Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #3208
HOMEBREW Digest #3208 Thu 30 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: Kitchen Aid Grain Mill (JOSEPH KISH)
Valley Mill Motors (Kevin TenBrink)
Oxygen Threads (Mark_Ohrstrom/Humphrey_Products)
tannins ("Paul Niebergall")
Re: Thermodynamics (Bob.Sutton)
Hopped Malts and Lag Times ("Penn, John")
german munich ("Czerpak, Pete")
Re: GMOs ("Pannicke, Glen A.")
yeast answers and holiday brewing sessions ("Czerpak, Pete")
Modified to fit your screen... (MICHAEL WILLIAM MACEYKA)
kitchen aid mill ("Alan McKay")
Belgian Doppel Maturity (Bob.Sutton)
genetics (Jim Liddil)
First mash (Clark)
* Beer is our obsession and we're late for therapy!
*
*** HAPPY HOLIDAYS TO YOU AND YOURS! ***
*
>> Note: The HBD server will be shut down 12/31
>> through 1/1/00. Yes, we're Y2K compliant -
>> that's not what we're concerned over...
>>
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: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 21:52:41 -0800
From: JOSEPH KISH <jjkish@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Kitchen Aid Grain Mill
Rudi asked what we thought about Kitchen Aid's Grain
Mill Attachment (GMA).
My wife owns the Kitchen Aid, The GMA was a gift. It is
very slow, and it "grinds" the malt like an old flour mill,
instead of crushing it, like a roller mill.
It only holds a cupful of malt; I had to come up with a
larger grain malt hopper. I cut a section out of the bottom
of a large coffee can and fashioned a hopper from that.
It is adjustable, it generates some flour, and is quite
slow. I counteract the flour by using some rice hulls in
the grist to increase flow rate in my RIMS. I have had the
GMA for years, and it works. For the price, you can get a
roller mill that is a lot faster, and gives a better crush;
but if you receive the GMA as a gift, use it.
Joe Kish
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 04:52:16 -0800 (PST)
From: Kevin TenBrink <zzymurgist@yahoo.com>
Subject: Valley Mill Motors
Hello-
I was recently on the receiving end of a new Valley
Mill. I am interested in motorizing it and am looking
for sources of motors that would be up to the task.
My HB shop owner used an old clothes dryer motor. Any
Ideas?
Kevin
Elkhart IN
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger.
http://messenger.yahoo.com
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 08:51:00 -0500
From: Mark_Ohrstrom/Humphrey_Products@humphreypc.com
Subject: Oxygen Threads
Bill attempts to oxygenate:
> but apparently O2 regulators have some special threading
> or something.
If I recall correctly, O2 threads are Left-handed, while (most of) the
others are right-handed. This is to prevent the inadvertent mixing of
flammables with a powerful oxidizer, since the "righty-tighty, lefty-loosey
won't work! My guess would be to try your friendly neighborhood welding
gas supply counter. The guys there would most likely be able to hook you
up with what you need -- perhaps primed with some of your dee-licious
homebrew!
Mark in Kalamazoo
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 08:13:51 -0600
From: "Paul Niebergall" <pnieb@burnsmcd.com>
Subject: tannins
Last week, Stephen Alexander wrote about tannins:
>Anyone who has ever sparged down below SG=1.010 and tasted
>the result knows that the stuff tastes like sweet watery tea.
>The tea-like flavors are the tannoids - not a momily.
Dilute wort always tastes like sweet watery tea. If you dont believe it,
try mixing a couple of teaspoons of dried malt extract with a cup of
warm water and taste it. This flavor in no way proves or disproves
the presence of tannins (tannoids, tannerites, or what ever you
want tocall them). Still a momily, in my book.
While the rest of the post was fairly interesting (reference to 'Hop
and Malt Phenolics in Lager Brewing', JIB v85,pp23-25. etc.],
the "sweet watery tea" observation is an extremely weak link
that is used to connect a scientific study with the reality of what
is happening in our home breweries. Not exactly the most scientific
way to interpret and apply scientific data.
Paul Niebergall
Burns & McDonnell
pnieb@burnsmcd.com
"Illegitimis non carborundum"
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 09:14:18 -0500
From: Bob.Sutton@fluor.com
Subject: Re: Thermodynamics
JackS asked about humidity calculations...
>I am trying to set up a humidity/temp controlled room
>for cheese aging but can't even get beyond the
>fundamental problem of measuring humidity,
>much less controlling it.
Jack, I eyeballed my psychometric chart after rounding your living room readings
into degreesC...
If your living room's dewpoint is 5C, and your dry bulb temperature is 20C, your
relative humidity is approximately 35% (by eyeball). Assuming you're viewing a
standard psychometric chart. simply extend a horizontal line from the 5C
dewpoint (5C on the 100% RH line), until it intersects a vertical line up from
your dry bulb (20C). Then read (interpolate) the RH curve values. These charts
are commonly set for sea-level, so there's some error introduced unless you
compensate for barometric pressure.
Here's a RH calculator site which responds to dry bulb, dew point, and
barometric pressure
http://nwselp.epcc.edu/elp/wxcalc.html
If you're not sure of your pressure just use 760 millibar - sea-level on
Earth... you are an astronomer - so I thought I needed to frame my response
appropriately... ;-)
I plugged in your living room readings and got 35.9% RH (the minimum dewpoint
entry is 10F, so I couldn't duplicate your outdoor readings).
Here's another link that has a psychometric chart that you can download/print..
http://www.techtrol.com/psyc.htm
Hope this helps...
Bob
Fruit Fly Brewhaus
Yesterdays' Technology Today
--------------------------------------------------------------
The information transmitted is intended only for the person or
entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential
and/or privileged material. If you are not the intended
recipient of this message you are hereby notified that any
use, review, retransmission, dissemination, distribution,
reproduction or any action taken in reliance upon this message
is prohibited. If you received this in error, please contact
the sender and delete the material from any computer. Any
views expressed in this message are those of the individual
sender and may not necessarily reflect the views of the
company.
--------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 09:39:45 -0500
From: "Penn, John" <John.Penn@jhuapl.edu>
Subject: Hopped Malts and Lag Times
As for the long lag times for Nottingham and the "stuck?" fermentation at
60F.
In my opinion/experience, it seems that Nottingham likes the warmer
temperatures to start. I try not to overcool my wort and let it be a bit
warm during the initial growth phase of the yeast. Then the wort cools
overnight in the carboy to be near a good fermentation temperature once the
yeast actually start fermenting. By this, I mean that I try to pitch the
yeast into a wort that's around 75F... 70F is a bit low, and 80F is a bit
high. Then the wort cools at least 5F overnight in a 5 gallon batch in my
basement. So its closer to fermentation temperature by the time the yeast
start fermenting and producing byproducts that are sensitive to temperature.
I think it is good to rehydrate the dry yeast in warm water and try not to
shock them by pitching very warm rehydration water into a very cool wort.
As for the post about not having as much activity and foam at 60F. 60F is
pretty cool compared to 65F or 70F. 5F makes a big difference to the yeast.
For those basement fermentations, summer ferments are much faster than
winter fermentations. However, at the cooler winter fermentations you don't
have to worry about infections as much. Those infectious growths are slowed
at cooler temps just like the yeast. Don't worry too much about the krausen
seeming slower or smaller from batch to batch. Some of that "foam" depends
on how much hops are in your carboy, what your ingredients are, mash
temperature, etc.
Hopped Malts,
Here's my opinion or thoughts on that hopped malt BUs. From older books,
it seems that they took the BUs or HBUs and multiplied them by 4 to get the
bitterness of the beer for a 5 gallon batch. This works great if your boil
gravity isn't too high, but doesn't compensate for high gravity beers or
concentrated (extract) brewing. My point is that for hopped malts the hops
are already isomerized so I think you want to multiply by 4 for a 5 gallon
batch to get bitterness and DO NOT COMPENSATE FOR BOIL GRAVITY! My opinion
or thought is that the hops are already isomerized in the hopped malts so
boil gravity doesn't affect utilization like it would if you were adding an
equivalent amount of hops (HBUs). I would love to see others opinions or
this. Please post your thoughts to the HBD and don't privately blast my
opinions as being "stupid". I really am stating my opinions and would like
to see what others think. There are few absolutes in brewing (but you
wouldn't know that from some of these posts). Anyway I wish the hopped
malts would use a bitterness rating like Morgans rather than using BUs.
Some extract producers use EBUs or IBUs and some don't. Also, I think you
can find a rating of some hopped malts at the brewery library. They are
posted in BUs or HBUs, I think. Nice thing about having IBUs for Morgans is
that they say 15 IBUs for a 6 gallon batch so its easy to calculate your
IBUs contribution from one can. If your batch size is X gallons (US gallons
that is), your bitterness is 15 x (6/X). My lawnmower beer is one 3.3# can
of Morgans and 1/4# maltodextrin. The bitterness comes out to 24 IBUs (15 x
6 / 3.75 = 24) for a 1.037 OG beer and usually 1.010-12 FG. Morgans comes
out a bit underhopped for my tastes but its a nice lawnmower beer
nonetheless.
Hope that helps, curious to see what others think
John Penn
Eldersburg, MD
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 11:31:42 -0500
From: "Czerpak, Pete" <Pete.Czerpak@siigroup.com>
Subject: german munich
I used a high % of German Weyerman's Munich malt in a pseudo-alt-kolsch
german ale a few days ago. I got significantly less extraction than I'm
used to (about 20% less). Grain bill was
62% Weyermanns Munich
3% German crystal
21% wheat
15% 2 row pale
OG was 1.044, yeast is Wyeast 1007 and hopped with 3 oz. of german
hallertauer throughout the boil. By the way, I'm a batch sparger
has anybody else seen this when using a lot of German Munich. Anybody got a
theo. gravity pts per lb for this stuff as the US Munich may apparently have
more non-extractables in it. Color was a nice orange amber though.
Hoppy early New Year.
Pete Czerpak
Albany, NY
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 11:41:48 -0500
From: "Pannicke, Glen A." <glen_pannicke@merck.com>
Subject: Re: GMOs
I like Peter C.'s question regarding Genetically Modified Organisms. It
made me think.
In the past I have personally modified bacteria and yeast strains through
various methods
of genetic manipulation to meet some need. I fully understand the
technology of manipulation
and know the different processes involved in checking for a successful
manipulation.
I also know that with proper research, experimentation, planning, execution
and testing you
can make a successful manipulation without negatively impacting other
properties of the genome.
For instance, most yeast strains cannot metabolize an adequate replacement
of an
amino acid (AA) such as valine from other amino acids and nitrogen sources
present in the wort.
Therefore the wort needs to have a moderate free amino nitrogen (FAN) level
to make up for this
inadequacy, otherwise my beer may consequently have a higher level of
diacetyl
(Fix,1993 - for those of you who are counting...). Say that I were to
genetically manipulate
a strain of yeast to contain a plasmid which facilitates this AA
production, then I might
not have as much to worry about regarding my FAN levels. My beer might be
better due
to the reduced diacetyl even though my wort has a low FAN content. This new
strain might
make for better tasting beer. It might enhance the fermentation rate and
improve my
yeast's quality of life ;-)
I'm not worried about the science fiction of genetic manipulation - becoming
infected with
a rogue plasmid vector, growing a third arm because of some funky transposon
which went
out of control and now is slowly replicating inside of me or even super
yeast cells that just
won't die when they're supposed to. A lot of this worry is resistance to
something new, fear of
new technology because of mistakes made in past technologies which had
adverse side-effects
and plain old ignorance of the entire process. Carefully planned, studied
and tested GMOs
can make for some wonderful new products.
But for some reason I just don't want that crap in my beer...
Dick D. brings up a good point about chicken eggs. My dad has been raising
his own
bantam chickens as a hobby since before I was born. The eggs, while smaller
than the
store-bought ones, were always a nice little "bonus" to the hobby. Compared
to store-bought
ones, these eggs tasted better, had a larger yolk:white ratio (maybe not so
good 4 cholesterol)
and cooked better. The birds were allowed to run free in the back yard
eating all manner of
plants, bugs and other things chickens may find in addition to their
processed grains (without hormones).
They were also not kept in a 1 foot square cage and forced to lay eggs all
day.
Sure, they would make the worst eggs for mass production, but they tasted
damn fine 'cause they
were all natural.
As Jim L. said "its more of a spiritual thing". I know that I'd have a ball
building my own RIMS, HERMS,
or whatever setup sometime in the future. And I'm sure I would wind up
making more consistent beer
with a higher degree of efficiency using it. But I think I would miss
standing over the vat with a big old
paddle, stirring it up when I think it's right, checking/adjusting the
temperature every few minutes while
I sip some of my last batch and listen to the stereo. It relaxes me and I
like a 6 - 8 hour brew day. This
is also one of the reasons why I moved from extract. It's the Zen of
Brewing that does it for me,
so to use a genetically altered yeast in my beer would be similar to
automating my mashing or
going back to extract. [Now don't anyone get their panties in a twist here!
I didn't say automation or
extract is bad. It's just not for me - right now]
I might try a strain or two for sh*ts and grins, but I probably wouldn't
stick with 'em. I like doing
things the "old school" way as much as is conveniently possible. While GMOs
might make
for a better end product, my opinion is that they are best suited for the
commercial breweries
where efficiency and consistency are the focus. I don't have a place for
them in my homebrewing
because I want to retain the esthetic quality attributed to a hand-crafted
product made more
through the use of all natural ingredients and the brewer's love of the art
than with high throughput,
super-efficient technology.
'Nuff said.
Glen Pannicke
Merck & CO.
Computer Validation Quality Assurance
phone: 732.726.2832
fax: 732.726.2860
mail: WBD-205
email: glen_pannicke@merck.com
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 11:57:24 -0500
From: "Czerpak, Pete" <Pete.Czerpak@siigroup.com>
Subject: yeast answers and holiday brewing sessions
Todd in NC asks about Wyeast 1084 and a supposed stuck frement at 1.018
before secondary. I have always found the Irish ale yeast to finish high (I
never got it to go lower than 1.018 FG). Of course I haven't used it since
the days I was underpitching yeast so take the comment for what its worth.
It may drop another pt or 2 in secondary but I cant see it going much more.
Paul Shick mentions using Windsor dry yeast for a big bitter beer. Watch
out for it also is known to finish high (mine was 3.5 gallons of 1.050 ESB
pitched with 2 or 3 rehydrated packets and it finished at about 1.020-22. I
think others experience with Windsor reflect this as well. Oxygenation may
help and I don't do anything more than the shake like hell method.
gotta love the holiday season, been doing 1 batch a day since sunday
(american pale ale, german kolsch/alt and IPA with only cascade hops
thoroughout)and I also racked my dry stout to secondary last night from last
week and a batch of imperial stout to keg after two weeks of secondary.
I did dry hop the imperial with Tettnanger pellets and they only dropped
clear when I chilled the beer to <40F. Its numbers are OG 1084, FG 1016-18,
Wyeast 1098 yeast cake. Very estery and alcoholic when racked to keg.
Goona let it chill and meld and taste again at the end of January.
Hopefully it'll be ready by late Feb/March.
Regards,
Pete Czerpak
Albany, NY
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 14:19:06 -0500 (EST)
From: MICHAEL WILLIAM MACEYKA <mmaceyka@mail.jhmi.edu>
Subject: Modified to fit your screen...
Howdy,
Just had to jump on the GMO grenade. Some of the Seattle rhetoric has gotten
me riled. I reiterate (check the archives): every organism you put into your
beer has been genetically modified by humans. The issue in question seems to
me to be how the modification was done, by traditional breeding and selection
methods or by direct modification of the genome with exogenous nucleic acid.
The later is far more efficient for some purposes. In the most recent digest,
George DePiro told us about two new hop varieties. These are mutant plants
that were bred (or stumbled upon) for certain characteristics. These plants
are genetically different than their parents (yes, the egg came first), and
different in unknown ways. Were they fully tested for toxicity before being
released to the market? Might the pollen from these varieties kill a cute
insect? What is the environmental impact of planting these hops? Do they
require more pesticides, or retain more pesticides, or perhaps even make
pesticides more toxic? Were their parents even tested? Yes, on all of us,
and without our consent!
It is ironic, then, that the only new crops that are tested at all for health
effects are those which are modified by exogenous nucleic acids. And yes,
they have been tested, and not just by the companies themselves. Are they
safe beyond a reasonable doubt? That is for the consumer to decide, which is
unfortunate given the amount of misinformation and mistrust out there.
Really, how different is Bt corn from its parent grown by organic farmers who
dusted it with the bacterium itself? Perhaps the organicaly farmed corn has
more fumonisins (the "all natural" way to get throat cancer).
Furthermore, while it is obvious that agribiz doesn't make these organisms out
of the goodness of their corporate hearts, these GMO's can actually benefit
others by reducing pesticide use, increasing yields and nutritional content,
etc. These organisms are no panacea for the worlds problems, and due caution
should be taken in developing and using any organism. And no, I do not work
for nor do I own stock in any agribiz (ADM is the devil). But I think the
large number of important issues surrounding GMO's have less to do with the
technology of gene transfer itself and more to do with the sustainable and
equitable use of the worlds resources. These are separate, but valid and
important, questions. Guess that is the point of this ramble.
Mike Maceyka
Baltimore, MD
Home of Four Square Brewing and the official Millennial Bunker of Love
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 14:36:11 -0500
From: "Alan McKay" <amckay@ottawa.com>
Subject: kitchen aid mill
Go to my page below, then "homebrew", then "FAQ", then
"Equipment FAQ". In short, yes it will work. But unless you make
a lot of bread, it's cheaper (and much better from the brewing
standpoint) to buy a real mill that is made for brewing.
cheers,
-Alan
- --
Alan McKay
amckay@ottawa.com
http://www.bodensatz.com/
What's a bodensatz? http://www.bodensatz.com/bodensatz.html
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 16:12:42 -0500
From: Bob.Sutton@fluor.com
Subject: Belgian Doppel Maturity
I was inspired by the recent issue of Zymurgy to tackle a Belgian Doppel (sp?).
One item that was not made clear in the article was the length of time for the
brew to mature. Also, I've seen varied opinions over the use of "light" vs.
"dark" Belgian candy. Appreciate all feedback.
Y2K Cheers!
Bob
Fruit Fly Brewhaus
Yesterdays' Technology Today
--------------------------------------------------------------
The information transmitted is intended only for the person or
entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential
and/or privileged material. If you are not the intended
recipient of this message you are hereby notified that any
use, review, retransmission, dissemination, distribution,
reproduction or any action taken in reliance upon this message
is prohibited. If you received this in error, please contact
the sender and delete the material from any computer. Any
views expressed in this message are those of the individual
sender and may not necessarily reflect the views of the
company.
--------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 19:02:07 -0500
From: Jim Liddil <jliddil@vms.arizona.edu>
Subject: genetics
And lets see farmers (or whatever they are called) quit using antibiotics
for no reason. How did the flesh eating e.coli develop? Farmers using
anitbiotics all the time. The spew about GM is silly. Man has been
genetically selecting stuff for 100 of years. I think waht is far more
dangerous is the huge amount of chemical agents that regular farmers use.
this icludes the growing of barley hust to keep it beer related. :-)
Jim Liddil
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 20:22:04 -0500
From: Clark <clark@capital.net>
Subject: First mash
Hi List,
Santa was good this year. I have my Listerman Lauter Tun ready to go. I
will hit the brew shop this weekend, providing the world doesn't end, and
fill my grain bill to brew my very first ever full mash beer. I have done
a bunch of extract brews and really like the results, so now it is time to
move on. The kids even gave me a corny keg, but that will be for later.
Question. I will be doing a simple ale with a single infusion mash. Will
I be better off doughing in in the lauter tun, mashing and sparging or
should I mash in a large pot on my stove and transfer to the lauter tun for
sparging? What about "mashing out", should I be concerned with my first
batch? I've never seen any info about the potential temperature drop that
would occur if I transferred the mash to the lauter tun. Would it be a
problem? Everyone has their own ideas about the proper techniques to
follow. I just want this to be as simple as possible while still making
the best beer that I can with what I have. Remember, this is my first
time, be gentle.
TIA.
Dave Clark
Eagle Bridge, New York
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #3208, 12/30/99
*************************************
-------
