seems reasonable to pose it to a
multitude of people on the net, as opposed to a handful of people locally. The
HBD should be a resource available to everyone, not an elitist forum for people
to look down their noses at each other.
Sorry to ramble here, but I feel rather strongly that one of the advantages
available to new homebrewers today is that there are many people like us out
there that have already learned things the hard way, and I for one don't mind
answering the occasional stupid question. Let the flames begin.
Steve R.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 8 Sep 1994 08:54:51 -0600
From: evanms@lcac1.loras.edu (Mark Evans)
Subject: Split the digest or bail out? I'll bail
How soon we forget where we've come from. How quickly we adhere to
superiority and scoff at those who are just learning. Is it so difficult
to help others to do what you have learned to do and now enjoy so much? Is
it possible that many of learned this craft before the internet became such
an immediate, viable resource?
Is it possible that homebrewers--people who I thought were "really cool"
and "down to earth"--could become such a contemptible lot?
And then I read this note from the HBD 9/8:
From: BREWS@delphi.com
Subject: worthless posts from lazy brewers
"I have a headache coming on from reading some of the drivel sent up here
continuously by lazy brewers who won't do their own legwork. I have feelings
for those unfortunate souls without a clue as to where they made a mistake
in their brewing procedure but strongly suggest that they figure it out for
themselves... by brewing with another person who's in the area. Team up to
talk over the procedures and recipes before wasting our time here with
boorish questions over and over again? Get a life and do some research on
your own with other warm bodies instead of a computer terminal! Have a cold
beverage and let your brain release its hidden potential over some boiling
hop oils before asking questions about hop utilization. try to bring the
fruits of your labors to all of us here in the HBD instead of
Gimme,Gimme,Gimme. You can all use the keyboard , so try to generate some
advanced slothlike articles that would be of value to the group. I'm
particularly intrigued by the combination of potential here with
professionals from all areas of the globe. I hope it gets better soon or its
off to another interest area. Contribute what you can and find the answers
to the simple stuff at your local level. Join a club ,go to a meeting and
get off this machine for a while and interact-face to face with your peers.
Then come back to us with some interesting anecdotes and some words with
socially redeeming value. Over?"
Despite my seven years of brewing and preference for the all-grain process,
I still find time to help new brewers with their problems. But I imagine
that they will start to leave this digest after such a frontal assault. Not
everyone has a club nearby or a good brew book or even another brewer
nearby to consult. The internet IS the new resource. Perhaps they should
split the digest. But BREWS@ delphi.com, don't bother going "off to
another interest area." I'll save you the trouble and start the parade
AWAY from the Homebrew Digest.
To all who were helpful and informative, thanks.
Mark Evans
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 8 Sep 1994 9:43:54 -0400 (EDT)
From: "John Faulks, Martin Marietta, 8*255-3959" <FAULKS@bng.ge.com>
Subject: San Jose Business Trip
I will be in San Jose next week (Wed & Thu) and would like some tips
for good beer and food. TIA
John Faulks
faulks@bng.ge.com
------------------------------
Date: 08 Sep 94 10:03:18 EDT
From: Mike Schrempp <73764.306@compuserve.com>
Subject: Insulating kettles
I insulate my brewpot with a newspaper wrap also, but with one addotion. I've
covered my newspaper blanket with aluminum foil to reflect the heat from the
burner. I've only made one and used it for over 15 batches so far. Oh, yeah. I
use an electric stove. I don't thinnk I'd try this with gas.
Mike Schrempp
(no fancy footwork)
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 8 Sep 94 10:14:39 EDT
From: Spencer.W.Thomas@med.umich.edu
Subject: "classic" green bottles, competition announcement
Bob Paolino writes:
> Radio ad I heard this morning: Rolling Rock ad proudly proclaims that it
> doesn't come in those less expensive brown bottles, but instead in "the
> classic green bottle." Maybe that explains the classic skunky flavour, eh?
Well, in PA, where Rolling Rock is brewed, you can only buy beer in
case lots (except many (all???) bars can sell by the six-pack for
take-out). So the green bottle doesn't really make much difference,
closed up inside the case. Probably explains the nice, reusable cases
that Rolling Rock comes in. I love those! You can keep the beer,
though.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 08 Sep 1994 10:08:20 -0400
From: RLANCASTER@ntia.doc.gov
Subject: Geneva
Trip...Geneva...November..I know its all good over there, but any
brewpubs...micros? TIA, private e mail ok to rlancaster@ntia.doc.gov
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 8 Sep 1994 10:46:19 -0400 (EDT)
From: Jim Busch <busch@daacdev1.stx.com>
Subject: RE:weizens/iodophors/cranks
George writes:
> Subject: Weizen Lauter Summary
>
> #1. The most often suggested idea was to switch from my ZapPap to a
> copper pipe manifold. I didn't have the time to build a manifold but I
> did go out and buy a Phils Phalse Bottom(tm) to replace the ZapPap.
Phils thingy is functionally equivelent to a Zappap, and in some cases
is smaller and will compact the grains more, leading to more difficult
lautering.
>
>That's about it. A lot of great suggestions from some great brewers who took
the time to try to help me out. Now the sad ending. I tried again last weekend
> utilizing just about all of your suggestions with the exception of the copper
> manifold and reducing the grain ratio from 70/30 (pride you know!).
> Unfortunately the lauter stuck just as solidly as it did the first three trys.
You didnt mention if you used a decoction mash program. Some of the
difficulty of weizens is based on wheat malt choices, but either multi-
protein rests or decoction (which will include at least one protein rest)
should make lautering bearable. A 50/50 ratio with the right yeast will
still make a fantastic weizen, so you might try working your way up the
difficulty scale.
> From: BREWS@delphi.com
> Subject: worthless posts from lazy brewers
>
> I have a headache coming on from reading some of the drivel sent up here
> continuously by lazy brewers who won't do their own legwork. I have feelings
> for those unfortunate souls without a clue as to where they made a mistake
> in their brewing procedure but strongly suggest that they figure it out for
> themselves...
> Bearer of Bad News! Bruce P.Stevens - MALT Prez
Sheesh, you must be some helpful Prez! Why dont you open your mouth and
help raise the content of the digest to your exhaulted levels.
> to Bob Jones and Micah:
>
> I observed the same thing with the forced air hood on my brew pot. In my
> old house the hood over the stove only had about 3 inches clearance, so
> when the exhaust fan was on it created quite a flow of air accross the
> top of the brew pot. I never had a problem with boil over.
OK, the boil over issue seems to make sense, its the increase in hop
utilization that is a radical result. Did your utilization decrease
when the hoods changed?
> Subject: Iodophor concentration
>
> Al says:
> > For 12.5 ppm (sorry Tony), use 1/4 ounce per gallon. I usually use 25 ppm,
> > or 1/2 ounce per gallon. Using too much is not only a waste of money, but
> > causes the solution to foam excessively when agitated.
> >
> > Al.
>
> Okay I'll bite. From memory:
> (so I expect to get at least 2 corrections.:-)
> In the Zymurgy special issue which discuss's sanitizing: 12.5 ppm is stated
> as the strength of Iodophor needed to sanitize without needing to be rinsed.
> So if the object is not wasting money: why use 25 ppm? The rinse wastes
> water as well as the Iodophor.
First of all, not all Iodophor's are created equal. Check the concentration
info on the label. Many brands have a level that gives 12.5 ppm when
used at 1 oz per 10 gallons (at least the stuff I get from breweries uses
this concentration). I seem to recall that the food prep stuff (the one
that foams, the brewery stuff usually wont foam) is 1/2 as strong.
Higher levels will give faster results, but rinsing is a good idea (as
long as you have reasonably clean water, I use hot hot water).
Good brewing,
Jim Busch
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 8 Sep 1994 10:41:02 EDT
From: PSTOKELY@ea.umd.edu
Subject: Artic Ice, High Temp lagering
Joe L. mentioned that geographical locations are not usable or
copyrighted. Try telling that to Sam Adam's Boston Brewing Co., or
Sierra Nevada or Deschutes Brewery! I think it is an attempt to
further erode our national spelling habits, such as "Lite" or "NO
THRU STREET". Hmmm... think I'll have an Icebock!
Also, I have just bottled an amber lager which fermented in my 65
degree basement (two weeks primary, two weeks secondary). So far so
good: the drop in gravity is about as expected. I have been informed
by my SO that I may use half of the bottom shelf of our fridge to
store beer bottles, enough for about 18 bottles. Hey! Almost like a
control set! California Common Lager yeast may not like this setup
(first too warm, then too cold) but I wasn't expecting a Best of Show
for this beer, only.....Answers.
Paul S. in College Park, Maryland "You speak in strange whispers,
friend, are you not of The Body?"
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 8 Sep 94 08:06:00 CST
From: Schwab_Bryan@lanmail.ncsc.navy.mil
Subject: Expectations over fruit
Hello to all, and please bare with me, as this is my first attempt at
communication with all of you. Eventually I'll get it right, as with my
several attempts at Homebrewing. My problem is this.... For the past
several days, well maybe only two, my latest attempt at a Peach ale has
been in the primary bubbling away like no other, last night after
pureeing four pounds of fresh peaches to add to the secondary, all of
the fruit floated to the top, ok no real problem here. This morning
after the usual morning rituals, my daughter ran up to startled because
there was a very big mess in the pantry. It seems that the batch became
so volatile, the air lock blew off as well as about a gallon of thick
mushy sludge! Well I quickly got together another air lock and it get
on ticking......... Do I have anything to worry about here?? As I was
cleaning up the mess, the aroma was great and thoughts of playing hooky
did enter my thoughts.
Thank-you for any responses and assistance.
{Schwab_Bryan@lanmail.ncsc.mil}:ddn:navy
- ---------------------- Replied Message Body ----------------------
Date: 9-8-94 2:59am
From: {homebrew-request@hpfcmi.fc.hp.com}:ddn:navy
To: Schwab_Bryan:ncsc:navy
Subj: Homebrew Digest #1521 (September 08, 1994)
Attach: h:\GATEWAY\IN\HISTORY\41843.att
- ----------------------------------------------------------------------
The original message was sent as an attachment because it was too long.
See attached file: 41843.att
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 8 Sep 94 9:06:48 MDT
From: npyle@hp7013.ecae.StorTek.COM
Subject: Generic malt/Sanitizing
Wow. Bruce P. Stevens sure knows how to make friends, eh? I just want to
say that his post about other people's meaningless drivel was, well, drivel.
Hope I've contributed enough to pass your standard of who's allowed to post,
Bruce. OBTW, the HBD is pretty much guaranteed to be filled for a week or
two with people flaming you for this post. Nice job.
**
00bkpickeril@bsuvc.bsu.edu (who?) writes:
>Looking to cut costs, I have recently tried some "generic" malt extract
>syrup from Wine Hobby USA. The price was really quite good at
>$1.50/lb. I know that Papazian for one says that all extracts are NOT
>the same quality, but I was wondering what other extract brewers
>thought of buying bulk extracts such as this. Comments? Is it best to
>stick with name brand extracts? What are your favorites and which do
>you tend to avoid?
I recommend you buy name brand extracts in bulk. You can get Alexander's,
which I believe is a quality syrup, pretty cheap this way. By using a known,
you have a better chance of repeating a beer. Using a "generic", you don't
know when and if it changes, nor have any idea what's in it. With all the
talk of adulterated extracts out there, I think a no-name would be the most
likely candidate for this sort of sin.
>Finally, it is necessary to crush specialty grains like crystal malt?
Yes. Unless it is stated, assume the following are crushed: pale, dextrin,
munich, aromatic, any crystal, carapils, roasted barley, and chocolate. The
only malt I've ever heard used uncrushed is black patent, but I think most
people probably crush this as well.
**
To Mark Bellefeuille, using a stronger sanitizer reduces the required contact
time. Most sanitizers list a concentration and a contact time to do their
job. I've always assumed it was linear (i.e. double the concentration, halve
the contact time) but I realize that may be greatly oversimplified.
Cheers,
Norm npyle@hp7013.ecae.stortek.com
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 08 Sep 1994 11:23:59 -0400
From: ggarnett@qrc.com (Guy Garnett)
Subject: Re: worthless posts from lazy brewers (HBD #1521)
I know I might have taken this to e-mail, but I think this is an acceptable
subject for public debate in this forum: "What, and who, is HBD for?".
BREWS@delphi.com (Bruce P. Stevens) about "worthless posts from lazy brewers":
> I have a headache coming on from reading some of the drivel sent up here
> continuously by lazy brewers who won't do their own legwork. [...]
> [T]ry to bring the fruits of your labors to all of us here in the HBD instead
> of Gimme,Gimme,Gimme. You can all use the keyboard , so try to generate some
> advanced slothlike articles that would be of value to the group. Join a club
> go to a meeting and get off this machine for a while and interact-face to
> face with your peers. Then come back to us with some interesting anecdotes
> and some words with socially redeeming value. Over?
Did I hear you tell the inexperienced brewers on this list to go get a life,
and not bother you with questions that 'everybody' (or at least, you) already
know the answer to? I can't think of an attitude less likley to contribute
positively to this hobby or this mailing list.
Can *you* give consice, clear answers to these questions? If so I'd love to
hear them, because in most cases I can't. If you can't, then perhaps you don't
understand the subject as well as you think you do. If you can't explain
something so that someone else can understand it, you don't really know the
subject yourself.
Yes, it is important to contribute to the group, instead of just request from
it. And yes, it is important to check in Papizan or Miller or the FAQs before
you go and ask a question of the group. On the other hand, what's a new
brewer with only about 3 batches (all of which were undrinkable) supposed to
say on here, other than "I'm stumped, can anyone help?" I suppose his other
alternative is to give up on the hobby. Is that what you'd prefer?
BUT, it seems to me that it's a perfectly valid use of the HBD to ask a
question, regardless of the level of expertise required to answer it. The
question doesn't take up that much room. It's also perfectly reasonable to
answer by e-mail, so as not to fill up the digest with replies. A summary
of the replies doesn't take up that much room, either, and may well help
other beginners. Such posts aren't 'worthless', even if they don't bring
you personally any new information.
Bruce then writes:
> And while I'm at it , I need judges for the upcoming Maine HBC in November.
> [...] This is the 2nd leg of the New England Homebrewer of the Year sortie.
(rolling on the floor laughing) Thank you, Bruce! I'm sure this is highly
relevant and interesting to your readers in Australia and New Zealand (not to
mention Europe and areas of the US that are rather remote from Maine). There's
probably at least order of magnitude more readers on the HBD that are unclear
of the difference between HBUs and IBUs than there are beer judges who will be
in the Maine area in November. I could post that I've got a headache coming on
from reading drivel sent up here continuously by lazy event organizers who
won't do their own legwork. ;-) But I think I'll refrain.
This is another thing that, IMHO is what the HBD is *for*. Who knows, maybe
that guy who asked a basic question about extract brewing three or four months
ago may be ready to enter your contest now. It'd be a shame if he didn't, and
a double shame if it's because he got the impression that MALT (or it's prez)
didn't want to hear from newbies.
I personally am a relatively new extract brewer who has had the good fortune
to have not yet managed to ruin a batch of beer. If (when) I do, you can be
assured that I'll post about it. And I'm not likely to become an 'advanced'
all-grain brewer any time soon; the investment, in terms of money, space, and
time, is more than I can support.
However, you'll not hear me complain about having to wade through posts by
all grain brewers about mashing schedules, 'set' mashes, propane cookers,
keg boilers, and the other trials and tribulations that can beset an all-grain
brewer. This is what the HDB is *for*, and if it's not relevant to me, I can
darned well page down past the post in question instead of flaming the rest
of this list about posts that aren't relevant to me. And the page-down key
is a lot closer, faster, and more effective. :-)
Bruce, why don't you get back to us with some interesting anecdotes or words
with socially redeeming value? Maybe some of the going-on between the folks
vieing for "New England Homebrewer of the Year", or perhaps some of the winning
recipies? Over? :-)
Guy Garnett - ggarnett@qrc.com
- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hakuna Matata and Have a Homebrew!
Standard disclaimers apply
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 08 Sep 1994 08:51:03 -0700 (PDT)
From: Tom Baier <BAIER_T@SALT.PLU.EDU>
Subject: Not a helpful attitude
Bruce Stevens, an alleged contributor, writes:
>From: BREWS@delphi.com
>Subject: worthless posts from lazy brewers
>I have a headache coming on from reading some of the drivel sent up here
>continuously by lazy brewers who won't do their own legwork.
snip.
>boorish questions over and over again? Get a life and do some research on
I want to understand correctly here, so I'll just quote what *I think*
are Bruce's key points "worthless", "lazy", "drivel", "boorish", "get a life"
Bruce was clearly never a boy scout, because his tirade was not
courteous, kind, helpful, or thrifty, for that matter.
I am terribly grateful that all brewers and HBD subscribers do not
share this attitude.
>And while I'm at it , I need judges for the upcoming Maine HBC in November.
>The competition is AHA sanctioned and open to all comers.
You've got a lot of gall asking for help or entries after your little
display. Furthermore, I would use the same words you so carefully chose
to characterize your chummy chatter about New England brew clubs.
Since you obviously know all these people, why not take it private?
To be as widely useful as it is, this forum cannot be relevant to
every brewer every day.
Bruce, how about a little tolerance for those not as worthy as you?
>There will also be a BJCP test the following day for
>those with strong hearts and weak minds. Put it on your calender ....
Nice attitude. Nice spelling. Nice proofreading throughout.
>I hope it gets better soon or its off to another interest area.
I hope it doesn't so that you make good on your threat.
Tom Baier, weak-minded brewer and beer judge, Tacoma WA
BAIER_T@SALT.PLU.EDU
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 08 Sep 1994 10:06:25 -0600 (MDT)
From: COYOTE <SLK6P@cc.usu.edu>
Subject: Basic Biology Lesson
Ed O' has a list of questions:
He sez he's read Charlie, Greg, and Dave.
My suggestion: Go to your local library and check out a basic biology
text. Really. Sounds like you'd benfit from the pictures and basic
descriptions of biomolecules and the relationships between them.
Better yet- take Biology 1 at a local community college, or university.
I did! (I am a biology grad student- FWIW :)
as for the question/statements/facts and falsities:
Unmalted barley contains proteins, carbs and enzymes.
*fact
Proteins are composed of amino acids.
There are 20 differnt amino acids.
*fact-fact
Enzymes are proteins.
*true, but not in reverse. Not all proteins are enzymes.
Enzymes can break down proteins.
*some of them. They all have rather specific functions.
One enzyme can only attack one type of protein structure (lock-key model).
*Buzz. Not true. Many are allosteric, or have multiple substrates.
The basic idea holds some merit, but one enzyme can react with a number
of similar substrates. That's one way that inhibitors function.
Enzymes can break down carbohydrates. (???? If not what does)
* Fact. Carbohydrases. (anything-ase is an enzyme )
Enzymes break proteins into shorter proteins and new enzymes.
* Eh....This gets potentially confusing. An enzyme catalyzes a reaction
but comes out of the reaction unaltered. SOME enzymes break proteins into
shorter proteins- chewing on different parts of the molecule (endo/exo)
Some proteins can be shortened creating new enzymes. That is how SOME
enzyme precursers become activated. But it can get very complicated
Enzymes break carbohydrates into less complex sugars.
* SOME enzymes...POLYsaccharadies, OLIGOsaccharides, DI-,MONO...
Sugars are generally the MONO and DIsaccharides. Starches are POLYsacchds.
Starches are a storage form of energy. Sugars are the faster usable forms
(WAAAAAAY overgeneralized!)
Malting breaks proteins, carbs and creates shorter proteins less complex sugars
and new enzymes (where do the new enzymes come from?)
* Again- we are oversimplifying. Malting is the process of GERMINATION.
A barley SEED starts growing. It takes stored energy (starches) and starts
SYNTHESIZING enzymes (aa->proteins=enz.s) to generate sugars for growth.
* The end result of interest to a brewer is that:
1. Enzymes complexes are synthesised. Amylases- alpha,beta
These can reduce complex starches to fermentable and non-fermentable
sugars.
2. Starches begin to be made accessible to the growing kernel.
Prior to the mash, the grain is crushed, exposing more starch to enz
Acrospire growth is an indicator of how much the proteins and carbs have
already been broken down.
* Indirectly, yeah. The "activation" processes occuring in the barley
cells include a host of metabolic activities. Protein breakdown is not
really so much a key here as is STARCH availability, SUGAR content, and
ENZYME synthesis and activation. Many enzymes need to be TURNED ON.
I'm tired now. I'm gonna go have a beer. No maybe I'll have breakfast.
Hmmm....Is there a best of both worlds!
Hope this hasn't bored the non-biological sorts among you.
I didn't have a text handy so this is off the top of my furry head.
But really- a basic bio text will answer alot of these things more clearly.
Understanding the classes of biomolecules and their interactions is essential
to dealing with the complexities of Malting and Brewing Science (a great text)
\-/-\ John (The Coyote) Wyllie SLK6P@cc.usu.edu \-/-\
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 8 Sep 1994 09:03:29 -0800
From: especkma@reed.edu (Erik Speckman)
Subject: Re: Weitzen Lauter Summary
>Date: 06 Sep 94 21:58:25 EDT
>From: "George A. Dietrich" <74543.310@compuserve.com>
>Subject: Weizen Lauter Summary
George Dietrich writes about his problems with lautering 70% wheat weizens
and summarizes the advice he got form the HBD.
I noticed that no one mentioned adding Rice Hulls to the mash. I had been
thinking about something like this since first I read about some of the
problems with high wheat malt mashing. I just kept it in the back of my
mind until last week when someone posted a question about it to the USENET
group.
Their homebrew shop sold rice hulls for just such a purpose but was unable
to advise them on their use. They winged it and ended up with a lauter
that flowed too quickly.
So, it sounds like there is another alternative but the exact parameters
aren't yet clear.
______________________________________________________________________
Erik A. Speckman Seattle, Washington Good Brain Doesn't Suck
especkma@reed.edu especkma@halcyon.com
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 8 Sep 94 12:20:56 EDT
From: Bob Fawcett <bobf@gulfaero.com>
Subject: Peat wood?
I've seen this twice now and I have to comment:
>Peat wood was recommended, but if peat moss is readily available and
>comes in smaller chucks thatare easily sprinkled over the stones in
>the propane grill.
Peat wood? Is there such a thing? Peat is dug from bogs in Scotland.
from Funk & Wagnalls Standard Desk Dictionary:
"peat 1. A substance consisting of partially carbonized vegetable material,
found usu. in bogs. 2. A block of this substance, pressed and dried for
fuel: also called turf."
Bob Fawcett
bobf@gulfaero.com
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 8 Sep 1994 11:48 EDT
From: CSS2@OAS.PSU.EDU (SPEAKER.CURTIS)
Subject: emergency blowoff idea
Hoppy Brewing to all my fellow zymurgists!
While making my 14th batch this year (is ATF listening? :), a Munich Alt, I
encountered a problem I had not had before, and found an ingenious way to
solve it, IMHO.
I used (for a 5 gal. batch)
3 kg can Ireks Munich Amber syrup
0.5# Crystal Malt (40L)
0.25# Chocolate Malt
2 oz. Hallertau hop pellets
Wyeast #1007 - liquid
Did all the usual things with the ingredients, pitched a well-puffed liquid
yeast packet the next morning with no starter (I know, I know; but I'm lazy),
and fermentation started in earnest about 30 hours later. IG was 1.052 I
watched as the head of kreusen slowly grew from 1/2" to 2" and kept going.
Soon it had reached the top of my plastic primary. Shortly after that,
kreusen started spurting out of the airlock; I needed to do something, and
quickly!
Trying to figure out what I could make a blowoff setup out of, I pulled out my
brewers bag 'o tricks. I finally settled on a small hobby lock (the tiniest
airlock that you can buy) and a 6' piece of tubing (standard siphon size). I
removed the cap and inner part of the airlock and attached the tubing directly
to the hub in the middle. Put the other end of the tubing in a half gallon
container with a weak bleach/water solution in it. Soon it was merrily
bubbling away. After the kreusen fell, I replaced this with a standard S-type
airlock.
I would not recommend this idea if you use leaf hops; the inside diameter of
the hobby lock and tubing are small, and would easily become plugged with hop
crud if you are not careful. But it worked for me. If anyone is interested,
I'll let you know how the Alt turns out.
Later
Curt
css2@oas.psu.edu
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 8 Sep 1994 13:40:27 -0400 (EDT)
From: jeff344@voodoo.lerc.nasa.gov (Jeff Berton)
Subject: Re: Automatic Sparging
John Dodson writes:
>Several weeks ago I posted a query looking for information on an
>'automatic' sparge ring (described as a copper ring with holes drilled
>in the bottom and a float valve mounted in the middle, used for
>'automatically' controlling sparge water flow to a grain bed).
...
>If _you_ know of any information on this device, please take a few
>minutes and post... there are quite a few gadget nuts out there that
>would like some information. Thanks!
I built something like that for my RIMS. Since sparge water can of course be
added manually, it's all extravagance, but then, so is a RIMS! I use a small
polypropylene float switch ($14.58, mail order from McMaster-Carr) with a 9VDC
power supply to trigger a relay that opens a 110VAC solenoid valve ($12, mail
order from C&H Sales) to dispense the contents of my hot liquor supply tank. I
mounted the float switch on an adjustable bracket to compensate for brews of
varying lengths. The sparge duration, of course, is controlled by a ball valve
at the tun's drain. Rather than use a drilled copper ring as you describe, I
just let the sparge water run down a short plastic tube and onto a saucer set
on the grain bed for more even distribution.
At $12, the solenoid valve was a steal. C&H Sales, being primarily a surplus
dealer, no longer has any. It seems to me that the high price of solenoid
valves may render my design rather cost ineffective unless you find one as
inexpensive as I have. One alternative is a float valve, available from
McMaster-Carr in many varieties, or you could scavenge one from a
you-know-what. The small float switch I use is much less balky than a typical
float valve. Indeed, since I operate off a relay in any case, my float switch
could even be replaced by the conductive contact of two parallel wires that dip
into the tun.
- --
Jeff Berton, Aeropropulsion Analysis Office, NASA Lewis Research Center
jeff344@voodoo.lerc.nasa.gov
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 08 Sep 1994 12:54:49 -0500 (EST)
From: FLATTER%MHS@mhs.rose-hulman.edu
Subject: Why insulate lauter?
At the risk of being included as "worthless posts from lazy brewers",
(From: BREWS@delphi.com, and yes, I get tired of questions that could be
answered simply by reading the extract can along w/ the more beer we
drink the more we vomit posts) why does the lauter need to be insulated.
I put my sparge water on to heat, draw some out at 170, then gradually
increase the temp of the sparge water as the grain clears. From the
weiBen post, I gather I risk a stopped tun.
> #6. Keep the lauter temp as stable as possible at the sparging
>temperature. I've added foam insulation to the lauter tun and it holds
the
>heat better.
> #9. Blow into the outflow tube. Don't laugh, I tried this as a
last
>resort!
How about a more sanitary alternative. The tubing coming from my lauter
tun is flexible Tygon. I pinch it off about half way down, then push
wort back into the tun to clear the exit opening.
>(And to restock my beer supply which is getting low)
While I'm asking stupid questions, what is an average stock? I have over
a dozen different kinds of beer in my cellar. Some varieties only have a
few bottles left while I have 60 bottles of last week's batch. I brew
when the urge hits me, which is more frequent than I can keep it
xdru/ankx used.
- --------------
Neil Flatter Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology
Chemistry - Math (CMA) Department of Chemistry Stockroom Manager
Novell Supervisor 5500 Wabash Avenue 73
(812) 877 - 8316 Terre Haute, IN 47803-3999
FAX: 877 - 3198 Flatter@MHS.Rose-Hulman.Edu
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #1522, 09/09/94
*************************************
-------
