Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #3179
HOMEBREW Digest #3179 Fri 26 November 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:
water treatment for Iron, Manganese ("Schrempp, Michael")
Boilover Preventer ("Humphrey,Patrick")
valley mills (Regan Pallandi)
Benzene and public safety ("Glen Pannicke")
RE: Grain Mill (Bob Sheck)
An Apology (Eric.Fouch)
Re: First-wort Hopping (james r layton)
Re: Smoky Scotch Ales, Decoction Mashing, & Open Fermenters (KMacneal)
RIMS overheat fail-safe (Jonathan Peakall)
BT - How Are The Mail-Outs Handled? (Ron and Sharon)
Peristaltic pumps (Louis Bonham)
Re: First Wort Hopping (Jeff Renner)
Re: Home Malting/Breadmaking (Jeff Renner)
Re: further to open fermentation (Jeff Renner)
Home malting update/ evaluating water uptake in steep (cmoore)
acidity of Wit ("Sean Richens")
* Beer is our obsession and we're late for therapy!
* With the addition of the Lambic Digest, the HBD now hosts NINE 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: Wed, 24 Nov 1999 11:04:23 -0800
From: "Schrempp, Michael" <michael.schrempp@intel.com>
Subject: water treatment for Iron, Manganese
Help, my well water has Iron and Manganese. My few brewing books say these
are both bad for brewing, but don't describe a way to clean them up. Anyone
out there have a good reference or a specific remedy? Meanwhile, I'm brewing
with jug water.
Mike Schrempp
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 24 Nov 1999 15:10:49 -0600
From: "Humphrey,Patrick" <patrick.humphrey@abbott.com>
Subject: Boilover Preventer
Back in HBD 3174, Alan Prezant asked about his pyrek boilover preventer
and
if it would work. I am sure it will but there is a much cheaper
solution. I
have posted this in the past but I will again here...
In the lab we use what are called boiling chips in flasks when we do
reactions. They are simply small inert materials such as glass or
plastic
beads that give a rough surface where bubbles can form. They smooth
out the
boil very nicely.
I have used marbles in the past and they have worked fine but the best
solution I found is to go out into the street and find five or ten
small
rocks about 1/4 inch in diameter. If you can't find small ones, break
a
larger rock into smaller pieces with a hammer. Clean them off with a
scrub
brush and throw them into the kettle. They work great and can just be
thrown
away when your are finished. I have used them many times with great
success.
I know it sounds goofy but it really works.
Cheers,
Pat Humphrey
Lake Villa, IL
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 25 Nov 1999 10:43:00 +1100
From: Regan Pallandi <regan@esb.net.au>
Subject: valley mills
Firstly, I should say that I think that the VM is quite a good product.
However, I thought I should realate my experiences with them. About 2 years
ago, I started bringing the VM into Australia. Since that time, I have sold
a modest number to the mash brewing community. All who have bought one have
been very happy. However, I also use one in the shop, and here is where
some problems have started. I motorized the mill a while back, and after a
while, the nylon bearing blocks melted and fused with the roller end.
Valley sent me a new set of ball-bearing blocks, which they initially
wanted me to pay for. After a few things were pointed out to them, they
carried the cost. Now, the mill is, in technical terms, knackered. The
passive roller jams or stalls so often, that milling any quantity of malt
is an exercise in frustration. I have asked them to send me a new roller
mechanism, which they are happy to make me pay for. When the problem was
pointed out to them initially, the silence was deafening. Buying the JSP
mill would have been an option, but the aussie dollar (aka the Pacific
Peso) would have made this too pricey. So, I can say the mill is nice,
providing a very good crush, but customer service is so-so.
Finally, I thought the only way around the stalling roller, would be to
make them both driven. Anyone have thoughts or ideas on how this might be
done? Gears, belts, wheels?
cheers, Regan in Sydney
Eastern Suburbs Brewmaker
149 Clovelly Rd. Randwick, 2031
N.S.W. Australia
ph/fax (02) 9399 8241
mailto:regan@esb.net.au
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 24 Nov 1999 18:51:47 -0500
From: "Glen Pannicke" <gpannicke@email.msn.com>
Subject: Benzene and public safety
Dave Burley stated on Tue, 23 Nov 1999:
> Glen Pannicke says about Benzene:
> "Benzene is a carcinogen"
> Unless I missed something, it has been only
> proven so in specially selected, tumor
> susceptible mice. But, he is right it is
> *legally* a carcinogen.
> And he says benzene is highly toxic and is
> absorbed through the skin, through ingestion
> and breathing the vapors.
> In my own experience, benzene is not toxic in the
> sense I believe this word should be used. - that is
> poisonous and life threatening.
First, thanks to Frank T.'s posting on the subject. I think it's safe to say
the question of benzene in dry ice and it's relationship to homebrewing is
dead. So in order to keep this posting on-topic, for any homebrewers who have
a question regarding the safety of any chemicals which may be present in their
brews, please visit one of the following websites for further
information:
http://sis.nlm.nih.gov/sis1/
http://hazard.com/msds/index.html
http://ntp-server.niehs.nih.gov/Main_Pages/Chem-HS.html
http://www.epa.gov/ngispgm3/iris/
Secondly, Dave, you *HAVE* missed a lot. In my own defense, I do not post
health information as important as this is without adequate and reliable
resources. If I want to post on a "feeling" or a "skepticism" I'll do so on
something like FWH, HSA or pitching rates which only effects the flavor of my
beer, not my health. Being a Biologist and a certified HazMat Technician, I'm
pretty familiar with some of the more common hazardous materials and their
effects on the human system. The information which I posted was directly from
the Condensed Chemical Dictionary, 8th Ed. (a bit brief in reference to
toxicity and a bit old, but I just don't make this kind of stuff up). Search
some of the databases presented above for "benzene". You're likely to find a
quote such as this:
"Benzene is classified as a "known" human carcinogen (Category A) under the
Risk Assessment Guidelines of 1986. Under the proposed revised Carcinogen
Risk Assessment Guidelines (U.S. EPA, 1996), benzene is characterized as a
known human carcinogen for all routes of exposure based upon convincing human
evidence as well as supporting evidence from animal studies. (U.S. EPA, 1979,
1985, 1998; ATSDR, 1997)."
You'll also find adequate references to human and animal studies which may
convince you that benzene and other such chemicals are potential hazards. Most
of the human data are based upon occupational exposure studies since we're
afraid to cram our own species full of enough chemicals to kill 'em or give
'em cancer. But we're not afraid to jam a buttload of some noxious crap into
a mouse (whose system is closer to ours than you'd like to admit) to
see if it's a carcinogen or to determine the LD50 toxicity exposure limits.
I hope that you'll change your mind on this issue and take appropriate
measures to minimize your exposure to these kinds of chemicals at work - for
your own health.
Brew Hard!
- or -
Brew Naked!
But not at the same time ;-)
G
================================
Millstone Alehouse
alehouse@homepage.com
http://alehouse.homepage.com
================================
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 24 Nov 1999 19:57:00 -0500
From: Bob Sheck <bsheck@skantech.net>
Subject: RE: Grain Mill
Well, I tried to send this direct to you, Contractor Bob,
but the mail kept bouncing. So if you see it here, then
consider my opinion based on using both (And I've also had the
displeasure of putzing around with the Valley Mill too, at
a friend's place).
I've used them before I bought my Schmidling mill.
Your a contractor, so you must know tools. Well,
figger if you want to buy some cheap Chinese thing
or a quality made tool.
I'd say it's pretty much the same with grain mills.
I've had my Schmidling mill for the last 4-5 yrs and
I'm glad I made that choice. Yes, I bought the
adjustable, but have only putzed with the adjustments a few times.
Now it's set to where my grain is just broken. I get
suitable extraction with very little cloudiness from 'flour'
which I notice the Corona makes a lot of. Sure, it converts
and can be filtered out through recirculation, but this is one
more damn thing to futz with in an already long brew
day!
- ----------
>There are many grain mills available on eBay. Corona hand
>mills are selling from $25 to $40. If they are any good.
>
>Contractor Bob
Bob Sheck
bsheck, me-sheck, abednigo! Greenville, NC
email:bsheck@skantech.net or see us at:
http://www.skantech.net/bsheck/
(252)830-1833
- -------------
"Madness takes its toll -- Please have exact change!"
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 25 Nov 1999 09:25:00 -0500
From: Eric.Fouch@steelcase.com
Subject: An Apology
With regards to the sig line of my last post, I made a personal reference to
an individual regarding something that happened on another mailing list. I
did this in jest. It was not received well by the person I referenced. After
sorting through the details, and the effect it had, I offer a public apology
to the offended party.
This is usually the part where I attempt to insert other pieces of humor,
because I am irretractably extroverted. But, as a show of good faith, I make
no jokes with this post.
I am sorry for the offense I perpetrated. I hope this post will precipitate a
string of apologies related to this event.
Happy Thanksgiving, All!
Eric Fouch
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 25 Nov 1999 08:38:14 -0600
From: james r layton <blutick@juno.com>
Subject: Re: First-wort Hopping
Matthew Arnold asked a recurring question which really needs some
research to provide a definitive answer:
>My big question is this: How do people calculate the bitterness
contributed
>from the first-wort hops?
I calculate the bitterness of first-wort hops the same as I would for hop
additions during the boil. For example, 1.0 ounce of first-wort hops
followed by a 90 minute boil equals 1.0 ounce of hops added at start of a
90 minute boil.
This method has served me well so far, but I know that there is some
controversy on the subject. The fact is, we'll probably never know until
a group of home brewers get together and do an experiment. Something
along the lines of the Palexperiment should provide enough data points to
lend some statistical support to the results.
Jim Layton
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 25 Nov 1999 10:17:02 EST
From: KMacneal@aol.com
Subject: Re: Smoky Scotch Ales, Decoction Mashing, & Open Fermenters
>From what I've read, the smoky flavor for Scotch Ales does not come from
smoked malt. You can use smoked malt, but it wouldn't be true to style. I
have used peat smoked malt from Williams Brewing in scotch ales & porters
very successfully. It doesn't take a lot (1/4-1/2 lb. in a 10+ lb. grain
bill for 5 gallons).
I decoction mash when brewing wheat beers, maerzens, bocks, etc. and haven't
noticed any large differences in the sparge between those beers and beers
brewed by infusion mashing. I only mill my grain once and keep the valve
throttled back so the sparge doesn't happen too quickly.
My primary fermenter is a large (~8 gallon) plastic bucket with a lid and an
airlock. The only times I've used a glass carboy with a blowoff tube is when
I had something going in the plastic primary. As a result, most of my beers
ferment in primary with the yeast head collapsing into the beer before I rack
to secondary. I haven't done any side by side testing of closed fermenter
vs. blowoff but I haven't noticed anything adverse in the beers brewed in the
closed fermenter, no anything particularly outstanding of those brewed using
a blowoff tube.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 25 Nov 1999 07:29:22 -0700
From: Jonathan Peakall <jpeakall@mcn.org>
Subject: RIMS overheat fail-safe
Howdy All,
A quick question for you RIMsers out there: I am setting up my control
system with a PID controller, and want to put in a overheat fail-safe that
would shut everything down in case of overheat, say due to a clogged pump.
I have been considering thermistors, but can't seem to find any information
on how to calculate the temp values from the resistance values. Does anyone
else have such a fail-safe, and if so, what do you use?
TIA,
Jonathan Peakall
********************************************
"I don't feel we did wrong in taking this great country away from
them. There were great numbers of people who needed new land, and
the Indians were selfishly trying to keep it for themselves."
-- John Wayne
********************************************
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 25 Nov 1999 09:33:28 -0600
From: Ron and Sharon <biohazrd@graceba.net>
Subject: BT - How Are The Mail-Outs Handled?
Happy Thanksgiving to the Collective!
I have only one question/observation regarding the BT debacle. What is
the order that the mail-outs are being handled? I am one of those who
had just resubscribed to BT before they went belly up. I'm out the
$30.00 at this time as I figure that I may have received one issue on
the new subscription (their calculation not mine but I'll go along with
it).
I've had magazine subscriptions go out of business before and every time
I was given a subscription to another publication for the remainder of
the subscription. This has happend at least twice. One of the new
magazines I actually liked better. This is the first time I have ever
lost money in a mail order operation (I'm 42 by the way so this covers a
long period of time). So no matter what anybody has to say about how
people are working for little or no pay, the closure of the operation
was NOT handled properly. By the way, we are being offered "news stand"
price for our subscription balance not issues left on the subscription,
this is rip number one. I get the promise of 4 back issues instead of
the 5 issues left on my subscription.
I sent in my request for back issues (4 of them) the day after I got the
notice in the mail. I would have mailed it the same day but the post
office was closed when I got the letter. Now I see on the HBD that some
people have received their back issues while I still wait. Now if I
mailed it back the next day, why was I not at least near the front of
the line? The issues are being sent out based on availability (of
course) so I figure now that the prime back issues are long gone.
I appreciate the fine work BT did when it was in business, and I'm
willing to cut them some slack in their final days, but, I don't have
any precidence for this type of treatment in all my years. I figure the
$30.00 is gone at this point. It seems that it took an exceedingly long
time to finally discover that the publication was defunct. I kept
waiting for my next issue and my wife called and called to see if there
was a problem with them receiving the resubscription to the constant
drone of a recording repeating "Your call is important to us..."
A recording saying "you're screwed, get in line" would have been better.
Send Flames To:
Ron and Sharon Montefusco
biohazrd@graceba.net
www.graceba.net/~biohazrd
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 25 Nov 1999 10:24:22 -0600
From: Louis Bonham <lkbonham@hbd.org>
Subject: Peristaltic pumps
Hi folks:
There've been HBD discussions periodically that mention
using peristaltic pumps (a/k/a tubing pumps) for RIMS
systems, etc. In the past few months I've scored a number
of them in the surplus channels and have been playing around
with them. (If you're not familiar with how peristaltic
pumps work, there's a neat set of diagrams illustrating this
at:)
http://www.masterflex.com/products/work.htm
These pumps are perfect for many homebrewing purposes.
Unlike most of the magnetic drive pumps we use, peristaltic
pumps do not need to be primed, don't clog from reasonable
amounts of particulate matter, can handle boiling liquids,
can run dry without ruining the pump, and don't introduce
any air or produce any cavitation during the pumping
process. Further, most of these pumps have built in motor
speed controllers, so you can slow down the flow rate
without the need of a throttle valve. Most importantly,
because the liquid only touches the inside of the tubing
(and never touches an impeller, pump head, etc.) if the
tubing used is sanitary, you run no contamination risk from
the pump.
Most of the peristaltic pumps and heads that are out there
are too small for most brewing uses. The Masterflex family
of pumps (which is what you'll usually find surplus) are
divided into four types:
C/L pumps -- precision lab "dosing" pumps, with flow rates
from 0.002 ml/minute to 37ml/minute. Way too small (think:
IV pumps). Forget them.
L/S pumps -- general lab use, and includes most of what
you'll find surplus. Most of the heads generate flow rates
that are too anemic for our purposes. However, the largest
L/S pump heads take 3/8" ID tubing and can generate a flow
rate of about 2 liters / minute. Probably too slow for RIMS
use, but more than adequate for wort chillers, wort/beer
transfers, filtration, etc. These pumps list for several
hundred dollars (motor and pump head), but can often be
found surplus for $50-75; often less. Just make sure that
the head is a big one (3/8" ID (#7018), 3/8" ID thick wall
(#7035), or 1/4" ID thick wall (#7024)) or is a "quick load"
head that can handle 3/8" ID tubing.
I/P pumps -- "industrial process" pumps, heads handle larger
tubing and faster flow rates (up to 13 liters/minute with
1/2" ID tubing; 17 liters/minute with 5/8" ID tubing).
Perfect for our purposes. Downside: these pumps list for
$1000+, although I've been able to score them surplus for
under $100.
B/T pumps -- heavy duty pumps that can generate flow rates
of up to 45 liters / minute (using 1" ID tubing). Downside:
the heads *alone* list of over $1500, and I've never seen
them available surplus.
One other thing . . . in general, you can't just throw any
old tubing in these pumps and have them work well . . . they
prefer tubing that's precisely extruded to fit the tubing
bed of the pump head. Needless to say, the stuff isn't
cheap in the 25' or 50' lengths they sell, and I've yet to
find a place that sells it by the foot. (If anyone knows of
such a place, or has a some I/P 82 (1/2" ID), L/S 18 (3/8"
ID), or L/S 24 (1/4" ID, thick wall) Masterflex tubing that
they could sell me, lemme know.)
LKB
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 25 Nov 1999 10:42:53 -0500
From: Jeff Renner <nerenner@umich.edu>
Subject: Re: First Wort Hopping
Matthew Arnold <revmra@iname.com> asks:
>How do people calculate the bitterness contributed
>from the first-wort hops? Based on the article Jeff R. quoted, I've always
>calculated them as if they were added with 20 minutes left in the boil. I've
>seen others who say that you should figure a _greater_ bitterness contribution
>than if you added them at the start of the boil!
The German method is to ignore the increased bitterness resulting from the
longer boil. I think that your interpretation of treating them as if they
were added -20 minutes is good.
>I want to try my hand at a pilsner again this winter.
>Such a delicate beer could be thrown way out of whack by over-bittering.
>Thoughts? Hearsay? Innuendo?
This is the style that the investigation was done with, and from my
experience, it works great. I do take into consideration the extra
bitterness, even thogugh the taste panelists found it to be more pleasing,
when formulating. I generally hop a little low - low to mid 30's IBU by
formula on my CAP. This works out just about right.
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: Thu, 25 Nov 1999 11:12:23 -0500
From: Jeff Renner <nerenner@umich.edu>
Subject: Re: Home Malting/Breadmaking
Thanks, "Keith Menefy" <<kmenefy@ihug.co.nz>, for updating us on your
malting. I also prefered the flavor of my home malt to commercial
malt, although it gave low extract. I used 6-row feed barley, though.
I haven't done it on as grand a scale as you or Clifton Moore.
>Has anyone tried malted barley flour in bread making?
0.1% malted barley is typically added to bread flour to provide enzymes
for yeast metabolization. There is not enough natural sugar in wheat
for long (flavor producing) fermentation, but there are enough damaged
starch granules from the milling process for the amylase to act on.
This damage accomplishes the same thing as gelatinization at higher
temperatures. In the old days when grain wasn't bred to resist
premature sprouting in the head and when drying and storage might not
have been as good, there was a natural level of amylase from sprouted
wheat that was sufficient for this. I notice that my flour bags lately
have a stamp on the ingredients that blacks out the "malted barley
flour" and adds the word "enzyme." My guess is that they're adding
fungal amylase.
I suspect, however, that you were asking about malted barley flour for
flavor. The problem with using very high levels of this is that
proteolytic enzymes make the dough sticky and poor rising. There are
bread flours with added malted wheat available in England, I
understand. I suspect that they have denatured the enzymes somehow. I
have coarsely ground malted wheat and mashed it and then raised the
temperature to inactivate the enzymes before adding it to bread dough.
It made it sweeter and gave a malt flavor, but I didn't care that much
for it to do it again.
Why not try it and report back?
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: Thu, 25 Nov 1999 12:56:19 -0500
From: Jeff Renner <nerenner@umich.edu>
Subject: Re: further to open fermentation
Robin Griller <rgriller@chass.utoronto.ca> writes on Dave Burley's
assertion that open, uncovered fermentation by homebrewers runs the risk of
contamination
>the *current* practices of
>british and belgian commercial brewers and many homebrewers who open
>ferment and top crop (harvest from the yeast head) is plenty of evidence
>that he is completely mistaken. Dave goes on about these being
>historical practices; this is just not true--many british breweries, for
>example, open ferment *and* harvest and repitch the yeast from the yeast
>head without contamination.
I have seen this practice and must say, that while many breweries do
ferment open and repitch yeast for years in some cases, this does not mean
the yeast is not contaminated. One case in particular - I visited Ridley's
in Essex earlier this year. They won GABF medals earlier this decade but
their beer is generally considered by local CAMRA types to have declined.
I brought some yeast back and Dan McConnell (Yeast Culture Kit Co.)
analyzed it and found what he suspected were mutant or wild yeasts and some
bacteria. I suspect this may cause a problem only if the (unpasteurized)
beer is kept more than a week or two. Indeed, the diacetyl levels of their
bitter became unpleasant to me in week old beer, even though it was from a
newly broached cask. Earlier casks were better, though still nothing to
write home about. There may well have been other reasons for this, but
repitching of the yeast wasn't helping things.
I think that good, even great beer can be made with open fermentation, but
I feel it is in spite of it, not because of it. Ridley's has a new brewer,
so I hope that their former quality will return. The cleaned up yeast is a
fine one that I like very much. I myself ferment in a stock pot with the
lid on when I'm not skimming. While this may keep oxygen off the yeast
head, I figure it keeps lots of boogers off it too. I repitch many times.
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: Thu, 25 Nov 1999 10:42:25 -0900
From: cmoore@gi.alaska.edu
Subject: Home malting update/ evaluating water uptake in steep
Every three to four days I have a 100 lb. batch of malt going
into burlap sacks from my garage maltings. The process has
been challenged as a product of my having received a broken
rib while playing hockey last week. Heavy lifting is restricted
and anything but the most mild shoveling effort has been
relegated to the use of hoists. I have a block and tackle attached
to a trolley that was intended for this purpose, but I rarely used it,
preferring instead to simply throw shovel loads of grain from
place to place.
I have made two 10 gallon batches with malt from this plant, and
was pleasantly surprised by how well behaved the mash was. It
came off clear and tasty, and has fermented well. The first batch
is still a bit green, but even now shows great promise.
I have some photos, and a plan to post a malting page on the local
Alaska Home-brew Supply web page at www.ahsbeer.com.
This retail outlet has co-located with Ravens Ridge Brewery
in an industrial garage out by the Fairbanks International Airport
(FAI).
It is a synergistic arrangement that has surprising benefits to the
entire brewing and consuming community. AHS has sold some
of my malt and I look forward to getting some feedback on others
experience in brewing with it.
Techniques report.
Water content in steeped barley seed:
The objective of the steep is to cause the seed to imbibe enough water
to carry it through the entire germination process. Additions of water
during germination are said to encourage root and germ growth, but
to have little effect on conversion and thus should be avoided in that
it adds to malting losses while having little effect on seed conversion.
I have been steeping for an extraordinarily long period of three days.
I change the water as needed (once or twice) and have been playing
with the temperatures of the steep water. The colder steeps (<40 deg F)
result in a water content of 40%. At closer to 50 deg, F I am getting
more like 43% water. I would like to see 45%.
Water content evaluation method:
I take a small hand grab from the steep and blotter it on a paper
towel.
The sample is placed on a screen of known weight and is weighed.
I write down the total weight and subtract the tare weight of the
screen.
The sample is placed in the oven set to 260 deg F for 90 minutes.
After drying, the sample is again weighed. The dry weight is subtracted
from the wet weight (original total weight) yielding the water weight.
This is divided by the tare adjusted weight of the wet grain resulting
in
the water content percentile.
I have used higher temps for shorter times but found my results were
higher and I feared that at 350 deg F I might be driving off some
organics.
On the other hand, it may be that my current method at 260 deg F is
under reporting the water content.
Your thoughts?
Sincerely,
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 25 Nov 1999 17:40:48 -0600
From: "Sean Richens" <srichens@sprint.ca>
Subject: acidity of Wit
Since the collective is on the subject:
I've never been a big fan of most Wit beers, but I once tried one that blew
me away called "Blanche de Silly".
Despite fervent searching, the closest thing I can find is "Titje Blanche"
from Brasserie de Silly with a similar design of label. The flavour isn't
the same though. It's fairly similar to Hoegaarden or Blanche de Bruges -
lots of orange and coriander and wheat and weirdo yeast, but hardly sour.
The "Silly" (pronounced "seeyee" I'm sure) was powerfully sharp, removing
layers of hop resin from my tongue with every swallow (it was a major
evening at the Rotterdam in Toronto trying to taste as many different beers
as wallet and metabolism would allow). I would love to track it down, but
all sources deny any such thing ever existed.
Has anyone encountered this beer? Robin Griller, are you lurking here?
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #3179, 11/26/99
*************************************
-------
