Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #2930
HOMEBREW Digest #2930 Sun 17 January 1999
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:
A few announcements... (The HBD Janitorial Staff)
ph level of water (Michael Rose)
Brew Watches ("Rob Moline")
I'm sorry, truly I am, mac users, please reply! (Breadnale)
Another Bleach data point ("Michael Maag")
Distiller's malt ("George De Piro")
Attenuation in IPAs ("Colin K.")
protein rests and beer character ("George De Piro")
Decoction Thread (Jim Bentson)
us-grown european hops (michael w bardallis)
"Killer" Vienna recipe (Jeff Renner)
Re: Decoction, Part II (Jeff Renner)
priming sugar effects on gravity, brewery set up, and making barley wine (Jason Henning)
re: Yeast Pak temperature, CF chiller cleaning (John_E_Schnupp)
Foam (Dan Listermann)
Yeast starters, part 1 (long but useful) ("George De Piro")
Yeast starters, part 2 (long, but useful) ("George De Piro")
Re: Non Food Grade Buckets ("Fred L. Johnson")
RE: non food grade buckets ("John Lifer, jr")
Beer is our obsession and we're late for therapy!
Enter The Mazer Cup! _THE_ mead competition.
Details available at http://hbd.org/mazercup
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. Digests
CANNOT be reprinted or reproduced in any format for redistribution
unless said redistribution is at absolutely NO COST to the consumer.
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. Home brew clubs NOT associated with organizations having a
commercial interest in beer or brewing may republish articles in their
newsletters and/or websites provided that the author and HBD are
attributed. ASKING first is still a great courtesy...)
JANITORS on duty: Pat Babcock and Karl Lutzen (janitor@hbd.org)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 22:47:11 -0500 (EST)
From: The HBD Janitorial Staff <janitor@brew.oeonline.com>
Subject: A few announcements...
Greetings, Beerlings! Take me to your lager...
The Janitorial staff has been doing a little work behind the scenes -
repairing creaking doors, polishing the banisters, waxing the floors...
The first of these is the new "Competition Calendar", accesible from a
pick on the main page at http://hbd.org. This is an interactive
application allowing you to enter information regarding your competition
and direct users to its homepage. All in all, I believe this is something
we've needed for a while. Not only is this handy for those wishing to
enter competitions, BJCP judges looking for experience points might look
to it in order to find sanctioned competitions in their area, too!
Next, in answer to a few queries on the Digest (some dating back to 1995,
as a matter of fact!), work has begun on the HBD Mugshot Gallery. When all
is said and done, willing subscribers *should* be able to upload their
picture and some biography information to be listed (and pictured) on the
server for all time.
Finally, the operating system is being loaded onto the new server as I
"speak". I expect to have this over to O&E Monday (1/18) morning. Due to
this, the HBD server and website will be out of commission for at least
part of the day Monday, and potentially part of Tuesday. We'll be allowing
a Sunday (should be this one...) Digest to publish in order to reduce the
queue and prevent losses.
See you on the new server!
Brewfully yours,
The Home Brew Digest Janitorial Staff
Janitor@hbd.org
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1999 21:36:15 -0800
From: Michael Rose <mrose@ucr.campuscw.net>
Subject: ph level of water
I just started doing the no sparge thing and had a question concerning
adding acid to the topping off water. Its possible to top off at 3
different times.
1. pre-boil
2. post boil
3. post ferment
What ph should the topping off water be at when adding at any of these
periods? Thanks,
Mike Rose Riverside, CA mrose@ucr.campuscw.net
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1999 23:33:22 -0600
From: "Rob Moline" <brewer@isunet.net>
Subject: Brew Watches
Brewing Watches...
Clint Thessen asks about brewing watches....Brew Promotions has the best
brewing related gift line in the game.....Unfortunately, their wesite,
www.brewgifts.com, while showing some of the better bits is not as
comprehensive as their brochure, which again unfortunately doesn't list
prices....
Thw 2 watches that they offer have miniature kettles in them, one in
stainless, one in copper. As with the rest of their product line, they are
quite nice....
phone numbers are- 707-586-1798 California
201-512-0387 New Jersey
800-514-2739
Jethro Gump
Rob Moline
brewer@isunet.net
"The More I Know About Beer, The More I Realize I Need To Know More About
Beer!"
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 01:37:07 EST
From: Breadnale@aol.com
Subject: I'm sorry, truly I am, mac users, please reply!
Hello,
Alright, I'm sorry, this isn't a beer question, but I'm gonna throw it out
anyway, I really do trust this group for some reason, and I'm looking for an
answer and don't know where to turn.
I bought a mac. I love the computer. Currently, I'm using aol, which was great
on my old pc, sucks on my mac, it keeps crashing! I'm told that's common with
the mac software for aol!? What internet provider are you mac users using? I'm
sorry, I won't use up any more space on non beer related stuff.
Thanks for your understanding!
Jim
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 08:51:39 -0500
From: "Michael Maag" <maagm@rica.net>
Subject: Another Bleach data point
The Center for Disease Control recommends the use of 5.25% sodium
hypochlorite (household bleach) diluited to between 1:10 and 1:100 with
water for disinfection of surfaces. This is for clean up of blood spills,
etc. to kill HIV (aids virus) and HBV (hepatitis), etc.. I realize we are
not dealing with these pathogens in brewing (i hope), but I offer this info
to show the wide effective range of bleach concentration. I use a very
precise method of bleach to water measurement, three glugs out of the jug to
a half sink of water. Soak 15+ minutes.
Mike Maag (Industrial Hygienist)
In the middle of the Shenandoah Valley 8*)
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 16 Jan 99 05:11:12 PST
From: "George De Piro" <gdepiro@fcc.net>
Subject: Distiller's malt
Hi all,
Jeff in Michigan ponders the amazing diastatic power of distiller's malt.
It is indeed higher in diastatic power than your average brewer's malt.
According to _Malting and Brewing Science_ there are two categories
of distiller's malt. The first is used in the making of grain whiskey.
It is
relatively high in protein, often being made from 6-row barley. The high
protein content is essential for yeast nutrition because the vast
majority
of the grist will be very low protein grains like corn.
The other type of distiller's malt is used for the production of malt
whiskey.
It is lower in protein than the malt used for grain whiskey and is smoked
over peat.
These malts are made using a long, cool germination cycle that promotes
the formation of diastatic enzymes. It is also kilned at very low
temperatures (53-54.5C, 128-130F) to preserve the enzymes.
Jeff is correct in thinking that the amylases continue their action in
the fermentation. In whiskey making the wort is not boiled, and the
mash temperature is relatively low, so the enzymes are not denatured.
The goal is to produce as much fermentable extract (and hence
alcohol) as possible.
Have fun!
George de Piro (Nyack, NY)
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 05:59:36 -0800
From: "Colin K." <colink@wenet.net>
Subject: Attenuation in IPAs
Greetings,
I brew IPAs. I have never attempted another style. I have gone all over
the board with this style. My latest kick is to try to make an authentic
historical brew. But first I need to learn more about attenuation. I
have read the starting gravity would be about 17deg P. I have no problem
hitting that. I have also read the final gravity would be about 2deg P!
My first attempt I used just British 2-row pale malt mashed at 140deg.
for 90 min then sparged at 168deg. I recirculated forever, well since I
have no pump it seemed forever, probably about an hour and the entire
volume of the mash twice. I was never able to get the wort to clarify
like I can at 148deg. I only test my thermometer at 212deg. It is always
right on. This was my girlfriends thermometer when she ran a bottling
line at a winery. She claims it is very accurate. I stirred the mash
from the bottom to the top to try to equalize the temp.
I used WLP001 yeast at 68deg F because I figured it would give me an
higher attenuation than any English yeasts. No starter. After three days
I transferred to the secondary and measured the gravity at 4.5deg P. Not
very close. I still had a haze. Almost milky. Is this a starch haze?
I put some amalase from the homebrew shop in the secondary with the dry
hops. I haven't checked the beer in two weeks (I brew at my girlfriends)
so I don't know the status of the haze or the final gravity but she says
there has been very little activity in the air lock.
I guess my question is help! But more specifically: How do I perform a
starch conversion test? Can I use Iodaphor? Should I use another rest?
Did the Burton Union System used historically keep the yeast in
suspension longer? Should I rouse the yeast during primary ferment?
Should I use a repitched yeast that is more acclimated to higher
gravity? Should I throw some wild yeast in there like the
super-attenuator that took one of my batches down to .5deg P? :-( wow
did that one taste bad!).
I realize a high gravity, high hop rate (11 oz of Kent in 5 additions
for a 4 gallon batch), high attenuation brew will be odd to the modern
pallet but I am trying to find the limits of the style. So far it tastes
like sucking on a hop pellet. But I hope riding in the trunk of my car
for 6 months will mellow it out (I don't have a ship handy :-). Any
ideas would be greatly appreciated.
TIA,
Colin K.
I have never ordered from Pat's and have no opinion. But I hope I get a
reply anyway ;-)
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 16 Jan 99 05:35:19 PST
From: "George De Piro" <gdepiro@fcc.net>
Subject: protein rests and beer character
Hi all,
Paul continues with questions about mash schedules, in
particular, about decoctions and protein rests. He asked
a local brewer about the subject of p-rests and was evidently
told:
"you @#$%^! homebrewers worry too %^&*($# much about
too *&&%^!@#$! little!"
and then:
"...he has noticed zero difference in his "protein
effects," e.g., body and retention, despite the fact that he uses protein
rests and despite varying S/T and total protein ratios over the years."
Does he really say things like "@#$%^!"? How rude!
What do YOU think his beer is like? Just the other night I was in
the company of a local brewer, sampling his beers. To my
palate they were thin tasting, regardless of the starting gravity.
Suspecting the answer (but wanting to be sure), I asked him
about his malt selection and mash schedule. He uses malt from
Canadian Maltings and a step mash emphasizing a protein rest.
I have met other brewers who were insistent that a step mash
would automatically make a better beer (I guess because it is
harder to do). Oddly, these same brewers are usually apologizing
for the poor head retention and/or thin body of their beers,
sometimes blaming things like the malt quality.
It seems that far too many brewers (both pro and hobby) lose
sight of the fact that proteins are VERY important to body and
head retention. Producing a dextrinous wort is not going to
give the same effect as producing a wort with adequate levels
of foam and body-building proteins.
A beer can be very well-attenuated and still have a rich body,
if it has the right protein profile. It can also taste sweet and malty
if hops are used in small quantities. Even a very well-attenuated
beer will taste very sweet if no hops are used. By reducing the
bitterness, you allow sweetness to take over the flavor profile.
To my palate, a very dextrinous beer can end up tasting worty and
unrefined (I've done it enough times myself to convince myself of this).
While it maybe appropriate for certain styles (like sweet stout), the
majority of beer styles taste more elegant if they are reasonably well-
attenuated. The use of hops and malts rich in melanoidins (or using
mash schedules that produce them) can control the perceived level
of maltiness in the beer, rather than high mash temperatures.
Have fun!
George de Piro (Nyack, NY)
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 11:57:01 -0500
From: Jim Bentson <jbentson@longisland.com>
Subject: Decoction Thread
Recently Paul Smith asked about any evidence about infusion vs decoction
effects on beer flavors. I went back through my records and found a post
from Louis K. Bonham in HBD 2395 ( April 1997) that quotes an article in
Brauwelt International. It shows virtually no discernable difference.
For those of you who have Web access and are unaware of how to use the
archives, if you go to http://www.hbd.org, all the HBD's from 1992 to
present are available in HTML ( web browser readable) format. You also can
search this base so it is VERY useful.
This particular post by Louis is in the archives and is quoting a published
article, so I am re-posting it without contacting him. Hope you don't mind
Louis.
******************************
Excerpt from HBD 2395 (posted by Louis K. Bonham)
On the decoction thread, Dr. Fix recently sent me a copy
of an article with lots of very interesting data on a
number of points that Dr. Pivo (sorry about that earlier
misspelling, BTW), Steve A., and other have raised.
Check it out:
G. Sommer, "Trials for the Optimisation of Mashing Procedure,"
Brauwelt International 1986 (1), p. 23.
This article details Henninger-Brau AG's evaluation of
infusion v. decoction mashing, both in laboratory and
brewhouse conditions. (It concludes that the qualitative
differences in beers produced with decoction vs. infusion
mashes were "extradinordinally small," and that, "based on a
large number of tasting trials it could be confirmed that the
taste was not changed" by converting from decoction to infusion
mashing.
This article contains lots of good info on other aspects of
mashing, incluing the 50-60-70 schedule and data that
contradicts the notion that thick mashes contribute
anything *except* in the rare case where you need to do
a protein rest. Well worth reading.
END of Excerpt
***************************************************
I hope this helps. The only comment I have is that it was done 13 years ago
and I don't know how much malt modification has changed in that time.
Jim Bentson
Centerport NY
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 13:55:46 -0500
From: dbgrowler@juno.com (michael w bardallis)
Subject: us-grown european hops
Fred asks:
"I would like to hear how well do specific varieties compare? For
example,
what am I missing by using US Fuggles rather than the more expensive
imports? Likewise, "Goldings" grown in the US versus East Kent
Goldings. How about Tettnanger, etc.?"
Here're a couple I can vouch for: Subjectively and according to some
datasheets I've seen (from HopUnion, if memory serves,) US Saaz compares
pretty favorably with European, while US Goldings really is no substitute
for the real thing.
Mike Bardallis
Allen Park, MI
___________________________________________________________________
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/getjuno.html
or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 13:48:48 -0500
From: Jeff Renner <nerenner@umich.edu>
Subject: "Killer" Vienna recipe
I suspect there may be requests for the "killer" Vienna recipe, so here is
the brief outline:
For 1/4 bbl, *7.6 gallons* OG 1.051, FG 1.012
10 lbs. Durst Vienna, 2 lbs. Durst Pils,1 lbs. Briess Carapils
40 minutes at 149F, 40 minutes at 158 (longer than intended), mashout at
170F, 3/4 oz. Hallertauer N. Brewer @ 7.5% alpha & 1 oz. Hersbrucker @3.2%
boil 60 min., 1/2 oz. HH at strike, recirc. during immersion chilling
through hop bed on false bottom so v. little trub into fermenter. Huge
(re)pitch of 8 fl. oz putty consistency Ayinger yeast (orig. from YCKCo), 8
day primary @ 48F, 4 week lager at 32F.
Elegant maltiness but not sweet. Hop and malt spiciness, almost gingery.
Too easy drinking.
Jeff
-=-=-=-=-
Jeff Renner in Ann Arbor, Michigan c/o nerenner@umich.edu
"One never knows, do one?" Fats Waller, American Musician, 1904-1943.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 13:47:33 -0500
From: Jeff Renner <nerenner@umich.edu>
Subject: Re: Decoction, Part II
Paul (no last name or location, c'mon, Paul, don't be so shy) "Membership"
<mship@mhtc.net> is decocting and doing some good deep thinking. some
thoughts on some of his thoughtful questions, but not a comprehensive
response:
>I have not yet found a
>way to step infuse or direct fire in my kegs without (a) too thin a mash by
>mashout; or (b) scorch, despite rigorous recirc during the step.
Do you have a false bottom in your mash kettle? This should prevent
scorching with recirculation - at least it does for me.
>If someone has some data or
>experience on replicating the "German" characteristic among the darks
>without decoction, would you please post or let me know?
I agree. I have used Durst dark crystal (90L?) and got good bit of
"German-ness." But I don't particularly like to use crystal since the
traditional German recipes don't seem to. I was also happy with using the
newly available Durst dark Munich malt (16L) - it gave that soft
bready/dark melanoidin flavor without the edge of dark malts.
Unfortunately, my 100% Munich malt Dunkels seem to suffer from short life.
My most recent one,100% dark Munich, gently handled during brewing (not
decocted), was great after 6 weeks of lagering at 32F, but after maybe 10
days at 44F serving temperature, it began to go downhill. Not exactly an
obvious cardboard or other oxidation symptoms, but it became dull and lost
its maltiness. I think it's oxidation. This was even more true of a
couple of previous decocted ones - more opportunity for rough handling. I
think a little chocolate malt works as an "oxygen interceptor," but I'm
reluctant to introduce much of a chocolate note.
>I pulled the thick mash after 20 minutes at 140, then
>brought the decoction to 158, rested for 20, boiled the decoction, with a
>net time for the main mash at 140 of well over an hour. Most who responded
>felt I would end up with a very dry beer.
That has not been my experience - quite the contrary. I get ~67% apparent
attenuation with this schedule. Skipping the 140F rest for a 30 minute149
F mashin and rest has given me 76% AA. I was afraid this would be too low
for my most recent lager - a killer Vienna, but it is great. Only trouble
is, with an OG of 1.051, it's a little alcoholic and a 1/2 liter while I
cook dinner and another 1/2 liter with dinner means I'm pretty well shot
for the evening.
Jeff
-=-=-=-=-
Jeff Renner in Ann Arbor, Michigan c/o nerenner@umich.edu
"One never knows, do one?" Fats Waller, American Musician, 1904-1943.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 19:53:15 GMT
From: huskers@voyager.net (Jason Henning)
Subject: priming sugar effects on gravity, brewery set up, and making barley wine
Hello-
A few questions from HBD 2928:
Rod Prather asks about the effects of priming sugar on the gravity of
his beer. He noticed that his 1.015 beer went up to 1.019-1.020. This is
exactly what I would have predicted. I added 3/4 corn sugar to five
gallons of water to see what the contribution was (back when the
Crabtree/botting debate was going on). I measured the solution at 1.004
with my narrow range hydrometer.
Bob Fesmire asks advice on brewery set up and making barley wines. Like
Bob, I too had more than my share of headaches with mashing in a kettle.
I switched to Gott coolers and infusion mashing for most of my brewing.
It's just so much easier to deal with. I've got single, double and
triple infusion formulas if anyone is interested.
Another thing that really made brewing easy was a brew stand. I bought
$30 worth the 3/4" tube steel. I installed a welding outlet for my
neighbor. He tested my work welding up my stand. It's a two level stand.
The lowest level is just higher than the top of my kettle sitting on the
cooker. The highest level is just higher than the top of my 10g Gott. My
brew stand is easily the best investment I've made. It's made brewing so
much simpler.
When I get done boiling, I use a block and tackle (pulleys) to lift the
kettle up high enough to slide the brew stand under. Then I set the
kettle on the top shelf. I put my c-f chiller on the lower level and the
carboy on the floor. I always test my block and tackle and cleat by
hanging on it first. I weigh at least 2 to 5 times more than a brew
batch does.
My system completely relies on gravity. My brewing has been going
downhill for the last 50 batches! I probably would've bought a pump if I
hadn't built a brew stand.
Now for barley wine, I brewed a Y2K batch starting on Dec 31 and anding
on Jan 2! I mashed in New Year's Eve and got about 4 gallons of 1.075
runnings. Then I continued sparging and collected about 4 gallons of
second runnings. I sat the first runnings aside (in the garage, below
freezing) and boiled the second runnings down to about 1.5 gallons. I
left there to cool over night.
The next morning, I racked it off the hot break. I understand that hot
break will dissolve back in to solution after prolong boiling. Then I
racked the first runnings off it's hot break and added the second
runnings. I brought this to a boil and shut it off and watched football.
Priorities you know.
The next day, I again racked off the break and preceded like normal.
Well except the hose bib was frozen and I couldn't chill the beer. I
left it in the driveway (with a lid on) on the cooker so the 10F winds
could chill it. 8-10 hour chilling. I don't know how snow bank cooling
can be a preferred method.
Anyway, the short version of my method is:
1. Collect the first runnings
2. Collect the second runnings
3. Boil the second runnings down to a suitable gravity
4. Remove the break from the second runnings
5. Combine the runnings
6. Precede as normal.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 18:32:19 -0800
From: John_E_Schnupp@amat.com
Subject: re: Yeast Pak temperature, CF chiller cleaning
>In HBD #2928, Frank Hight, who keeps his house temperature at 58-60,
>asked about how to get his yeast pak going quicker. One trick I use is
>to put the pak on the top vents of the VCR which always has some heat
>rising from them. This raises the temperature by a few degrees without
>cooking the yeast.
Here's another idea that I sometimes use in the winter. Place the smack
pack in the oven with the light on. Usually the light is a 15W bulb and
in my oven will raise the temp into the low to mid 70's. Give family
members (SO, kids) specific instructions NOT to use the oven!
On cleaning a CF chiller. How about this. I have a brush for cleaning
3/8" tubing. I also use it on my keg dip tubes. Why not snake a line
(a piece of copper wire, solid would probably be best) thru the chiller
and attach a brush to the end. Pull the brush thru the chiller several
times. The feasibility of this depends upon the length of chiller line
and the ability to feed the snake line thru the chiller. You could then
sanitize the chiller with what ever method you prefer.
John Schnupp, N3CNL
Colchester, VT
95 XLH 1200
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 21:41:05 -0500
From: Dan Listermann <72723.1707@compuserve.com>
Subject: Foam
I am looking for the correct scientific term for the collapsing of foam.
I
trust that the recesses of the collective can find this for me. Thanks!
Dan Listermann dan@listermann.com
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 16 Jan 99 18:06:55 PST
From: "George De Piro" <gdepiro@fcc.net>
Subject: Yeast starters, part 1 (long but useful)
Hi all,
There have recently been some posts about the hows and whys
of yeast starters. I have posted a lot about this topic before,
but feel like reiterating some important points for the
newcomers to the HBD.
I have written an article in the January/February issue
of Brewing Techniques magazine that may be very useful to
some of you, but to summarize some of the more important
points:
Why make an adequate yeast starter and oxygenate your wort
at pitching?
1. You will reduce off-flavors, particularly excessive esters
and fusel alcohols.
2. Your fermentation will get off to a faster start. This reduces
the chance of wort-spoiling bacteria from, uh, spoiling your wort.
The wort spoilers are bacteria that live and breed in unfermented
wort. They cause vegetable-like off flavors that do not fade with
time. Once fermentation gets going, these unwanted bugs are
killed, but if they have time to work, the beer will be tainted.
3. Your fermentation is less likely to get stuck, and
bottle-conditioning will occur in a reasonable amount of time.
Why is underpitching so bad?
The reason is simple: Yeast need sterols to manufacture healthy
cell membranes. They need a minimum of 0.1% sterol to be healthy.
They will not reproduce if the budding will cause them to go below
0.1% sterol. Yeast need oxygen to make sterol.
A healthy, happy yeast cell can contain, at most, about 1% sterol.
Each time the yeast cell divides, about half of its sterol goes to the
daughter cell. The math is easy: after just 3 divisions the cell will
be at about 0.125% sterol and be unable to reproduce again.
If you underpitch your wort, the yeast cells will absorb the available
oxygen, use it to make sterol, and start dividing. After about three
divisions they will not divide further. If you pitch too little yeast,
three divisions will not make enough yeast to quickly ferment the wort,
and you end up with a sluggish fermentation. If the yeast get really
upset, they will practically come to a stop.
You may say, Ah ha! I can just give them more oxygen now, and
theyll get happy again!
This would work, except that the dose of oxygen will do 2 unwanted
things:
1. It will quickly oxidize the hell out of the young beer and render it
marginally drinkable (at best; it will be cardboard soup at worst).
2. You will grow too much yeast and get all of the off-flavors
associated with excessive yeast growth (high fusel alcohols, etc.).
Ask yourself this: are you trying to grow yeast, or make beer?
To be continued....
Have fun!
George de Piro (Nyack, NY)
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 16 Jan 99 18:09:07 PST
From: "George De Piro" <gdepiro@fcc.net>
Subject: Yeast starters, part 2 (long, but useful)
Hi all,
Hopefully the last post explained why you need to pitch a good amount
of healthy yeast. You may now ask, "How do I do that?"
Since most homebrewers don't have microscopes, they cant do cell
counts. Fortunately, there is an easy rule of thumb to follow:
The volume of wort that the yeast are being pitched into should never
be more than 10 times the volume they are currently in. High gravity
worts and lager yeasts should be stepped up less.
In other words, a Wyeast pack has 50 mL (~2 ounces) of wort. That
means it should be pitched into no more than 500 mL (~1 pint) of
wort for its first step. After the 500 mL is fermented out, the starter
can be stepped up to as much as 5000 mL (1.3 gallon), but 2 L
(half a gallon) is as big as the starter has to be for a typical homebrew
batch of 19 L (5 gallon).
The starter should be aerated at each step. Constant, or even
intermittent
agitation will help increase the cell count.
The next question you should ask is, "Do I pitch all the starter, or just
the yeast at the bottom?"
The starter will not taste like wonderful beer. It will have all the
off-
flavors that are associated with excessive yeast growth. These are
different from contamination flavors, so you can taste the starter and
still tell if it is contaminated. Flavors associated with excessive
yeast
growth are higher alcohols (which are kind of harshly alcoholic, even
solventy), high esters (fruity; in my experience raspberry is common),
and even diacetyl (butter).
Contamination off-flavors include phenolic (medicinal, swimming pool,
spicy in a clovey way, astringent), vegetal, and butter. Youll notice
that
butter appears on both the contamination list and the normal starter
flavor list. That can be a bit of a problem for you, but if you have not
experienced a pediococcus infection earlier, youre probably OK.
(Pediococcus are the common brewery bacteria that produce lots of
diacetyl.)
Since the starter is likely to taste like something you don't want in
your
beer, you should allow the last step to ferment out and cool it to force
the
yeast to flocculate. On brew day you can pour off ,most of the
fermented
starter wort, feed the yeast a fresh pint of wort, aerate it, and then
pitch
that entire volume into your production wort.
Believe it or not, you can get *much* more detail from my Brewing
Techniques article, so I encourage you to read it if you are interested
in
this stuff. I dont get reimbursed based on the number of readers, so
don't worry: reading the article will not fill my wallet. Check their
web
site to see if it is available on-line (thats free).
Have fun!
George de Piro (Nyack, NY)
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 19:59:45 -0500
From: "Fred L. Johnson" <FLJohnson@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Non Food Grade Buckets
Chuck Cubbler asks if its ok to use non food grade buckets:
I went through a discussion of this within the last couple of years. The
experts I contacted told me that food grade plastic is virgin plastic and
is traceable to FDA standards. Non food grade plastic MAY be the exact
same plastic, especially the white HDPE, but maybe not. Some non food
grade plastic is produced from recycled plastic and can contain some
organics that you wouldn't want to be drinking. I believe most of the
recycled stuff is not white.
- --
Fred L. Johnson
Apex, North Carolina
USA
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 22:08:04 -0600
From: "John Lifer, jr" <jliferjr@misnet.com>
Subject: RE: non food grade buckets
Ok, I'll do it again, this is what I wrote last year -almost to the day.
I work for a company who makes restaurant equipment including plastic
food
containers. The NSF mark is from a voluntary testing & inspection
company.
They audit our company and test the containers for a number of
contaminants.
The USDA does not really have an inspection or test such as this. They
rely on
your certification that what you say is ok is really ok. Like most of
our food
actually! In most cases, companies use much more material that is
'virgin' that is,
direct from the material manufacturer, than they can possibly get from a
reprocessor
or recycler. In almost 100% of the time, I would say that if
the container is white or an off white (natural material no color) the
container
is ok to use. I would be very concerned if I were using a container
that had
held sheet rock joint compound or the such. As I had said earlier, they
may
contain UV inhibitors which cannot be used in food containers. There is
no test
that I know of that you or I can perform that will tell us what the
container is
made from or if it is safe. I would say that #1 If it previously held
processed
food it is probably Ok to use. #2 If it is white, or uncolored, it is
probably
Ok to use. #3 If it is green, red, BLACK, or other bright color, I
would use it
in the garden to hold dirt!
I don't want to discourage anyone from using plastics, I wouldn't use
anything else
after I had a carboy shatter on me while cleaning it. Just don't use
just anything
you get your hands on. Being cheap (frugal) isn't the same as being
dumb. I would be
more hesitant about using a bucket that held something I couldn't eat
rather than what
the container is made from. Some substances will leach into container
and will stay there
no matter what you do. John Lifer, Jr.
- --
Cornelius Ball Lock Kegs for Sale
See Web page for details.
http://www2.misnet.com/~jliferjr/Kegs/Default.htm
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #2930, 01/17/99
*************************************
-------
