Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #2320
HOMEBREW Digest #2320 Tue 21 January 1997
FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
Digest Janitor: janitor@brew.oeonline.com
Many thanks to the Observer & Eccentric Newspapers of
Livonia, Michigan for sponsoring the Homebrew Digest.
URL: http://www.oeonline.com
Contents:
Post-brew water adjustments
Killing yeast with O2 (Alex Santic)
Homebrew Digest V2 #38
Sea Salt
Re: Dead & Imperfect Yeast -- Braam Greyling
life of plastic fermenters?
Double Batches
Old Starter - still usable?
RE: "Reverse step infusion mash" (George De Piro)
Secondary Yeasts, Bottle lagering
carbonation, yeast health, carbonation
Re:"Freshman" home brewing list
remove
Re: Dead & Imperfect Yeast (Was: Fermenting the commercial way)
beer
Aeration/kraeusening
Plastic Fermentors
5# CO2 tanks/reusing yeast
Re: CO2 cylinders
No sparge mashing, recirculation (Dave Mercer)
Aeration P.S.
Thanks
kettle, and mashing
Anal Retentiveness Disorder (ARD)
Unusally high O.G.
Iodophor
IBU Analysis
Re: Double Batches
Yeast
Re: Multiple replies
NOTE NEW HOMEBREW ADDRESS: brew.oeonline.com
Send articles for __publication_only__ to homebrew@brew.oeonline.com
(Articles are published in the order they are received.)
Send UNSUBSCRIBE and all other requests, ie, address change, etc.,
to homebrew-request@brew.oeonline.com BUT PLEASE NOTE that if
you subscribed via the BITNET listserver (BEER-L@UA1VM.UA.EDU),
you must unsubscribe by sending a one line e-mail to listserv@ua1vm.ua.edu
that says: UNSUB BEER-L
Thanks to Pete Soper, Rob Gardner and all others for making the Homebrew
Digest what it is. Visit the HBD Hall of Fame at:
http://oeonline.com/~pbabcock/hbd/hallofame.html
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: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 01:09:38 -0700 (MST)
From: Agnor Craig <Craig.Agnor@Colorado.EDU>
Subject: Post-brew water adjustments
Hi y'all,
This post is about adjusting the salt content of the beer after
the brewing session.
Recently I brewed an all-grain batch of oatmeal stout. After the brewing
session I discovered that the local water that I used for the brew was
much softer than I had expected. The mash and sparge were performed
without any problems. The stout is currently in the primary
and tastes fine except that the beer is not as bitter as I had hoped. Can
I add gypsum to the priming sugar at bottling to increase the hardness and
the perceived bitterness? Would it be better to just make a hop tea at
bottling to increase the bitterness? Any help would be greatly
appreciated.
Cheers,
Craig Agnor
agnor@ucsu.colorado.edu
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 03:12:47 -0500 (EST)
From: Alex Santic <alex@salley.com>
Subject: Killing yeast with O2 (Alex Santic)
I have apparently demonstrated the sanitizing power of pure oxygen. Do you
know what happens if you give a starter flask a good blast of O2 after the
Wyeast pack has already been poured into it, and then give it a shake?
Nada. Murderized yeast.
Having had the experience of sanitizing a yeast starter with O2, I'm now
feeling a little paranoid. If I add a starter to the primary after
oxygenating with an airstone, do I need to worry? Normally I'd shake the
carboy a little bit just to mix the yeast into the wort, but what about
the O2 in the headspace and the O2 foam...does it cause casualties when it
mixes into the wort? Should there be a waiting period before pitching?
- --
Alex Santic - alex@salley.com
Silicon Alley Connections, LLC
527 Third Avenue #419 - NYC 10016 - 212-213-2666 - Fax 212-447-9107
http://www.salley.com
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 06:13:20 -0500
From: animnate@rocket.nwohio.com
Subject: Homebrew Digest V2 #38
Digester, (?)
Re: Drilling Stainless Steel Kegs; Do NOT centerpunch stainless to keep the bit
from wandering. It hardens the heck out of the material below the dimple!!! If
you must, scratch an X and use that to keep steady.
Regards,
Nate Wahl
My first contest this weekend!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 08:15:44 +0000
From: "Nathan L. Kanous II" <nkanous@tir.com>
Subject: Sea Salt
Greetings to the collective. With regards to sea salt and iodine, iodine is added to
Morton's iodized salt. It does not naturally accompany "salt" (i.e. NaCl). Iodine was
added to salt in an attempt to supplement the diet in areas with low iodine contents in
the soil and thus in foods. Geographic areas came to be known for "endemic goiters"
because of the lack of iodine in the local diet. Iodine in iodized salt would have a
negative effect on yeast, just as with iodophor. Sea salt, on the other hand, should
not have iodine in it unless it has been fortified.
Nathan
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 15:22:29 +200
From: "Braam Greyling" <acg@knersus.nanoteq.co.za>
Subject: Re: Dead & Imperfect Yeast -- Braam Greyling
Hi there
Dave from New Hampshire wrote:
>David R. Burley <103164.3202@CompuServe.COM> wrote:
>> The reason the yeasts in the secondary are not producing CO2
>> and are on the bottom has to do with the fact that the sugar
>> in the wort is all gone and not the fact that these are
>> inferior yeasts. Remember this apparent "real ale" type of
>> brewer isn't going to a secondary, really. His kegs are his
>> secondary.. It's all these "dead" yeast which carbonate his
>> keg!
> I didn't think that the yeasts on the bottom of the fermenter
> were the yeasts that carbonated the finished beer. I thought it
> was the yeasts still in suspension in the finished beer. Not true?
> Aren't the yeasts in the bottom of the fermenter going through
> autolysis?
The way I understand it, the yeast on the bottom of the fermenter is
not dead but only resting. It will start going through autolysis if
you leave it too long without food. Some people pour their wort on
the previous yeast cake and then it ferments like a rocket. I dont
think it is inferior yeast on the bottom, it is just yeast without
food.
Am I understanding things wrong here ?
Braam Greyling I.C. Design Engineer
Azona (Pty) Ltd
tel. +27 (12) 665-1338 fax +27 (12) 665-1343
- ---- 24 hours in a day, 24 beers in a case ----
- ---- coincidence ????? ----
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 08:28:54 -0500 (EST)
From: Eugene Sonn <eugene@dreamscape.com>
Subject: life of plastic fermenters?
Greetings to the HBD braintrust,
Anyone out there know how long we can trust plastic fermenters?
Assuming my fermenter hasn't been scratched (I don't scrub it and don't
store anything in it), should I wait until I have a problem with it?
Would a food-grad plastic pail have a certain lifespan? On the same note,
would plastic siphon hoses and racking canes "expire?" I figured you
folks are a more reliable source for this info than a homebrew shop which
would love to sell me new ones.
Eugene
eugene@nova.dreamscape.com
Brewing in the shores of Lake Ontario
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 21 Jan 1997 08:46:30 U
From: Ray Robert <Ray_Robert@bah.com>
Subject: Double Batches
Good day brew collective.
I wanted to post a follow-up to a discussion about a month ago extolling the
benefits of making two batches in one brew session. Because my brew time has
been limited due to the addition of a new family member, I was looking to
optimize my brew schedule. This past saturday, I attempted to make two
batches back to back. I want to say it was a great success, only requiring an
additional two hours over what it normally takes to make a five gallon batch.
Some tips if you want to try. You will need more than one pot to heat
infusion/mash/sparge water. Two heat sources would be great, but are not
necessary. Try to stay organized. Handling two recipes with at least 4
grains and 3 types of hops each can be trying. Optimize down time, prep for
the second batch while the first is resting, boiling, etc.
I am sure there are more tips that the veterans can offer, but I am hooked.
It does make for a long day, but you have twice as much beer for the effort.
Robert Ray
ray_robert@bah.com
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 97 9:26:35 EST
From: Michael Mahler <mmahler@dorito.agile.com>
Subject: Old Starter - still usable?
I made a 1 liter started (Wyeast Irish Ale) about 2 weeks ago and it
krausened and is now dormant. It has been in the brewing closet
(about 60 degrees) that whole time. Can I use this to brew this coming
weekend?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 10:05:28 -0800
From: George De Piro <George_De_Piro@berlex.com>
Subject: RE: "Reverse step infusion mash" (George De Piro)
Hi all,
Eric asks for comments about his technique of starting
saccharification at 158F and letting the temp drop to 140F.
Well, in short, you can't work backwards with mash enzymes.
The high initial heat will denature the beta amylase. As the
temperature drops all that you will achieve is slowing down the
surviving alpha amylase. You'll get conversion, but a highly
dextrinous wort.
Have fun!
George De Piro (Nyack, NY)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 21 Jan 97 10:18:31 EST
From: "David R. Burley" <103164.3202@CompuServe.COM>
Subject: Secondary Yeasts, Bottle lagering
Brewsters:
Dave (Nice Name!) Hammond says:
> Dave...
>
> I didn't think that the yeasts on the bottom of the fermenter
> were the yeasts that carbonated the finished beer. I thought it
> was the yeasts still in suspension in the finished beer. Not true?
>
You are exactly correct that the yeast in suspension do the majority of the
fermenting.
> Aren't the yeasts in the bottom of the fermenter going through
> autolysis?
Nope, at least not if your fermentation is just finishing. My point was these
yeasts are viable and only need food to continue fermenting and get re-suspended
by the CO2 and agitation. They are not damaged,dead and dying yeast, in the
large part, in contrast to what Graham Stone was told by a local brewer. I pick
up these yeast with a siphon and use them for a krausen starter.
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jim Booth asks:
> If one lets the beer settle fairly well before bottling, wouldn't
> storing the conditioned bottles at the low 30'sF be about the same as
> bulk storage (assuming one has room).
Should be the same or better in the bottle since the beer is closer to the
yeast. This is how I did it for decades. It's sorta like a flat carboy.
However, you touched on the reason with your parenthetical comment. Cornies or
carboys are much more space efficient in a fridge. , which is the same reason
the big boys use big tanks instead of lots of smaller ones.
- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Keep on brewin'
Dave Burley
Kinnelon, NJ 07405
103164.3202@compuserve.com
Voice e-mail OK
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 10:42:29 -0500
From: Ed & Laura Hitchcock <ehitchcock@oise.utoronto.ca>
Subject: carbonation, yeast health, carbonation
Jim Daley writes:
>1. If I want to force carbonate my beer at 30 PSI, how long would it take at
>45 degrees F. ? 35 degrees?
The time is roughly the same, the amount of dissolved CO2 the beer can
hold increases with decreasing temperature. There are two methods I
use. The "Pressurize it up to 35 psi and shake the sh*t out of it"
method, which will do a reasonably good job of carbonating it in about
45 minutes, and the "Just let it sit with the pressure on at 30-35 psi"
method, which takes about 3-4 days. This second method I use for ales,
letting it corbonate as the yeast drops (pressure seems to speed up the
dropping too).
>2. Once its carbonated, and I wanted to leave it hooked up for dispensing, I
>assume the carbonation would slowly go down if my dispensing pressure was 4 -
>6 psi (thats all I need). Is there any solution other than relasing pressure
>and then re-pressurizing every time I want a beer (say once every few days)?
If you want, keep the pressure up around 9-10 psi, and just release
excess pressure if you have trouble with foaming. Otherwise, just get a
longer or narrower hose. If it's an ale, I usually leave mine at about
7psi for dispensing, and the carbonation is about right.
***
David R. Burley asks:
>How can such a small amount of oxygen, which, in the presence of an active yeast
>colony, lasts only a few minutes, have such a large effect on the outcome of the
>yeast colony and subsequent batches. Anybody?
We think of wort as yeast food, but it is really a harsh environment.
At first it is a hypertonic solution, tending to draw water out of the
yeast cells, and later it is full of toxic ethanol. By increasing the
availability of oxygen to the yeast the cells can better build up their
defences, reproducing more effectively, and passing on more of those
defenses to daughter cells. In this way the yeast can go though more
reproductive phases before succuming to the nasty effects of the
environment. And by the way, some authors recomend aerating for a full
12 hours after pitching, which is more than just a few minutes...
***
Michael Gerholdt writes:
>David, once CO2 is actually and fully suspended in the beer then, if
>conditions are the same, there should be absolutely no difference in how the
>CO2 comes out of suspension based on how it got in there.
actually in solution, not suspension, but you are quite correct.
>The idea that force carbonation produces "fish eye" bubbles and natural
>carbonation produces a finer bead ... this can only be the case, can't it,
>if the force carbonating homebrewer doesn't get the CO2 fully into
>suspension (dispenses before it's really ready)?
The big-bubble misconception is a hard one to shake. I know
experienced brewers and judges who admit they should know better but
still cling to this notion. The truth is that bubble size is determined
by the protein content of the beer, thus commercial hyper-filtered beer
is force carbonated and has bigger bubbles, but "kit & sugar" homebrew
is bottle conditioned and has bigger bubbles as well. A hearty
all-grain or partial-mash beer shows no difference in the quality of
carbonation whether it's naturally conditioned or pressurized.
Cheers.
ed hitchcock
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 11:35:27 -0500
From: bonnerj@rockvax.rockefeller.edu (Joseph Bonner)
Subject: Re:"Freshman" home brewing list
John C Peterson <petersonj1@juno.com> asks:
> and 2) is there a "Freshman" homebrew digest? With my last posting, I
> learned that there are many "Freshman" brewers like myself subscribed,
> but some of the discussions such as yeast strains and Planispiral
> Chillers are still beyond my grasp.
I don't know if there are any beginner homebrewer lists, but if anyone is
interested in starting one, I run a listserv out of my office and can
pretty easily set one up. Please send me private e-mail
(bonnerj@rockvax.rockefeller.edu) if you are interested.
Joe Bonner
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 11:37:52 -0500 (EST)
From: MrMcdaa@aol.com
Subject: remove
remove homebrew
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 12:43:45 -0500 (EST)
From: Christopher Tkach <tkach@tiac.net>
Subject: Re: Dead & Imperfect Yeast (Was: Fermenting the commercial way)
I would have to agree that skimming the krausen off and saving/repitching
it IS the best way to reuse your yeast, as ALL the brewery visits I have
been to can attest to that.
My only question...in order to adapt it to homebrewing, wouldn't you
need to do your primary fermentation in an open fermenter (plastic bucket).
In order to remove the krausen, you need to get to it!
If anyone has any ideas about removing krausen from a glass carboy I'd
like to hear it. Especially if you plan on skimming off the brown trub
first. Maybe a turkey baster to "suck up" the good stuff?
- - Chris
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 18:37:30 -0800
From: JW Blokzijl <0blokzijl01@flnet.nl>
Subject: beer
subscribe 0blokzijl01@almere.flnet.nl
(please add to mailinglist)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 13:38:01 -0600 (CST)
From: korz@xnet.com
Subject: Aeration/kraeusening
There have been a number of posts recently saying that using submicron
filters for aeration/oxygenation is unnecessary and several posters have
given testimonials on how they used room air for aeration with no problems.
These statements are very narrow-minded. These procedures may work for
you, but they don't necessarily work for everyone. The FACT is, that in
my basement, in the summertime, I CANNOT use room air for aeration of
wort, else I will get a beer that has a faint clovey character that
increases over the course of several weeks in the bottle. First, buying
a filtered air aeration system from Heartland Hydroponics (about $25,
including submicron syringe filter) immediately solved my problem. Now,
foaming became a problem because I had to run the system for several
minutes. I then switched to an Oxynater(tm) which not only solved the
problem of my clovey Bitters and Brown Ales, but also gave me faster
starts and lower FGs. Incidentally, nobody suggested that oxygen needs
to be filtered and it's generally accepted that nothing harmful can live
in 99% O2, but I believe that spores can actually survive and there are
a number of beer-spoiling yeasts that do form spores. So, while I don't
filter my oxygen, it's not as silly an idea as you may have initially thought.
***
Dave writes:
>>Dave writes:
>>>1) Make up a Krausening starter of 1-2 Tlb of Hopped malt extract plus 4 oz
>>>of corn sugar ( I suppose sucrose would be OK?), 12 oz water, boil and cool,
>>>Remove
>>>small amount of yeast with some beer from the bottom of the secondary with a
>>>siphon. pitch yeast and beer into the starter. When it is foaming (high
>>>Krausen) usually 12 hrs,
>>>Immediately ( before the sugar in the Krausening starter gerts used up):
>>
>> This is very imprecise kraeusening... "1-2 Tlb" should probably be "1-2 tbsp"
>> and still, that's not precise at all. I don't have my books here or I would
>> give the proper formula for calculating the amount of malt you want to use,
>> but I believe this has been posted. My main point here is *the method
>> described above is more likely to give you the wrong level of carbonation
>> than the right level!*
>
>Al,
>
>I use hopped liquid extract so it is very difficult to precisely measure a
>small quantity. Besides, the priming sugar is the major contributor to the
>carbonation level. If the priming sugar is 10 oz ( as in my bottle-conditioned
>American Lagers) then 1-2 tlb (variation of max of 0.5 oz, probablty 0.4 oz for
>the extract which is 20% water) is less than 5%. The variation between 1 and 2
>tlb is a hardly noticeable (if any) variation. At 4 oz priming sugar in the
>keg, the 1-2 tlb can represent a variation of 10% or so and really not a
>substantial difference that can't be corrected for by a CO2 addition if needed.
>I've never really had a problem.
Sorry... I was under the assumption that you were using dried malt extract.
Why anyone would have liquid malt extract sitting around at all is beyond
me... DME was the only logical "malt extract" in my mind. Since there can
be an incredible amount of difference between a heaping tablespoon of DME and
a level one, you can see why I reacted to the "imprecision" of this method.
Regardless of whether it is DME or liquid, I fail to see the use of adding
extract if you are priming with corn sugar. If you're going to say "to
absorb the oxygen added during bottling" forget it... the yeast will absorb
the oxygen because they like oxygen, not because there's some maltose in
the primings (there will be no difference in oxygen use between all-malt and
all-dextrose priming). If you're going to say "because it gives better
head retention" or "for the nutrients" forget those too... there just isn't
enough of anything in two tablespoons of syrup to make a difference.
Now, regardless of all of that, this is still an imprecise way of kraeusening.
Why? Because the yeast in the kraeusen beer is eating up the priming sugar.
Simply waiting 8 or 12 or 24 hours will not give you a predictable amount of
fermentable sugar in the kraeusen beer... neither will waiting for the
nebulous "high kraeusen."
The proper way to kraeusen a beer is to *know the FG of the kraeusen wort*.
Let's say you knew it was 1.010 and you started with 1.045 OG kraeusen wort.
What you want is to add a precise amount of fermentable sugar to the
finished beer. Let's say you wanted 2.5 volumes of CO2. Let's say the
finished beer was at 68F. I happen to know that I need an increase of
0.00222 in gravity to get the 2.5 volumes of CO2. This is 2.22 "gravity
points" or just "points." The final volume will be about 5.3 gal (simply
because I happen to know that the kraeusen beer volume will be about a third
of a gallon). Multiplying 2.22 times 5.3 gallons gives 11.77 points needed.
Now, let's get back to that 1/2 gallon of fermenting 1.045 OG wort (or
corn sugar water, for that matter) that we know will have an FG of 1.010.
We measure the SG and it's 1.040 (it has lost 0.005). We now know that
each gallon of this liquid will add 30 points. We also know that we need
11.77 points to add to the finished beer. Dividing 11.77 by 30 gives 0.39
gallons of krausen (see, about a third of a gallon) beer needed. 0.39 times
128 ounces is 49.92, so you should add 50 fluid ounces of the kraeusen beer
to the finished beer and bottle immediately. Had the kraeusen fermentation
gone a bit longer and there were only 25 points per gallon left in the
kraeusen beer, you would have had to add about 60 fluid ounces (20% more).
THAT'S kraeusening!
Al.
Al Korzonas, Palos Hills, IL
korz@xnet.com
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 11:39:49 -0800
From: "Brander Roullett (Volt Computer)" <a-branro@MICROSOFT.com>
Subject: Plastic Fermentors
From: mikehu@lmc.com
Subject: Plastic Conical Fermenters (Mike H.
Greetings -
I wanted to pass along a warning concerning the plastic, conical bottom
tanks that can be ordered through U.S. Plastics. These are the ones that
come with a metal stand, and are available in 18 gal, 30 gal, and one
larger size - I think it's 45 gal.
Hearing your warnings about these brought to mind a particualar idea i
had a few months ago. Fermenting in large batchs. so i got to
thinking.... (i know it gets me in trouble. :)
what to ferment in? i wanted to do Oak Cask, but the price is
prohibitive. so i was thinking of acceptable substitutes and came
accross a web page that had 30 gallon 2 hole plastic barrels for ~$27,
and thought Hmm.. 30 gallons of beer... wow!
my questions are this...
1) has anyone tried this?
2) how do think i could steralize these things? they are not open, but
have to holes fist sized in the top. hard to get into them.
3) how would i scale up batch size, and work in 30 gallon batches using
a 15 gallon converted keg brewing kettle (when i get it set up)?
4) comments, other ideas?
Brander Roullett(a-branro) aka Badger
http://www.nwlink.com/~badger/
For a quart of ale is a dish for a king. -William Shakespeare
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 15:06:20 EST
From: Curt Speaker <speaker@safety-1.univsfty.psu.edu>
Subject: 5# CO2 tanks/reusing yeast
To catch up on a few recent threads...
I have a 5# CO2 tank and 4 corny kegs, 2-3 that are usually full and
in use at any given time. I only have 1 spigot, so I usually only
have one beer on tap at a given time (although I also have 2 picnic
taps). I use my CO2 tank to purge sanitized kegs and for force
carbonation.
I'm not sure who posted the original note saying that you could get
about 5 kegs out of a 5# CO2 tank, but that was a horrendous
underestimation. I get my tank filled about twice A YEAR, and I must
get 15-20 kegs purged, carbonated and dispensed from that same tank.
And a KISS (keep it simple stupid) guide to reusing yeast...
After I bottle or keg my beer from the carboy, I have a clean yeast
cake on the bottom (this does not apply if you dry hop). I swirl the
last few ounces of beer around to suspend the yeast, then pour it out
of the carboy thru a (sanitized) funnel into a (sanitized) grolsh
bottle. I then label the cap and put it into the door of the fridge.
I have kept yeast for 2-3 months like this with no problem. A few
days before brew day, I remove the bottle, release the pressure
(especially important with lager yeast!) in the bottle, decant off
the old beer and add the yeast slurry to
some freshly made starter (1/3 c. DME in a quart of water), and in 2
days or so, I have a quart of yeast (about half slurry) at high
kreusen.
I don't want beginning brewers to think that getting more than one
batch of beer out of a smack pack is any more difficult than it is.
Extended yeast propogation is not difficult, time consuming or
expensive.
Beer is good food!
Curt Speaker
Biosafety Officer
Environmental Health and Safety
speaker@ehs.psu.edu
http://www.ehs.psu.edu
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 15:17:12 -0500
From: Spencer W Thomas <spencer@engin.umich.edu>
Subject: Re: CO2 cylinders
Ian Smith asks how many "corny kegs" of beer you could carbonate and
serve with a 5lb tank of CO2.
Well, let's see.
5lb of CO2 is about 2300 grams. At 1/2 gram per liter, this is about
4600 liters of CO2 at STP. If you assume a carbonation rate of 2
volumes, then you could carbonate 2300 liters of beer (60 kegs).
BUT, you need to push the beer out of the tank. Assume you do this at
14PSIG, or 1 atmosphere. Then it takes 10 gallons (38 liters) of CO2
to push 5 gallons of beer out of the tank. And it takes 10 gallons of
CO2 to carbonate the 5 gallons of beer, or 20 gallons per tank. 20
gallons of CO2 is 76 liters. Therefore, you can carbonate and serve
about 30 5-gallon kegs of beer with a 5lb tank of CO2.
This is not out of line with my experience. Of course, I use the CO2
for much more than just serving the beer, and I'm sure I DO have leaks
in my system.
=Spencer Thomas in Ann Arbor, MI (spencer@umich.edu)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 12:55:07 -0800
From: "Mercer, David" <dmercer@path-seattle-01.path.org>
Subject: No sparge mashing, recirculation (Dave Mercer)
Tried a no sparge mash this weekend. Efficiency was lower than expected
(maybe 50%) so the gravity was about 10% below my target, but that's
okay. Live and learn.
Some questions: I assumed it would be a good idea to top-off with boiled
(and still hot) water, as this would decrease likelihood of HSA.
Q1 - Is this correct? What I actually did was guesstimate that I'd need
around 3.5 gallons of extra water, so I brought it to a boil in my
brewpot, then drained the mash directly into the pot with the boiled
water (aka reverse topping off) keeping the tube outflow below the water
surface the entire time. Smart, huh?
Q2 - is there any benefit to a slow, medium, or fast drain (other than
time saved)? For the record I had the valve opened all the way and let
'er rip. Which brings me to...
Q3 - I vorgot to vorlauf (doh!) and the wort was pretty murky (although
usually I only have to recirculate a quart or so before it's running
clear so I don't know how much unwanted crap actually got in.) It didn't
taste bad when racking to the primary (In fact, it tasted damn good
although I overshot the IBU's a little, I think.) Didn't look any more
muddy than usual with cold break either. So the question: Is
recirculation done for aesthetic reasons, or taste? I.e. Will I have a
beer that will not clear, or one with tannin off-flavors, or both, or
neither?
Dave in Seattle
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 14:55:20 -0600 (CST)
From: korz@xnet.com
Subject: Aeration P.S.
I wrote:
>you, but they don't necessarily work for everyone. The FACT is, that in
>my basement, in the summertime, I CANNOT use room air for aeration of
>wort, else I will get a beer that has a faint clovey character that
>increases over the course of several weeks in the bottle. First, buying
Incidentally, this was despite pitching 1 to 2 liters of actively fermenting
starter wort. Yes, perhaps your air is cleaner than mine, or perhaps you
simply have a high sensory threshold for phenolic aromas/flavours.
Al.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 08:34:50 -0600
From: Cuchulain Libby <hogan@connecti.com>
Subject: Thanks
Greetings All,
A global and heartfelt thanks for the response to my yeast
non-emergency. I now know what is meant by "relax, don't worry...."
For my next trick, I'll be washing this yeast to get rid of the
excessive trub (thanks Alex).
Just a note Re: Phil's sparge arm if they're watching; CHECK YOUR
QC. I bought one that didn't spin, we had to go through 6 to find one
that did, also those little holes were too high it wanted to shoot water
out the top.
Cuchulain
Eagerly awaiting my next brewday
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 13:07:46 -0800
From: "Brander Roullett (Volt Computer)" <a-branro@MICROSOFT.com>
Subject: kettle, and mashing
From: Hal Davis <davis@planolaw.com>
Subject: Re: Spargeless Mashing: Something New?
vessels (I use one) and I don't understand why one could possibly need a
mash tun, a lautering tun, and a sparge vessel.=20
this has been extremely confusing for me as well.
Apparently there are folks who mash in a kettle. So, how do you sparge?
Do
you just shovel the glop from the kettle into some other kettle that has
holes in the bottom? That seems like a lot of extra handling, a chance
for
infections, a good way to get burned, and an opportunity for hot side=
aeration.=20
I have never done it, but am thinking of starting. I think the important
item that you need to know is an EasyMasher is installed to drain the
Liquor into a plastic pail, then more hot water is added after the
Mashout to sparge the remaining liquor out. "Then pour hot water
through the grain to get the volume up and specific gravity down to what
you had in mind."
does that clear it up?
the reason i am thinking of going with this method is reduced cost, and
clutter, and better tempeture control. this is open to debate of
course. :)
Brander Roullett(a-branro) aka Badger
http://www.nwlink.com/~badger/
For a quart of ale is a dish for a king. -William Shakespeare
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 13:22:26 -0800 (PST)
From: "Michel J. Brown" <mjbrown@teleport.com>
Subject: Anal Retentiveness Disorder (ARD)
ARD is a disease of psychosomatic (worrying too much) origins. The basic
presenting complaint is of inability to pass a stool which is interpreted as
constipation (ie full of it). Most commonly constipation (or more seriously
obstipation) is caused by dehydration (lack of homebrew) and compounded by
ingestion of constipating foodstuffs (like cheese). ARD is relieved by
digital dilatation of the anal sphincter muscle (you know, the glove trick).
This procedure is most commonly performed in the left (or right if you are
left handed ;^)) lateral decubitus position (a la modified Sims).
I frequently recommend to my patients a round or three of sitz baths (~105'F
with Epsom salts, waist high), stool softeners (like spent grains), and
suppositories (as seen on TV), subsequent to digital dilation (you know, the
glove thing again). I also find a good dose of homebrew helpful in causing
relaxation of the smooth muscle tissue found in the anal sphincter
(rostrally, the distal being striated and less reactive to homebrew). So, by
relaxing, not worrying, and having a homebrew, ARD is avoided, or at least
deminished to the point of being nonsequiter 8-)
Dr. Michel J. Brown, D.C.
mjbrown@teleport.com http://www.teleport.com/~mjbrown
"Big Man don't drink no stinking light beer!"
"Big Man drink beer what got BIG TASTE!"
Big Man Brewing (R) 1996
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 15:57:06 -0800 (PST)
From: "Michel J. Brown" <mjbrown@teleport.com>
Subject: Unusally high O.G.
I brewed up a batch of all grain mash (two step infusion) Cream Ale on
Monday. I used 5# of six row American (1.8L), 0.5# of crystal (10L), and 1#
of rice (dry white rice milled and cooked for 30 minutes to gelatinize). I
used a 1 qt/lb dough in at 135'F for a protein rest at 122'F, then proceeded
to mash at 1.5 qt/lb at 150'F for 20 minutes, then raised the temperature to
158'F for another 20 minutes. Hopped with 0.5 oz of Cascade (5.8% alpha) for
60 minutes, then added another 0.5 oz for 30 minutes then finished with 0.5
oz of Willamette (4.6% alpha) for flavor/aroma (ten minute steep). Lautered
and sparged as usual and boiled to volume. Chilled to 60'F and took a
hydrometer reading -- 1.052!!! According to my calculations, I *should've*
gotten around 1.040. Otherwise I am getting an unbelievable 125% extraction
rate :-/ I checked *both* the thermometer, and the hydrometer, and they
checked out fine. Any ideas on where all this gravity came from? I even
weighed my grains on a triple beam, and use hop plugs which I also confirmed
the actual weight to within a gram. I cannot account for the extra
unanticipated OG and would like to know what mechanism is at work here. Any
ideas from the all grainers out there?
Dr. Michel J. Brown, D.C.
mjbrown@teleport.com http://www.teleport.com/~mjbrown
"Big Man don't drink no stinking light beer!"
"Big Man drink beer what got BIG TASTE!"
Big Man Brewing (R) 1996
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 20:11:59 +0000
From: John Robinson <robinson@novalis.ca>
Subject: Iodophor
Hi all,
I've recently started using Iodophor as a sanatizer. I've been
following much of the recent discussion and I've searched the
archives for all posts on Iodophor.
My first attempt left me with quite an 'interesting', unpleasant
taste, in the sample I drew off for a gravity measurement. I'm about
as certain as I can be (without being positive) that this flavor was
not there prior to racking.
The Iodophor I'm using is B.E.S.T (forget what they stand for) and it
says on the small 4 oz bottle that 1 oz to 10 gallons will give 12.5
ppm of titratable iodine. Looking on my measurement chart in the
kitchen I see that 1 fluid oz == 2 tablespoons, thus it would seem
that 1 tablespoon / 5 gallons would be about right. This matches
both the information in the archives and recent posts on the
subject. That is what I used to sanitize my carboy and my racking
cane. I left them both to soak for .5 hour, and then lightly rinsed
each. I did not let either air dry, nor did I do the triple hot
water rinse procedure that I usually follow with CTSP.
So, my questions for those with more experience using this stuff than
I are:
1) Does it seem likely from this description that I've gotten
Iodophor at detectable levels in my beer? ( I still have positive
pressure on the airlock of the secondary.)
2) If it is in solution, will it degrade with time?
3) Get scrubbed out by CO2?
4) Should I stick with CTSP for glass and siphon tubes, and use
Iodophore strickly for kegs?
5) How critical is it to allow it to air dry?
Thanks in advance.
- ---
John Robinson "When I am working on a problem I never think about beauty.
Software Developer I only think about how to solve the problem. But when I
NovaLIS Technologies have finished, if the solution is not beautiful, I know
robinson@novalis.ca it is wrong." - Buckminster Fuller (1895-1983)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 20:14:21 +0000
From: John Robinson <robinson@novalis.ca>
Subject: IBU Analysis
Hi again,
Does anyone out there know of any place in either Canada or the US
(preferably Canada so I don't have to futz with customs) where I can
send beer samples for IBU analysis? If so, can you please let me
know who, what, where and how much? Thanks.
- ---
John Robinson "When I am working on a problem I never think about beauty.
Software Developer I only think about how to solve the problem. But when I
NovaLIS Technologies have finished, if the solution is not beautiful, I know
robinson@novalis.ca it is wrong." - Buckminster Fuller (1895-1983)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 18:25:49 -0600 (CST)
From: Hal Davis <davis@planolaw.com>
Subject: Re: Double Batches
When I started getting geared up for all-grain brewing, I knew that my new
heatsource would have the capability of brewing a double batch, and that my
old kettles (4 and 5 gallons each) would not be adequate for even a single
all-grain batch of 5 gallons. So I made sure that my new kettle was at least
12 gallons, I got a 10-gallon keg, and I got an outdoor propane cooker. My
new plan is the brew less frequently (sad face) but brew a lot more on those
days (happy face). I plan each brew session to do a 10-gallon batch of
all-grain, and while the grain is mashing to do a five-gallon extract batch.
I've only brewed one all-grain batch so far, and it was a five-gallon batch,
but it was no problem to brew a five-gallon extract brew during the mash.
Hal Davis
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 13:33:46 +1300
From: Bruce Baker <Bruce.E.Baker@tsy.treasury.govt.nz>
Subject: Yeast
G'day from New Zealand,
I've been reading the HBD for only the last week or so, so I'm a bit puzzled
by the discussion of aeration:
1. Isn't the process by which yeast converts sugar to yeast an anaerobic
process, ie doesn't require oxygen?
2. Doesn't aeration lead to oxidation, a bad outcome?
I've also got a few unrelated questions about yeast?
3. What constitutes an adequate supply of yeast? Doesn't yeast multiply?
Doesn't the difference between a million yeast cells and a billion come down to
time and sugar?
4. What's the point of a starter bottle? Is it to shorten fermentation time
overall, or is it to give the "good yeast" a head start in the life and death
battle against "bad yeast"? The starter bottle looks to me like another source
of contamination, so I've just pitched the yeast into the wort straight out of
the package. Is this heresy?
5. Why do brewers reuse yeast? Is it to save money, or is there another
reason?
Thanks in advance for your replies.
Cheers,
Bruce
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 20:02:50 -0500 (EST)
From: Joe Rolfe <onbc@shore.net>
Subject: Re: Multiple replies
>Date: Sun, 19 Jan 97 12:59:45 -0500
>From: Michael Gerholdt <gerholdt@ait.fredonia.edu>
>Subject: CO2 in Beer
>
>- -- [ From: Michael Gerholdt * EMC.Ver #2.5.02 ] --
>
>David, once CO2 is actually and fully suspended in the beer then, if
>conditions are the same, there should be absolutely no difference in how the
>CO2 comes out of suspension based on how it got in there.
well from my and several other commercial brewers there IS a big difference.
forced/jacked up co2 take more time to mellow out, no i dont have technical
articles on this (does anyone?) but it is very apparent thru blind taste panels
we have done (and others). actually artifical co2 produces large bubbles for
a period of time, top yeast tended to produce smaller bubbles and bottom
yeast <seemed> to produce the finest bubbles of all. the yeasted beers
were (of course) bottle conditioned, same beer, same primings(both were
fermented out). from this the only difference was bottle conditioning
temperature.
taste wise all the panelist mentioned a harsh (carbonic??) bite to the
artificial
carb and smooth carbonation to the yeasted beers. over time the carbonic bite
does mellow and the head is better but the retention was still much better
in yeasted beers.
most commercial breweries (not all) bung off the fermenter with about 2P
or so left as fermentables. not only does it save money and time, but the
beers just taste better quicker.
this again is a commercial experience, based on our results with our beers
and was corroberated by my mentor. just a data point
- ---------------------------------------------
good brewing
joe
Joe Rolfe onbc@shore.net
----------------------------------------------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #2320, 01/21/97
*************************************
-------
