Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #3110
HOMEBREW Digest #3110 Sat 14 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:
Re: CO2 measurement (John_E_Schnupp)
mint in stout (?) (darrell.leavitt)
It's The Worry That Makes You Sick ("Phil and Jill Yates")
Crack inside a Gott! (bjm)
re:Yeast Lifespans (RCAYOT)
Is it Malty, or is it Oxydized? AND Fault Line Brew Pub ("Alan McKay")
Pumping - I did - now I don't (Demonick)
Pressure Cookers ("Charles R. Stewart")
waste water, water wasting ("Jim Clayton")
Pumps/Fermentability/loose ends of tubing ("Stephen Alexander")
Old Bottle Caps (Chuck Cubbler)
Social Commentary ("Eric R. Theiner")
Maybe not ("Eric R. Theiner")
pCooking ("Stephen Alexander")
variable pump control (AKGOURMET)
The Zone Beer Diet ("Brian Dixon")
RE: Pumps/Fermentability/loose ends of tubing (Kirk.Fleming)
* 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: Thu, 12 Aug 1999 23:39:32 -0700
From: John_E_Schnupp@amat.com
Subject: Re: CO2 measurement
Matt said he did his calculations based on bubbles.
>I estimated how many bubbles per second (BPS!) I observe
<snip>
>So how much volume is each airlock bubble? I decided about
>2 mL. This leads to a little over 300 g and about 170 L of gas. The
>calculations all depend on the value you use for 'volume of an airlock
>bubble' and how many bubbles you get during a fermentation.
Brings a method to mind. Why not put a blow off tube in tall beaker,
say 500 mL and use an ultra sonic sensor to count the bubbles. I'm
assuming all of the bubbles from the hose (at the bottom of the
beaker) would be the same size (much the same way at all the drops
from a dropper are basically the same size).
Of course maybe the bubble stream would be too great to get an
accurate measurement of each bubble passing the sensor during the
really serious fermentation.
Sounds like an experiment to me.
John Schnupp, N3CNL
Dirty Laundry Brewery
Colchester, VT
95 XLH 1200
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 1999 06:17:28 -0500 (EST)
From: darrell.leavitt@plattsburgh.edu
Subject: mint in stout (?)
Recently someone mentioned mint in a stout,...and I am considerring it.
If I find fresh mint....what to do? Boil and put in like hops, or,
put into the seondary?
Any experience with this would be appreiated.
..Darrell
<Terminally INtermediate Home-brewer>
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 1999 21:42:08 +1000
From: "Phil and Jill Yates" <yates@flexgate.infoflex.com.au>
Subject: It's The Worry That Makes You Sick
Dear Dr Panther,
It seems you have become a victim of your own obsessive
behaviour.
>No, the bleeding ulcer and gout did that! I am currently into virtual
brewing and virtual drinking. Much healthier for the temple that is my body
than the real thing.<
Considering your intense approach to brewing I am not surprised you
have an ulcer or two. Nitrogen filled sheds for storing grain is one thing,
hey each and every one of us at least does that. But spaying the stuff into
your mash tun? Just not necessary Doc.
I appreciate you making the effort to respond, I do not appreciate
your personal interpretation of Australasian history.
>I prefer the story about Captain Cook being a homebrewer. He was under the
misapprehension that beer prevented scurvy. So he brewed for his crew all
the time. Of course, all his seamen knew that beer had nothing to do with
scurvy prevention, but nobody ever told him. Would you?<
It is true that Captain Cook brewed beer and insisted that his crew drink
it, but it was seen more as a punishment than a cure for any diseases. The
good Captain was a lousy brewer and he knew it. It is documented that some
crew opted for a keel hauling rather than drink the dreadful stuff!
The question of Sir Edmund's brewing is a sensitive one and I would caution
you not to be flippant here.
In Kiwi land the men are men.....and the sheep are very nervous. Don't push
your luck on this one.
Your suggestion that the HBD be beamed into space for the benefit of aliens
demonstrates your poor grasp on reality. The HBD is beamed to us from space
for the benefit of earthlings. You can't seriously believe what you read in
here is coming from mere mortals!
Doc, take it easy and get yourself well. Worry will make you sick. By the
way, ulcers do not do well in a nitrous gaseous environment. Perhaps a
squirt of that stuff down your throat before bed instead of into your mash
tun will do you the world of good.
Cheers
Phil Yates.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 1999 08:42:49 -0500
From: bjm@roisysinc.com
Subject: Crack inside a Gott!
While cleaning my Gott cooler / mash tun earlier this week, I noticed a
small crack in the plastic. It is a vertical crack about 2 to 3 inches long.
My cooler has been used for about 15 batches. I do add boiling water to get
the mash temp up to mash-out.
Has anyone else who uses a Gott cooler as a mash tun gotten a crack? If so,
did anyone try to seal the crack? If you did seal it, what did you use? I'm
very happy with the Gott as a mash tun. I had hoped they would hold up to
the higher temps. Maybe I've got a bad one.
TIA
Brad Manbeck
Burlap Shack Brewing
Private emails are OK
Bjm@roisysinc.com
------------------------------
Date: 13 Aug 1999 08:52:34 -0400
From: RCAYOT@solutia.com
Subject: re:Yeast Lifespans
David Lamotte asks about yeast lifespans, to this I would add only
what I remember from reading something somewhare (pretty sloppy huh?).
Yeast cells have a scar on the cell surface from wheere they have
budded off. When yeast have gone through enough generations that too
much cell surface is scarred, I think they are no longer viable, or at
least can no longer bud. I also think that cell wall components are
diluted by the budding process, so subsequent generations have less
and less of the critical components of the cell wall, and become less
robust, less able to ferment, etc. I think that because the critical
cell wall components metabolism requires oxygen, that the repitching
of yeast indefinitely without aeration causes problems, I think that
is why breweries that re-pitch use oxygen infusion when they re-pitch
in order to allow yeast to remake those critical cell wall components.
At least that is my understanding, others may come up with charts and
graphs, cell counts, viability tests, optimum pitching rates, etc.
Roger Ayotte
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 1999 09:31:25 -0500
From: "Alan McKay" <amckay@nortelnetworks.com>
Subject: Is it Malty, or is it Oxydized? AND Fault Line Brew Pub
Hi folks,
Here's a good one for the science types on the digest :
Are there any chemical similarities between malty and oxydized.
Here's why I ask :
I'm pretty sure I know what oxydized tastes like. About a year ago I let
half
of a 10 gallon batch sit in a carboy at room temp for about 8 months, and
the
beer ended up tasting quite different from the half that didn't sit around.
It was
horrible, and I'm pretty sure that it was oxydized.
I just got back from a short business trip to San Jose / Santa Clara, where
I
got to try a few new beers. For lunch one day I went to Togo's (Sandwich
Shop)
across from the Nortel campus (next to Great America). There I had a Sierra
Nevada Pale Ale (which was good - for an "Americanized" Pale Ale, that is -
waaaaayyyyyy overhopped). Then I had a Gordon Biersch, which I think is
local to San Jose. Sorry, Togo's couldn't tell me which Gordon Biersch it
was,
but it was darker than the SNPA, and was less hopped. I also know it was
not the GB Maerzen, since I had one of those at a different place (very good
beer). Though I did have something called a "Hump Back" at the hotel. I
didn't catch the name of the brewery, but they said it was a local San Jose
beer. It was similar in colour to the horrible Gordon Biersch - anyone know
who makes "Hump Back"?
Anyway, the unknown Gordon Biersch was horrible. I left the glass 3/4 full.
It
was the same horrible flavour that I remember from the 5 gallons which sat
for
8 months. At this point I was thinking simply that it was oxydized.
But the next day I went to the Fault Line Brew Pub and sampled a number of
their beers - including an Alt which they bill as being "very malty". Well,
low
and behold it was that same horrible flavour - though not quite as
pronounced
as it was in the Gordon Biersch from the day before. I couldn't finish it,
either.
I asked the waitress to take it away and get me a Best Bitter.
I find it difficult to believe that the Fault Line would be serving oxydized
beer
(but who's to say - maybe their quality control isn't the best). So this is
why
I ask if there is an chemical similarity between the two flavours. Of
course,
at the same time I've drunk other malty beers and they never tasted anything
at all like this. Maybe it's "dark and malty" (both the Alt and the Biersch
were
pretty dark), or perhaps the whole lot of them really were oxydized.
BTW, the Fault Line Koelsch was pretty good. Not quite a real Koeslch - a
little
too much citrus, for one thing - but still a great beer. Their Hefeweizen
was
extremely good (but served with a slice of lemon - which I personally have
never
seen in my 2 years in Germany, though I understand that others have). The
Best Bitter was also extremely good. But that Alt - ugggghhhh - what a
horrible
beer! I've had real Alt, and I can tell you that it doesn't taste like
THAT!
In a related question, what are your experiences with The Fault Line? Could
it be that the Alt I had really was oxydized?
cheers,
-Alan
- --
Alan McKay
OS Support amckay@nortelnetworks.com
Small Site Integration 613-765-6843 (ESN 395)
Nortel Networks All opinions expressed are my own
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 1999 08:15:49 -0700
From: Demonick <demonick@zgi.com>
Subject: Pumping - I did - now I don't
A few years ago I decided that pumping wort/beer around my "brewery"
(laundry room) would be efficient and easier than siphoning. Cooler
too. So I picked up a little magnetic drive hot liquid pump from
McMaster, and medical grade quick disconnects and lots of tubing. I
used it to pump hot wort from the kettle through the CFC and into the
carboy. I used it to pump green beer from the primary to the
secondary. And, I used it to pump from the secondary into the keg.
I used it on about 10 or 12 5 gallon batches.
I experienced a number of problems and annoyances. First, the little
pump was not self-priming. It had to be filled with liquid before it
would pump. How do you do that? Well, you can prefill all the
tubing. You can suck on the output, or blow into the source.
Basically, you are starting a siphon ...
Second, the pump cavitated like crazy, particularly with green beer
with CO2 in solution. The CO2 comes out of solution and causes all
sorts of gurgling and serious cavitation, at times breaking the liquid
flow so that the pump no longer pumped. The solution? Turn off the
pump and let the natural siphon action clear the bubble.
Third, it was more stuff to sanitize and clean, more tubing, more
hardware, it was just more stuff to deal with, more stuff to worry
about.
Finally I realized that the pump wasn't making anything easier, in
fact it was making brewer harder. I never noticed any change in the
quality of the brew, even between identical brews made with and
without the pump. No change in flavor. No change in foaming quality.
No evidence of "foam only once proteins". No FOOP problems. My REAL
problem was starting siphons, and the pump was not the solution. The
solution to starting siphons, for me, YMMV, was to get over my
paranoia of blowing into the "other" tube of the orange carboy cap.
For those times when sucking is the only solution, I got a 4 foot
length of big tubing, into which the transfer tubing can be stuffed.
This 4 foot tube gets sanitized, the "mouth" end marked with felt pen,
then it is used as a suck extension. The point? You need enough
volume in the extension to really get a huge suck to get enough flow
going the first time. Also if some of your tubing still has sanitizer
in it you need enough "suck buffer" to avoid a mouthful of iodophor or
bleach, though the iodophor isn't that bad.
I've never used the pump again.
Were I to go back to pumping for some reason, I would pony-up the
extra bucks and get a high quality, low volume, self-priming,
adjustable flow pump.
Cheers!
Domenick Venezia
Venezia & Company, LLC
Maker of PrimeTab
(206) 782-1152 phone
(206) 782-6766 fax orders
demonick at zgi dot com
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 1999 11:29:34 -0700
From: "Charles R. Stewart" <Charles@TheStewarts.com>
Subject: Pressure Cookers
Scoot Moore wrote looking for larger pressure cookers. A quick search
on e-Bay (www.ebay.com) produced dozens, and in all sizes.
Chip Stewart
Charles@TheStewarts.com
http://Charles.TheStewarts.com
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 1999 11:48:27 -0500
From: "Jim Clayton" <jim@iowacity.net>
Subject: waste water, water wasting
Take a minute to think about all the water consumed/wasted in the
brewery. Cooling water could be hosed into the washing machine for the load
that's always waiting. (Your spouse will love a brewery/laundry room
combination.) Sanitizer solutions can be used as weed killer on gravel
drives and in the cracks of poured cement. Bleach water will lose its'
chlorine if it is kept in an open container for a couple of days. It could
be used right away for white loads of wash or wait to de-chlorinate and then
use it on the garden or flower beds. Some parts of the country are under
water restrictions this year. How about some creative recycling of our
waste water? Any other ideas? Jim Clayton
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 1999 12:32:13 -0400
From: "Stephen Alexander" <steve-alexander@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Pumps/Fermentability/loose ends of tubing
Kirk is concerned about pumps
>What I've READ (and I can't cite the source) is that these pumps have a
>shear effect of the beer, and in particular proteins, and change the
>character of the beer for the worse.
'Handbook of Enzyme Biotechnology', Alan Wiseman Ed., Halstead Press, 2ed
ed, 1990(?) section 2.4.2 and 'Protein Biotechnoloy: Isolation,
Characterization and Stabilization', Felix Franks Ed, Humana Press, 1993
~pp398... both speak to the issue.
Even modest shear forces can denature enzymes. This occurs as a result of
irreversible conformational changes to tertiary structure. The same sort of
changes must occur to other proteins. This means they fold differently, but
probably are not divided. As a result I expect little direct flavor
impact - tho' an impact due to enzyme denaturing is possible.
In practice the RIMSers teach us this isn't a significant problem. Pumping
and shear forces are an important issue in certain commercial enzymatic
processes, but apparently not in home brewing with RIMS type equipment.
Perhaps if an extra few minutes, or an extra percent of extract were
important and reliably measurable it would be a concern.
>All that said, my next RIMS system will be based on either diaphragm or
>peristaltic pumps
You may well reduce the shear levels in the pump itself that way, but the
shear losses in a tube in turbulent flow is proportional to
(L/D)^(b)
Where L is length D is the diameter, and 'b' is a coefficient which is
dependent on pH and temperature and specific to the particular enzyme. You
are better off keeping the tubing short and the diameter large, which argues
against most peristaltic pumps.
=== === ===
In private email, someone noted, related to my post on enzymes, that Siebel
had posted ...
>Experience with North American malts is
>that a temperature of 158F for saccharification still gives a lot of
>fermentable sugar, about 65 to 68% wort fermentability, and that you have
to
>go quickly to saccharification at about 165F to get a significant increase
in
>non-fermentable sugars.
And states this matches his experience of little difference in
fermentability at mash temps of 65C vs 69C.
First there is no contradiction here. The beta amylase present in the
(presumably) British PA malt in some of the papers I have cited is almost
certainly a bit lower than for US malts, and even then the British malt had
about 3.5X the amount of beta-amylase necessary for a complete reduction to
maltose - under ideal circumstances in a 1hr, 65C mash. The problem of
course is that ideal conditions don't obtain, and we only get a fraction of
the BA activity that is potential.
As for the "165F [74C] to get a significant increase in non-fermentable
sugars." comment by Siebel. I think that this must be considered further.
'Enzyme Technology, Tauber (a rather old American book) gives the following
table (adapted):
64C 73 % fermentability
66C 71.5
68C 67.6
70C 65.8
72C 63.7
Muller (presumably using British PA malt) gives (at 1.25qt/lb) :
70C 70% fermentability
75C 53%
80C 28%
85C 21%
The table by Hall in M&BS for ~1.28qt/lb shows fermentability of:
60C 76.1% fermentability
65.6C 71.2%
68.3C 65%
- ---
Many of the difference between tables may have to do with variables in the
mash thickness, pH and especially the mash time.
So what is a *significant* increase in non-fermentables ?. I personally
would be very concerned if my attenuation limit dropped from 75% to 65%, as
well it might when pushing the mash temp from 64C to 70C. If I didn't know
the cause I'd certainly be concerned about a stuck fermentation. I'm also
pretty sure I wouldn't want to have a well attenuated style (like a British
ale) with only 65% apparent attenuation. Not a disaster, but certainly not
the goal either. OTOH if you wish for truly low fementability and high
dextrins, then temps beyond 70C are indicated.
======
RogerA seems very confused ...
>a problem waaaay in the beginning [...]
I said,
>>The original equations were, as usual, unitless (not
>>dimensionless)
referring to the pressure equation:
>>dP = [ C' * (Length/Diam) + k ] * [ (rho * vbar * vbar)/2 ]
which was the unitless "original equation", "waaaay in the beginning".
>Excuse ME? If you don't put the units in Explicitly, then the
>coefficients don't work do they?
Yes, they do for the unitless "ORIGINAL EQUATION" above.
- --
>if they are really unitless, then will the coefficients
>work for any dimension of L?
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
You don't understand the distinction between units and dimensions. L has
fixed DIMENSIONS of length, but arbitrary units in the eqn above.
- --
Roger misinterpreted my statement about 'unitless' as applying to the
resulting practical equation:
>>dP = L (in feet) * 0.56psi + 0.43 psi [1/4" ID ...]
how it is possible to make this association when three units are mentioned
in the very line (feet, psi, psi) is beyond me..
>NO NO NO, the drop in pressure would not be for instance 0.56psi
>per light year or something would it?
Given your serving tube length in light years, inches and in meters how
would these be expressed in an equation that calls for length as "L(in
feet)" ? Gosh-golly they are all the same numerically, and the unit becomes
irrelevant to the numerical result.
When I state "your height in meters is your height in inches divided by
39.37", I do not need to write "39.37 inches/meter" since the required units
have been explicitly stated, and no confusion should be possible.
- --
>as for the V squared, hey, I just said I didn't see it
No, you asked for a source and a case - derivation as,
> [...] where does this come from?
>[...],you just don't make a case like that!
So you requested a derivation then snidely reply ...
>good for you, you can do algebra,
I can do the tensor analysis too, but that won't help you solve basic word
problems, nor remember your own requests. I gave the v^2 result w/o algebra,
YOU both asked for the derivation and then complain when it includes
algebra. Perhaps when you said, "where does this come from" you expected
Rennerian coordinates ?
-S
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 1999 13:26:02 -0400
From: Chuck Cubbler <chuck@maguire.com>
Subject: Old Bottle Caps
Hey all,
Thought I had sent this a few days ago. Apparently not. Please forgive if
it posts twice....
I came across some old bottle caps. Cork gasket instead of rubber.
Foil-like disk in center, where it would contact bottle contents. I
believe these are from the late 1960s. Two types, Budweiser and Stroh's
Bohemien.
Two questions, are they worth anything as collectible? If not, how might I
sanitize them for my own use, considering that I normally boil caps before
bottling?. Presumably, this would destroy the cork.
Thanks,
Chuck
Brewing in NJ this Sunday (in the rain I hope)
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 1999 14:05:40 -0700
From: "Eric R. Theiner" <logic@skantech.com>
Subject: Social Commentary
I have been thoroughly enjoying some of the less serious posts in the
HBD from certain subscribers. (At least I hope they are lest serious--
otherwise we have a few lunatics in our midst.)
It was only today that I began to wonder if they are actually poking fun
at certain of our more serious subscribers (I particularly wonder that
since I see open baiting now). An interesting social commentary on the
state of uptightness on our beloved forum.
Cool.
Rick
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 1999 14:06:07 -0700
From: "Eric R. Theiner" <logic@skantech.com>
Subject: Maybe not
Or maybe I'm just reading too much into this.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 1999 13:50:07 -0400
From: "Stephen Alexander" <steve-alexander@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: pCooking
Eric Panther says ...
>Well I made several batches which were p-cooked in this monster. The taste
>was not so much malty as cooked caramel.
Caramelization does occur in the pCooker too (as it does in a decoction
boil, or a boiler) but the rate is rather low, yet dependent on lot of
factors like sugar concentration and pH, metal ions (copper is not such a
good idea). To confuse the matter further some Maillard product to smell
like caramel, and the initial steps in sugar caramelization are the same as
those for Maillard reactions. All I can say to Eric is that if his flavor
difference before and after pCooking is primarily throaty-hot sharp
caramel - then he's getting a different result than I am. I get caramel
notes too and moreso on higher gravity longer pCooks.
I still think it much more effective in enhancing maltiness than decoction
(which is a pretty weak method for the effort IMO), tho' I'm sure that the
attempt to reach the 'malt sandwich' will create more caramel flavors and
darker colors than desired.
>PS. Hey, the beergod Narziss (I am so surprised he does not contribute to
>this most excellent forum - the world's best! Maybe nobody has told him
>about it?)
I've never seen LudwigN write anything directly in English. Maybe it's the
lack of umlauts that keeps him away.
>does not recommend overheating wort either, for you science
>geeks.
Just for the science geeks ? What odd advice. For what reason and at what
temp does he consider it overheating ? It's normal (to about 219F) in
internal boiler systems and extreme (3+ bar) systems around 300F and even
higher are described in Kunze and elsewhere. 250F is pretty tame by
comparison.
==
In a related note Phil Yates says ...
>[Steve], I just hope you aren't going to tell us all you don't drink
>beer either!
Never. Yeast asexually reproduce in it, cats p*ss in it.
Steve
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 1999 17:09:46 EDT
From: AKGOURMET@aol.com
Subject: variable pump control
Matt in HBD# 3109 asked about using a dimmer switch to control a RIMS pump.
I use one on my 2-tier RIMS and it works great. It's a ceiling fan
controller rated for 5 amps that cost about $12. The mag. pump only draws
about 1.3 amps, if I remember correctly. I usually recirculate for 30
minutes and then do a 30 minute sparge with the pump running at 1/2 - 3/4
speed. I also use a valve on the output side to regulate the flow. The pump
barely gets warm to the touch. I also like the way the switch allows the
pump to start slowly and gradually increase the flow .
==============
Mint in beer: I did this with a Christmas Ale several years back. The base
beer was porter/dark ale style to which I added cinnimon, nutmeg, ginger and
mint. I added a whole bottle of dried, crushed mint leaves, which is only
about .2 ounces. I think it was Schilling brand -- the standard size spice
bottle you buy in the grocery store. Added it right to the boil. 5 gallons,
by the way. The flavor was barely perceptible in the finished beer, but it
had a nice cooling effect on the tongue. Kind of like a peppermint patty. I
liked it.
==============
Did I hear(read) Rob say that its preferable to store dry yeast frozen?
Freezing won't kill it? I assume it's not a good idea to put frozen yeast
into 105f. water to rehydrate. Any idea what an acceptable warming rate is?
Bill Wright
Juneau, Alaska
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 1999 18:44:08 -0700
From: "Brian Dixon" <mutex@proaxis.com>
Subject: The Zone Beer Diet
I haven't been around here too much in the last few months 'cuz I've been
dieting ... dropped 43 lbs so far, and have about 15 to go. I've been doing
it on the Zone diet (see New York #1 top seller by Dr. Barry Sears "Enter
the Zone"). No affiliation, yadda, yadda, yadda. I'm just a non-hungry,
fully satisfied, weight losing customer ... that Dr. Sears dude knows his
stuff (in spite of the flashy 'used car sales' book cover.)
In any case, the beer drinkers in the crowd might want to know that the beer
belly effect can be reduced! For reasons of hormone control, specifically
the glucagon/insulin axis, Dr. Sears recommends eating and snacking with
particular ratios of the macronutrients (protein, carbohydrate, fat). It
works. The ratio is for each 7 grams of protein, eat 9 grams of
carbohydrate and 1.5 to 3 grams of fat. In calories, each meal and snack
should be 30% protein, 40% carbohydrate, and 30% fat. Any higher in the
carbs and you increase your insulin response, which in turn reduces blood
sugar by moving sugars into fat store and locks up fat store so that you
can't utilize it. Since maltose has a glycemic index even higher than pure
sucrose, beer is an especially effective way to mess up your insulin
response and to gain (and keep) fat ... hence the beer belly. I'm 43 lbs
(out of 58 that I needed to lose) into proving that Dr. Sears is right. If
you are interested, check out http://www.zoneperfect.com.
In the mean time, move that beer drinking closer to a 'zone' meal by
consuming protein/fat before and during the beer consumption. Those clever
folk in the crowd already see why I'm so excited ... hmmmm, maltose is
absorbed especially fast and fat acts as a regulator to slow that
absorption. And you've got to have protein to go with the carbs in the
beer. And by transitive deduction, it'd be best if the protein source
included an appropriate level of fat. Are you there yet? For each 12
ounces of microbrew type beer (go by average specific gravities), you should
eat about 1.5 to 2 ounces of meat (or eggwhite or tofu or soy protein etc.)
and about 3 to 6 grams of fat. But since maltose is utilized so fast some
extra fat, for regulation purposes, is not a bad thing. As Dr. Sears points
out, it's not fat that makes us fat, it's carbohydrates (what do you fatten
a cow with ... oily hay? Nope! Lots of grain and sweet feed!). So what
protein source meets the requirement of having a high enough level of fat to
regulate all that nasty maltose? You can figure out your own answer, but
hey ... I'm heading off to the bar for summer sausage and beer! (The only
downside here is that only two 12 ounce beers and 3 or 4 ounces of the
sausage would be our limit ... more than that and the extra calories in
themselves cause the insulin response and fat gain again.) I'm sure Dr.
Sears would not suggest this as your normal diet, but I actually DO have
sausage and beer like this about once or twice a week and it has NOT reduced
my rate of fat loss (1.5 to 2 lbs per week).
Life is good!
Brian
PS: I just figured that if anyone out there is tending to be on the 'portly'
side like I was, that they'd like this good news ... lose weight and still
drink beer and eat meat!
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 14 Aug 1999 00:10:13 -0500
From: Kirk.Fleming@born.com
Subject: RE: Pumps/Fermentability/loose ends of tubing
...but I certainly wouldn't expect turbulent flow using a peristaltic pump,
and in fact, I'd be very surprised if even my centrifugal pumps drive the
flow turbulent in my system. It certainly LOOKS laminar based on visual
observation of small particles at or near the tubing wall (5/8" ID).
Kirk
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #3110, 08/14/99
*************************************
-------
