Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #2084
This file received at Hops.Stanford.EDU 1996/06/27 PDT
Homebrew Digest Thursday, 27 June 1996 Number 2084
FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
Shawn Steele, Digest Janitor
Thanks to Rob Gardner for making the digest happen!
Contents:
Oxidization during boiling, High temp Hose (Geza T Szenes/IPL)
Sorry about HSA misinfo/O2 in beeer.Repost#2 (Charlie Scandrett)
and More Enzymes (Steve Alexander)
Fruit wine recipe (Bertina.Hou@Corp.Sun.COM (Bertina Hou))
Questions about fruit wines (Bertina.Hou@Corp.Sun.COM (Bertina Hou))
Oxygen ("William D. Knudson")
Kettle headspace (O2 or Steam) (Charlie Scandrett)
my scotch ale (nigelt@delm.tas.gov.au (Nigel Townsend))
Re: Morraine cooker ("CHUCK HUDSON, ER LAB 3-2865")
Re: Clinit*st, reducing sugars (Jeremy Bergsman)
Chancellor Group (symbol = CHAG) (term@moneyworld.com)
Quickie Mead Recipe (Douglas Kerfoot)
distilling beer ("Bryan L. Gros")
Repost re: Chlorine removal (JACKMOWBRAY@delphi.com)
chlorophenols/Sheila/sacks & bales/enzymes/FG/WI water/wiley Weizen (korz@pubs.ih.lucent.com)
Yeast Washing ("Terry Terfinko")
Grapefruit in my beer (Dave Mercer)
55 lb Sack O'Sh*t / Electric Coolers / Water Kemistree Again (KennyEddy@aol.com)
Pint Glasses/Beer Labels/55lb Sacks/Old Wyeast (Fred Waltman)
NOTE NEW HOMEBREW ADDRESSES
homebrew@aob.org (SUBMISSIONS only)
homebrew-digest-request@aob.org (for REQUESTS only)
Send articles for __publication_only__ to homebrew@aob.org
(Articles are published in the order they are received.)
Send UNSUBSCRIBE and all other requests, ie, address change, etc.,
to homebrew-digest-request@aob.org, BUT PLEASE NOTE that if
you subscribed via BEER-L, you must unsubscribe by sending a
one line e-mail to listserv@ua1vm.ua.edu that says: UNSUB BEER-L
This list service is now being provided by majordomo@aob.org, so some
of the commands may have changed. For technical problems send
e-mail to the Digest Janitor, shawn@aob.org.
If your account is being deleted, please be courteous and unsubscribe first.
ARCHIVES & OTHER INFORMATION
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 or visit
http://alpha.rollanet.org on the Web. Othere information is available by
e-mail from info@aob.org and on the AHA's web site at http://www.aob.org/aob.
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 at /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. Some
archives are available via majordomo@aob.org.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Geza T Szenes/IPL <Geza_T_Szenes/IPL.IPL@NOTES.IPL.CA>
Date: 26 Jun 96 15:51:44
Subject: Oxidization during boiling, High temp Hose
David R. Burley Wrote:
>>SNIP<<
In the absence of clear proof, I basically challenge the idea that in a 5
gallon kettle boiling away for an hour or more, open to the air, that no
oxidation of the wort will occur.
>>Stuff Deleted<<
a rolling boil which constantly exposes all of the volume of
the wort to oxygen at the highest possible temperature, 212F or 100C for a
period of an hour or more. I do not believe that all of the gas above our
kettles is water vapor. Some of it is air. I believe this is real, but this is
only my intuition.
>>UN-SNIP<<
I've always thought the same thing. My intuition has always been that some
oxidation of the wort does take place during boiling. As a wine maker I've
always been interested in how sherry is oxidized by slowly baking it in an
"estufa".
It is interesting to note that it is actually a closed system, yet the sherry
will be
oxidized by the length of the baking process.
I would also be interested in proof of the level of the oxidation of the wort
from the
boil. Is the dreaded HSA nothing more then a momily?
Is this why breweries use closed boilers?
Also; is there conclusive evidence for the temperature at which
aerating the wort is safe so HSA does not occur? I've seen references
that say that aeration during sparging causes HSA. So assume that introducing
oxygen
at 170 degrees is not safe, is 165 safe? Is 160?
What is the highest temperature at which you can aerate wort without causing
HSA?
High Temp Hoses
- ----------------------------
There has been a lot of discussion with regards to High temp hoses in the last
while.
I have recently obtained (but not yet used) surgical tubing. It is pure latex,
can be
boiled to sterilize, and it can be purchased in different wall thicknesses and
interior diameters. I bought 5/16 id with a wall thickness of 3/16. It is
quite sturdy.
Can be purchased at most surgical or hospital supply places for
a reasonable amount (approximately $ 1/foot).
Anyone else using them?
------------------------------
From: Charlie Scandrett <merino@buggs.cynergy.com.au>
Date: Thu, 27 Jun 1996 08:19:12 +1000 (EST)
Subject: Sorry about HSA misinfo/O2 in beeer.Repost#2
John Wilkinson posted,
>In hbd #2076 Charlie Scandrett said:
>>...HSA (hot side aeration) is not just dissolving
>>O2 in wort. It is the oxygenation of Mellanoids and fatty acids. This
>>reaction slows exponentially I think below about 70C, it is considered
>>insignificant below that threshold.
>Since my sparge probably runs off below 70C does this mean I don't need
>to worry about HSA as I collect it?
Sloppy posting by me actually John, keep the O2 out till much lower
temperatures post boil.
Maillard reactions virtually stop below 70C. However oxidising of the
resulting "mellanoids" takes place well below that temperature. I'm not sure
if the suggested decline of 1/2 rate for each 10C for O2 dissolving in water
is relevant to oxidation of organic compunds. Does anybody have references?
But Al Korzonas correctly pointed out that the *low temperature rate of
reaction* and *short length of oxygen exposure* rule out significant
oxidation during fermentation aeration.
HSA oxidation of polyphenols is not a problem *preboil*, because they
complex out with proteins. It actually helps remove them. Post boil it
promotes haze, staling and some astringency. (depending on what polyphenol)
Polyphenols oxidise easily to form tannins (tannoids) which complex with
protein to form haze.
The role of O2 in beer is *very complex*. Basically the cons outweigh the
pros at all points except pitching. It is used up at that stage very
quickly. Narziss, the German brew scientist recomends even de-oxygenated
mash and sparge water! That would involve boiling it and keeping the cooled
water under CO2.
Enzymic oxidation of fatty acids by lipoxygenase is a problem at *low
temperatures* in mashes esp with lightly kilned lager malts, but is not such
a problem over 65C when it is denatured in solution. I've been doing some
flavour research and lipoxygenase is active in changing aroma and flavour
compounds after harvesting in many fruits, herbs and cereals, including
hops. This strange enzyme (actually enzymes) is catalysised by iron and
inhibited by low pH. It is in the mash where it forms the water soluble
hydroperoxide derivatives of the fatty acids (esp linoleic). Oxygen oxidises
these into heat stable precursors of the staling aldehyde "trans-2-nonenal".
Because hydroperoxide derivatives of fatty acids are destroyed in the boil,
HSA is more of a *mash* problem for lipid>staling aldehyde production.
Mashout is important in denaturing the lipoxygenase, and air should be
excluded from the lauter.
I am building an experiment with a University professor to test the complete
removal of O2 from kegs of beer with his new gas membrane technology. By
complete we mean < 0.01 ppm! We would be finished months ago, but the
"basic" research of variables for our experimental model turned out to be a
bloody mammoth task! HSA reared its ugly head very quickly.(I would
appreciate any references from organic chemists/brew scientists that would
shorten the investigation.)
In fact, current research suggests HSA in the *mash* and bottling air pickup
as the two main O2-mediated flavour degradations of beer. With higher kilned
malts, de-oxygenated mash water, O2 scavenging bottle caps, the new hot CO2
jetted bottling lines, and my professor's new O2 removal technology applied
to bright beer tanks, I think very long term beer flavour and aroma
stability can be achieved. Wine buffs look out!
I will report next year!
Charlie (Brisbane, Australia)
------------------------------
From: Steve Alexander <stevea@clv.mcd.mot.com>
Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 18:55:35 -0400
Subject: and More Enzymes
David R. Burley writes ...
>Jim Busch and I still agree on the basic framework of enzyme
>kinetics,but we are having trouble recognizing that fact. Jim points
>out that some recipes call for
>
>10-15 minutes saccharification time as proof that my suggestion to
>extend this time to get better conversion was out of line. Of
>course, this exactly proves my point. If someone is having trouble
>with high FG and it is not due to stuck fermentation then the amylase
>is not completing the conversion. My point is at
^^^^^^^^^^^
Which amylase is the question David.
>high temperatures ( e.g. 158F) the beta amylase is crippled by two
>factors - denaturization and slower rate of reaction at a given
>concentration. The
Actually a 15 minute rest at 70C (=158F) in a pCA=4 (calcium rich)
solution has been used as a method of isolating alpha-amylase (AA).
In other words it is used specifically to destroy beta-amylase! The
specific acivity of the AA and BA do not decrease with temperature,
even at high temperature. Only the denaturing, primarily of the BA
but to some extent of AA is an issue at 70C. There are some enzymes
that experience a REVERSIBLE deactivation at temperature, some of the
lipases for example. These few enzymes do have a decrease in activity
at higher temps. Amylase enzymes do NOT experience this phenomenon.
>classic method as Jim suggests is to lower the saccharification
>temperature and get a more complete conversion of the starch to
>femantable sugar, since the beta amylase will have a slower loss due
>to denaturation and wil be at a higher rate at this lower
>temperature. I suggested an alternative and that was to extend the
>saccharification time ( knowing that some people use S times as short
>as ten or fifteen minutes - as Jim comments). This time is definitely
>adequate to chew up the colloidal starch
>
>from any adjuncts and perhaps give a negative starch test, but
>depending on the type of malt being used, the yield will suffer more
>or less. I thought that an easy way to decrease the FG to some extent
>without any other major changes, while increasing the yield would be
>to extend the saccharification time. I was assuming that the writer
>was using a short S time.
>
>I was also using this as a forum to question the on-off mentality on
>enzyme kinetics I see here and in most HB books. There is nothing
>magic about the range 144-158F except this is the range found in
>Malting and Brewing science -
I'm not sure if my previous post got dumped by the HBD gods or what
but to re-iterate.
A BA only mash would produces a lot of maltose (~73% of carbs) and a
lot of beta-limit starches (~22% of carbs). Alpha-amylase is thus
necessary to break down the beta-limit starchs. (results from 'Enzymes
in Food Science' edited by Gerald Reed, Academic Press 1975.).
An AA only mash produces a wide spectrum of poly-saccharides. The
precise spectrum of poly-saccharides is dependent on the source of the
AA (Yes, all AA is NOT the same!). Wheat AA differes from Barley AA
results, tho' they are similar. Bacterial source AA is different yet,
as is mammalian AA! The point is that AA eliminates high molecular
weight almost completely, but contrary to popular belief is doesn't
produce a wort full of glucose in any reasonable amount of time, if
ever. Generally speaking the AA produces < 20% fermentable sugars
(from M&B Sci) and only 5% G1 (mono-saccharides), 12% G2
(di-saccharides), 20% G3 (not all fermantable), 10% G4, 15% G5, 30%
G6, 5% G7, which accounts for virtually all of the carbs!! These
figures were taken after a 180 minute AA only rest of an amylose
substrate from (Robyt and French, 1963, Recent Advan. Food Sci.). The
point is that AA is selective about which 1-4 bonds is breaks. The
well substantiated fact that AA won't cleave linkages in
polysaccharides with fewer than 3 1-4 linked glucose units doesn't
mean that it's equally likely to cleave a link in a G5 as in a G500.
It is not.
Your 158F(70C) mash is a pretty close approximation of an
alpha-amylase AA only mash after the first few minutes. You can mash
it till the cows come home, but you'll still get a very dextrinous
wort and a correspondingly high FG. The other point in my previous
post is that there is relatively little AA as compared to BA in any
malt, tho' pale ale malts are likely to be weaker in AA. Plan on
spending 2X to 3X as long mashing at 70C as you would at 60C to break
the same number of links. The temp increases activity 2X, but you'll
lose 80% to 85% of your total amylase, and BA lost is a bit active
that AA per unit weight.
>range 144-158F except this is the range found in Malting and Brewing
>science - a British book about using well modified British malts that
>have the enzyme system
Whoa - this is dead wrong. M&B Sci is decidedly NOT just about using
english malts.
M&B Sci is by British authors, and includes some chapters primarily on
commercial practice that are IMO Anglocentrically slanted. You are
likely to see more details on English commercial malt kilns, but never
to the exclusion of info on continental practice. The theory and
experimental results chapters are quite general and many of the
experimental data tables call out results from German lagers and
American lagers as well. Many if not most of the experimental results
presented reference papers originating in continental europe and NA.
The practical differences in beer production in many different
geographical regions are mentioned including some emdedded references
to beer in the far east and in the carribean!
>crippled to some extent. Enzyme reactions happen at other
>temperatures higher and lower than this, given the caveats of
>temperature dependence of rates of reaction, substrate availability
>and denaturization temperature range. I can't help but feel that we
>may be ignoring some variables in producing unique beers
True - and some of those beers will be uniquely bad if you don't
account for the known facts about enzymes and mashing and use them. I
agree that breaking the tyranny of historical methods can produce
useful and improved results. But 144-158 isn't just a Britishism,
it's well accepted the world around for some good reasons. To
successfully break out of this limit YOU have to demonstrate an
improvement, and hopefully explain what you are doing and why it
works. You need a goal other than just being different - perhaps I
scanned over it - but what are you trying to achieve w/ a high temp
mash ?
>but toeing the line on these temperature ranges. I would also like to
>see some discussion on how we can tell something about the progress
>of the various steps in the brewing process by testing as we go
>along. Any info on this?
Agreed. I like the bit on diabetic tests. Do you know if the same
reactions are used to assay blood sugar level in the electronic test
strip readers ?
>- -----------------------------------------------
>
[...]
>Dave Burley
Dave - my advice is to just cool it - your mash that is.
Steve Alexander
------------------------------
From: Bertina.Hou@Corp.Sun.COM (Bertina Hou)
Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 16:04:46 -0700
Subject: Fruit wine recipe
Hello,
This is directed to Michael Aesoph or anyone else with helpful hints
regarding the interesting fruit wine recipe. Basically, I'm about as
green as they come
and I'd like to try out this recipe, perhaps undertake a prospective
hobby.
Could you tell me:
1) what kind of container I'm supposed to mix all the ingredients in
2) how long do I age it for
3) how long can I drink it for
4) is there a health risk if I do it wrong
5) what's the difference in taste with the different fruits or
vegetable
6) which fruits/veggies should I stay away from
I really excited to try this. =)
Thanks,
Bertina
------------------------------
From: Bertina.Hou@Corp.Sun.COM (Bertina Hou)
Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 16:14:36 -0700
Subject: Questions about fruit wines
Hello,
This is directed to Michael Aesoph or anyone else with helpful hints regarding
the intersting fruit wine recipe. Basically, I'm about as green as they come
and I'd like to try out this recipe, perhaps undertake a prospective hobby.
Could you tell me:
1) what kind of container I'm supposed to mix all the ingredients in
2) how long do I age it for
3) how long can I drink it for
4) is there a health risk if I do it wrong
5) what's the difference in taste with the different fruits or veggies
6) which fruits/veggies should I stay away from
I'm really excited to try this. =)
Thanks,
Bertina
------------------------------
From: "William D. Knudson" <71764.203@CompuServe.COM>
Date: 26 Jun 96 19:11:11 EDT
Subject: Oxygen
Russ Broduer asked about the welding tanks as alternative source for 'liquid
bread' O2 supply.
I spoke with Phil Hunt of Gulf Stream Brewing Products today. His company is
about to market a competing oxygenating product.
I asked him Russ's (sp?) question. He indicated that the welding tanks are of
the same source and quality. In fact, Gulf Stream is also offering the setup
without the tank.
No affiliation -blah x 2.
Bill
Ich kann besser Deutsch wenn ich etwas Bier getrunken habe.
------------------------------
From: Charlie Scandrett <merino@buggs.cynergy.com.au>
Date: Thu, 27 Jun 1996 09:01:20 +1000 (EST)
Subject: Kettle headspace (O2 or Steam)
David Burley wrote
>I do not believe that all of the gas above our
>kettles is water vapor. Some of it is air. I believe this is real, but this is
>only my intuition. Does anyone have any way to prove it or disprove it?
>What fraction of the oxidation of the wort is from the boil and what fraction
>from the , so called HSA?
Any oxidation during boil *is* HSA. However during a vigorous 25 litre boil
for 60 minutes about 2.5 litres of wort is lost. This is ~40,000 litres of
steam. (water vapour) If your kettle is ~350mm in diameter, steam is leaving
your kettle surface at 115mm/sec or about 4.5 inches/sec. This is a "steam
wind" protecting the surface of your wort. You would need a healthy cross
draught to get air in contact with the surface of your wort?
Charlie (Brisbane, Australia)
------------------------------
From: nigelt@delm.tas.gov.au (Nigel Townsend)
Date: Thu, 27 Jun 1996 09:28:22 +1000
Subject: my scotch ale
- ------------------------------
Stetson asks about reducing over - carbonation in the bottle. I had a
similar problem when I overprimed (in a bottling bucket) a lager which I
forgot that I had taken I gallon out to trial a fruit lager.
Using advice on the HBD, I placed the bottles in the freezer for between 1
and 2 hours to chill and absorb more CO2. I then took them to the sink and
eased off the edge of the crown caps without removing them completely. Out
spurted a lot of foam. I waited until it was finished and then recapped
using the same cap.
I have not had a problem with infection since,
You should trial a couple of bottles with letting out different amounts of
foam as I had some which ended up pretty flat, but still drinkable. They
were also a bit of a lower risk of glass grenades, or fountains on the best
lounge carpet (each a risk to life and limb). A bit of trial and error on
a few bottles should be sufficient to get a reasonable pressure on the
rest.
I wouldnt throw it away, but dont leave it too long. I over primed and
blew up several flagons (thicker than modern champagne botles) of home made
ginger beer as a kid, missing my mum by about 2 minutes. Very messy, but
flying glass shards are also very dangerous as any one with the misfortune
to be in the vicinity of a car bomb will know.
Nigel Townsend
Hobart, Tasmania,Australia
------------------------------
From: "CHUCK HUDSON, ER LAB 3-2865" <CHUDSON@mozart.unm.edu>
Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 18:35:27 -0600 (MDT)
Subject: Re: Morraine cooker
Afternoon all:
Mark your calendars,,, June 26 1996 @1822 hrs it rained here in Albuquerque
NM!!!
Back to beer. Oshmans (a chain sporting goods store) has Cajun cookers at a
great price, 35,000 Btu ring burner @ $US 39.95 and 170,000 Btu twin (Yes TWIN
burner) for $US 69.95. The downside to this is that the ring burner is set up
to use ONLY the 16 oz disposable propane cylinders. (But for nominal fee you
can purchase the adapter set and regulators for @ $20-25.00).
I have two of the ring burners and a little bit of New Mexico engineering
connected the two to a "Y" hose and run it off of my gas grill's 20 lb tank.
Shop around and you might find what you need.
Chuck Hudson
Front Porch Brewing Co.
Albuquerque NM.
chudson@mozart.unm.edu
Give a man a beer and he wastes an hour
Teach a man to brew and he wastes a lifetime
My wife circa 1983 I haven't a clue where she heard it
------------------------------
From: Jeremy Bergsman <jeremybb@leland.stanford.edu>
Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 16:40:37 -0800
Subject: Re: Clinit*st, reducing sugars
Dave Burley writes:
> (I am puzzled now since I always assumed the cupric ion was
>being reduced ( no other choice in this case of a redox reaction), yet
>it reacts with "reducible" sugars.) I'm going to have to look this up,
>unless some HBDer knows.
I only got B's in OChem, but I believe these are known as
*reducing* sugars, explaining your confusion. Also note
that the ends of starches are reducing (each amylase
"bite" creates one new reducing end) so the starches themselves
should react with the test, regardless of length (of course
with fewer reactions per unit weight in the case of longer
chains).
=======
Ken Koupal asks why grain comes in 55 lb sacks. Maybe 25 Kilos
sounds better.
=======
I have really been enjoying all the technical posts on enzyme stability
and ester production. I would like to wonder "out loud" whether MABS
is really a good reference for such discussions. In my field of science
(neuroscience) there is no textbook that is anything like up to date or
complete. Original research articles and reviews are the only way
to get the state of knowledge. MABS, being a textbook and being,
what is it, 20+ years old, can't be very state of the art. Just think
how much basic biochemistry has been learned since then, not to mention
brewing science. Unfortunately, like most of you, I don't have ready
access to real brewing journals, so keep those summaries coming!
- --
Jeremy Bergsman
jeremybb@leland.stanford.edu
http://www-leland.stanford.edu/~jeremybb
------------------------------
From: term@moneyworld.com
Date: Thu, 27 Jun 96 1:14:18 GMT
Subject: Chancellor Group (symbol = CHAG)
http://chancellor.stockpick.com
I just got wind that Chancellor Group just announced a stock dividend for
July 31. SGA Goldstar has sent out a "buy" recommendation. I understand
other investment advisors are looking to recommend CHAG. The company has a
strong book value. The short sellers need to cover. This looks like a
good situation to me. What do you think? They are located at:
http://chancellor.stockpick.com
Bob Williams, 206-269-0846
To terminate from my Investment Opportunities, Reply to term@moneyworld.com
with "remove" in the subject field.
------------------------------
From: Douglas Kerfoot <dkerfoot@macatawa.org>
Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 21:28:32 -0400
Subject: Quickie Mead Recipe
Thought I would post my favorite summertime mead recipe (ready in about 3
weeks!)
Peel one large grapefruit (set fruit part aside)
Grate 1 oz of ginger
Boil peel and ginger in 2 gallons water for about 15 minutes. Turn off heat,
skim out most of the solids.
Add 8 lbs honey (go ahead and boil it if you must, but I don't)
cool, top with cold water to equal 5 1/2 or so gallons
Cut up grapefruit and dump in. Note: You can use a carboy if you want, but I
recommend a PLASTIC fermenter for the primary. It's easier to clean,
scratches and all.
Add a scant palmful of yeast nutrient and one package of Edme yeast. Don't
try to get fancy. I maintain about a dozen yeasts on slant, including mead
yeasts, but for this recipe, use one package of Edme dry yeast. (Yeah, I
usually rehydrate it)
Ferment about two weeks in primary to let the yeast break down the citrus
globules. Try to keep below 75 F. Rack to secondary. Start siphon by
sucking hose. Let clear for one week. Rack to keg, carbonate to about 15
psi. If botting, use a bit more suger (or honey) than you usually use for
beer.
I am pretty sure that it will continue to improve if aged, but I have never
had 5 gallons last more than 2 months past brew day. This stuff is great on
a hot summer day!
- --
Douglas G. Kerfoot
Brewmaster and Chief Publican (Down with 'mocrats!)
Cunning Linguist(TM) Brewery and Flophouse
Need a temperature controller for both heating and cooling?
Check out my website at: http:\\www.macatawa.org\~dkerfoot\
------------------------------
From: "Bryan L. Gros" <grosbl@ctrvax.Vanderbilt.Edu>
Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 20:49:46 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: distilling beer
Kurt Schilling <kurt@pop.iquest.net> writes:
(re: the distillation thread)
>>This has brought me out of the lurker mode and I'm not sure that I like it.
>>Engage Hyper rant module:
>>According to Title 26 of the United States Code ,Subtitle E, Chapter 51,
>>Subchapter J,Part 1, Sect 5601(a)1 ......
[legalese kindly deleted]
I agree with this whole-heartedly, and my previous post was worded poorly.
I pointed to Alan Moen's article, not as a reference to suggest that one
take up distillation, but to point out his (good) arguments as to why
distillation should be legalized. Distillation can be an extension of
brewing and, with modern technology and information, can be safe and
enjoyable. There is a long history of distillation in America, especially
the South.
While I have no desire to begin distillation should it become legal, I support
any efforts for its legalization.
- Bryan
grosbl@ctrvax.vanderbilt.edu
- Bryan
grosbl@ctrvax.vanderbilt.edu
Nashville, TN
------------------------------
From: JACKMOWBRAY@delphi.com
Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 22:20:11 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Repost re: Chlorine removal
In HBD #2077 or #2078, Paul Sovcik suggest the use of Sodium Thiosulfate
to remove chlorine from brewing water.
I would like to see more homework done before anyone follows Paul's
suggestion. I agree that Thiosulfate neutralizes chlorine, but to make the
leap from its use in aquarium keeping to its appropriateness in brewing
water leaves me troubled. Just because Sodium Thiosulfate is used in
medical applications it doesn't mean that it is safe for food use. When
there are safe and effective (and inexpensive) alternatives for the removal
of chlorine from brewing water, why take the chance on a method that hasn't
been shown to be safe? If there are any readers out there that may know
more about the potential toxicity of this suggestion, perhaps you can add
to the discussion. In the meantime Paul, I hope you are labeling your
product to reflect this added ingredient so that your consumers know what
they're getting.
Jack Mowbray
------------------------------
From: korz@pubs.ih.lucent.com
Date: Wed, 26 Jun 96 19:16:55 CDT
Subject: chlorophenols/Sheila/sacks & bales/enzymes/FG/WI water/wiley Weizen
Darrell writes:
>Per Al K's recommendation, I added plain water to my
>blowoff bucket as opposed to a weak chlorine solution to avoid the
>possibility of sucking back any chlorophenols into the post
>fermented/cooling beer
Just to clarify, I suggested using water simply so that if there
was suck-back, it would be water and not bleach solution. The
chlorophenols would be created upon reaction between the bleach and
the beer. Darrell's post implied I said that chlorophenols were
actually being sucked into the fermenter.
***
Regarding "Sheila in the gutter," after my three week trip motoring
through Britain, during which I can proudly say I was always on the
proper side of the road, the first time I actually made a turn into
a two-lane road upon returning to the US... you guessed it... into
oncoming traffic!
***
Ken asks about sacks and bales.
It's not really 55 pounds -- it's 25 kilos and that's only for European
grains. US grains are sold in 50 pounds sacks. One exception is
DeWolf-Cosysns malts, which are Belgian, but also sold in 50-pound
sacks. It's because they come to the US in containers and then are
bagged by Schreier Malting. A bale of hops is very close to 200 pounds.
***
For the record, I didn't question the statement that thicker mashes
favoured enzyme stability (actually, I supported it), but rather, I
said I had never read about stiffer mashes resulting in faster conversion
and asked for a reference for that.
***
Dave writes:
>Although this text doesn't have the data at 158F, it is apparent that beta
>amylase will not be destroyed instantly
>It wil exhibit some activity for perhaps a half an hour in thick mashes, at
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Sorry... that's pure speculation and if it were true, we would not be able
to make dextrinous (high FG) worts, which is indeed possible.
>least, at 158F. I conclude, therefore, that short mash times at high
>temperatures may produce a high dextrin mash in which the efficiency of the
>extraction is reduced because the alpha dextrinase didn't have the opportunity
>to produce the various dextrins and the beta amylase wasn't given the
>opportunity to saccharify them.
Again, I disagree. Too short a time at 158F and you have remaining starch.
I contend that the beta amylase denatures much faster than you suggest and
this is why we are able to control fermentability (i.e. FG) via mash
temperature.
>I presume the rate constants of both amylases
>are reduced at 158F and need more time to do the reduction. Therefore,
>extending
>the time at 158F could give a different profile of dextrin/maltose and a more
>efficient extraction.
It's the time below 153F or so that determines the fermentability (i.e.
FG, aka dextrin/maltose ratio) and not the time at 158F.
***
Craig writes:
>A couple of months ago, I posted about my low (23-26pts) extraction rates.
>Since that time, I have tried lots of things without much success. I am down
>to water chemistry. My pH out of the tap is 7.8. BiCarbonate is 108ppm. My
>Calcium is about 20ppm and my Sulfate is at around 28ppm. Based on what I
>have read, I need to acidify my sparge water. How much gypsum per gallon
>would one of you water chemists recommend? Or would you go with lactic acid.
>(My local homebrew shop carries lactic acid, but no directions or information
>on concentration is on the label.) I am brewing primarily American Pale Ales,
>so how would the additional sulfate impact the hop bite?
Sounds just like Chicago water (and probably is, since we both get it from
Lake Michigan). Despite the 7.8pH out of the tap, that's virtually no
indication of what your mash pH will be. For making American Pale Ales, I
would stick with lactic acid, but ONLY if you need it. Try mashing in
at no more than 1.5 quarts per pound and I'll bet that your pH will be
in the 5.1 - 5.5 range. When you start taking runnings, monitor the pH
and if it starts to get above 5.8, shut off the sparge and runnings.
Add lactic acid a drop at a time to your remaining sparge water till it's
about 5.5 pH. Then restart the runnnings and sparge. You may have to
recirculate a little because the initial runnings when you restart may
be cloudy. I've made all pale malt beers with Chicago water and no
water treatment and the pH never went above 5.8.
***
Michael writes:
>I went to bottle a weizen last night that has been in the pimary (I don't do 2
>stage) for 4 weeks at 68 degrees. It has been unbubbling for about 2 of those
>weeks however last night I pulled it out of the closet and set it up on my
>kitchen counter to get going and about 2 hours later I was going to start and
>noticed the air lock bubbling (about 1 blook per minute I'd say). The room
>was like 75 degrees.
That wasn't restarting fermentation. The CO2 in the headspace warmed up
from 68 to 75F and expanded, which is what restarted your airlock. I don't
use DME for priming, but for a Weizen I would use about 1 cup of corn sugar.
Al.
Al Korzonas, Palos Hills, IL
korzonas@lucent.com
Copyright 1996 Al Korzonas
------------------------------
From: "Terry Terfinko" <terfinko@enter.net>
Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 21:24:38 4
Subject: Yeast Washing
I have been recycling my yeast by saving wort from the bottom of a
carboy that has just completed fermentation. I store the wort/yeast
in a quart mason jar.
This wort contains a mix of trub and yeast. After about 24 hours the
liquid in the jar separates leaving an inch or two of white slurry on
the bottom of the jar. I have never been sure as to were most of the
yeast cells are residing, so when I repitch the yeast, I pour off
some liquid and shake the rest to create a pourable slurry.
I have heard about yeast washing and would appreciate any advice as
to how to save the yeast and discard the trub.
Terry Terfinko - terfinko@enter.net
Backwoods Brewing
Located in the Peoples Republic of Macungie, PA
------------------------------
From: Dave Mercer <dmercer@path.org>
Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 16:33:09 -0700
Subject: Grapefruit in my beer
I recently got back the tasting notes from a competition I entered and for
an IPA one of the judges noted a slight 'grapefruit' flavor which, he said,
was appropriate (this beer scored fairly high and took second place, so I'm
not complaining). Frankly, I hadn't noticed it. But in my most recent batch,
where I used the same grain bill and yeast (Wyeast 1098) but substituted
milder Challenger hops (for about half the IBUs of the IPA, which used
Columbus) and dry-hopped with East Kent Goldings, the grapefruit notes are
more noticable. In fact, they are fairly prominent. This is a good beer -
very complex with good malt flavor and hop nose - but there's no mistaking
that grapefruit. Where the heck does that come from? The yeast? Hops?
Temperature?
Dave Mercer
------------------------------
From: KennyEddy@aol.com
Date: Thu, 27 Jun 1996 00:15:21 -0400
Subject: 55 lb Sack O'Sh*t / Electric Coolers / Water Kemistree Again
Ken Koupal asks:
>Why does grain come in 55-pound sacks? Why not 50 lbs?
55 lb = 25 kg, the "standard" sack size. It's a firkin' metric thang.
********
Michael Mahler asks about Peltier junction solid-state thermoelectric coolers
(alright, not exactly):
> Those new (well to me at least) coolers that have those cooling chips and
fan
> apparently can cool low enough for lagering. I'm wondering if it's
worthwhile,
> if they fit a carboy standing up, to fill the cooler with water and put the
> carboy in it and fire it up (with a 12v power supply I guess, or heck the
> 120volt into it if it uses a step-dowon transformer?)...
>
> Anyone done it or at least thought about it?
Yup. I've considered using them (the cooling element itself, not the whole
cooler) in the Fermentation Chiller (see web page below). For a company like
Coleman or whoever to buy them cheap is no problem; for you or me, they're
about $20 - $30 for starters -- you'll need about a 25W unit minimum, if you
have a decent insulated box and can be patient about lowering your
temperature in warm ambient weather. But another drawback, even if you're
using the ready-made cooler, is that you must SUPPLY more energy than you are
WITHDRAWING (cooling); this means that your 12 volt supply must be capable of
supplying several amps (like 5 to 10 or more for these icechests). That gets
to be an expensive power supply. Your car can deliver this from the
alternator or the battery (though maybe not from the battery for long!), but
a homemade line-powered supply would probably be bulky and expensive.
Surplus power supplies are an option. You must supply a lot more power when
cooling as opposed to "maintaining" a temperature; that must be taken into
account. If you can wait two days to chill your 80F wort to 45F, that's one
thing. If not, you'll have to crank up the electrons. Finally, do these
icechests have air circulating fans? I suppose they do but it'd be worth
checking.
That said, I suppose someone is using one right now to make ice beer, powered
by a hearing aid battery and making me look stupid. Cut it out!
*******
Craig Rode laments:
> A couple of months ago, I posted about my low (23-26pts) extraction rates.
> Since that time, I have tried lots of things without much success. I am
down
> to water chemistry. My pH out of the tap is 7.8. BiCarbonate is 108ppm.
My
> Calcium is about 20ppm and my Sulfate is at around 28ppm. Based on what I
> have read, I need to acidify my sparge water. How much gypsum per gallon
> would one of you water chemists recommend? Or would you go with lactic
acid.
> (My local homebrew shop carries lactic acid, but no directions or
information
> on concentration is on the label.) I am brewing primarily American Pale
Ales,
> so how would the additional sulfate impact the hop bite?
I think you're on the right track; for such a high bicarb, your calcium
(required to acidify the mash) is probably a bit too low to offset it. I did
a brew last weekend using a soft water I "made" with about 25 ppm Ca and less
than 50 ppm alkalinity; it only dropped to ~5.5 (pale malt, light crystal, a
touch of biscuit and wheat). Incidentally, my efficiency was much lower than
my usual ~80%, though a few other things happened which might have
contributed. Dark grains are naturally acidic and tend to result in lower
pH's. I'm leaning toward a Rule o' Thumb that one needs a good 30 ppm Ca to
get to the 5.2 - 5.4 pH range if the alkalinity is relatively low (~50 ppm or
less); more for higher alkalinities.
You could tolerate a gypsum infusion in the mash or strike water to boost
your sulphate for APA's without too much harsh side effect; to get your Ca to
35 ppm you'll need about 1/8 tsp (~1/4 gram) per gallon; this puts your
sulphate aroun 60 ppm.
Sparge water cannot be appreciably acidified with gypsum! Because gypsum is
often used to help acidify a mash, the misconception is that it is an acid.
It's the *calcium* in gypsum that *reacts with the mash* to lower the pH.
Calcium Chloride is another salt that can be used to acidify a mash without
the sulphate boost. Calcium Carbonate (chalk) has calcium but also has
carbonate (an alkali); the carbonate "wins" and the pH will rise.
Acidify your sparge water with lactic or phosphoric. I use 10% phosphoric at
the ballpark rate of ~ 5 - 10 ml per 5 gal, depending on the water makeup.
Use pH papers or a meter to monitor your pH drop since it's easy to overdo
it; add no more than about 1 ml (~1/4 tsp I think) at a time. Mix, measure,
lather, rinse, repeat.
*******
Ken Schwartz
KennyEddy@aol.com
http://users.aol.com
------------------------------
From: Fred Waltman <waltman@netcom.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Jun 1996 00:49:42 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Pint Glasses/Beer Labels/55lb Sacks/Old Wyeast
A note on the "not quite full" pine glass discussion: There was an
article I read somewhere (mainstream press I beleive) a few years ago
about a brewpub in Colorado who got burned by Weights and Measures for
pouring 14 oz "pints." It turned out their glasses (Libby?) were not the
16oz they thought. They ended up renaming their beers "small, medium and
large." I don't think it is written anywhere that you have to serve beer
in 16oz glasses, but if they call it a pint, it had better be 16oz or
they are shorting the customer -- just like the butcher who sells short
weight meat.
There was an article in the LA Times this morning about a state Senator
who was pushing a bill (backed by the industrial brewers) that would do
away with our law that says anything over 4% cannot be called "beer." A
Morman Assemblyman was blocking it saying it would encourage underage
drinking (???) and that now kids bought "beer" instead of the stronger
"ale", "stout" and "malt liquour" because of the label. "Who wants to go
to an ale bust" he said. Well, I would :)
Ken Koupal askes why grain comes in 55lb sacks instead of 50lb sacks.
Well, some grain does come in 50lb sacks, but the 55lb sacks are really
25kg sacks and those of us who are metrically challanged use the US
approximation.
A while back someone asked about how long a Wyeast package lasted. I
found a yeast dated 12/01/93 that had been sitting at room temperature
since this past February. I smacked it, it swelled up in about 4 days.
The starter smells OK and I will pitch the yeast in a brew on Thursday.
Fred Waltman
Culver City Home Brewing Supply Co.
waltman@netcom.com
http://www.homebrew.inter.net
------------------------------
End of Homebrew Digest #2084
****************************
