Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #3560
HOMEBREW Digest #3560 Mon 19 February 2001
FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
Digest Janitor: janitor@hbd.org
***************************************************************
THIS YEAR'S HOME BREW DIGEST BROUGHT TO YOU BY:
Northern Brewer, Ltd. Home Brew Supplies
http://www.northernbrewer.com 1-800-681-2739
Support those who support you! Visit our sponsor's site!
********** Also visit http://hbd.org/hbdsponsors.html *********
Contents:
alcohol metabolism (ensmingr)
pollution concern ("Benjy Edwards")
Hudson Valley Homebrewers 2001 Competition (David Sherfey)
early off-flavor question (darrell.leavitt)
ADH ("A. J.")
Re: Beer in Ireland (Jeff Renner)
RE: bottling with LME - primers & starters (Craig Agnor)
Re: Dropping at 14 hours, I mean really dropping (Jeff Renner)
Re: History help (Jeff Renner)
Diacetyl in Yates/Pivo pils (Paul Kerchefske)
Old Speckled Hen (Jacob Jacobsen)
Poor man's agar ("Joel King")
Re:Hopback ("Brew Dude")
Dry Hopping Summary ("Tom Williams")
(Ron and Aleta Jacomen)
Historical APA ("Al Beers")
re: Mashout _increases_ fermentability ("Stephen Alexander")
re Coldie... (scott morgan)
Aussie Beers ("Aussie Brewer")
Nitrogen freeze dried hops???? ("Stephen Alexander")
1098 and diacetyl (Marc Sedam)
*
* Beer is our obsession and we're late for therapy!
*
* Bluebonnet Brew-Off Entry Deadline is 2/25/01!
* http://welcome.to/bluebonnet for more information
*
* Drunk Monk Challenge Entry Deadline is 3/17/01!
* http://www.sgu.net/ukg/dmc/ for more information
*
* Maltose Falcons Mayfaire Entry Deadline is 3/20/01!
* http://www.maltosefalcons.com/ for more information
*
Send articles for __publication_only__ to post@hbd.org
If your e-mail account is being deleted, please unsubscribe first!!
To SUBSCRIBE or UNSUBSCRIBE send an e-mail message with the word
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to request@hbd.org FROM THE E-MAIL
ACCOUNT YOU WISH TO HAVE SUBSCRIBED OR UNSUBSCRIBED!!!**
IF YOU HAVE SPAM-PROOFED your e-mail address, you cannot subscribe to
the digest as we canoot reach you. We will not correct your address
for the automation - that's your job.
The HBD is a copyrighted document. The compilation is copyright
HBD.ORG. Individual postings are copyright by their authors. ASK
before reproducing and you'll rarely have trouble. Digest content
cannot be reproduced by any means for sale or profit.
More information is available by sending the word "info" to
req@hbd.org.
JANITOR on duty: Pat Babcock and Karl Lutzen (janitor@hbd.org)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2001 01:55:37 -0500
From: ensmingr@twcny.rr.com
Subject: alcohol metabolism
Dominick and HBDr's,
There are 2 main iso-forms of aldehyde dehydrogenase (ALDH).
About 1/2 of Asians and about 1/3 of South American Indians
are deficient in ALDH-I, so they accumulate acetaldehyde.
Accumulation of acetaldehyde is typically blamed for turning
"bright red". Reference: Goedde, HW and Agarwal, DP (1989)
Alcoholism. Biomedical and Genetic Aspects. Pergamon Press,
NY.
Alcohol metabolism:
EtOH ---[ADH]---> Acetaldehyde ---[ALDH]---> Acetate
Cheerio!
Peter A. Ensminger
Syracuse, NY
Life Under the Sun: http://www.yale.edu/yup/lifesun
From: "A. J." <ajdel@mindspring.com>
>The stuff that your grandmother snuck into your
gramdfather's coffee to
>control his drinking (disulfiram) blocks the action of
aldhehyde
>dehydrogenase thus allowing acetaldehyde to pool. Some
orientals are
>genetically deficient with respect to this enzyme which is
why many of
>them can't drink.
Actually, my grandmother was the lush - but that's another
story.
I always thought that it was a lack of alcohol dehydrogenase
that was the
reason some individuals of some racial groups, particularly
asians, had
trouble with alcohol. I know a Japanese woman who gets
drunk, and I mean
fully drunk, on a single glass of wine. I also know a
Chinese gentleman
who turns BRIGHT red after a couple of beers. Both of these
effects are
fast.
I know that A.J. was far from his references, so if I've
been wrong all
this time, and it's happened before in other venues, I'd
appreciate
verification.
Thanks,
Domenick
Seattle, WA
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2001 03:36:37 -0500
From: "Benjy Edwards" <rdbedwards@hotmail.com>
Subject: pollution concern
I urge those of you who dump your sanitizing agent (whether it be
iodophor, bleach, etc.) onto your lawn, the driveway, or some other place
outdoors (even a storm sewer) to please consider your actions. The
chemicals are toxic and damage the environment, as well as pollute
groundwater. Moreover, dumping chemicals in such a way is in violation of
the federal Clean Water Act.
As brewers we should be mindful of our environment and the delicate
balance of the ecosystem. Many environmental groups desire everyone to
limit the amount of household cleaners that we dispose of in our drains, as
well. Chemicals such as bleach tax our water treatment plants.
Sincerely,
Benjamin Edwards
rdbedwards@hotmail.com
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2001 06:22:44 -0500
From: David Sherfey <sherf@warwick.net>
Subject: Hudson Valley Homebrewers 2001 Competition
Saturday, March 24, 2001 The Hudson Valley Homebrewers Present Their 11th
Annual Homebrew Competition at the Hyde Park Brewery, Rt. 9, Hyde Park, NY
More complete competition information is available on our website, but briefly;
Beer, Mead, and Cider entries are welcomed. Entry categories are per the
1999 BJCP Style Guidelines. The entry fee is $5.00 per entry, or for five
or more entries, the fee is $4.00 per entry. Entries will be accepted
between March 3 and noon March 17. Two (2) 10 to 16 oz bottles per
entry. Awards for 1st, 2nd and 3rd place and prizes will be available
for each category at the discretion of the judges. The Best of Show award
will be a hand-cast brass brewers mashing fork, custom made by our Prez,
Steve Thomas.
Judges and stewards are needed. If you are interested in participating,
please contact the Judging or Steward Coordinator listed below. Judges may
bring their entries to the competition provided that entry forms (judges
fees to be paid at the competition) are sent to the Competition Organizer
to arrive by the entry due date. Judges entries must arrive before 8:45 AM.
Please check the website info for more details on judge entries.
SHIP TO LOCATION:
Party Creations
345 Rokeby Road
Red Hook, NY 12571
(845)-758-0661
The local drop-off locations are listed on the website.
Competition Organizer, David Sherfey
Judge Coordinator, David Sherfey sherf@warwick.net
Steward Coordinator, Tony Becampis all_grain@hotmail.com
Competition Registrar, David Tuohey davidt7826@aol.com
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2001 06:39:41 -0500 (EST)
From: darrell.leavitt@plattsburgh.edu
Subject: early off-flavor question
A steam beer that I made on 1/28 was bottled on 2/10. I had tried it as
I took the gravity reading (going into the secondary) and it tasted good
to me. However, just 4 days into the bottles,...I could not resist, and
decided to sample...well...there was an off-flavor/taste that concerns me.
My wife called it "musty"...and the best I can get is to say that it re-
minds me of sort-of-dirty-socks! I have read a good deal about off-flavors,
and while my sanitation is generally pretty compulsive....I am concerned that
some nasties have finally gotten the best of me...
I have though that this could be HSA in that I poured from several large
pots into my lauter-tun that I had just cleaned....and use as my kettle.
Could the be the "cardboard" that some have spoken about....OR could
I be getting an off - flavor from the yeast....California V ....that
may go away with time....cold conditioning....??
Wishfull thinking I suppose.....
Any thoughts woudl
// would be very welcome...
And while I am at it, thanks to Pat and the other Janitors and hosts of this
list, and also to all of the folks who have kept home-brewing alive....
worried.
...Darrell
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2001 13:25:36 +0000
From: "A. J." <ajdel@mindspring.com>
Subject: ADH
For Domenick: You're right but not at odds with what I wrote. Orientals
and women of all races have less >alcohol< dehydrogenase than we hairy
chested western European males. Hence they get >drunk< faster and stay
drunk longer. Disulfiram blocks >aldehyde< dehydrogenase causing the
acetaldehyde produced by oxidation of alcohol catalyzed by >alcohol<
dehydrogenase to pool. People treated with disulfiram suffer from the
effects of acetaldehyde poisoning, not the toxic effects of alcohol.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2001 14:07:29 -0500
From: Jeff Renner <nerenner@umich.edu>
Subject: Re: Beer in Ireland
Bill Frazier <billfrazier@worldnet.att.net writes:
>Wilf says to stick with the Guinness_its the real original irish stout. I
>can't argue with that advice
But I will. Don't limit yourself to Guinness. It's a great beer,
but I preferred the slightly more chocolatey, perhaps less sharp
flavor of Murphy's. It is not as universally available as Guinness,
but in the south and west (it's brewed in cork), you should be able
to find it, and typically for 20p less a pint. When I could find it,
it was my choice, but when only Guinness was available, I wasn't at
all unhappy. The third national Irish stout, Beamish, also brewed in
Cork, didn't suit my palate. I found it thin and unbalanced. But as
A.J. wrote, "de gustibus non disputandem est."
Unfortunately, the serving temperature of Guinness has kept going
down, to the point that In the US, the distributor requires it be
served at 40F, or 4C! In Ireland, may pubs will have two Guinness
taps - one with a red border on the pump clip, and one with a blue
border, for COLD! Ugh!
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: Sat, 17 Feb 2001 13:25:03 -0700 (MST)
From: Craig Agnor <Craig.Agnor@Colorado.EDU>
Subject: RE: bottling with LME - primers & starters
> I've not seen anyone mention bottling with LME... other that vague
> rememberances of someone saving a litre of wort to do so with... I'd
> like to boil up some LME & water to prime my beer with as i have a ton
> of it, and no DME...
>
> thoughts?
Jeremy,
My guess as to why most people don't use LME as priming
sugar is that it is a PITA to precisely measure out the small quantities
that you need for bottling. I saw your post and a possible LME priming
technique hit me like a ton of bricks.
I'm primarily a grain brewer, but use LME to make a batch of starters
periodically. I can the starters in regular Ball jars currently, but have
also bottled them as suggested in TNCJOHB. So, you could probably do
something similar and make a batch of canned wort - probably without much
in the way of hops. When you need one to do your bottling, just pour one
into the bottling bucket and away you go. Plus, they could double as
starter medium.
The hitch would seem to be getting the right gravity and volume in
each bottle/jar. The calculations for priming in this way are very
similar to those for computing how much gyle to save when carbonating via
kraeusening. The principal difference being that the specific gravity of
the gyle is not necessarily the same as the original beer. For example,
on pp. 331-332 of TNCJOHB Charlie gives some relations for computing the
amount of gyle to save which can be easily used. For carbonation levels
matching those of 3/4c. of corn sugar in 5 gal. of beer the amount of
gyle you need can be determined using the following relationship.
12*(gal. of beer)
Qts. of gyle = --------------------------
(SG of gyle - 1.000)*1,000
or for the algebraically challenged
12*(gal. of beer)
SG of gyle = 1.000 + --------------------
1,000*(Qts of gyle)
So, if you can wort in 1qt canning jars, you need to have gyle of SG 1.060
so that you can prime your 5 gal. batch with a single 1qt jar. When
canning the starters/primers you'd just have to be careful to get the
right gravity of the gyle for the volume of the containers you're going to
store them in.
I should say that I've never actually done this, but it appears to be
a simple and accurate way to use LME as priming sugar. Plus, if you
already make starters it may actually make bottling easier and save time.
Is anyone out there using a similar wort starter/priming sugar in a
bottle technique?
I hope this is helpful.
Cheers,
Craig Agnor
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2001 18:33:18 -0500
From: Jeff Renner <nerenner@umich.edu>
Subject: Re: Dropping at 14 hours, I mean really dropping
"Bruce Garner" <bpgarner@mailbag.com> asked
>here is the question. Are outgassing of CO2 and hop trub removal good at
>14 hours?
It depends, I think, but it is certainly an accepted practice in some
traditional British breweries.
The 14 hours, which I (and others) have quoted from Dr. Cone, was
based on average growth rates for yeast, I think. So it may be
earlier or later in some cases. He was specifically speaking of
oxygenation, not dropping, and in particular spoke of breweries that
have fermenters twice the capacity of one brew. In this case, they
are introducing freshly chilled and oxygenated wort from the second
brew of the day into 14 hour old wort, which gives the yeast new
oxygen. This is apparently common in Germany.
In the case of dropping, you do run the risk of leaving behind some
of your yeast with the trub, as has been suggested here. However,
I've never had that be a problem. I think there is plenty of
suspended yeast with the strains I've used. Some strongly
flocculating strains may be different.
Depending on the characteristics of your yeast, this could result in
pretty high levels of diacetyl, which is typical of beers from
breweries that drop. Irish yeast, which you may have used for your
stout, will react this way, and some should be OK in a stout. If you
and Nathan used Chico (1056) for your APA, it probably won't produce
diacetyl. Hope not, at least, as I think it would be out of place.
I practiced vigorous dropping on a few ales, but stopped as I found
the resulting diacetyl levels too high for my taste.
Hope this helps.
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: Sat, 17 Feb 2001 18:50:52 -0500
From: Jeff Renner <nerenner@umich.edu>
Subject: Re: History help
Bob Bratcher wrote:
>Looking for some info on the history and evolution of
>American Pale Ales. Can anyone point me in the right
>direction?
>I've found a few things on what it should taste and look
>like and recipes abound but not much more.
I'd suggest checking out Brewing Techniques web site
http://www.brewingtechniques.com/. I know they have had an article
or two on this subject, but I don't know if it made it online before
they shut down.
The latest Zymurgy also had an article on Sierra Nevada.
I think that New Albion's pale ale from California back in the
(early?) 80's was the original, and its indirect successor, Sierra
Nevada (which I think may have had some of the same people)
popularized the style. It's now a classic imitated around the
country and, indeed, out of the country.
Good luck.
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: Sat, 17 Feb 2001 16:40:29 -0800 (PST)
From: Paul Kerchefske <wadworth6@yahoo.com>
Subject: Diacetyl in Yates/Pivo pils
Perhaps we have overlooked the most obvious reason for
the lack of diacetyl in this infamous brew. As we all
know water goes counter clockwise in the land of OZ.
But the land of origin for this beer is in the
northern hemispere where things go clockwise down the
drains. The question now is which way was the beer
whirlpooled?
PK @ Keepers of odd knowledge INC.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2001 22:30:45 -0500 (EST)
From: Jacob Jacobsen <brewer@cotse.com>
Subject: Old Speckled Hen
Can anyone help me out with a recipe for Old Speckled Hen? I found over
twenty references in the archives, but no recipes.
Thanks,
Jake
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2001 03:41:21 -0000
From: "Joel King" <joel_d_king@hotmail.com>
Subject: Poor man's agar
p.smith@gooseisland.com wrote on 2/10:
>>Or, if you are cheap like me (and cannot obtain either of the above
>>gratis), go to your local asian food store, obtain raw agar-agar,
>>boil 80 g/liter of wort, autoclave (pressure cook at 15 psi/121C for
>>15 minutes) and voila, you have wort agar!
Sounds like what I do, but I'm even lazier / sleazier. I bought the agar
from an asian market, and chopped it up so I could measure it by volumes
easier. I don't bother to boil everything together, as I discovered that I
can just dump the dry ingredients in, top off with water, and pressure cook
- and it works just fine. Get some trub and other nasties at the bottom,
but the top pours off clean. I make a cup of agar at a time, which lasts a
long time. Whenever I need to pour some I reheat it in the pressure cooker,
but with the weight off, for about 20 minutes.
I use 8 oz bottles from Starbucks that their refrigerated coffee drinks come
in.
1 tablespoon DME
1 (heaping) tablespoon agar
A pinch yeast nutrient
A hop pellet or two
Dump dry ingredients into the bottle. Top off with water. Pressure cook
(10 minutes venting, 15 minutes at temperature with the weight rocking).
Don't pour those slants or plates until the bottle cools to the point where
you can hold it comfortably with your bare hand, that keeps the condensation
problem to a minimum.
- Joel King
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2001 04:53:17 -0000
From: "Brew Dude" <brewdude_@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re:Hopback
I was also thinking about putting a hopback in before the counterflow. I
found this link....
http://www.pbsbeer.com/pbs/hopback.html
I have nothing to do with this company, but I may consider buying one of
these in the future. Hope it helps.
Brewdude
Society of Northeastern Ohio Brewers
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2001 08:47:43 -0500
From: "Tom Williams" <williams2353@hotmail.com>
Subject: Dry Hopping Summary
Thanks to all who responded privately and by posts to my question about dry
hopping. This forum is far better than a book for working out a technique.
The original question was about the desireability of putting loose hops in
the secondary for dry-hopping, as opposed to hops in bags.
Here is a summary of the 9 private and 7 HBD posts:
Dry hopping techniques fall into 3 categories:
1) loose or plug hops directly in secondary - 5 responses in favor
2) pellets directly in secondary - 4 responses in favor
3) loose or plug hops in weighted bags - 7 responses in favor
- Those who do not use bags generally agreed with my suspicion that the bags
impede hop utilization.
- Among those who do not use bags, responses were split almost equally
between "the hops/plug residue are a PITA when racking" and "the hops/plug
residue are no problem when racking".
- There were no observations concerning the improved hop utilization of
weighted bags over floating bags.
- Several pellet users observed that the freshness of pellets for this
purpose seems superior to loose hops or plugs, and that the smaller
particles settle out more readily.
I conclude that the trouble with handling the hops during racking and
cleaning is a matter of personal tolerance and patience. I am also still
skeptical whether weighting the hop bag does much to improve the
utilization. Therefore, next time I will dry hop using pellets directly in
the secondary.
Cheers,
Tom Williams
Dunwoody, Georgia
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2001 10:02:01 -0500
From: Ron and Aleta Jacomen <ledanron@bignet.net>
Subject:
<html>
Hello Folks,<br>
I enjoy your newsletter to the utmost.And now I need to ask a question of
anybody who cares to answer.<br>
I bought some coriander powder..............how should I use it.Gosh an
ounce cost me a whopping 35 cents so I don't want to waste the
money.Please help me.<br>
Ron.<br>
<x-sigsep><p></x-sigsep>
<font face="Comic Sans MS">Off The Wagon Brewing !<br>
No Web Page.....Just Good Beer.<br>
</font></html>
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2001 14:03:54 -0500
From: "Al Beers" <albeers@hotmail.com>
Subject: Historical APA
Bob wrote:
"Looking for some info on the history and evolution of
American Pale Ales. Can anyone point me in the right
direction?
I've found a few things on what it should taste and look
like and recipes abound but not much more."
Try: http://www.beerhistory.com/library/
Good luck, Al
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2001 15:59:00 -0500
From: "Stephen Alexander" <steve-alexander@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: re: Mashout _increases_ fermentability
Nathaniel P. Lansing writes ...
>Steve Alexander [..] states,
>>[...] beta-amylase was quite active
>>during mashout rest at 78C in this case.
> A bad conclusion because Alpha amylase does create fermentables,
The total fermentables was not the basis of my statement, Del.
Rather it's the ratio of glucose:maltose:maltotriose produced.
They were 7:44:15 by weight, so roughly 7:22:5 by molar
concentration. You cannot explain so much maltose except by
a lot of beta-amylosis.
- --
>I've been saying this quite a bit during previous discussions on mash-out.
>I was always rebuffed with the comment that BA was for the most part
>entirely denatured by the time you reach mash out.
You've mis-remembered our positions Del. What I posted in June 2000
was:
DEL>The difference in fermentability comes
DEL>not from the denaturing of BA but from the also increased action of
DEL>AA. [...]
>
SA>No. Each enzyme increases activity (almost) the same as temps increase.
SA>[...] different fermentability. Denaturing is the factor.
In early April 2000 I posted an example with some math that must
not have been well understood. Let me outline the argument simply.
Imagine two identical mashes with final saccharification rest of say 67C.
One called 'M' has mashout (say 77C) for 20' and the other called 'N' (for
no-mashout) is left at 67C for 20'. What is the relative amounts of
beta-amylase activity in the two mash tuns during this final 20 minute
period ?
BA is denaturing with a half-life of say 12 minutes roughly at 67C. At 77C
this halflife is roughly 5 minutes. The initial activity of BA at 77C is
~double the activity at 67C. The instantaneous activity over time can be
plotted:
|M
| M
| M
| NNNM
| M NNNN
| M NNNNN
___________M______ NNN__
5 10 15 20
Both curves show an exponential decay in the amount of BA
remaining. The mashout case has higher initial activity and faster decay.
If all other conditions are maintained then the total activity of BA is
directly related to the area under each curve. If is not obvious w/o
calculation which area is larger. BA activity for the two cases is similar.
The sign (direction) of the difference (which one has more BA activity)
is not determined by the event of mashout, but by small parametric
changes like the actual temps. and half-life periods at those
temps and the smallish starch release the boost.
- --
> So now the wind blows a different direction and our conclusions are
>all different.
No Del, I think you are just creating new misunderstandings from the
same position I stated last year.
YOU argued and still argue that mashout has a critical impact on
final fermentability. I've always stated the difference was small
and not easily determined.
>All along I had mentioned this cited test was not a good experiment to
>substantiate the value of mash out on fermentability and yield.
It isn't a study of 'no-mashout' and you will probably never find one.
It is an excellent study of mash-out vs pre-mashout carbohydrates
and demonstrates that mashout versus any reasonable expectation
of no-mashout only makes a small difference in fermentability.
>I have to
>call this a test since there is no control and doesn't qualify as an
>experiment.
NO - a test is a portion of an experiment designed to challenge a
hypothesis and that typically requires a control. This paper is a
longitudinal study of the mash carbo species throughout a mash
cycle. Webster would call it an experiment tho' a purist might label it
a study - never a test - so what ? That the Tuborg study appeared
in 3 peer reviewed journals and is twice references in M&BS speaks
to the value of the data.
>Not many conclusions can be drawn, only that in this
>case here is what happened. Steve_did_say >>in this case<<.
Well here are two conclusions. My previous statements that mashout
is NOT the immediate cessation of beta-amylase activity is demonstrated.
Also my statement that the impact of mashout vs no-mashout on final
fermentability is small is supported with an upper bound of 2.3%
for this case.
> To put another fly in the ointment: Now that we are accepting that
>>>beta-amylase was quite active during mashout rest at 78C<<
>Why does a high temperature rest even produce a less fermentable
>wort?
No Del - there is no fly in the ointment of anyone who can follow some basic
math in my 'enzyme kinetics 101' post last April.
The factors relating the rate of conversion to temp are 1/ enzymes
of interest increase in activity by nearly a factor of two for every 10C
boost, and 2/ these enzymes increase in their rate of denaturing as
temp increases (very roughly a 2X - 6X decrease per +10C).
If the half-life is long compared to the mash period, then we can get MORE
total enzyme activity by boosting the temp. If the half-life is short
compared to the mash period, then boosting the temp means that the
denaturation losses are the important factor. The 'optimal' point is very
roughly when the mash period is about 3X the half-life..
Every all-grain brewer already knows the truth of this. If you boost from
53C to 63C for a 45' mash you INCREASE the BA hydrolysis. If you
boost from 63C to 73C you DECREASE the total action of BA. This
is no contradiction, it's just a result of the complex rates interacting.
Similarly if you are performing a 20' mashout vs no-mashout for BA
with a 67C vs 77C halflife of 12' and 5' then you are considering total BA
activity from BELOW the optimal temp versus above the optimal
temp FOR A 20' REST. There are no easy guesses about which one
produces more BA hydrolysis, but the difference is very likely to be
small for reasons cited.
Once you can accept that for a 60' rest 65C is an 'optima' for BA, and
also that for a 20' rest 72C (a guess) is also a BA optima then the
conclusions should be obvious.
> Looking back at denaturing times it seems like the factor of
> increasing denaturation is 1/4 or 1/3 (@+10 F) [...]
NO. It's very clear you don't get it. We are looking for the RATE
and you can't infer the rate in the simplistic way you are attempting.
>From another BRF study the BA denaturation FACTOR is
91% loss in a 1 hour mash at 65C, and 6 minutes for a comparable
loss at 80C. That's 10X diff in halflife RATE over 15C or a 4.6X change
in RATE per 10C.
>If you were to mash in at 154 F for 1 hour
>and not mash out; during the 30 or 40 minute lautering the
>fermentability of the wort at the end of the mash step _will_
>change before you are done lautering. [...]
Yes - I've been saying that all along . But you've forgotten to
drop the other shoe - If you DO mashout then fermentability
will change too (as in Tuborg). and the DIFFERENCE in the
two cases is chipmunk nuts.
>Mashing out _will_keep the fermentability closer to it's value at
>situation you make adjustments for this drift when you decide,
>"hmmm 154 wasn't hot enough, I wanted more maltiness. I'll kick
>it up to 156 next time."
That is exactly wrong. Bumping 154->156F for a 45' rest
moves farther from the 45' BA optimal temp and so decreases total
BA activity. That does NOT mean that a further increase to 170F
doesn't actually get *closer* to the optimal temp for a 15' mashout
period. The 'optimal' temp is very dependent on the time period.
If you mash at 154F-156F for 45' then mashout vs no-mashout
won't make much difference at all in fermentability.
-S
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2001 09:34:28 +1100
From: scott morgan <scott.morgan@aus.sun.com>
Subject: re Coldie...
Morning there,
Well if you really want one let me know.
CUB revolutionary brewing technique was probably being able to make beer
with least amount of malt possible and still being able to call it beer.
As well, brewing with no hops at all, using a lager yeast whilst still
calling it a bitter and bottling some in plastic bottles (esp. good for
when the natives get excited at football paddocks) has been a real
evolution for beer!
well let me know, i'll track down some in plastic and send off...its a
scary thing.
Scotty
- --
*****************************************
Scott Morgan
Sun-On-Line Telesales Representative
Working as part of the
National Education and
Queensland Team
scott.morgan@aus.sun.com
freecall 1800 628 193
direct 02 9844 5396
mobile 0419 545 114
fax 02 9844 5189
*****************************************
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2001 10:52:14 +1100
From: "Aussie Brewer" <ozbrew24@hotmail.com>
Subject: Aussie Beers
Hi Guys,
I am a relatively inexperienced brewer from downunder and would like to make
some beers that are similar to the commercially avaialable ones here.
If anyone knows of any recipies (preferably using kits/extract) for beers
like: James Boag Premium, Carlton Crown Lager, Victoria Bitter, Cascade
Premium, Coopers Sparkling Ale etc. It would be much appreciated.
Cheers,
Aussie Brewer
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2001 19:46:47 -0500
From: "Stephen Alexander" <steve-alexander@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Nitrogen freeze dried hops????
Mark L. Ellis writes ..
>Hey has anyone know or played around with freeze drying hops with liquid
>nitrogen. I can possibly see some advantages for extract brewers in that
the
>hops would shatter into dust before becoming solution when added into the
>wort. Any opinions/comments..
Freeze drying doesn't require anything like liquid nitrogen temps.
The point of freeze drying is to cool to just below water's freezing
point and then decrease the atmospheric pressure which allows
water to convert directly from solid ice to vapor without being liquid.
Once all the ice is gone you can raise the temps and you have a
dry extract.
It *might* be a terrific way to dry hops, but I am concerned that
the process might cause the aromatic volatile to evaporate too.
Tossing hops in liq.N is probably just a way to make wet hops mush
since the water won't be removed. The excessive cell disruption will
probably increase alpha-acid utilization, but it is likely to increase
phenolic & lipid extraction too. Try it w/ a banana sometime -
they are not very tasty once the seed capsules are disrupted.
Still it might work - try it and post a note.
-S
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2001 20:30:01 -0500
From: Marc Sedam <marc_sedam@unc.edu>
Subject: 1098 and diacetyl
Has anyone had experience with Wyeast 1098 (British Ale) throwing off
abnormal amounts of diacetyl at "regular" fermentation temps (65-68F)?
How about 1338 (British III)?
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #3560, 02/19/01
*************************************
-------
