Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #1818
This file received at Hops.Stanford.EDU 1995/08/30 PDT
HOMEBREW Digest #1818 Wed 30 August 1995
FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
Rob Gardner, Digest Janitor
Contents:
Wheat / esters, phenols / hopback / new Web page (Troy Howard)
stainless screens (HOUCK KEITH A)
Irish WYEAST Bombs? (Aubrey Howe)
Re: scum skimming, pumps (Jim Dipalma)
Wheat extract (Jim Busch)
Wyeast 1338 European Ale yeast (Mark Kuebeler)
RTP yeast cultures ("Lee A. Menegoni")
Lagering Advice Please (rapaport)
Saranac Fall Fest: Call for Entries/Judges (Scott Barrett)
Re: MM Motorization (FLATTER)
Hunter fix and defrost clock (DONBREW)
RE: Need Pumpkin Ale recipe/Misc (MClarke950)
Re: Mega Craft Breweries (Benwrtr)
Low-Alcohol Beer Follow-Up, Pt. I (Nicholas A. Franke)
Low Alcohol Beer Follow-Up, Pt. II (Nicholas A. Franke)
Sour Mash Beer Recipes? (Roy Bourcier)
Cat's Meow Database (Ray Robert)
Pilsner (JOHN)
Carboy Hairline Cracks (hadleyse)
Re:outflow connections for cooler-mashtuns (djt2)
******************************************************************
* 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.
******************************************************************
#################################################################
#
# YET ANOTHER NEW FEDERAL REGULATION: if you are UNSUBSCRIBING from the
# digest, please make sure you send your request to the same service
# provider that you sent your subscription request!!! I am now receiving
# many unsubscribe requests that do not match any address on my mailing
# list, and effective immediately I will be silently deleting such
# requests.
#
#################################################################
NOTE NEW HOMEBREW ADDRESS hpfcmgw!
Send articles for __publication_only__ to homebrew@hpfcmgw.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@hpfcmgw.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.
Please don't send me requests for back issues - you will be silently ignored.
For "Cat's Meow" information, send mail to lutzen@alpha.rollanet.org
ARCHIVES:
An archive of previous issues of this digest, as well as other beer
related information can be accessed via anonymous ftp at
ftp.stanford.edu. Use ftp to log in as anonymous and give your full
e-mail address as the password, look under the directory
/pub/clubs/homebrew/beer directory. AFS users can find it under
/afs/ir.stanford.edu/ftp/pub/clubs/homebrew/beer. If you do not have
ftp capability you may access the files via e-mail using the ftpmail
service at gatekeeper.dec.com. For information about this service,
send an e-mail message to ftpmail@gatekeeper.dec.com with the word
"help" (without the quotes) in the body of the message.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 28 Aug 1995 13:43:05 -0800
From: troy@oculus.jsei.ucla.edu (Troy Howard)
Subject: Wheat / esters, phenols / hopback / new Web page
Whew!
I guess a lot of subjects built up while we were offline. :-)
Let's get started...
####################
Wheat Malt Diastatic Power:
Yes, malted wheat has sufficient diastatic power to convert itself. In
fact, according the info in the BJCP Study Guide (available at
http://www.umich.edu/~spencer/beer/judge/studyguide_v2) malted wheat has a
little MORE power than Pale Ale malt. Here are some numbers (in degrees
Lintner):
6-row Lager 100-200
2-row Lager 63-70
Pale Ale 36
Malted Wheat 49
####################
Esters & Phenols:
palmer@San-Jose.ate.slb.com (Eric Palmer) asks what esters and phenols
taste like.
My understanding is that they are two large classes of chemicals. The
individual chemicals can taste very different. But the terms usually used
to describe them are that esters tend to taste "fruity" (e.g., banana,
plum, citrus, etc). Phenols tend to taste "medicinal" (e.g., Listerine,
band-aid, etc.)
####################
Hop Back:
I have been toying with the idea of using a hop back. But I do not want to
move from my immersion chiller to a Counter Flow chiller (I like the ease
of use and the ease of cleaning, and I don't trust the sanitation of CFs).
Here is what I thought I might do: construct a screen of some sort and
place it ~ 2-3 inches below the top of a 33 qt enamel-on-steel kettle. I
could then place hops on the screen and laddle/pour cooled wort thru this
screen. Then siphon the wort from under the screen into a fermenter.
Opinions? Is this a really dumb idea? My big problem that I have yet to
resolve is whether I will get any hop character at all using cooled wort.
It would be effective (I imagine) for removing break. Any other (better)
ideas out there?
####################
New Web Page:
My Home Brew Club (Pacific Gravity from Culver City, CA) now has a Web
Page. Check it out! It's brand new, so stuff is being added all the time.
URL is http://soho.ios.com/~cchbs/pg.html.
-Troy
- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Troy Howard | Live fast,
troy@oculus.jsei.ucla.edu | die young,
Jules Stein Eye Institue, UCLA | and leave a good looking corpse.
- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 28 Aug 1995 20:43:20 +0000 (GMT)
From: HOUCK KEITH A <HOUCK_KEITH_A@Lilly.com>
Subject: stainless screens
Hey y'all,
Anyone know a source of stainless screens for a converted keg
false-bottom? Anyone know what happened to Stainless in Seattle?
Their phone number is no longer in service (Revenuers got 'em?)
Thanks much.
Keith Houck (hak@lilly.com)
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 28 Aug 95 07:58 PDT
From: howe@shemp.appmag.com (Aubrey Howe)
Subject: Irish WYEAST Bombs?
Greetings,
I thought I had been either dropped from the list, or that the
majority of people were on vacation or something. Luckily it was just
an AI Robot malfunction..."Open the HBD Door, Hal!"
I have a question about Wyeast #1684 (?) the Irish one. Has anyone
had a similar experience of the extraordinarily quick fermentation
that I got? I brewed on a Sunday (First all grain batch in a while)
and was able to bottle on the very next Friday! Wow! I tried it the
other day, and it is one of the better batches I've made.
Now for the real question: Will the bottles be OK? Did I just
create two cases of bombs? Is this why they call the 22 ounce bottles
"Bombers?"
TIA, & Hurry up and get here, hockey season!
--Aubrey Howe, III
Santa Barbara, Ca.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 28 Aug 95 16:13:41 EDT
From: dipalma@sky.com (Jim Dipalma)
Subject: Re: scum skimming, pumps
Hi All,
In HBD#1814, Brian Pickerill asks:
>Does anybody know
>of a cheap ($10) source for propane burners?
About a year ago, I bought a multijet propane burner casting for $15.50
from Metal Fusion, (part# WKAF2, phone# (504)736-0201). I used the hose and
regulator (5 psi) from an old gas grill, and mounted the casting on an angle
iron rack under my mash tun.
I'm not sure what the burner is rated for, but I've used it for temperature
step mashes with ~30# of grist in the tun, worked very well. Seems to put
out plenty of heat.
You might consider calling Metal Fusion and asking for the catalog. They
sell a variety of different castings as "parts". I know the $15.50 is a
little over your price limit :-), and I'm not sure how that price would
compare to the cost of converting a natural gas heater. Just wanted to give
you another option.
*******************************************************************
In HBD#1815, Kevin Imel asks about scum skimming:
>Should the foamy scum that forms during the boil (especially with wheat
>beers) be skimmed off? Having started my illustrious brewing career making
>mead, I have a well learned impulse to skim the scum. Is this the right
>idea or does it matter? If I skim the scum am I removing some of the mouth
>and head of my beer? What is the collective wisdom of the HBD on this one?
I confess, I've always been a scum skimmer. Gives me something to do while
hovering over the brew kettle, and flinging the gobs of scum around can be
way fun! I usually open the garage door and shoot for the basketball hoop
out in the driveway.
All kidding aside, what I've read about this is the foamy scum is mostly
high molecular weight proteins, the kind that cause haze and stability
problems in the finished beer. Also, removing the scum seems to help prevent
boilovers. Once removed, the surface of the wort is exposed to the air, the
boil stabilizes faster than if I don't skim.
Haven't noticed any negative effects on head retention from doing this. My
beers are fine in that regard, and I've developed great 3-point range!
*******************************************************************
In HBD#1816, Rich Lenihan asks about pumps:
>I need a high-temp pump to complete my brewing system. It doesn't
>have to be self-priming (although that would be nice) but it should have
>enough force to move hot water and/or wort to a height of 8 feet. It should
>also be food-grade as well as easy to clean and operate. Finally, it should
>introduce little or no air into the liquid being moved. I've heard about the
>March pumps, but I don't have specific model #'s.
March MDX-3 or MDXT-3, US Plastics Corp, 1-800-537-9724. The distinction
between these two models is that the MDX-3 has 1/2" O.D. smooth connectors
that you can slip tubing right over, the MDXT-3 has a 1/2" FPT threaded
connector on the inlet, 3/8" FPT on the outlet. At 8 feet of head space, the
graph in the catalog sez this pump will move about 4.5 GPM.
I have the MDX-3, the housing is glass filled polypropylene. No temp specs
given, but I've pumped water at about 200F, and wort at ~160F, through it
with no problems. The catalog sez the pump is designed for "sanitary liquid
food applications."
The pump doesn't introduce air, but it's not self-priming, either. I think
you're going to have a problem finding such a pump. Every pump I found that
was magnetic drive and produced a laminar flow was not self-priming. I think
you'd have to go with some kind of peristaltic pump if you want self-priming.
Personally, this hasn't been a problem. Mine is set up to be gravity fed, once
the housing fills up, the pump starts. No big deal.
>I would also
>appreciate any tips you might have regarding set-up, tubing, connectors, etc.
One caveat: the standard poly tubing that many of us use gets a bit soft
at 150F-200F, the tubing attached to the pump inlet actually collapsed when I
started the pump. I had to use the braided, reinforced PVC to pump hot
liquids. YMMV.
Cheers,
Jim dipalma@sky.com
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 28 Aug 1995 18:09:42 -0400 (EDT)
From: Jim Busch <busch@eosdev2.gsfc.nasa.gov>
Subject: Wheat extract
<In HBD #1815 (August 26), Bill Bunning questioned whether
<wheat malt had the diastatic power to permit a wheat beer to be
<made from a 100% wheat grist. In my opinion, a 100% wheat grist
<can be used.
This is correct.
<I believe that had barley malt been added to the grain
<bill of this beer that the extract yield would have been higher.
<In my opinion, extract yield suffers as the percentage of wheat
<in the grist increases.
Actually, wheat malt has the highest extract potential. The difficulty
arises in getting this extract out of the mash and lauter tun and
into the brew kettle. Thats why in practice 70% wheat is generally
accepted as the upper limit where one can still have acceptable
lauter results.
FWIW, DeWolf Pale ale has 80.8% Fine Grind extract potential while
DeWolf Wheat has 83.5%, and Shreier 2 row has 81%. (data from
Shreier, probably on one shipment of 94 malt).
Good brewing,
Jim Busch
busch@mews.gsfc.nasa.gov
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 28 Aug 1995 17:49:47 -0500 (CDT)
From: kuebeler@PICARD.tamu.edu (Mark Kuebeler)
Subject: Wyeast 1338 European Ale yeast
Has anyone else experienced long lag times with this yeast? The first
time I used it, I just pitched the contents of the smack pack and it
took almost 36 hours for signs of fermentation to appear. I used this
yeast again, this time pitching from a 1 quart starter that was
prepared the day before. It's been 24 hours since I pitched from the
starter and nothing has happened yet. Wort temperature was about 68^F
(this was a main goal for this batch) and the wort was as well aerated
as previous successful batches. The only possible problem I can see
is that I usually keep the fermenter in a wash tub of water that is
around 70^F, but yesterday I just reused the ice water from the
chilling phase, and as a result the wort may have gotten down below
60^F for the first six hours. Could this have caused the yeast to go
dormant or slowed them down, even with a higher pitching rate?
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 28 Aug 95 19:03:43 -24000
From: "Lee A. Menegoni" <lmenegoni@nectech.com>
Subject: RTP yeast cultures
RTP is a new product available in the Boston area. The product has been made
available by a professional microbiologist and home brewer. He is a member
of Bostons largest home brew club and has supplied cultures to many Boston
area brew pubs. He recently introduced the product to a few homebrew shops
and a brew on premisise. RTP cultures are available for 5 and 12 gallon
batches, there are about 6 ale yeast and a German lager yeast.
I have no financial intrest in the venture though I would like to see it be
successful. Here is a homebrewer that saw the potential for a product and
delivered it to the market at a competitive price.
Lee menegoni
LMenegoni@nectech.com
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 28 Aug 95 17:02:43
From: rapaport@srvware.serviceware.com
Subject: Lagering Advice Please
I want to make my first batch of German lager and I've got a couple of
questions about the temperature of fermentation.
I've read a couple of things on it and there seems to be some
discrepancy regarding the temperature of fermentation and storage.
My beer-supply-store guy says that it should be primary fermented at
45-55 degrees for about 3 weeks, then secondary fermented then stored
at the same temperature. From what I read, these temperatures are for
american lagers, and I want to make a German Lager.
A book I read says to primary ferment it at 45-55 degrees, then
secondary ferment it at 60-65 degrees, then store it at 32 degrees.
Anybody know what the right way to do it is?
Also -- I think the warmest I can get my refrigerator is 44 degrees.
Will this work? Again What temp should it be at. If it is still too
cold, how do I get an external thermostat -- what is THAT toy going to
cost me?
Please respond either direct or on this digest.
Mary Rapaport
rapaport@serviceware.com
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 28 Aug 1995 20:55:31 -0500
From: scott@partech.com (Scott Barrett)
Subject: Saranac Fall Fest: Call for Entries/Judges
Attention New York State homebrewers
(with apologies to the rest of the hive)
CALL FOR ENTRIES
CALL FOR JUDGES AND STEWARDS
The 1995 Saranac Fall Fest Homebrew Competition
will be held Saturday, September 23, 1995
at the F.X. Matt Brewing Company in Utica, NY
This BJCP-registered homebrew competition is open to all New York State
homebrewers with entries in all 1995 AHA styles, except sake. In addition to
style category prizes, special prizes (personalized Saranac canoe paddles)
will be awarded to the five entries selected as closest to the Saranac family
of beers:
Saranac Adirondack Amber
Saranac Golden Pilsener
Saranac Black & Tan
Saranac Stout
Saranac Pale Ale
This competition is a part of the F.X. Matt Brewery's Fall Fest celebration,
the proceeds of which benefit the United Way. Your competition entry also
gets you a Fall Fest admission ticket, Saranac sampling tickets, and Saranac
T-shirt (available at the door).
Listing of events at the Saranac Fall Fest (tentatively) include:
Special "Brewer's Heaven" brewery tour by members of the Matt family.
Saranac beers on draft, including the new Saranac Stout (the Black of
their Black & Tan).
Special "Behind the Scenes" brewery tours of interest to homebrewers.
A chance to win "Saranac Beer for a Year".
Seminars and discussions by members of the brewery.
Live entertainment and great food throughout the day.
Saranac specials and give-aways in the Brewery Shop.
Special "beer library" in the Brewer's Cafe.
100+ years of brewery memorabilia on display.
The competition also kicks off the first year of the "NY State Homebrewer of
the Year" and "NY State Club of the Year" awards.
For homebrewing entry forms, judge/steward registration forms by US mail, or
more information, please contact competition organizer Scott Barrett
(barretts@partech.com). Competition entries deadline is September 16th.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 28 Aug 1995 11:55:30 -0640
From: FLATTER%MHS@mhs.rose-hulman.edu
Subject: Re: MM Motorization
Kirk Fleming <FLEMINGKR@afmcfafb.fafb.af.mil> tried to reply to Rob ?
about motorizing the MaltMill (tm) but couldn't find articles discussing
optimum roller RPMs, etc. I saved the information on my computer at
home, knowing I'd want it someday. Now, I don't have the reference
memorized, but I recently decided to look at upgrading from my Corona to
a roller miller. [Anyone out there have a used one for a good price?]
I'd be glad to provide the source if asked. If I remember correctly, the
reference related a discussion with Jack Schm. about motorizing his
roller mills. [Standard warning about invalidating the warranty.] The
suggestion was for no more than 200 RPM and 1/4 HP electric motor with a
belt drive. A geared, direct drive won't allow any slippage in the rare
event that the rollers jam. There was no mention of other safety devices
like a hopper lid lockout or shear shaft keys. I suppose if I were going
to put it in a commercial shop, I'd consider it. I'm looking at
something I can mount to the work bench when I want to grind grain.
One other option you might consider. I "motorized" my Corona by removing
the bolt that held the handle on and replacing it with one that had a hex
head. I then keyed up a standard nut driver in my electric drill. Short
bursts on the trigger crank the grain through in no time at all. A
variable speed drill ought to be adjustable to ~200 RPM, making this an
alternative. The problem I ran into running the Corona continuously with
the drill was all the flour in the air made a mess.
+++++++++++++
Neil Flatter Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology
Chemistry - Math Chemistry Facilities Technician
Novell Supervisor 5500 Wabash Avenue 73
(812) 877 - 8316 Terre Haute, IN 47803-3999
FAX: 877 - 3198 Flatter@Rose-Hulman.edu
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 28 Aug 1995 21:34:51 -0400
From: DONBREW@aol.com
Subject: Hunter fix and defrost clock
Well, add one more satisfied customer (at least for a day). Last night I
did the two 12V 1W zener diode from RS fix on my broken Hunter unit. It has
functioned properly for a day.
On a related note. I certainly hope that everybody who uses a
refridgerator for fermenting/lagering has remembered to either use an old
fashioned "defrost it yourself" fridge or disabled the defrost clock. If you
explore underneath the fridge, probably near the back side you will find a
little "black box" with a knob on it and two wires plugged into it, this will
probably be the clock. Just short the two wires and voila, no more auto
defrost cycle. BTW this clock is in my limited experience the most common
cause of a "dead" refridgerator, they tend to break in the off cycle.
Don
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 28 Aug 1995 22:05:07 -0400
From: MClarke950@aol.com
Subject: RE: Need Pumpkin Ale recipe/Misc
joep@informix.com (Sr. SE) asked for a pumpkin ale recipe, here it is:
Beer Name: Spiced Pumpkin Ale
Batch Size (gals): 5
Amt Mash Ingrediants Color Color Extract Extract %Grist
(lbs) Rating Total Rating Total
7.50 Maris Otter 2 Row 3.00 4.50 30.00 45.00 77%
0.50 Crystal Malt L40 (8o 40.00 4.00 18.00 1.80 5%
0.20 Chocolate malt (3oz) 350.00 14.00 18.00 0.72 2%
0.50 Wheat Malt HMD Belgi 3.00 0.30 18.00 1.80 5%
1.00 Pumpkin Flesh 5.00 1.00 20.00 4.00 10%
9.70 Total 23.80 53.32 100%
Starting Ending %Alcohol
Gravity Gravity by Vol
Estimate 1.053 1.013 5.25
Amt Hops and Spices AAU HBU Time In Util. Estimated
(oz) Boil Rate IBU
2.00 Hallertauer 3.2 6.40 60 30 28.38
Cinnamon stick-2 inc 0.0 0.00 30 17 0.00
Ground Mace-1.5 gram 0.0 0.00 15 8 0.00
Ground Nutmeg-1.5 gr 0.0 0.00 15 8 0.00
Ground Ginger-1 gram 0.0 0.00 15 8 0.00
2.00 Total 6.40 28.38
Yeast:
Wyeast American Ale
Procedure:
Steam Pumpkin for 10 to 15 minutes or until tender,
add to mash in progress.
Single Step Mash at @ 152F until conversion is reached.
Mash for 1.5 hours.
Amt Dry Spice Additions (grams)
6 Cinnamon Chips
3 round Nutmeg
2 Ground Mace
3 Sliced Ginger root
0.5 Ground Cloves
Notes: I used fresh pumpkin, but canned pumpkin should work.
Cut into 1/2 inch to 1 inch cubes. If its soft you can probably
omit the steaming part. For the Dry spice additions, I boiled a
cup of water, then added the spices (inside a hop bag). I let it
steep for a couple minutes, then transferred the whole shebang to
the fermenter. I racked it again a couple of days later.
Tasting Notes:
The majority of the taste/aroma came from the ginger. The spices
really came through. The hops and malt were balanced and neither
dominated. The pumpkin showed up in the color, a nice orangish/
brown. I didn't get much taste though. It was my wife's favorite
beer, it was also the hit of the Christmas party. Good Luck I hope
this helps.
BTW this was based on a recipe in the zymurgy's Indigenous Beers
Issue, sorry don't remember the authors name.
- ------------------------------
SoarMoose@aol.com (Chris) writes:
>I've never used a smaller amount of Mt. Hood for finishing
>because I used a butt-load the first time and I loved the result.
Is butt-load one of those new-fangled brewing terms? ;-)
Cheers,
Mike
Mike Clarke
Seattle, WA. USA
Email: MClarke950@aol.com
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 28 Aug 1995 22:39:07 -0400
From: Benwrtr@aol.com
Subject: Re: Mega Craft Breweries
I tried to send this a week ago, but it got lost in the shuffle to HBD's new
address. Hope I'm not beating a dead thread, but I wanted to toss in my two
p's on the megaswillery invasion of the micros.
The megaswilleries definitely don't want to eliminate the craft brewing
industry--they just want a piece of the action. In the first half of 1995,
beer sales at Anheuser-Busch grew by less than 1% from the first half of
1994, while sales at Miller and Coors actually declined. By contrast, craft
brewers have been growing by 50% or more annually, and they have pretty fat
profit margins.
As an example, take Redhook (I think I'll take one right now...), which went
public recently. Anheuser-Busch paid $18 million in October 1994 for a 25%
stake in Redhook. When Redhook issued stock two weeks ago, A-B invested
another $10 million to maintain its 25% stake. Based on the current share
price (as of 8/29) of $33 a share, A-B's stake (which originally cost $28
million) is now worth nearly $70 million!
So megas like A-B will gladly leave the actual brewing operations of the
micros alone, as long as they can siphon off their share of the profits. I
expect this unfortunate invasion to continue, since the micros are probably
willing to give up part ownership in order to have access to the megas'
national distribution system and big marketing dollars.
As for who's next...maybe one of the many Portland-area micros?
jeff tonole
SlothBrew
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 28 Aug 95 20:35:43 PDT
From: NAFRANK@pop03.ca.us.ibm.net (Nicholas A. Franke)
Subject: Low-Alcohol Beer Follow-Up, Pt. I
PART I
INTRODUCTION.
In the July 6, 1995 issue of the Digest (HBD #1774), I
requested information on making alcohol-free beer from the
collective. My motivation for making alcohol-free beer was
that a friend of ours had recently become pregnant but still
wanted to have an occasional beer. I thought I would provide a
summary of the responses I received and my experience with
making low alcohol beer.
THE RESPONSES.
I want to thank everyone who responded to my request.
All of the responses were very helpful. I received twenty-four
responses to my post, which provided the following input:
-- 4 responders suggested using heat (78-82 C) to
remove the alcohol from regularly-made beer;
-- 4 responders suggested freezing regularly-made beer,
and pouring off the alcohol (that would not freeze at the
temperature water freezes at). Most of these responders were
very pessimistic about the heating method, claiming that it
would ruin the flavor of the beer;
-- 2 responders suggested making the beer with non- or
low-fermentables. The primary suggestion was to make the beer
entirely with Cara-pils, which would give an O.G. of no more
than 1.010, and thus keep fermentation and alcohol production
at a minimum;
-- 1 responder suggested that using a reactant that
would turn the alcohol into a type of salt might be a
possibility;
-- 1 responder felt that it was too expensive and
impractical for a homebrewer to make non-alcohol beer;
-- 7 responders though that pregnant women should just
drink regular beer in moderation, and that reports of
detrimental effects of moderate alcohol consumption on fetuses
were largely exaggerated;
-- 3 people then responded to those posts that any risk
alcohol might pose to fetuses was too large to take;
-- 2 responders suggested that non-alcohol malt
beverages be substituted for beer during pregnancy.
Specifically, a German product called "malzbier," and a
Hispanic product called "malta goya," were suggested.
Coincidentally, the Fall 1995 issue of Zymurgy
contained a small blurb regarding an article written by Dr.
Siegfried Gunther and Stefan Vetter for Brewing and Beverage
Industry International (April 1994 edition) regarding
alcohol-free brewing methods. That article divided methods
into "biologic" and "physical". The three biologic methods
noted were:
1. Interrupting fermentation with a one minute
pasteurization at 140 F at the desired alcohol level;
2. Brewing a low-gravity beer and using yeast of the strain
Saccharomyces iudwiggii, which will ferment only simple sugars;
3. Mixing the yeast and wort at 32 F and filtering the yeast
out after a rest period (duration not specified).
The three physical methods noted were:
1. Heating the finished beer at atmospheric pressure. The
authors noted damage to the beer that made this method
undesirable;
2. Reverse osmosis. Removing alcohol by passage through
diaphragms by use of pressure gradients;
3. Dialysis. Passing the beer through fibers that are
bathed in a counterflow dialysate that produces a concentration
gradient.
THE PLAN.
Armed with this information, I decided to merge two of
the most popular concepts together. I decided to brew a fairly
low gravity beer, and then to freeze it after fermentation so
that the alcohol could be poured off. For reasons that I will
go into later, and although not planned, I also ended up using
a third method of removal--heat--but in a different way that
was suggested.
The recipe I used was for a pale ale-type beer, and
consisted of the following:
3# Domestic Malted Barley
1.75# Munich Malt
1.25# Cara-pils
12 ozs. Canadian Wheat
6 ozs. English Crystal (80L)
2 ozs. Domestic Crystal (120L)
.88 ozs. Northern Brewers (8.2% A)--60 mins.
2.69 ozs. Liberty (2.7% A) --10 mins.
Wyeast American Ale yeast (#1056)
The mash was a standard infusion mash, except that the
Cara-pils was not added until the mash was brought to 158 F.
The boil was for 90 mins. A 300 ml yeast starter and 3 tsp.
yeast food were pitched into 6 gals. The O.G. was 1.031.
Primary fermentation lasted for four days at 68 F.
Secondary fermentation was for another ten days at 68 F. F.G.
was 1.012.
270.4 fl. ozs. was separated from the main batch after
fermentation was complete for use in the "no alcohol
experiment".
REMOVING THE ALCOHOL.
The 270.4 "experimental" ozs. were racked into 4,
2-liter plastic soda bottles. Those bottles were placed
upside-down (on their caps) in a freezer at between 0 and 10 F
for 36 hours. The fluid in the bottles was solid at the end of
that period.
By inverting the bottles, the fluid that did not freeze
(including the alcohol) was at the cap-end of the bottle,
making it easier to pour it off. The biggest surprise of this
whole process was that when I opened the cap on the bottles,
they virtually exploded. After the first bottle, and cleaning
the sink, cabinets, walls and ceilings of alcohol sludge, I
opened the remaining three bottles underneath a plastic bucket.
Each one of them exploded. I estimate that 770 ml of the
alcohol sludge (I will call the "extract") was lost on the
walls and down the sink. I did manage to save 950 ml of the
extract.
There was an unexpected problem when I removed the 950
ml extract. I had been forewarned that this freezing method
removed a lot of body and hop bitterness (thus the 1# Cara-pils
and 35 IBUs), but no one had mentioned the loss of color. This
was supposed to be a pale ale, and had been the appropriate
color when I froze the beer. But when the extract was removed
the beer remaining frozen in the 2 liter bottles was almost as
clear as ice--no color at all. The extract, on the other hand,
was as dark as a stout. The extract also had a S.G. of 1.039
and smelled like alcohol and HOPS (capitalized on purpose and
for effect).
So, I was left with the problem of a colorless, no
alcohol beer. This is when I decided to employ the third
method of de-alcoholization--heat. Numerous people had warned
me about the bad effects of heat on the beer for alcohol
removal, and so I decided to heat only the extract. After all,
that's where the alcohol was. After I removed the alcohol from
the extract, I planned to put the extract back in the beer to
give it color again.
Those suggesting heat as an alcohol removal method
instructed that alcohol evaporates at 78-82 C (I did not check
this fact). Therefore, I heated the 950 ml of extract at
174-178 F for 13 minutes, which resulted in 600 ml of extract
at 1.069. After cooling, I returned this extract to the
melting beer.
CARBONATION.
After going to all this trouble, I did not want to add
any alcohol back into the beer through priming. I was also
concerned about the viability of the yeast after the
freezing/thawing/heating process. So, I put the thawed beer
into a 3 gallon keg and force carbonated the beer for
approximately 2.6 volumes of CO(2). The end result was 244
ozs. (7,222.4 ml) of low alcohol beer.
PART II
Part II, which includes the estimates of the alcohol
content and extraction for the beer, will be sent in a separate
transmission.
NAF.
nafrank@ibm.net
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 28 Aug 95 20:44:17 PDT
From: NAFRANK@pop03.ca.us.ibm.net (Nicholas A. Franke)
Subject: Low Alcohol Beer Follow-Up, Pt. II
INTRODUCTION.
In Part I of this post, I described my attempt to
make a low alcohol beer by starting with a low gravity beer
and then removing the alcohol by freezing the beer and
pouring off the alcohol. In this follow-up post, I will set
out my estimates of how efficient that alcohol removal process
was.
THE NUMBERS.
My Disclaimer: I am not a chemist, physicist,
mathemetician, professional brewer, alchemist, botanist, or
floral arranger. However, I am a lawyer and know how
to write a disclaimer. Accordingly, none of the following
theories, theorems, equations, hypotheses, statements, opinions
and conclusions should be relied on. If you need a truly
alcohol-free brew for health or safety reasons, please do not
rely on my (probably flawed) methodology and results. Instead,
buy a tried and tested commercial, non-alcohol beer. The
purpose of this post is the amusement of the homebrewing
collective. If anyone sees an error in any of the following
(and I'm sure there are a few), please point it out. I don't
mind admitting that I struggled greatly with these equations
and the theory underlying them.
The Alcohol Content of the Original Beer.
I started by figuring the alcohol content of the beer
before I did anything unnatural to it. I used the following
formulas (taken from the Summer 1995 Zymurgy):
O.G. 1.031 F.G. 1.012
A%(by weight)=76.08(OG-FG)/(1.775-OG)
=76.08(1.031-1.012)/(1.775-1.031)
=76.08(.019)/1.744
=1.996574585
A%(by volume)=A%(weight)[FG/.794]
=1.996574585[1.012/.794]
=2.544752491
Thus the beer had a very low alcohol content of
approximately 2.5% even before doing anything to it.
I next computed the volume of actual alcohol in the
beer. The total beer volume was 244 ozs. (7,222.4 ml), and so
I multiplied that number by the percent alcohol by volume to
determine the number of milliliters of alcohol in the beer:
7,222.4 ml beer x .02544752491 = 203.6779104 ml alcohol
Composition of the Extract.
Out of necessity, I made the assumption that the
freezing method removed all of the alcohol in the beer with the
extract, and that no alcohol remained in the frozen beer.
Therefore, all 203.6779104 ml of alcohol were contained in the
extract.
I saved 950 ml of the extract and, based on the
beginning and ending volumes of beer, estimate that I lost
approximately 770 ml of the extract down the sink, on the
walls, etc. Therefore, the total volume of the extract was 950
+ 770, or 1,720 ml.
Again, out of necessity I assumed that the percentage
of alcohol in the extract I lost was the same as the percentage
of alcohol in the extract I saved. This does not seem to be an
outrageous assumption to make. Then I computed the volume of
alcohol that was lost with the lost extract:
[770 ml lost extract/1,720 ml total extract volume] x
203.6779104 ml alcohol = 91.1813901199 ml alcohol lost
203.6779104 ml alcohol - 91.1813901199 ml alcohol lost =
112.496520281 ml alcohol in 950 ml saved extract
Specific Gravity of the Extract Without Alcohol.
Next you must compute the specific gravity of the
extract as if there were no alcohol in it. I used the number
.796 as the S.G. of alcohol in this equation:
(extract gravity)(extract volume)=
(SG alcohol)(alcohol volume)+(SG of extract without
alcohol)(alcohol-free extract volume)
(1.039)(950 ml)=(.796)(112.496520281)+(SG)(837.503479719)
987.05=89.5472301436+(SG)837.503479719
897.502769857=(SG)837.503479719
1.07164064578=SG of 950 ml extract without alcohol
Adjusting the Specific Gravity for Volume.
The next calculation adjusts the specific gravity of
the extract without alcohol (1.07164064578) for the reduction
in volume of the extract that occurred when it was heated. The
extract volume was reduced from 950 ml to 600 ml. From the
above, though, it was determined that only 837.503479719 ml of
the original extract was not alcohol. Assuming there was a
proportional decrease in the volume of extract that was alcohol
and the volume of extract that was not alcohol, the non-alcohol
portion of the extract would have been reduced from
837.503479719 ml to 528.949566144. [The reality is that the
non-alcohol part of the extract actually evaporated slightly
quicker than the alcohol part. This can be demonstrated through
several equations which I have not included here.]
The specific gravity of the non-alcohol part of the
extract is adjusted for the reduction in volume as follows:
837.503479719 ml (begin volume)/528.949566144 (end volume)
x 1.07164064578 (SG non-alcohol part)
= 1.11343102248 (SG of non-alcohol part of 600 ml extract)
Calculating the Alcohol Content of the Processed Beer.
Finally, taking the results from the foregoing, the new
alcohol content of the beer, after the freezing and heating
processes, is calculated.
[Actual SG of extract]/[SG of extract without alcohol]
= Efficiency Factor
Efficiency Factor x Original Alcohol Vol.=Actual Alcohol Volume
1.069/1.11343102248 = .60829919797 [efficiency factor]
.60829919797 x 112.496520281 ml alcohol = 68.4315430613 ml alc.
The remaining amount of alcohol in the extract, which
is added back to the beer, is 68.4315430613 ml. The total
volume of the beer is 7,222.4 ml. Thus, it is simple to do the
final calculation and figure out the alcohol content of the
beer by volume:
68.4315430613 ml/7,222.4 ml = .0094749035, or approximately 1%
The beer therefore still has about 1% alcohol by volume
because the extraction method was only about 61% efficient.
COMPARISON OF BEERS.
The untreated beer was only slightly darker (maybe 2-3
SRM) than the beer which had been frozen and had alcohol
removed. The untreated beer also had slightly more hoppiness
and a little more body. However, on the whole I can not say
that the alcohol removal process dramatically changed the beer.
While I would certainly prefer a regular pale ale, I found both
the treated and untreated versions of this beer to be very
drinkable, and certainly recognizable as beer.
METHODS OF IMPROVEMENT.
If I were to attempt a no- or low-alcohol beer again,
which, by the way, is a lot of work, I would use this same
method. Freezing the beer, removing the extract, heating only
the extract, and returning the extract to the frozen beer gives
the benefits of alcohol removal without losing all of the body,
hoppiness and color found in the extract.
Improvement is needed primarily on the efficiency of
the heating process to remove alcohol. A longer heating
process is necessary. Through a series of other calculations,
I estimated that to get a beer of this OG/FG to less than .5%
alcohol v/v (the legal definition for a no-alcohol beer),
approximately 90% of the extract would have to be evaporated by
heating. One-half of the volume that evaporates could be
replaced by water without harming the color or flavor of the
extract.
I would be very interested in receiving any comments or
suggestions anyone might have.
NAF.
nafrank@ibm.net
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 28 Aug 95 21:58 MDT
From: rjbourc@nmia.com (Roy Bourcier)
Subject: Sour Mash Beer Recipes?
I have the interest span of a fruit fly - I'm not proud of it, but I accept
it. A month ago, I was possessed by brewing the perfect American Pale Ale.
I will get back to this obsession shortly. But for the moment I've found a
new diversion...
A couple of weeks ago, I tried brewing a minor spinoff of a sour mash beer
recipe by Micah Millspaw which I found on Cats Meow III. It's still in
secondary, but already it's apparent (to my taste) that this is something
worth pursuing. What (incredibly) little I can find to read on this style
suggests (nay, hints) that this is a truly native US style worthy of the
same respect as Steam Beer and Cream Ale. I'm presently working on my
second recipe, incorporating several hints from Randy Mosher's excellent
book (no connection, yada, yada, yada) and some suggestions posted by Bill
Vaughan (I forget where). My current thinking is as follows:
Sour Mash Beer (5 gal.)
8.5 lb American 2 row malt
1.5 lb Rye malt
1 lb Cara Pils malt
1 lb 95-115L Crystal malt
1 oz Galena hops (60 min)
1 oz Cascade hops (30 min)
1/4 tsp powdered Irish Moss (10 min)
Yogurt culture
American Ale yeast
Mash 2 lb of 2 row malt using 50-60-70 schedule
Mashout @ 175=B0F for 5 minutes
Cool to 90=B0F and stir in yogurt culture
Sour for two days
Mash remaining malts using 50-60-70 schedule
Mashout at 175=B0F for 5 minutes
Combine mashes
Sparge at 170=B0F
Boil for 90 min
Cool and pitch yeast
Any comments on this formulation? Anybody got a REALLY GOOD RECIPE? C'mon,
let's bring this American classic back into vogue - I'm tired of having to
brewing funky European styles to dabble with bacterial "innoculations".
TIA.
- -------------------------------------------------------------------
Roy J. Bourcier rjbourc@nmia.com
"Once a guy stood all day shaking bugs from his hair."
A Scanner Darkly, by Philip K. Dick
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 1995 08:13:49 EDT
From: uscgc2r3@ibmmail.com
Subject: MPBITU
I couldn't seem to make out Bill's (most powerful beer in the universe) address,
and maybe this has general interest so here's my thought...
Bill,
>From what I've read, yeast can't take that level in the solution with them.
Something in a wine book had some scheme for multiple yeast additions over time
to get up over 8-9%. Have you got some special yeast in mind?
Wallie Meisner
1800 334 9481 x-2410
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 95 08:33:00 PDT
From: Ray Robert <rayr@bah.com>
Subject: Cat's Meow Database
Hi All!
Awhile back there was a posting about the possibility of a Microsoft Access
Cat's Meow 3 database. Was this true or had my homebrew clouded my mind?
If it is available please post on where it is. Also is Meow 3 available in
SUDS 4.0 format. It would be great to upload all those recipes once instead
of one at a time. Inquiring minds want to know.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 1995 7:44:00 -0500 (CDT)
From: JOHN <KRHOVJAK_JD@lvs-emh.lvs.loral.com>
Subject: Pilsner
Can someone post or send me a good recipe for a pilsner? I was in the
Czech Republic recently and drank a lot of their Pilsner Urquell on tap
which turned out to be about the best I've ever had. I've tried the
pilsner recipes in "The new joy of..." but they were not very close to
the real thing.
Thanks,
John Krhovjak
krhovjak_jd@lvs-emh.lvs.loral.com
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 95 09:40:17 EDT
From: hadleyse@pweh.com
Subject: Carboy Hairline Cracks
I was taking a close look at my 5 Gal. carboy while I was cleaning it
and noticed many thin cracks encircling the conical section near the
neck. It wasn't very noticeable because they're kind of hard to see.
Its only a year old and has seen a dozen batches. I bought it new and
never looked at it really closely before so I'm not sure if I bought it
with the cracks. I'm going to replace it because of the thought of it
breaking while I'm carring it full of beer in the house. Is this
typical of 5 Gal. carboys made in Mexico? Does anyone regularly recycle
their carboys? TIA
Scott Hadley
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 1995 09:40:52 -0400
From: djt2@po.cwru.edu
Subject: Re:outflow connections for cooler-mashtuns
cem@cadre.com (Chuck E. Mryglot) wrote
>I have jest received a round, 10 Gal Igloo cooler which I
>want to modify to be a mash/lauter tun. I am looking
>for a source to find a replacement for the push-button
>spigot that comes with it. Anyone have any advice?
For my 5 gallon Gott cooler I found that the spigot screwed right out and
that a plastic bulkhead fitting fit tightly in its place. I used the 3/8 "
tube size union made out of polypropylene, allowing access to the 3/8"
copper manifold on the inside, and a vinyl tube outflow with a tubing
clamp. The nice thing is that when I switched over to a larger tun, I could
just return the spigot to make the cooler usable for drinks again. I don't
know if the Igloo spigot just screws out or not.
I get my plastics parts from US Plastics 1-800-537-9724. The bulkhead union
is #61123, $1.30. There is a $2 addition for orders under $20. Their
catalog has a wide variety of valves, fittings, and tubing.
For my new tun I discovered another neat trick; Using a 48 quart
rectangular Coleman cooler, with a flip-up plug, I tried to unscrew that
one as described above. It became clear that it was going to be
irreversible, and I wanted not to destroy the cooler. Instead, I found that
a piece of vinyl "bubble tubing" placed from the inside would fit snugly in
the hole, leaving a segment inside to connect to the manifold and an
outflow piece too. Bubble tubing is the kind that has areas of enlarged
diameter spaced at meter intervals. Cutting the tubing at these bubbles
results in a funnel-shaped end that can be easily connected to other
tubing. I got mine from my lab, and I've never seen bubble tubing
elsewhere. The scientific supply houses carry it (Fisher, VWR, etc.) at
some high price for about 50 feet. You might also accomplish the same end
by boring a 3/8" hole in a stopper to fit the opening, and sliding this
along the tubing to make a removable bulkhead union too.
Dennis
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #1818, 08/30/95
*************************************
-------
