Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #3280
HOMEBREW Digest #3280 Fri 24 March 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:
A review of Fix's POBS 2nd Ed. (ALAN KEITH MEEKER)
Big Brew 2000 Recipe - National Homebrew Day festivities (Crispy275)
Port Hueneme, CA bound ("Spinelli, Mike")
Re: outdoor cookers ("J. Doug Brown")
HBD Post (MAB)
Competition Brews ("Houseman, David L")
Orlando Brew Pubs (Mark Tumarkin)
force carbonating (J Daoust)
re: Competition Brews ("Curt Speaker")
Sparge pH (Nathan Kanous)
Sight tubes ("Strom C. Thacker")
sparge monitoring - pH or SG? ("Alan Meeker")
RE: Yeast dump from a conical (LaBorde, Ronald)
Souring A Fruit Beer (John Varady)
trip to san francisco ... (ensmingr)
re: hard cider won't clarify (+ iron) (Dick Dunn)
More Real Ale (John Varady)
Re: HBD#3279 Iron Toxicity (ed basgall)
Re: Mashed Rice For Dinner? (Jeff Renner)
Re: searching the archives (Joel Plutchak)
iron (kathy/jim)
POBS II review (pt.2) ("Alan Meeker")
more czech notes, Brewing book ("St. Patrick's")
POBS II part 3 ("Alan Meeker")
question re: brewing equipment & decoction brewing ("St. Patrick's")
* Beer is our obsession and we're late for therapy!
* Entries for the 18th Annual HOPS competition are due 3/24-4/2/00
* See http://www.netaxs.com/~shady/hops/ for more information
* 18th Annual Oregon Homebrew Festival - entry deadline May 15th
* More info at: http://www.hotv.org/fest2000
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: Thu, 23 Mar 2000 00:59:05 -0500 (EST)
From: ALAN KEITH MEEKER <ameeker@mail.jhmi.edu>
Subject: A review of Fix's POBS 2nd Ed.
(Part 1)
I have finally gotten around to reading the second edition of George Fix's
Principles of Brewing Science and while it is somewhat of an improvement over
the first edition I'm afraid the second edition is still deficient in several
important respects.
Before continuing I will preface this review by pointing out that by all
accounts Fix is an excellent brewer and I don't doubt for a moment that
he brews great beer. In fact, this practical knowledge is readily apparent
in his other recent book - An Analysis of Brewing Techniques which I think is
well worth the cover price. Unfortunately, I cannot say the same for POBS II.
Aside from several annoying proofreading errors, it is the /scientific/
content that I find lacking in the new book. It could be argued that most of
these errors would cause no great harm in the brewhouse. Still, the
book is titled; Principles of Brewing /Science/ therefore the reader is
presumably interested in the scientific aspects of brewing although most
likely with an eye towards practical applications as well.
The book starts off with a very nice introductory overview (lacking in the
first edition) in which various aspects of brewing are ranked according to
their perceived impact on beer quality. Heavy emphasis is placed on both the
quality and quantity of the pitching yeast as well as the potential problems
of contamination and oxidation. While this was a welcome addition, useful
portions of the first edition apparently didn't make the cut; one notable
example being the appendix containing the basic science review material. A
review of basic relevant chemical principles would undoubtedly have been
helpful to many readers especially since there are instances where chemical
terms, such as oxidizing/reducing for example, are used without first being
defined and simple yet important concepts like pH are not elaborated on.
Approximately 1/3 of the references are new (since POBS I) but I found the
referencing to be terribly spotty. Far too much material is presented totally
unreferenced and in several places the references cited aren't the primary
sources for the information presented.
Most of the chemical equations in the second edition are now in balance (with
a few exceptions such as the "Strickland reaction") and most of the chemical
structures are OK as well though there is a fair sprinkling of incorrect ones
including an incomplete alpha acid structure, hop "isomers" which are not
truly isomers as drawn, the figure on page 107 labeled "structure of leucine"
when in fact it is supposed to be the R group of leucine (actually, it isn't
even the correct R group for leucine) but these by and large are minor
annoyances.
(to be continued)
-Alan Meeker
Lazy Eight Brerwery
Baltimore,MD
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2000 06:56:39 EST
From: Crispy275@aol.com
Subject: Big Brew 2000 Recipe - National Homebrew Day festivities
Guess you could call me a worried mother hen, but just two final
clarifications when it comes to my Nearly Nirvana Pale Ale recipe.
First, I happen to like to boil for 75 minutes vs. 60 minutes. Someone asked
me why and I guess I have no particuarlly good reason, just sort of habit. I
count the first fifeteen minutes of adjusting my boil to get the best rolling
boil without the dreaded boilover. It usually takes me 10-15 minutes to get
to the point where I feel confident enough to be able to take my eyes off the
kettle for a minute. It is during these fifeteen minutes I typically add my
Perle hops. While I have fooled around with first wort hopping, most of my
SNPA clones I have not. So I suggest that we just go with an ounce of Perle's
at boil.
Second, I personally like to mash with about 1.25 quarts of water for each
pound of grain. I use a Pico system with just over a gallon of water under
the screen, so for 10 lbs. of grains I have a gallon foundation water plus
10x1.25 quarts for er, ah, man it's early, mmmn, oh yeah 12.5 quarts or 3.25
gallons. I am sure people who use different systems have different
philosophies, so I am not sure it is really a relevant measure to provide
people.
As an aside, even before I knew about the AHA using my recipe, I am having my
third annual National Homebrew Day celebration on May 6th. I live just south
of Ann Arbor, Mi. , so if there are any brewers who may be interested in
brewing with bunches of Fermental Order of Renassiance Draughtsmen and Ann
Arbor Brewers Guild members, drop me a line and I will give you the details.
Last year we brewed over a hundred gallons on over a dozen systems and we had
a great time!
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2000 07:01:36 -0500
From: "Spinelli, Mike" <paa3983@dscp.dla.mil>
Subject: Port Hueneme, CA bound
HBDers,
My brother is moving to Port Hueneme, CA. Can any of you locals recommend
areas to live, apartments, bars, BP's?
Thanks
Mike Spinelli
Mikey's Monster Brew
Cherry Hill NJ
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2000 07:04:19 -0500
From: "J. Doug Brown" <jbrown@mteer.com>
Subject: Re: outdoor cookers
Cookers on the Deck,
I have found that by attaching aluminum flashing to the top of a piece
of plywood and placing this under my camp cooker has help keep from
scorching whatever I am brewing over. My camp cooker sits low (4 inches
above the gound) and the aluminum flashing seems to have the effect of
reflecting much of the heat back up to my kettle. The flashing will
also help prevent a spark or stray flame from igniting hot plywood.
Just my 2 cents
Doug Brown
- --
J. Doug Brown - Fairmont, WV
Sr. Software Engineer
jbrown@mteer.com jbrown@ewa.com
www.labs.net/kbrown www.ewa.com
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2000 09:07:28 -0500
From: MAB <mabrooks@erols.com>
Subject: HBD Post
In a recent post concerning a water analysis:
I'm posting this water analysis courtesy of another brewing
site on the web. It's quite strange. Seems like it has
almost nothing other than sodium bicarbonate in it.
Calcium 1.6
Magnesium 0.08
Iron 0.12
Manganese 0.0
Sodium 216.1
Carbonate 28.8
Bicarbonate 478.2
Sulfate 19.4
Chloride 9.6
Flouride 0.6
Nitrate 0.0
Phenolphtalein Alkalinity as CaCO3 24.0
Total Alkalinity as CaCO3 440.0
Total Hardness as CaCO3 4.3
Dissolved Residue (TS) Calculated 754.5
Specific Conductance Micromhos/cm 880
pH 8.8
Total Iron 0.20
Cheers!
Marc
Marc,
It looks like this water has been processed through a water softener.
Indications are the very high level of Na+, and subsequently low levels
of Ca++. It is likely the water was initially very hard (in the form of
CaHCO3). The high levels of dissolved solids and the high conductance
are a result of the high levels of Na+ that are substituted for Ca++ in
the softening process. This water could be problematic for use as
brewing water. I would recommend the use of KCl (Potassium Chloride)
pellets as a substitute for NaCl pellets in the softener regenerate
tank.....Better for making Beer....Better for your Health.
Matt B.
Northern VA.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2000 09:22:26 -0500
From: "Houseman, David L" <David.Houseman@unisys.com>
Subject: Competition Brews
Bill Tobler asks about submitting a beer brewed with someone elses recipe?
Of course you can. In fact, you won't find a homebrew recipe that
accurately reflects the actual beer the author made in sufficient detail to
duplicate it exactly. Listing the malts, the hops, the yeast and even going
so far as to describe the mash schedule and water chemistry is only part of
the equation. Your system will have its own characteristics for mash
efficiency and hop utilization. You probably won't have the exact grains or
malt extract. Your might or might not find the same hops with the same
Alpha that has been cared for in the same way. Your fermentation
temperatures will most likely vary. Your sanitation habits will be
different. And on and on. The bottom line is that a recipe you get from
someone is a starting point. Your batch of beer will be unique. So an
honestly acquired recipe should not be a concern for entering a competition.
Hope you do well.
David Houseman
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2000 09:28:33 -0500
From: Mark Tumarkin <mark_t@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: Orlando Brew Pubs
Stefan asked about brewpubs in the Orlando area. I live in Gainesville,
well north of Orlando, so I don't get down there often. However, I can
point you to a few places. First, Shipyard Brewing has a brewpub in the
Orlando Airport so if you're flying that should be easy. There is also a
fairly new brewpub called Oldenberg Grill in Oviedo (NE Orlando). I
haven't been there but have heard good things about their beers. There
is also the Big River Grille at Disney's Boardwalk. They also make
decent beer, though nothing inspired.
hope this helps,
Mark Tumarkin
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2000 06:38:12 -0800
From: J Daoust <thedaousts@ixpres.com>
Subject: force carbonating
When force carbonating, how long do you need to leave the keg under
pressure? I am keeping the temp in the mid 40's. I have used one of the
various charts to get the pressure, but they only say leave for a long
time. Thanks for the help, Jerry Daoust private email is ok
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2000 09:40:46 +0500
From: "Curt Speaker" <SPEAKER@SAFETY-1.SAFETY.PSU.EDU>
Subject: re: Competition Brews
Bill Tobler asks about beers for competitions:
As judges, we must evaluate the beer on its own; we never see the
recipe. We look for two major things: Are there anything wrong
with the beer? Off-flavors (diacetyl, DMS, tannins/phenolics,
sourness, astringency), off-aromas, obvious flaws. The other
consideration is how closely does the beer adhere to the style that
it was submitted as? Many a good beer is entered in a
competition in the wrong catagory and gets hammered. You end
up with a lot of comments on the scoresheet like "This beer would
be and ideal <style>, rather than what you entered it as." So
knowing the beer styles and being able to place your brew in them
is important. Some folks are bullheaded and say "I brewed this
beer as an IPA, and I am going to enter it as one, dammit!" In
several cases, I have attempted to brew Bohemian Pilsners that
them as American Pilsners (BudMilloors type beers) and have
actually won ribbons with them.
Regarding recipes, if someone posts a recipe to the Internet, it has
pretty much become public domain. I think you are free to use the
recipe as-is, tweek it a bit, and by all means, enter the brew in
competitions to get feedback on how well you have made the beer
and adhered to the style. Recipe formulation for beer is a lot like
cooking: some folks have a natural knack for it and never need to
follow a recipe, others well always follow a recipe exactly as
written. To each their own.
jjust my $0.02
Curt
BJCP Certified (almost National - 2 more points!!!)
Curt Speaker
Biosafety Officer
Penn State University
Environmental Health and Safety
speaker@ehs.psu.edu
http://www.ehs.psu.edu
^...^
(O_O)
=(Y)=
"""
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2000 08:46:08 -0600
From: Nathan Kanous <nlkanous@pharmacy.wisc.edu>
Subject: Sparge pH
Del says:
"When then do you cut off the sparge? you can no longer monitor pH because
it will always remains in the range, so you could run off as long as you want?"
Well, to that I say....I sparge with a specific amount of sparge
water. When it's gone, I'm done. Ain't rocket science and it's served me
well. Generally, I use 1/2 gallon per pound of malt. Works pretty
good. No mucking around with hydrometers or really expensive pH meters or
useless pH papers.
nathan in madison, wi
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2000 09:54:46 -0500
From: "Strom C. Thacker" <sthacker@bu.edu>
Subject: Sight tubes
I have a sight tube setup that works (for me, at least) without any
extra welding or a bulkhead into the kettle (1/2 barrel sanke). The
basic principle is to tap into an existing fitting on the kettle
drain. I fitted my kettle drain with a brass T, with a female pipe
fitting facing up. Into that I placed a compression fitting, which
was attached to an approx. 2' length of polypropylene tubing (polypro
tubing is cheap, food grade, and heat resistant, but too stiff to use
with hose barbs/clamps). Make sure the tubing rises above the level
of the top of the vessel, and you shouldn't need to drain it back
into the kettle. This tubing is milky white, but clear enough to see
wort or even water through. A couple of inches below the top of the
tubing, I wrapped a small piece of approx. 1/2"-wide copper long
enough to go around the polypro tubing with a couple inches to spare
on either side (thick wire might work, too). I then attached the
copper to the top ring of the sanke keg with a ss screw to keep the
top of the sight tube stationary. The polypro tubing is pretty
stiff, so the whole thing doesn't move around much at all (giving, I
hope, consistent volume measures). The fittings should be available
at a hardware or plumbing supply store, and I got the tubing from US
Plastic (http://www.thomasregister.com/olc/usplastic/) (yadda,
yadda). Calibrate and mark with a permanent marker.
The trick, which I learned the hard way, is to attach a valve or air
cock of some sort to the top of the sight tube. Leave it open except
when draining the vessel. If the top is open when you drain it, you
will suck in large amounts of air and, at least in my case, the flow
will slow to a trickle or stop altogether.
I haven't checked to see if my sight tube yields measures consistent
with other types of setups, but so far my yields to the fermenter
have been consistent with the rough measures given by the sight tube.
This setup isn't as pretty as others, but it works for me, it's easy,
and it's cheap. Of course, YMMV.
Hope this helps!
Strom Thacker
Newton, MA
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2000 10:30:40 -0500
From: "Alan Meeker" <ameeker@welchlink.welch.jhu.edu>
Subject: sparge monitoring - pH or SG?
Nathaniel Lansing wrote commenting on the practice of acidifying one's
sparge water and the subsequent determination of when to end the sparge.
"...The pH rise is the "indicator", acidifying the water voids
your indicator."
As far as I'm aware, the rise in pH is simply an indicator of the fact that
phosphates (the major buffering species in the mash) have been significantly
leeched out of the grain bed. I don't see how this is any better or worse an
indicator of when to end the sparge than using specific gravity.
As for myself, I no longer monitor either the pH or the SG of the sparge. I
bump up my grain bills by about 10% or so, acidify my sparge water and
sparge till I have collected a target volume appropriate for my brewing set
up and based on reasonable estimates of my expected mash efficiency and
target SG. I've fallen into the camp of people who are willing to take the
small $$ loss in exchange for not having to push the sparge too far.
-Alan Meeker
Baltimore
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2000 09:27:48 -0600
From: rlabor@lsumc.edu (LaBorde, Ronald)
Subject: RE: Yeast dump from a conical
>From: "John Todd Larson" <larson@amazon.com>
>How do I keep the dump area clean? I assume I dump some trub and junk out
>after a few days and then harvest a few days later. Should I try to clean
>the outside part of the valve and try to sanitize in place -or- after
>dumping trub maybe quickly cover with aluminum foil and leave dirty until
>harvest?
When visiting Abita brewery in Abita, La., here is what I saw. Another
visitor who happened to bring along his mason jar asked for some yeast. The
brewer took the jar, went to a large sink with sanitizer in it, rinsed the
jar & cover, took a spray bottle of something and sprayed up at the conical
tank and valve inner surfaces. Then he sprayed his brush and brushed the
exposed area inside the valve, then he sprayed again. He opened the valve,
dumped some yeast into the jar, closed the valve, brushed and sprayed again,
then handed the jar to a very happy visitor.
Ron
Ronald La Borde - Metairie, Louisiana - rlabor@lsumc.edu
http://hbd.org/rlaborde
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2000 10:42:55 -0500 (EST)
From: John Varady <rust1d@usa.net>
Subject: Souring A Fruit Beer
I took 4 gallons of Alt that I had fermented with a pilsner yeast and added
12 pounds of mulberrys. It's been on the berrys for 10 days. I'd like to
rack it to a 6 gallon carboy and add a lambic culture to sour it. I'd love
to get the sour/tartness of a framboise. I'm willing to let this beer set
for a few months or more. Which would be the best Wyeast culture to use? I
also plan on getting a bottle or two of lambic to dump the dregs in. I
realise that this is no lambic and I will not be able to acquired the exact
profile of a framboise - this is just an experiment.
4335 Lactobacillus delbrueckii
4733 Pediococcus cerevisiae
3278 Belgian Lambic blend
3112 Brett. bruxellensis
3526 Brettanomyces lambicus
>From reading the descriptions of each of these, the 3526 sounds like the
best choice. I'd like to hear about experiences with each.
John
- --
John Varady http://www.netaxs.com/~vectorsys/varady
Glenside, PA rust1d@usa.net
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2000 10:53:12 -0500
From: ensmingr@npac.syr.edu
Subject: trip to san francisco ...
Two San Francisco beers come to mind that you may enjoy
depending upon your religious and sexual preference(s).
"HE'BREW" ( http://www.shmaltz.com ) is a kosher beer made
in San Francisco whose motto is "Don't pass out, passover".
"Queer Beer" (formerly at http://www.queerbeer.com ) is an
entirely different beer, that some others on the HBD (Fred
Garvin?) may be more familiar with.
Cheers!
Peter A. Ensminger
Syracuse, NY
------------------------------
Date: 23 Mar 00 08:54:49 MST (Thu)
From: rcd@raven.talisman.com (Dick Dunn)
Subject: re: hard cider won't clarify (+ iron)
"Nigel Porter" <nigel@sparger.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
> I wouldn't worry too much about the cloudy cider. For those of you
> who have had the pleasure of drinking proper English West Country
> cider, you will have found it to be totally flat (ie no carbonation at all),
> exceptionally dry and so murky that you cannot see your fingers
> through the glass.
Two out of three. The West Country style is certainly still/dry, but if
you're getting "murky" cider you'd do better to look elsewhere. It will
likely be unfiltered and un-fined, which means that it won't be "bright",
but you should certainly be able to see through it. Properly made and
fermented over a reasonable period (slowly over several months) a good
cider will fall clear, especially with the apples they favor in the west
counties, which are high in tannins.
> Also to buy it, you can normally go to a farm with a container of your
> own, and the farmer will go and pull some out of a dubious looking
> container in the back of a dirty old barn.
Nigel, you're laying it on a bit thick. Yes, you'll find cider in some
interesting and old places, but if it looks dubious or dirty you're
probably going to be disappointed. We've tried places that are off-the-
path and a bit "funky" as we'd say...some of them have good cider while
others have thin, mean stuff that's starting to vinegar or oxidize due to
poor care. You'd best ask for a taste before you have your jug filled up.
For a better start on West Country cider, look for small-scale commercial
cider makers first. They'll introduce you to the West Country style with
well-made ciders; then when you visit that out-of-the-way farm selling
cider around back you'll be able to tell the difference between a style
which is new and surprisingly different to your taste, _vs_ one that's just
plain bad.
If you can get the brochure of the "South West of England Cidermaker's
Association", it's got a map to a couple dozen reputable producers, almost
all of them small. That will give you a good start. Unfortunately, the
copy I've got has no address for the Association, so I don't know where
you could get a copy in advance of a trip.
_ _ _ _ _
There was a quick question about iron in the same HBD. Just a note re
cider: Keep it away from iron! It turns the cider a nasty dark green.
- ---
Dick Dunn rcd@talisman.com Hygiene, Colorado USA
...Simpler is better.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2000 11:41:50 -0500 (EST)
From: John Varady <rust1d@usa.net>
Subject: More Real Ale
Lynn notes that this is a fabolous weekend for real ale. However, she missed
one!
I'll be there, since I won't be in St Louie.
REAL ALE RENDEZVOUS 2000
That's right, America's oldest real ale gathering is in its 6th year,
and will feature another amazing selection of 12 cask ales from
near & far. Many of the beers have been commissioned specially
for the event, and each has been maintained according to CAMRA
standards and served by gravity or handpump, using no cask
breathers or electrikal cooling apparatus.
Saturday March 25, 2000
2-6pm
$20 includes beer & snacks
Dock Street Brasserie
18th & Cherry Streets
Philadelphia, PA
- --
John Varady http://www.netaxs.com/~vectorsys/varady
Glenside, PA rust1d@usa.net
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2000 11:52:43 -0500
From: ed basgall <ejb11@psu.edu>
Subject: Re: HBD#3279 Iron Toxicity
Adam wrote:
>Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2000 21:09:14 +0000
>From: jafjmw@wlsfn.force9.co.uk
>Subject: Iron - good bad or indifferent?
>A combination brewing / cooking question. Everyone agrees that lead is
>poisonous; aluminium is debatable. What about iron? I am thinking
>mainly about rusty woks and frying pans, but also about iron water
>pipes and other sources of iron or iron oxides in liquid or solid
>foods. Are they harmful, beneficial as dietary iron, or irrelevant?
>Thanks
>Adam Funk
Hi Adam,
These sources of iron (oxides) are generally considered poorly absorbed by the
Human intestinal tract, however.
this from: http://health.excite.com/content/asset/chat_transcript.524967
"Dr_Krikker Hemochromatosis is a genetic disorder of iron loading of
vital organs such as the heart, pancreas, liver, joints and the
pituitary gland. It is not only a common genetic disorder, but it is
probably the only genetic disorder which when diagnosed and treated
is compatible with a healthy and full life span. Without a diagnosis
and treatment, these patients go on to develop the symptoms of the
iron loading. The symptoms depend on the organs involved. To
understand hemochromatosis is to understand the uniqueness of this
genetic disorder. "
Cheers
ed
RaidR
Nittany Valley Hash House Harriers
http://www.rehrig.net/nvhhh/index.html
State College Underground Maltsters (SCUM)
http://rayleigh.chem.psu.edu/scum/
"Give a man a case of beer and he drinks for a day,
Teach him to brew and he drinks for a lifetime"
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2000 11:57:13 -0500
From: Jeff Renner <nerenner@umich.edu>
Subject: Re: Mashed Rice For Dinner?
"Phil Yates" <yates@acenet.com.au> pries himself away from the six scantily
clad ladies in the billiards room long enough to write:
>How will it mash if it hasn't been cooked first? I
>thought it needed to be gelatinised before mashing.
You're right that corn and rice starch will not gelatinize at mash
temperatures. However, there are several factors that make the whole
picture not as simple as that. First, starch granules are ruptured in the
milling process and this makes them available to solulize in water, which
is what gelatinization is. I coarsely mill my rice in a Corona mill into
"grits," maybe 1 mm pieces. Secondly, I suspect there may well be
enzymatic processes going on other than amalytic that make the mash more
liquid.
At any rate, you can see it get more liquid (do use sufficient water) with
time. After a 20-30 minute mash, I boil for about 20 minutes as I recall.
Brewing texts (I could look this up but I have posted it in the past with
citations) recommend boiling the rice "grits" until there is just a tiny
uncooked kernel in the very center. If you cook further it seems that you
don't get as good lautering. Then stir this into the main mash. I usually
rest the main mash at around 144F (62C) during the cereal boil, and adding
the cereal mash brings it up to my next rest of 158-160F (70C+). Sometimes
I have to adjust with the burner or cold water.
>I mention this because it means I could now, if I want, cook the rice first
>in the masher then add the Barley, even throw in a protein rest and go from
>there. I'm sure this way the rice would cause me no trouble. But I can't
>imagine how one would mash uncooked rice.
I like to do the cereal mash in a small separate pot. I mash in then put
it in the preheated oven in the kitchen, then cook it on the kitchen stove
or on one of my brewery burners.
>Oh and by the way, not only do the ladies like the rice beer, I
>do too.
I do too, although I generally prefer corn beer. But rice makes a great
light lager. It's nice to have a "lawnmower beer" with real flavor.
Again, maybe like 1900 Budseiser.
Jeff
-=-=-=-=-
Jeff Renner in Ann Arbor, Michigan USA, c/o nerenner@umich.edu
"One never knows, do one?" Fats Waller, American Musician, 1904-1943.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2000 11:33:16 -0600 (CST)
From: Joel Plutchak <plutchak@ncsa.uiuc.edu>
Subject: Re: searching the archives
In HBD #3274, Jim Liddil asks:
>Can't some programming genius out there come up with a better
>search engine for the HBD? Google and altavista style comes
>to mind. But I am not a programmer and so if I am way over
>simplifying forgive me.
I'd be among the last to call myself a genius, but I've
been programming from 20+ years, and doing web stuff for
almost as long as NCSA Mosaic has been around. Personally,
I think the HBD search engine is fine the way it is: simple
and direct, with no annoying frippery to get in the way.
(And thanks to Spencer Thomas for selflessly providing
the service!)
- --
Joel Plutchak
Brewin' and computin' in south-central Illinois
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2000 13:00:34 -0400
From: kathy/jim <kbooth@scnc.waverly.k12.mi.us>
Subject: iron
As I understand, iron is a surplus in most of the USA
population and we do not need the iron supplements the
food industry pushed on us in the last 40-50 years.
Man evolved with various parasites and developed an
iron gathering mechanism to feed the worms and
us. It is being dropped from many vitamin supplements
formulas.
Iron is a problem in brewing and should be avoided as
with enamel cover boiling pots that are chipped, etc. Too
much iron in the water is also a problem, but I'll let
others elaborate. Iron in skillets, pots, etc is
not usually a problem unless you are one of the few
people poisoned with retained iron.
The use of aluminum is no longer argued as numerous
tests establish that except for reacting negatively
with the caustic cleaners that the commercial boys/girls
use, it brews beer extremely well. In fact
traces of copper are more problematic healthwise then
elemental aluminum. I'm in the market for a new brewing
pot and going aluminum is my path.
cheers, jim booth
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2000 13:17:35 -0500
From: "Alan Meeker" <ameeker@welchlink.welch.jhu.edu>
Subject: POBS II review (pt.2)
POBS review/corrections (part 2)
Water Chemistry:
The first chapter jumps right into various aspects of water chemistry and
treatment options - material of obvious importance to the brewer.
Unfortunately, the general reader is unlikely to take away much other than
confusion from this section. It would have been nice to include clear
descriptions of basic concepts here, such as what exactly pH is, its
logarithmic nature and why it is so important. The concept that the
carbonate buffer system is a coupled equilibrium between gasseous CO2,
various carbonate species, and carbonic acid is lost and was better
described in the first edition. It would also have been nice to have clearly
defined the somewhat confusing terminology used in describing water
chemistry - terms like temporary and permanent hardness for example.
A basic description of the phytic acid/phytase system in malt may have been
beneficial.
The proposed mechanism for acidification by lactic acid is a bit strange,
Fix has it reducing pH as a consequence of complexation with calcium but the
actual mechanism is almost certainly simple proton dissociation upon the
introduction of the acid into water. Indeed, lactic acid certainly lowers
the pH in the complete absence of any calcium. Carbonic acid is given
similar short-shrift as we are told that since it is "neutral" it thus does
not change wort pH.
Where things really get muddled (and where most people are likely to get
truly lost) is in the description of Residual Alkalinity.
RA is given as = <HCO3-> -0.87<Ca2+> this disregards the effects of any
magnesium present which may in fact play a significant role depending on the
source of the water. Also, the formula differs from that presented by Fix in
AOBT where at first RA = <HCO3-> - <Ca2+>/135 then later RA = <HCO3-> -
<Ca2+>/35. In fact, if one checks the Moll reference given one finds the
denominator of the calcium term is actually 3.5 Introducing the units of
German degrees of hardness only complicates things further.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2000 12:29:54 -0500
From: "St. Patrick's" <stpats@realtime.net>
Subject: more czech notes, Brewing book
First Wort Hopping (moving last hop addition to first wort) is not
practiced in Czech Republic but the first hop addition is indeed before
kettle so that boil is reached about same time lauter is finished. First hop
addition coincided with putting heat to kettle. So first hops weren't
boiling for at least 45 minutes. This may explain the misunderstanding
that FWH is practiced. I don't know for sure, but I suspect this
contributes a different flavor profile than if first addition were
after boil began. Second addition about 10 minutes into 1.5 hour boil,
and last at 20 minutes before end. Each addition about same amount of Saaz.
Last addition for dark lager was a little less than what it would be for
pilsner.
I also spent a couple of hours with a member of the tasting panel (which
also included retired Pilsner Urquell brewmasters) which evaluated
Pilsner Urquell as they switched from oak to cylindroconicals. It isn't quite
accurate that the panel reached the conclusion that Pilsner Urquell of
today is the same. Over a period of months changes were made to emulate the
traditional beer. But as this person emphasized, if you want the
Pilsner Urquell of old, you must go to the pub inside brewery (not the bar
outside gates) which still serves beer fermented in open oak and lagered in
oak.
Double decoction is the norm in Czech Republic. However, Pilsner
Urquell does indeed use triple decoction, as many have reported over the
years.
Some Czech breweries are now using German lager yeast (from
Weihenstephan). Pilsner Urquell has their own as does Budvar. However, the
most popular yeast strain is none of these. I have made some inquiries about
acquiring it.
One of the most interesting things I learned was that Budvar yeast can
be crashed at a higher temperature than the Weihenstephan lager yeast.
Budvar can be crashed at 3C while Weihenstephan keeps plugging along and must
be brought to about 0. The relative maltiness of Budvar and many other
Czech beers I now believe has more to do with the choice and handling of yeast
and lagering temperatures than anything else.
Jim Busch's post of Wednesday relates to this issue of crashing yeast and
leaving residual maltiness. Fullers also crashes the yeast to retain some
residual sweetnesss.
I have since talked to some brewpub brewers in Texas and this temp
difference may be quite significant in a practical sense. It is not too
difficult
for most with glycol jackets to hit 3C, but 0 or 1 C is difficult.
I'm not sure but I think you can hit 3C in most home fridges at the
lowest setting.
I know there has been just a little discussion about diacetyl in Czech
beers ;-) I only want to point out that Czechs control diacetyl in a different
manner than most German (and American) breweries. The 3 ways to reduce
diacetyl (I was given a nice lecture on this and read it in Kunze
later) are 1) diacetyl rest which is used in Germany. Czechs use either
2) krausening (3-5% typically but up to 10%) or 3) reducing pressure in
lagering vessel to reduce diacetyl.
Paul Smith asked how to get I. Hornsey's book:
Here's the Royal Society of Chemistry web page where Brewing by Ian Hornsey
can be purchased. It's 17 pounds (about $28) and I'm not sure about
shipping costs.
http://www.rsc.org/is/books/brewing.htm
You can get the chapter on hops off the website and also look over table of
contents.
Lynne O'Connor
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2000 13:31:02 -0500
From: "Alan Meeker" <ameeker@welchlink.welch.jhu.edu>
Subject: POBS II part 3
POBS II (part 3)
- ---------------------
Basic Biochem:
Brewer's yeast do not consume proteins and peptides are not properly
considered a "class of proteins."
It is said that "Only 20 different amino acids generally appear in enzymes
relevant to brewing" of course this is true as virtually all enzymes are
made up of just these same 20 amino acids.
Fatty acids in the wort cannot be used as substrates in sterol synthesis as
they are not in the sterol synthetic pathway.
Any oxygen sparing in this situation would be due to the reduced oxygen
requirements for UFA synthesis therefore more of the available oxygen could
be used for sterol synthesis instead.
The graph on pg. 97 shows sterol synthesis occurring over a period of some 2
1/2 days - this seems a bit long.
Permeases are located in the cell membrane not the cell wall. The enzyme
maltase is not the same thing as the maltose permease, they are separate
proteins the latter serving to facilitate transport of the sugar maltose
into the cell while the former cleaves the maltose to yield two molecules of
glucose.
Catabolite repression does not act to "deactivate" permease enzymes, rather
their synthesis is inhibited.
The formation of acetlylCoA diagrammed on page 91 is incorrect. The acetyl
residue does arise from pyruvate but coenzymeA does not. In addition, the
two should be linked via a thioester linkage forming a single molecule. It
is stated that this is an important compound because it is the "first
fermentation product containing sulfur." however, this statement is not
strictly true and no explanation is given as to why this sulfur should be
important in brewing. The only function of this sulfur is to act as a
donor-acceptor for various carbon compounds, it is not a source of the
organolepticaly important sulfur compounds found in beer.
The enzyme phosphatase is said to "break down phosphoric acid" but its real
function is to liberate inorganic phosphates by breaking their linkages to
various organic compounds. For instance, phytase is a phosphatase that
specifically releases free phosphate from phytate - the major malt phosphate
storage compound. The phosphoric acid "breaks down" as a consequence of its
own intrinsic propensity to release protons as well as reactions such as
those between phosphoric acid and divalent metal cations such as calcium and
magnesium.
The reaction labeled as illustrating beta amylase action is actually the
alpha amylase mechanism.
In the esterification reaction on pg. 111 the ester is mislabeled as a
carboxylic acid.
The sharp decrease described for amylase activity (alpha? beta?) with
increasing pH (as opposed to decreasing pH) seems a bit questionable. One
reference is given (from the 1950's) and the activity vs pH data in Table
1.9 are presented in a way that unfairly accentuates the decreases in
activity at higher pH. Also, this behavior stands in stark contrast to later
biochemical analyses of the pH dependence of amylase activities published in
the biochemical literature. The activity level of the amylases is a
multifactorial property with the variables of temperature, calcium
concentration, and substrate concentration, playing key roles in addition to
that played by pH. A sound explanation of how all these various factors
interact and affect the enzymatic activities of the amylases (particularly
during the mash) would have been preferable.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2000 13:13:55 -0500
From: "St. Patrick's" <stpats@realtime.net>
Subject: question re: brewing equipment & decoction brewing
I have a couple of questions for people familiar with brewpub and micro
equipment in US.
I spent some time at several brewpubs and a micro in Texas before this
trip to familiarize myself with equipment so I could ask the right questions
and look for the right things. It would seem that the only major difference
in 2 vessel systems here and in Czecho is the drain above screen in lauter tun.
This drain is to draw off decoctions. All brewpub systems I saw here do
not have this and I think this is all that prevents brewers from doing
decoction. I understand pump requirements for moving thick mash might be
different as well.
The other issue of whole hops came up as well. Czechs do whirlpool like
everyone else and whole hops are a problem in whirlpool there as well.
Basically they have a hop-back type vessel to remove whole hops between
kettle and whirlpool. This vessel is enclosed and it basically has a
wire basket inside. I'm not sure of size but it's much, much smaller than
kettle.
So my questions are:
Are any of the US manufacturers making lauter tuns with a drain above
the screen?
Is anyone making an enclosed hop-back for brewpubs? I think I saw one
advertised from an eastern US or Canadian place (pugsley?)?
Lynne O'Connor
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #3280, 03/24/00
*************************************
-------
