Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #3392
HOMEBREW Digest #3392 Tue 01 August 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:
Adelaide Malting Company not seling to public anymore (Darren Miller)
re:no sparge haze ("Stephen Alexander")
Maize malting ("Keith Menefy")
re: Acetaldehyde and Budweiser ("Stephen Alexander")
Drunks reply, ayinger yeast, aus humor ("Graham Sanders")
In support of intoxication ("Stephen Alexander")
("Dave Edwards")
An interesting Question (Alan Monaghan)
Soap, detergents and hard/soft water (Jeff Renner)
Anyone ever do a "beer" by using the methods for sake??? (John Baxter Biggins)
Georgia beer law ("Hull, Ted")
Re: Building Backyard Bathyspheres In Burradoo (Jeff Renner)
Re: Malt Liquor??? (Jeff Renner)
Just say Yes to Aussies! ("Brian Lundeen")
Re: In support of intoxication (Some Guy)
Guaging the baron, Helmets and seatbelts , alpha and beta (Dave Burley)
potassium sorbate (Scott Birdwell)" <defalcos@insync.net>
* JULY IS AMERICAN BEER MONTH! Take the American Beer
* Pledge of Allegiance! Support your local brewery...
*
* Beer is our obsession and we're late for therapy!
Send articles for __publication_only__ to post@hbd.org
If your e-mail account is being deleted, please unsubscribe first!!
To SUBSCRIBE or UNSUBSCRIBE send an e-mail message with the word
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to request@hbd.org FROM THE E-MAIL
ACCOUNT YOU WISH TO HAVE SUBSCRIBED OR UNSUBSCRIBED!!!**
IF YOU HAVE SPAM-PROOFED your e-mail address, you cannot subscribe to
the digest as we canoot reach you. We will not correct your address
for the automation - that's your job.
The HBD is a copyrighted document. The compilation is copyright
HBD.ORG. Individual postings are copyright by their authors. ASK
before reproducing and you'll rarely have trouble. Digest content
cannot be reproduced by any means for sale or profit.
More information is available by sending the word "info" to
req@hbd.org.
JANITORS on duty: Pat Babcock and Karl Lutzen (janitor@hbd.org)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 16:06:43 -1400
From: Darren Miller <darren.miller@adelaide.edu.au>
Subject: Adelaide Malting Company not seling to public anymore
Howdy Adelaidians,
Just called the AMC today fro my usual 50kg of pale malt. They tell me
minimum order is now 500kg. You can of course buy the malt from your
local HB shop but the price though has more than doubled ($0.80/kg upto
now $1.90/kg). Is there a homebrew club which I can tap into and arrange
a large 500kg order? I really only ned 50kg for the next couple of
months. Can anyone offer any advice. At that price I might have to
sample some imported malts and give Adelaide Malting/Coopers the flick
although I would prefer to support the local industry.
Please EMAIL me or post if anyone is interested in a bulk order.
Thanks
Darren Miller
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 02:03:20 -0400
From: "Stephen Alexander" <steve-alexander@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: re:no sparge haze
Nathaniel P. Lansing writes ...
>Steve had mentioned, >>enough tannins to create haze
>but not enough to precipitate it in the no-sparge. <<
> When I first read that I was thinking it said "enough
>_protein_ to create haze, not enough tannins to precipitate"
>Did you say that right? Tannin haze I never heard of.
Haze is caused when tannins combine with proteins to form
big macromolecular 'clods' nearly as big as the wavelength
of light. Say 1000 angstroms and up.
The soluble proteins in beer are not usually so big (the biggest
ones are lost in the boil), so MOST so called protein haze is
due to relatively small tannin molecules each binding two or
more protein molecules together. until a big 'clod' is formed'.
Tannins are the 'glue' that bind the proteins into optically
active clods.
If you eliminate the sources of tannin (for example use special
proanthocyanidin free barley) then you get remarkably stable beer.
Also if you already have haze it can be removed by adding
additional tannins. The extra tannins make the 'clods' so big that
they drop out of solution.
So adding a little tannin to a protein sol'n may cause haze and
adding a bit more may precipitate that same haze. Most beers,
I think, are on the high side of the phenolic vs clarity curve, but
those that are not are often subject to haze instability. For
example the existing phenolics get oxidized and start forming
bonds between proteins and ... haze.
Adding PVPP or Polyclar to beer *BEFORE* haze forms
removes some of the tannins (glue) and hopefully enough to
prevent haze. Adding it after haze formation is almost a waste
since the tannins will usually not bind to very many amide-like
sites.
>Also I was thinking that on the next no sparge batch that instead of
>adding tannin to get the flocculation, and nullify the benefit of no sparge
>technique; how about upping the dose of Spanish Moss to about 1 1/2
>gram to do the job the missing tannins would have done, without the risk of
>astringency.
I've never added tannin to these beers nor ever used spanish moss.
I did use IM and still got a haze. IM is pretty persnickety stuff - it's
a very complex carbo that can bind weakly to tannins tho' primarily to
certain proteins but is not IMO a reliable improvement to beer clarity.
It is reported to remove foam active proteins as well so ...
Far better IMO to modulate the tannin level w/ PVPP or Polyclar
which is pretty specific to the haze forming tannins.
Best yet is to learn to brew clear beer w/o these crutches. I
do this regularly, but my methods need work with no-sparge.
One possibility is that I've reduced wort oxygenation enough to
increase the amount of unoxidised phenolics carried into the
fermentor later to oxidize and create haze. Maybe I could change
which beer is hazy by HSAing my wort ! This sort of thing is
reported in the lit, where oxygenating the mash or adding hydrogen
peroxide improves beer haze stability. Not great methods IMO.
-S
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 18:33:46 +1200
From: "Keith Menefy" <kmenefy@ihug.co.nz>
Subject: Maize malting
G'day
Just a short report on my maize malting trial. Short because there seems to
be very little interest in it. Only had two replies to my question on HBD.
One very informative reply (thanks Sean) and one fatuous response from Dave
Burley.
The malting was not very successful, only about twenty percent of the grain
germinated. A couple of possible reasons.
1. It was too cold. Tis winter here and although I did try to keep it warm
it may not have been enough. Maize needs a germination temp of 16 or 18C.
I'll try another lot in summer.
2. It was a feed maize, almost certainly a hybrid crop. I don't know if this
would be a reason or not. I wanted to keep away from a commercial seed
source.
Crushing was a lot longer job than with ordinary maize. Had to put it
through the crusher four times, each setting a little closer than the
previous. This may have been because it was over dried.
The crushed maize was soaked in cold water for a short time after crushing
and then the germ and other debris floated off. (A Steve Alexander idea.
Thanks Steve). The main idea behind the malting was to try and loose the
embryo through germination.
A decoction mash was used. The maize being boiled for 45 minutes.
((So next time you have the urge to undertake Decoction Mashing I have given
you ammunition to help you persuade yourself not to. But brewing isn't all
about facts and science and the way things are. Its partly about magic and
quaint and luscious lager and Alps to say nothing of frauleins!.
If Decoction Mashing makes you feel good --- do it and enjoy it!
Prof. Michael J. Lewis. PhD, F.I.Brew Department of Food Science and
Technology
http://www.brewingatdavis.com/page1.htm
Gee........ thanks Jim))
Getting to the real point of this post
There was a huge amount of hot break. Like a big oil slick!!
I have been using first wort hopping (FWH) and don't usually bother to
remove hot break because I would lose those first hops also. This time there
was no real choice. You could not even think of leaving it. The question I
have is, with FWH should you skim the hot break and remove the hops at the
same time or do you leave the hot break and hops to sort themselves out.
(like me)
I followed this brew with another all barley brew, pretty much the same
recipe and mash, just to check on what amount of hot break was normal.
Nothing like the absurd amount in the maize brew.
I have read several times that hot break should be removed but a lot of
brewers just seem to ignore it. Which is correct?
Fermented with a Ayinger yeast courtesy of Phil Yates. (thanks Sooky La La)
O.G. 1050
F.G. 1011
A nice light golden colour. Slightly hazy.
Good long lasting head. Fine bubbles.
I really hate to admit this but I do prefer its flavour and looks compared
with the all barley brew. The maize seems to add a delicate flavour.
I would hesitate to call this a CAP but it is huge improvement on last years
effort. Still have four dozen of a five dozen brew. Can't even give it away.
To finish on a completely different flavour and if you like stouts, try
this. This is part of a review of a beer tasting in the local paper.
Then, like a match-winning substitute, the most memorable beer of the
evening: Young's Double Chocolate Stout, a velvet-smooth, totally indulgent
oddity brewed in Wandsworth, London.
The brew uses chocolate malt and real dark chocolate -- a brewing nightmare,
because the fat in chocolate can kill the head. This stout has plenty of
both, and despite the expectation of an overweight, sickly sweet brew, this
was a rich and ultimately satisfying experience.
I would appreciate any ideas on cloning it.
Cheers Keith
New Zealand
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 02:41:07 -0400
From: "Stephen Alexander" <steve-alexander@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: re: Acetaldehyde and Budweiser
Rob Dittmar ask after the source of 'the flavor' in A-B products.
Some WAGS:
I perceived acetaldehyde as fresh-cut very sharp green apples.
The aroma in A-B is apples but maybe not so green or harsh as
acetaldehyde. I think we have to admit that A-B would know what
is or isn't in their beers.
The green aroma in real apples is from an excess of
cis-3-hexanal and trans-2-hexanal. Beers certainly
contain various hexanal compound. My recollection is that
they are primarily from malt, esp green or uncured malt,
but don't quote me on that.
Maybe the strecker products of the amino acids (from leucine,
isoleucine, valine) 2-methylpropanal, 3-methylbutanal,
2-methylbutanal in the right combination give a green-apple
sensation. They are described as green, malty, almond,
penetrating ... maybe in combination with others ... ?
These have 2-4ppm aroma thresholds.
Ethyl-2-methylbutyrate is the ripe apple aroma (0.1ppb
threshold). It's *possible* to get butyrate compounds from
yeast fermentation but I wouldn't wager heavily on it.
BTW - I even get this apple-y sensation in some of the A-B
ales so maybe it's not the yeast (or do they use different yeast ?).
fwiw,
-S
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 18:45:31 +1000
From: "Graham Sanders" <craftbrewer@cisnet.COM.AU>
Subject: Drunks reply, ayinger yeast, aus humor
G'Day All
Well I have to respond to a few of you out there, so here goes.
>
>Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 07:43:45 -0500
>From: Jim Bermingham <bermingham@antennaproducts.com>
>Subject:
>
>Don't know about down under, but most of the world doesn't give awards for
>being a drunk. I agree with Pat. I'm a home brewer, not a drunk and don't
>want to be called one.<
>
Jim, your right we are different down here.
Dont know about the rest of you, but I have a number of awards for being a,
um, ah..................., what word am I after--------yes, a leader in the
art of beer abuse. This of couse from my University days. That movie
Animal House had nothing on what we got up to in our younger days. The beer
drinking parties, sex, drugs, the mischief (oh for my younger days) - oh
carp I digress.
My awards. Best coloured yawn, (two years running), leading oarsman for the
sculling team, best sculler in the Department (three years running), Best
sculler on campus, (I had this ability to be able to open my throat and pour
without swallowing) and of curse my favourite, least likely to get laid at
graduation. (they were right).
Funny thing thou, they mean nothing now, just fond memories. If I tried
that level of drinking at my age, I would be dead and buried (but well
preserved).
>
>
>m Adwell <jimala@apical.com>
>Subject: Drunken Beer Louts, Oat beer update, Buckwheat and Rye
>
>Rather than perching on the pole, as Graham has done ( and a nice job of
>waffling it was, congrats, Graham!), I will come down firmly on Pat's side
>of the fence.
>
Yes its a fine art to please everyone. But I thought I was fence sitting.
Shit I must have been drunk at the time and didn't realise. Oh there that
word again, No I wasn't drunk, I was , ah , well
....................................... Hows this word sound
PISSED
Oh by the way, you'll pay one way or another having me sitting on your pole.
SWMBO wants some of this action. Since I wont supply it I've given her your
E-mail address. You asked for it!
>
>>And I am getting pretty tired of
>folks who upon learning that I am a home^H^H^H^H craftbrewer want to see my
>'still'
>
Appologising now, well its just too late. But its interesting thou over
there the fear of having a coil of copper pipe in your house. I must admit,
When people look at my HERMS setup, first thing they say is"oh you have a
still". You wont convince them otherwise of the fact, unless they actually
see it in action.
But there is no reason I couldn't use it as part of a still, cold water in
the keg, hot vapours going down the coil. Trouble is I already have a
still, a bloody big one in fact (18 gallon). And they now sell 5 litre
stills in our homebrew shops.
Thank god I dont live over there, I would on COPS in a week
>
>Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 09:31:09 +0930
>From: LyndonZimmermann <lyndonz@senet.com.au>
>Subject: 220V Freezer questions and malo
>
>
>In this lovely land downunda we get to make real red (and white) wine! I'm
>drinking Cab Sauv 2000 already, yum.<
>
Ah we have a wine-o amonst us. I suspose not surprising coming from South
Australia. Oh shit I bet Wine-o is out of the question. What about cask
jockey instead.
>
>Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 20:27:46 +1000
>From: "Phil & Jill Yates" <yates@acenet.com.au>
>Subject: Sooky La La And His Magic Mini Keg
>
>
>
>But there are occasions when the devil gets the better of me, and this was
>one such occasion.
>I know I had a great party.<
>
Good to see Phil doesn't use that D word. But thats the great thing about
being over here. We dont feel guilty about getting sloshed, poured into the
back of the car, SWMBO ranting at us (we just dont listen), hugging the one
we really love (our keg). Yes the world can be a wonderful place.
Now if they can stop hangovers!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Finally even though its green, I have tranferred the Hells to the serving
keg ready to drink. This is the one with the famous drug induced Phills
Aylinger yeast so a report will follow.
Oh one last thing
>From: Jim Bentson <jbentson@longisland.com>
>Subject: Coconut in Beer & Aussie Posts
>Concerning the spate of Aussie non-beer posts;
>I only go through the HBD once a month and am surprised at how much
>wasted bandwidth is being tolerated relative to the Aussie's attempts at
>humor. Come on guys, there are many pertinent posts being pushed back a
>day or two due to the constant stream of Aussie posts with nothing in them.
well after this posting I'm not doing the cause any good. Some say I'm a
wasted space, didn't know it extended to the HBD
Shout
Graham Sanders
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 05:26:07 -0400
From: "Stephen Alexander" <steve-alexander@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: In support of intoxication
Peter writes ...
>I do not like the feeling of being drunk; for one thing, I
>consider myself to be a role model for my five children.
The fact they you deny or fail to experience the joy of
inebriation doesn't mean that your children will too. Getting
drunk, and other forms of intoxication are common to virtually
every culture. Hiding this from kids isn't a formula for a better
next generation any more than is prohibition. [I'd compare US
alcohol taboos to sexual taboos, but I fear the response from
Oz]. I think we would be better off being seen to exercise our
normal impulses in a safe and healthy way rather than pretend
they don't exist. That veneer of sainthood/role-model is pretty
transparent to a sarcastic 17yo.
I've been to a Volksfest were drunkenness to the point
where few could safely drive, but most all could competently
walk was the norm - yet it was all friendly, polite good fun.
What is the harm (on an annual basis) except to the mind of
the moralist who associates alcohol with immorality ?
One of the problems with alcohol use in the US is that it is
such a great taboo, so socially unaccepted, and a symbol
of adulthood for the underage that it becomes their focus.
Not so, I think, if it was a more normal and accepted part
of life.
Let's face it, alcoholism is a problem, drunken violence is a
problem, drunken driving is a problem, seeking psychological
refuge in intoxication is a problem, getting fall-down,
uncontrolled, 'worship the porcelain god', harm your liver,
drunk is a problem. But why should everyone give up their
freedoms because some act irresponsibly ? What's wrong
with getting a good buzz on in a safe and sane way on
special occasions ? [No - I'm not talking about every month
at a club meeting where everyone drives].
- --
I'm not picking on you PatB, but I don't believe that people
who must hide their activities from the Politically Correct
Police really have any such rights or freedoms. If you are
afraid to exercise 'em in the open, they aren't real freedoms
and you might as well kiss your hobby goodbye right now.
Having a hobby related to areas in which some people act
irresponsibly or criminally is either a freedom or not. If you
try to appease the prohibitionists you'll soon be brewing NA
beer Pat.
-S
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 21:33:39 +0930
From: "Dave Edwards" <eddiedb@senet.com.au>
Subject:
Get a life mate. Why is it so bad that a few blokes have a few shits and
giggles in amongst all of the other stuff? The HBD goes further than just
'let's talk about homebrew' to more of a chat between people who have a
mutually strong interest in brewing. I personnally like reading the *crap*
that Phil, Graham and co. put up. This is probably because I am an Aussie
(and a bit of a dickhead to boot!)
By the way, if you have a problem with non-beer related posts, why did you
ask a question relating to those matters?
Cheers,
Dave.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 09:12:52 -0400
From: Alan Monaghan <AlanM@Gardnerweb.com>
Subject: An interesting Question
I use a standard setup for my mashing in that I have a hot liquor bucket
attached to a Phil spinner going down to a grot cooler. I have been sampling
my temps at various places and I have come to the realization that I am not
hitting the 170 to 180 degrees (F) to sparge out. I generally boil the water
and then move it into a plastic bucket with a flow drilled in the side near
the bottom. My temps approach 160 degrees (F) by the end of the 45 minutes.
I also am noticing that I am unable to get the mash temp up to the hi 160's
to low 170's when I am at the end of the mashing cycle. What is the best way
(short of being able to apply heat directly to the vessels) that I can do
this. Or, how are rest of you doing this?
Personal Emails are welcome.
Be like water my friend ...
Alan G. Monaghan, MCSE+I
Gardner Publications, Inc.
Internet Administrator
* Phone 1-513-527-8867
* Fax 1-513-527-8801
* Cell 1-513-520-6866
* E-mail AlanM@Gardnerweb.com <mailto:AlanM@Gardnerweb.com>
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 09:20:57 -0400
From: Jeff Renner <nerenner@umich.edu>
Subject: Soap, detergents and hard/soft water
Brewers
I just posted this to Historic Brewing Digest as a response to another
post, but thought that it would be of broader interest, so I've edited it
for HBD.
Jeff
Soap and synthetic detergents are both surfactants, or surface active
agents. This means that they reduce surface tension, or make water
"wetter," which helps clean things by making the dirt rinse out or off
things more easily. Their molecules also have an oil attracting end and a
polar, water attracting end. This means that they will make oil and water
mix, which is handy for cleaning as much dirt is oily.
Mild warning - some sorta technical stuff follows, but I think I've made it
pretty straight forward and I hope understandable, and it's stuff that is
useful to know as a consumer, I think.
Soap is an organic salt made from a fatty acid and sodium (or potassium)
hydroxide. This salt is very soluble in water, which is a good thing for
soap to be, of course. However, in hard water, calcium ions (Ca++) will
displace the sodium ions (Na+) from the soap molecule. It's an energy
thing, you don't need to know why it happens, it just does.
Unfortunately, while sodium soap is very soluble in water, calcium soap is
very insoluble. We have a name for it soap curd - or bathtub ring. Since
it isn't soluble, it can't participate in cleaning. This is where water
softeners come in - they substitute sodium ions for the calcium ions in
hard water. Water with no calcium (or magnesium, which acts like calcium)
is called soft because of the way it behaves with soap - no soap scum.
Adding washing soda will have a similar effect by putting in a whole lot of
sodium ions, which keep more of the soap soluble.
Soap scum is bad since it won't rinse out and traps dirt (bathtub ring).
You can scour your bathtub but your clothes will not rinse clean and your
hair will be dull and stiff. Incidently, it is the lack of soap curd that
makes people feel they can't rinse soap off when they shower with soft
water. Actually, they are rinsing off far more than with hard water, it's
just that it remains soluble and slippery. In hard water, it is not
slippery, even though there is lots more left on your skin.
Synthetic detergents were developed (I think in the 1930's) to work in hard
water - they remain soluble in hard water, so they will clean clothes,
hands, dishes, hair, etc. in all kinds of water, although you need to use
more in hard water.
There are very few actual soaps left on the market except for bar soaps -
most are detergents, and even some bars are synthetics (Zest and Dove are
two - do you remember the TV ads for Zest showing how there was no scummy
deposit on eyeglasses that were dipped into sudsy water with Zest as there
was with soapy water?). Virtually all major manufacturers' laundry
products are synthetics - Ivory Flakes may still be soap; I think Duz is
gone. Dishwashing liquids and dishwasher powders and liquids are all
synthetic, as far as I know. Household cleaner are likewise except for
Murphy's Oil Soap and perhaps some others, but Mr. Clean, Spic n' Span, etc
are synthetics. Shampoos are too - you wouldn't like the results with hard
water and soap. That's why women used to use rain water for shampooing -
or beer!
I make my own soap and really like it with my softened water, but I'm
certainly glad for detergents.
For beer glases, I use hand dishwashing detergent and just rinse really
well. Seems to work pretty well, but not great. I know brewers who use
nothing but hot water, but that won't remove lipstick, and it just leaves
me uncomfortable anyway.
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: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 09:31:19 -0400
From: John Baxter Biggins <jbbiggin@med.cornell.edu>
Subject: Anyone ever do a "beer" by using the methods for sake???
Living in NYC, my Spartan accomodations make it increasingly difficult to
brew an actual beer, so lately I have been experimenting w/ strict
fermentations of ciders & meads--no mashing & supplies are available to me
at local green markets & health food stores. I am now thinking of
branching out into sake. My question: has anyone tried to brew a
"beer"-like sake, that is, instead of rice use non-malted barley w/
pseudo-normal hopping schedules & yeast to make a "pale" or non-malted
wheat to make a "weizen"? I expect certain sake-like components from the
sugar conversion by the fungus to remain, but I am just curious if anyone
has ever tried doing such
- -------------------
John B. Biggins
Cornell University Medical College
Weill Graduate School of Medical Sciences
Student -- Program in Pharmacology
Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center
Laboratory for Biosynthetic Chemistry
Department of Molecular Pharmacology and Therapeutics
lab:(212)693-6405 fax:(212)717-3135
http://www.ski.edu/lab_homepage.cfm?lab=189
"Science, like Nature, must also be tamed
With a view towards its preservation.
Given the same state of integrity
It will surely serve us well."
-- Neil Peart; Natural Science (III) -- Permanent Waves
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 06:45:12 -0700
From: "Hull, Ted" <THull@Brwncald.com>
Subject: Georgia beer law
Mark Tumarkin wrote in HBD # 3389 asking about the state of the effort to
change the alcohol limit in Georgia.
As one of the members of Georgians for World Class Beer, the group behind
the proposed change, I thought I'd give a quick update.
Currently, the limit in Georgia is 6% alcohol. During the past legislative
session, a bill passed the state House which would have raised the limit to
14% and added a higher tax bracket for beers between 6 and 14%.
Unfortunately, our bill was DOA in the state Senate. It was assigned to a
committee whose head is very anti-alcohol, and it died there.
The Georgia General Assembly has 2-year sessions. The 1999-2000 session
that do not make it through both houses during the session must start over.
And that's what we're prepared to do. We think that we've done a good job of
educating the Georgia House on the issue, but we've had a setback in that
our sponsor was defeated in a primary election (due to his stance on a
statewide education debate). We're working on finding a new sponsor and
getting our message out to the state senators.
We also are planning an 'education month' to raise awareness and funds for
our efforts. Our experience thus far is that any alcohol issue is easily
demonized in the media. When our bill passed the Georgia House, the local
wire service story labelled the beers as 'high octane,' a local alternative
weekly published a cartoon lampooning 'making beer stronger' in comparison
with efforts to limit drunk driving, and local TV news showed footage of
college students quaffing pitchers with a voiceover on our bill. And that
was just in Atlanta.
We're committed to making this happen, and we've already put two years into
the effort. If you're elsewhere, please send some good vibes our way. And if
you're a Georgian, for God's sake, volunteer to help if you haven't already.
Ted Hull
Atlanta, Georgia
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 10:09:40 -0400
From: Jeff Renner <nerenner@umich.edu>
Subject: Re: Building Backyard Bathyspheres In Burradoo
Phil & Jill Yates [mailto:yates@acenet.com.au] has run out of beer and is
reduced to doing thought experiments:
>Let's say you have gassed your beer up at 30psi, rather overdone to be sure.
>Sitting in our bathysphere, Jill struggles on the external billows until Wes
>and I (sitting comfortably in our smoking jackets) are enjoying an
>atmosphere at 30psi.
>What has happened to our beer?
>Will it now be flat?
Here are my thoughts on this. Dissolved CO2 does two things - it creates
carbonic acid, which makes the beer more acidic, or more tart, and the lack
of this is part of what makes flat beer taste flat. But it also has the
prickly effect of the bubbles on your mouth when they come out of solution.
So my guess it that the beer would not bubble but it wouldn't taste as
"flat" as it would at atmospheric pressure saturated but not oversaturated
with CO2.
>Conversely, Wes and I enter the chamber with our CO2 regulator carefully set
>at 15psi. In more predictable fashion, Jill pulls the big lever which
>immediately evacuates all atmosphere from the bathysphere (of course, Wes
>and I were not smart enough to incorporate oxygen masks - in short, we've
>had it chums!) My dying question, as we sip our last in a total vacuum is
>"what is now the reading on the CO2 regulator"?
Your regulator reads 15 psi *gauge* before Jill's attempt to collect on the
very large life insurance policy you have - that is, 15 psi over the
ambient atmospheric pressure, which is ~15 psi, so it is ~ 30 psi
*absolute*. This is what your gauge would read after Jill implements her
scheme. However, you wouldn't be able to take that last sip as the beer
would have all boiled away rather explosively from the dissolved CO2 and
its own vapor pressure. As far as that goes, your body fluids, being at 15
psi, would also boil at 0 psi ambient, and you would probably explode like
a hot dog in a microwave. Won't Marilyn be disappointed.
(Note to Jim Bentson, if you've read this far, note that the digest has
almost never been at its 45K limit this summer, so Aussie nonsense hasn't
delayed any important botulism or dui or aluminum posts. It will all have
to end if/when traffic resumes).
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: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 10:11:40 -0400
From: Jeff Renner <nerenner@umich.edu>
Subject: Re: Malt Liquor???
"Scott Church" <schurch@gte.net> of Tampa, FL asks about malt liquor:
>At first guess, I would have thought that it was any fermented alcoholic
>beverage that was produced (largely or partially) from a "malted grain".
Brewers sometimes do use it to mean just that, but some state liquor laws
use the term to refer to strong beers, typically over 6% abv or so. While
some fine beers fall into this category, the typical mega-brewery's malt
liquor will be a cheap, strong, high sugar adjunct/low malt, low hops beer
sold in 40 oz. containers and marketed in what I consider to be a socially
irresponsible manner, despite their "Enjoy our product responsibly" slogans.
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: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 10:12:43 -0500
From: "Brian Lundeen" <blundeen@rrc.mb.ca>
Subject: Just say Yes to Aussies!
Look out, Dave, it appears Jim Bentson is aiming for the Digest curmudgeon
title by posting:
> Concerning the spate of Aussie non-beer posts;
> I only go through the HBD once a month and am surprised at how much
> wasted bandwidth is being tolerated relative to the Aussie's
> attempts at
> humor. Come on guys, there are many pertinent posts being
> pushed back a
> day or two due to the constant stream of Aussie posts with
> nothing in them.
> Anyone else feel the same way or am I getting too old for the
> Digest???
While there have been a few Bruces-come-lately appearing on the scene with
little more to say than, "Look at me, mate, I've got my thumb up this
kangaroo's butt, by crackey" (my apologies for stealing jokes from the South
Park writers), they seem to disappear as quickly as they came and I don't
expect this to be an ongoing problem. However, as far as the contributions
from the down under regulars such as Phil and Graham, I personally find them
to be quite entertaining and they do manage to slip in a bit of beer-related
discussion from time to time. I also enjoy getting the perspective of
different cultures, and I wish we had more homebrewers from outside
Americanada to tell us about their experiences.
I much prefer reading about Phil's experiences with hitchhikers than wading
through the chemistry classes here, although watching the combatants go
medieval on each other about the congress mash minutiae was bordering on
stimulating. But that's just personal preferences and obviously there are
people who really get off on the ultra-technical aspects of brewing, and who
am I to begrudge them their forum. There's room enough here for all this
stuff.
As far as the posting delay aspect, I rarely have trouble making it into the
Digest the next day. In fact, by inviting responses to this clearly
off-topic discussion on off-topic discussions (hmmm, does that make it
on-topic by cancellation, whatever) you are only going to compound the
problem. I mean, it's just really not that busy here. If it takes a couple
of days to get in, so what? The emailed digest form of discussion has delays
inherent in it anyway. If you have an "I'm brewing tonight and need to
know..." sort of question, you're better off going to rec.crafts.brewing.
So, to answer your question, yes, you are too old. We've seen only too well
lately that mild-mannered Pat will turn green, tear through all his clothes
(did nobody else have a problem with the fact the pants still fit?) and
develop a speech impediment when suitably provoked. I think we can safely
assume that when the off-topic posting becomes a problem, Pat will start
culling them from the queue with a ruthlessness we can scarcely imagine. Of
course, he might have to get drunk first. ;-)
Cheers
Brian
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 11:43:56 -0400 (EDT)
From: Some Guy <pbabcock@hbd.org>
Subject: Re: In support of intoxication
Greetings, Beerlings! Take me to your lager...
Stephen Alexander writes...
> Peter writes ...
> >I do not like the feeling of being drunk; for one thing, I
> >consider myself to be a role model for my five children.
>
> The fact they you deny or fail to experience the joy of
> inebriation doesn't mean that your children will too. Getting
> drunk, and other forms of intoxication are common to virtually
> every culture. Hiding this from kids isn't a formula for a better
> next generation any more than is prohibition. [I'd compare US
> alcohol taboos to sexual taboos, but I fear the response from
> Oz]. I think we would be better off being seen to exercise our
> normal impulses in a safe and healthy way rather than pretend
> they don't exist. That veneer of sainthood/role-model is pretty
> transparent to a sarcastic 17yo.
and
> I'm not picking on you PatB, but I don't believe that people
> who must hide their activities from the Politically Correct
> Police really have any such rights or freedoms. If you are
> afraid to exercise 'em in the open, they aren't real freedoms
> and you might as well kiss your hobby goodbye right now.
>
> Having a hobby related to areas in which some people act
> irresponsibly or criminally is either a freedom or not. If you
> try to appease the prohibitionists you'll soon be brewing NA
> beer Pat.
*CLICK* *CLICK* *CLICK*
You know: it never ceases to amaze me the direction some people will take
on a comment or a set thereof.
How many kids do you have, Steve? I hope to God they are not
treated to the sight of their Dad wandering about in a drunken stupor
every time you get the thirst for a beer. It's not a matter of hiding the
intoxicant. It's a matter of demonstrating that it can be enjoyed -
flavor, aroma, color and effects - without going over the deep end. It's a
demonstration that you don't have to turn into a drooling idiot simply
because you've enjoyed aome alcohol. Not the guise of sainthood, Steve -
it's the demonstration of RESPONSIBILITY FOR ONES' OWN BEHAVIOR. Something
we could use a whole lot more of these days...
Steve, I do not brew NA beer, I do not "hide my hobby from
prohibitionists", and I do not brew behind closed doors - unless it is
convenient (neighbors visiting with beers can sometimes draw the brew day
out, or cause sparging accidents...). I simply DO NOT want the term "home
brewer" and "drunk" forever tied together. No matter how you care to
justify your version of the equation, there is a "does not equal" between
"drunk" and "home brewer". Any more than is should be there when "home
brewer" is replaced by "home wine maker". It is not about appeasing PC
people or prohibitionists. It's about respect and the manner in which the
most assinine of opinions some how manage to become law. I can't
understand why that's so hard to get through.
- --
-
See ya!
Pat Babcock in SE Michigan pbabcock@hbd.org
Home Brew Digest Janitor janitor@hbd.org
HBD Web Site http://hbd.org
The Home Brew Page http://hbd.org/pbabcock
"The monster's back, isn't it?" - Kim Babcock after I emerged
from my yeast lab Saturday
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 12:33:01 -0400
From: Dave Burley <Dave_Burley@compuserve.com>
Subject: Guaging the baron, Helmets and seatbelts , alpha and beta
Brewsters:
Phil Yates asks how his CO2 guage reads. Most CO2 Guages are PSIG meaning
"Pounds per Square Inch, Guage" or the zero point is whatever the
atmospheric pressure is at time of the reading.
- ----------------------------
With almost relevant timing, the following story made the front page of the
newspaper on Sunday, July 30, 2000 Anderson Independent-Mail. I share it
not to prolong the discussion of helmets, seatbelts and related topics and
about doing things safely so you can do it again whenever you feel like it,
but just thought it somehow sadly relevant and ironic at the same time.
"A 20 year old Tri-county Technical College student was killed early
Saturday in an Anderson County wreck and his lifelong friend was charged
with driving under the influence....."
The jeep he was riding in flipped and threw him out along with two other
unseatbelted passengers riding on the aft speakers. One of these, a 16 yr
old, is in intensive care with severe head injuries, the other walked. The
driver was seatbelted and stayed with the vehicle and wasn't hurt badly.
Further discussion goes through the deceased's lifetime accomplishments
including being an Eagle Scout, church work,being a nice guy with a big
heart, etc.
The article closes with his mother commenting about how she last saw him
riding away that evening on a friend's motorcycle. "He was happy when he
left here" she said. "He rode off with his helmet on and I watched his
shirt flapping in the wind and I said 'careful Bill' ".
- -----------------------------------------------
Jeff, thanks for your comments and for sharing your experimental results in
which you held at a low temperature and then heated up through the
saccharification temperature to two high level holds and for quoting the
Budweiser method. I was trying to make my explanation simple to clarify the
roles of alpha and beta amylase. Holding at the low end of the
saccharification range will produce the most alcohol per pound of malt and
I suspect this is Bud's motivation, as well as to produce a dry,low dextrin
beer which will allow the drinker to continue drinking without satiety.
Didn't surprise me to find that Bud did a saccharification at the low end.
Remember that Bud does a cereal mash to gelatinize the adjuncts and like
the Germans doing a decoction has starch available at a low ( below 149F)
temperature ( their glucose hold) from the boiling of the malt. My point
is, if the starch is available (gelatinized) it can be converted at a
lower temperature than 149F. As this was one of my points, we agree.
I agree starch gelatinization is not a hard fast number, but I recall
barley starch is most often given as 149F. Now maybe this is not the starch
in the malt, although I have always assumed so. Amylopectin and amylose
undoubtedly have different gelatinization temperatures.
Of course, beta amylase activity and alpha amylase activity can take place
at room temperature ( and even lower) or it wouldn't be too useful to
plants. It is a matter of practical rates from a production point of view.
Few brewers would like to wait a few weeks to complete mashing, even if the
bacteria wouldn't chew up the maltose solution. There are some experiments
in M&BS conducted at low temperatures demonstrating conversion can take
place over time with some differences from normal mashing.
I assume you used iodine to determine that conversion was complete? As you
undoubtedly know, this is only reliable for soluble (gelatinized) starch
unless you use the solid matter also in the test ( as I recommend). This
test performed on the solution is useful after saccharification and during
the higher T holds to prevent a "blue brew" and starch haze due to starch
release into the solution by the temperature rise.
I do not doubt that all the gelatinized starch would disappear at low
temperatures as that is what I said that beta and alpha amylase are both
active at lower than "saccharification" temperatures. An interesting
experiment would be to hold at 147-148 F or even lower to be sure the
starch is not gelatinized and check the OG without the heatup. Also check
the solids for starch content. I suspect that within a reasonable time
frame, you will find a small portion of the malt will contribute
carbohydrates as sugars ( about 10% if memory serves) and any cooked or
flaked cereal will be reduced to sugars and dextrins but not the rest of
the starch in the malt, if I am correct in my assumptions about the
gelatinization temperature.
Keep on Brewin'
Dave Burley
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 11:51:18 -0500
From: "DeFalco's (Scott Birdwell)" <defalcos@insync.net>
Subject: potassium sorbate
Paul Kensler was asking about potassium sorbate. Apparently he was not
able to stablize his mead and cider using the product as instructed. "I
have a question and need some help regarding the use of potassium
sorbate for preventing fermentation. I have a product labeled
"sorbistat K", the label said usage is 1 tsp. / 5 gallons. It is a
white substance, sort of
rod-shaped pieces which float when put in liquid and dissolve rather
readily.
The problem is that I recently used it to prevent fermentation on a mead
and a cider after they were sweetened, and it didn't work. In both the
mead and the cider, fermentation was complete and they were clear when I
added the additional sugars and the sorbistat K. The mead was intended
to be still (now its quite bubbly) and the cider, which was
force-carbonated, is insanely overcarbonated."
First, let me say that in the 22 years that I've operated a wine & beer
making shop, I have never, ever heard of this dosage. It has always
been "1/2 tsp. per gallon of wine (mead or cider)." It is very
important that the wine be completely stable before adding the sorbate.
In other words, adding sorbate to a still-fermenting wine will not STOP
the fermentation. It is intended to PREVENT renewed fermentation. I
also recommend to my customers that they add this to the wine 48 hours
prior to sweetening. This will give the sorbate a chance to mix
thoroughly throughout the wine before the sugar hits it. This may be
over-kill, but it seems to work. It's also a good idea to mix the
sorbate in a little wine or water to help dissolve it before you mix it
into the whole batch. As you pointed out, sometimes it doesn't readily
go into solution without a little assistance. Lastly, I like to add 1/2
campden tablet per gallon at the same time as the sorbate goes in. They
seem to re-inforce each other as far as stabilizing the wine, plus the
campden tablet (sodium or potassium metabisulphite) also helps reduce
problems with oxidation.
"How do you use it? Boil it?"
Definitely do not boil it.
Does this stuff "go bad"?
I've noticed that over time, sorbate begins to turn brown. I don't
necessarily think this means it's "going bad," but you might want to
replace it with fresh sorbate if it reaches this point. We're not
talking big bucks here, folks! I hope this helps. Later. . .
Scott Birdwell
DeFalco's Home Wine & Beer Supplies
Houston TX (Bonhamville)
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #3392, 08/01/00
*************************************
-------
