Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #2700
HOMEBREW Digest #2700 Wed 29 April 1998
FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
Digest Janitor: janitor@hbd.org
Many thanks to the Observer & Eccentric Newspapers of
Livonia, Michigan for sponsoring the Homebrew Digest.
URL: http://www.oeonline.com
Contents:
Clinitest ("David R. Burley")
Rice / Rice Extract (Barry Allen)
analysis of variance and spit-brew (JKW)
Chiropractors/ BT Problems? ("RANDY ERICKSON")
Clinitest (Al Korzonas)
Green Guinness Bottles (Mark_Ohrstrom/Humphrey_Products)
orange flavoring (Brandon L. Schanbacher)
Re: apple & ciders (Jason Hartzler)
Magnetic water treatment (Kelly Jones)
Harsh Beer; Sparge Water; RIMS (tkelly)
Munich malt base grains; first runnings ("Rich, Charles")
Saved yeast phenom (Utesres)
Invert Sugar Question (mike megown)
Molsen Export: Ale or lager? ("John R. Bek")
homebrew cooking - beer-soaked black bean soup (smurman)
Selling our RIMS (Lau William WT)
Brewpubs in Virginia? (Mike Beatty)
Re: Two Pots,Scientific Proof, medical philosophy (dfikar)
Secondary Fermentation,magnetic circulation, Stout ("David R. Burley")
IBU formulas (Steve Jackson)
Renner's whereabouts (Nancy or Jeff Renner)
Magnetic Beer ("Harry Houck")
The Greenfield Effect (michael rose)
O'Douls Amber - Yes! ("George, Marshall E.")
Bottle Conditioning BIG beer with W1056 (Charles Burns)
Glenn Tinseth's IBU Calculator (Herbert Bresler)
Tinseth IBUs, etc. (Matthew Arnold)
JudgeNet is under repair and will return online May 1.
BURP's Spirit of Free Beer competition is June 6-7 and entry information
is available by contacting Jay Adams (adams@burp.org).
NOTE NEW HOMEBREW ADDRESS: hbd.org
Send articles for __publication_only__ to post@hbd.org
(Articles are published in the order they are received.)
If your e-mail account is being deleted, please unsubscribe first!!
To SUBSCRIBE or UNSUBSCRIBE send an e-mail message with the word
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to request@hbd.org.
**SUBSCRIBE AND UNSUBSCRIBE REQUESTS MUST BE SENT FROM THE E-MAIL
**ACCOUNT YOU WISH TO HAVE SUBSCRIBED OR UNSUBSCRIBED!!!
IF YOU HAVE SPAM-PROOFED your e-mail address, the autoresponder and
the SUBSCRIBE/UNSUBSCRIBE commands will fail!
For "Cat's Meow" information, send mail to brewery@hbd.org
Homebrew Digest Information on the Web: http://hbd.org
Requests for back issues will be ignored. Back issues are available via:
Anonymous ftp from...
ftp://hbd.org/pub/hbd/digests
ftp://ftp.stanford.edu/pub/clubs/homebrew/beer
AFS users can find it under...
/afs/ir.stanford.edu/ftp/pub/clubs/homebrew/beer
JANITORS on duty: Pat Babcock and Karl Lutzen (janitor@hbd.org)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 27 Apr 1998 10:14:27 -0400
From: "David R. Burley" <Dave_Burley@compuserve.com>
Subject: Clinitest
Brewsters:
Sam MIze says:
>Dave, here's what I thought you have said before: Use Clinitest only to
>determine whether fermentation is complete. You agree that it does not
>measure some sugars, but this is irrelevant because they won't affect
>completion. Do I recall correctly?
>Harlan is wanting to track the progress of fermentation -- how much
>fermentation has occurred set times during the fermentation. I don't
>think Clinitest will give him an accurate view of the degree of
>fermentation -- just whether it's done or not.
Thanks for the chance to discuss this, again.
You are correct that I recommend this as the only accurate
application of this technique in which dextrose levels are
<1/4% show it is OK to prime for bottling. That does not mean
it is the only application for Clinitest in brewing if you are not
interested in a high degree of accuracy.
If you recall, a study was done to determine other applications.
Andy Walsh did an excellent study in which he reviewed the
impact of various dextrins and Clinitest's response to
various molecular weight dextrins. He concluded, as I
recall, that these could cause some interference with the
exact determination of glucose (which I had always suggested),
but that Clinitest was OK for following the progress of a
fermentation, which is what Harlan asked for.
Remember Harlan's main interest, like all brewers, is
"is it done yet?" He may also be interested in following the
progress and this can be done easily with Clinitest, given
he understands the problems with using this
technique during fermentation.
At the beginning of the
fermentation, there is about 3% sucrose in the wort which
will be unresponsive to Clinitest, but once fermentation sets
in, this is quickly inverted by extra-cellular yeast invertase to
simple sugars which are responsive to Clinitest. Throughout
the fermentation the Clinitest will be responsive to a dextrin
content which is unfermentable, but gives a response of <1/4%
at its reducible sites. It will also be responsive to maltose which
is also reducible and has twice the molecular weight of glucose.
Since I have never used Clinitest for this purpose I do not
know the response factor exactly, but presume it is w/w identical
to that of glucose, since maltose is made up of two C6 sugars
which are also reducible. This factor could be determined
using pure maltose or estimated with dried malt extract to
see if the maltose response were a factor of two off from this.
However, the point here is that with minor exceptions Clinitest
is responsive to *only* the fermentable sugar content (which is
what a brewer wants to know) and not other factors like gas
bubbles, alcohol and temperature. Clinitest is a chemical
measure and responds to chemical changes. Hydrometers
and refractometers are physical measurements and respond
to extraneous physical changes independent of what you want
to know.
I ask you to look at what the alternatives are
1) hydrometers
which have significant interference from both bubbles of CO2
and alcohol formation and vary from batch to batch in their
expected final gravity reading depending on the mashing
conditions ( a long hold at low mashing temperatures will give
a different final gravity reading than a longer hold at a higher
temperature) which makes it totally unreliable for new batches
or screwed up batches. This is, of course, when you need
the readings the most and where the hydrometer falls down.
In the middle of an active fermentation, degassing techniques
do not work unless you kill the yeast. The hydrometer being
made of glass is very fragile in an industrial environment.
The response varies with the alcohol generation and CO2
content as well as the loss of fermentable sugars. This
instrument should have stayed in the 18th century where it
was better than nothing, but not much, for this purpose
of following a fermentation.
2) refractometers are expensive,
pain in the butt to use and clean, easily broken and difficult to read
for darker beers, plus they suffer similar problems with the
alcohol interfering with the reading as the density of the solution
changes. They are also temperature dependent. A refractometer
is just a more expensive non-solution to Harlan's problems.
3) Now look at Clinitest it is cheap, easy to use, readily available,
almost unbreakable, but if you do break it, it's just a testube not
$3500 and a long wait to replace it
.
The results reflect the fermentable sugar content to within 1/4%
or so shortly after the fermentation has started and the invertase
generated by the fermentation has inverted the sucrose
(maybe 3%) to reducible sugars. Clinitest is independent
of the alcohol content, CO2 bubbles, temperature, and the
final reading of <1/4% is independent of any mashing
modifications, intended or not.
This final factor is
my main reason for recommending Clinitest, since neither
the hydrometer nor the refractometer can be used accurately
for the determination of the end of the fermentation in every case
( is it stuck or finished when the reading is constant?). In fact,
the above methods other than Clinitest cannot be used to
accurately determine the endpoint without multiple readings
of the same batch over time and lots of experience
( not available with a new mashing schedule intended or not).
In an industrial environment a day too long in the fermenter
can mean a 20% reduction in capacity in some cases. There
are no multiple readings required with Clinitest once it is <1/4%
These major limitations of the other instruments, which do not
determine the sugar content directly, far outweigh a minor error
caused by the dextrins having some few reducible sites.
Don't you think so?
Keep on brewin'
Dave Burley
Kinnelon, NJ 07405
103164.3202@compuserve.com
Dave_Burley@compuserve.com
Voice e-mail OK
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 27 Apr 1998 09:23:38 -0600 (Canada Central Standard Time)
From: Barry Allen <allen@SEDSystems.ca>
Subject: Rice / Rice Extract
I want to do a "Budweiser Lite" brew (hey, relax, it is for my wife. Have to
keep her happy with my hobby.). I have my 1/2 hop ready to go, but how do I
deal with the rice issue? My home brew supplier says he cannot find a source
for rice extract. Can I make it myself? Can I add rice to pot during the
1/2-hop boil? When? How much? Is there any suitable substitute, such as corn
sugar?
Thanks for your assistance.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 27 Apr 1998 17:28:49 +0200
From: JKW <kev@post8.tele.dk>
Subject: analysis of variance and spit-brew
Greetings-
brian_dixon wrote:
> On the remark about the average micro- or homebrewer not having more
> than a vague sense of what an 'experiment' is, I agree wholeheartedly.
> Engineers (I'm one also) should be all rights have a pretty good
> background in experimentation, much more so than the average micro- or
> homebrewer, yet they don't. Not right out of school anyway. I'd say
> most people in most disciplines don't, unless they were lucky enough
> to get an education from an institute that included formal training in
> it (there _are_ a few out there!). Just so nobody misconcludes what
> I'm talking about here, I'm speaking mostly about formal design of
> experiments (D.O.E.). If terms like full or partial factorial, with
> and without repetition, analysis of variance (ANOVA), and others are
> familiar to you, then you are at least familiar with designed
> experiments and their analysis. If you haven't heard these terms,
> then you are not. If you can effectively design, conduct, and analyze
> DOE types of experiments, then you are "in the know" about what Lewis
> is probably talking about and probably also realize how few people are
> knowledgeable and good at these things.
>
Holy geek-talk Batman!
I am "in the know" enough to know that these things are
merely tools used to reduce the number of experiments
or determine interactions between variables. They are
neither necessary nor sufficient to do good experiments,
though they may be helpful, especially in a system as
complex as brewing.
I am, for instance, quite sure that our hero, Louis
Pasteur, a great experimentalist, never used them.
I would hate to see people discouraged from doing
simple, intelligent experiments just because they
are not familiar with this jargon...
on a lighter note Randy Ricchi wrote:
>Jim Wallace noticed his spit-batch attenuated differently,
I was hoping this was a start of an "amylase in spit" thread,
but alas, just a typo... Guess I'll have to settle for
a first wort hopped cat vomit thread ;-)
Skaal! from Denmark and keep those brew experiments
a comin'
- -------------------------------------------------------
Kevin S. Wenger
Kalundborg, Denmark
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 27 Apr 1998 10:38:55 -0700
From: "RANDY ERICKSON" <RANDYE@mid.org>
Subject: Chiropractors/ BT Problems?
Eric Tepe opines that many HBD readers have likely had positive
experiences with chiropractors. I'm one of them. And in my case,
the treatments have been effective and affordable.
That said, I have also talked to one chiropractor whose belief in
positive energy force fields and the like sounded decidedly quack-
like to me. I am also aware that some in this profession have
aligned themselves with ambulance-chasers (no specific offense
intended to Louis et al) and others have taken to hawking
various products and treatments. Of course, my dentist also sells
various products and new services, and it's pretty well accepted
that physicians and drug companies share cosy relationships,
so maybe it's just an economic fact that these guys have to pay
off their student loans and their insurance somehow.
****************************************************************
I recently subscribed (a gift actually) to Brewing Techniques, and
like a few others here am still awaiting the March/April issue.
I understand that BT has had some computer problems and as
many as 1000 subscriptions did not go out. So if you are still
waiting for an email reply, customer service is busy at the moment.
Randy in Modesto
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 27 Apr 1998 13:20:48 -0500 (CDT)
From: Al Korzonas <korz@xnet.com>
Subject: Clinitest
Dave writes:
>Rather than
>spring for a refractometer , which has the same problem on
>a smaller scale, try taking a sample of beer and diluting it
>( say 2 drops of beer in 8 drops of water) and then use this
>diluted sample with a Clinitest Kit from the Pharmacy.
>It is a lot cheaper ( $14 versus $3500)...
Dave will keep posting about Clinitest and I'll keep posting
that I feel it is not accurate enough for most applications
(you can probably get away with it when kegging, where you can
measure and bleed-off excess pressure). Secondly, you can
get refractometers for a small fraction of that $3500, not
that they are without problems.
Al.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 27 Apr 1998 14:31:57 -0400
From: Mark_Ohrstrom/Humphrey_Products@humphreypc.com
Subject: Green Guinness Bottles
>Lee Carpenter - Check with Heublein to see if they
>can help you on the import information. Also try Guiness.I
>wonder about the green glass bottle. Is it possible that
>this is from some other Guiness Brewery besides Ireland?
I recall seeing a design for a squared-off (rectilinear) green
Guinness bottle for use in the Caribbean and other third-world
markets. The concept was that the bottles, when empty, could
be used as bricks for the construction of small buildings.
What an elegant idea! "I'll finish the baby's room, honey,
but first I need to get a few more <urrrp> bricks...."
Mark in Kalamazoo (No relative to Jeff Renner)
"The Optimist sees that the glass is half full,
The Pessimist sees that the glass is half empty,
The Engineer sees that the glass is twice the
size it needs to be!"
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 27 Apr 1998 17:07:00 -0400 (EDT)
From: schanbacher.2@osu.edu (Brandon L. Schanbacher)
Subject: orange flavoring
Hello all,
I have a question regarding the addition of orange to a belgian ale. My
most recent brew was a belgian ale which has now been in the secondary
fermenter for quite some time since I haven't had the time to bottle. I
have heard of people adding coriander and bitter orange peel to belgians and
was thinking of bottling half of the batch and spicing the other with these,
just to see how it turns out. I haven't found bitter orange peel locally
here, but did find dried mandarin peel in an oriental food market and was
wondering whether it would serve as a substiture. The descriptions of
bitter orange peel I have seen generally indicate that it is brown/green and
nasty looking. The mandarin peel is brown and nasty too, but that may be as
far as the similarities go - I don't know. Any thoughts? Also, would there
be anything wrong with bottling half the batch and spicing the other?
Thanks in advance-
brandon
"I'm ahead of my time, but only by a week." - Too Much Joy
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 27 Apr 1998 17:09:02 -0500
From: Jason Hartzler <jehartzl@rs6000.cmp.ilstu.edu>
Subject: Re: apple & ciders
thanks to everyone who replied to my apple cider question. later,
jeh
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 27 Apr 1998 15:55:31 -0700
From: Kelly Jones <kejones@ptdcs2.intel.com>
Subject: Magnetic water treatment
This only marginally relates to beer, so I'll try to keep it short:
> I'd be interested in any references to studies disproving the effect of
> magnetic water softeners or magnetic medical effects.
I hate to use a web site as a 'reference', but it's all I have on hand
at the moment:
http://www.csicop.org/si/9801/powell.html
> Remember, science never proves anything. It disproves wrong theories.
Science never proves THEORIES as true. But it is very simple to use the
scientific method to prove that a device does not do what it is claimed
to do. If someone comes out with a new product that they say works, but
has no scientific explanation for how or why it works (techno-babble and
pseudo-scientific jargon is not accepted), then as a consumer, I say
it's up to the salesman/inventor/whatever to prove it works, rather than
waiting for science to disprove it. If I believed everything I was told
simply because science hadn't yet disproved it, well, I wouldn't be
brewing beer, I'd be hanging out with the rest of the castrata on
Hale-Bopp. Or not.
> > Heck, you could replace the magnets with beer nuts, and the device would
> > be just as effective. It's what you believe that enables such a product
> > to work, not what the device actually does.
>
> Again, if you have references to research in this area, they would be
> useful to me.
A good starting point (and an excellent article, recommended for anyone)
is an article in the January issue of Scientific American, "The Placebo
Effect". It's not online, you'll have to visit the library.
Kelly
Hillsboro, OR
- --
Kelly
************************************************************************
Kelly Jones Intel Portland Technology Development
Phone: (503) 613-8093 FAX: (503) 613-8261
email: kejones@ptdcs2.intel.com MS: RA1-303
************************************************************************
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 27 Apr 98 17:15:57 -0500
From: tkelly@hologic.com
Subject: Harsh Beer; Sparge Water; RIMS
Fellow HBDers:
Carm Salvatore making harsh-tasting all grain brews. (HBD #2689).
I had the exact same problem with most of my early all-grain batches.
They had
a harsh, astringent aftertaste that mellowed with time but never
totally
disappeared. Adjusting the hop schedule downward seemed to help but
the bulk of
the problem persisted. For me the problem was in the sparging process.
More
specifically, the sparge was too hot. (It may also have been too long,
or too
hot and too long).
Some background here. I brew 12 gallon all grain batches. My setup is
two
barrels, one for the mash tun and one for the boiler. Both are fitted
with
circular false bottoms with 3/16 holes from Stainless in Seattle. I
recirculate
using a 1/50 HP March pump operating at 10% of its rated power via a
fan speed
control. At this setting the flow rate is considerable. (I know
others use
HP pumps. You don't need a pump anywhere near that powerful. In fact,
an
overpowered pump is a disadvantage in RIMS).
I supply heat for temp. rises using a Superb Gas Products ring burner
set on a
flicker, not a forest fire. I average 0.6-0.8 degrees F/Minute. I
have never
had a scalding problem or a stuck mash. I strongly recommend the
Superb burner
to those in need of a recommendation.
I brew in my basement, where I installed an exhaust fan, CO detector,
and two
full windows. I am exceedingly cautious, especially with the propane
and the
fire.
Incidentally, if Jack Schmidling (or someone else) wants to know why I
chose
RIMS (i.e. Why bother?), I will gladly offer an explanation. Jack,
where have
you been these days?
My sparge water is delivered by an electric 4-gallon point-of-use water
heater
purchased at Home Depot for around $140. It is rated at 1500 watts
which is
plenty of power provided the unit is fed with hot water from the main
house
supply. In this configuration, 1500 watts will take water entering at
135F and
bring it to 168F at a rate of approx. 1/4 to 1/2 gallon/minute. If you
feed the
system with cold water you will find that 1500 watts it not enough
power to get
the water to 168F at the above flow rates. Consequently, the
availability of
168F sparge water will limit your sparge rate and increase TSB (Time
Spent
Brewing).
The above unit has an adjustable "clicks-on" thermostat with a top
setting of
170F. Most home water heaters won't go anywhere near that high because
of the
risk of scalding someone. I modified the unit so that it overshot the
170F
limit by a solid 25F. The reasoning here was that 135F input water
would mix
with the 195F water inside the unit's 4 gallon tank to produce sparge
water near
the target of 168F. In actual runs the water was nearer 185F and the
grain bed
exceeded 170 F toward the end of the sparge. One of Jack Schmidling's
instructions for all-grain beginners suggested that the sparge water
should be
heated to 200 F. All my beers produced this way had a harsh,
astringent tone.
(I agree with the majority of Jack's suggestions but this particular
one should
be reconsidered).
One memorable day the switch on the water heater broke, interrupting
power to
the unit. Sparge water temps that day started out in the low 160s and
finished
out around 145F. The beer produced in this manner was extremely smooth
only two
weeks after brewing. There were no astringent tones. I was happy.
Consequently, the thermostat was readjusted to produce 165F sparge
water. Five
or 6 subsequent batches were all free of the harsh, astringent tones.
For me,
the problem of harsh beer was solved.
For those considering an overhead sparge vessel, this setup may be an
alternative. Since it's a pressurized supply it conserves headroom and
eliminates the dangers of both fire and scalding water overhead.
Cost-wise its
competitive with a separate sparge vessel and burner. Its also
thermostatically
controlled. It definitely wins on ease-of-use and there is nothing to
clean.
Since I have a pressurized sparge water supply and use a pump to
transfer the
sweet wort from the mash tun to the boiler, I guess I have a one-tier
system.
Tom Kelly
Groveland, MA
Brewer of Shipwreck Ale and other fine brews
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 27 Apr 1998 17:48:17 -0700
From: "Rich, Charles" <CRich@filenet.com>
Subject: Munich malt base grains; first runnings
In HBD #2696 George De Piro asks, regarding Munich Malt base grain,
"..how much of a difference to the Maillard reactions will 1-2% total
nitrogen be?"
Conjecture: I'd guess it'd be just a fraction of a percent more
flavorful, but it'd probably be cheaper than the lower protein grains
needed for more delicately flavored malts.
===============================================================
In HBD #2697, Charley (still double decocting and loving it) in N.Cal
writes:
> PS - that also helps to explain the malty flavors created when
pressure
> cooking first runnings that are thick with enzymes (proteins) no?
I know you already know this, but It's not an enzymatic reaction.
They're irrelevant at these temps except as mangled bits of peptides and
aminos, a tad more fodder for Browning reactions possibly, but I doubt
they contribute significantly compared to the typical FAN.
The first runnings are mostly attractive because, having the richest
concentration of sugars and goodies they yield more flavor per volume
than later runnings. Although there'd be slightly more reaction in a
thicker solution than vice versa, it wouldn't compare to processing the
whole, even though thinner, collection for total flavor development.
Because I'm constrained to p-cooking in a smaller vessel than my kettle,
p-cooking the first runnings gives the most bang for the buck.
Cheers,
Charles Rich (Bothell, USA) :-)
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 27 Apr 1998 21:41:26 EDT
From: Utesres <Utesres@aol.com>
Subject: Saved yeast phenom
I saved some Wyeast 1056 from a secondary last Monday by swirling the beer I
didn't siphon and pouring into a quart jar, then saved it in the fridge.
Yesterday I pitched that yeast into a new batch and it's fermenting fine.
Just for grins I measured the specific gravity of the beer that was stored
with the yeast slurry and was surprised to read 1.003.
That beer was 1.046 at brewing and 1.012 when I racked it to the secondary. I
didn't measure it at bottling, but doubt it was 1.003 when I put it into the
fridge. Doesn't it seem strange that this yeast could attenuate the beer that
far, especially in the fridge?
Mike Utes
Big Rock, Il
Hollow Leg Brewery
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 27 Apr 1998 22:34:43 -0400
From: mike megown <magobrew@erols.com>
Subject: Invert Sugar Question
I've been reading a book entilted "Brew Your Own Real Ale at Home"
written by Grahm Wheeler exclusively for CAMRA. I plan to do a bitter
this weekend and in mony of the bitter recipes he presented the recipe
calls for 9 - 12 % INVERT CANE SUGAR, can someone tell me what it is and
where do I get it or can I make it at home? also is it added for the
entire boil of 90 - 120 minutes?
mike
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 27 Apr 1998 22:39:23 -0700
From: "John R. Bek" <johnb1@mindspring.com>
Subject: Molsen Export: Ale or lager?
Being prompted by this evenings message from a gentleman visiting
Toronto and looking for something other than the typical, I was reminded
of my visit there last week and all the Molsen Export I drank...
Molsen Export has the term "Ale" noted on it's label. Although it
tastes very much like a lager (to me anyway). I also know that Molsen
Canadian & Molsen Light are lagers... So, is Export an ale or a lager?
Does anyone have a recipe? What type of yeast would I use to brew it?
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 27 Apr 1998 23:22:59 -0700
From: smurman@best.com
Subject: homebrew cooking - beer-soaked black bean soup
This is another recipe of the fairly simple, yet effective variety.
As several have noted, most of the recipes are pretty easy to make,
but (hopefully) pretty hard to screw up too horribly. This is my
general idea, as I originally just wanted to give folks some
motivation to try cooking, or try cooking with beer, or simply try a
new dish (with beer). I'm a cook of the seat-of-the-pants variety,
and I think all of the recipes I create are "open ended", in that you
could change just about all of the ingredients or procedures in some
way to suit your tastes or experience. That's the theory anyway. In
practice, it's a good idea to keep the pizza delivery number handy.
1 lb. black beans (any store that carries bulk food will have them)
1/2 - 1 lb. country-style pork ribs (alternate: good ol' bacon)
1 small-medium diced onion
3-30 diced chile peppers (to taste)
3 tbsp. butter (do not use margarine. Margarine is Satan's tool)
1 large can (45-50 fl. oz.) of chicken broth
1 can diced tomatos, or 1-2 cups fresh diced tomato
3-30 diced garlic cloves (to repel vampires)
a blender
a large pot
anything else not nailed down (some likely candidates include carrots,
celery, chopped cilantro, fennel ...)
Wash the beans lightly in water, and remove any rocks, pebbles, or
dead insects (really). Cover the beans with beer (about 22 oz.), and
let them soak for an hour or two (or all day while you're out running
errands). The best beer for this is probably the
Whateveryouhavethemostof or Liketheleast style. The beans should soak
up a decent amount of beer.
Remove the pork ribs from the bone and trim all of the nasty fat.
(Vegan alternative: tofu + Worstechire). Dice into small pieces.
Cook at 375F for about 40 min., turning once.
Brown the onions and garlic lightly in some oil in your stock pot.
Add the peppers, tomatos, chicken broth, butter, beans-n-beer (and
whatever wasn't nailed down) to the pot. Add the pork pieces when
they're done cooking as well. You shouldn't really need to spice this
soup too much, if at all, IMO. Let it simmer for 1 to 2 hours.
The only tricky part is determining when to stop simmering. You're
going to ladle the soup into the blender, and blend it up to pulverize
the beans (and whatever else wasn't nailed down). This is going to
thicken the soup quite a bit, so don't simmer until there's no liquid
left. Process all of the soup through the blender. I wish I could
give you some guidelines to follow here, but really it's best just to
use your judgment. If it's too thick, add it back to the pot with
some water to thin and cook until desired consistency. If it's too
thin, add it back to the pot and cook until ...
Serve with a dollop of butter, and some chopped chives or green onion
if you're feeling fancy. This soup is very healthy, and almost a meal
in itself. Makes enough for a week or two, and freezes well.
Buon appetito,
SM
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 28 Apr 1998 07:28:19 -0400
From: Lau William WT <william.lau@phwilm.zeneca.com>
Subject: Selling our RIMS
Two friends and I built a 30 gallon RIMS as a winter (18 months!!??)
project to stay out of our wives hair. We are going to start a new
project and are looking to sell this system. We are located in southern
New Jersey (Glassboro) and are looking to recover our material costs of
around $1200. Anyone interested contact me by e-mail and I will forward
more information.
william.lau@phwilm.zeneca.com
Bill
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 28 Apr 1998 08:04:16 -0400
From: Mike Beatty <mbeatty@ols.net>
Subject: Brewpubs in Virginia?
Hello all-
The Winston-Salem Worthawgs are considering a trip up into Virginia to
visit some of the area brewpubs/microbreweries - we know of a few, but
wanted to get some recommendations/suggestions.
In addition, North Carolina has a law restricting the sale of beer w/an
alcohol level greater than 6%. Are there any places to purchase beers
that fall outside that range, such as some of the Belgian Lambics and/or
Chimays (sp?).
Thanks!
- --
Mike Beatty
Intelligent Business Solutions
________________________________________________
Adopt a Collie! Check out: <http://www.collie.net/~pcc>
________________________________________________
Do you believe in Macintosh? <http://www.evangelist.macaddict.com/>
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 28 Apr 1998 07:18:47 -0500 (CDT)
From: dfikar@flash.net
Subject: Re: Two Pots,Scientific Proof, medical philosophy
>Two Pots,Scientific Proof, medical philosophy ("David R. Burley")
>
>Sam also says:
>>And I can imagine that magnetism has an effect on the
>human body,
>>otherwise an MRI would come out blank.
>
>Of course, the use of (Nuclear) Magnetic Resonance (MRI) to
>determine the state of the certain portions of the human body
>has to do with the response of certain nuclei to radio frequency
>energy being absorbed in a magnetic field and has nothing
>to do with the response of the human body to a magnetic field.
>
Actually, MRI is based on radio freq. energy produced by nuclei (mostly
hydrogen) resonating in a relatively strong magnetic field. Only a few
nuclei are induced to precess in synch with the magnetic gradient
(something like one in ten thousand, as I recall) and it takes a super-strong
magnetic field to cause even these few nuclei to respond - typically 0.5
to 1.5 Tesla in medical imaging. Thus, protons in the human body *are*
affected by magnetic fields but the effect is relatively minute.
- ---------------------------------------------
Dean Fikar - Ft. Worth, TX
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 28 Apr 1998 09:24:31 -0400
From: "David R. Burley" <Dave_Burley@compuserve.com>
Subject: Secondary Fermentation,magnetic circulation, Stout
Brewsters:
Doc Erickson says after racking his barleywine to a
secondary, it got cloudy and apparently started slowly
re-fermenting again.
>Does anyone have suggestions.........PLEASE (I'm going nuts).
I suggest you try a Clinitest to see if you have any residual
fermentable sugar. If it is less than 1/4% glucose ( maybe
1/2% in the case of a barleywine - I don't know) you do
not have a yeast fermentation, if you do, I'd let it continue.
If there is still fermentable sugar available, you might
consider adding a small amount of yeast nutrient and
some b vitamins. I would try it on a small sample first.
OTOH, this may simply be the result of this warming up
and the CO2 bubbling off and stirring up some yeast from
the bottom. If this is the case, you can bottle it.
- ---------------------------------------------------------
D.A. Erickson also says:
>To the best of my knowledge, the magnets people are
using for "pain
>relief" and other maladies have been scientifically
shown to do only
>one thing,and that is to increase circulation in the
area the magnet
>is applied
To the best of my knowledge this is hooey. Please provide
the references to the scientific papers that demonstrate this
has been proven.
- --------------------------------------------------
Pat Babcock's recent tirade inspired me to re-read portions
of Michael J. Lewis' "Stout" book. Actually, I found it to be
one of the better in the Style series, since it was well
referenced and used a very scientific approach in trying to
define the taste of Stout. Lewis used spider diagrams to locate
a "Stout Taste" in an attempt to define the style. The fact that
these were difficult to pin down makes his point that the
only *operative* definition of Stout at the beginning of his
taste experiments was that "Stout is a black beer that the
brewer defines as stout." Perhaps this statement is the
one which Pat is referring to and he missed Lewis' point.
After saying this, Lewis tries to pin down the taste
characteristics using 1) foam quality 2) beer aroma
3)beer flavor and 4) beer mouthfeel 5) Acetaldehyde
content, etc. These were evaluated by skilled,
knowledgeable tasters and his results presented
in tables, plots and diagrams.
He says on p69 in "Stout":
"our focus was on learning to what extent stouts were
related to each other by flavor character and whether
these were natural groupings among stouts based
on such factors as natural origin or manufacturing
practice."
Sounds to me like he took the title of the "Style Series" to
heart and did his best to define a style for "Stout", while
showing in detail how he came to his conclusion.
If others were to take this effort so seriously, perhaps
we wouldn't always be arguing about IBUs in IPAs, etc.
Keep on brewin'
Dave Burley
Kinnelon, NJ 07405
103164.3202@compuserve.com
Dave_Burley@compuserve.com
Voice e-mail OK
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 28 Apr 1998 06:33:47 -0700 (PDT)
From: Steve Jackson <stevejackson@rocketmail.com>
Subject: IBU formulas
I haven't felt much need to get into the whole debate over the
efficacy of Tinseth's IBU formula, largely because I lack the
technical expertise to lend much insight on the matter.
However, after reading through the thread over the last several days,
I think there is a point about IBU predictions that is being missed,
or at least not discussed.
As at least one poster has mentioned (I can't recall exactly who), it
is a virtual impossibility that any formula, no matter how
meticulously constructed, could be developed to accurately predict
IBUs. This is because a beer's IBU level is dependent on more than
just amount of hops, alpha acid content and utilization. Kettle
geometry, vigor of the boil and, for all I know, position of the stars
all have an effect as well and can't be adequately expressed in any
mechanical formula.
Now, to my point: The value of any IBU prediction formula is that,
with repeated use, it allows a brewer to reasonably predict how bitter
his or her beer will be. I personally use Tinseth's numbers, because I
have brewed enough batches to know what to expect when it kicks out a
value of 30 IBU. In reality, the resultant beer may be nowhere near 30
IBU, but I don't care. I know about what level of bitterness the value
of 30 will give me, and I can plan my beer appropriately.
The same would hold true if I used the most incredibly flawed formula
possible, as long as it gave me consistent mathematical results. I
would know what to expect using this theoretical formula, even if it
gave me an IBU figure of 250 for a lightly hopped beer; I would know
that to get the appropriate bittering for an IPA, I'd have to up my
hops until I got a figure of say 400. The number is obviously way off
from what the actual IBUs would be, but I can still get a reasonably
good prediction of how bitter my beer will be.
I think this might be one of those cases where the desire to be
technically correct might be counter-productive. Instead of beginning
to doubt whatever calculations one might get from Tinseth's formula
(or anyone else's for that matter), I think it's more important to
stick with whatever works for you insofar as allowing you to
consistently and reasonably predict how bitter one's beer will be.
_________________________________________________________
DO YOU YAHOO!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 28 Apr 1998 10:35:29 -0400 (EDT)
From: Nancy or Jeff Renner <nerenner@umich.edu>
Subject: Renner's whereabouts
Lou Heavner <lheavner@tcmail.frco.com> is in Toronto and wrote that he is:
> currently far from home (but closer
> to Jeff R) and unable to brew :(
You're probably farther from me than you've ever been, Lou. I'm in Big
Sur, CA this week! I'm telnetting via aol to umich, and it sure is
cumbersome.
So, anyhow, this is a good time for my semiannual reminder for HBDers to
include their location in their post. It fosters community and might help
us answer a question you have. And you might even find there is a
brewer nearby you didn't know about.
Jeff Renner, usually in Ann Arbor, Michigan, and isolated from beer this
week because Highway One from Monterey is still out from El Nino except
for an hour each evening, which isn't enough time to run out and back for
a pubbreak.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 28 Apr 1998 07:43:13 -0700
From: "Harry Houck" <hhouck@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: Magnetic Beer
When I heard that a buddy had spend many $$$ for magnet insoles, magnet
back pads and a magnet bracelet, a huge inspiration came upon me.
Magnetic Beer. It'll surround and confuse all the bad cells in the body.
It'll straighten and unblock arteries, veins and capillaries. Your dog
will seem smarter after only sniffing the stuff. Your kidneys and colon
will be cleaner than distilled water. It'll clean out your house
plumbing too!
Maybe the list can help me with some technical problems. I need aluminum
bottle caps. The beer sticks to the steel caps and pulls out of the
bottle at one shot.
-HH, waiting for my patent
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 28 Apr 1998 08:07:48 -0700
From: michael rose <mrose@ucr.campus.mci.net>
Subject: The Greenfield Effect
Jim wrote,
>Years ago GE had the notion the lighting
>environment would change the productivity of workers, so the lighting
>was redone and productivity went up. They tried a different lighting
>and productivity improved..... This became known as the
>"Greenfield, or Greenwell or Greensomething (help Jeff!...someone!)
Its called the 'Hawthrone Effect'. It was done in an aircraft parts
factory in 1943(?)... in Hawthrone CA.
Michael Rose Riverside, CA mrose@ucr.campus.mci.net
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 28 Apr 1998 10:06:30 -0500
From: "George, Marshall E." <MGeorge@bridge.com>
Subject: O'Douls Amber - Yes!
Richard Gardner asks if anyone has tried the new O'Douls Amber, and if
it's decent or not. Well, I thought it was pretty good, accepting the
fact that most NA beers are difficult in retaining full body and any
sort of hopping. It has some body to it, but not much in the way of
bitterness. It does have a nice amber color though.
I've long said that the first micro to release a full bodied NA pale ale
(or something like it) will do very well with it. Hmm...NA IPA perhaps?
Marshall George
Edwardsville, Illinois
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 28 Apr 98 08:23 PDT
From: cburns@egusd.k12.ca.us (Charles Burns)
Subject: Bottle Conditioning BIG beer with W1056
Last August 31 (49'er Opening Day Disaster) I made my first (and only)
Barleywine. OG 1.115, FG 1.025, about 78 pct AA and about 12 pct alcohol by
volume. Used Wyeast 1056 in a big 3 quart starter. Since I knew it would
need some aging with ~100 IBU's, I decided to bottle condition.
After two months in the bottle I tried one. Dead - no carbonation. Bummer. I
had earlier harvested the yeast from the secondary so I emptied all the
bottles into my bucket, pitched in about 4-6 oz of slurry (did not restart)
shook it up good and rebottled.
After four more months in the bottle, a **little** carbonation was finally
apparent. I was just about to dump it into a keg and force carbonate it when
I decided to move the brew upstairs out of the basement (its been 55-60F all
winter down there). I upended all the bottles, shook 'em up (roused yeast)
three times over the last 3 weeks, all the time keeping the brew above 65F.
It worked. Last night I had my first carbonated bottle of barleywine and now
its nearly 8 months old and quite a bit better than I expected it to be.
Actually a little OVER carbonated.
Just goes to show, you really don't need to use champagne yeast to bottle
condition a big beer, 1056 did the trick, it just took a **long** time.
Charley (with yeast roundup in full swing) in N. Cal
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 28 Apr 1998 11:32:50 -0400
From: Herbert Bresler <bresler.7@osu.edu>
Subject: Glenn Tinseth's IBU Calculator
Beerlings,
I have used Glenn Tinseth's IBU calculator located at
http://realbeer.com/hops/IBU.html for about a year now, with very
satisfying results. I brew 5 gallon batches, mostly all-grain
(occasionally supplement my mash with LME). I use the calculator to target
IBU for my brews. Using Glenn's calculator I have made both high and low
IBU brews: pale ale, doppelbock, mild brown, classic Pilsener, stout and
others. Each time the results are very close to what I expect for each
style.
If anything, I sometimes get a little bit more bitterness that I expect
according to the program, but that always seems to coincide with when I use
hop pellets instead of whole hops. If I were to suggest any change in the
current program, it would be to include an adjustment for pellet vs whole
hop utilization.
It is a very useful tool for me, and so very easy to use. It is also
satisfying to hit target IBU so reliably. As Glenn says, YMMV. Of course,
I am not actually measuring IBU chemically, just with my taste buds (which,
according to most references, can detect a difference of about 5 IBU at
best).
Happy hopping,
Herb
Columbus, Ohio
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 28 Apr 1998 15:41:24 GMT
From: marnold@netnet.net (Matthew Arnold)
Subject: Tinseth IBUs, etc.
In private email, Glenn Tinseth told me that he recommends using "the average
wort gravity over the course of the boil" in his formula. That gives me the
information I was looking for, so the author of this new brewing program will
know how to make use of the formula properly.
I agree with the person (didn't jot down the name, sorry) who said that it was
splitting hairs to decide what gravity to use because of the inherent problems
with guesstimating IBUs. My goal was not to ensure that IBUs are being
perfectly estimated, but instead to ensure that the formula is used properly.
The fact that the three common formulae for predicting IBUs give vastly
different results is a testament to how difficult it is to predict something
like this.
I've found that, by using Glenn's formula, I can reasonably predict the IBUs of
a recipe on _my system_. Rager's and Garetz' formulae don't seem to work as
well _with my system_. Your mileage may vary. Thus, I wanted to make sure that
this new program properly uses the formula that I use. As I pointed out, the
difference between using the pre-boil and post-boil gravities in the IPA recipe
was around 26 IBUs. That's a pretty big deal in my book.
- -----
Recently, I asked for comments on a Dunkel recipe I was trying. Thanks to the
many people who responded. It is now sitting in the primary. Here's the final,
adjusted recipe I used (assumes a 70% efficiency):
Poke-Check Dark
9# DWC Munich
.5# Weyermann Melanoidin
.5# 150L crystal (CaraB from St. Pat's)
.5# Wheat malt
.25# Chocolate malt
.5 oz Hallertau Northern Brewer pellets (8.5% AA, 60 min)
2.5 oz Hallertau Hersbrucker pellets (1.3% AA, 1 oz 60 mins, 1 oz 30 mins,
.25 oz 10 mins, .25 oz knockout)
Liquid lager or neutral ale yeast
O.G.: 1.056 IBU: 22
Mash program: 15 mins @ 135F, 60 mins @ 156F, 10 mins @ 165F
I would have dumped the chocolate and most of the CaraB if I could have found
Weyermann dark munich malt. Maybe someday . . . I ended up using Danstar
Nottingham dry yeast because it is so neutral. It's already too warm to lager
even in the Midwest! I realize that it may attenuate more than I want it to,
but hopefully the high mash temperature will help there. I'll let you know how
it turns out. This winter I'll probably tweak it and brew it as a real lager.
- -----
It's not too late to enter the Titletown Open hosted by the Green Bay Rackers
Homebrewers' Club! Check out http://www.rackers.org for more information!
Finally, please, for the love of God, drop the chiropractic discussion!
Matt
- -----
Webmaster, Green Bay Rackers Homebrewers' Club
http://www.rackers.org info@rackers.org
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #2700, 04/29/98
*************************************
-------
