Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #2772
HOMEBREW Digest #2772 Mon 20 July 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:
Disaster! (sort of) (Mark T A Nesdoly)
Hemp beer / Corny corrosion / Young rhizomes (Matthew Arnold)
Dehumidifiers and Brewing water (Steve)
Request suggestions / opinions / observations, etc. (dcstanza)
Ooops - recipe follow-up (dcstanza)
Competition Announcement - Queen of Beer (Charley Burns)
CarboyCare/Starters/IM/Books ("Steve Alexander")
Fw: Infection/Tests ("Steve Alexander")
RE: fridge -- to stuff or not to stuff (LaBorde, Ronald)
Re: a better starter method? (Alan Edwards)
RE: Tempeture of Corny Keg. (LaBorde, Ronald)
Fermenting carboys (Jeff Pharr)
hallucigenic botulism (Scott Murman)
re: Balanced dispensing (Michael Rose)
scaling up batches ("Bryan L. Gros")
RESULTS: Summer Cap-Off '98 ("RANDY ERICKSON")
grain balance (Poris)
South African sorghum beer? (Vincent Voelz)
fear (Al Korzonas)
brewing an imperial stout for competitions (Jonathan Edwards)
Tubing (Kurjanski)
Starter Aeration/Short Lag Time Questions/Under Carbonation ("Michael O. Hanson")
Carbonation/HBDers in the flesh (michael w bardallis)
Schmidling; percentages; bar measures; oxygen and lag; CP filling; zest (Samuel Mize)
Have you entered a MCAB qualifier yet?
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-warning: Date header was inserted by mail.usask.ca
From: Mark T A Nesdoly <mtn290@mail.usask.ca>
Subject: Disaster! (sort of)
Hello all,
Up until Wednesday night my most serious brewing disaster was a tie between
the time that I watched my hydrometer roll off the table just as I was
reaching for it, and the time my thermometer broke in my wort mid-chill.
I guess this last incident isn't so much serious as it is maddening. I just
finished stocking up on bulk grains last week. 25 kg of DWC wheat malt, 25
kg of DWC pilsen malt, and 25 kg of prairie (a local maltster) 2-row. The
wife & I have two cats, so I decided against keeping the malts in their
original bags. I didn't want the cats to mistake it for kitty litter. I
have quite a few rubbermaid containers, so I put the malt in those. The
pilsen and the 2-row each *just* fit in their containers, and the wheat had
lots of room left over, since that container was about twice the volume of
the others. I stacked them in the corner with the 1/2 filled larger
container with the wheat on the bottom and the pilsen and 2-row stacked on
top. You can probably tell what happened.
Wednesday evening the wife and I were greeted to a short-lived
creaking/groaning sound, followed by the sound of 50 kg of malt spilling
onto the floor. The bottom container buckled under the weight of the two
containers on top of it, and my pilsen and 2-row spilled onto the floor.
The next hour was spent scooping up whatever I could from the carpet and
then vacuuming up the rest.
The good news is that because of the way the containers came down, it was
pretty easy to separate the pilsen from the 2-row. I also didn't lose too
much malt--maybe 1 - 1.5 kg total.
- -- Mark, vacuuming in
Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 17 Jul 1998 15:12:32 GMT
From: marnold@ez-net.com (Matthew Arnold)
Subject: Hemp beer / Corny corrosion / Young rhizomes
> Mr. Hart's statements confuse Jethro....he wants the association with
>dope, but he doesn't want the association with dope to tittilate kids, who
>already have more access to the illegal stuff than any previous generation.
>They just can't buy a beer. This one has more twists than Medusa's hair and
>will, no doubt, place another arrow in the neo-prohibitionist's quiver.
The craft brewing industry is shooting itself in the foot with this one. Hemp
adds little along the line of flavor and opens up a Pandora's box of troubles,
especially when they deliberately play on hemp's relationship to its THC-laden
cousin. If the craft brewing industry is looking (nay, begging) for a way to
give neo-prohibitionists more ammunition, they've done an excellent job. I can
see the slogans now "Less Taste, Twice the Controversy." I also have difficulty
believing that the BATF isn't going to be all over this like a $13 suit.
- -----
ObHomebrewing: I transferred my barleywine to another corny the other day. I
can't wait for it to be done! I cleaned the one it was in and filled it with an
iodophor solution (at the no-rinse concentration). My concern was that the
chlorine in my water (more specifically, chloramine) would begin to pit my
corny. I filled it up as far as I could, but I'm sure there's still a water
line at the very top. Granted, it's only going to be sitting like that for
about a week, but am I begging for trouble? What if I would keep it like this
for a longer period of time? Are you out there John P.?
- -----
Update: Two of my rhizomes are growing like mad. The one that suffered from the
bunny attack has not reappeared. Looks like the survivors will do quite well.
Later,
Matt (yes, I've changed ISPs again *( )
- -----
Webmaster, Green Bay Rackers Homebrewers' Club
http://www.rackers.org info@rackers.org
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 17 Jul 1998 11:21:49 -0500 (CDT)
From: Steve <JOHNSONS@uansv5.Vanderbilt.Edu>
Subject: Dehumidifiers and Brewing water
Tidmarsh Major mentions having used a dehumidifier to help control the
dankness and mustiness in the brewery. I also keep one going in my back
apartment brewery and storage area here in Nashville, TN, where the humidity
this time of year really starts to kick in for the next 4 months (I envy our
friends Bryan and Lisa in their moving back to the cool climate of the Bay
Area in California!). Anyway, I was wondering if anyone else has used the
water from the dehumidifier to soften their mash water? Might be good for
a Pils, perhaps? I'm assuming that this water is the result of a condensation
process, with the final product being pretty similar to steam distilled water?
I don't know without having it tested, however. Maybe Mr. Duddles, the Fridge
Guy also knows about dehumidifiers?
Steve Johnson, President
Music City Brewers
Nashville, TN
97% relative humidity yesterday...down "a bunch" to 60% today!
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 17 Jul 1998 12:27:19 -0500
From: dcstanza@OCC.PASEN.GOV
Subject: Request suggestions / opinions / observations, etc.
Hi, collective! Sorry for the length.
Last night I brewed my 7th batch ever (Newbie, obviously) and it was a
kit beer. Whilst I was waiting for the wort to cool off, I thought it would
be
an interesting idea to submit the recipe and instructions that came with
the kit to the HBD and solicit comments, suggestions (please keep them
anatomically possible, eh?), observations, etc.
What I'm looking for is just exactly what the various and experienced
voices of the HBD would say in regards to what is being sold as kit beer.
I think this would be expecially enlightening for me since I really don't
have
a clue as to how this recipe would stack up against others; better or
worse.
This beer is being brewed specifically for an upcoming camping trip with
some friends and relatives (mostly light mega-beer crowd) and will be
filtered, kegged and force carbonated. I've purposely left out the
ingredients and directions for bottling.
I'll reserve revealing the name of the company (no affiliation, just a
very
satisfied customer) that I bought it from until later, unless nobody cares.
The recipe is called Pilsen Supreme and is described as "An American
style light beer with an unusually smooth mouth feel, clean rich taste and
a medium golden color".
Remember, I'm soliciting your opinions on the whole works - ingredients,
methods, etc.; it's not my recipe and you're certainly not going to hurt my
feelings in any way! Comments/questions in brackets [ ] are mine.
Here's the ingredients:
4 lbs light pure unmalted extract (can)
2.2 lbs rice syrup (can)
1 lb Laaglander Dried malt Extract (bag)
1 muslin boiling bag of crushed Crystal malt (sorry - I have no idea as
to
how much malt this is - I'll try to find out)
1 oz Cluster Hop Pellets (1 oz is my guesstimate - the bag was
unmarked)
1 oz Hallertau Hop Pellets - Alpha acid 3.2%
Muntons dry ale yeast packet
Directions:
Remove Crystal Malt from plastic bag and place boiling bag in 6 quarts
HOT (not boiling) water, cover with lid and steep for 30 minutes. [Do they
expect to 'lose' 2 quarts to evaporation during the following boil, since
this
is a recipe for 5 gallons?]
Remove Crystal malt from water and bring mix to a boil.
[Questions for the collective - is this done for flavor? Are you supposed
to squeeze the liquid out of the boiling bag when you remove it?]
Add malt extract, rice syrup, and dry malt. Stir thoroughly until they
are
dissolved and bring to a boil. [No lid, of course - thanks HBD!]
Add cluster hop pellets, boil for 20 minutes.
Add Hallertau hop pellets and boil an additional 5 minutes.
Total boiling time 25 minutes.
Add mix (wort) to 4 gallons (16 quarts) of cold water in sterilzed
fermenter and stir thoroughly. [I waited here for the wort to cool to
approximately 80 degrees before proceeding]
Add yeast and let sit for 10 minutes.
Stir mix thoroughly, seal fermenter, add fermentation lock and allow to
ferment 7 - 10 days.
[Bottling directions followed - snipped for brevity].
That's it. I checked on the fermenter this morning (about 7 hours after I
sealed it up) and the air lock was bubbling rapidly. It's in my basement at
about 72 degrees, I believe.
Thanks in advance for any and all comments; perhaps other newbies
will benefit in seeing how a kit beer stacks up against other
recipes/methods. Private e-mail replies are fine, too!
Keep up the good work, HBD - you make a great resource for learning!
Dave Costanza
"Nothing is simple anymore - except SOME of the people we work for!" -
D Costanza.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 17 Jul 1998 12:31:33 -0500
From: dcstanza@OCC.PASEN.GOV
Subject: Ooops - recipe follow-up
I forgot to mention in my earlier post that the instructions did specify:
SG - 1.054
FG-1.026
Alcohol range - 3% - 4%.
My hydrometer read 1.052 SG.
Is this close enough??
Thanks, again!
Dave Costanza
"Nothing is simple anymore - except SOME of the people we work for!" -
D Costanza.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 17 Jul 98 11:59 PDT
From: caburns@egusd.k12.ca.us (Charley Burns)
Subject: Competition Announcement - Queen of Beer
Ladies (and NOT gentlemen) Fire up those Kettles!
Competition Announcement: The Hangtown Association of Zymurgy Enthusiasts
(H.A.Z.E.) of Placerville, California is pleased to announce the Fifth
Annual Queen of Beer Women Only Homebrew competition. This event is
sanctioned by the American Homebrewers Association and will be judged by
BJCP certified judges.
Eligibility - The Queen of Beer Women's Homebrew Competition is open to all
non-commercial, home brewed beers, meads and ciders produced by persons of
the female gender. Beers produced by or with the assistance of persons of
the male gender are NOT eligible. "Assistance" is defined as: coaching
during the brewing process, measuring ingredients, performing chemical
reaction and /or timing calculations, racking, bottling or in any other way
manipulating wort or fermented product. Lifting of heavy equipment or full
brewing vessels, milling of grain, and operation of a capper device ARE
permitted. Female competition judges are eligible and encouraged to enter in
categories other than those they will be judging.
Summary of entry information: Entries are $5 each and should be mailed to
Jack Russell Brewing Co., 2380 Larsen Drive, Camino, CA 95709 between
September 16 and 26, 1998. Final judging will be held October 10, 1998 at
the Brewery. Entry forms, style sheets and competition details will be
available very soon at our web site: http://haze.innercite.com.
Competition co-coordinators: Nora Seeley nseeley@level1.com and Beth Zangari
zangari@ns.net can provide additional information and are both registering
judges for the competition.
Charley
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 17 Jul 1998 14:57:25 -0400
From: "Steve Alexander" <steve-alexander@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: CarboyCare/Starters/IM/Books
re - Hot beerstone washs in your carboys. Be careful about adding
very hot liquids to a cold glass carboy. I once lost a carboy by
absent mindedly turning on the hot water spigot to wash the
carboy. Thermal shock!
- --
re - starter flavors ... high growth starters are just going to taste
bad. And even if they taste alright there is the issue of diluting
your 'brewed to style' wort with 5% to 10% sized starters of 'plain
vanilla' starter beer. I don't have the answer, tho' I think George
DePiro is on the right track making a high growth starter, ferment it
to completion, drain the 'bad beer' and top up with fresh wort maybe
12-48 hrs before pitching.
- --
Dwayne Robert McKeel says about Irish Moss ...
>In HBD2765 Steve Alexander comments on the effectiveness of irish moss
>(IM). I contend that the proper way to gauge the effectiveness of IM is
>by the amount of hot break left in your kettle.
I>[...] . However, for myself, I find that using
>IM helps to leave enough proteinaceous matter in the kettle to make the
>effort and cost worth while.
I couldn't agree less. Protein, when it's not involved in haze, is
generally a very positive influence on beer body and head. Tho' I
suspect that nearly all of the added hot break is really the
carageenen (IM) expanding to several hundred times it's original
volume in the hot wort. IMO if IM isn't solving a problem in the
final beer, its use isn't indicated. I'm personally not that fond
of extra glop in the whirlpool.
Incidentally Fix, in AoBT indicates that HB IM levels of 1tsp/5gal,
and commercial levels are at 2 to 3 times that. At yet higher
levels fermentation is impared. Fix states "We found that different
concentration levels did not affect the stability of finished beer,
nor did they offer chill proofing". The accompanying table does show a
decrease in formazin turbidity units as IM concentration increases.
>[...] As for clarity of the finished product, I
>find that removing the fermenting wort off from the cold break is just
>as important as the amount of hot break left in the kettle.
>[...] I also find that this method produces a
>cleaner tasting beer. I suspect it also may help remove potential
>nutrient for spoiling organisms. Any comments on this last point?
Removing cold break is widely held to produce beers with cleaner
flavor. I certainly agree with this. I don't believe that using IM or
cold break removal can seriously be considered as an infection
preventative. Removing excess fatty acids in the break, beyond the
amount that your yeast can consume is a good thing in that it removes
a potential head killing material. It is a nutrient, as is the protein
- but there is still plenty of protein on the beer for a protein
metabolizer to work on - they don't primarily because of the pH.
>On another note, does anyone have any experience on minimizing mold
>contaminations?
Molds sporulate easily and voluminously and so airborne contamination
is almost inevitable in a moldy environment. You need to control mold
in the environment - not in the fermentor - unless you plan on brewing
under a HEPA filtered hood. There are various antifungal agents
available, and basic brewing sanitizers will kill current
infestations, but one of the simplest long term controls for mold is a
dehumidifier. Molds simply won't grow in a low humidity
environment.
- --
Scott Murman comments:
> Here in America, people are paying
> a premium for "pints" that are actually only 13 oz. (steal a pint
> glass from your local pub and try it for yourself). I don't know how
What are the relative ethics of shorting a customer 3 oz versus
stealing the glass ?
- --
ALAN KEITH MEEKER says ...
>Subject: Any good chemistry of brewing books?
>Hi. I was wondering if there are any decent books out there on brewing
>chemistry and/ or brewing science? I just received a copy of George
>Fix's 1989 book and am truly dismayed by the poor quality of the
>information contained in it. It's hard to believe this book was proofread
>at all given the multitude of errors throughout the text. If it was
>proofed it apparently wasn't by anyone with even a high school level
>course in chemistry! Have such deficiencies been corrected in his latest
>book Principles of Brewing Science? Are there other books anyone can
>recommend...?
Huh ? The 1989 book was PoBS. The latest book is called An Analysis of
Brewing Techniques which relates a lot of great brewing experience
findings and opinions. I have a relatively short list of errata noted
- the ones relevent to chemistry are pp 143 - there is something wrong
with the DMS production rate equation and pp 13-19 there is something
rather confusing, *maybe* wrong about some of the water ion
discussion. Also I think that the level of detail in the chemistry
discussions in PoBS may not impress a professional chemist, but
considering it is written for a different audience I don't believe
that it is bad at all. As for the "multitude of errors" - I guess I'd
like to see just what you are talking about. Are these really
conceptual errors - or is it the sort of imprecision that is probably
necessary in a presentation to a general audience. Would you care to
cite a few examples ?
Other more detailed books would include Malting and Brewing Science
(Chapman Hall, 1983, ~$120US) - though it is not primarily a chemistry
book. I suspect that The 'Brewing Science', vol 1-3 ed J.R.A.Pollock,
Academic Press (Acad.Press, 1979-1987, ~$625US) would fall in the
right category. There are a lot of good titles on yeast technology -
too many to list. Many good books have been published in the area of
food science and chemistry - here I find almost anything with Gerald
Reed's name on it to be worth the money. Enzyme technology - also many
good titles check Cambridge Press for some good leads here. A lot of
good stuff on food chemistry and particularly flavor technology by a
little publisher AVI press. Perhaps my best advice is check the 'books
in publication' list in the Brewing Techniques market guide (about
$10) and scan through the book reviews in the Journal of the Institute
of Brewing - full of good leads.
Steve Alexander
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 17 Jul 1998 15:03:28 -0400
From: "Steve Alexander" <steve-alexander@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Fw: Infection/Tests
- -----Original Message-----
From: Steve Alexander <steve-alexander@worldnet.att.net>
To: homebrew-request@hbd.org <homebrew-request@hbd.org>
Date: Friday, July 17, 1998 2:49 PM
Subject: Infection/Tests
>George De Piro writes that Steve Alexander says:
>>>Only after the sugars and several critical amino acids are depleted and the
>>>alcohol level is fairly high does beer become nearly uninfectable by
>>Statements like this always frighten me, because it may make some
>>believe that they can be lax in their sanitation around fermented
>>beer. This is not true. Yes, the fermented beer is much less
>>hospitable to many bugs than unfermented wort, but it is far from
>>invulnerable. Wild yeast will gladly take up residence inside your
>>keg of bright beer, and they'll invite their friends the Pediococci
>>over for a party.
>
>Touch. I probably should have said 'much less infectable'. Finished
>beer is probably infectable by only a fraction of a percent of the
>organisms that could make a home in wort - but by some strange
>coincidence (NOT) these few organisms are prevalent brewery problems.
>Still - aside from S.diastaticus strains which exude extracellular
>enzymes that can break down dextrins and starch - I don't think other
>wild yeast growth is much of an issue in finished beer. Pediococcus
>and some lacto's are reportedly able to survive (tho' grow??) in the
>yeast cake, and acetobacteria could be a problem if air is introduced
>(but then you have other problems too). If I was an infectious agent
>out for a party - I'd head straight for the unfermented wort. Over in
>the bright tanks the party food (sweets and fats) and air are all
>gone, and everyone's asleep ;^)
>
>BTW - Louis Bonham's article in the May/June BT covers the topic of
>unpitched wort stability testing in a similar manner as G.Fix AoBT
>that I mentioned before. Louis also goes thru several more advanced
>tests which can help determine whether you have infections in your
>culture or starter - which is (part of) the other half of the puzzle.
>
>Steve Alexander
>
>
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 17 Jul 1998 14:31:39 -0500
From: rlabor@lsumc.edu (LaBorde, Ronald)
Subject: RE: fridge -- to stuff or not to stuff
From: "Jay Spies" <spiesjl@mda.state.md.us>
>He told me that
>the refrigerator would work best and most efficiently if it was
>nearly empty.
I am no expert on this, but from what I know, I would say the fridge
would be most efficient when it is full. The reasoning is this:
If empty, there is little mass other than air to hold any temperature,
so the inside temperature will change, causing frequent cycling. Now,
when the compressor first starts, power is used not to begin cooling
yet, first the pressure needs to build up in the system so that the
mechanics begin to cool. So this is really inefficient operation,
unavoidable but inefficient.
With the fridge loaded with items, the items will hold the temperature
more constant than just air, so less wasteful cycling will occur.
Ron
Ronald La Borde - Metairie, Louisiana - rlabor@lsumc.edu
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 17 Jul 1998 12:33:11 -0700 (PDT)
From: Alan Edwards <ale@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: a better starter method?
Steve Alexander asks:
> Anyone have a better starter method ?
I have a *simpler* method:
I'm going focus on the mechanics and avoid theory of when to oxygenate,
and when to decant and add fresh wort, and how soon after that is optimal
for pitching. I'll leave that to the more knowledgeable. I don't worry
about such things, and always make great beer, IMHO. (Except that time
that I cultured yeast from the beer from the taps at a brewpub...don't
ever do that! (bacteria))
I wanted to take this opportunity to show those of you who think making
a starter is a hassle, that it doesn't have to be hard at all! If you
don't make starters, please have a look--it's easy (and important).
And for those of you who do, maybe you'll find this method a bit easier.
The reason it's a bit easier is that you boil and ferment in the same vessel:
1) Put 3/4c dried extract and a several hop cones in a 1000ml
Erlenmeyer (sp?) flask. Add water to reach 800ml. (SG: 1.040-1.045)
2) Simmer the wort on your gas kitchen stove for about 1/2 hour.
Strain out the hops at the midpoint(+). Keep a close eye on it--
avoid boilover. (You would risk breaking the flask on an electric
stove; maybe it would work with some sort of spacer.)
3) Cover the top of the flask with aluminum foil before boil (simmer)
is finished.
4) Allow to cool (or force it in an ice-water bath)
4) Pitch your yeast(*) and cover with #9 stopper with an airlock.
(Shake it gently to oxygenate--make foam.)
5) 2-4 days later, pitch it! (Taste it first!)
(+) Taste the wort to see if you put the right amount of hops in.
You'll do better next time!
(*) If I'm not brewing to a particular style, I pitch the dregs
from a few bottles of Sierra Nevada Pale Ale. (Flame the lip
of the bottle before pouring.) Great yeast--clean and flocculent!
It is SO EASY to culture from SNPA bottles, that I rarely buy
yeast. (I don't usually brew a particular style.)
The beauty of this is you only need to sanitize the stopper and airlock!
Quick, easy and effective!
-Alan in Fremont
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 17 Jul 1998 14:42:06 -0500
From: rlabor@lsumc.edu (LaBorde, Ronald)
Subject: RE: Tempeture of Corny Keg.
From: Badger Roullett <branderr@microsoft.com>
>How do I tell what temperature the liquid in the keg is, with out
opening the
>keg and exposing it to infection?
You can buy from Radio Shack, for about $15, a digital thermometer with
internal and external probes. Sometimes it goes on sale for less.
I just use plastic electrical tape to tape the probe to the carboy or
corny keg and the thin wire can easily pass over the door gasket. Works
great, and you don't even need to open the door to read the temp.
Ron
Ronald La Borde - Metairie, Louisiana - rlabor@lsumc.edu
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 17 Jul 1998 16:03:13 -0400
From: Jeff Pharr <pharr@metsci.com>
Subject: Fermenting carboys
Robert Buchanan asks in HBD #2770 if multiple carboys can be produced by
placing broken carboy pieces in a plastic fermentation bucket...
No, no, no! Carboy reproduction is not nearly so simple. For starters,
it requires both a carboy and a cargirl as well as the proper lighting
and mood. Cargirls are hard to find these days because they are not
legal to sell or posses. Just think of the mess that could result from
a cargirl getting too close to one of your carboys during fermentation.
This is just one more reason to carefully sterilize your carboys before
filling them with wort.
Now the plastic carboys are another story altogether...
Just wasting a little bandwidth,
- --Jeff
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 17 Jul 1998 13:20:04 -0700 (PDT)
From: Scott Murman <smurman@best.com>
Subject: hallucigenic botulism
Longtime readers of the HBD may find this article interesting. Then
again, long time readers of the HBD may find this article cause for
rolling their eyes towards the heavens and muttering under their
breath. Or both.
http://dailynews.yahoo.com/headlines/health/story.html?s=z/
reuters/980715/health/stories/bot12_1.html
Botulism linked to peyote use
NEW YORK, Jul 15 (Reuters) -- Peyote stored in a jar for months
before it was ingested caused three recent cases of botulism among
members of the Native American Church, according to a report in
the July 16th issue of The New England Journal of Medicine.
<snip>
your botulism detective,
SM
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 17 Jul 1998 14:15:18 -0700
From: Michael Rose <mrose@ucr.campus.mci.net>
Subject: re: Balanced dispensing
Mark Swenson writes;
> Now I have made a German Weiss beer and would like to produce a glass
> of sparkling beer. I have read that 3.5 volumes of CO2 is appropriate
> for the style and I am keeping the beer at about 50F, so this requires
> about 30 psi to carbonate. No amount of fiddle would allow me to
> dispense with the 3' length of 1/4" ID tubing I was using, so I went to
> the archives and learned about balancing the system. I have dutifully
> bought 2 x 10' of 3/16" ID tubing to experiment with.
>
>
> Rather than experiment on the Weiss, which my wife loves (even with
> most of the gas removed during the dispense) and which I don't really
> plan to brew very often, I began to experiment on an ale that I cannot
> find room for in my refrigerator. It is at 80F (the temp inside my
> *air conditioned* home here in Miami) so 26 psi are required to
> carbonate to 2.0 volumes of CO2. I carbonated it, let it sit a few
> days and checked with a pressure gauge to find it at 23 psi. Not bad.
> I hooked up 20' of 3/16" ID tubing (2 10' lengths spliced with a
> male/male barbed connector), attach the CO2 at 25 psi and let her rip.
> It's like a fire hose! Nothing but foam. Turn off the gas and the
> result is the same. Why am I not getting the resistance from the hose
> (which is beverage hose obtained from homebrew shops)?
>
Mark, you have several possible problems.
1.I don't think CO2 stays in solution at 80f. You will need to lower
the temp before going any farther.
2. Asuming that the beer is at a cooler temp, procede as follows;
1. If the beer is dispensing at proper presure, just foams alot, then
you have the right 3/16 tubing but its probably getting warm over that
long draw. Put tubing in ice bath when dispencing.
2. If the beer is dispensing at too high a presure then you have wrong
tubing or incorrect length.
> Scott Murman writes;
> In my post about European glasses containing measuring lines, I was
> confused by a factor of 10.
This would be a good sig line!
Michael Rose Riverside, CA mrose@ucr.campus.mci.net
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 17 Jul 1998 14:12:13 -0700
From: "Bryan L. Gros" <gros@bigfoot.com>
Subject: scaling up batches
Samuel Mize wrote:
>> From: David Rinker <drinker@mci2000.com>
>> Subject: Recipie percentages and specialty malts
>...
>> Rather than clarifying things for me, this information makes it seem
>> like I should add a disproportionately *greater* amount of specialty
>> malts as either my efficiency drops or as my volume increases...
>
>I would expect their larger batches to be more efficient, not less. Aren't
>large, commercial-type systems more efficient? So scaling up they might
>increase the proportion of specialty grains, since they're getting MORE
>extract from each pound of pale malt.
I talked to Dave Miller about scaling up batches, since he's scaled up
several homebrew recipes to brewpub-sized batches. He says that
when you get up to barrels, you get better efficiency from the hops
and worse from the specialty grains (hope I've got that in the right
direction). So you have to know your system and adjust accordingly--
you can't just scale the entire recipe up from five gallons to 400
gallons or whatever.
- Bryan
Bryan Gros gros@bigfoot.com
Oakland, CA
Visit the new Draught Board homebrew website:
http://www.valhallabrewing.com/~thor/dboard/index.htm
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 17 Jul 1998 14:52:08 -0700
From: "RANDY ERICKSON" <RANDYE@mid.org>
Subject: RESULTS: Summer Cap-Off '98
It's a Cap-Off, Jack!
The Stanislaus Hoppy Cappers, Ceres, California held Summer Cap-Off 1998
on Sunday, July 12, 1998.
See the results at http://www.jps.net/randye/winner98.htm .
Congratulations to Jim Johnson for his Best-of-Show Belgian Trippel!
Thanks to all judges and stewards who braved the heat and turned out to
help, you did a great job!
If you are on the winners list and know that you won't be attending the
awards party on July 25th, call organizer Wayne Baker at (209) 538-BREW or
BarleyLW@aol.com to have your scoresheets and ribbons mailed early.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 17 Jul 1998 18:09:15 EDT
From: Poris@aol.com
Subject: grain balance
Hi,
BG Micro (an electronics surplus dealer) has a great deal on used Pitney
Bowes postal balances. 16 ounce capacity with 0.1 ounce readability. Great
for grain using multiple measurements but might be a little crude for hops.
The weighing tray is about 7" by 9" and the price is $10. Their phone number
is 1 800 276 2206 to order or 972 271 9834 for tech support. Web page is
http://www.bgmicro.com/
Jaime
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 17 Jul 1998 17:44:26 -0500
From: Vincent Voelz <voelzv@winternet.com>
Subject: South African sorghum beer?
I recently picked up an old copy of Zymurgy (1994) in which they describe
the brewing of sorghum beer, and now I'm really eager to taste some!
Every liquor store I ask doesn't have any in stock (go figure), and has no
idea where they could even order it from. Does anyone know of a source
where I could obtain sorghum beer? What sort of beers are out there (and
obtainable)? It seems like there shouls at least be SOME distributor in
the U.S. I could order some from...
Also, any additional info on sorghum beer in general would be most welcome.
I'm still mostly in the dark on this style....
Thanks,
Vincent Voelz
voelzv@winternet.com
http://www.winternet.com/~voelzv
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 17 Jul 1998 18:15:43 -0500 (CDT)
From: Al Korzonas <korz@xnet.com>
Subject: fear
Bruce writes:
>Newbie question, only second batch attempt. First some background: 5
>gallons extract Dry Stout in the primary, 35 hours into fermentation,
>airlock bubbling 40+ times per minute. I chose to rack to secondary at
>this point with the reasoning that the wort needed to come off excess
>trub ASAP (I was not able to strain much out as it first went into the
>primary and advice was that this was not good). I had trouble with the
>siphon hose (1st attempt) and ended pouring into secondary using funnel
>w/strainer. Needless to say I introduced much O2 into the batch during
>this transfer. Also it seems to have killed the wonderful bubbling
>ferment. Have I also killed this entire batch? Any salvation tips, I
>pray?
Firstly, the reason that the siphon kept stopping is because the CO2
that would come out of solution would make a big bubble in the hose,
right? The solution is to increase the difference in height between
the source and destination... this will keep the flow fast and when
the bubble forms (and it will) it will get pushed down into the
destination container.
When you say "I was not able to strain much out" I presume you mean
hops... Back when I used to use pellets (my system is quite different
now), I used hop bags. These were actually straining bags made for
making fruit wines, but I used them for hops. They have a fine mesh.
They are made from nylon, I'm told, but they are white. They kept
95% of the hops out of the wort. I added 10% more hops to account for
the bags and this seems to have given me something similar to predicted
bitterness (i.e. I guessed right that I should add 10% more hops).
Regarding your aeration during fermentation, this will not *kill* this
batch. What it will do is increase the amount of diacetyl that is
produced and as a result, your beer will be quite buttery-flavoured.
If you don't like butterscotch this will be a problem, but it is not
technically a stylistic fault (many stouts are quite buttery).
Finally, your fermentation appears to have stopped *probably* because
of one of two reasons:
1. you knocked a lot of CO2 out of solution and the beer has to get
re-saturated with CO2 for it to begin bubbling out again, or
2. the first night after your transfer, the fermentation was so active
that the beer simply finished fermenting (you missed all the action).
While not "killed," this is not the very best way to treat your beer.
It will be good for a while, but because of oxidation, it will tend to
stale much faster than if you would have siphoned. I recommend that you
consume this batch as quickly because it will soon show the effects
of oxidation. An example of a beer made almost exactly like yours
(except that it is made with oats and it is not as dry) is Samuel
Smith's Oatmeal Stout. It is intentionally aerated during fermentation.
Al.
Al Korzonas, Palos Hills, IL
korz@xnet.com
http://www.brewinfo.com/brewinfo/
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 17 Jul 1998 19:53:03 -0400
From: Jonathan Edwards <jdedward@us.ibm.com>
Subject: brewing an imperial stout for competitions
hey now,
usually when i brew, i brew for the unadulterated pleasure of it. now i want to
brew for competitions. i've got a pretty good pale ale recipe i'll use and i'm
developing an imperial stout...i'd like your help on the recipe. never brewed
one all grain before so it's a first. here's my recipe:
15 lb. British pale
.5 lb. Belgian aromatic
1 lb. American crystal 120L
.75 lb. Roasted barley
1.5 lb. Flaked wheat
.50 lb. American chocolate
1.5 oz. Nugget (12% AA, 60 min.)
1 oz. Kent Goldings (5% AA, 45 min.)
1 oz. Kent Goldings (5% AA, 30 min.)
based on 70% efficiency...which unfortunately is my norm...will give me an og
for 6 gallons of 1.083.
ibu's should be about 70. my concern is that the aha description describes
roasted flavor but not overwhelming.
should i use more or less of the roasted barley? i figure .75lb would give me
some good flavor and
the .50lb of chocolate would give me color without that overlly roasted
character.
do the hops look okay? any comments appreciated...remember that i'm brewing
this for competition so
any help you could give me would be appreciated. i plan to rack this onto a
yeast cake of wyeast
1056 of a 1.06 or so ale. i'm also going to hit it with about a minute of pure
oxygen.
thanks once again,
Jonathan
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 17 Jul 1998 22:21:04 -0500
From: Kurjanski <kurjan@adams.net>
Subject: Tubing
As I was walking through the Home Depot tonight I came across 3/8 inch
vinyl tubing in the plumbing section. Is this the same tubing that I
buy at the local homebrew supply shop? How can I tell if it is food
grade?
My local homebrew supply shop is closing its doors shortly and it would
sure be nice if I can replace my tubing on occasion with the Home Depot
variety.
Thanks,
Paul in Quincy
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 18 Jul 1998 02:19:47 -0700
From: "Michael O. Hanson" <mhanson@winternet.com>
Subject: Starter Aeration/Short Lag Time Questions/Under Carbonation
I am responding to three previous posts. The first had to do with aerating
yeast starters after the sugar is used up. I would advise against aerating
starters after the sugar is used up. This may result in some oxidation.
If you want to keep the yeast going, I would suggest adding more starter
solution as well as aerating your starter. The yeast will use up
additional oxygen more readily in the presence of sugar. This will also
increase the number of yeast cells you pitch into your wort and should
decrease the lag time. Sugars of various kinds are present in wort. Yeast
uses sugar in the presence of oxygen. The exposure of alcohol pitched into
wort or in a starter along with yeast to oxygen after aeration is likely to
be less than in an aerated starter containing alcohol and no sugar.
The second had to do with aeration of wort. The theory is that aerating
wort will give the yeast oxygen. This allows them to engage in aerobic
respiration, which is more efficient than anaerobic respiration. This
increases yeast reproduction and the number of yeast cells. This is
probably the main factor influencing decisions on wort aeration. This idea
is covered in at least twenty books on brewing including the AHA Style
Series and is a preferred method of shortening lag times.
The third had to do with under carbonation. Iodine will kill yeast. Use
of Iodophor may have killed the yeast if the bottles were not rinsed.
Iodophor contains iodine. I don't know if the amount of iodine left in the
bottles would have been enough to kill yeast.
It may have been that the amount of priming sugar was insufficient to
produce the desired amount of carbonation. An easy way to check this would
be to determine whether you had any carbonation at all. If there is
carbonation, I would suspect insufficient priming sugar.
My suggestions would be to rinse bottles with clean water and check the
amount of priming sugar. Based on statements indicating that beer was
under carbonated, my first guess would be that insufficient priming sugar
was used.
Keep up the good work. I have learned a good deal from the Homebrew Digest.
Mike Hanson
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 18 Jul 1998 08:14:09 -0400
From: dbgrowler@juno.com (michael w bardallis)
Subject: Carbonation/HBDers in the flesh
Keith asks about carbonation in his Wit & Grand Cru-
Our club, Downriver Brewers Guild, made a 15 gallon batch of American
brown ale a couple of years ago, and about 1/3 of them failed to
condition. Though we had not tracked each bottle from production through
consumption (that's a lot of radio transmitter collars), the flat ones
seemed to be the ones that had been sanitized in iodophor, and drained
without rinsing (bottle procurement and prep chores were divided between
two brewers).
Also, assuming the beers were reasonably still at bottling, 2/3 cup of
priming sugar may be a tad low for an effervescent beer like a wit; I'd
be trying about 1 cup.
Mark T. talks about how nice it is to meet other HBDers in person. How
many of us will I see in Portland?
Mike Bardallis
Only 4 more days....
_____________________________________________________________________
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com
Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 18 Jul 1998 10:33:31 -0500 (CDT)
From: Samuel Mize <smize@mail.imagin.net>
Subject: Schmidling; percentages; bar measures; oxygen and lag; CP filling; zest
Greetings to all.
The Holders ask:
>Who or what is Jack Schmidling and why does someone name Jack Schmidling
>post it?
The guy's batty. There's even a movie about it. (He made it.) That WAS
you, wasn't it Jack? Is it still available, maybe on video by now?
- - - - - - - - - -
On grist percentage:
Remember, the question was not which is BETTER, but which was most likely
used in a random recipe. For trading recipes between systems and brewers,
the percent of grist version is close enough (given differences in boil and
fermentation), and is frequently used in informal exchange of recipes.
Many recipes are stated by people like me, who often wing the whole
question of expected points and efficiency. OTOH, we're less likely to
mess with percentage-statements too. People who are Really Serious about
precisely describing a wort use percent of extract.
When you see a recipe that gives percentages without specifying, you'll
have to evaluate the source and guess what this particular person was
probably talking about.
Let's agree that, when you state a recipe by percentages, you should say
which method you're using.
Of course, if you want to compute a recipe for your own system, where the
post-mash variables will be constant between batches and you know what they
are, the percent of extract version is more precise.
- - - - - - - - - -
On measures:
It's been noted on rec.crafts.brewing that there already ARE laws about
serving shorter measures than you claim. If a bar claims to sell "pints,"
but doesn't, you can call the state bureau of weights and measures and turn
them in. The typical result is that they start calling them "large" instead
of "pints," it's unlikely to affect the actual size or price.
I agree with Scott Murman that the seller should state the size. I think
this would be better addressed with market pressure than with a law.
- - - - - - - - - -
Scott Murman writes:
> Where did this notion that oxygenating the wort will reduce lag times
> get started?
I think the home-brewing community was noticing how much aeration helps,
about the same time that they were figuring out that the typical home
brewer was grossly underpitching yeast.
If you have too few yeast (too few yeasts? too little yeast?)
Anyway, without added oxygen, yeast can only reproduce for a few generations.
So with an underoxygenated AND underpitched batch, the lag and fermentation
will take much longer, because you wind up with a too-small colony.
The better approach to reducing lag times IS pitching adequate yeast. As
you point out, oxygenation DOES have other benefits. But historically,
people DID get shorter lags by oxygenating, because they were underpitching.
- - - - - - - - - -
Alan in Fremont asks about counter-pressure filling. I've never done it,
but I note you don't specify the temperature at which you're working. Some
people chill very cold and transfer WITHOUT CO2 counter-pressure, and still
get adequate carbonation.
- - - - - - - - - -
Tom Puskar is buying.
According to The Joy of Cooking (November 1981 edition) the zest is "the
gratings of the colorful outer coatings of lemons, oranges, tangerines and
limes."
Since you're settling a bet, I figured you'd want a fairly authoritative
reference.
Same source says you should "[u]se only the colored portion of the citrus
skins; the white beneath is bitter." Try tasting a little of each.
Best,
Sam Mize
- --
Samuel Mize -- smize@imagin.net (home email) -- Team Ada
Fight Spam: see http://www.cauce.org/ \\\ Smert Spamonam
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #2772, 07/20/98
*************************************
-------
