Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #3213
HOMEBREW Digest #3213 Wed 05 January 2000
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:
Feelings on early racking (Calvin Perilloux)
tannic materials and sparging (Louis Bonham)
Re:Old Peculier Recipe Clone sought (Anthony and Mary Ann Tantillo)
Head? (John Penn)
Re: Too much head ("Brian Dixon")
Early Racking QDA (Eric.Fouch)
Inconsistent Carbonation (Chris Palmer)
Re: Too much head (Jeff Renner)
Re: tannins (Jeff Renner)
Isn't it ironic? ("Alan Meeker")
re luddites, gullibility, and insults (Robin Griller)
WORDMIXER (The Holders)
Tannins? Tannins?! I gotcher stinkin' tannins! (Pat Babcock)
kegging ("Dan Michael")
tannins & final gravity (Bret Morrow)
Fermentation Temperature (Doug.A.Mccullough)
Books (Nathan Kanous)
keg type? (Doug Mansfield)
CO2 / Nitrogen Mix (MIKE BRANAM)
Crappy Wine From France? ("Nigel Porter")
Tannins and Sparging (Dave Burley)
Enough already, Dave ("Ken Schramm")
Unsanitized but Cleaned Fermenter ("MAS, JOHN C. [FND/1820]")
re: Genetically Modified stuff (Lou.Heavner)
Free 12 Oz bottles ("Jeff")
Final Run-off SG (Jim Bentson)
* 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: Tue, 4 Jan 2000 04:03:50 -0500
From: Calvin Perilloux <peril@compuserve.com>
Subject: Feelings on early racking
(Brian Dixon wonders if he should be concerned about racking
from a settling tank to the primary fermenter after 8 to 24 hours,
and whether this affects the yeast by removing it from the
trub/fatty-acids.)
I had wondered the same thing a couple of years ago when I was
following a similar procedure. My reasons were partly for trub
removal and partly for further oxygenation. (I couldn't find the
handy Liquid Bread item or even oxygenating stones in Australia
at the time, and the usual sources I knew in the States wouldn't
mail order overseas, so all that waited until a friend made the
trip there to the Land of Brewing Gadgets.)
My usual procedure was to brew an all-grain batch after work,
pour it slowly into the "settling tank" to oxygenate it a bit,
pitch half the yeast into the settling tank, and then go to bed.
The next morning I would then transfer it in a thin dribble to
the primary fermenter, thus picking up maximum oxygen, and
then pitch the rest of the yeast. I'd take a bit of trub with it,
but not much. The result was a fairly clear wort at the start
of fermentation with very, very little trub. And despite any
theoretical concerns, I had no problems with healthy, active
fermentations.
(This begs the question of why I held off on pitching all the
yeast at first, and I have to admit that I was not energetic
enough to experiment with pitching it all early, especially
given some of the highly flocculating strains I tended to use,
like Wyeast 1968, so I wanted enough yeast in there at first
to get a hold on it, but not to lose it all when I transferred.
Since my results were good, I felt no need to alter the
method, though curiosity remains as to whether what
I was doing made complete sense.)
I don't know how I'd have felt about a 24 hour rest with all
the yeast pitched at first, since in warmer temperatures that
might have let the yeast get well underway in the fermentation,
and introducing extra oxygen then might not have been a great
idea, not to mention further risk of losing a fair bit of my
active yeast that might well be stuck in the mass at the bottom
of the settling tank.
But the six (or eight) hour "rest" I used and the subsequent
further oxygenation had no apparent bad effects at all on
the final beer. To the contrary, they seemed quite clear and
clean in the end and were often award winners. If what
you're doing works well (and the comp judges agree)
then keep at it and don't worry!
Calvin Perilloux
Staines, Middlesex, England
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 04 Jan 2000 05:37:45 -0600
From: Louis Bonham <lkbonham@hbd.org>
Subject: tannic materials and sparging
Paul Niebergall again questions the theory that excessive
sparging is bad because it leaches excessive tannins /
tanninoids:
> In lieu of an anecdote being repeated enough times to be
> beyond a reasonable doubt, scientific information can be
> useful. So, where is all the scientific evidence that
> lautering below 1.010 leaches tannins that have a negative
> impact on beer?
It *is* there, if you look for it. You can start with Lewis
& Young, Brewing (Chapman & Hall 1996), which is pretty
widely available. At p. 95, you'll find charts (summarizing
their lab data) which depicts the relative levels of wort
gravity and polyphenols (and other things) during the
sparge. The relative levels of polyphenols and wort gravity
remain fairly constant until wort gravity goes below about 6
P (SG 1.024), at which point the relative polyphenol levels
begin to rise dramatically. (Not coincidentally, pH and
mineral compound levels also start to rise dramatically at
this point.) By the time you get to SG 1.010, the
polyphenol levels (relative to wort gravity) are over *ten
times* as high as they were at the beginning of the sparge.
Stated differently, if you took samples of first wort and
oversparged wort from the same mash, diluted the first wort
to the same gravity as the oversparged wort, and then
measured the polyphenol levels, you'd find that the
polyphenol levels in the oversparged wort was ten times that
of the diluted first wort. And for this reason I'd wager
that most folks would in fact find that the oversparged wort
tasted more like tea than the diluted first wort.
As Steve A. has pointd out, from a purely quantative
perspective most of the tannic materials are in fact
extracted during the main mash and are contained in first
runnings. However, it is pretty well established that,
relative to wort gravity levels, the harder you sparge, the
more tannic materials (as well as fatty acids and mineral
compounds) you'll get.
Does this increase in tannic materials matter? I have
theorized that this is the reason why "no sparge" beers are
consistently judged to taste better and maltier than
equivalent gravity sparged beers. In the experiment I did
for my BT column a while back, the total polyphenol levels
of the sparged beer *were* significantly higher than the
beer made solely from first runnings. Granted, this is n=1,
but there it is.
Louis K. Bonham
lkbonham@hbd.org
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2000 06:58:40 +0000 (/etc/localtime)
From: Anthony and Mary Ann Tantillo <tantillo@ichange.net>
Subject: Re:Old Peculier Recipe Clone sought
Try the Zymurgy Special Issue from 1994 p102.
Also, the Cat's Meow has at least one clone recipe in category 9.
Tony Tantillo
tantillo@ichange.net
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 04 Jan 2000 09:12:06 -0500
From: John Penn <John.Penn@jhuapl.edu>
Subject: Head?
Marv mentions Too much Head...
Sounds like you may be confusing Head and Carbonation. Head is the
foam that remains on the top of the beer. A good head will last a long
time like a good Guiness. Carbonation is the excess CO2 escaping from
the beer. If you look at your glass and look at the rate of bubbling
you get an idea of carbonation. Carbonation and head are not the same
thing. A common mistake of newbies is to bottle too early or not to
aerate enough so that the Final Gravity is high because not enough
healthy yeast were around to ferment the beer. Both of these mistakes
result in "gushers", over carbonated beers. They may not be
overcarbonated at first (1-2 weeks) but they gradually get
overcarbonated over time especially if the yeast were not aerated
enough. Another cause of gushers is contamination. This may be hard to
recognize but results in a ring around the top of the bottles and a
degradation in flavor with time. Levels of comtamination and results
vary. Are you sure you just don't have overcarbonated beer? Or is it
really Head? Head will stay foamy for a long time, Almost definately
requires a partial mash to get a good head. Kit beers do not usually
have any "head". FYI
John Penn
Eldersburg, MD
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2000 06:06:58 -0800
From: "Brian Dixon" <briandixon@home.com>
Subject: Re: Too much head
Marv Pozdol writes:
> I am not into the grain mashing etc that most of you are doing. I am
still
> using kits and do not intend to go into mashing in the near future.
Lately,
> my American Amber and American Lite have too much of a head. Lots of
foam
> in glass and sometime the head "eases" out of the bottle. What may cause
> this?
Marv,
Without knowing more, such as whether or not your other beers do this too
and what the starting/finishing gravities are, I can think of three possible
causes for your over-carbonation:
1. Priming. How are you priming your beer? Corn sugar? Careful to use the
right amount (typically 3/4 c.) and not too much?
2. Bottling too soon. Are you sure you are not bottling too early? Once
the final gravity is stable, it doesn't hurt to wait another couple of days
to make sure.
3. Infection. If everything else is right, it's possible that a minor
infection got going in the bottles. Various infections are able to
metabolize more complex sugars and/or starches than beer yeasts and produce
CO2 as a side effect. The usual symptom is over-carbonation ... but you
often lost the simple proteins and what not that you need for forming a nice
head too, e.g. gushing or over-carbonation and a lack of head retention is
more typical of an infection. Is your beer's head retention ok?
Brian
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2000 10:30:00 -0500
From: Eric.Fouch@steelcase.com
Subject: Early Racking QDA
Brian asks:
I've often considered racking after about 8 to 24 hours into a primary
ferment to take the wort off the bulk of the trub, but hesitate because I've
read that the fatty acids in the trub are beneficial to the yeast. It just
seems 'good' that the primary would only be exposed to good clean yeast
sediment once the growth period of the yeast is over, and I believe (if
memory serves) that the fatty acids are only helpful up through the finish
of the growth period. Thoughts? If I want to try a first racking that is
to take place as soon as exposure to the trub (non-yeast sediment portion of
it) is not helpful anymore, then when should it take place? Is this a good
idea, or a bad idea? Why?
I'm interested to see the HBD expurts go at this one. I would like to prime
the pump with some hearsay and unsubstantiated information:
In conversations with a local head brewer (a Seible graduate) we discussed
fermentation, yeast management and the like. The world according to him:
Yeast management: You want to pitch at the rate of 1 million yeast cells per
ml per degree plato. This should cause four generations of yeast growth
before the yeast population reaches ideal fermentation population. This
allows the yeast to adjust to the wort conditions, but not form too many
unwanted reproduction related compounds. I will defer any lewd commentary at
this point.
Use the clearest run off possible: Clear run off from the mash tun, clear
trub free run off from the brew kettle. While cold break will cause a faster
fermentation, he contends that fermenting with trub adversely affects flavor
and shelf life. He claims to have the published reports that document these
findings.
He also advocates racking off the yeast in the primary soon after fermentation
has begun.
I cannot substantiate these claims, although some of them make sense to me.
In my case, I feel my taste buds may not discern the flavor differences that
my or may not be produced changing over to some of these processes.
Eric Fouch
Bent Dick YoctoBrewery
Kentwood MI
PS- Sounds like your aspirin beer may be a binge drinkers dream! It may take
care of the morning after hangover!
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 4 Jan 100 11:03:35 -0500 (EST)
From: Chris Palmer <crpalmer@ux7.sp.cs.cmu.edu>
Subject: Inconsistent Carbonation
The last batch of beer that I bottled had unbelievably inconsistent
carbonation. Some of the bottles were over carbonated (not to the point
of exploding, but for the style) and some were flat or nearly flat.
I was hoping to figure out the cause before I bottle my next batch...
I boil corn sugar in water to sterilize it. Add it to the bottling
bucket and siphon the beer from the secondary to the bottling bucket.
I try to not overly aerate the beer and assume that the steady flow
from the siphon will mix the sugar and beer.
As you might guess, the only theory I have at this point is that the
sugar was not evenly distributed. I have ruled out:
- all bottles stored under the same conditions
- all bottles filled to (approximately the same level -- ie, it's not
a matter of less filled bottles being more carbonated)
I'd prefer email responses and will summarize to the list if there is
any interest.
Thanks,
Chris.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2000 10:51:04 -0500
From: Jeff Renner <nerenner@umich.edu>
Subject: Re: Too much head
MarvPozdol@aol.com writes:
>I am not into the grain mashing etc that most of you are doing. I am still
>using kits and do not intend to go into mashing in the near future.
Pay no attention to the man behind the screen. In other words, don't be
intimidated - you can make fine beer without mashing. I suspect lots of
lurkers also don't mash. It's just that many of the most enthusiastic
brewers do two things because of their enthusiasm - mash and post to HBD.
So the mashers are probably over-represented.
>my American Amber and American Lite have too much of a head. Lots of foam
>in glass and sometime the head "eases" out of the bottle. What may cause
>this?
This can be from two conditions (and more causes) - either the beer has too
much carbonation or it it holds its head more than usual. I suspect it is
the former. The most likely cause (assuming you didn't mis-measure your
priming sugar) is bottling before the beer is done fermenting. Did you
change yeasts? Is your fermenting area colder than it was? Are you using
genetically modified ingredients?
It can also be caused by contamination by wild yeast or bacteria that
continue to metabolize complex sugars. Does the beer taste extra dry or
thin bodied or even off flavored? The remedies are obvious- make sure the
beer is done fermenting, weigh priming sugar if possible, and be extra
careful with your sanitation.
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: Tue, 4 Jan 2000 11:01:28 -0500
From: Jeff Renner <nerenner@umich.edu>
Subject: Re: tannins
Here is some additional anecdotal observation about tannins in last
runnings. I generally stop runoff at about 1.012. My pH hasn't risen at
this point because I'm careful about water chemistry. It tastes merely
watery and not very sweet. Then when I'm cleaning up, I drain the rest of
the liquid off the grains, usually 2-3 gallons from an 8 gallon batch.
This has been sitting on the grains perhaps another hour, and it always
tastes astringent - I assume from some tannin-like substance, whereas the
earlier last runnings did not particularly. I haven't taken the SG or pH
of these runnings. Perhaps they are so low in sugar that any tannins are
not masked by sugar (strong tea tastes less astringent with sugar), or
perhaps more tannins are extracted by sitting that extra hour. I don't
know.
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: Tue, 4 Jan 2000 11:19:58 -0500
From: "Alan Meeker" <ameeker@welchlink.welch.jhu.edu>
Subject: Isn't it ironic?
Dave Burley wrote:
> Get some facts on a subject before
> you make up your mind. Just because
> you don't know something, doesn't
> mean it is not known. Do some research.
> It won't hurt as much as you might fear.
> Maybe it won't be as much fun as
> criticising without facts, but you will be
> able to make intelligent decisions
> about your life.
Quite the ironic statement.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2000 11:21:11 -0500
From: Robin Griller <rgriller@chass.utoronto.ca>
Subject: re luddites, gullibility, and insults
Hi all,
Preface: this is my last post on the subject, so fire away. Apologies for
taking up space, but we must have the right to defend ourselves against
gratuitous insults.
I normally try to be polite and avoid insults etc., but, frankly, I've
had enough of Mr. Burley's insults and bad manners, so my (hopefully)
usual restraint may not be present here. To put it bluntly, Dave seems
incapable of having a discussion without throwing gratuitous insults
at people. For example, Dave says he didn't call anyone a luddite; well
look again Dave, your original post on gm called people who oppose gm
luddites *in the title*! Since you obviously consider 'luddites' bad, the
fact that you put luddite in the title of your original post on the matter
was clearly meant as an insult. If you can't tell when you are posting
insults, maybe you should consider asking someone more astute than
yourself to read your posts before you send them.
This is, of course, typical of Dave's approach, as he demonstrates in his
response to me. Rather than dealing with the issues at hand he calls
people luddites, gullible, etc. I pointed out the distinction between
demonstrating something dangerous and demonstrating something safe. Does
he respond to this issue? No. I pointed out that he had set up false
dichotomies between whatever new technology comes up and no technology.
Does he respond this? No. What does he do? He insults people. He simply
presumes that if he hasn't read or seen any evidence for something, it
doesn't exist and if it doesn't exist, anyone who disagrees with him is
simply an ignoramous. He presumes that if he doesn't get the point being
made, the person making it must be an idiot. He even descends to the
repulsive tactic of insulting a whole nation of people, simply because
they won't let his beloved u.s. corporate masters sell their nasty crap in
their country without first demonstrating its safety. The nerve of these
people! Then we get extended nonsense and drivel about French wine and
beeer; ever had a decent Bier de Garde, Dave? Oh, I forgot, if you haven't
seen it yourself, it must not exist. Of course, unlike all that awful
French beer, America produces huge volumes of wonderful Budweiser, Coors,
etc.
On to some of the substantive issues, Dave can't even tell the difference
in environmental damage between a single bus carrying forty people and
forty cars carrying one each. Hmmmn. In addition, back to the cows, it
isn't of course milk that is the problem, but putting hormones into
cows to increase production; while I can't off hand provide the evidence
myself, according to television and print news reports I have read, there
is ample evidence that (1) these productivity increasing techniques have
very nasty impacts on the health of the cows and (2) the hormones carry
through to the finished product. Personally, I don't want to feed such
*potentially* dangerous crap to my son, unless it can be conclusively
demonstrated that it is safe. I guess because Dave hasn't read such
reports, the evidence doesn't exist.
As I said, this will be my last post on the subject as it is utterly
pointless trying to debate an issue with someone who does not respond to
your actual post, instead simply insulting anyone who has the nerve to
disagree with him. In terms of gullibility, Dave, it must be a relaxing
life to believe whatever powerful corporations like Monsanto want you to
believe. Very sad.
Robin
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 04 Jan 2000 08:55:51 -0800
From: The Holders <zymie@sprynet.com>
Subject: WORDMIXER
Well, I guess I was right. Jack just can't let this die, so neither can
I for now. I'd hate to disappoint all my fans ;^).
Quote from Jack:
"Nice try but even if I was wrong I would have to acknowledge my
mistake."
Jack, one thing I've come to realize is that you will NEVER be wrong in
your own mind. The point I was originally making before you completely
twisted this thread into something else was: If you're going to make a
blanket claim about something, be prepared to back it up with more than
verbal evasion.
Here is a quote from your original post about your MASHmixer (lower
case- HA, HA!):
"have a system that does everything a RIMS is supposed to do and
actually
work the very first time."
There is no possible way that you can prove that your system will do
EVERYTHING a RIMS is designed to do, because there is no such thing as a
universal RIMS. Every brewing system, whether is be an extract or all
grain system, has its own unique characteristics.
To take a blind potshot at people who enjoy tinkering AND brewing just
doesn't make any sense Jack. Certainly you spent time tinkering with
your gadgets you so shamelessly plug here. Why can't you just admit that
your system is what it is, and others are what they are, and quit trying
to convince yourself that everything you do is the greatest?
Your mixer is just as subject to a power failure as any
electro-mechanical system out there. You also use a pump in your brewing
operation. I know this because I was the one that recommended the speed
controller to you.
I suppose you probably would recommend a horse and carriage, or maybe a
coal fired steam engine rather than my truck, as the truck might
experience some sort of failure over the years. I am not afraid of the
coming of the industrial revolution, and you shouldn't be either Jack.
Jack, you have quality products, but products alone do not carry a whole
tune unless left to speak for themselves. I know that you will either
dissect this post and have us talking about trademark law again, or you
will let it die with the realization that maybe two people can be right
at the same time. There is more to being right than "it all depends how
you define______".
I intend to let it die.
I would like to thank all my fans ;^)
Now back to our regular program.
Wayne Holder AKA Zymie
Long Beach CA
*coming soon* http://www.zymico.com
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2000 11:51:35 -0500
From: Pat Babcock <pbabcock@hbd.org>
Subject: Tannins? Tannins?! I gotcher stinkin' tannins!
Greetings, Beerlings! Take me to your lager...
Yet another astringent extraction anectdote - much to Paul's chagrin:
In my former life as a home brewer (not sure what I am at the moment), I
was a bit of a gadgeteer. One of my gadgets was a "Y" at the outflow of my
mashtun. One part of the "Y" went to the brew kettle, the other to the
drain. Once upon a time, about five years ago, I was merrily completing the
sparge for an expected-to-be-delightful, triple-decocted hefe-weizen.
Seeing the hot gravity drop to my target of 1.000 @ ~160'F (which leaves
about 1.022 @ 60'F behind...), I happily switch open the "Y" to the drain,
and began preparations for the boil. Once the grain bed was drained (and
the volume of boiling kettle mysteriously higher than I remembered it, the
hand met the forehead at incredible speed - the "whap!" heard around the
world! I FORGOT to close the "Y" to the kettle!
Being of indominatable spirit, I plunged relentlessly onward and completed
the brew, extending the boil to get back to the desired gravity. The
resulting weizen was of lovely color, bountiful carbonation, and as nasty
as all hell. You could detect cloves and various other esters (the
handiwork of the Weihenstephan yeast so lovingly pitched into the batch),
and the body of the beer was appropriate to style, but there was a nasty,
drying quality to the batch. Oddly, I found that if enough lactic acid and
a touch of acetic acid was added, it made a most enjoyable plambic. Also,
if the sediment was undisturbed at the pour, it was almost tolerable
(hardly the fitting the style of a hefe if you can't stir the sediment,
though).
Tannins? I can't say. Astringent? Yes. "Tannic"? Yes. If there is any
scientist nearby capable of analyzing the slop to see whether there is a
bounty of tannins in the beer, some of it remains in my cellar to date. I'd
venture a guess, though, that the runoff gravity dropped below 1.010...
-
See ya!
Pat Babcock in SE Michigan pbabcock@hbd.com
Home Brew Digest Janitor janitor@hbd.org
HBD Web Site http://hbd.org
The Home Brew Page http://hbd.org/pbabcock/
"Just a cyber-shadow of his former brewing self..."
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 04 Jan 2000 08:56:59 -0800
From: "Dan Michael" <dmichael@avuhsd.k12.ca.us>
Subject: kegging
Ok this I am sure is a repeat.
I am about to experience my first kegging experience.
I have a few pin lock kegs.
1. when I prime my beer and put it into the keg
should I give it a blast of co2,
how much?
2. after it has conditioned
what do I do to drink it.
(It's a english pale ale)
What is forced carbonantion, do I do that?
or do I attach co2 and drink,
This process I am unclear about.
Thank you in advance
Dan
What is the best way
I am having trouble getting
the liquid and gas fittings off
to replace the o-rings and sanitize
thanks again
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 04 Jan 2000 12:18:50 -0400
From: Bret Morrow <bret.morrow@yale.edu>
Subject: tannins & final gravity
Greetings,
Glad to see Phil Yates back at the mash tun/computer.
It was my understanding that the extraction of tannins into the wort
occurs more frequently at the end of the sparge not because of the
diminished gravity, but because of the increasing pH. Dave Miller
discussed this in one of his book. Therefore tannin extraction would
occur with more alkaline sparge water and with mashes that contain less
dark grains. These roasted grains can help keep the pH of the mash at
the end of the sparge down. When I brew a paler brew, I generally add
some lactic acid to the later half of the sparge water. This has
dramatically reduced the astringent taste in the last runnings. For
what it is worth, it has not appreciably changed the taste or clarity of
the finished beer.
Bret A. Morrow
Hamden, CT
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2000 11:31:47 -0600
From: Doug.A.Mccullough@bridge.bellsouth.com
Subject: Fermentation Temperature
When I moved from glass carboys to a 12-gallon cylindroconical stainless
fermenter, I lost the ability to see the fermenting wort. As an alternative
means of monitoring fermentation I taped a digital thermometer to the outside
of the fermenter with the metal probe resting against the outside of the
stainless fermenter.
I am finding that fermentation significantly increases the wort temperature.
For example, take my oatmeal stout with an initial gravity of 1.063. The
ambient temperature in my basement is currently 64 degrees F. The wort was at
about 74 degrees when I pitched yeast. At high krausen about 24 hours later,
the fermenter was at 73 degrees. After 78 hours of very active fermentation the
sg had dropped to 1.021 and the fermenter temperature to 69 degrees. That stout
is not yet finished, but previous batches returned to ambient basement
temperature a week or so after pitching.
We all know fermentation generates heat. I wonder how many of us have ever
measured just how much heat is generated in our own systems. My current
thinking is that if the recommended fermentation temperature for a strain of
yeast is no more than 73 degrees, I should not attempt to ferment in my
basement if the ambient temperature there is over 64 degrees.
Any thoughts?
BTW, the stainless fermenter is a joy and worth every penny.
Doug McCullough
Birmingham BrewMasters
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 04 Jan 2000 11:40:04 -0600
From: Nathan Kanous <nlkanous@pharmacy.wisc.edu>
Subject: Books
Hi All,
I was just checking the old web for Michael Jackson's Great Beers of
Belgium. Although I looked on-line, I intend to walk into one of the
bookstores here in Madison to buy it. However, I found different books
with the same ISBN. One shows a book cover with Michael and is listed as
3rd edition with 348 pages published in August '98. The other shows a
cover with beers (no Michael), is 3rd edition with 244 pages and was
published in September '98. Each has the same ISBN (0762404035). What's
going on? Which book is "the" book? Any thoughts?
nathan in madison, wi
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 04 Jan 2000 12:55:27 -0500
From: Doug Mansfield <mansfield@cns.ohiou.edu>
Subject: keg type?
Happy New Year All.
I am a recent homebrewing enthusiast, and thanks to John (Homebrew) Schnupp
found my way to your forum.
A friend recently gave me a 1/2 barrel US_Sankey keg to use in my
homebrewing. Reading through the archives, I found that it may not be the
best way to keg beer. But regardless, I now have the keg and some fittings.
My question: I have two fittings (that I thought were for Sankey kegs).
One has a picnic faucet on it and the other a hand pump. The bottom, where
it would twist into the keg, is about half the size as my other sankey
level style coupler.
Does anyone know what keg type these might fit?
Thanks,
Doug Mansfield
------------------------------
Date: 04 Jan 2000 13:03:28 -0500
From: MIKE BRANAM <Branam.Mike@bei.bls.com>
Subject: CO2 / Nitrogen Mix
Hi guys,
I have a draft system at my house and have been using it for years. I
have recently been kegging my own homebrew and using the draft system.
I have been hearing alot about CO2/Nitrogen mix like they use for
Guinness Stout. Will that work with my regulator, faucet, and CO2
tank. Will it make a difference in other beers like New Castle or
Bass.
Mike
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2000 18:21:13 -0000
From: "Nigel Porter" <nigel@sparger.freeserve.co.uk>
Subject: Crappy Wine From France?
Sorry to be off beer topic, but I couldn't help but reply to Dave
Burley's comment on French Wine.
I know there is no great love between us Brits & the Frogs, but in my
opinion they do make some of the finest wines in the world. I have
drunk my fair share of New World wines, but still find myself drawn
back to the French.
Nigel
Brewing (and drinking wine) in Guildford
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2000 13:21:33 -0500
From: Dave Burley <Dave_Burley@compuserve.com>
Subject: Tannins and Sparging
Brewsters:
I basically agree with Paul Niebergall's position
that anecdotal evidence is always questionable.
However, the rationale of stopping the sparge
at SG>1.010 has basically nothing to do with
tannin extraction just because the SG is less
than 1.010. This is some sort of rule of thumb that
really doesn't apply in many cases.
What should be the center of focus is the pH
of the sparged liquor. As the sparging continues,
the pH normally rises as the buffers in the wort
are diminished ( and I guess the rationale for
giving an SG as the control point). It is the rise
in the pH which brings about the increased
solubility of these weak organic acidic
substances like phenolic tannins contained
in the grain husks. You also have to wonder
what happens to these tannins
as they enter the wort at pH of 5.3-5.5 or so.
Likely they precipitate or react with protein
and come out of solution anyway. So it may
not even be an important issue.
You can leach down to 1.001 if you want to as
long as the sparging liquor has a low pH ( or
added acid) such that the pH of the sparged
liquor stays below pH = 5.6 or less. Alkaline
waters which are unadjusted will produce
tannic sparged solutions at SGs higher than
1.010 if the pH of the sparging liquor is high.
Keep on Brewin'
Dave Burley
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 04 Jan 2000 13:40:35 -0500
From: "Ken Schramm" <schramk@resa.net>
Subject: Enough already, Dave
OK, I've sat by and read enough of Dave Burley's commentaries that
stray far from the subject and berate others. Dave, your comments come
across to me as obnoxious, condescending and rude.
Quote you : Get some facts on a subject before
you make up your mind. Just because
you don't know something, doesn't
mean it is not known. Do some research.
It won't hurt as much as you might fear.
Maybe it won't be as much fun as
criticising without facts, but you will be
able to make intelligent decisions
about your life. End quote.
Dave, you would do well to heed your own advice. Countless times
in this forum, you have shot off your mouth (keyboard) without doing
the research you need to back yourself up. You speak for others ("it
won't hurt as much as you might fear" : how do you know what they
fear?). You have used classic radio talk show host argumentation
techniques, playing wild and loose with the "facts" to meet your
arguments, and saying "there is no evidence" of thus and such
when there is plenty if you look about. You have been called for
this folly and have not apologized or recanted. Your continued
ranting only builds a greater mound of evidence as to your
dogmatic, closed minded stance, and erodes your future credibility.
Dave, the general public is suspicious of capitalism, the chemical
industry, the car companies and the government for one reason:
we have been burned. Love Canal, Three Mile Island, cigarettes,
Hooker Chemical, Dioxin in our fish, Thalidomide, Car companies
resisting seat belts and pollution controls. Above ground nuclear
testing, Agent Orange, X-raying our feet for our shoe sizes, feeding
domestic animals back to domestic animals for feed. Time after time,
our government and our industry have taken our money and said
"don't worry, we'll look after your best interest," when we should have
been worrying a lot. When there is a profit to be made, business goes
off half-cocked, and the public pays the price later, in lives or tax dollars
or lost homes or a polluted environment. Ford claims to be
environmentally conscious, but builds a gas guzzling, environmentally
disaterous Excursion. It's greed. The media is not the source of the lies,
Dave (cigarettes don't cause cancer. The public just isn't interested in
automotive safety. Agent Orange poses no significant health threat.
There is no such thing as global warming: see the pattern?). They are
just like tuna following a shrimp boat. If you know there is going to be
food by the boat, that is where you hang out. Industry hides all it can,
but eventually gets caught.
The way it seems to me is that humans have a history of terribly
irresponsible use of this planet. If we can look back at 7000 years of
mass extinctions and environmental devastation and not feel that we
need to look at changing some of our behavior patterns (like starting to
use mass transit, and moving toward solar energy, sustainable farming
techniques, and most importantly population control), then we will continue
to denude the planet until we are the species on the end of the
threshold event. If we've been here for 10,000 years, why can't we
start to think that far into the future? We are going to look like total idiots
to our future generations. Especially if we unleash some GM species
that throws the whole mess out of kilter, like the sea lamprey did to the
Great Lakes (yes, humans did that one). History shows that we humans
are masters of the unforeseen consequence, but for some reason, every
new generation thinks that it is beyond that phenomenon. Seemingly
every time we try to second guess nature, we get it wrong.
Dave, I don't hold that you should be censored or eliminated from the
forum. But your rants make the whole experience far less enjoyable
for me. Some suggestions: stick to brewing (yeah, I know I broke that
one myself, but I hit boiling). I really like your posts about brewing. You
know quite a bit. Speak for yourself, stay away from false dilemas and
negative option arguments, avoid the insults, and do a little homework
yourself (find out about prions, for example, and learn how spongiform
encephalopathy works). If you can't abide those tenets, maybe you
could keep your diatribes out of the main channel.
Have at me. I have a thick skin.
George De Piro, it's great to see you post again.
Ken Schramm
Troy, MI
I have no idea how far I am ideologically from Jeff Renner
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2000 15:48:53 -0600
From: "MAS, JOHN C. [FND/1820]" <john.c.mas@chi.monsanto.com>
Subject: Unsanitized but Cleaned Fermenter
Newbie(?) question.
Brewed a batch of wheat beer. First time using B Brite. Didn't know it was
JUST a cleaner. Thought it was a sanitizing agent. Beer still in Fermenter
about to transfer to secondary. This is my second batch of beer. My first
was 5 years ago. What might be the Best case / Worse case senarios for this
batch??
Thanks!
John
jcmas@usa.net
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2000 16:50:20 -0600
From: Lou.Heavner@frco.com
Subject: re: Genetically Modified stuff
I don't have a problem with GM materials, but I am probably not going
to rush out and buy them. Jim Layton touched on the reason as have
others. I don't try to clone Bud or Miller or Coors, but not because
I don't like them. Rather, it is because they are readily and
inexpensively available. I tend to make experimental or uncommon
styles and have developed a preference for some but not all of them. I
also garden and I don't grow iceberg lettuce, green bell peppers, or
slicing cukes because they are also readily and inexpensively
available and usually as tasty as the ones I grow. I tend to grow
more unusual vegetables and have developed a preference for some but
not all of them. And I don't like eggs, no matter how they were
produced or prepared.
When considering GM products like vegetable seeds, you should consider
what was the goal/benefit of the genetic manipulation and whether that
is of interest to you. Super sweet corn is a good thing! Tomatoes
which sacrifice flavor in order to be easier to harvest, handle, and
store are not a good thing for me. I practise IPM and grow a small
garden, so pesticide tolerant seeds are of no benefit to me. Same
thought process works for modified hops, barley, or yeast. If a GM
choice is available, pick it because it improves your beer or brewing
experience in some worthwhile way, not because it is new and somebody
else finds it beneficial.
If I was trying to make a living growing vegetables or making beer or
doing something else which might involve GM material, I might make a
different choice. A lot of GM has focused on increasing production
yields, especially with disease resistance. As we brew our beer, we
will vote with our wallets for the malt and hops we want, GM or not.
Our vote may not be as big as A-B's, but if we can perceive a
difference worth paying for, there will be somebody willing to supply
our needs.
I understand the balance of nature debate and try to encourage
diversity of flora and fauna. But species have been coming and going
for years. I am just as glad that some things like smallpox virus and
dinosaurs are extinct. Wouldn't mind seeing the demise of a few other
pests like HIV, kudzu, and fire ants. I am confident that consumers
will ultimately get what they want unless government gets involved and
gets in the way. There are enough independant cusses out there to
ensure preservation of genetic diversity. Seed savers exchange is one
example that was listed. I am also confident that the same people who
develop new technology with some negative and unintended side effects
will find ways to overcome the same. It is difficult to take comfort
in a government bureacracy that pays farmers in the fertile midwest
not to grow crops and at the same time subsidize irrigation and
farming in the arid southwest.
Lou Heavner - Austin, TX
Reveling in the multitude of styles, methods, and ingredients
available for homebrewing in the new year!
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2000 21:29:46 -0500
From: "Jeff" <jeffi@chesapeake.net>
Subject: Free 12 Oz bottles
Thanks to the collective for the information contributed to this forum, it
has made me a better brewer in a short period of time.
I have a number of cases of 12 oz brown bottles taking up space in my
basement. Free to a good home. Otherwise off to the recycling center. You
pick them up. I am located in Southern Maryland, Calvert County. I have
given up bottling in favor of corny kegs. Contact me by email.
Jeff
jeffi@chesapeake.net
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 04 Jan 2000 21:38:29 -0500
From: Jim Bentson <jbentson@longisland.com>
Subject: Final Run-off SG
Recently, there has been some discussion about the recommended "low limit"
for lauter runoff specific gravity. Many homebrew texts cite this as 1010
to 1012 and Steve Alexander and Paul Niebergall have been debating this
point with Paul feeling some statements are anecdotal rather than
scientific evidence.
For what it is worth I will give two interesting statements that relate to
this issue from Malting & Brewing Science 2nd Ed. My intent is to present
some statements and data from recognized texts with no comment one way or
the other .
1) On page 350, in Table 11.8 titled "Comparison of brewing practices" ,
the S.G. of the last runnings are given as 1004 for Britain , 1004 for
Continental Europe and 1008 for North America. This table is given along
with the statement that "last runnings tend to affect flavor and head
retention adversely".
2) On page 273 it states, "The last runnings are rich in oxidizable
polyphenols, but most oxidized polyphenols emerge in earlier wort
fractions". Tannins are polyphenol complexes but I am not enough of a
chemist to know whether this statement supports tannins at the late stage
or not.
In addition, Fix in "Principles of Brewing Science" discusses the issue of
tannin extraction during sparging on page 120 and points to a number of
causes. Fix says the following of the sparging process:
"Sparging. Unless care is taken, considerable amounts of husk derived
phenols and protein-tannin complexes can be extracted into the wort and
passed on to the beer. Extraction tends to be proportional to the amount of
sparge water used. Since the pH of the runnings tends to increase with
extraction, maximal levels of sparge water can be checked by pH
measurement. Conversely, the high pH of alkaline water itself stimulates
extraction. Finally, the extraction rate increases very rapidly above 74
to 76 deg C, so it is important that temperature be controlled during the
sparge. In fact the sensitivity of phenol-protein extraction to
temperature has led to some interesting experiments where the lauter was
carried out at 1 deg C"
It is interesting that Fix does not seem to mention low SG as a cause of
Tannin extraction.
Jim Bentson
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #3213, 01/05/00
*************************************
-------
