Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #3249
HOMEBREW Digest #3249 Tue 15 February 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:
Capricious Mr Fouch ("Phil & Jill Yates")
Re figuring out the degrees/gal/min of a herms (RobertJ)
2nd Annual Palmetto State Brewers Open ("H. Dowda")
Re: fermentap (Kurt Kiewel)
Ethanol from glucose, sterols, oxygen (pt.1) ("Alan Meeker")
Ethanol form glucose, sterols, oxygen (pt. 2) ("Alan Meeker")
Magnetic stirrer question (Edward Seymour)
CAP Questions/ bottle fur (Edward Seymour)
Wyeast, Bottle fur ("Spies, Jay")
Micheal Jackson World Beer Tour ("Eric R. Theiner")
Pitching rates. ("Dr. Pivo")
Best of Brooklyn 2000 ("George de Piro")
* Beer is our obsession and we're late for therapy!
* Entry deadline for the Mayfare Homebrew Competition is 3/15/00
* See http://www.maltosefalcons.com/ for more information
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, 14 Feb 2000 23:42:41 +1100
From: "Phil & Jill Yates" <yates@acenet.com.au>
Subject: Capricious Mr Fouch
I have to take my hat off to Mr Fouch, he lies dormant and quiet for months
on end then strikes like an angry snake. Mind you, it has taken a fair bit
of prodding to make him jump. Something about his Florida holiday has
definitely got him hot and prickly.
But who knows just what personality he may assume next. Ever since Ray Kruse
told him his pumpkin lager could be sold as paint stripper, well he just
hasn't been himself at all, whatever "himself" was.
As for discussing Australian reptiles, when I mentioned to Eric I was in the
habit of keeping Chelodina Longicolis about the house as pets, he refused to
speak further on the matter.
I am beginning to suspect it was Eric and not poor Ray who sent me this
atrocious bottle of skunk odour.
Cheers
Phil Yates
Ex Baron of Burradoo
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2000 08:34:22 -0500
From: RobertJ <pbsys@pbsbeer.com>
Subject: Re figuring out the degrees/gal/min of a herms
>From: J Daoust <thedaousts@ixpres.com>
>
>I just gave my new herms a try, and I think it did pretty good, I heated
>4 gals. of water 35 degrees in 30 min. I came up with 4.64 degrees
>/gal/min. I divided the 35 by 30 and got 1.16, then, multiplied by 4
>for the amount of water. Is that right?
That's the calculation we use.
Although I have not seen a lot of data from others, from what I have seen,
I believe most homebuilt systems using the HLT as the heat source get about
10 deg/gal/min. Non HLT heat exchangers (electric heating chamber,
counterflow chiller) vary greatly.
PBS HERMS runs at 20-21 deg/gal/min (6.3 gal, 28 deg inc within 9 mins).
However, a more practical calculation includes the addition of 19 lbs of
grain to the above, giving 17.6 deg/gal min). Data can be found on our page
Bob
Precision Brewing Systems URL http://pbsbeer.com Manufacturer of 3 Vessel
Brew Systems, HERMS(tm), SS Brew Kettles, SS hopback and the MAXIchiller
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2000 06:13:03 -0800 (PST)
From: "H. Dowda" <hdowda@yahoo.com>
Subject: 2nd Annual Palmetto State Brewers Open
April 8, 2000, Columbia, SC. Entries close April 1,
2000. On-line entry, AHA/BJCP, $5/beer.
http://www.sagecat.com/psbcomp2.htm
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger.
http://im.yahoo.com
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2000 08:52:47 -0600
From: kiewel@mail.chem.tamu.edu (Kurt Kiewel)
Subject: Re: fermentap
Will Randle wrote "..In addition to Kurt K.'s question, I was wondering how
does the CO2
produced/evolved during fermentation escape from the inverted carboy?"
I can answer this one but it brings another question to mind. The gasses
escape through a racking cane tip that goes all the way up through the
inverted carboy. I have thought of trying a Fermentap but one time during
a normal fermentation the foam and break material clogged the bubbler.
This clog resulted in a build-up of pressure and eventually the top blew
the bubbler off with such force that I spent the entire day cleaning wort
off the ceiling, walls, windows... With a Fermentap if the same were to
happen I propose the pressure would build up enough to break the carboy
with even more disastrous results. Comments?
Kurt Kiewel
Brewing in Texas.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2000 10:11:20 -0500
From: "Alan Meeker" <ameeker@welchlink.welch.jhu.edu>
Subject: Ethanol from glucose, sterols, oxygen (pt.1)
Got bounced for length - will post in two parts...
> >> basic information I
> > >would like to ask you for is this: What is the formula for the
breakdown
> > >of glucose to etoh and co2 during anaerobic respiration. What are
> > >sterols and how do they function in the yeast cell wall and where does
> > >o2 function in making sterols. This is the most technical info I would
> > >need. Thanks for all of your help.
>
ETHANOL FROM GLUCOSE:
The overall equation for ethanol formation from glucose is:
1 Glucose (C6H12O6) ---------> 2 Ethanol (C2H5OH) + 2 CO2
This is performed anaerobically. The process shares the set of reactions
called glycolysis (also called the Embden-Meyerhof pathway) with aerobic
respiration. Glycolysis is a series of enzyme-catalyzed reactions that
function to split molecules of glucose (a 6 carbon compound) into two
molecules of pyruvic acid (a 3 carbon compound). During glycolysis a NET
synthesis of 4 ATP molecules (Adenosine triphosphate) per glucose results.
This ATP is used later for energy-requiring reactions in the cell.
The point where pyruvic acid is formed is an important metabolic
branchpoint
in yeast. If oxygen is available the pyruvate will eventually be degraded
completely to water and CO2 and yield a maximum amount of metabolic energy
(net of 38 ATP molecules). This is a pretty efficient process, capturing
266
kcal in the form of ATP out of a possible 686 kcal of energy (the amount
determined for the complete oxidation of glucose in calorimetry) thus,
using
aerobic respiration, we can capture 39% of the available energy with the
remainder being released as heat.
When we make beer we exclude oxygen during the bulk of the fermentation
(the
small amount of oxygen present initially in the wort is quickly used up by
the yeast). Under these oxygen-free conditions the yeast convert the
pyruvic
acid made in glycolysis to ethanol. The process goes in two steps:
Pyruvic acid (3 carbon compound) -------> acetaldehyde (2 carbon compound)
+
CO2
Acetaldehyde --------------> Ethanol (2 carbon compound)
Now, you may notice that no more energy is being captured in this further
processing of pyruvic acid so why is the yeast going to all this
trouble????
It is because there is a key oxidation - reduction step in glycolysis. This
step uses the compound NAD (Nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide) reducing it
with the addition of hydrogen to make NADH. Since there is only a limited
amount of NAD in the cell, glycolysis would quickly come to a screeching
halt once all this NAD was reduced to NADH. Without glycolysis the cell
would not be generating any metabolic energy in the form of ATP and would
then die so it is imperative that the yeast keep glycolysis running. Thus,
the purpose of converting pyruvic acid to ethanol is simply to regenerate
NAD from the NADH generated during glycolysis.
An aside - our muscles do a similar thing during strenuous exercise when
oxygen is limited and cannot keep up with the muscle's demand and need to
generate energy. Here, the muscle also uses fermentation though in this
case
the end result is lactic acid rather than ethanol. Some bacteria also
perform lactic acid fermentation and can thus "sour" beer. In all these
cases the goal is the same - to regenerate NAD from NADH so that glycolysis
can continue.
-Alan Meeker
Lazy Eight Brewery "Where the possibilities are infinite."
Baltimore, MD
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2000 10:13:23 -0500
From: "Alan Meeker" <ameeker@welchlink.welch.jhu.edu>
Subject: Ethanol form glucose, sterols, oxygen (pt. 2)
> > basic information I
> > would like to ask you for is this: What is the formula for the breakdown
> > of glucose to etoh and co2 during anaerobic respiration. What are
> > sterols and how do they function in the yeast cell wall and where does
> > o2 function in making sterols. This is the most technical info I would
> > need. Thanks for all of your help.
STEROLS AND OXYGEN:
Sterols are a subset of lipids - water insoluble molecules that play key
architectural roles in cell membranes. Sterols are multi-ringed organic
compounds that all share a common structure along the lines of cholesterol.
The main sterol in yeast is called ergosterol. It plays an important part
in
the cell membrane; affecting such membrane properties as permeability,
fluidity, and, through these or via direct effects, affect the functions of
membrane-resident enzymes.
The yeast can obtain it's sterol either pre-formed in the wort or can
synthesize it from scratch. However, oxygen is required to synthesize
sterols. Specifically, oxygen is used in two of the late steps in sterol
synthesis at least one of which is involved in cyclization. This is one of
the reasons yeast cannot grow indefinitely in the absence of oxygen. The
other reason is that oxygen is required for the synthesis of certain
unsaturated fatty acids - another subset of lipids important in membrane
structure/function.
Research has shown that if yeast are supplied with pre-formed ergosterol
/and/ unsaturated fatty acids they can grow indefinitely without ever
seeing
any oxygen.
As far as the cell wall goes - there is a difference between the cell wall
and the cell membrane. All cells have cell membranes; these are made up of
lipids and proteins and are where the bulk of the sterols and fatty acids
(both saturated and unsaturated) occur. The cell membrane encloses the cell
acting as a barrier between the cell and the environment. A primary
function
of the cell membrane is to regulate the traffic of compounds between the
cell interior and exterior. In addition to the cell membrane, free-living
cells such as yeast and bacteria also have a cell wall which lies outside
of
the cell membrane. This is necessary because the environment these
organisms
find themselves in are unregulated in terms of the amount of water present
(osmolarity). Water is able to cross cell membranes freely and if there is
a
lot of water outside the cell it will rush inside greatly increasing the
hydrostatic pressure causing the cell to blow up like a balloon. If the
imbalance is too great the cell will actually burst. We humans don't have a
problem with this since our bodies regulate our cells' environment so that
they are not osmotically challenged. In contrast, when yeast find
themselves
surrounded by water the water enters the cell causing it to swell but the
cell wall restricts the swelling. The cell wall is made up of a tough
meshwork of polysaccharides and proteins, lipids don't play much of a role
here. Here's a simple model: imagine putting a water balloon in a small
basket. The balloon represents the cell membrane while the basket
represents
the cell wall. If you fill the balloon with water it expands till it's
continued expansion is restricted by the basket. The cell wall also serves
to protect the yeast cell from physical damage.
A few things to note here:
1) Once the oxygen is used up in the beginning of the fermentation no more
sterols or UFAs will be synthesized by the yeast. Thus, the total amount of
sterols present at this point will now be meted out among all the yeast
progeny during the subsequent growth of the yeast population. The result is
that a yeast population starting with a maximum amount of sterol will be
limited to dividing about 4-5 times. This is why your yeast starter should
be grown with plenty of oxygen exposure to ensure that they are maximally
charged with sterols and UFAs. Also, it should also be obvious that even if
your starter /is/ well oxygenated, if it is too small it may not be able to
grow to a sufficient density to conduct a rapid and complete fermentation.
Of course, this will depend to some extent on the degree of oxygenation of
the wort as well as on the amounts of UFAs and sterols present in the wort.
Since glucose inhibits aerobic respiration it appears that much of the
oxygen absorbed by the yeast early in the fermentation is probably being
used for lipid synthesis
2) UFAs are not precursor compounds for the synthesis of sterols. UFAs and
sterols are made in distinct pathways so, contrary to what some think,
providing UFAs or having UFAs around from the malt will NOT contribute
directly to sterol synthesis. However, it may provide the cell indirect
help
in that if the cell can obtain its UFAs from the wort then oxygen that
would
have been used for UFA synthesis can be used instead for sterol synthesis.
3) Since sterols and UFAs play key roles in membrane structure/function,
if
these compounds become limiting the yeast may be stressed in a number of
ways exhibiting temperature, alcohol and osmotic sensitivities as well as
deficiencies in nutrient transport across the membrane. All of these can
cause problems for our beer fermentations including stuck ferments and an
increased tendency for autolysis.
-Alan Meeker
Lazy Eight Brewery "Where the possibilities are infinite."
Baltimore, MD
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2000 07:15:34 -0800 (PST)
From: Edward Seymour <eseymour@yahoo.com>
Subject: Magnetic stirrer question
Someone a few weeks back gave a heads up on
magnetic stirrers under $20.00 on ebay. I was hi
bidder the day before this post, when all of a sudden
all of the bids jumped up over $65.00. Things have
settled and I was able to purchase one for $16.50 plus
shipping and handling (see, not only is Jack charging
for S&H, but so is the general public) ; )
http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=256917026
My question to the digest is, now that I have
one, what the #$!@ do I do with it? I heard it told
(or read it in the HBD) that I can make starters that
are reported to have 10 times more yeast cells with a
stirrer, but how is this done? Do I just make a
starter as usual, put in a stir bar and make a nice
gentle motion on the surface, or do I put it on high
and make a tornado? Are there any books on the
subject (with lots of BIG pictures) for the science
illiterate? Someone last fall was willing to write
such a book if there was a need. Did they start? Do
they need someone to test their process?
Another thing, I would like to start culturing my
own yeast. How do I do this? What other equipment
should I buy (is there a kit)? Will I need an
Autoclave, or will something like this do?
http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=257151470
I just purchased a microscope on ebay can I use this
for cell count?
(http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=244285359)
There is a small community college in my area that
offers classes in science. What type of class should
I take?
All these questions, not enough beer.
Regards,
Ed Seymour,
Hamden, CT
"I thought that when you said 'you would be happy with
a MALTMILL', all of this would end" Beverly Seymour,
patient wife.
http://geocities.com/eseymour/brewery.html
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger.
http://im.yahoo.com
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2000 07:43:37 -0800 (PST)
From: Edward Seymour <eseymour@yahoo.com>
Subject: CAP Questions/ bottle fur
Back in December Jeff Rennier was kind enough to
Post his rendition of a Clasic American Pilsner using
percentages of the grain bill. I asked the local
homebrew store if they carried the corn meal that Jeff
recommends, but the only corn product that he carried
was flaked maize (sales employee, owner was not
there).
I made this brew using the flaked maize and
Noonans' three step method of decoction. After
lautering I found a gray crust on the top of the spent
grains. It looked like gun powder. What was that
stuff? It was only 1/8 of an inch thick, but it
covered the top of the spent grains. Everything else
with the beer was fine (smell, color, taste, etc).
I've made pilsners before using the three step
decoction, and none of that stuff showed up.
================================
I never had the pleasure of having this fur in
any of my beer that I have made. If the culprit is
static, has anybody tried using Static Guard on a
bottle? It works on my wife's skirt. : )
Regards,
Ed Seymour,
Hamden, CT
Head brewer, bottle washer.
http://geocities.com/eseymour/brewery.html
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger.
http://im.yahoo.com
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2000 14:08:10 -0500
From: "Spies, Jay" <Spies@dhcd.state.md.us>
Subject: Wyeast, Bottle fur
All -
Some comments have floated on the HBD concerning Mike Maceyka's post about
finding cocci floating about in several smak paks of Wyeast that he streaked
and scoped out (including, I assume, someone from Wyeast). As he is in the
middle of preparing for defense of his Ph.D. thesis in Molecular Biology, I
thought I'd chime in (he's in my brew club).
Fred Scheer in particular had some comments. Yes, Wyeast does a great
service to the brewing community by providing a good variety of yeast
strains to the brewing public. So do a lot of other companies. When
examining the yeast that prompted him to write the article, Mike was as
surprised as anyone to find the level of contamination that he did. It
wasn't a witch hunt. Additionally, he did his work in a bio lab at Hopkins,
not in some musty cellar, so before others point fingers in his direction,
perhaps they should simply ask him to quantify his methodology. He *didn't*
say that Wyeast products are inferior, nor did he make any direct
accusations about any *intention* on the part of Wyeast to put these
critters in their yeast packets. He also said that N=1 for his "test". He
and Alan Meeker maintain our club's yeast bank (which puts Wyeast to shame,
IMO), and was streaking and scoping for his own quality control purposes.
He found what he found. For me, the ball is in Wyeast's court...
If Wyeast is found to have contaminated smak-paks, I want to hear about it.
The fact that they have a lot of experts on their staff doesn't necessarily
guarantee a quality product. The Government has a lot of experts on their
staff too... Perhaps they need to re-evaluate their QC. I would certainly
hate to hear that it *was* intentional (though I doubt we would ever hear
that).
As for the statement that we should "stay to homebrew discussions" - Um...I
thought this *was* a homebrew discussion.
If Wyeast wants to keep our business, they will need to ensure that they
have a quality product. Same applies to any business in the world. If it
is shown that they don't, or can't, or won't, then I'll go elsewhere.
As for the bottle fur discussion, I yanked a few of my long-term storage
Belgians, and yep, there was the fur. Strangely enough, the fur was all on
one side. Stranger still, careful analysis and GPS plotting revealed that
they were all oriented toward Rennerian (0,0). Perhaps the yeasties are all
longing to go back to their true home at the center of the brewing universe,
but keep *DOH!* smacking into that pesky bottle wall...
Jay Spies
Wishful Thinking Basement Brewery
Baltimore, MD
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2000 11:19:25 -0800
From: "Eric R. Theiner" <logic@skantech.com>
Subject: Micheal Jackson World Beer Tour
Rich asks about experiences with the subject organization.
All I know is that you'll have problems if you join in North Carolina.
We have some of those stupid beer laws that are found all around the
country, one of which is the 6% alcohol cap.
I don't know exactly which laws are to blame, but since joining in May,
I have received only 3 shipments. Legal problems are the reasons cited
to me when I call or e-mail to see what's going on.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2000 21:35:30 +0100
From: "Dr. Pivo" <dp@pivo.w.se>
Subject: Pitching rates.
It was asked by Tim Sigafoose:
> Are
> there reasons other than healthy fermentations why one would be
> concerned with pitching rates?
There are three possible correct answers to this question:
a) Increased esters.
b) Encouragement of the production of higher alcohols.
and...
c) Nobody knows.
And the correct answer is......
"c".
If you search the archives, you will find that there is an "exact"
reccomendation of pitching rates and number of generation turnovers.
You will also find that "nobody has done anything about finding out if
these numbers are relevant."
If you are looking to make "Budweiser", then I think that this is advice
well worth heading.
If you are looking to make your "best beer", it is probably well worth ignoring.
My own solution was a serrindipodous combination of underpitching, and
lower than reccommended temperatures.... made the smoothest and richest
beer I've yet tasted. Since then I've consistantly split my ferments,
and proved to myself many times that the "minimum daily requirement" is
the result of industrial brewing who has reinforced its belief in itself.
That this forum continually cites the information disseminated from an
industry where we all know where it is heading (tasteless, and lasts
forever), is a sad comment indeed.
One would think that "Homebrewers" would be more interested in creating
something that "perhaps had a short shelf life, but was brilliant in
it's day(s)", but that seems not the case.
If you are considering pitching rates in general, I would say, if you're
a bit behind on your hygiene, a healthy pitching rate is a good way to
protect against infection.... if you are looking for good beer you'll
just have to play with it (one yeast strain.... lots of 'spurments").
I am always scepitcle of the reporter who says: "Last week I brewed a
Belgium wit, and English Bitter, a Czech Pilsner, and a Stout.... and
they were all great!"
With good reason these particular beers usually stop becoming available
at there nation's borders... it takes an extreme familiarity of style,
and attention to detail.
A life time is probably enough to learn two styles correctly.... in
North Amerika they become "experts" on about two styles a week.... if
failing to match someone else's evaluation, then there's is "more authentic".
ooh boy.
If you visit a "traditional brewery" (there's not that many left) you
will be surprised at two things:
1) How variant there methods are form that that is reccomended here.
2) How bloody brilliant there beer is.
If I was going to make a reccomendation, I would pick out Nuwarelia in
Sri Lanka, where they haven't changed a brick since the British left....
it sure don't travel, but on site might remind you why you wanted to
become a homebrewer.
A closer to hand example for the Yanks might be "Belize". They haven't
been able to afford to change anything, and you might see the value in that.
Elsewise you might listen to the industrial dogma that is spouted here,
that is .... how should I put this delicately.... yes, diplomatically....
"crap"
Dr. Pivo
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2000 17:01:23 -0500
From: "George de Piro" <gdepiro@fcc.net>
Subject: Best of Brooklyn 2000
Hi all,
This is the final announcement for the third annual
***BEST OF BROOKLYN HOMEBREW COMPETITION***
The *Malted Barley Appreciation Society* and *Brooklyn Brewery*
are once again joining forces to bring you one heck of a homebrew
contest! The event will be held on Sat., Feb. 26, 2000 at the
Brooklyn Brewery (79 North 11th Street in Brooklyn, NY). Entries
must be received by Friday, Feb. 18. Check our website for a drop-off point
near you.
The Best of Show prize this year is a custom-made Brooklyn Brewery leather
jacket (valued at $400!).
Aside from the standard BJCP categories, there is our unique "First
time entrants" category and Experimental category which encourages the
entry of historical recreations.
Check out our website at http://hbd.org/mbas/bob2000.html for details!
We need judges and stewards!!! You can register electronically
at the above website or contact me for more info! Good luck and have fun!
George de Piro
C.H. Evans Brewing Company
at the Albany Pump Station
(518)447-9000
http://evansale.com (under construction)
Malted Barley Appreciation Society
Homebrew Club
http://hbd.org/mbas
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #3249, 02/15/00
*************************************
-------
