Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #3102
HOMEBREW Digest #3102 Thu 05 August 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:
P-cooking decoctions (CMClancy)
More phytin words... (ALAN KEITH MEEKER)
No-sparge revisited ("Scholz, Richard")
early hops (ALAN KEITH MEEKER)
donning the science hat (ALAN KEITH MEEKER)
"Classic Beer Style" Remainders (Donald Beistle)
50 qt pot ("Paul Valdiviez")
Desired Temps (Rob.Green1)
Yeast Aging (Jeremy Bergsman)
New user's guide (ALAN KEITH MEEKER)
No subject given ("Todd Carlson")
More starters stuff ("Rich, Charles")
Attenuation (Dave Burley)
The Truth ("Brian Rezac")
Bell's Two Hearted Ale Recipe ("BeerGeek")
Re: Eric Panthers Idea Of Brewing? ("Eric Panther")
Dry Yeast ("glyn crossno")
MCAB II is Scheduled In St. Louis (RBoland)
Science/art/religion (Steve Lacey)
Brewing on a scale? (Matthew Comstock)
Re Whirlpooling (RobertJ)
Re: Backyard hops (Jeff Renner)
Re:Innovations (Matthew Comstock)
1st and 2nd runnings ("Sieben, Richard")
Hose Length (RCAYOT)
Hop garden woes ("Sieben, Richard")
Oxygen in Mash Liquor (Dave Burley)
Chiller suggestions ("Charles T. Major")
ham and orange zest (MVachow)
* Beer is our obsession and we're late for therapy!
* The HBD now hosts eight digests related to this and a few other hobbies.
* Send an email note to majordomo@hbd.org with the word "lists" on one
* line, and "help" on another (don't need the quotes) for a listing and
* instructions for use.
*
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: Tue, 3 Aug 1999 10:56:27 EDT
From: CMClancy@aol.com
Subject: P-cooking decoctions
I am really interested in the recent thread related to p-cooking mash in lieu
of traditional decoctions. In fact, this thread made me wonder if one could
p-cook a bunch of jars of mash or runoff to be stored and added to later
batches. This would save the decoction step for these batches yet possibly
lend the desired character. Has anyone considered or tried such a technique?
If so, would it be better to p-cook and store only runoff or a thick portion
of the mash? Any ideas on how well the canned "decoction" might keep?
With all of the recent talk about pressure cookers for starters and
decoctions, it looks like they may become a more popular tool for the average
home brewer. I use mine for homegrown veggies and cooking stews/soups as
well - novel idea, huh?
Chad Clancy
Mechanicsburg, PA
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 3 Aug 1999 11:51:34 -0400 (EDT)
From: ALAN KEITH MEEKER <ameeker@welch.jhu.edu>
Subject: More phytin words...
AJ revives the recently deceased phytin thread!
BEWARE **** SCIENTIFIC CONTENT ***** LUDDITES PAGE DOWN NOW!!
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
AJ, your results are very interesting but also very puzzling! Free phosphoric
acid has three pKa's ~1-2, ~6.7, AND ~12.7 Since the pKa's are not
disturbed
greatly upon formation of the monoester (the case for phytic acid) I would've
expected two predominant "families" of pKa's from your measurents, namely
approx 6.7 and approx 12.7 (the oxygen with pKa ~1.0 having been "used up" in
the formation of the ester to inositol). The strange thing is that you got
MANY pKa's ranging all the way from ~1 to 12.7
So, what is going on here? My first thought is that the phytic acid solution
you used may not have been pure - what was the source? My second thought is
that your sample may have undergone a fair amount of hydrolysis, thus
resulting in free phosphoric acid in your sample which would at least explain
the many pKa' around 1 - 2.
An aside, the oxygen atom will be NEGATIVELY charged following deprotonation,
not positively charged.
Finally AJ, you may remember that we'd debated whether or not the action of
the enzyme phytase would lower pH simply as a consequence of Pi liberation
(your point of view) or was strictly a byproduct of calcium phosphate
precipitation (my point of view). Well, I think you were right after all! In
looking into the reaction I'd assumed that during the hydrolysis, the
components of the split water (H+, OH-) would both be consumed (therefore
no net gain or loss of protons) but this isn't the case. Mike Maceyka pointed
out to me that, since this newly liberated phosphate oxygen is the one with
the pKa ~1-2 it will NOT pick up a proton during the hydrolysis reaction (at
least certainly not at any /reasonable/ mash pH!).... Doh!! Mike, guess that
Chem degree did come in handy after all.
-Alan meeker
Baltimore MD
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 3 Aug 1999 12:02:57 -0400
From: "Scholz, Richard" <RScholz@refco.com>
Subject: No-sparge revisited
Dear Collective,
With the resurgence of the no-sparge discussion, I thought I would chime in
with an account my last couple of no-sparge / batch-sparge brewing. After
last years article in BT by Louis B. and the discussion it generated here. I
started no-sparge brewing as a way to shortening the brewing day. I mash in
a 10 gal. Gott cooler with an EM (tm) and collect into a 15 gal. boiling
pot. The ESB I made as my first no-sparge brew became an ESB when my
extraction efficiency was ~55% not the 50% I pre-calculated? ( I figured a
bitter was a good starting type since low OG becomes an Ordinary, on target
is a Special and a high OG is an ESB ) I just mash as usual and then pump in
just boiled water onto the grain bed and recirculate until clear and then
drain the mash tun until about 6gals are collected. This saves about at
least an hour of sparging and seems to give an extra malty flavor note to
the brews. I continued to use the 55% efficiency and hit the target OG on
the next few batches, but the last batch I did, I used a cereal mash added
to the main mash. The main mash (~18lb) was doughed in at 140 F and a side
pot of 1lb of cracked oats and 1lb 60L crystal was slowly raised to the
boil with 2 gallons of water (less water and you make oatmeal). After
30mins it was added to the main mash that stabilized at 155Fand held for
~45mins. Then the sparge water was dumped on top and recirculate until
clear, then collected 6 gals. I was looking for a 1.067 OG but got 1.082 OG
this works out to be an extract efficiency ~62%. My questions to the
collective are these:
Why did the cereal mash ( almost like a single decoction ) improve the
efficiency significantly?
Was it the 30mins at 140F added to the mashing process?
Was it the gelatinization of the starch in the oats?
Was it just the longer mashing time ( usually 1hr )?
Any thoughts?
TIA
- ----
Richard L Scholz
Brooklyn, NY
(624.2, 102o Rennerian)
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 3 Aug 1999 12:17:42 -0400 (EDT)
From: ALAN KEITH MEEKER <ameeker@welch.jhu.edu>
Subject: early hops
People have been mentioning early harvests, well add my name to the list! My
hops were ready for harvest weeks ago. Have Liberty, Mt Hood, and Perle
growing here in Baltimore Md. We've had tons of heat and drought conditions
but the hops have been well watered (took plenty of tug and war with the hose.
for some reason, my wife thinks the watering of ornamental flowers is as
important - go figure). This is VERY different behavior compared to last year.
Also, there are tons of new flowers just budding so I'll be getting a second
harvest as well!
-Alan Meeker
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 3 Aug 1999 12:18:16 -0400 (EDT)
From: ALAN KEITH MEEKER <ameeker@welch.jhu.edu>
Subject: donning the science hat
- ------------------------------
But Brad, they WERE DOING SCIENCE!! Their instrumentation (hairy arm) was just
a bit less precise than today's (thermometer)
>"Q. How did house brewers know what temp. to mash at before the
>invention of thermometers?
>A. If the water was just too hot to stick your hand in, you've
>reached strike temperature!
>Some times you just have to look at brewing without the
>science hat on...."
-Alan Meeker
Baltimoron
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 3 Aug 1999 12:17:27 -0400 (EDT)
From: Donald Beistle <dbeistle@arches.uga.edu>
Subject: "Classic Beer Style" Remainders
Calling All Tightwads!
During a recent trip home to SE Wisconsin I visited Half Price Books, my
favorite new and used bookstore, and discovered piles of remaindered
"Classic Beer Style" books. Half Price Books is a small national
chain with two locations in metro Milwaukee and two or three in
Madison as well as some in Texas and Arizona. Both Milwaukee
locations had Volumes 1 "Pale Ale," 2 "Continental Pilsener," 4
"Vienna/Maerzen/Oktoberfest," and 5 "Porter" in stock. The Brown Deer Rd.
store had ten-or-so of each and was selling them for $3.98. The Bluemound
Rd. store had at least twice as many copies of each book and was selling
them for just $2.00. I have no idea if the Madison stores have these books
in stock, but anyone living in or around Dane county might want to take a
peek in either the Half Price Books located in one of those little
satellite malls next to East Towne Mall or their original location on (I
think) Odana Rd. just off the beltline.
Half Price Books does not take orders or ship books, so you'll actually
have to visit one of their stores to take advantage of their great
prices--but any excuse for a road trip to Milwaukee or Madison is a good
one! Maybe some enterprising homebrewer or club could act as a proxy for
interested parties living outside of Wisconsin. Please note that I have no
commercial interest in this business and am providing this information
strictly as a kind of preaching to the tightwad choir.
Prost!
Gelaered Ealu
a.k.a. Donald Beistle
Athens, Georgia
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 3 Aug 1999 10:44:29 -0700
From: "Paul Valdiviez" <brewpab@iwon.com>
Subject: 50 qt pot
I found a great price on a 50qt stainless steel pot. Is 50qt (12.5 gal.) big
enough for a 10 gal. boil.
Private emails okay.
Paul Valdiviez
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 3 Aug 1999 13:43:07 -0400
From: Rob.Green1@firstunion.com
Subject: Desired Temps
Hi Beer Guys and Gals,
I haven't noticed any discussion about beer temperature
lately, and was wanting to know what temperature is the
optimum for any given beer style? i.e. what temp should
an Alt be served at as opposed to the best temp for a
bitter, or Brown Ale, or Porter, or Wheat? It appears
that some beer styles seem to have their character
hidden by serving at a cold temperature but as it warms
in the glass seems to 'blossom' with different flavors and
character. I guess what I'm looking for is a thread where
everyone posts their personal preferences for any given
style. I myself like to have my German Alt dispensed at
around 45 degrees F and an Irish Red Ale I make
dispensed somewhat colder at about 40 degrees F.
Keeping in mind that CO2 volume is a function of pressure
and temperature, you may want to post your regulator
setting as well as your temperature, if you keg your beer.
Again what I'm asking for is personal preferences not
guidelines, I can read those from a book.
Live to Brew, Brew to Live
Rob Green
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 03 Aug 1999 11:13:50 -0700
From: Jeremy Bergsman <jeremybb@leland.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Yeast Aging
In support of the pointy-haired form of the HBD I would like to alert people
to a somewhat interesting article at:
http://www.pnas.org/cgi/content/abstract/96/16/9100
It contrasts prolonged periods in stationary phase with reproductive aging.
- --
Jeremy Bergsman
jeremybb@stanford.edu
http://www.stanford.edu/~jeremybb
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 3 Aug 1999 14:42:27 -0400 (EDT)
From: ALAN KEITH MEEKER <ameeker@welch.jhu.edu>
Subject: New user's guide
- ------------------------------
Kevin Elsken wrote to new users:
>I know that there are many new home brewers out there who are reading
>the HBD who are looking for useful and practical tips on how to make
>beer at home. As a new brewer, it can be difficult sometimes to decide
>what aspects of the crafts are the most important to master, and which
>aspects can be largely ignored with little critical effect on the beer.
>Trust me, you can make very good, excellent, tasty, "your friends will
>love it" beer without doing the above. I have done it over 20 times
>myself.
Well newbies get used to this. There are indeed many variables that can impact
the quality of your final beer and, as a new brewer, it is in fact nigh on
impossible to figure out which are the most important to control.
Here's the deal - if you read the books, magazine articles, and HBD you will
find many things to worry about and to lose sleep over. Confusingly, whenever
someone focuses on a potential problem I can almost guarantee that there
will be at least one person saying "Well, in my experience, this is not a
problem" or "I've never paid attention to this but I make great beer..." etc.
How can there be so much conflicting opinion out there? What's a new brewer to
do?
Consider the following possibilities:
1. The "problem" is really not a problem at all. Corrections are a waste of
time/effort/money.
2. The problem does exist and can be corrected but will not result in a
substantial improvement in your beer.
3. The problem exists and impacts significantly on the final beer's quality.
People who claim otherwise don't appreciate how much better their beer could
be. (they are making "good" beer or "great" beer but could be making awesome
beer!)
4. The problem is context-dependent, that is, it is only a problem for certain
brewers or at certain times depending upon details such as the type of
equiptment they use, environmental conditions, peculiarities of their
technique, etc...
I'm sure all 4 of the above come into play, but if I had to put my money on
one of these I'd bet on #4. For instance, there is currently a classic example
of one of these discussions taking place on the HBD - namely,
whether or not to use a secondary fermenter. There has been (and will likely
continue to be) discussions concerning the relative merits of this technique,
some say it is very helpful, while others say it makes no difference or even
makes worse beer. Plenty of anecdotes will appear, along with reports of
"experiments" conducted. However, the basic question will remain unresolved.
This is almost certainly a "category 4" problem. The question - "Whether or
not to use a secondary?" can't be answered with a simple "Yes" or "No." The
real answer, the best answer for most of these questions is - "IT DEPENDS."
It depends on a whole host of variables, for example:
How long do you usually let the primary go? Someone who would leave the beer
in the primary for a month or two may find racking early to secondary
beneficial because he is getting away from the bulk of the yeast which would
otherwise cause negative flavors due to autolysis. Here too, yeast strain,
condition of the starter, fermentation temperature, wort gravity, and aeration
could all impact the yeast's vitality making them more or less prone to
autolyze which in turn can allow racking to be beneficial or not.
How is your technique? The process of racking to secondary itself is a
potential source of introduction of spoilage organisms or oxygen that may
cause staling. Perhaps some people that find secondaries detrimental to the
quality of their beer are contaminating their beers in the process. Again, a
whole host of variables come into play, such as when to rack - if you go early
the yeast may still be quite actuive and in suspension in large numbers, able
to quickly metabolize any oxygen introduced during the racking.
My point is, that making beer is a complex process with MANY variables, and
that many of these are interrelated. You can almost never rely on blanket
statements. WHAT DOES OR DOES NOT WORK FOR ONE PERSON MAY NOT APPLY TO YOU AT
ALL!
Your mission, should you choose to accept it, is to learn as much
as you can and then see for yourself how well it applies to your own unique
brewing situation.
Trust no one (not even me).
Good Luck Jim
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 03 Aug 99 15:44:36 -0500
From: "Todd Carlson"<carlsont@gvsu.edu>
Subject: No subject given
I'm trying to formulate a clone for Smithwicks Export Ale (Canadian
version). I searched the HBD archives and found that this question
has come up several times with no satisfactory recipes posted. I
surfed the web and asked around a few places and came up with the
following information. Michael Jackson says that this ale tastes
"bigger than its recipe would suggest". Another page says it is very
soft at first but develops in sweetness and a hint of treacle toffee
dryness. The OG is 1.048 and made from a highly modified pale ale
malt and roasted barley (3%). The bittering hops are Challenger,
Northern Brewer, Borthdown, and Target. Fuggles and Goldings are
added for aroma and something (maybe Fuggles) for flavor. The color
is 29 EBC and bitterness is 20 IBU. The yeast may be of scottish
origin (McEwan's or Younger's, and produces some diacetyl. Wyeast
Irish Ale was suggested. Using the Beer Recipator I came up with
this.
for 5 gallons partial mash recipe:
2 lb Begian Munich Malt
3 oz Roasted Barley
6 lb light malt extrat
0.5 oz fuggles and 0.5 oz goldings (60 min)
0.5 oz fuggles (15 min)
0.5 oz fuggles and 0.5 oz goldings (0 min)
Wyeast Irish Ale Yeast
color is 29 HCU (15 SRM)
bitterness 20 IBU
OG 1.055
Here are some questions:
Should I use pale ale malt or is the munich malt a good idea?
Is 3 oz roasted barley too much?
Would I be better off using an amber ME (I usually use Northwestern)?
Should I add aroma hops in the kettle at the end of the boil or dry
hop or both?
Irish or Scottish yeast?
Is 29 HCU = 29 EBC?
Any water treatment in order?
our water is from Lk Michigan and will have some, but not too much
permanant hardness (Ca) left after pre-boiling
Recommended mash temp, or doesn't matter for only 2 lbs?
Thanks for the tips - I'll post the final recipe and results when
available.
Topic Two - there has been some discussion of yeast starters. If the
info on the Yeast-Link web page is to be believed, wouldn't you get a
better yeast starter from aerated 5% (1.020) wort than anaerobic 10%
(1.040) wort, even without the incremental feeding? It would be a
simple experiment - set up the two cultures (same volume) and
innoculate with the same amount of yeast. When fermentation has
subsided, chill to settle the yeast and see if there is a difference
in the size of yeast cake. Maybe I'll try it when I get set up to
brew the Smithwicks clone
todd
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 3 Aug 1999 13:24:15 -0700
From: "Rich, Charles" <CRich@filenet.com>
Subject: More starters stuff
> Along with the many good tips contrinbuted by Pat Babcock, Rich, Eric et
> al. I'd like to add that I find it's useful to keep on hand some
> pre-canned sterile "empties" and some quart jars half-filled with sterile
> water.
>
> The half-filled jars are useful for capturing yeast cakes, the empties,
> well they just surprise me by being there for different things when I need
> them, like splitting a starter for a friend, recieving yeast from a
> brewery, etc..
>
> When canning "empties" put a little water inside to generate steam. I use
> about half a teaspoonful.
>
> After canning these and my starters, and after removing the canning rings,
> I put a new plastic baggie over the tops, like a codom, to help keep dust
> off, then they're good for storage in the worst conditions. The baggie is
> useful later too as a protective cover for handling the lid.
>
> After racking beer out of the fermenter (under a plastic baggie lid with a
> CO2 bleed to keep outside air from entering the carboy), I pour out the
> last bit of beer from the carboy and pour in the freshly opened jar of
> water. Swish everything around and pour it back into the still sterile
> jar. Since it was half-filled it has room for the additional yeast.
>
> I handle the lid from outside the baggie so I don't touch the lid or jar
> directly. I spritz the lid and stuff inside with iodophor in a spray
> bottle before opening and let stand a few minutes for contact time. I'm
> sure the technique can be improved but it's pretty painless and improves
> the sterile quality of the work. Never had one go South yet!
>
> Good luck,
> Charles Rich
>
> PS: I've tasted canned starters over 6-years old and they were still very
> fresh with no evidence of spoilage.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 3 Aug 1999 17:27:21 -0400
From: Dave Burley <Dave_Burley@compuserve.com>
Subject: Attenuation
Brewsters:
John Wilkinson asks the question ( my paraphrase)
"Do yeast affect the attenuation? If they do,
doesn't this mean there is fermentable sugar
left in the less attenuated beers?" Answer? Yes.
See my disussion on secondary maintenance
in a recent HBD and using stirring and the like
to maximize the fermentation of these residual
sugars. Why? Different strains of yeast flocculate
in response to various factors. One of the often
unappreciated aspects of consistent beer
brewing is the management of residual sugars.
Choice of a yeast will affect not only the taste and
aroma of the beer from the esters and such, but
the level of unfermented sugar can be different and
be dependent on handling techniques during
brewing.
In fact, DeClerk believed that all brewers yeasts
would ferment to the same level of attenuation if the
fermentation were agitated in some manner.
On the subject of attenuation limit in Volume 2
(Analytical Methods) p 371
DeClerk says:
"A number of brewing chemists still hold the view
that the value of the attenuation limit varies with
the strain of pitching yeast. This is not so and all
strains of Saccharomyces Cerevisiae will give
precisely the same value for the same wort,
provided, of course, that the determination has
been properly carried out; a fact that has been
proved over and over again."
As John points out, some yeasts will ferment
some of the higher oligoisaccharides and some
of the simpler sugars and therfore, some minor
differences are to be expected, but these are
often minor compared to residual fermentable
sugars left in beer under normal commercial
fermentation and handling conditions. I believe
DeClerk was aware of these differences. But
in brewed beers these differences are small.
Taxonomy of yeasts have changed and yeast
desribed as "brewing yeasts" has narrowed, so
it is likely DeCLerk is even more right today.
Later,(p 444) DeClerk comments :
"A well attenuated beer should not give a
difference greater than 0.1-0.2 degPlato
between the present gravity and the
attenuation limit."
Do I think all beers should be well attenuated?
Not necessarily, but as a brewer you should
know how to measure and control it so you
can get the beer you want, consistently.
Keep on Brewin'
Dave Burley
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 3 Aug 1999 16:31:20 -0600
From: "Brian Rezac" <rawhide@oneimage.com>
Subject: The Truth
Paul Gatza on 7/21/99 10:39 AM said:
>>I terminated Brian Rezac's employment from the AHA yesterday. I have known
Brian since the first time he came in to the homebrew shop after his wife
Nancy bought him his start-up kit. We are friends and will continue to be.
>>
Paul must have been very torn to "have to" fire such a "friend". Well they
say you can't believe everything you read...The truth is that I have never
brewed a batch of beer from a kit, starter or any other. Ever. I have
nothing against kits, I just haven't brewed from one. My wife, who's name
actually is, Nancy, has never bought me one single ingredient of any of the
batches that I've brewed over the years. Ever. What Paul states above,
never took place. Paul must have made it up thinking that you were gullible
enough to believe it. My mother has a saying, "Show me your friends, and
I'll tell you who you are." I find Paul's last sentence the most slanderous
of all.
I took a little time off to rest from all the work that I wasn't doing at
the AHA and reflect on my next step. But now I'm back. I have been trying
to "take the high road" and refrain from commenting as I know some may
dismiss it as rantings of a disgruntled former employee attempting to "exact
a pound of flesh." But, I very much want to stay in the brewing industry.
To do so, I feel that my hand is forced to defend against the slander of my
name and reputation. However, I have the utimate defense, the truth.
I will be posting soon.
Brian Rezac
Homebrewer
rawhide@oneimage.com
"You may write me down in history
With you bitter, twisted lies,
You may trod me in the very dirt
But still, like dust, I'll rise."
- Maya Angelou, Still I Rise
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 3 Aug 1999 22:04:05 -0500
From: "BeerGeek" <beergeek@flash.net>
Subject: Bell's Two Hearted Ale Recipe
Anyone out there have an all grain recipe for Bell's Two Hearted Ale?
Specifically, I am interested in the hops/hopping schedule.
TIA,
Kevin
beergeek@flash.net
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 4 Aug 1999 12:30:40 +1000
From: "Eric Panther" <epanther@somelab.com>
Subject: Re: Eric Panthers Idea Of Brewing?
Phil and Jill ask:
>Are you seriously going to tell us the above ideas and God knows
>what else you have read is actually incorporated into your brew day?
>
Hell no! I don't even drink beer! Haven't you folks out there heard that
beer is bad for you?
Eric Panther.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 03 Aug 1999 21:59:08 -0500
From: "glyn crossno" <crossno@tnns.net>
Subject: Dry Yeast
I split (as usual) a recent soy CAP. 5 gallons in glass used EDME, 3.5
gallons in plastic EDME, and 3.5 gallons in plastic windsor. Both of
the EDME had a foam cap 9 hours after pitching. Windsor no foam at 18
hours.
EDME appeared to finish first. Both yeasts were bought at approximately
the same time and treated the same way. Both were rehydrated before
pitching.
At bottling, 9 days later. EMDE glass 1.011, plastic 1.009. Plastic
always finishes lower??? Windsor 1.008. The Windsor is totally clear.
The EDME is cloudy for 3/4 of the glass carboy and syphons cloudy from
the plastic. With the EDME still in suspension it has a yeast taste.
More on tasting later.
The soy left no flavor I can detect at this time.
Glyn Crossno
Estill Springs, TN
- --
The Surgeon General said nothing about smoking the competition.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 4 Aug 1999 00:15:41 EDT
From: RBoland@aol.com
Subject: MCAB II is Scheduled In St. Louis
The St. Louis Brews are pleased to announce that the Second Annual Masters
Championship of Amateur Brewing (MCAB II) now has a date and location. MCAB
II will be held March 24-26, 2000 at the Hampton Inn Union Station, 2211
Market Street, St. Louis, MO, 63103. Mark your calendars and make your
reservations now! A block of rooms has been reserved for us at a group rate;
please mention MCAB when you call the Inn at 314-841-3200 for reservations.
Following the example set by MCAB I, the program will include a high quality,
results-oriented technical conference in addition to the championship
judging. Of course, the awards ceremony and party will include great prizes,
great food, and a wide variety great homebrew. This year, there will be more
opportunities to rub shoulders with the best in the field as both the
technical conference and the judging will be held at the Inn. We're also
setting the stage for a private tour, on Sunday, of the big guy's pilot
brewery.
Union Station is a beautifully rehabilitated train station that is now home
to many interesting shops, restaurants, and bars. It has been an anchor to
the redevelopment of midtown St. Louis. The Hampton Inn is located three
blocks west of Union Station and three blocks from St. Louis's oldest and
newest microbreweries. The newest is located in the Station itself.
As you can imagine, there are a zillion details to be addressed and things to
be arranged before March 24. Additional information will be published as it
becomes available. In the meantime, we welcome any comments and suggestions
brewers may have; please send private e-mail to rboland@hbd.org.
Please visit the MCAB and St. Louis Brews web sites for information about the
event and our club. Addresses are http://hbd.org and http://www.stlbrews.org.
The most important things for you to do right now are to clear your calendar,
make hotel reservations and travel arrangements, and set your sights on St.
Louis and MCAB II. We'll see you there!
Bob Boland - Organizer
John Sullivan - Head Judge and Program Chairman
Luanne Naski - Head Steward
Mark Naski - Prodding, Loose Ends, and Everything Else
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 4 Aug 1999 18:07:54 +1000
From: Steve Lacey <stevel@sf.nsw.gov.au>
Subject: Science/art/religion
Hear! Hear! to John Wilkinson's post in #3101. So, we make a few mistakes in
the laundry/kitchen/garage that serves as the sacred brewery (there is
religion to be considered too you know). If we can't discern the difference
at tasting time, it doesn't matter. If we can, it does. Home brewing is
trial and error. We apply and refine methods and techniques gleaned from all
manner of sources from Charlie P. to Dr P. to -S to the old bloke over the
back fence. Calling home brewing science is like calling farming science.
Science is basically hypothesis testing. It has taken place to establish
many of the relationships which are applied in the production of a crop of
wheat, barley or beer. But producing the crop or the brew is not science,
nor is delving into the scientific literature to improve our knowledge of
the processes involved. Applying that improved knowledge is not science. Is
engineering a science? To me, science is practiced in laboratories,
greenhouses, fields, forests, at the telescope, in the oceans, at the
computer terminal .... etc etc but not in the kitchen/garage/laundry! What
goes on in these hallowed places is a much nobler and genteel activity. I'd
prefer to call it craft. A hobby. A passion. My reason for existence (sorry,
getting a bit carried away)! Leave science to the scientists - including the
brewing scientists who have the laboratories and resources to truly test
hypotheses about relationships between the myriad of brewing variables.
Whilst I respect the deep chemical and physical knowledge that goes into
many of the more technical posts of the HBD, even these should not be
thought of as science. At their best, they are very helpful for
understanding the various processes involved and what effects you might get
if you change a certain practice during brewing (enzymatic activity is a
good example). At their worst, they are just techno-babble of no practical
interest to anyone. But there is room for all on the HBD. I suppose, in
conclusion, I hope I have assisted in putting the case that
brewing/homebrewing is NOT science. It is underpinned by science, but
anybody who has common sense and half a brain can do it, and with
persistense, do it very well. I therefore submit my "data point" that it is
either craft or art. Now, which one could it be.........? (It could
possibly, in extreme cases, be religion. I mean, who hasn't offered the odd
prayer or incantation after a particularly long lag or accidental splashing
of the hot wort?)
Keep on brewin'
Steve Lacey,
Brewin' in Sydney, Aust and about to go and whack Phil and Jill around the
head at our monthly brew club meeting.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 4 Aug 1999 04:58:02 -0700 (PDT)
From: Matthew Comstock <mccomstock@yahoo.com>
Subject: Brewing on a scale?
Ok this is a goofy thought. <GTA>. During the fermentation, the
specific gravity is dropping, mass is floating out of the carboy as
CO2, could we monitor the fermentation by placing the carboy on a
scale? Better than sticking our grubby hands in to get a hydrometer
sample. Probably couldn't tell the difference between 1.012 and 1.014,
but....
Matt Comstock in Cincinnati.
_____________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Free instant messaging and more at http://messenger.yahoo.com
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 04 Aug 1999 08:09:42 -0400
From: RobertJ <pbsys@pbsbeer.com>
Subject: Re Whirlpooling
Jay Spies wrote
... I'm currently in
the process of designing a homebuilt heat-exchange recirculating mash brew
system, and was going to incorporate a whirlpooling feature in the brew
kettle.
Here's how it would go. The brew kettle would have a 1/2" ball valve
mounted in the lower side for a drain, with no internal piping (i.e.: just a
hole on the inside). The outflow of cool wort will have the ability to be
directed past a pump, and then up to the side of the kettle about 2/3 of the
way up, where it will go through the keg wall and make a 90 degree right
urn....
____
If the expense of an addtional pump and/or fittings to use your existing
pump is not a problem such a system will work fine.
I incorporated a silar design in an earlier brew kettle, which was used
with a CF chiller. It worked fine but I viewed it as overkill. About 4
stirs with a spoon is enough to get 13 gals of wort moving and get the hot
break to the center.
If you use an immersion chiller, keep in mind, after a while, you will run
cooled wort through a pump that has unsanitized fittings. Great place for
bacteria to grow unless you clean fittings before each use.
Bob
Precision Brewing Systems URL http://www.pbsbeer.com Manufacturer of 3
Vessel Brew Systems, HERMS, SS Brew Kettles, SS hopbacks and the
MAXICHILLER (fastest CF chiller available)
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 4 Aug 1999 09:27:45 -0400
From: Jeff Renner <nerenner@umich.edu>
Subject: Re: Backyard hops
Joel Plutchak <plutchak@ncsa.uiuc.edu> wrote:
>The weird thing is that while talking to MI brewers/growers
>at the Michigan Brewers Festival a week or so ago, they said
>they were just now getting little hop-baby burs. Southern
>Michigan weather isn't *that* much different from northern/central
>Illinois, is it?
No. I've got lots of maturing Cascades. Can't imagine what they were
talking about. Fortunately, we've had lots of rain here - no drought. I
give the vines no special care - just mulch with some of my spent grains
during the winter. They grow like weeds. But, just to show how much
weather can vary in a short distance, Columbus has a 24% water deficit for
the year according to this am's Weather Channel, and it's less than 200
miles SE. (Directions to Columbus from Ann Arbor - south 'til you smell
it, east 'til you step in it.) ;-)
Jeff
-=-=-=-=-
Jeff Renner in Ann Arbor, Michigan USA, c/o nerenner@umich.edu
"One never knows, do one?" Fats Waller, American Musician, 1904-1943.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 4 Aug 1999 06:30:35 -0700 (PDT)
From: Matthew Comstock <mccomstock@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re:Innovations
I recently suggested compiling a list of innovations found here and in
your own brewery. Um, most of the things I could think of putting on
such a list can be found in the library at http://brewery.org.
However, I think there are a lot of small things that I've read here on
the hbd that aren't discussed there, like adding a DME to sparge water
to lower pH, or using an inert gas manifold to transfer beer to a
secondary under an argon atmosphere (kidding). Anyway, check out the
Brewery. If you think of something else to add, I can add it to my
list and post a compilation if anyone else is interested.
Matt Comstock in Cincinnati
_____________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Free instant messaging and more at http://messenger.yahoo.com
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 4 Aug 1999 09:01:59 -0500
From: "Sieben, Richard" <SIER1@Aerial1.com>
Subject: 1st and 2nd runnings
Paul Valdiviez asked about procedures for making a double batch:
Well I have done this a couple of times myself and was pleased with the
results. Have some dry malt extract on hand to boost gravity up if you need
it, but I just collected 6 gallons for my 'Pussycat Dopplebock' and boiled
it down to 5 gallons. (Pussycat because it was strong enough to make you
purr!) and since I was happy with the gravity I didn't need to add any DME.
I continued the sparge for the next 6 gallons for my 'small beer', which I
knew would need a boost, to which I added 3 lb. of honey and 36oz of maple
syrup. (Ok, since it was just the juice of the Pussycat dopplebock mash and
it was sweetened, it became 'Sweetened Pussy Juice', now that's good eatin!)
The second runnings were weak enough that I still needed to add DME to get
my desired gravity. I was not trying to make a particular style with the
second runnings, just a very nice beer. By the way, the maple syrup
ferments all the way so it really adds little if any flavor ;-( but the
honey flavor did come through ;-)
Anyway, it was a great way to get a double batch with one mash procedure.
The big question for you is whether or not your mash tun can actually hold
enough grain to make a barleywine. You may well have to add malt extract
just to get the required gravity for that, unless you are going to make a
smaller batch of barleywine, like 3 gallons.
Rich Sieben
Island Lake, Illinois
42deg 16min north
88deg 12min the other way that is perpendicular to the first.
------------------------------
Date: 04 Aug 1999 08:20:08 -0400
From: RCAYOT@solutia.com
Subject: Hose Length
Steve is trying to make some excuses:
"Then Roger mistakenly thinks I have made an error ...
>but I see a problem waaaay in the beginning:
>
> "dP = L (in feet) * 0.56psi + 0.43 psi [ 1/4" ID tubing, 2.5
> fl.oz/sec ] (where the 0.43 psi is the
kinetic term)"
>
> You have an equation which contains a sum of factors with
different
> units,
No Roger. The original equations were, as usual, unitless (not
dimensionless) and I *explicitly* deleted the unit and dimension from
the
'L' factor when I wrote "(in feet)". which is a convention more widely
used than writing "L/ft".
If you prefer then read the equation as "dP = L * 0.56psi/ft + 0.43
psi"
that's fine too. There is no error in my previous post."
Excuse ME? If you don't put the units in Explicitly, then the
coefficients don't work do they? for instance, if they are really
unitless, then will the coefficients work for any dimension of L? NO
NO NO, the drop in pressure would not be for instance 0.56psi per
light year or something would it? Please, the equation does NOT work
without units. Period.
as for the V squared, hey, I just said I didn't see it, now I do, good
for you, you can do algebra, and since you can, I don't understand
your insistance that you were correct? Puzzling...
Roger
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 4 Aug 1999 09:39:21 -0500
From: "Sieben, Richard" <SIER1@Aerial1.com>
Subject: Hop garden woes
Tidmarsh Major asked about an organic source of potassium, I had the same
problem last year and I scored a small 1# box of potash at the local Ace
hardware store. It was enough for 3 applications to my 11 hop plants, two
last year and one this spring. It has been very hot here this summer and I
think having the lower leaves die back is actually normal, but I pull them
off to the 3 foot level anyway during the spring so as not to promote downey
mildew. It's the plant level over 6' that really produce most of your hops
anyway.
As to scale infestation, I am not familiar with it. What is it exactly and
what does it look like?
Rich Sieben
yep, still 42x16' and 88x12'
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 4 Aug 1999 10:50:24 -0400
From: Dave Burley <Dave_Burley@compuserve.com>
Subject: Oxygen in Mash Liquor
Brewsters:
Paul in Vermont wants to know how long he
has to boil 5-8 gallons of water to get an
acceptable drop in oxygen.
Do you mean chlorine?
If you mean oxygen, don't worry about it. It is
only ppm in room temperature water. Just
avoid splashing or pouring your hot mash
and wort through air where oxygen pickup
can occur.
In either case of oxygen and (unstabilized)
chlorine simply bringing to a full boil should
eliminate these dissolved gases.
Keep on Brewin'
Dave Burley
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 4 Aug 1999 10:00:04 -0500 (Central Daylight Time)
From: "Charles T. Major" <ctmajor@samford.edu>
Subject: Chiller suggestions
Greetings, all!
Given the long cooling times with my immersion chiller
and 75F tap water, I'm contemplating moving to a
counterflow wort chiller (probably using Philchill fittings
and the copper coil from my immersion chiller).
I'd like some suggestions on cleaning & sanitizing.
(warning: inconsistent mix of US and metric measures to
follow) I'm thinking of rigging up a 1-liter soda bottle
with some 5/16" tubing through the cap to use to flush the
chiller with a cleaning (1 tbs Electrasol dissolved in 1 L
hot water) and then sanitizing solution (either Starsan or
iodophor:
Wort chiller exit tube (3/8" Cu)
| |
|| ||
| | 5/16" vinyl tubing
| |
__| |__
| | | | Bottle cap with 1/4" hole
|__| |__|
| | | |
/ | | \
/ | | \
/ | | \
/______|___|______\
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
|___________________|
1L Soda bottle with cleaning/sanitizing solution
Squeeze bottle to push solution into chiller; release to
drain. Squeeze bottle and plug inlet of wort chiller to
soak. Remove plug to drain. Repeatedly squeeze and
release bottle to flush. A table in a recent HBD shows that
3/8" tubing holds 3/4 oz. per foot, so a 25-ft chiller
should hold 18 oz., and thus a 1L bottle should have
plenty of solution to fill and drain a 25-ft chiller (but a
50-ft chiller will need a 1.5L bottle).
I've also read of some people who run anywhere from a couple
of quarts to a gallon of hot wort through the chiller to
sanitize before turning on the cooling water. Any comments?
What about storage: dry, or filled with sanitizer?
I'd also like suggestions for the hose from kettle drain
(EZMasher in my case) to chiller inlet. I think that the
vinyl tube I use now to fill my fermenter with cool wort
won't stand the heat of near-boiling wort going into the
chiller.
Cheers,
Ted Major
Birmingham, Alabama
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 4 Aug 1999 10:07:31 -0500
From: MVachow@newman.k12.la.us
Subject: ham and orange zest
David Campbell inquires about the difference b/w orange zest and orange
peel. One creates orange zest with a raspy kind of grater obtainable at the
cooking gadget section of your grocery store or at Williams Sonoma where
they'll let you pay about 8X as much. This device allows you to get mostly
the orange-colored exterior part of the fruit wherein the desired flavors
for beer (or pies, or marmalade, or marinades, etc.) are contained. The
peel, by contrast, also includes the white, pulpy portion of the fruit.
Some brewers contend that this pulpy part of your basic Florida navel orange
will impart a kind of "hammy" flavor to a wit beer. I encountered just such
a flavor in half of a batch of wit I brewed with satsuma (indigenous
Lousiana variety) peels in the late portion of the boil. The first keg,
tapped about three weeks after brewing, was tasty, nice spicy yeast zip
complemented by lots of citrusy coriander and orange. The second keg of
this beer was over two months old when tapped, three months old when the
keg was dry. This second keg had a distinct, rather unpleasant hammy
flavor, not right up front, but in the after taste. The second keg of the
beer also lacked the citrusy zing that the first keg had. I have brewed
lager beers with whole navel oranges and lemons in the secondary that did
not contain this flavor. I suspect that the boil extracts undesirable
flavors from the pulp that, in combination with the spicy flavors of Belgian
yeast, conjure an unfortunate taste association with ham for the beer
drinker. Dried Curacao orange peel reputedly contains the bitter citrusy
zing that complements the spicy Belgian yeast so well and does not impart
the undesirable hammy flavor. I will definitely brew my next wit with it.
Mike
New Orleans, LA
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #3102, 08/05/99
*************************************
-------
