Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #3188
HOMEBREW Digest #3188 Tue 07 December 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: RIMS ("Rick Wood")
Pro Mash Hop Calculator (Roger Whyman)
Re: carcinogens (Spencer W Thomas)
Dry Hopping Haze (KMacneal)
lp gas (Keith A Houck)
RFRIMS (Reverse Flow RIMS) warning ("J. Doug Brown")
brewing old school-style (Marc Sedam)
Grain Mills and mash pH (JDPils)
fixing an under-attenuated beer (Marc Sedam)
Re: FWH Experiment (Jeff Renner)
Re: First Lager Season questions (Jeff Renner)
FWH: Haze / IBUs / dry hopping and teas / lagering / what's it called? ("gdepiro")
Hop tea, Freshman Chemistry, Tourette's (Dave Burley)
Re: RIMS Comments:Grainbed flow and increased ramp times (LaBorde, Ronald)
German Pils Efforts ("Gregory Remec")
budvar malt ("St. Patrick's")
Article in Sunday Boston Globe (Seth Goodman)
Pickled Eggs ("Jack Schmidling")
Question: this one came out REAL good...why? (darrell.leavitt)
Re: Celebration Ale (phil sides jr)
Carbonation ("=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Ari_J=E4rm=E4l=E4?=")
* Beer is our obsession and we're late for therapy!
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 FROM THE E-MAIL
ACCOUNT YOU WISH TO HAVE SUBSCRIBED OR UNSUBSCRIBED!!!**
IF YOU HAVE SPAM-PROOFED your e-mail address, you cannot subscribe to
the digest as we canoot reach you. We will not correct your address
for the automation - that's your job.
The HBD is a copyrighted document. The compilation is copyright
HBD.ORG. Individual postings are copyright by their authors. ASK
before reproducing and you'll rarely have trouble. Digest content
cannot be reproduced by any means for sale or profit.
More information is available by sending the word "info" to
req@hbd.org.
JANITORS on duty: Pat Babcock and Karl Lutzen (janitor@hbd.org)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 6 Dec 1999 06:47:06 +1000
From: "Rick Wood" <thewoods@netpci.com>
Subject: Re: RIMS
Hello All,
I have been following the RIMS/HERMS discussion with interest.
It seems that we are limited by two basic things (according to many, most
recently MaltHound). We require:
Heating, to hold or raise the temperature of the Wort
and Recirculating Flow to achieve and hold and distribute mash temperatures
and to do temperature boosts.
Technically we have no problems with the temperature Delta T. We can always
pump more heat into the flow. But practically there is a limit to Delta T,
because we don't want to denature enzymes. Many of the heating solutions
answer this problem.
Technically also, were it not for the mash bed, we could pump almost any
flow that we wanted by getting a bigger pump and/or larger diameter
plumbing. We might also get a more efficient false bottom, one with more
open space. Even so, we are limited by grain bed compaction. Even with the
"best" pump, the "best" plumbing and the "best" false bottom grain bed
compaction is the bugaboo.
This problem has two solutions, as far as I can see.
Micah Millspaw has a wonderful design for a RIMS heater using Propylene
Glycol and an electrical heater. Thus he has answered the first problem,
gentle temperature. He answers the second problem by doing a reverse flow -
pumping into the bottom of the mash bed, infusing upward, and collecting at
the top to be pumped back through the heating device. Elegant: flow
operating against gravity to limit grain bed compaction. He has a very nice
PowerPoint presentation to explain the system that he will probably send
you:
<MMillspa@SILGANMFG.COM>
I would like to throw this idea out as another solution for comment and
discussion:
How about having a tiered mash bed with several false bottoms stacked in the
grain bed. Each false bottom would have to be held at its level so that the
weight above would not compact the bed. So, for a 9 inch grain bed I could
envision three layers in the mash, each three inches in depth. Grain would
still be compacted by flow, but the effect of the weight of the grain bed
would be minimized. Additionally, since there is only a limited weight of
grain on each layer, the false bottom could be relatively light weight -
perhaps only a stainless steel wire screen. I would think that with this
arrangement flow through the grain bed could be increased a great deal above
the usual one tier deep bed arrangement. (Remember that each level of false
bottom would have to be physically supported in the tun, rather than just
laid upon the grain below it so that the weight of the grain at each level
would be minimized.)
Any comments?
Regards,
Rick Wood
Brewing on Guam
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 05 Dec 1999 19:00:55 -0700
From: Roger Whyman <rwhyman@milehigh.net>
Subject: Pro Mash Hop Calculator
I've just recently started using the Pro Mash program and I'm wondering
what is the prefered hop calculator when brewing at a mile high, thus a
lower boiling temp, Rager, Garetz or Tinseth? Send me a private email
and I post the consensus in a week or so.
Thanks,
Roger Whyman
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 06 Dec 1999 01:17:08 -0500
From: Spencer W Thomas <spencer@engin.umich.edu>
Subject: Re: carcinogens
The problem, as I see it, with high dose testing is that it assumes
that response is linear, cumulative, and that there is no threshold
effect. I am not convinced that any of these are true in all cases.
I know, you'd say "better safe than sorry" but I do a lot of things
that have a much higher risk of killing me (such as driving a car!) I
do so because the benefit (to me) outweighs the risk (to me).
Zero-tolerance (which is basically the US policy on potentially
cancer-causing substances) is never a good idea in the real world.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 6 Dec 1999 07:16:52 EST
From: KMacneal@aol.com
Subject: Dry Hopping Haze
In a message dated 12/6/1999 12:23:51 AM Eastern Standard Time, Bret Morrow
<bret.morrow@prodigy.net> writes:
<< With this said, any comments
on FWH (or dry hopping) and hazing? >>
I've consistently noticed that a fairly bright beer racked to secondary and
dryhopped gets cloudy. I don't use clarifiers and the beer is never around
long enough for the haze to settle out.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 06 Dec 1999 07:25:40 -0500
From: Keith A Houck <HOUCK_KEITH_A@Lilly.com>
Subject: lp gas
Has anyone use a direct line from a large lp gas tank (home gas supply) to
fuel a Superior or similar stove? Are there any special modifications
required? I would like to include such a line in deigning a new house. Thanks
very much.
Keith
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 06 Dec 1999 14:57:04 +0000
From: "J. Doug Brown" <jbrown@labyrinth.net>
Subject: RFRIMS (Reverse Flow RIMS) warning
Hello,
I have thought about the reverse flow RIMS (Recirculating Infusion
Mashing System) unit for quick ramp times. It sounded like such a good
idea, I modified my plumbing diagram to allow for it, now I am not so
sure I should have and might go back to my original design. The
potential problem I visualize with this type operation is husk
relocation and fluid tunneling. I have not tried this experiment
yet!!! I imagine that when the flow is reversed and the rate is
increased several things might happen which would not allow for a
consistent mash temperature and rapid ramp times.
1) A tunnel might form up through the grainbed where fluid would push
the malt up and out of a column enabling the wort to reverse flow
through the tunnel rather than the grain bed. This would be bad as only
the tunnel would be at temperature, the grain bed would only have
minimal heated flow through it and would not be at the temperature of
the wort. In a RIMS system consistency seems like the objective so even
heating in my opinion would be the goal.
2) If there is a nice flow (no tunneling) it seems likely that the husks
will likely migrate to the top of the grain bed due to their high
surface area and low mass. What happens from here could range from the
husks being sucked into the pump and then clogging under the false
bottom, or clogging any filter above the mash. The reason this would be
more likely on a reverse flow is that during normal flow the grain bed
is held in place through gravity and downward wort flow, however in
reverse flow the grain bed would not be held together so well. In a
reverse flow system the flow would be acting against the gravity pulling
the grains down, so the grains would likely form a loose grain bed prior
to tunneling and the loose grainbed would likely allow the smaller
particles with more surface area to migrate to the top of the mash. My
theory is once the husks have migrated out of the grain bed they will
need to be removed as they will not be able to migrate down into the
grain bed during normal downward wort flow and will tend to form a layer
on top of the grain, causing flow blockage and grain bed compaction.
A side benefit of the hull relocation, could be their easy filtration
from the mash and increase the possiblities of new flavor profiles in
the wort without worring about tannin extraction. Are there other
enzymes we want to stimulate in the wort that operate in the tannin
extraction range, without extracting tannins?
Just my 2 cents.
Brewing in WV
Doug Brown
- --
--------------------------------------------------------
/ J. Doug Brown Sr. Software Engineer \
< jbrown@labyrinth.net jbrown@ewa.com >
\ http://www.labs.net/jbrown http://www.ewa.com /
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 06 Dec 1999 10:06:33 -0500
From: Marc Sedam <marc_sedam@unc.edu>
Subject: brewing old school-style
I was asked (OK, I offered) to bring some homebrew to a holiday
party in two weeks. Lacking the time, energy, or spousal
approval for my normal long brew day, I decided to take my skills
to school--old school. The concept? Brew and ferment 5 gallons
of all-grain beer with as little time, effort, and energy
(literal and figurative) as possible. I decided to drop most
pretenses and brew like a newbie with all the info I've picked up
over the years.
The system--a cajun cooker, two 7-gallon buckets, a 5 gallon Gott
cooler with a Listermann plastic screen in the bottom, one 7.5
gallon SS pot, and a wort chiller. Oh, and I refused to give up
my pure oxygen system for ensuring a quick start. I could have
shaken the carboys, but remember the mention in the second line
about lack of energy???
The grist--4lbs DWC 2-row, 6lbs light Munich, 1lb Biscuit, 0.5lb
cara-pils. First wort hop with 1 oz Hallertauer (a=2.4%), 0.6oz
N. Brewer (a=7.6%) at 60 min, 0.5 oz Tettnang (a=3.8%) at 10 min,
and 0.4oz Tettnang (a=3.8%) when the heat was turned off.
Ferment with a quart of Wyeast 1028 yeast picked up from the
kindly folks at a local brewpub in Chapel Hill. They were so
cool about getting me the yeast. I gave them the pressure-
sterilized ball jars and they filled it for me the next day. The
other brewpub didn't even respond to my request for a yeast
donation...guess where my next drinking business goes?
Making life as simple as possible, I mashed in at 105F and raised
the temperature 2F/minute until reaching the saccharification
temperature of 156F. Rest for one hour. Transfer to the Gott
cooler. Once the sach. rest started, boil six gallons of water
and pour in one plastic bucket (with spigot). Let water cool as
the gods may wish it to be. After an hour, I recirculated the
mash until clear, and lautered into the now-clean kettle.
Guesstimated a matched flow from my sparge bucket and mash tun
and left to get more propane and a couple of herbed-cheddar
cheese biscuits (LOVE the South for it's biscuits). When I came
back, the sparge was done...no water in the bucket, no liquid
left in the cooler...nothing but 7 gallons of wort that smelled
lovely. Picked up the kettle, fired up the cooker, boiled, then
chilled with the wort chiller. While chilling I cleaned
everything else up and put it away. Pitched the yeast, blasted
with a 20 second shot of oxygen, waited 45 minutes then hit it
with another 20 second shot. Within 4 hours after pitching there
was some serious krausen going on; 12 hours later it was climbing
out of the bucket, and 18 hours later (this morning) the krausen
had dropped. I wanted to check the gravity but didn't.
The lesson? In under five hours I had made one complete
all-grain beer and cleaned everything up. There were almost no
gadgets (I won't ever give up my pure oxygen bursts) and the beer
was super tasty going in the bucket. I didn't check any
temperatures other than the mash-in and to get the right
saccharafication temperature. Use of the HUGE volume of yeast
made all the difference in the world--it was free because I asked
nicely and gave up a few of my prized bottles of imperial stout
and barleywine. The brew day was so quick and efficient that my
wife didn't really know that I'd started when I was already
finished.
Just proof to myself after years of voracious reading and an
addiction to stainless steel equipment, that all I've learned can
be put to use making my brewing easier should I choose to do it.
I have to admit I was inspired by all the talk of RIMS, HERMS,
EAHERMS, HERMIE the dentist, and all the other techno-brew talk
of the past few weeks in deciding to go minimalist.
Here's to old-school brewing!
Marc Sedam
"Hauptbrauerei Altschul"
(Old-School Homebrewery)
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 6 Dec 1999 10:13:26 EST
From: JDPils@aol.com
Subject: Grain Mills and mash pH
Dear fellow brewer's,
I want to thank everyone for responding to my questions regarding grain
mills. This is a great forum and I hope I may also contribute to others'
questions in the future. The feedback I received was excellent. It seems
that for home use all the mills will work well.
I have another question to ask the hbd collective regarding water treatment
and mash pH. The Seattle area has some of the best water for brewing in the
country. It is very soft with 14 ppm alkalinity as CaCO3 and 10 ppm Ca. For
years I never did anything to treat the water. For pilseners and wheat beers
my mash pH is usually 5.5 and ESB's 5.3. For dark beers like porters I found
the pH to be on the low end at 5.0, so I thought the best thing to so was
start adding some CaCO3 to buffer the mash. Recently, I brewed a Munich
Dunkel with 50% Gambrinus dark munich, 25% Gam. light munich and 25% Weyerman
pils malt. I added 0.75 gms of CaCO3 to my mash water. Also thinking to get
closer to the munich water. The pH never got above 5.0 and dropped to 4.9,
perhaps lower, over the course of a double decoction mash. The extraction
was extemely good, as I calculated 90%, which is higher than normal (80% for
infusion and 85% for decoctions) for my method which I have used for about 7
years now. The only other factor in efficiency is the crush, which was on
the fine side. I used a large horizontally slotted grain mill at Larry's
brewing supply that I was not familiar with. The sparge was also normal.
The lag time was very short about 8 hours, reaching high Kreusen in 12 at
55F. The wort was very clear after the trub had settled. So my questions
are:
1) Should I be adding more CaCO3 or less?
2) Although the dark munich acidifies the mash, did the added Ca decrease
the pH further than the CO3 could buffer?
3) Is there another salt or compound to add CO3 without the calcium?
4) Is there a simple "how to treat water text" or web sight that could help
me?
Thanks in advance.
Cheers,
Jim Dunlap
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 06 Dec 1999 10:19:40 -0500
From: Marc Sedam <marc_sedam@unc.edu>
Subject: fixing an under-attenuated beer
I recently had a problem with beers failing to attenuate
properly. They were all-grain batches using my normal (not
old-school) tested procedures, except I ran out of oxygen to help
kick-start fermentation. I shook the carboys but none of the
beers attenuated anywhere close to where they should have. Most
stopped halfway through fermentation. The other difference from
my normal processes was that I pitched dry yeast (using ALL
proper rehydration techniques). They took off fine, but just
didn't finish the job. One I left alone because it was VERY
bitter (the subject of another of my posts a few weeks back) and
the residual sweetness helped balance an otherwise unpalatable
beer.
The solution? I went to a local brewpub (the same as mentioned
im my earlier post) and asked for a quart of lager yeast. It was
a full jar of nothing but yeast slurry. The yeast went from the
fermenter at the brewery to my Ball jar to my house in under 30
minutes. I racked both under-attenuated beers (bock, Vienna
lager) to new carboys and added a pint of slurry to each. Within
2 hours there was a thin layer of krausen on each beer and the
gravity has dropped steadily over the past few days. I expect
they will attenuate out fully and make tasty beers.
I've seen people post about how to fix under-attenuated brews and
this is my $0.02. It involves one customer-friendly brewpub (or
brewery) but you don't have to do anything detrimental to the
beer like try to shake it again. Perhaps the Vienna will finish
up in time for the new year.
Cheers!
Marc
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 6 Dec 1999 10:08:20 -0500
From: Jeff Renner <nerenner@umich.edu>
Subject: Re: FWH Experiment
Louis Bonham <<lkbonham@hbd.org> asks real scientists to comment on his
FWH experiment protocol. Well, I fail the qualifier, I guess, but I'll
still comment:
>Batch 1 -- FWH -- When the temp hits 80C (176F), add 1.000g
>of high alpha hop pellets. Record the time it takes from
>this addition until boiling begins.
FWH procedure involves allowing the hops to steep the entire lautering
time, or about an hour, at lauter temperature, or about 170F (76C) (I'm
not quibbling with your specified 80C), then ramped up to boiling.
Your hops will probably steep a very short time, only the time ti takes
to get to boiling.
Also, you specify high alpha hops. Why not noble hops, since that is
what FWHing was in the German paper, and what would be used in a Pils,
at least.
I certainly would expect the IBUs to be higher in the FWH, but in my
experience, the resulting bitterness and hop character are indeed quite
nice. Haven't ever run a controlled experiment, though.
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: Mon, 6 Dec 1999 10:28:49 -0500
From: Jeff Renner <nerenner@umich.edu>
Subject: Re: First Lager Season questions
"scott" <Cuckold@cornerpub.com> (who has certainly chosen a strange email
moniker) asks about lagers:
>Question 1:
>While one beer is lagering, will it hurt it any to raise the freezer temp
>for a week, so your next batch can primary ferment?
My guess is that it will delay maturation, but I don't know for sure. It
may also shorten its ultimate life.
>Question 2:
>After lagering for 2-3 months, will there be enough active yeast leftover to
>carbonate with corn sugar? Will I need to add a secondary yeast? Am
>planning on having kegging capacity by next month, which will probably help
>me in that dept.
I have successfully carbonated lagers with the residual yeast. As a matter
of fact, I've never had a failure. However, I don't bottle them anymore
(haven't for some years), but carbonate them in kegs. If you do have your
keg setup going by then, I'd suggest artificial carbonation by the methods
you'll find in the archives rather than priming the keg. It's quicker and
you don't get sediment. And no, natural carbonation doesn't give you finer
bubbles or longer lasting head. I'll go out on a limb and state this as a
fact. At least, no one in the years I've been reading HBD has ever been
able to suggest why it should be otherwise, and I think most agree.
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: Mon, 6 Dec 1999 10:38:55 -0500
From: "gdepiro" <gdepiro@mindspring.com>
Subject: FWH: Haze / IBUs / dry hopping and teas / lagering / what's it called?
Hi all,
Bret asks about increased haze in FWH beers. I have noticed that any
highly-hopped beer can throw more haze than a lower-hopped but otherwise
identical brew. I believe this may have something to do with the increased
amount of tannins. As many of you already know, chill haze is formed by
tannins and middle-weight proteins. Increase those, and you can increase
chill haze.
You should determine what type of haze you have before you take action
against it. If your beer is hazy, but clears upon warming, it is chill haze
(unless there is also a pile of yeast at the bottom of the container after
it sits a while). If the beer remains hazy once it is warmed, then you have
what is referred to as a permanent haze. This can be due to unconverted
starch (common to extract brews to which unmalted gains or pumpkins have
been added), yeast, or bacteria.
If bacteria are present in large enough quantity to cause a haze, the beer
is probably pretty bad tasting, too, so I won't expound on that. If you
have starch in your beer, there is not much you can do other than drink the
beer with your eyes closed. If yeast is the cause of your haze (which you
can positively determine either by process of elimination or by microscopic
examination of the beer), then you can add a fining agent (I have had great
success with gelatin, 200 bloom from Crosby and Baker) or just give it more
time to settle out.
Filtering will also eliminate haze, regardless of the cause. I hate
filtering my beers, though, so look to finings most of the time. I'm
basically lazy; filtering takes 3 hours while fining takes 5 minutes. The
beer's flavor is unaffected by fining, unlike filtering, which pleases me,
too.)
- --------------------------------
Troy asks about dry hopping and using hop teas to increase aroma. He
mentions a grassy aroma in a beer he hopped with hop tea, and poor aroma
increase in beer that he has dry hopped.
Adding hops to young beer (dry hopping) is a tried and true method for
increasing hop aroma and flavor in a beer. I find that the perception of
bitterness can be increased, also. I guess this happens because if you are
smelling and tasting a ton of hops you expect more bitterness, too. Why
didn't dry hopping increase the hop aroma of Troy's brew?
I think there is a clue in his discussion about his experience with hop tea:
he says that he got a grassy note from it. Grassy notes are associated with
hops that are past their prime. Old hops don't work very well as dry hops.
Avoid hops that are yellow, brown, cheesy or grassy smelling, very brittle
(for cones) or very hard (for pellets). Hop pellets should be bright green,
not olive drab. They should smell as fresh as good whole hops.
Adding hop tea to your beer will give an effect different from dry hopping
because the short boil will drive off some of the myrcene and other hop oils
that give dry hopped beer its distinctive character. Some brewers don't
favor the aroma of dry hopped beers, describing it as green and harsh, while
others simply can't get enough of it.
When making hop tea, you can lower the pH of the mixture to minimize
isomerization of the hop alpha acids. Isomerization occurs much more
efficiently at higher pH, so if you are adding hop tea for aroma/flavor
effects, you may find pH adjustment useful (I wouldn't bother; I would just
not boil the tea for too long). Lower pH may also reduce tannin extraction.
- ----------------------------------
Louis proposes an experiment to determine the amount of IBUs added by first
wort hopping (FWH). He asks for comments, so here's mine:
I have found the ASBC IBU test to be sort of inaccurate. I spoke with some
brewing chemists from Anheuser-Busch about this, and they were not surprised
at all. As I suspected, the method extracts all sorts of interfering
substances that absorb UV light, throwing off the test results. Darker
beers have more interfering substances.
If I still had access to a spectrophotometer (anyone at Berlex still reading
this? Mike?), I would like to do a recovery study to assess the accuracy of
the test. Simply spike several different colored, unhopped beers with
isomerized hop extract of known quantity and test both the spiked and
unspiked samples. The difference in IBUs should be the amount you spiked
in, and the unhopped versions should read zero (but I doubt that thy will).
Each sample should be prepared in triplicate to assess method precision.
- ---------------------------------
Scott asks about lagering, specifically wondering what effect (if any)
raising the temperature of his lagering fridge will have on his beer.
If you raise the temperature to the 60's for an ale fermentation, and your
lager had significant oxygen pick-up during a transfer, you could stale the
beer prematurely. If you have been careful to avoid air pick-up, you should
be fine in that department. There are two other concerns, though:
1. The yeast may not survive the period of high temperature because of the
lack of food. This can cause carbonation problems later.
The yeast may well not carbonate the beer after a long, cold lagering,
anyway (some people have problems, others don't), so if you keg and force
carbonate or kraeusen you'll eliminate this concern.
2. A big part of the reason for cold-lagering at home is to settle the
chill haze. If the beer is warm, there will be no chill haze to settle.
You'll just have to wait longer.
You can avoid warming the beer altogether by simply keeping a cooler full of
ice water with the lagering vessel in it. I used to do this all the time
before I had a separate fridge.
- ---------------------------------
Finally, a question:
I have brewed a beer that is 1/3 apple cider and 2/3 beer. Is there a term
for this type of beverage?
It is available at the brewpub if you are in Albany and care to taste it
(I'll also have it at my homebrew club meeting in Brooklyn on Wed.; see
website in sig line). It has a decidedly apple nose, with some wine-like
(Chardonnay) character. The flavor is apple cider-like up front, with a
soft malt character and tart finish. I'm not sure if I like it or not, but
it sure isn't boring!
Have fun!
George de Piro
C.H.Evans Brewing Company at the Albany Pump Station
(518) 447-9000
Malted Barley Appreciation Society Homebrew Club
http://hbd.org/mbas
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 6 Dec 1999 10:46:56 -0500
From: Dave Burley <Dave_Burley@compuserve.com>
Subject: Hop tea, Freshman Chemistry, Tourette's
Brewsters:
Troy made a hop tea from Columbus and
was disappointed with the powerful hoppiness
and grassy flavor.
Why not try some noble aroma hops instead
of a high bittering hop like Columbus ( which I
think gets its grassiness from being a
Cascades cross?.) Use hops like Saaz
for Pilsners and EK Goldings for bitter ales.
This will reduce the intense flavor and bitterness
and increase the hop nose, which I believe
was your goal. You should put the hops in
along with the liquid. But first tie the hops
in a cheesecloth bag ( double or triple
folded). Make sure the bag will easily
go through the neck of the carboy if that
is what you use for your secondary.
- ---------------------------------------
Oooops. The correct MW of CO2 is 44, not the
46 I got when I used Carbon-14 in my calculations!
but the basic idea behind the results is the same.
Carbonate by using the pressure of CO2 as a
guide. It is much safer to handle this way.
However, if you want a carbonated beer quickly,
I suppose you could put some dry ice in a glass
of cold, still beer and be prepared to drink it!
- ---------------------------------------
Bret comments on Tourette's Syndrome. While
touring with a British friend, who loves dogs, we
heard barking and my friend began to search
for the source. We were embarassed to find it
was a woman pumping gas at the next pump.
In response to our puzzled looks, she said
"I have Tourette's Syndrome". Until that time I
thought it was largely associated with swearing
and antagonistic behavior.
- ---------------------------------------
I know the official cover story, but am I the
only one who wonders about the fact that the
Mars Polar Lander got to within 500 miles of
the planet, fired two grapefruit sized objects
at the planet and was never heard from again?
And then there was the last failed attempt
curiously blamed on not converting from
English to Metric systems and the Russians also
had failed probes when they got near Mars.
And there is that face on Mars which NASA
denies.
This could be bigger than Roswell!
- --------------------------------------------------
Keep on Brewin'
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 6 Dec 1999 11:26:49 -0600
From: rlabor@lsumc.edu (LaBorde, Ronald)
Subject: Re: RIMS Comments:Grainbed flow and increased ramp times
>From: "Martin Brungard" <mabrungard@hotmail.com>
>...The lowest cost dimmer I've found is $60 for 1500 watt
>capacity and the lowest cost PID setup I've found is on the order of
$230....
There is an inexpensive circuit using a 555 timer IC that can be built for
just a few dollars that can control an SSR from full on to full off and
incrementally between. It varies the on/off ratio with a cycle time of
about 1/2 second.
>I'm in the process of creating a RIMS and my system could easily allow me
to
>reverse the flow through the grainbed during mashing. All I need to do is
>change the flow outlet fixture sitting on top of the grainbed into a filter
>style inlet/outlet. I'm using stainless steel hose reinforcement as the
>filter under the grainbed, so I'll just add another one on the top of the
>bed to filter the wort during the reverse flow. Lautering will still go in
>the normal downflow direction. Unless someone can see a reason why using a
>high rate upflow through the grainbed would be bad, I'm going to try this
>idea.
Let us know how this works out. I wonder though, if you have a filter at
the top, could this now be an upside down grain bed. Could the mash compact
at the top just as it does at the bottom?
>One idea that Rod had to decrease the energy density through the RIMS
>heating chamber was to have a bypass in the system to allow a higher
>flowrate through the chamber. I can see a problem with this proposal
because
>it will end up overheating the wort on top of the grainbed. And since all
>the flow is not going through the grainbed, the heated wort will not be
>distributed through the bed as quickly. This idea may not provide the
>results we are ultimately looking for, no wort scorching.
Sure, seems logical. My thermometer is mounted way down, just a few inches
above the filter screen, and when I start temperature boosting, it takes
quite a while before I see any rise on the thermometer. I know the liquor
is at high temperature at the top, but it takes some time for it to reach
the bottom and affect the entire mash.
I did have the opportunity to observe a RIMS system where circulating was
done with a long stiff copper tubing with a right angle at the bottom, the
was started the mechanical action stirred the whole mash up nicely, by being
close to the bottom, it tended to lift and move all the grains and acted
like a great stirrer, and full open valves were used with plenty
circulation. I just must try this myself soon, not much needed except a
piece of copper tubing. If it does not work, I can just switch to my normal
downflow device and continue. Oh, not enough days, not enough hours in a
day....
Ron
Ronald La Borde - Metairie, Louisiana - rlabor@lsumc.edu
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 06 Dec 1999 12:00:02 CST
From: "Gregory Remec" <gremec@hotmail.com>
Subject: German Pils Efforts
Hello all,
Thanks to all who responded to my questions regarding my quest to replicate
the unique taste of classic German Pils. Happily, a fair number of you
recognized what I was talking about and were kind enough to offer
suggestions. Most responses suggested that the spicy character I seek is
the result of the hops selection, and others thought it is due to the malts,
water, or decoction mashing. Unfortunately, no one claimed to have
successfully reproduced the flavor I'm trying to replicate.
I was somewhat surprised that no one agreed with my hypothesis that the
yeast held the key to my desired results. All agreed that Czech yeasts
would finish too malty and not dry enough. Based on the marketing
description, Wyeast 2247 European Lager II was suggested. Could anyone who
has tried this variety please provide your opinions of this yeast?
Since I now split my mashing and boiling sessions I can tolerate longer
mashing procedures, so for my next attempt at this style I'll try decocting.
My thought was to achieve a 40C/60C/70C temperature profile, and use a
final boiling water infusion for mash out, and 100% German Pilsner malt.
Any thoughts? Can anyone suggest a decoction-mashed German Pils recipe with
which they are pleased?
Thanks again for all the help.
Cheers,
Greg
______________________________________________________
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 6 Dec 1999 13:11:02 -0500
From: "St. Patrick's" <stpats@bga.com>
Subject: budvar malt
Jim Busch, Mark Bayer, and Jim Liddil offered reasoned comments about
Budvar malt as well as details of Czech decoction. I should be old enough
to understand the wisdom of Mark Twain's admonition "It's better to keep
your mouth shut and look stupid than to open it and remove any doubt."
I was a little stung by Jim Busch's belief that the import I attach to
Budvar malt is hyperbole. But the full context of Jim's post as well as
comments made by Jim Liddil made me realize that "most important" is at
best vague and clearly implied things to the Jims that I did not intend. I
did not mean that Budvar malt was the "best" new product nor even the best
malt in the past ten years. To make that claim would indeed be hype at best.
Budvar's importance emanates from the intellectual curiosity of brewers,
even those who can never use this malt, which admittedly is the vast
majority of brewpubs and micros. Can you make a traditional Czech
or German style pilsner without undermodified malt? Are all these
preprohibition american beers simply wishful thinking without undermodified
malt? Are those that promote the importance of multiple temperature rests
regardless of modification simply whistling Dixie? Or are those that tout
the paramount importance of modification to mash regimen making a mountain
out of a molehill? Narziss has noted the decline in 'liveliness' in
German beers over the past couple of decades. Narziss attributes this
defect to brewers failing to compensate for modification in the malthouse
vs the brewery.
These are just a few of the fundamental questions and issues that
undermodified malt relates to and this is why I believe it is the most, for
lack of a beter word, important new product.
The issues that drive modern brewing research are primarily those of shelf
life, extract efficiency, and time and labor costs in both the brewery and
malthouse. Technological advances resulting from that research, which may
have benefits to consumers (fresher beer for example), may not be
particularly important to homebrewing or brewpub brewing. More
importantly, these advances can have unforseen detrimental effects on beer
quality such as higher beer pH.
I appreciate Jim Busch noting my post was certainly not complete regarding
decoction. Jim has a well earned reputation for writing clearly about
mashing and I hope to provide him and others with meatier details in a few
months.
I tried to emphasize two areas which vary from what most of us have read
about decoction, viz, 4 temps with 2 decoctions and boiling the entire mash
prior to lautering. Mark succinctly notes why the latter may not be
desirable at least for homebrewers.
I'm returning to the Czech Republic in 3 months and I have a laundry list
of detailed questions which honestly didn't occur to me before. But I am
quite certain of the facts I have stated although the beauty is in the
details. I have been deliberately restrained in offering details because I
want to be sure I really got it right. Czech mash schedule is not
accurately described in any text available in English that I am aware of.
Is, as Jim Liddil queries, using undermodified malt retrobrewing? Maybe.
Undermodified malt is largely extinct. I spoke with more than 40 maltings
worldwide over the past 7 years trying to get undermodified malt. I lived
and traveled with maltsters for over a week in the Czech Republic but
ironically it was a statement I made on Moravian TV about traditional
pilsner which lead to Budvar malt.
How about this for retro brewing---Budvar gets 27-28 pts/lb with this malt.
It is an acknowledged fact that Budvar is knowingly inefficient and
resisting the westernization of Czech pilsner which is so evident at many
others. Budvar is also the fastest growing, in both percent sales and
profits, of all Czech breweries.
DeClerck's book is 40 years old---actually 50 I think (English translation
is 40). However, as Roger Protz has noted, Moravian barley had been
recognized as the finest in the world for over 100 years prior to
DeClerck's book. The climatic and soil conditions which contributed to
this prestige cannot be easily dismissed as antiquated.
I am keenly aware that the vast majority of brewpubs and micros cannot use
this malt or will choose not to due to very practical reasons expressed by
Jim Liddil and George DePiro. Fortunately, I have enough brewery interest
to continue to offer it to homebrewers for a long time.
I have another container on order and I may take Jim Liddil's counsel and
send it for additional analysis beyond what I provided for the last.
Budweiser Budvar requests only protein, extract, moisture, Kolbach, and
Hartong.
I appreciate skepticism. As a well known beer writer said to a brewer in
Moravia, "Everyone says that crap".
Best regards,
Lynne O'Connor
St. Patrick's of Texas Brewers Supply
http://www.stpats.com
St. Patrick's of Texas http://www.stpats.com
Brewers Supply stpats@bga.com (e-mail)
1828 Fleischer Drive 512-989-9727
Austin, Texas 78728 512-989-8982 facsimile
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 06 Dec 1999 16:24:37 -0500
From: Seth Goodman <sethgoodman@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Article in Sunday Boston Globe
Hi Brewers,
There was an interesting article in yesterday's Boston Globe, North Weekly
Section, page 17, about home brewing. If you don't receive the Globe, you
can read the article on-line at:
http://www.boston.com/dailyglobe2/339/north/Something_s_brewing+.shtml
Cheers,
Seth Goodman
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 6 Dec 1999 15:06:02 -0600
From: "Jack Schmidling" <arf@mc.net>
Subject: Pickled Eggs
From: kathy/jim <kbooth@scnc.waverly.k12.mi.us>
>I'd like some suggested recipes for the pickled eggs often served in
bars from jars on the counter.....
Would you believe..... I sat down to read the Digest with a glass of the World's
Greatest Beer http://user.mc.net/arf/wgb.htm and a pickled egg. It's the bottom
of the last keg for the season so I am really taking it in and there is no
better way to enjoy it than with pickled eggs.
Our chickens are putting out faster that we can use them, especially with my
wife in Germany at the moment, so I pickled a bunch last week. They just scream
for beer.
Recipes are as varied as beer but if you just put boiled and peeled eggs in
vinegar, sugar and any herbs that come to mind, you can't go wrong. You can
dilute the vinegar 50/50 with water and any combination of sugar like 1 tbs per
quart, more less your option.
Garlic is great. They start getting tasty within hours and a day or two will
do it. I threw in some fresh/boiled beets and ended up not only with pickled
beets but beautiful red eggs to boot.
The keep for weeks. If you want to preserve them long term, you have to process
them but they never last that long.
If you are really lazy, you can put the boiled eggs in straight vinegar without
peeling them. The vinegar will eventually disolve the shell. The eggs taste
great but the mess in the bottle really looks gross.
js
PHOTO OF THE WEEK http://user.mc.net/arf/weekly.htm
HOME: Beer, Cheese, Astronomy, Videos http://user.mc.net/arf
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 06 Dec 1999 18:22:06 -0500 (EST)
From: darrell.leavitt@plattsburgh.edu
Subject: Question: this one came out REAL good...why?
Date sent: 6-DEC-1999 18:12:09
OK, sorry to bore the more advanced folks with this, but I recently made an
ale that came out wonderful. Just the right balance of hops and malt, a
real clear brew, tho dark red in color, and nothing short of excellent. But
, here is the problem: I am not sure why...
Here is what I did:
put 3 gal into pot, heated up to about 160 F
mashed in: 1/2 lb Weissheimer Dark Carmel Malt
1 lb Paul's Dark Crystal Malt
8 lb Maris Otter 2 row malt
Single infusion: 148 F for about 60 minutes
first runnings were 1.092
based upon a thread a few months ago here, I boiled down a bit more than a
pint on the side, then added it to the main kettle.
boiled for 1 hour
1 oz Northern Brewer at start
1/2 oz Saaz at 30
1 oz Tettnang at 15
Berlios' Requium was playing on public radio as I pitched a Wyeast
Scottish Ale starter onto the chilled wort.
OG was 1.056
FG was 1.005
ABW was 5.3 %
(about 3 1/2 gallons of sparge water at about 170 F)
Yield was 38 Grolsch bottles (16 oz)
no secondary fermentation.
This is, perhaps , the best brew that I have ever made (and so say visitors
)...was it the music?
..Darrell
<Terminally INtermediate Home-brewer>
_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/ _/
_/Darrell Leavitt _/
_/INternet: leavitdg@splava.cc.plattsburgh.edu _/
_/Internet (receives attachments): _/
_/ dleavitt@sln.esc.edu _/
_/AMpr.net: n2ixl@k2cc.ampr.org _/
_/AX25 : n2ixl @ kd2aj.#nny.ny.usa _/
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 06 Dec 1999 18:20:34 -0500
From: phil sides jr <psides@carl.net>
Subject: Re: Celebration Ale
Paul Shick celebrates:
>>Thank goodness that Sierra Nevada is shipping its Celebration Ale as
far
>>East as Clevelnad this year.
As does Paul Ward:
>Believe it or not, they even shipped it as far east as Vermont this
year!
It made it to New Hampshire too guys. Made me wipe my eyes for a few
minutes when I spotted it next to the SNPA.
Phil Sides, Jr.
Concord, NH
- --
Macht nicht o'zapft ist, Prost!
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 7 Dec 1999 02:05:31 +0200
From: "=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Ari_J=E4rm=E4l=E4?=" <jarmala@pcuf.fi>
Subject: Carbonation
On Sat, 4 Dec 1999 Dave Burley explained a method for calculating the
amount of dry ice needed per bottle. I agree with him that dry ice
can not be recommended for carbonation because of certain safety
risks like exploding bottles or cold bites in your fingers.
However, the amount of dry ice needed is very easy to calculate.
First, find out what is the desired level of dissolved carbon dioxide
in that type of beer. It is usually between 2.5 to 5 ppt (or grams
per litre as we like to express it here in Europe). The rest is
calculus: multiply the volume of beer in the bottle by the factor
0.0025 to 0.005. This gives you the mass of dry ice per bottle.
Assume SI (metric) units.
> The MW of carbon dioxide is 14 + 2X16 = 46.
Actually, it is 12+2x16 = 44. Carbon 14 based CO2 migth be much too
costly ;-)
>One volume of CO2 in one bottle will be
>0.32 * 46/22.4 = 0.657 grams of dry ice.
Wouldn't it be easier for the calculations to express the content of
CO2 in weight ratio, like percents or parts per thousand or grams per
litre?
Ari Jrml
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #3188, 12/07/99
*************************************
-------
