Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #3298
HOMEBREW Digest #3298 Thu 13 April 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:
RE: Tequiza and Agave ("Flash")
Wanted: Manuals for a SelfMade Microbewerie ("A.Carminati")
mysteries of iodophor revealed (Marc Sedam)
Free Sake fungus - Australian brewers only (Graham Sanders)
Philly Competition Results (Joe Uknalis)
Water retention by hops (John_E_Schnupp)
Hops planting question - Jeff Lutes ("Sieben, Richard")
Re: Rims (Susan/Bill Freeman)
Bob Bratcher Writes ("Pannicke, Glen A.")
cleaners and sanitizers available to homebrewers (Jim Liddil)
Subject: Chicken Feed ("Houseman, David L")
RE: RIMS Soldering question (Jonathan Peakall)
Defending Fouch (fred_garvin)
re: Bob Bratcher Writes ("Nigel Porter")
Attenuation Question ("Darrell Leavitt")
re HSA ("Stephen Alexander")
Re: Infusion Mashing Help ("Frank J. Russo")
"scientific' brewing ("Alan Meeker")
Change of Addresses (David Houseman)
Fire Extinguisher (Epic8383)
Re: Barley wine carbonation (Spencer W Thomas)
RE: Yeast Question ("Rob Moline")
re: Chicken Scratch (Dick Dunn)
* Beer is our obsession and we're late for therapy!
* 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: Tue, 11 Apr 2000 14:27:00 -0700
From: "Flash" <ferment@flash.net>
Subject: RE: Tequiza and Agave
Joe O'Meara asks about making a Tequiza clone.
I have not tried to make a clone of Tequiza - and don't want to. Sorry for
the comment, but I just don't like that beer. I can tell you a few things
about Tequiza. I know they use a small portion of Agave Nectar in (I
believe) post fermentation, and I mean a very small. Just for flavor. That
is to say they don't use very much and not as a primary fermentable. Note:
Some of what I am saying is speculation based on what I have been told by
the main importer of Agave, and my experience with using agave, not any
first hand knowledge from AB. They are very mum about these things.
Agave, by the way, for those who don't know is what tequila is made from.
Agave first of all, is very expensive compared with what A-B would be
willing to spend for a fermentable. Wholesale cost exceeds that of malt
extract. I can't see A-B using something that expensive as a major
fermentable in a brew that doesn't cost much more than Bud.
I have however made some brews I like much better than Tequiza, which is not
too difficult. Anheuser-Busch it seems can screw up any new brew they do
and simply brew to the lowest common denominator. The wonder bread of
beer..
It is too bad too that Anheuser-Busch was first to come out with an agave
drink. I can't see any craft brewer trying to brew with it after trying a
Tequiza. But it is uncharted territory and the potential is tremendous.
My favorite recipe so far is basically 50% agave nectar and 50% wheat
extract (Alexander's). Low hopping with something like a crystal or ultra
low alpha hop and sweet orange peal in the fermentor. I use lagar yeast for
its clean profile. There are some ale yeast such as White California or
wyeast 1056 that would also do fine.
More about agave can be found at:
http://www.steinfillers.com/agave.htm
Don Van Valkenburg
Stein Fillers Brewing supply
www.steinfillers.com
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2000 22:25:30 -0300
From: "A.Carminati" <carminat@cpovo.net>
Subject: Wanted: Manuals for a SelfMade Microbewerie
I'm a brazilian interested in making a micro-brewerie here. I already
receive "home beer digest" emails.
I'd like to receive some hints on what book to read to begin a microbrewerie
which can produce about 3000 litres/month.
Thanks in advance
Alexandre Carminati
carminat@email.com
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2000 22:36:26 -0400
From: Marc Sedam <marc_sedam@unc.edu>
Subject: mysteries of iodophor revealed
http://www.calweb.com/~robertac/iodophor.htm
Someone on another forum found this site. It talks about
iodophor, it's proper use, and what concentrations show up on the
palate. Good, interesting stuff worth looking at. I'm merely
passing it along.
Cheers!
Marc
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2000 13:38:18 +1000
From: Graham Sanders <GrahamS@bsa.qld.gov.au>
Subject: Free Sake fungus - Australian brewers only
G'day to my fellow brewers
Thanks to Mutuso in Japan, I have got hold of and have bred up the Sake
fungus. Since this stuff is soooooooo dificult to get in this country, I am
offering to my countrymen a free sample in the spirit of the homebrew
community.
If you are interested contact me, but for my sanity and not wanting to be
swamped, only people who are really interested in making sake should
naturally ask for it.
Mate-ship is alive and well in the Land Down Under.
Shout
Graham Sanders
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2000 00:30:28 -0700
From: Joe Uknalis <birman@netaxs.com>
Subject: Philly Competition Results
Homebrewers of Philadelphia & Suburbs are pleased to announce the
results of our
18th annual competition (HOPS-BOPS).
Hearty congratulations to Craig McKelvey on winning best of show with
his Bavarian wheat, Alpengluen edlweizen.
Full results can be found at:
http://www.netaxs.com/~shady/hops/archives/hops-bops_2000/results.html
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2000 22:34:32 -0700
From: John_E_Schnupp@amat.com
Subject: Water retention by hops
In an attempt to become more accurate with my water
usage calculations I would like to know the amount
of water trapped in the hops. I don't recall seeing
this anywhere (there are numbers for water retention
by grain).
I've done some guestimates by squeezing as much wort
out of my brewing hops and measuring the "sludge" left
in the brewpot. However, there is still water trapped
in the hops due the hops being re-hydrated.
I could buy a bunch of hops and runs some tests to
determine this but if anyone has this information,
it would help prevent me from wasting hops and money.
TIA,
John Schnupp, N3CNL
Dirty Laundry Brewery
Georgia, VT
95 XLH 1200
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2000 08:02:50 -0500
From: "Sieben, Richard" <SIER1@Aerial1.com>
Subject: Hops planting question - Jeff Lutes
Jeff, my soil is a heavy clay and pebbles (glacial till) here in McHenry
county, IL. Years ago when I started my veggie garden of 9'x20', I added a
cubic yard or so of natural peat that was available for free from the local
peat bog! It made the garded very water permeable such that I would only
have to deep water the garden one time per week in the peak of summer.
Anyway, this garden became my hop yard, and I added even more peat then to
keep the soil loose. I also added composted cow manure, one bag for each
hop mound and mixed it well with peat and some of the existing soil. I did
get hop production the first year, some varieties even gave me nearly 1lb.
dry weight.
good luck on your hop ranch!
Rich Sieben
Island Lake, IL
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2000 08:42:53 -0500
From: Susan/Bill Freeman <potsus@bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: Rims
Scot,
You have the basics for a RIMS system. There must be a heat exchange
somewhere along the line and therefore you must have at least 2 pots or
containers. The Polarwear pot with its false bottom will serve as the
mashtun. I hope that this pot has a valve low on its side for wort
pickup. A second pot with a copper coil in it similar to an immersion
chiller and heated by your burner will serve as the heat source in place
of an electric element. Run hoses from the Polarwear valve to the pump,
then from the pump to one side of the copper coil, and hence back to the
mashtun from the other side of the coil. Throttle the OUTFLOW from the
pump to keep it from taking a suction on the mashtun grain bed. Stop
the pump altogether when you reach the mashtun temp you want or add a
simple bypass valve that cuts out the coil f. Recirculation up to just
prior to pumping the finished wort to whatever you collect the wort for
boil will help clarify it. With a little "slight of hand" the mashtun
can then be cleaned out and used for your boiler. (A third boil pot can
be added later.)
When mashing in with my system, I thoroughly mix grist and strike water
and let it sit for 20-30 minutes. Then I start recirculation and or
temp steps. Recirculation goes until I finally start to pump off
finished wort. Mashing in I use 1 quart/pound of water - during recirc
that usually rises to 1.25 qurts/pound.
Hope this helps.
My system can be forund at http://www.brewrats.org/hwb/er
Bill Freeman aka Elder Rat
KP Brewery - home of "the perfesser"
Birmingham, AL
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2000 09:43:36 -0400
From: "Pannicke, Glen A." <glen_pannicke@merck.com>
Subject: Bob Bratcher Writes
Phil writes of an HBD party:
>Yes it would certainly make an interesting party if we all did actually get
>together. Well I'll rack up the balls and gas up the rice lager, the
>Billiard room is just waiting for a ding dong party. But let me know
>approximate numbers so I can round up the appropriate number of scantily
>dresses women, looks like it's going to be a wild one!
Meeting HBD people face-to-face would be interesting however, there are some
I would still prefer to meet from a distance - at least at first. Now as
to Phil's idea of a party, I'd have a few concerns about what he means by
"rack up the balls" and a "ding dong party". I wasn't too worried when he
mentioned that he hallucinates over naked deceased film stars knocking on on
his bedroom window late at night but even the promise of scantily clad women
just can't overcome my perception of what ball racking and ding dongs
entail...
As for some of the missed humor which sometimes results in lots of
scratching and hissing, I think I'll end all my posts from now on as such:
;-) ;-) ;-) closed-captioned for the humor-impaired ;-) ;-) ;-)
Glen Pannicke
Merck & Co.
Computer Validation Quality Assurance
email: glen_pannicke@merck.com
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2000 06:50:58 -0700 (MST)
From: Jim Liddil <jliddil@VMS.ARIZONA.EDU>
Subject: cleaners and sanitizers available to homebrewers
I am scheduled to give a talk at the AHA conference this summer on the
subject of advances in cleaning and disinfection for homebrewers. In this
vain I would like to request that any manufacturers who make such products
and can provide info please contact me. I am alos intersted in general
technical info about mechanisms of action in both cleaning and sanitation
of surfaces
Jim Liddil
North Haven, CT
jliddil@liddil.com
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2000 10:18:36 -0400
From: "Houseman, David L" <David.Houseman@unisys.com>
Subject: Subject: Chicken Feed
Good idea about feed corn; I hadn't thought of that. But I did buy a 100lb
bag of feed barley for malting at my local Agway for about $15. I malted
some to see how it would go and it worked fine but never got around to my
Big Malting Adventure. Anyone wants to share this barley they are welcome
to it. Maybe I should malt it and go get the feed corn as well. With the
hops growing in my yard I should be able to produce homebrew CAP VERY
cheaply ;-)
Dave Houseman
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2000 07:24:14 -0700
From: Jonathan Peakall <jpeakall@mcn.org>
Subject: RE: RIMS Soldering question
Howdy All,
Many have pointed out that solder is a less than perfect conductor, and
point out that a physical connection is best. While I always crimp a
terminal before I solder it, I am reluctant to "crimp only" as some of
my RIMS is stored outside, and after years of marine activities, have
seen far too many "crimp only" connections fail due to dielectric
corrosion build up in the crimped area. Like whole panels you could snap
every wire right at the terminal with a tiny tug. And of course,
numerous failures and brown outs throughout the vessel. So my question
is, by how much does solder decrease the conductivity/efficiency of the
connection? Are we talking a few percentage points or a lot? I want to
try to gauge if for me, in my application, if soldering the leads is
worth it to prevent corrosion problems or not.
So cool to have so many brains to pick!
Jonathan Peakall
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2000 11:19:56 -0400 (EDT)
From: fred_garvin@fan.com
Subject: Defending Fouch
As employers go, I would have to say
Mr. Fouch is better'n most. Totally
unwarranting attacks such as this:
PhilJill says:
>
Now I know I have been asked not to
comment here, but I think what Bob
has to say is true. Well I know Bob
you are not implying that you would
like to see Fouch in the flesh,
nobody wants to see that!! Just in
his tutu is quite far enough.
>
Mr. Fouch almost never wears the tutu
anymore, and when he does, it's a
real treat, since he's lost 30#'s on
the Atkins diet.
And as far as a fair employer, he only
made me pay the deductable when I got
my club foot stuck in the KY wall
dispenser.
Yes, Mr. Fouch is A-O.K. in my book.
Oh- and to get those annoying "Elect
McCain" bumper stickers off the SUV,
lather it up with some mayonaise.
Let it sit for 15 minutes, and it'll
peel off like a dream!
It doesn't seem to work with beer
lables, though.
Fred Garvin
Bent Dick Kraft Korner
Kentwood, MI
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------
Get free email from CNN Sports Illustrated at http://email.cnnsi.com/
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2000 18:36:27 +0100
From: "Nigel Porter" <nigel@sparger.freeserve.co.uk>
Subject: re: Bob Bratcher Writes
Phil (with some help from Jill) wrote:
>Yes it would certainly make an interesting party if we all did actually
>get together.
Maybe you could ask your nice Kiwi bosses if you can borrow a
plane, and you can do a quick zip round the world to pick us all up
and take us to a suitable party location.
Nigel
Brewing in Guildford
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2000 13:53:07 -0400
From: "Darrell Leavitt" <Darrell_Leavitt@esc.edu>
Subject: Attenuation Question
I have started to pay more attention to attenuation, and notice that the
info sheet that WhiteLabs sends does not have attenuation info for both the
Champagne Yeast, and for the Sweet Mead Yeast. Is there a good reason...or
an understandable reason for this?
..Darrell
<Terminally INtermediate Homebrewer>
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2000 14:14:31 -0400
From: "Stephen Alexander" <steve-alexander@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: re HSA
Pivo says ...
>Stephen Alexander writes:
>> I wrote both last year [...] ENZYMIC
>Oooops. I guess I missed that (an embarrassed look).
I must apologize too. I made a reference to the paper & result in #3708 but
my detailed post never made it to HBD. We were in the middle of one of the
book-burning/anti-librarian/anti-dogma/don't-call-him-Jeff-Irvine/anti-scien
ce frenzies that always seem to center around you. (and you claim *I* waste
bandwidth). What I wrote was in part:
>[...] there is a book edited by Piggott and Peterson called
>something like 'Analysis of Flavour', by Blackie Press. In one of the
>articles Heineken correlates the progressive development of trans-nonenal
>in sealed containers kept at ambient temps (20-30C as I recall) over 6
>months to the presence of oxidized oils in the wort. They then correlate
>the levels of oxidized oils in wort to the amount of lipo-oxygenase enzyme
>(fatty acid oxidizing enzymes) in the original malt. They prove nothing,
>but show a forceful correlation between the potential oil oxidizing enzyme
>in the malt and the final trans-nonenal levels in the various beer samples.
>Bottom line is that the wet-cardboard antecedent was apparently created in
>the mash tun - or in the barley if you like.
I posted the same idea in early 1998 tho' w/o sources. The idea of
lipo-oxygenase causing oxidized linoleic and eventually trans-2-nonenal has
been around a while. See Eric Panther in HBD #3097, which covered much of
what I recently reported, one by Mort O'Sullivan in #2711, and in a post by
Charlie Scandrett in #2084.
>I tried to find where you said that, but couldn't (searching "hsa and
>alexander" DOES bring up a pile).
Maybe if you approached this as a brewing topic instead of a personal
vendetta you'd find what you were looking for. I posted enzymes =>
trans-2-nonenal just last week. You replied but didn't bother to read the
post you were replying to. If you were really interested in the topic, it
has appeared in HBD several times since June 1996 and is easy to find in the
archives.
>Let's see... this time you were saying that enzymatically destroyed wort
>was at HSA risk.
>
>A different time, a different argument.
I am continuously trying to get a better picture of the cause and
prevention, so yes - my views have become refined over the past 20 years and
will undoubtedly shift even more in the future. Learning
is a process which involves making ever finer distinctions. It takes time.
I won't apologize for refining my view based in new information.
Now go back and read (at least once) what I posted last week. Both enzymic
and non-enzymic oxidation. enzymic mostly responsble for nonenas and pals,
non-enzymic oxidation involved in other lesser flavor and problems. Dave
Burley notes that if you can't taste the difference (nonenzymic) you can
certainly see the difference as a darker color. Kunze calls it a coarser
flavor. Many of these off-flavors develop over time as various chemical
changes take place in the beer. The yeast strongly reduce the beer during
fermentation, but afterward the stuff starts to decline.
I do want to say that I do appreciate your experiment. It was well
conducted and does demonstrated an example of a lack of flavor
impact due to post boil oxygenation of a beer tasted at an age of
6-8 weeks. It does not appear based on present results to say
much about staling aldehydes, nor the more typical slow
development of stale flavors.
What I am saying is that the type of oxidation you introduced does not have
much impact on the worst and most familiar oxidation flavor, and that these
are not likely to be evident after less than 2 months anyway.
>Now let's see. If I interpret you correctly this time, Then extract
>brewers needn't worry about HSA at ALL!
The manufacturer may have created precursors, and the dry storage may
oxidize the lipids (non-enzymic) too (it does in other dry foods). I don't
think the extract brewer has much control of the nonenals.
Brewers can of course impact the non-enzymic oxidation.
And that HB sized batches and methods (extract or all grain) have a great
potential for oxygen contact compared w/ commercial size brews.
>Now what am I to think of all the times people were poking each other in
>the ribs and guffawing over Charlie Papazian publishing a picture of
>himself pouring an extract beer through a colander?
That he was forming polyphenolics, sulphites and maybe staling his
melanoidins - but not forming staling aldehydes.
>[...] It's just difficult to keep up with which hypothesis you
>are toting this week.
I revise, not change, my view over 20 years and it's too much for you. Now
I see why you are such a traditionalist. Do you still keep leeches and
bleed your patients ?
>I really think YOU should design and do the experiment....
That would be a waste of time. If someone reports data from the lit they are
hounded by people like you for not presenting their own experience. If you
post personal experience then it is picked apart, with some validity, for
being an amateur experiment with the attendant limitation or only a few data
points - or personal bias is invoked. There are better experiments and
results already in the lit. You don't believe those, why would you believe
mine?
Don't get me wrong, I am interesting in such an experiment, but it wouldn't
begin for several months (I already have 2 experiments in the queue), but I
don't see any reason why you would believe it more than the current
presentation. Convince me otherwise.
Despite the title of your last post, this is NOT Steve's model. The authors
were credited in the post you didn't bother to read. I was attempting to
REPORT salient parts of this work, not SUPPORT it. You are as always
welcome to reject these papers if you choose - but try reading them first.
>I'd be more interested in seeing where you found the limits were [...]
I've posted on this in response to you in the past. Why do you need a
rehash ? Perhaps you falsley believe that because I post from lit that I
don't also brew and taste - hogwash.
>It may save you some sleep as well.
Well if I oversleep I can always follow your example, respond without
reading and base my conclusions on one non-definitive experiment. That
should save a lot of time.
-S
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2000 16:09:14 -0400
From: "Frank J. Russo" <FJRusso@coastalnet.com>
Subject: Re: Infusion Mashing Help
- ------------------------------
Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2000 03:08:24 -0400
From: "Jeremy J. Arntz" <arntz@surfree.com>
Subject: Infusion Mashing Help
.......question about using nylon mesh bags as opposed....
- ------------------------------
I have used nylon bags in my sparge vessel. I also tried a number
different weave patterns. My reason for using the nylon bags was to speed
up the sparging without a loss of efficiency. I since have stopped using
the nylon bags. I often got stuck sparges when I should not have and it was
do largely to the pores in the mesh becoming blocked. I also did not see an
increase in efficiency but rather a loss. There was an advantage in I could
remove the nylon bag and hand squeeze the grain to remove the most amount of
liquid possible. I recommend you go ahead and purchase or make the false
bottom for yourself. Just my 2 cents.
Frank Russo
FJRusso@Coastalnet.com
"There is only one aim in life and that is to live it."
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2000 16:40:07 -0400
From: "Alan Meeker" <ameeker@welchlink.welch.jhu.edu>
Subject: "scientific' brewing
A few comments on Alex's recent post:
>If your beer tastes great and is appreciated by
>legions of your friends and family then who gives a crap about 3/4 of the
>dissertations on HBD?
Nothing wrong at all with the old "If it ain't broke don't fix it"
philosophy. If you're happy with your beer and aren't looking to diversify
or need to troubleshoot then you're probably right - scroll down.
>While I view their information as
>extremely valuable and thought-provoking, very little of their ramblings
>actually help me brew better beer.
Of what value are the "ramblings" to you then? Have you actually tried
applying the info posted to this forum? Are you saying that your beer is
absolutely the best that it can possibly be??
>do I really need to know about how many yeast cells it takes to
>make my wort turn into beer? Hardly and certainly not on this "amateur"
>forum.
One could argue just the opposite - that the "amateur" nature of the forum
makes it even /more/ important to discuss basic principles (such as pitching
rates) that are likely to have big effects on the quality of the finished
beer.
Regarding the Paul Valery quote:
> "Science means simply the aggregate of all the recipes that are always
> successful. The rest is literature."
This is a pretty poor definition of science! Science is certainly more than
some aggregate of "recipes." The knowledge base makes up only half of
science, the other half being the /process/ of science whereby new knowledge
is constantly being generated and integrated with prior knowledge,
hypotheses are tested, older results are re-evaluated, etc...
> Let us not forget, however, that beer
>is an ancient drink most likely discovered by accident. It has been
enjoyed
>for centuries by royalty as well as plebeians. It is a simple drink,
>concocted not by man, but by yeast. To overly complicate the process is
>folly.
Yes but what the "ancients" were probably drinking would probably cause one
to spit it out were we to try drinking it today! Also, I don;t see a lot of
beer being made in nature by yeasts without some help from homo sapiens. And
why is it folly to treat beer-making as a complex process if one wishes to?
>Brewing beer is as simple as using the
>freshest ingredients and following basic brewing and sanitation
techniques.
>Is there REALLY anything else? Sure there are a myriad variables and
>unknowns, but like Eric stated in his post, I too, quite frankly, find it
>hard to brew lousy beer.
There's plenty else. And, if you find it hard to brew a lousy beer I
consider you very lucky indeed!! I've brewed plenty of beers that sucked and
many that were major disappointments. I'm not content to sit back and be
happy with the ones that do work out. When a beer doesn't come out the way I
wanted or even worse, has a major flavor defect, I want to get to the bottom
of it and correct the flaw!! I HATE making sucky beer, it's frustrating and
my time is just too valuable to burn on making bad beer. It is for this
reason that I read and ponder the posts on the HBD as well as reading
virtually every piece of info I can get my hands on. Also, as a scientist I
actually enjoy learning as much as I can about the process. Perhaps I'm
over-complicating things but my beers are generally improving over time as I
try to apply some of the things discussed on this forum.
Then there's also the old adage about chance favoring the prepared mind...
-Alan Meeker
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2000 18:49:32 -0400
From: David Houseman <dhousema@cccbi.org>
Subject: Change of Addresses
I'm in the middle of getting ready for the first round AHA nationals in
Philadelphia and have mailed almost 600 notices to all the judges in this
region of the BJCP. There have been an amazing number of returns for
"change of address; forwarding order expired" and the like. Since I don't
have email addresses for all of these, nor do I have the new addresses, I
can only post on a number of fora to remind all the BJCP judges to get in
touch with the BJCP program administrator (see the BJCP web site) and notify
Russ of your new snail mail and email addresses.
David Houseman
BJCP MidAtlantic Representative
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2000 22:49:25 EDT
From: Epic8383@aol.com
Subject: Fire Extinguisher
Fellow Brewers,
As a 'lurker' who reads but rarely posts, I must say I agree with the
most recent posts concerning the blatent lack of respect on HBD. Our beloved
hobby (addiction?) is in enough trouble without the incessant backstabbing
and downright nastiness evident in recent posts. What better way to scare off
the few newcomers than to over-analyze every aspect of the brewing process,
then flame anyone who dares disagree.
So please, everyone have a little respect for each other and our noble
craft. Remember that is both science AND art, and a little creative license
is what makes the difference between us and them.
Sincerely,
Gus Rappold
P.S. Anyone have a favorite all-grain Belgian Trippel recipe?
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2000 23:00:17 -0400
From: Spencer W Thomas <spencer@engin.umich.edu>
Subject: Re: Barley wine carbonation
Dale Fogg asks about carbonating a barley wine.
I'd add a little bit of yeast to it (like a Wyeast pak, for example).
Then agitate your bottles daily until they're carbonated. This really
DOES help. I did an experiment a few years back with side-by-side
bottles. I agitated some (turned them over and back) daily, and left
the rest alone. The agitated bottles carbonated and the others did
not.
=Spencer
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2000 22:09:10 -0500
From: "Rob Moline" <brewer@isunet.net>
Subject: RE: Yeast Question
Rick,
The thing that will make your efforts more difficult is because you
don't have a stainless (or glass for that matter, wouldn't that be nice?)
fermenter that is cylindro-conical in shape. With a cylindro-conical...you
can easily wait until the feremntation is finished...then drop out the
yeast...discarding the first portion...that is the thick pasty stuff that is
laden with trub...and collect the desireable middle portion....and once that
is collected...easily discard the final yeast slurry...
Rule one in yeast harvesting is to get the 'middle cut' of the final
yeast bed....If one collects the first yeast that flocc's or the last yeast
that flocc's, it is most predictable that successive generations of the
yeasts from those collections will be either too flocculant, and hit the
bottom before they have finished all the sugars in solution......or they
will be too powdery ..and take excessive time to flocc...and thence leave a
clear beer.
So, how to collect the middle? I would suggest that you use you own
experiences with a particular yeast strain....and after what you judge to be
the first third has fallen out, do a racking transfer to a seconday
vessel.....leaving behind the first third...and therefore taking the final
2/3'rds with the brew...
Then probably around the time that the fermentation stops showing
evidence of activity, rack the beer back to the original vessel, which you
will have cleaned and sanitised in the interim. This will then leave the
middle third in the secondary carboy for you to collect!
So, by this method..you will also have left the trub behind in the
primary....with the most flocculant cells.....set yourself up for collecting
the middle third in the secondary carboy...and have the least flocculant and
powdery cells in the teriary carboy for extended maturation and clearing
time...or you could also use a fining agent like gelatine in the tertiary to
enhance clearing.
Of course, this in no way 'guarantees' the perfect middle cut of the
yeast....but in the circumstances that you describe, which probably mirrors
most homebrewer's practices...I think it's the best compromise.
As for storage routines the WEB is full of them....but what I would
suggest would depend on how long you plan to store them. Let me know, and I
will see if I can't point you in the right direction. As a dry yeast user, I
personally don't have much need for storage, except to advise the dry yeast
is best stored in a freezer or fridge. Distilled water storage seems to be a
simple, yet effective solution for short term purposes, while longer term
storage on slants, and plates is recommended. For really long term storage,
immersion in liquid nitrogen at -80 is the way to go!
A search on the Northern Light engine on "Yeast Storage" offers 20,634
items. So, there is plenty written on the subject.
Good luck, sir!
Cheers!
Rob
"The More I Know About Beer, The More I Realize I Need To Know More
About Beer!"
- -----Original Message-----
From: Rick Oftel [mailto:Rick.Oftel@toro.com]
Sent: Wednesday, April 12, 2000 1:44 PM
To: brewer@isunet.net
Subject: Yeast Question
Rob, I have a yeast question. Not sure if it is worthy; you decide.
Question: I ferment in two stages (glass) and would like to know the best
way to harvest and store yeast. I have not been very successful in removal
of cold break since my counterflow cooler outlet dumps into the fermenter
and the primary fermenter always has a thick bottom layer of yeast and trub.
Any ideas for separation and or storage?
------------------------------
Date: 12 Apr 00 21:33:14 MDT (Wed)
From: rcd@raven.talisman.com (Dick Dunn)
Subject: re: Chicken Scratch
Glen Pannicke <glen_pannicke@merck.com> wrote:
> Joe Kish suggested using cracked corn in CAPs:
>
> >Go to an Farm animal feed store and buy a bag of 'cracked
> >corn', also called Albers' Chicken Scratch. It's not as fine as
> >corn meal so it won't give a stuck mash.
...
> One question on this subject though... I know that different varieties of
> corn have been developed and marketed for use as animal feed vs. people
> food. I'm not sure that there is a huge difference in flavor contributions
> between feed corn and people corn when it comes to beer ...
Realize that what's commonly sold as "chicken scratch"--also called
"scratch grains"--is a combination of grains, of which corn is only one and
not even necessarily predominant. "Cracked corn" is different (although it
can be fed to chickens too). Albers isn't a brand I've seen here, so I don't
know whether it really is all corn. The other grains in what we use appear
to be a little millet, maybe milo, and something I don't recognize (not
wheat or barley as far as I can see).
I think I'd be most concerned about cleanliness and what sort of foreign
matter might be mixed in with the scratch grains. There's certainly bits
of plant stems and who knows what else. After all, if you're feeding it to
chickens, stems and even outright dirt won't matter.
- ---
Dick Dunn rcd@talisman.com Hygiene, Colorado USA
...Simpler is better.
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #3298, 04/13/00
*************************************
-------
