Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #2787
HOMEBREW Digest #2787 Tue 04 August 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:
Re: Improving beer through bigger starters ("George De Piro")
Gushers,forced fermentation, Clinitest ("David R. Burley")
jim liddil's post #2784 (tonja and kevin eichelberger)
Proper Iodophor Temp. (Domenick Venezia)
A Canning Question / A Propane Question (MaltyDog)
Proper storage of malt. (Matthew House)
Schmidling Productions, Inc.... New Web Location (Jack Schmidling)
Jack Bashing ("Bob Zamites")
Re: Pitching temps - second thought (Dion Hollenbeck)
RE:inactivity ("Grant W. Knechtel")
holes in my fridge (Robert Johnson)
Irish Moss vs Carrageenan (Fred Johnson)
pH Data (Fred Johnson)
Re-Pitching after using Polyclar (rpm2nite)" <rpm2nite@ten.net>
Re: High Temp. Wheat Beer Ferments (Jim Bentson)
Amstel Lager in the Netherland Antilles ("Scott W. Nowicki")
sweet potato (JohanNico)" <JohanNico.Aikema@akzonobel.com>
Re: artistic pitching rates re-visited (Scott Murman)
bottle conditioning ("arne seeger")
hop questions ("Paul E. Lyon")
Brewery Finance 201 (Results)
re: extract FAN/fusels/O2/beer inductors/starters/top-fermenters (Jeff)
Forced Aging? (Paul Ward)
Lifting Carboys (Mark_Snyder)
Use of OAK in brewing (ALAN KEITH MEEKER)
Women Brewers (Monika Schultz)
Starter gravity (Dave Humes)
There will be a Sunday Digest this week...
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: Sun, 02 Aug 98 08:55:30 PDT
From: "George De Piro" <gdepiro@fcc.net>
Subject: Re: Improving beer through bigger starters
Hi all,
Alan wants to pitch a large starter, but is concerned about pitching 10%
of a foreign wort into the main batch. He asks if you can just pitch the
dregs from the starter.
You can just pitch the dregs, but unless the starter is fermented out,
that will
cut the cell count and select only for the cells that flocculate early.
If you
were to repeat this several times with the same batch of yeast, you could
end up with a yeast population that floccs too early.
To maximize the number of cells pitched while minimizing the amount of
alien wort going into the main batch, constantly aerate the starter
(using an
aquarium pump) and/or agitate it constantly (using a stir plate). Allow
it to
ferment out, decant off most of the liquid, and feed it a small amount
of wort.
Once this is active (or soon thereafter), pitch it.
This process will take longer than your average starter, but it really
doen't require
much effort (the yeast are the ones doing most of the work). It is an
easy way to
improve your beer tremendously.
Have fun!
George De Piro (Nyack, NY)
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 2 Aug 1998 09:41:05 -0400
From: "David R. Burley" <Dave_Burley@compuserve.com>
Subject: Gushers,forced fermentation, Clinitest
Brewsters:
Last week or so George DePiro and Jim Liddil and Al Korzonas
all addressed the problem of not knowing when the fermentation
is finished. George and Jim both opted for a forced fermentation
at 80F to help Charlie determine the fermentation endpoint of a new
batch of Stout ( I think).
On a different subject, without offering a solution, AlK said:
"As for when you should rack out from under this pancake of yeast,
the question is: "is the beer done?" Better put: "Have I gotten
enough attenuation?" Part of this is determined by knowing what
your expected apparent attenuation is for this yeast and calculating
it. No fermentation is perfectly clean and if you leave too much
fermentable sugar in the beer, you'll have gushers eventually."
Forced fermentations may offer a clue to when the fermentation will be
furnished, but are subject to indeterminate errors. Remember that
this same forced fermentation method is also used to determine the
stability of the beer, as a check for unwanted bacterial fermentation.
Bacteria function better at elevated temperatures, so likely any even
slightly infected beer will give an FG dependent on the bacterial content
as contrasted to a fermentation that was carried out at cooler
temperatures.
AlK also brings up the other issue that certain yeasts like Ringwood
and Samuel Smith's require rousing to bring the beer to completion.
This implies of course that the fermentation is vessel and agitation
dependent as well as dissolved CO2 dependent and therefore
temperature dependent. Ergo, the smaller test bottle at a higher
temperature may give a different result from the larger vessel. Finally,
there is a need to bring the beer back to near the temperature of the
brew, so that a highly accurate FG can be determined. As we have
often pointed out in the past, accurate determination of the FG of a
beer full of CO2 is not hydrometry at its finest. In fact, it is full of
errors
as a method of determining the FG because of the bubbles of gas
that cling to the hydrometer. Worst of all these errors are in the wrong
direction, since the readings of the hydrometer will be higher and lead
the brewer to conclude that the main batch is finished when it is not.
AlK also suggests that we, who make many different kinds of beer,
actually know what the FG is ahead of time. If we were Budweiser
or used only extracts, this could be an acceptable method, perhaps,
but we aren't and don't. The whole point of this hobby for most
homebrewers is to make all kinds of beers with various
( intentional or accidental) mash temperature profiles and yeast that
behave differently. As a result, we almost never know what the final
FG will be, since we have no experience. Given this, how do we know
what the expected FG is supposed to be?
Actually you don't care what the FG is supposed to be, but as AlK
points out to know "Is the beer done?" This is another way of saying
"Are there any more fermentable sugars in the beer?"
Forced fermentations are probably very useful to determine if
your beer will have a shelf life (most often we don't care) and to
evaluate your basic cleanliness in your preparation. However, I believe
they are a cumbersome, 1800s, time consuming and full
of error method of determining a fermentation endpoint. Worst of all
these errors are indeterminate and vary from batch to batch.
Clinitest is superior to this forced fermentation/hydrometer method
for this purpose of determining "Is the beer done?", since it directly
determines the state of sugars in the beer and not the specific gravity
which is only marginally related to the (total) sugar content. One
minute to run this simple test and you know exactly the state of the
fermentable sugar content of your beer at that point in time.
Visit your local pharmacy for a Clinitest Kit and actually know the
current status of the fermentation near the endpoint without having
to wait days for a suspect result. If you use Clinitest you will never
have to worry about gushers
Keep on brewin'
Dave Burley
Kinnelon, NJ 07405
103164.3202@compuserve.com
Dave_Burley@compuserve.com
Voice e-mail OK
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 01 Aug 1998 09:10:08 -0500
From: tonja and kevin eichelberger <tkeich@falcon.cc.ukans.edu>
Subject: jim liddil's post #2784
I was skimming through the digest, and wanted to add a couple of thoughts
on ph and its measurement. Having had some concern over low ph readings at
high temperatures, I have since changed my methods of taking the readings.
Siebel has noted that "by convention, when a ph value is mentioned in
brewing the ph would be the ph that the material would have at room
temperature." I have found that atc ph meters, read much more accurately at
room temp. The probe is a highly sensitive piece, and undoubtedly will have
a longer life when taking readings at room temp. Its my understanding that
the reasoning behind the lower ph at the higher temp is that hydrogen ions
dissasociate with h2o molecules and acids and go into solution. Higher
concentrations of hydrogen ions in solution will give you a lower ph
reading. Is it true that only the "reading" is changing, and not the actual
ph? On another note, when stirring yeast on a stir plate with a magnetic
stir bar, you will generate heat. I like to use three rubber stoppers to
elevate the beaker. Although rather expensive, orbital shakers make a good
alternative for aerating yeast for propagation or forced fermentation.
Respectfully,
Kevin Eichelberger
Lawrence, Ks.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 2 Aug 1998 07:24:51 -0700 (PDT)
From: Domenick Venezia <demonick@zgi.com>
Subject: Proper Iodophor Temp.
Tim Burkhart <tburkhart@dridesign.com> asks:
>What is the optimum water temperature for the use of Iodophor?
I don't know the optimum "killing" temp for iodophor, but I'd guess that
the hotter the water the better in terms of killing quickly.
However, Iodophor should be used in cold water. Since iodine is EXTREMELY
volatile - a solid piece will sublimate in just minutes to hours - it acts
more like a dissolved gas, and will quickly evaporate out of a warm/hot
solution. In some ways iodine is like dry ice only slower.
Domenick Venezia demonick at zgi dot com
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 2 Aug 1998 10:42:22 EDT
From: MaltyDog@aol.com
Subject: A Canning Question / A Propane Question
I have a couple of quick, unrelated questions for
the group en masse:
I have canned wort starters for some years.
When I first started doing it, I picked up
jars from a local hardware store, with no
instructions, and read a little about canning
in homebrew books, but I didn't know
everything there was to know about
standard canning techniques.
The above is mentioned just so you
realize the habit I'm about to mention
didn't come about because I'm
incredibly cheap, just ignorant.
Anyway, I didn't know you were
supposed to replace the lids
everytime you canned! I have
reused the lids many times,
and I never had any problem with
them. They sealed properly several
times, the wort seemed fine, etc.
So I wonder exactly why you're
not supposed to reuse the lids. If you're
boiling & pressure cooking them,
well, they become sterile, don't
they? Or am I missing something?
On the propane front. I just ordered
an outdoor cooker, which I should
receive momentarily. I purchased
and filled a propane tank. I was
wondering how many batches of
beer those of you who do this regularly
get out of one tank. I was
thinking of getting one of those
adaptors to attaching one of the
mini disposable propane cans,
which I always have around for
yeast culturing, because I'd
hate to run out of propane in
the middle of a brewday, and
I really don't want to have 2
of those monster propane tanks
in my house-or rather, my
back yard-1 is scary enough!
Thanks for any input,
Bill Coleman
Brooklyn, NY
MaltyDog@aol.com
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 02 Aug 1998 11:01:58 -0400
From: Matthew House <mthouse@concentric.net>
Subject: Proper storage of malt.
Scott Bickhams article in the latest issue of Brewing Techniques
mentions the proper storage of malt as a way to stave off some of the
fatty/soapy flavors discussed. Can someone enlighten me as to the
proper storage of malt? I am storing it in my basement, 50F-60F,
contained in the usual mesh grain bags.
Matt House
Midland, MI
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 02 Aug 1998 10:07:54 -0700
From: Jack Schmidling <arf@mc.net>
Subject: Schmidling Productions, Inc.... New Web Location
We are moving our Homebrew page to our local ISP and combining it with
our Astronomy Page. We have a new Home Page which should make it
painless to get where you want to go.
This change is effective immediately but a referral will be provided
at the old url for one year.
We ask that anyone with links to our pages, please make necessary
corrections. I would also like to take this opportunity to thank
Keith Royster for getting us off the ground on the WWW and wish
him the best of luck.
js
Visit our WEB pages: http://user.mc.net/arf
ASTROPHOTO OF THE WEEK..... New Every Monday
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 2 Aug 1998 11:32:56 -0600
From: "Bob Zamites" <bamzam@trail.com>
Subject: Jack Bashing
For some reason, Sam Mize feels the need to attack Jack Schmidling:
>ordering info AND info on how to make your own. (That dirty
>money-grubber, it's got to be a trick somehow...)
Well Sam, I personally find that anyone who uses this forum as a
venue for attacking others is acting like a schoolyard bully. Take your beef
with Jack to private e-mail instead.
Jack took time out to call me back one night (on his dime...not exactly
a money-grubber's attitude) and walked me through, step-by-step, my
first lauter with a newly purchased EasyMasher. I had gotten a stuck
run-off, and w/o Jack's help, I would have been in a fix.
Any response that anyone has to this post, please private e-mail me.
Bob Zamites (First Fire Brewing Co.) Santa Fe, NM
------------------------------
Date: 02 Aug 1998 11:18:49 -0700
From: Dion Hollenbeck <hollen@woodsprite.com>
Subject: Re: Pitching temps - second thought
>> Samuel Mize writes:
Sam> Dion commented on pitching ale yeast at 82F, and Sam Mize replied
Sam> that this was a little hot. What a maroon. It's warm for
Sam> fermentation, but should be fine for pitching if the batch cools
Sam> to fermentation temperature in a few hours. I haven't seen
Sam> advice suggesting that an ale needs to be pitched cooler than
Sam> that. Heck, *I* pitch at that kind of temp, so it *must* be
Sam> right.
Dion concurs. After 5 days in primary, I racked to secondary and took
gravity reading. After that, sampled the result. No off flavors at
all. And yes, the wort did cool down to 72F in a couple of hours
after pitching.
dion
- --
Dion Hollenbeck Email: hollen@woodsprite.com
Home Page: http://woodsprite.com/hollen.html
Brewing Page: http://hdb.org/hollen
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 02 Aug 1998 11:34:25 -0700
From: "Grant W. Knechtel" <GWK@hartcrowser.com>
Subject: RE:inactivity
Earl asked in Homebrew Digest 2785:
-Snip-
I am a new homebrewer and just did my first batch Weds night. It is now
Fri. morning and still have no activity. I followed the directions to the
letter. Any suggestions, should I wait longer, repitch more yeast, please
help????
-Snip-
Some more information would be helpful, such as what type of fermenter
you're using, what your recipe was, and what type of yeast you pitched.
I'll make a stab at your problem anyway. Most new homebrewers start with
an extract recipe, plastic bucket fermenter and dry yeast. Some
possibilities are:
1. your ferment has started since you posted Friday and is proceeding
normally. Don't do anything different than originally planned for this
batch. Take steps to reduce lag time for your next batch.
2. your ferment proceeded normally but the leaky lid of your plastic
bucket didn't allow enough pressure to build to bubble through your
airlock. If there's foam (kraeusen) on top of your fermenting beer, or
kraeusen stuck to the fermenter sides above the beer, where it rose before
subsiding, this was probably the case. Proceed as for 1.
3. If you used liquid yeast but didn't make a starter, the long delay, or
lag time, is due to the yeast needing to multiply many times before
there's enough yeast to ferment. Make a starter next time. There are
instructions on the Wyeast packs, at the Wyeast.com web site or search HBD
archives or the Brewery library.
4. you used dry yeast but didn't rehydrate before pitching. Symptoms are
much the same as pitching liquid yeast without making a starter. Osmotic
pressure on dry yeast cells attempting to rehydrate in heavy, sugar-laden
wort kills a large part of the cells. Try the Lallemand.com website for
tips on use of dry yeast. I can email you instructions for yeast starters
and rehydrating, if you're web impaired.
5. you may have pitched yeast into wort at too high temperature, over ca.
110 F. and killed or seriously impaired the yeast, or your yeast packet
had been mishandled before purchase, killing it. Try repitching a
rehydrated yeast packet, use a different source and/or type if you suspect
your purchased pack. This is another advantage of making a starter, you
*know* the yeast is viable before committing your valuable wort to it.
No doubt others will post some good thoughts on your ferment. I was
fortunate to start brewing by taking a night class mentored by some
experienced homebrewers. Finding a class or a club where you can interact
with others more experienced will help a lot with those first time
jitters. Reading the Homebrew Digest every day will also help, but it's
not always on point for the problem you have at the moment. The Brewery
BBS is also a good source for more-or-less real time interaction online.
Naturally, information from there as with anywhere online needs filtering
through your common sense.
I'd also recommend you purchase a good beginning homebrewing book, Al
Korzonas' "Homebrewing Volume 1" is excellent, and is available from his
website at http://www.brewinfo.com/brewinfo/ I have found it to be
better (more correct, thorough and complete) than the widely available
books from Papazian and Miller, although I own several of those as well.
No affiliation with any commercial entities noted above, just a satisfied
customer, of course. Good luck, and Prost!
-Grant
Neue Des Moines Hausbrauerei
Des Moines, Washington
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 2 Aug 1998 12:40:12 -0600 (MDT)
From: Robert Johnson <robertcj@lamar.ColoState.EDU>
Subject: holes in my fridge
I recently acquired a used Frigidaire refrigerator with a freezer on top,
and the fridge part below. I will be keeping the CO2 tank outside of the
fridge and am interested in any suggestions as to where to drill the hole
for the gas line. A few suggestions, from different sources, would be
helpful, as I want to avoid using a method someone used successfully only
once, as this success may have been due to chance/luck in avoiding
coolant lines.
Thanks in advance,
Bob Johnson
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 01 Aug 1998 15:05:03 -0400
From: Fred Johnson <FLJohnson@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Irish Moss vs Carrageenan
It is my assumption that the ability of Irish moss (Chondrus crispus) to
precipitate proteins (and polyphenols?) resides in its content of
carageenan (also spelled carrageen or carragheen according to the
dictionary). I also assume that the carrageenan in Irish moss is
extracted from the Irish moss flakes (is there any other form?) by boiling
it, which I believe is part of the method of preparing carrageenan
commercially. If my assumptions are correct, why should I not use the
active ingredient, carrageenan, in my brewing instead of Irish moss?
- --
Fred L. Johnson
Apex, North Carolina
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 01 Aug 1998 15:41:31 -0400
From: Fred Johnson <FLJohnson@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: pH Data
I've heard much discussion about the conventional temperature at which pH
should be measured by the brewer, but I've never heard an answer to the
question, "How was the pH measured by the biochemist when he determined
that the pH optima for the enzyme?"
What is the convention among the biochemists of the temperature at which
one specifies the pH of the enzyme reaction being measure? And is this
the convention used by whomever determined the pH optima of the enzymes we
are dealing with? I really don't care what Miller or anybody else's standard
practice is. I want to know what the biochemist did when he studied the enzyme!
It seems that unless one has the answer to this last question, we're only
guessing as to the appropriate temperature at which pH should be measured
in the brewhouse.
- --
Fred L. Johnson
Apex, North Carolina
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 02 Aug 1998 20:47:54 -0400
From: "Rich Andel (rpm2nite)" <rpm2nite@ten.net>
Subject: Re-Pitching after using Polyclar
I was wondering if anyone has ever tried this. I meant to collect the yeast
from the primary but forgot and added polyclar to the secondary before kegging.
Do you think its possible to still gather up some yeast and re-pitch in my next
beer after using polyclar?
thanks,
Rich
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 02 Aug 1998 21:38:26 -0400
From: Jim Bentson <jbentson@longisland.com>
Subject: Re: High Temp. Wheat Beer Ferments
In HBD 2781 Tom Barnet wrote:
> I've brewed a few batches of wheat beer this summer and have been
>somewhat unsatisfied with the results. I've been employing a step-mash
>procedure, with rests at 100F,122F,155F and 170F, followed by a thorough
>sparge. I've made a starter with Wyeasts Weihenstephan yeast and have
>had strong fermentation. The flavor however does not seem to have the
>character i've read it should. For example, there isn't really any
>bannana or clove-like flavors, and there seems to be a somewhat bitter
>aftertaste--also some smoke-like flavor. I'm following the basic recipe in
>Warner's book on german wheat beer. The fermentation temperature was
>75-80F, and i'm wondering if this is the reason for the beers taste profile.
As many have already commented I too would be willing to bet that the
temperature is the problem. When I volunteered to work in a brewpub two
summers ago, I got "paid" either with finished beer or with 5-10 gallons
unfermented of whatever we brewed that day, which I then took home to
ferment and bottle. I loved their wheat beer brewed with the same ( 3068 )
yeast that you are using. Thus, I often took my" fresh from the kettle", 10
gal ration of this whenever available. Unfortunately I did not have a
refrigerator for fermenting at the time. Since it was the summer, my
fermentation temperatures also reached into the low to mid 80's. When
fermenting this wheat beer at home, I never got antwhere close to the
taste of the brewery's beer from the same batch. There was always a strong
raw taste I believe was due to Esters and/or Fusel Alcohol (bad vodka or
nail-polish like) and little of the banana taste.
I also found that the color from the high temp. ferment was decidedly
"greyer" than the beautiful orange shade that a good wheat beer has ( see
the cover photo of Warner's book).
When I started paying attention to temperature control of my summer
ferments, the taste and final color got a lot closer to what I wanted.
Wyeast gives 68 deg F as the optimal temperature for this yeast. At 80 deg,
I bet you had a real ferment gusher on your hands as I have found that this
yeast can qualify for emergency rocket fuel at around 78 deg F but behaves
OK when kept at around 65 to 68 deg F.
************************
In HBD 2874 George dePiro wrote:
>I asked Lyn Kruger at Siebels about doing alot of things on a homebrew scale.
Careful George. You can break a scale that way!!
*************
Jim Bentson
Centerport NY
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 3 Aug 1998 00:19:51 -0400
From: "Scott W. Nowicki" <nowicki@voicenet.com>
Subject: Amstel Lager in the Netherland Antilles
I've just recently returned from a vacation on Bonaire, in the Netherland
Antilles. The primary beer there is Amstel Lager, which is brewed on the
neighboring island, Curacao. I was wondering if anyone has any insight on
the brewing process/recipe for this variation of Amstel (versus the Dutch
Amstel). Has anyone ever toured the brewery in Curacao? All I really know
about it is that it is brewed with distilled seawater, according to age old
recipes from the Amstel Brewery in Amsterdam (as it says on the back label).
I'm curious if the water chemistry is adjusted to that of "Amsterdam water."
I have never actually had Amstel Lager (not Light) here in the US, as it's
kind of rare, so I really don't even know if the taste is different. Their
web page (http://www.amstel.nl/lounge/us/m0.html) says that it is now
available in the US, and that it is a bottom-fermenting lager beer, brewed
from ... malted barley, hops and water. This, of course, doesn't help much.
:-)
I would love to try to reproduce it for myself and my travel companions.
Perhaps even a recipe for a traditional Amstel Lager would get me started.
All-grain or extract.
Thanks,
Scott
Scott W. Nowicki
Holland, Pennsylvania USA
nowicki@voicenet.com
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 3 Aug 1998 07:45:40 +0200
From: "Aikema, J.N. (JohanNico)" <JohanNico.Aikema@akzonobel.com>
Subject: sweet potato
Hello Brewers,
Does anybody know if the innulin from sweet potato is converted into
fructose by the enzymes of barleymalt?
Did somebody used the sweet potato as adjunct? If so, was the beer
drinkable?
TIA, Hans Aikema
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 2 Aug 1998 22:49:50 -0700 (PDT)
From: Scott Murman <smurman@best.com>
Subject: Re: artistic pitching rates re-visited
Paul Niebergall wrote:
>
> Samuel Mize wrote:
> >"Dry yeast does contain about 50 times the yeast in a Wyeast pack, but
> >I still don't think it's enough for pitching directly. If you
> believe
> >your dry yeast is 100% viable (is that a big or little if these
> >days?), then 2 typical-sized packages (5g) would be about the minimum
> >for a 5 gal. batch. If you don't trust that your yeast is 100%
> >viable, then scale up from there. It's cheap and effective."
First of all, Sam Mize didn't write that snippet, I did. Paul then
tries to both mathematically and sarcastically prove that I'm being
overly zealous.
> Let*s see if we can follow this reasoning:
>
<snip>
> So if this is true, pitching two dried yeast packs is like pitching
> 100 regular sized (50 mL) smak paks, or the equivalent of a super-anal 5
> liter starter volume.
Your math looks correct Paul; a 5 liter starter volume would be about
right. Thank you for illuminating us further. I look forward to your
next contribution to the discussion.
> I think the yeast police are at it again!
>
> Paul Niebergall
I think most of us are just trying to help others by offering advice
based on experience, not trying to condemn others that have a
different view than ours.
SM (I guess I should be grateful he didn't call me a yeast fascist)
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 3 Aug 1998 00:11:21 -0600
From: "arne seeger" <seeger@pdrpip.com>
Subject: bottle conditioning
I bottle condition my ales using a fridge that I keep at 68 degrees. Once
my ales are carbonated I don't always have room for all that beer in my
other fridge, and I don't want to turn the fridge I keep at 68 down because
I want to ferment another batch. So my question is this- How long can I
safely keep bottled beer at 68 degrees? I need the fridge to ferment my
ales because living in New Mexico we experience about a 30 degree
difference in temp between day and night.
Thanks,
Arne Seeger
seeger@pdrpip.com
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 3 Aug 1998 09:16:44 -0400
From: "Paul E. Lyon" <lyon@osb1.wff.nasa.gov>
Subject: hop questions
I have 2 home grown hop questions:
1. I have a vine of Cascade which is covered with cones of various sizes.
I am having trouble understanding the books I have on the tests used to see
if the hops are ripe. I gently squeezed the cones to see if they are
"springy", as in they don't stay stuck together, and they seem to spring
back. I have cut a cone open to see that the lupins are present from the
center of the hops down to the stem, and they are. But I have also read
that the cones should be slightly yellow before they are ripe. My cones are
not yellowed at all, but just about as green the leaves. I don't want to
wait too long to harvest, but I don't to harvest hops that are too young
either. Is one test more determinate than another? For instance, should I
wait till they are yellowed, or is if fine to pick once the lupins are full
within the hops.
2. I have a vine of Fuggles that has cones, but only 2 per leaf breakout on
the vine, not clustered like on the vine of Cascade. Is this normal for
Fuggles? The cones on this vine are also quite small. They are all about
1/2" long and the leaves are very loose, more like flowers than like cones,
and my Cascade has cones as long as 2.5" and are tight like pine cones.
Could the number of cones and size of these cones on the Fuggles be caused
by a weak vine? The Fuggles didn't climb nearly as high as the Cascade
vine.
Thanks,
P.E.L.
- Paul E. Lyon EG&G Services Inc. -
- Ocean Color Research -
- lyon@osb.wff.nasa.gov -
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 03 Aug 1998 08:51:10 -0500
From: Results <results@win.bright.net>
Subject: Brewery Finance 201
Kyle Druey wrote:
>
> Isn't finance fun.
I haven't had so much fun since I was working for accountants..
> Depreciation is a fixed cost of production. At Viking, you don't have
> the G&A that the megas do, and you have more flexibility with expanding
> or contracting it, thus my point. Your depreciation, on a proportional
> basis of capital, should be similar to A/B's.
This is true. I get to use the same Depreciation schedules as the Big
Boys and therefore I'm paying about the same depreciation for scale
(give or take). What makes the difference is that the Big Boys have a
utilization rate much higher than the micros. They put a lot of beer
though the tanks and keep them full. At a micro you do less of that. We
don't do 7 day lagers ;-) Therefore the cost of that equipment (although
probably about the same on a time line) is higher on a volumetric basis.
Now as far as G&A, we beat the pants off someone like A/B...
> The equipment cost is irrelevant to production costs once you have
> purchased it, installed it, and are operating with it. This is a
> capital item, and was justified based on future production levels and
> sales and is not regarded as an operating cost or overhead. The more
> relevant term is your current financing costs (of the equipment
> purchase) per bbl and not the original equipment cost.
Yes and No. I used to militate this position frequently. What I found is
that there is real depreciation and there is IRS depreciation. The
former is based in physical reality, the later in political reality. I
hate the later. There is a real cost of equipment; it wears out (some of
it *real* slowly) and therefore there is a replacement cost. On very
slowly depreciating things, the cost of the capital far outweighs the
actual depreciation.. This is a real cost even if you didn't borrow the
money. You have to figure in what it cost you to put that money into
this venture as opposed to some safe investment like T-bills...
>
> >it is hard to expand substantially.
>
> Seems that these problems could be minimized with proper front end
> planning and designing your equipment so that the capacity can be
> eventually increased.
Capacity on the scale of a micro exhibits quantized effects. Brew houses
(the limiting sizing thing) come in specific sizes: 7, 10, 15, 30 and up
bbls. Within a range of size, you can move production around with
relative ease. Once you hit the ceiling imposed by the brew house, you
have to rip out that brewhouse and put in another (assuming that you
don't want to run two). This is what I mean by expanding sizes.
If you start up with a 15 bbl brewery in a 7 bbl market, you gots
problems for a long time to come.
> Hope you are not expanding into a mature competitive
> micro market and left holding the bag. The micro market needs more
> differentiable products, instead of the tidal wave of amber ales that I
> usually see now.
Actually we are in a rather strange market. We came up 2 years ago and
are the first micro within 100 miles. We are both ahead and behind the
curve here. Micro beers are a dime a dozen on the shelves (well, more
than that), but few people know what one is. The hoppy beers of the west
coast won't sell here at all. You can still find $0.25 tap beer.... We
came up very small and are expanding as we generate market. Always
watching our backside too since Leinenkugals is in our back yard.
> You got it almost right, the *Market* is more important than marketing.
> Marketing can't always expand or improve a market, but if the market is
> there you don't necessarily need the marketing.
I mostly agree with you. We have an add budget of about $100/month or
so. We do very little advertising and are using you assertion to it's
fullest. OTOH, people like A/B create market by application of huge
market dollars. This is the basis of lite beer.
>
> >- production capacity needs to reflect current and *future* markets.
>
> Agreed, but the future part of that statement is where one needs to be
> the most careful. And how does one identify that future part? You tell
> me, because I don't know!
Hmmm. People make plenty good money voicing some kind of opinion on
this. While the micro markets must be pretty well saturated on the west
coast, places like the midwest are definitely under done. I had someone
point out that while the large (micro?) like Sam Adams and Petes are in
trouble the smaller ones are continuing the climb... It'll be
interesting to see where it levels out.
> Only depends on who the "market" is. I don't know this, just a WAG, but
> it seems that the micros cater to a niche market. This niche has an
> educated beer pallet.
Absolutely True. The vast majority of drinkers in this country won't
touch a micro beer if offered one. We have a few people out here who
violate this dictum because we are the local brewery and they try it out
of curiosity / courtesy (and guess what? they like it!)... Maybe a third
of our market is the older W.W.II vets who remember what beer used to
taste like.
> Micros cater to a unique part of the beer market (see
> above) and do not IMO compete with A/B. If you think you are competing
> with A/B you need to change your business model!
Anyone who thinks they can compete with a large brewer is doomed. No we
don't complete with any of these things directly. We do compete for tap
handle space (not on product) with Leinies, which puts in a strange
position. The basic thing here is that a micro *can't hope* to compete
with even a regional brewer so they *must* differentiate themselves
greatly from those. In a crowded micro market, they probably have to
either step up the advertising or take an even narrower niche market.
Randy Lee
Viking Brewing Company
Dallas, WI
http://www.win.bright.net
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 3 Aug 1998 09:59:39 -0400 (EDT)
From: mcnallyg@gam83.npt.nuwc.navy.mil (Jeff)
Subject: re: extract FAN/fusels/O2/beer inductors/starters/top-fermenters
Hi All,
Al K. writes (quoting Laurel):
>Laurel writes:
>>In answer to Mark Swenson's question about dispensing from a keg at
>>relatively high pressure - you're right to use a longer dispense line,
>>but you might also try coiling it up several times (say, a 5-6" diameter
>>coil or as small as you can make it without kinking the tubing) to give
>>more back pressure.
>
>Are you sure about this? I don't see how coiling would increase back
>pressure... the fact is that flow is what causes the pressure drop.
>Is there an "inductor-like" effect (like coiling a wire)? No... there
>can't be... can there? An inductor works because a magnetic field is
>generated.
Yes, coiling the dispense line will increase the dynamic pressure loss
in the system. I can even provide a reference:
"A bend or curve in a pipe, as in Fig. 6.19, always induces a loss
larger than the simple Moody friction loss, due to flow separation at the
walls and a swirling secondary flow arising from the centripetal acceleration.
The loss coefficients K in Fig. 6.19 are for this additional bend loss."
Frank M. White, "Fluid Mechanics" second edition, McGraw-Hill, 1979, pg 334
Hoppy brewing,
Jeff
==========================================================================
Geoffrey A. McNally Phone: (401) 832-1390
Mechanical Engineer Fax: (401) 832-7250
Launcher Technology and email:
Analysis Branch mcnallyg@gam83.npt.nuwc.navy.mil
Naval Undersea Warfare Center WWW:
Code 8322; Bldg. 1246/2 http://www.nuwc.navy.mil/
Newport, RI 02841-1708
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 3 Aug 1998 10:14:19 -0400 (EDT)
From: Paul Ward <paulw@doc.state.vt.us>
Subject: Forced Aging?
Well the results are in and my first all grain brew turns out to
be,...turpentine.
I'm not worried.
Brew session went exceptionally well. I nailed my single infusion
temp right on the nose (156 F). The sparge was smooth and clear. I
guessed wrong at initial boil volume though and had to top up my
1.068 three gallons of wort with a couple of gallons of tap water to
bring me up to 5.25 gallons (US) for ferment. I used my new 'Moroni'
gas cooker for the first time (170,000 btu propane cooker, control
valve allows a gentle simmer without sooting problems - $39 US at
BJ's Wholesale). Did the whole process from grinding to cleanup on
the deck on a beautiful Vermont Sunday.
I'm not worried.
I forgot to rehydrate my dry yeast (Yeast Labs 'Whitbread') in
advance, so I did a real 'quicky' rehydration of about 5 minutes in
lukewarm tap water. We had a heatwave the day after pitching - I was
on vacation and have no idea how warm fermentation was during this
period, but have reasons to believe it was quite warm.
I'm not worried.
After 3 weeks in the bottle, the stuff is not drinkable.
I'm not worried.
I know that many of the fusels and other harsh flavors will mellow in
time. Alk had his now infamous 'Home Perm Solution Ale' go on to win
a medal or something after it had aged sufficienetly. The problem is
that I'm not the most patient person around. Is there some series of
actions I can take which will speed along the aging process? Some
combination of abuses we normally avoid so we don't get stale (aged)
beer?
I'm not looking to beat up my whole batch, just a few bottles to see
if I ever will be able to drink this pilot brew. So what do you
think? Should I drive around with a sixer in the back of my car for
a week, refrigerate/warm/refrigerate the beer, store under
flourescents, anything else? I mean, this IS my first all grainer,
I really would like to be able to drink some of it.
I'm not worried, just disappointed.
Paul in Vermont
paulw@doc.state.vt.us
- --
According to government height/weight charts,
I'm seven and a half feet tall.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 3 Aug 1998 10:06:13 -0500
From: Mark_Snyder@wastemanagement.com
Subject: Lifting Carboys
Mark Snyder@WMI
08/03/98 10:06 AM
Dick Dunn discusses the fact that "the folks who deliver 5-gal bottles have
long used a "handle" that has a hand-grip and a fork that grabs the carboy
just below the molded-in bulge in the neck. This indicates that our
ubiquitous carboy handle is probably quite safe (and that their
_sotto_voce_ instructions are mostly intended to try to keep the
ambulance-chasers at bay) even if handling full carboys."
One point to consider is that the "fork" device will lift the carboy
without placing any extreme forces on the neck of the 'boy since it is
grabbing the neck from two sides and lifting straight through the neck. A
typical carboy handle of the sort we use lifts the carboy from 'one' side
of the neck, and will place different stress on the carboy neck than the
device Dick describes. An extreme comparison would be to imagine holding a
carboy only by the neck and parallel to the ground. Probably not a major
point, but one would be better off to use the handle to initiate the lift
and then support the carboy from the bottom with the free hand when lifting
a full carboy.
Although I haven't had the misfortune of dropping a carboy, either full or
empty, one precaution I take when handling a full carboy is to wear good
quality leather gloves. Good quality work type with a smooth natural
finish. Most carboys are probably dropped due to a wet carboy slipping
from ones grip, and you won't believe how well a leather glove sticks to a
surface, wet or dry, until you try it.
Just my 2 cents, and I still have all my toes. :-)
Mark Snyder
Marietta, Georgia
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 3 Aug 1998 11:21:55 -0400 (EDT)
From: ALAN KEITH MEEKER <ameeker@welchlink.welch.jhu.edu>
Subject: Use of OAK in brewing
Hi All, I have lately become enamored of a certain red wine that,
according to my wine-knowledgeable friends, has a strong oak character.
This of course immediately led me to ponder what oak could do for my beer.
I've seen oak chips for sale but haven't the foggiest idea how best to use
them so am asking the collective for advice and any experiences they'd
care to relate concerning the use of oak in beer
Any commercial examples of oaked beers worth seeking out?
Thanks,
Alan
- ------------------------------------------------------------------
"Graduate school is the snooze button on the alarm clock of life."
-Jim Squire
-Alan Meeker
Johns Hopkins Hospital
Dept. of Urology
(410) 614-4974
__________________________________________________________________
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 3 Aug 1998 11:07:04 -0500
From: Monika Schultz <mschultz@spacehab.com>
Subject: Women Brewers
There has been some speculation lately about why so few women brew beer
these days. One poster suggested lifting heavy carboys, etc may be one
reason. As a female brewer, I think it's even more basic than that.
Most women simply don't like beer. Certainly not ALL women (no gender
slight intended), I know a few who love beer. And there are plenty of
women who do drink beer, but mainly because that's what's available,
they don't like it enough to brew it. Most of my female friends prefer
wine or mixed drinks to beer. Part of it may be due to the marketing
influences which strongly suggest beer as a man's drink (Bud babes for
example - where are the Bud hunks?). I've tried converting my female
non-beer drinkers with homebrew to no avail. They say it tastes better
than the beer they're used to, but it still tastes 'beery'. Remember,
you have to really like the stuff first before you'll be willing to put
in the effort to make it.
The general attitude among non-brewers toward me brewing is that men
think it's really cool, and women think it's really weird/odd/whatever.
But then, I have other hobbies (motorcycle riding) that are
traditionally male dominated as well, so it must be a personality quirk.
:-)
- Monika
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 03 Aug 1998 12:57:25 -0500
From: Dave Humes <humesdg1@earthlink.net>
Subject: Starter gravity
Greetings,
With all the discussion recently about starters, I'd like to ask a
question again that went unanswered several weeks ago.
Why does Wyeast recommend that starters have a gravity of 1.020?
That's significantly lighter than the lightest "real" wort. So it
would seem that yeast pitched from 1.020 starters into higher gravity
real worts might have a difficult time acclimating to the higher
gravity. Also, it would seem that if you start with a higher gravity
starter, you'll get more yeast. I suppose a low gravity starter
ferments out faster than a higher gravity starter, so your starters
would take less time to prepare.
Any ideas?
Dave Humes >>humesdg1@earthlink.net<<
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #2787, 08/04/98
*************************************
-------
