Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #2903
HOMEBREW Digest #2903 Thu 17 December 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:
AOL Readers: Please read! (The HBD Janitorial Staff)
Attenuation, milling ("David R. Burley")
Fusel aclohols / protein rests / home malting ("George De Piro")
re: stolen recipes ("Larry Maxwell")
Mazer Cup Mead Competition ("Ken Schramm")
RE: Smoke Peated v.s. Smoked (was liquid smoke) (David Houseman)
RE: Paul Gatza's fable (David Houseman)
Re: Grain Mill ("Brian Dixon")
Re: Waffles ("Brian Dixon")
re: Cider (Dick Dunn)
The Jethro Gump Response ("Rob Moline")
Re: air/oxygen/pure oxygen ("Brian Dixon")
Oxygen in the headspace again... ("Brian Dixon")
Grain Mill Modifications (Rich Byrnes)
Hemp cake ("Doug Evans")
Re: Legal status of homebrewing and AHA (Steve Jackson)
New digital thermometer ("Jim Kingsberg")
Online Wahl-Henius book (Steve Jackson)
Best of Brooklyn Homebrew Competition ("George De Piro")
Braggot (Richard Buckberg)
The speed of change at the AHA ("Brian Wurst")
Re: Got them Carbon Monoxide blues... (Jeff Renner)
Beer is our obsession and we're late for therapy!
Enter The Mazer Cup! _THE_ mead competition.
Details available at http://hbd.org/mazercup
NOTE NEW HOMEBREW ADDRESS: hbd.org
Send articles for __publication_only__ to post@hbd.org
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!
Contact brewery@hbd.org for information regarding the "Cat's Meow"
Back issues are available via:
HTML from...
http://hbd.org
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
COPYRIGHT for the Digest as a collection is currently held by hbd.org
(Pat Babcock and Karl Lutzen). Digests in their entirity CANNOT be
reprinted/reproduced without this entire header section unless
EXPRESS written permission has been obtained from hbd.org.
COPYRIGHT for individual posts within each Digest is held by the
author. Articles cannot be extracted from the Digest and
reprinted/reproduced without the EXPRESS written permission of the
author. The author and HBD must be attributed as author and source
in any such reprint/reproduction. (Note: QUOTING of items
originally appearing in the Digest in a subsequent Digest is
exempt from the above.)
JANITORS on duty: Pat Babcock and Karl Lutzen (janitor@hbd.org)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1998 08:42:21 -0500 (EST)
From: The HBD Janitorial Staff <janitor@brew.oeonline.com>
Subject: AOL Readers: Please read!
People subscribing from America Online MUST - absolutely MUST - turn off
the AOL-supplied external mail filter to subscribe! If you DO NOT turn
this off, the Digest cannot reach you since it is OUTSIDE AOL!
If you recently tried to subscribe, and have received neither an
acknowledgement of your attempt, nor a Digest, check your MAIL CONTROLS.
Brewfully yours,
The Home Brew Digest Janitorial Staff
Janitor@hbd.org
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1998 14:24:26 -0500
From: "David R. Burley" <Dave_Burley@compuserve.com>
Subject: Attenuation, milling
Brewsters:
Timo Peters says:
>I have problems with my apparent attentuation.
>whether I brew a lager or an ale all my beers suffer from low
>apparent attentuation. For a pils it is about 66% (12 deg B start, 4 deg
>B end) and a current old ale stops fermentation with only 54%.
>this high remaining extract leads to a sweet beer, uncommon for the
>desired style.
He then suggests two fermentation related problems as a possible
explanation:
While we do not have enough data to say for sure, if you pitched adequate
yeast ( even much less than desired), had enough FAN and kept the
fermentation at the temperaure appropriate for the yeast, and are in the
"normal"
OG range of <1.070 or so, then it is unlikely poor fermentation is the
cause
if you are using a pure mashed wort.
Once when using a John Bull Stout Extract for a class demonstration, it
did
not finish properly and I assumed it was due to low FAN apparently due to
a
high added glucose. Pure wort should be OK.
I doubt oxygenation of the wort is a problem
Your third suggestion that your problem lies in the mash tun is most
likely.
First check your thermometer. This is the most common problem.
Make up boiling water, check the temperature and don't forget to correct
the boiling point for elevation ( see my comments on this a year or so
ago
in the archives). Make up a water and finely crushed ice slurry and
check
that temperature. Then remove any ice by straining the slurry and make
up
mixtures of ice water and boiling water to cover the range of
temperatures.
Use a glass thermos ( double walled vacuum) bottle if you can. Plot these
actual readings on the "Y" axis and the apparent readings on the "X" axis
to provide you with a correction plot. Rather than adding a certain
volume
of water, I put the ice water in the thermos, weigh it and then add
boiling
water increments and weigh that. Measure the temperature after each
addition. Weigh the bottle empty, then you can get an accurate idea of
the
volumes ( and temperatures) without cooling off the
water by pouring it into a measuring vessel first. In Centigrade degrees
you
are OK since the ice water is 0, but with F degrees you need to subtract
32,
apply the proportionality and then add the 32 degrees back on.
Although it is unlikely you are destroying the beta amylase,
it is a possibility as you suggest.
Rather than directly heating the mash tun for the entire mashing
procedure,
try using boiling water infusions to achieve your various rests, with
minor
temperature adjustments by direct heat
- ---------------------------------------------.
Eric Fouch says:
> With a few adjustments, I increased the adjustablility from 3
>settings to 15 settings, motorized it and mounted it on a platform which
>straddles a 5 gallon pail. It does not have a huge throughput, but it
is
>adequate, especially for $50. I believe Mr. Burley also employs the use
of an
>Italian made Marga.
Eric is correct. I have used a Marga for at least that long I guess and
have been very satisfied with it. The only difference is I use an
aluminum
dishpan to catch the milled grain which gives, perhaps, a more stable
base
onto which to mount the plywood board ( big enough to cover the dishpan)
with a rectangular hole in the middle holding the mill and power drill.
Using 4 mill plastic sheeting and duct tape as milled grain guides, I
constructed a relatively dust free mill. I widened the input area and
used
a gallon plastic milk jug as the hopper. I hold the board onto the
dishpan
with small "c" clamps for quick disconnect. Throughput is very adequate.
Also, on this subject, the use of an adjustable mill allows me to mill
the
malt twice, first on a wider adjustment (0.080 I think) to crush the
grain
coarsely and then the regrind thorugh a smaller nip ( 0.060 in, I think).
This is actually faster than a single fine pass and gives the equivalent
of
a four roll mill just like the big boys. Extraction efficiency and
lautering
is significantly improved over a single fine pass. A third pass at 0.055
in
will give you the equivalent of a six roll mill and the preferrred
milling
in the
brewing industry. I don't bother. Use a sparkplug feeler guage for the
measurements of the nip. I have a second dishpan into which I pour
the milled grain between millings. See the archives to check the
details.
Keep on brewin'
Dave Burley
Kinnelon, NJ 07405
103164.3202@compuserve.com
Dave_Burley@compuserve.com
Voice e-mail OK
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1998 14:32 -0800
From: "George De Piro" <George_De_Piro@berlex.com>
Subject: Fusel aclohols / protein rests / home malting
Hi all,
There has been some mention of fusel alcohols and how to control
them. Fusel alcohols are also called "higher" alcohols because
they have more carbon atoms than our beloved ethanol (which has 2
carbon atoms). I like to talk about fusel alcohols because they
are one of the few brewing topics where one can use the word
"always."
High yeast growth ALWAYS leads to the production of excessive
fusel alcohols. Anything that promotes yeast growth will
therefore promote fusels. Things like fermenting above 68F
(20C), underpitching, and agitating the fermenting beer will all
promote increased yeast growth.
Forcing the yeast to utilize trub instead of oxygen will also
promote the formation of higher alcohols. In other words, proper
yeast management will help you to avoid excessive fusels in your
beer.
Excessive fusel alcohols is one of the most common homebrew
flaws, as are excessive esters. Both are caused by poor
fermentation management. The January issue of Brewing Techniques
will have a nice little article about yeast management; I
recommend it highly. (Yeah, it's my article, but I don't get
compensated based on the number of subscribers).
----------------------------------------------
Ah, protein rests. Any of you who have been reading this
electronic tome for the past year know that I think they are
worse than useless when brewing with commercial barley and wheat
malts. Here's why I think this:
1. Large proteins are foam positive, as are some mid-weight
proteins. Small peptides and free amino acids are not foam
positive. Modern malts (yes, even wheat malts and German malts)
are well-modified, meaning that they have already undergone
substantial protein breakdown. Why do any more? The maltster
did it for you!
2. Chill haze is caused in large part by the mid-weight proteins
that are degradation products of larger proteins. Resting at the
high end of the protein rest range (~130F; 55C) can actually
INCREASE haze potential by forming more of these haze precursors.
The reason some of us care about chill haze is because after you
have been brewing a while you may want to make beer that lives up
to very high standards, in taste as well as appearance.
3. The body of a beer can be compromised by the loss of large
proteins. Some styles should be watery, but most of us aren't
striving to make watery beer!
4. The folks at Briess malting advertise all of their malts
(including wheat malt) as not needing a protein rest.
5. The brewers at Schneider und Sohn (makers of one of the
world's great Hefeweizen beers) use custom-made malts, in
Germany, and STILL need to minimize protein rests because the
stuff comes to them more modified than they would like!
Evidently, modern grains malt really easily.
The list goes on...
Why make life complicated? A complex mash schedule does not
automatically make a more complex beer. The only malt I have
seen that needed a protein rest (because it was undermodified)
was stuff I made myself, and it wasn't outrageously
undermodified, either (I had it analyzed chemically).
----------------------------------------
That segues nicely into home malting. Some people are concerned
about ergot and other biological contaminants affecting their
homemade malt.
This could become the malting equivalent of the botulism
thread...
If you are malting properly you should not get lots of bacterial
and fungal growth. If you do, I'd bet that the grain will smell
really bad, look really odd, taste quite off, and exhibit very
poor germination (in other words, it won't malt!). The biggest
danger when home malting is suffocating the grain by steeping it
too long and turning it infrequently. Dead, soggy grain makes a
great environment for bacterial and fungal growth, but as I said,
you'll notice the stench!
Home malting is something that I would encourage all brewers to
try at least once. It is the best way to gain a solid
understanding of the process.
Have fun!
George de Piro (Nyack, NY)
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1998 12:39:43 -0800
From: "Larry Maxwell" <Larry@bmhm.com>
Subject: re: stolen recipes
>I saw this and remembered Louis Bonham' post in HBD 2575 in
>which he expressed the idea that recipes are not protectable
>intellectual property. I agree.
I second Bob McDonald's comment. I wish I were a plant pathologist,
fluid dynamicist, a fridge guy, electrician, or had some other skill
genuinely useful to homebrewing, but I'm just a patent, trademark and
copyright lawyer. Individual recipes as such are simply not protectable
by any of these means. Once your secret recipe is published, the cat's
out of the bag.
Larry Maxwell
larry@bmhm.com
Suing and brewing in San Diego
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1998 16:11:54 -0500
From: "Ken Schramm" <schramk@wcresa.k12.mi.us>
Subject: Mazer Cup Mead Competition
After a brief hiatus, the Mazer Cup is resuming its staid and worthy
tradition of soliciting the finest meads from around the globe for
judging
and recognition. This is the largest single-site mead judging in this
country, and perhaps the world (we may even seek Guiness Book
acknowledgement this year). We will, as always, be awarding custom,
limited edition, hand-thrown ceramic Mazers to the top three places in
each of the eight mead categories
(Traditional, Show, Melomel, Metheglin, Braggot, Cyser,
Pyment, Open/Mixed). And we have kept the entry fee at $6.00 (Yes, we
usually do lose money on this, but the AABG bails us out). Entries
will
be accepted from Feb 1 - 20, 1999, and the judging will be completed as
soon after 2/27 as can be, bearing in mind that each entry will be
judged
by at least two competent judges.
The Mazer Cup Rules, regs and entry forms are online at
http://hbd.org/aabg/mcmc/
or can be obtained via US mail or sent as a Word attachment to EMail by
contacting me, Al Franken (no, wait) Ken Schramm at
schramk@wcresa.k12.mi.us.
Judges interested in joining us can contact me at the above EMail.
Beds
will be made available. The quality and variety of meads in this
competition is unparalled (yes, I have done second round NHC meads on
more than one occasion. I will put the MCMC up against anything in the
US).
We run a jovial but thoroughly professional judging.
Please enter this fine competition. Many Thanks, and Happy Holidays.
Ken Schramm
Troy, Michigan
"Even moderation is only good in moderation."
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1998 19:56:34 -0500 (EST)
From: David Houseman <dhousema@cccbi.org>
Subject: RE: Smoke Peated v.s. Smoked (was liquid smoke)
The use of smoked malt, or liquid smoke, in scotch ales is really
questionable. The hint of smokiness in these beers is [usually] due to
other factors such as the yeast used that gives off some smoky character or
the use of roasted barley that can result in that perception. The smoked
malts are either peat smoked, that is smoked over peat fires, or wood
smoked, most commonally smoked over beachwood. While German Rauchs may have
50% or more of rauchmalz in the grain bill, the use of peat smoked malt in
scotch ales should be used VERY sparily. An once in a 5 gallon batch would
be quite sufficient to impart the slight smokiness to scotch ales. This is
a very strong malt! The one expection may be the Wee Heavy that support
higher levels of smoke character in its malt strength.
Dave Houseman
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1998 20:17:34 -0500 (EST)
From: David Houseman <dhousema@cccbi.org>
Subject: RE: Paul Gatza's fable
While Steve and others have commented on Paul's fable with various reasons
to join or support the AHA or not, there is one that I do feel that the
experienced brewers are missing. That is that unless there is a sufficient
market to support the suppliers of this hobby, they will exit and it will
leave a void in the current vast array of brewing products, malts, hops and
yeasts available. Hobbies only have an average 7 year life with people as
they move from one interest to another. Some of us will maintain this hobby
for life; some of us will try it and quit after a few batches. But if new
people don't start out and stay with the hobby it could well die out.
Already many stores have closed. Some of the distributors have reported
down sales. So whatever we can do to help the newcomers is needed to
generate and maintain interest in brewing. The AHA may not appeal to many
experienced brewers as they have moved on. But Zymurgy and the AHA may be
much more useful and attractive to newcomers and others less experienced.
If they are successful in attracting and maintaining a body of new brewers
it will help us all as the more people there are in the homebrewing market
the more it will keep suppliers in the market as well.
Dave Houseman
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1998 21:55:03 -0800
From: "Brian Dixon" <mutex@proaxis.com>
Subject: Re: Grain Mill
Just a clarification on your summary, which seemed quite correct by the way.
You mentioned that the gaps were not "calibrated" on the Valley Mill and
that the manufacturer "wouldn't say what they were", and consequently you
assumed that they have manufacturing variation that they don't want to
advertise. First of all, I don't know why they don't print the gaps on the
mill, because they ARE known and the manufacturer DOES tell you the info if
you ask for it. I either saw it posted here in the HBD (search the
archives) or in rec.crafts.brewing (search using http://www.dejanews.com).
In any case, the info can be had ... yes, they should print it right on the
mill, but nothing is being hidden and there doesn't seem to be an variation
in the product that would make them want to hide anything. It's a very good
mill and you get more for your money than with the JSP MaltMill that offers
the same features. I did the analysis and bought a Valley Mill and my
question is "Why doesn't Jack make a better hopper and also sell his
adjustable mill for the same price as the Valley Mill?" and "Why, in spite
of there being many uses for it, do people keep defending single-setting
mills that they either a) already bought, or b) sell?" To me, most of the
arguments come from people who have reason to be defensive rather than
unbiased. These questions seem a lot larger than whether or not Valley
Mills have the thousands of inches printed for each gap. Dang! Please
don't turn this into a flame war. I'm just trying to be honest. I came to
these conclusions long before buying a mill...
Just my 2 cents worth.
Brian
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1998 22:00:31 -0800
From: "Brian Dixon" <mutex@proaxis.com>
Subject: Re: Waffles
>In light of Al K.'s post on Fries, I'd like to point out that the Flemish
are
>incorrectly attributed in the production of Belgian Waffles. These
>creatures were introduced at the 1964 NY World's Fair and, then, called
>Bel-Gem Waffles. Kind of a French (why? I don't know) Beauty thing, I
>suppose. But, those Noo Yawkers...Bel-Gem quickly became Belgian
>and then there was no turning back...
>
>Chris in Brooklyn, NY.
So, how come when I went to Belgium last year there were Belgian Waffles
being made in street stands everywhere. Considering the fact that the US of
A is not highly respected in Europe (we are crass and have no culture, we
wear tennis shoes like little children, and our president keeps warming his
willie for national news casts), then why would they copy something from the
1964 World's Fair in NEW YORK? Seems odd. Might be true, but seems odd...
Brian
------------------------------
Date: 15 Dec 98 23:01:48 MST (Tue)
From: rcd@raven.talisman.com (Dick Dunn)
Subject: re: Cider
Eric Fouch writes, as one item in a longer note:
> A cider question (can't seem to get any response from the cider digest)
> or two:
Eric, patience please. Your questions appeared in the _most_recent_ issue
of the Cider Digest. You haven't had a response because the next issue has
not appeared yet. The Cider and Mead digests move at a slower pace due to
their smaller readership and also due to the slower pace of fermentation
of the beverages they address. (Fast fermentation may be a Good Thing for
beer, but it is at best arguable for mead and not-so-good for cider.) Oh,
they also go slower because the digest janitor is lazy.
> If fermenting at room temp. does the malo-lactic fermentation take place
> simultaneously with the the yeastie fermentation, or does it only happen when
> doing spontaneous (no campden) fermentations?...
It generally happens after the main fermentation. Often it doesn't happen
at all. Why do you expect it to happen?
>...I am a bit concerned of the
> "spring malo-lactic fermentation" taking place in bottled product, causing
> overcarbonation problems.
It doesn't produce a lot of gas, at least not that I've observed.
> Also- last week I fined my cider with gelatine: a teaspoon of gelatine
> stirred into water at about 190F. I added the gelatine solution rather hot.
Don't fine cider with gelatin. I've got that in my brew log for a couple
of batches. The first, it's just a sentence in the text. The second, it's
in bold-italic with some embellishment around it.
It's not the heat. It's the gelatin.
- ---
Dick Dunn rcd@talisman.com Hygiene, Colorado USA
...Don't lend your hand to raise no flag atop no ship of fools.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1998 00:08:43 -0600
From: "Rob Moline" <brewer@ames.net>
Subject: The Jethro Gump Response
The Jethro Gump Response
Gee, and I felt honored that my recipe was chosen........in an attempt to
create the first 'simultaneous' brewing record! Oh, well, @ least more than
a few brewers have enjoyed the result!
For the record, my position with regards to LABCO is that I have continued
to offer support to the brewers there, ALL of them in succession. First to
Bret Kimbrough, when I left, in offering him the latest tweaks on my
recipes, by many months.....the photocopies in his possession that easily
preceded his tenure even as an assistant @ LABCO......info which more than
updated his collection of illicit access to my recipes.....then to Heidi
Helwig, who graduated to brewer from bar manager after Bret left before
being thrown out for lack of performance....I couldn't say that he spent
more time drinking than brewing, as I wasn't there..........
But to Lou Kaylor, the current Head Brewer, who I had wished to install as
an assistant, years ago, I have not only offered the same assistance...... I
also entertained him recently @ CABCO, when he was on his way to a Short
Course @ Siebel, I even invited him to my home, where we spent a grand
evening, before he left for Chicago, after spending the night @ Chez Gump. I
had previously written a glowing reference for him, when he was in the
military.....and I also praised him to Bill Siebel......
Now, if these are the actions of a brewer involved in a vendetta....please
get in line..... the next person I have a row with will undoubtedly be given
a winning lottery ticket!
My position with regards to LABCO finally is such....I owe much to the
'true' owners of that institution....and my loyalty to people such as Galen
Fink, who gave me my 'shot' is undying.....but that will never approach my
loyalty to the customers, the true supporters of my brewing efforts
there.... I owe them much more than I could ever return......
Others involved in the administration of the LABCO still earn my
scorn....but I see no need now, nor have I in the past, to discuss
that.....they will get their own as time goes by......It all evens out, eh?
Not having posted to the HBD for some time, I apologize to the collective
for my venting....Mr. Henning, your apology is accepted, partially.......It
won't be accepted in full until you buy me a beer ....and we drink
together.....
Jethro Gump
"The More I Know About Beer, The More I Realize I Need To Know More About
Beer!"
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1998 22:17:20 -0800
From: "Brian Dixon" <mutex@proaxis.com>
Subject: Re: air/oxygen/pure oxygen
>Am trying to determine what to use to help kick start fermentation. There
has
>been conversation here about pure oxygen (99.9%) and ~20-30 second blasts.
>
>What is the need for pure O2 when carboys are shaken vigorously just before
>pitching? Instead of using pure 02 can the small canisters of oxygen for
>welding/cutting found in hardware stores also be used? It would seem that
the
>oxygen in this type of tank is greater than the oxygen in air but less than
>pure 02.
>
>Thanx for your thots.
Ok, let's see ... one thing at a time. First, kick starting a fermentation.
There are about 3 primary things that effect how quickly your fermentation
kicks off. The first is the amount of yeast you put in. If using dry, I'd
recommend 2 to 4 packets ... rehydrated in warm water for 30 minutes first.
If using liquid yeast, then I'd recomment a minimum of a 2 cup starter, with
a 1 quart or larger starter being better ... it actually takes about a
gallon of starter to pitch at an optimal rate like the professionals do.
But then you have to let it go to sedimentation and pour off most of the
wort, pitching the leftover slurry at the bottom. About a cup of slurry is
correct for 5 gallons (but I forget the number of cells per milliliter that
gives you ... something like 50 million I think). The second thing that'll
help kick off the fermentation is the provision of a good healthy
environment. That means you don't use old extract, and you do make sure
your water has 50 to 100 ppm calcium as a couple of minimum requirements.
Best route for health is to make your own wort from grain (mash) and to
treat your water if necessary to reach 50-100ppm calcium. Finally, the
third thing you can to to promote a good kick off is to make sure you
aerate/oxygenate appropriately. Lots of ways to do it, but some are more
effective than others ... so let's move on to your other questions where
we'll cover this one too.
Pure O2 like you buy in the brew shop -vs- vigorous carboy shaking -vs-
welding oxygen. I think it was Zymurgy that did a study on oxygenation
techniques here awhile back. But anyway, the 2 best ways (if memory serves)
to aerate is to either use a very fine airstone (like the LiquidBread one)
with pure _clean_ O2 (like the Oxynator bottles), and carboy shaking. If
shaking the carboy, it seems the best method was laying it horizontally
across your knees and rocking it back and forth to make "ocean waves" ...
for about 5 minutes. Then you take a rest and do it again. Once your bad
back has established itself though, the Oxynator seems a lot more
attractive. Note that the methods of oxygenation that use air suffer
primarily from the fact that O2 is a small percentage of air (16%? 25%?
can't remember ...), otherwise it'd be a lot easier. And as far as the
welding O2 goes, it's pure O2 like the Oxynator stuff also ... but may have
dirt and oil in it too, so it's not clean. You may consider doing it
anyway, but use a 2-micron inline filter between the O2 bottle and your
wort. For the pilots in the crowd, note that you can use your portable
oxygen mask setup to oxygenate your beer also. That's what a friend of mine
does and his O2 costs a lot less than mine as a result! One thing I'll say
against the Oxynator (it works great) is cost ... the setup costs a lot to
begin with, and the oxygen bottles (1.4 ounces of oxygen is all they carry)
cost too much.
Good luck,
Brian
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1998 22:34:45 -0800
From: "Brian Dixon" <mutex@proaxis.com>
Subject: Oxygen in the headspace again...
Just a quick note here. Got a lot of responses from my lengthy post about
how I go about trying to avoid oxygen (when you are supposed to) and how to
get it when you want it. First question:
When filling the secondary with CO2 from the primary during fermentation,
doesn't the CO2 just diffuse in the air that's there? Answer: Yes. I don't
know how pure the CO2 in the secondary is by the time the primary finishes,
but I suspect it's a lot better than a plain ol' air filled carboy. Make
sure you always rack quietly and smoothly.
Question number two: Since the priming solution is likely higher in gravity
than the fermented beer, doesn't it just sink to the bottom of the beer in
the secondary and risk getting left behind when you rack to a bottling
bucket (or carboy)? Seems like it might be a risk. But I rack every little
bit out and don't leave much behind. I've never yet gotten an
undercarbonation from this cause ... leaving beer in the secondary for 6 or
8 weeks and bottling without new yeast, yes, but not from priming this way!
I recommend that if you prime this way that you tip your carboy and get each
little ounce out of the secondary. A bit of yeast from the secondary
certainly won't hurt your beer any.
Third question: CO2 from dry ice to fill bottles prior to bottling ...
doesn't that just diffuse around and not do that good of a job? Answer:
Maybe if you treat the bottles too quickly. But since the CO2 is heavier
than air and it's cold coming off the dry ice, your bottles will experience
good convection of CO2 and this will help flush rather than just diffuse the
CO2 into them. Take your time with this step and don't worry.
Last questions: Will using a syringe and a squirt of water get much CO2 out
of the beer into the headspace? The beer was not force carbonated and
counter pressure bottled, so where is the CO2 coming from? And why not use
a shot of beer rather than sterilized water? Answers: Remember that I said
I haven't tried this yet. But based on my observation of CO2 coming out of
solution when I bang a bottle on the counter (don't do this ... risks
breakage) the last time I bottled, I suspect that there is still plenty of
CO2 dissolved in the beer after bottling. Might not be quite as efficient
as the pro's, but it's better than nothing. Oh, and yes, use beer if you
want. Sucking it out of each bottle and blowing it back in with the syringe
is a great opportunity to adjust the headspace(s) AND it means you don't
have to sterilize any water.
Someone else recently mentioned that he/she (? .. no offense, just can't
remember) figured that O2 in the headspace wasn't a problem because yeast
scavenges O2 anyway, and if you don't shake the bottle too much, the O2 will
stay out of the beer and won't have a chance to react with alcohol. Yes,
yeast will scavenge some. But at this point, it doesn't need too and it
grows just fine anaerobically, so there's no need (O2 in the wort prior to
pitching is for improving the health of the yeast membranes in preparation
for budding, not for 'food' that's necessary for growth). and O2 will
indeed diffuse into the beer in the bottles, so any excess will end up in
your beer.
Anyway, this is dragging on, so I'm going to go. I'm sure it'll get
discussed a lot anyway (feel free to make any and all corrections ... I
don't claim perfection, only my wife does that <g>).
Brian
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1998 08:02:39 -0500
From: Rich Byrnes <rbyrnes2@ford.com>
Subject: Grain Mill Modifications
OK, before this gets into a pissing match about who's mill
can and can't be used on a bucket, I will correct "the other
guy". Yes, the philmill CAN be used on abucket, regardless
of it's upside down design. Simply cut a piece of wood to
fit whatever bucket you want and drill a hole in the middle
of it, the diameter of a carboy opening. Now use the small
piece of wood that came with the Philmill as a template for
drilling the mounting holes and bolt the philmill under the
board as before. Unbolt the handle of the philmill and
replace with a 3 or 4" long bolt, whatever it takes to be
wider than the bocket, drill a small hole in the side of the
bucket so the bolt head can pole through when the mill sits
on top. NOW, go buy one of those nifty blue collars used
for drying a carboy upside down, or stacking carboys on top
of each other upside down (aboiut $8 at a homebrew supply
shop) and screw it down to the topside of the piece of wood,
directly centered over the hole. Now go get a plastic
carboy and cut the bottom off (I used a jigsaw and a file to
get the burrs off) and plunk it upside down into the plastic
collar. Now step back and admire your drill moter driven 5
gallon hopper Philmill that sits on a bucket. It's amazing
how many pounds of grain a 5 gallon carboy will hold! I use
a triple gear reduced drill for the torque so I can start
the mill with grain in it. I've been using ths setup for 3
years now without a problem.
So yes virginia, you can use a philmill on a bucket (with
about 30 minutes worth of work and a scrap piece of plywood
and a hole saw or two) and yes, there is a Santa Claus!
Rich Byrnes
Founder/Secretary
Fermental Order of Renaissance Draughtsmen
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1998 08:25:57 -0500
From: "Doug Evans" <Devans@greenapple.com>
Subject: Hemp cake
Due to the Holiday season, I've been offering 1 LB of Hemp cake to anyone
who e-mails me. I've had quite a few people take me up on it on the Beer
List.
I take care of shipping, however, I will send it USPS. The other thing is
that I only have ten to fifteen pounds of it left. If you are on the beer
list and have already received this you are not eligible for another LB.
BTW, Hemp cake is legal and is a product of a company here in Ohio.(Athens)
I do have some information on the use of the cake if you need it.
Generally, 10-20% of your grist bill should be Hemp..It also needs to be
steeped with your grains.(so I've been told).
Take care...
Doug Evans
VinBrew Supply
Carroll, Ohio
(740)756-4314
ProMash ONLY $20.00
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1998 05:36:17 -0800 (PST)
From: Steve Jackson <stevejackson@rocketmail.com>
Subject: Re: Legal status of homebrewing and AHA
In HBD #2902 (December 16, 1998) Lee Menegoni <Lee.Menegoni@digital.com>
wrote:
>>>>
Homebrewing may be legal in most states but possession of outside the
home,transporting home brew or , holding competitions is either illegal
or a violation of liquor commission policy in many states.
<<<<
I'm not sure how many states this applies to, but Indiana, where I
live, is one. We've been trying for the past two legislative sessions
to get that changed, as well as allowing pubs to host club meetings
without risking their licenses. Hopefully, the third time will be the
charm, which leads to a not-so-subtle solicitation: Any Indiana folks
out there who are interested in seeing it become legal for us to haul
our homebrew around (not that anybody's cracking down on the
practice), let me know.
Actually, our legalization effort does lead me to one gripe about the
AHA. When our club requested some help from the AHA on this, all we
were sent was some fact sheet that didn't lend a whole lot of insight
(for instance, it contained absolutely no Indiana-specific
information) and was contained information that for the most part was
easily accessible elsewhere. That was it (Caveat: another club member
handled the dealings with the AHA, so there may have been more to it
than that, but I don't recall the circumstances as being such. If I am
incorrect, however, I do apologize). If legalization efforts are
supposed to be one of the perks of AHA membership, the organization
appears to be falling short on that account too.
-Steve in Indianapolis
_________________________________________________________
DO YOU YAHOO!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1998 07:45:19 -0600
From: "Jim Kingsberg"<jdkingsb@hewitt.com>
Subject: New digital thermometer
The S.O. and I exchanged a couple Christmas gifts early. She gave me a
Taylor digital thermometer. This one has a 6 inch probe, about a 3 foot
lead (so you can plug the probe into meat while in the oven) which plugs
into the unit which can keep time, has an alarm for hitting the temperature
and digital read out (of course). I remember discussions past regarding
the Polder thermometer and the need to plug up/seal the probe so that
liquid does not get into the electronic unit.
Anyone familiar with the Taylor brand of digital thermometer? Any info is
greatly appreciated.
Thanks,
Jim Kingsberg
(a coupla two-tree miles left of Jeff Renner, over by der by Chicago.)
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1998 05:46:19 -0800 (PST)
From: Steve Jackson <stevejackson@rocketmail.com>
Subject: Online Wahl-Henius book
Does anybody out there know of another online location for the
Wahl-Henius American Handy book of Brewing, Malting and Auxillary
Trades? I've tried the one link I have
(http://hubris.engin.umich.edu:8080/wahl) several times over the last
couple months, and the server has never responded.
Alternately, if anyone has a copy of the book themselves and would be
kind enough to send me a copy of the information I'm seeking (I'm
researching Kentucky Common Beer), I would be most appreciative and
would be willing to compensate you for your costs in cash or the beer
equivalent. Also, feel free to toss me any other information any of
you may have about KKC my way.
-Steve in Indianapolis
_________________________________________________________
DO YOU YAHOO!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1998 9:01 -0800
From: "George De Piro" <George_De_Piro@berlex.com>
Subject: Best of Brooklyn Homebrew Competition
Hi all,
Just a quick note to announce the second annual
***BEST OF BROOKLYN HOMEBREW COMPETITION!!!***
The *Malted Barley Appreciation Society* and *Brooklyn Brewery*
are once again joining forces to bring you one heck of a homebrew
contest! The event will be held on Sat., Feb. 27, 1999 at the
Brooklyn Brewery (79 North 11th Street in Brooklyn, NY). Entries
must be received by Friday, Feb. 19. Judges may carry in entries
ONLY if they are pre-registered by the entry deadline!
Last year over 50 judges and stewards worked hard evaluating over
260 entries. All of them went home with gifts to reward their
efforts, and over $2000 worth of prizes were awarded to the
brewers of winning beers! We are hoping to have an even greater
prize package this year!!!
The Association of Brewers president, Charlie Papazian, will be
on hand and will be the guest of honor at a beer dinner following
the contest at nearby *Mug's Ale House*. This is a great
opportunity to meet Charlie and discuss important brewing issues
with him!
Aside from the standard BJCP categories, there are two new beer
categories in this year's BoB:
1. The "First Time Entrants" Category. There is no need to be
intimidated by contest veterans! As well as being judged in
their respective categories, "first time entrants" will compete
in a special category that will be judged by a panel that
includes Charlie Papazian!
2. The "Experimental" category. Do you make a lovely recreation
of a historical beer style but fear entering it into contests
because there are no appropriate categories? Do you make a great
Brettanomyces black pilsner but have nowhere to enter it? This
is the category for you!
Check out our website at
http://members.aol.com/MaltyDog/bob99.html or contact Bob
Weyersberg at 212-989-4545 or triage@mindspring.com for more info
about the contest and the dinner.
We need judges and stewards!!! You can register electronically
at the above website or contact Bob for more info! You must
register to judge or steward by Feb. 19. Preference will be
given to people that are active in the Beer Judge Certification
Program. You will be notified of your category assignment the
week prior to the contest.
Good luck and have fun!
George de Piro (Nyack, NY; a former president of the Malted
Barley Appreciation Society, and I was not impeached)
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1998 06:07:18 -0800 (PST)
From: Richard Buckberg <buck@well.com>
Subject: Braggot
If any of you ever get to Bar Harbor, ME there is a great beer to be had on
tap, an aged braggot at the Lompoc Cafe, which is Atlantic Brewing
Company.
(usual disclaimers and all - I have nothing to do with them)
Does anyone have a good braggot recipe? I have found a few on the web, but
wonder if anyone can recommend one they've had good results with.
Braggot is an old style that is generally half malt, half either honey or
maple. I'd like one that's made with honey. The brew is then aged, up to a
year or so.
Thanks in advance.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1998 08:38:39 -0600
From: "Brian Wurst" <brian@mail.netwave.net>
Subject: The speed of change at the AHA
Brian Rezac writes in HBD#2902....
- ---quote-----
As for me being one of the good guys over at the AHA, I wonder as
well. I am not perfect. I wish I could get more done faster. I get
frustrated with the "change takes time" thing. But I can tell you
that Paul and I are working to move the AHA into a more member-driven
organization. And, you are correct, we do have limited resources, but
we are always open for suggestions.
- -----endquote----
In an organization with TWO employees (a Director and Administrator) change can
be effected quite quickly, if not immediately. Which one is impeding change?
The most probable explanation is neither Paul nor Brian.
My suggestion is to do what you think is right and damn the Board of Advisors
and the AoB(=charlie). If what you do isn't what they think is right, let them
undo it after the fact. If there is that much resistance to change (or lack of
trust in your vision) then the AHA is in far worse shape than what its
detractors make it out to be.
A true revolution begins when people who benfit most from the status quo step
forward to champion the cause of changing the status quo. Brian, Paul - start a
revolution!
Happy Trails!
Brian Wurst brian@mail.netwave.net Lombard, Illinois
"Nature has formed you, desire has trained you, fortune has preserved you for
this insanity." -Cicero
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1998 09:57:01 -0500
From: Jeff Renner <nerenner@umich.edu>
Subject: Re: Got them Carbon Monoxide blues...
Hmbrwrpete@aol.com is having monomxide problems but only when he puts the
kettle on the flame.
Evidently what's happening is that the flame is cooled by the kettle and
incomplete combustion is occuring. I think lots more people have this
problem that are aware of it - they just don't have a detector. I have one
and brew in the garage, where I can regulate the monoxide by opening the
doors more or less. If you have a garage, I recommend that for a brewery.
Spills are less of a problem, too. Glad you're taking your kids' well
being into account. A few 10s ppm won't hurt us, but why endanger them at
all?
A cautioinary tale:
Keep that detector going in the house when you're not brewing. We had some
kind of cold block in our furnace chimney (perhaps compounded by a patented
heat activated damper that I removed) and awoke last week 20 minutes after
the heat came on in the morning to 138ppm! No alarm that soon, and no
health consequences, but what if it had happened early in the night and no
detector? The basement was worse - fumey smelling, moisture in the air,
and the flue icey cold and dripping with condensate. The furnace man
couldn't find anything wrong with the chimney or furnace. Apparently the
particular temperature and direction and speed of the wind combined with
the closed damper kept the heat and combustion products from the furnace
from being able to push past the cold air in the flue stack and get a draw
going, and they spilled out of the front of the furnace.
Most important brewing equipment to ask Santa for - a digital plug-in
monoxide detector! Doesn't even cost any beer bullets since what spouse
wouldn't agree to it for daily monitoring? I have a Nighthawk, which
Consumers Report recommended as tops. Paid under $50.
Jeff
-=-=-=-=-
Jeff Renner in Ann Arbor, Michigan c/o nerenner@umich.edu
"One never knows, do one?" Fats Waller, American Musician, 1904-1943.
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #2903, 12/17/98
*************************************
-------
