Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #4061
HOMEBREW Digest #4061 Tue 08 October 2002
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:
Home malting and outdoor brewing ("Guy and Norine Gregory")
Oops ("David Craft")
re: Carafa malts (Paul Kensler)
Re: Ion/water softener and pH (Jeff Renner)
First Wort Hopping Query (David Towson)
Re: false bottom help (David Towson)
What th' el...... ("Berggren, Stefan")
Beeson's Pale Chocolate Malt ("Hedglin, Nils A")
Re false bottom help ("Mike")
RIMS Cleaning -- Is CIP OK? (Charles)
Re: Sunlight, Hops, and Outdoor Brewing (Michael Grice)
Guinness comes alive ("Joseph Gerteis")
Re: Zepto-sized brewing in a growler?? (R.A.)" <rbarrett@ford.com>
False Bottom Specs ("Kirk Fleming")
Yeast Experiment (Richard Foote)
Re: Ion/water softener and pH ("Dave Burley")
Free the Melanoidins (Kevin Crouch)
RE: RIMS Cleaning -- Is CIP OK? (Mark Alfaro)
RE: Zepto-sized brewing in a growler?? ("Todd")
Good Eats beer episode ("John O'Connell at Work")
*
* Show your HBD pride! Wear an HBD Badge!
* http://hbd.org/cgi-bin/shopping
*
* 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 cannot reach you. We will not correct your address
for the automation - that's your job.
HAVING TROUBLE posting, subscribing or unsusubscribing? See the HBD FAQ at
http://hbd.org.
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 or read the HBD FAQ at http://hbd.org.
JANITOR on duty: Pat Babcock and Karl Lutzen (janitor@hbd.org)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sun, 6 Oct 2002 22:12:37 -0700
From: "Guy and Norine Gregory" <guyg@icehouse.net>
Subject: Home malting and outdoor brewing
Gents:
I did a home malting experiment before...even in Columbia, it could work.
Try the Brewery home malting article, but basically 1: weigh a measured
amount of grain.
2. soak the grain in a zapap lautertun for a couple of days, then spread on
a screen box and keep moist until it sprouts. When the sprout is as long as
the kernal, kiln it in the oven at 135-150F until it weighs about as much as
it did dry.
Crush, and brew with it. You'll need about 30% more than you would for a
normal recipe. But, there it is, and it adds some dandy flavor.
Simple brewing requires a thermometer, a large enough vessel, and your
attention. Go for it.
And I brew outdoors, all the time. The only time I have any trouble is when
there is a lot of tree pollen in the air. 10 years, every beer I've made in
May is spoiled. No matter what steps I took.
Cheers!
Guy Gregory
Lightning Creek Home Brewery
Spokane, WA
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 7 Oct 2002 06:21:23 -0400
From: "David Craft" <chsyhkr@bellsouth.net>
Subject: Oops
Good Morning,
I made a Dunkelweizen Saturday morning using a double decoction mash, my
first decoction. I got so caught up in the process I forgot the iodine
process.
Any harm done? Some starch left over will lead to some cloudiness which is
fine for this beer. Unless I really screwed up, most of the starches
should have converted..................
Any other thoughts?
David B. Craft
Battleground Brewers Homebrew Club
Crow Hill Brewery and Meadery
Greensboro, NC
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 7 Oct 2002 06:09:55 -0700 (PDT)
From: Paul Kensler <paul_kensler@yahoo.com>
Subject: re: Carafa malts
One comment about Carafa malts from Weyermann... a
lot of home-brewers I've met are under the assumption
that all Carafa is dehusked - in fact, Weyermann makes
"regular" Carafa malts and dehusked Carafa malts (both
in grades I, II, and III). The dehusked Carafa malt
is made from dehusked barley (my point being, the husk
is removed before its malted).
Hope this helps,
Paul Kensler
Gaithersburg, MD
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 07 Oct 2002 09:00:13 -0400
From: Jeff Renner <JeffRenner@comcast.net>
Subject: Re: Ion/water softener and pH
"Dave Burley" <Dave_Burley@charter.net> wrote:
>Michael Hackney has recently moved from a city water supply to a well and
>wonders if pH paper is adequate to check the pH of the water for adjustment.
>
>The pH of the water is irrelevant as the calcium, and to some extent the
>magnesium content, of the mash liquor (brewing water) and the grist makeup
>control the pH of the mash.
>
>If your water source is a well ( as mine was when I lived in NJ) and you
>soften it and ion exchange it ( as I did) you should have no problem except
>carbon dioxide in it. A quick boil or air scrub should solve that problem if
>you want to.
>
>I'd use the water ( which should be ion free) as you get it and modify it
>with calcium for ales and the like. For lagers, I wouldn't touch it. If you
>insist, then add 20 ppm as calcium chloride.
I'm confused, Dave. Michael says he softens his water, and I
presume, as you did, that it is softened by ion exchange, not by
reverse osmosis. Ion exchange softeners.
For those who don't know (Dave does), this exchanges two sodium ions
for every calcium or magnesium ion (these are what makes water
"hard". This makes the water "soft" - i.e., it makes good lather
with soap. This is because calcium and magnesium ions in hard water
substitute for the sodium on the soap molecule, which makes the soap
insoluble, and if it can't go into solution, it can't clean.
Back to your message. In your fourth paragraph above, Dave, you say
Michael should use his water "as you get it." Do you mean as it
comes out of his well, or out of the softener? Either way, it
doesn't make sense. You seem to have jumped to ion-free RO water.
Did the HBD server steal some text again?
Michael - here's my advise. Your ion-exhange softened water will
have no calcium (calcium is necessary for mashing) and lots of sodium
(which is bad for beer, although it doesn't affect the mashing
process).
Your well water may need treatment for brewing, but you should
probably get an analysis. A water softener company or Sears can do
this for you if you tell them you are considering buying a softener.
My well water here in Michigan is moderately hard (calcium and some
magnesium) and relatively high in alkalinity. It works fine as is
for dark and even copper-colored beers, but for all pale malt mashes,
it is too alkaline. For these beers, I boil and decant, which
removes much of the alkalinity. Since it also removes much of the
calcium, I also add either CaCl2 or CaSo4 (gypsum), depending on
style.
pH paper for the mash and runoff is a good way monitoring how your
brew is going and if the water is suitable for the style you are
brewing.
Jeff
- --
Jeff Renner in Ann Arbor, Michigan USA, JeffRenner@comcast.net
"One never knows, do one?" Fats Waller, American Musician, 1904-1943
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 07 Oct 2002 10:23:02 -0400
From: David Towson <dtowson@comcast.net>
Subject: First Wort Hopping Query
I've been following with great interest the occasional posts concerning
FWH, and I have poked around in the archives for more. But I have not
found any references to the relationship between the physical form of the
hops used (whole, pellet, plug) and the effect on the result. Can anyone
provide either pointers to references or details of personal experiences
concerning that?
Dave in Bel Air, MD
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 07 Oct 2002 11:53:58 -0400
From: David Towson <dtowson@comcast.net>
Subject: Re: false bottom help
In HBD 4060, Kirk McDonald asked about false bottom geometry and materials.
The most common choice of hole size and spacing for stainless steel
false bottoms seems to be 3/32" holes and 5/32" spacing with the hole rows
staggered to form the hex pattern to which you referred. I have experience
with two false bottoms having this geometry, and I am very pleased with
their performance so far as flow and filtration are concerned in a HERMS
using constant recirculation. But there is a big difference between the
two with regard to their ability to support a large grain charge with the
pump running full-time. The false bottom that came with my B-1500 system
from Beer, Beer and More Beer is 0.034" thick, and is supported by five
pieces of stainless tubing welded to the underside. It sits in a
flat-bottomed stainless pot. I use it now only to filter hops in my boil
kettle because it was forever being bent into strange shapes by the
combination of grain weight and pump suction. It's just not sturdy enough
to stand up under those forces. The other false bottom, which came with my
Sabco half-keg conversion, is 0.060" thick and holds up very well, even
though it consists of two semi-circles hinged together. This false bottom
is supported around its entire outer edge by the domed bottom of the keg,
and by a removable support which I place next to the siphon pickup tube in
the center. Because this false bottom works so well, I now use only the
Sabco keg for mashing.
For a recirculating mash system, I highly recommend using a mesh
filter beneath the false bottom to keep little grain bits from getting out
of the mash tun. Otherwise, you'll go nuts fiddling with the throttling
valve used to regulate the flow. The little bits build up in the valve and
restrict the flow so you have to keep "burping" the valve to clear them
out. For a filter, I use two metal mesh lint traps commonly available at
hardware stores. These things look like metal mesh condoms (ouch), and
they are intended to be fit over the ends of clothes washer discharge hoses
to keep lint from going down the drain. I cut off the closed end to make a
metal mesh tube, and then roll up the tube from both ends to form a stacked
pair of metal mesh donuts. This arrangement gives a greater height than
rolling the tube from just one end. I place two of these double-donuts,
one on top of the other, around the siphon pickup tube underneath the false
bottom. Stacking two gives enough height to allow them to be slightly
compressed by the false bottom, thereby forming a good seal with both the
false bottom and the bottom of the keg. This filter works very well so
long as I don't pump so fast as to suck a lot of crud through the false
bottom. I made that mistake recently with 30 pounds of grain in the tun,
and plugged the filter so badly that it took me five hours to get through
the mash and the sparge with the flow reduced to a mere trickle. But the
Sabco 0.060" screen held up fine, even though I had to use maximum pump
suction to get any flow at all.
Dave in Bel Air, MD
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 7 Oct 2002 11:12:04 -0500
From: "Berggren, Stefan" <stefan_berggren@trekbike.com>
Subject: What th' el......
Hello everyone,
I wanted to share a moment of both humor and seriousness......
Yesterday while brewing a pale ale, I experienced a rather amusing but
somewhat painful epiphany.
I had just brought in my brew kettle full of wonderful sugary hot wort,
from outside and hooked up my wort chiller to the kitchen sink, ready
to cool down my brew and have a well deserved brew. Slowly I turned
on the faucet and the cool water surged through the vinyl tubing and
into the copper coils of the wort chiller. As I carefully monitored the
flow of water making sure all was well, I slowly increased the water.
Then I noticed a small growth forming on the out tube of the chiller,
no wait it was more of an instantaneous "balloon" ! Before I had time to
figure out what the hell I was looking at "BOOM" the vinyl tube blew up
in my face, hot water and all from the still hot wort.
My brother now unable to contain laughter and nearly succumbing
to micturition, saw more levity in the matter than I. After containing
the water flow and cutting off the damaged segment of tubing and
reattaching, I contemplated this error in my design.
For all those home-made chillers out there, one might want to
consider some heavy duty "High Temp" vinyl tubing when creating your
chilling
monster. Yes I have to laugh after the fact and smirk at my lack of
forethought, but
I can assure you that I will not make this mistake again......
Thanks for listening.....
P.s. the slight burns were attended to by a nice cool porter......
Happy Brewing,
Stefan Berggren
One of the penalties for refusing to participate
in politics is that you end up being governed by your inferiors." -Plato
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 7 Oct 2002 09:22:57 -0700
From: "Hedglin, Nils A" <nils.a.hedglin@intel.com>
Subject: Beeson's Pale Chocolate Malt
Hi,
I'm looking for Beeson's Pale Chocolate malt. Does anyone knew
where to find it, or maybe a good substitute for it?
Thanks,
Nils Hedglin
[I'd stick my Rennerian Coordinates in here, but the link I have for
the calculator is broken.]
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 7 Oct 2002 12:41:48 -0700
From: "Mike" <Mike@Bronosky.com>
Subject: Re false bottom help
The only time I have ever had a stuck sparge was with a false bottom. To be
exact, it was a Phil's Phalse Bottom.
After that I started using a homemade EZ-Masher. It was made using a short
piece of 1/2" SS tubing, wrapping a SS screen (probably 1/8 grid) around an
inch or so of the pipe with about 4 inches extending beyond the end of the
tube. The open end of the screen was plugged off. This was held together
with SS hose clamps.
This may not be the best, the most effecient, the most whatever but she
works great for me and several people in the homebrew club I'm in.
Cost- Made out of scrap parts laying around. Someone else even made it for
me. Can't beat that.
Mike
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 07 Oct 2002 10:00:10 -0700 (PDT)
From: Charles@thestewarts.com
Subject: RIMS Cleaning -- Is CIP OK?
On Sun., Oct. 6, Lou from Ijamsville, MD, (right around
the corner from me), worries about cleaning his RIMS
system by pumping PBW through it.
Lou - this is what I've been doing with mine from the
begining without any problem. Well, there was problem
once . . . I closed the lid to the ice-chest-mash-tun
once. I opened it a little later and there was a
slight off odor. Anyhow, what I do now is run a couple
of gallons of PBW through it, then rinse with hot
water. I then drain everthing and leave the hoses
unplugged so that everthing can dry out. I can get
this done while the wort is on the boil. Quick and
easy.
Chip Stewart
Charles at TheStewarts.com
http://Charles.TheStewarts.com
Support anti-Spam legislation.
Join the fight http://www.cauce.org
Chip Stewart
Charles@TheStewarts.com
http://Charles.TheStewarts.com
Support anti-Spam legislation.
Join the fight http://www.cauce.org/
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 7 Oct 2002 12:21:09 -0500
From: Michael Grice <grice@binc.net>
Subject: Re: Sunlight, Hops, and Outdoor Brewing
Chad Gould wrote:
>Firstly, hop skunking is only present in wort that has been boiled -
>hop compounds have to be isomerized in the boil first. I imagine that
>there is minimal skunking actually going on when you are merely boiling
>the beer in the sun. Skunking (from what I've been told) will reverse
>itself eventually if left in the dark for a couple of weeks, so I don't
>think you have that much of a problem boiling the beer in the sun one
>way or the other.
On another note, does anyone know what sort of effect aging hops has on
the propensity to skunk? I'm thinking of the lambics, which use aged hops.
I've had great luck buying lambics, and only fair luck with other Belgian
beers--I can think of a number I've bought which have been slightly or
greatly skunked. So I wonder if the aging process had any effect. I
realize also that lower amounts of hops used might have a similar
effect.
I am also tempted to demonstrate for my own satisfaction whether or not
what you say about the reversal of skunking is indeed true...
- --Michael
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 07 Oct 2002 10:38:09 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Joseph Gerteis" <joseph540@elvis.com>
Subject: Guinness comes alive
Once again, there is some discussion of whether
Guinness does,
does not, or may exhibit a tang that may or may not
come from
Lactobacillus. E.g., from Jeff Renner:
It has been argued that Guinness adds 3%
soured beer to its final
product, but this has never been
confirmed. I don't find any
particular lactic acid tang or aroma in
Guinness.
Dave Houseman agrees that Lactobacillus does not come
into play in
Guinness.
I can't really comment on whether it does or doesn't --
I don't
have enough experience with sour beers to know. But
one point does
confuse me a lot. I distinctly remember a "tang" to
Guinness years ago
- -- it was *not* grain-derived astringency. It was not
really metallic either,
but sort of a pleasant, mellow sourness. I noticed it
in American pub
Guiness (before wide availability -- like in the early
80s), and I noticed it
in British pub Guinness when I tasted it in the early
90s.
But I do not taste it now -- not at all. I don't think
this is just a change
in my taste buds or selective memory, but that is
possible. Am I nuts,
or has a defining characteristic really been bred out
of the beer as it has
gone global?
Joe
- -------------------------------------------------
Get your free @Elvis e-mail account at Elvis.com!
http://www.elvis.com
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 7 Oct 2002 14:27:29 -0400
From: "Barrett, Bob (R.A.)" <rbarrett@ford.com>
Subject: Re: Zepto-sized brewing in a growler??
Robert Marshall (from where???) asks:
>Has anyone brewed a complete batch in a growler?.....
>What about carbonation? A growler will hold fermented
>beer from a microbrewery for a couple of days, but its
>not exactly designed to naturally carbonate in it.
>Anyone have any successes/failures attempting this?
I've used growlers to carbonate in when transferring from
the primary to the secondary and all the beer won't fit.
I just sanitize a growler and move the hose to the growler
when the secondary is full.
I've done it with beer that was at terminal and beer that
still had a ways to go. In both cases the beer carbon-
ates nicely. The beer at terminal only has about 2.0
volumes of CO2, but it's fine with me. Much better than
tossing it out. The other beer was a pilsner that I racked
to a keg with about 2 points to go on the hydrometer. I
let it finish in the keg to naturally carbonate. The extra
I put in a growler and it carbonated too.
The growlers I've used are both the ones with the screw
on lids and the ones with the swing top lids (like a
Grolsch bottle). Both work fine.
We make the beer we drink!!
Bob Barrett
Ann Arbor, MI
(2.8, 103.6 Rennerian)
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 7 Oct 2002 12:37:27 -0600
From: "Kirk Fleming" <kirkfleming@earthlink.net>
Subject: False Bottom Specs
In 4060 "Kirk McDonald" <kirem@ihug.com.au> asks about false bottoms. I
won't say what's idea, but I've built a bunch of them for the Sankey keg and
what I ended up with work flawlessly. It's an aluminum plate 1/8" (3mm)
thick. I used 3/32" (~2.4mm) holes, spaced about 1/4" apart (6mm). Since I
had to drill these by hand, if you do the math you'll see one reason I chose
aluminum rather than stainless. On one side of the plate (the bottom) I
relieved the holes using a standard countersink tool (used to countersink
flathead machine screws). I relieved the holes deeply enough to leave only
about 0.030" (~0.75mm) of the original hole diameter.
I've thrown everything at this you can imagine in terms of grain bill--and
have never been able to stick it. During initial mash in, I usually get a
countably finite number of husks under the false bottom--if the pump pulls
'em out fine, if not, fine. Finally, even though this privitive fabrication
technique may not be what you want to tackle, you can certainly compute the
ratio of hole-to-plate (I probably did this--if you search the web for my
name you'll come up with an article I did once on the whole setup--it might
be in there "A Recirculating Wort Processor" or something like that). Good
luck, good brewing.
Jeeez..HBD #4060. I can't hardly believe it.
Kirk Fleming
FRSE, FRSL, BSAE, MSAE
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 07 Oct 2002 15:43:49 -0400
From: Richard Foote <rfoote@mindspring.com>
Subject: Yeast Experiment
Yeast Experiment
Have you ever wondered if that favorite yeast you use is really the best?
Have you ever wondered how "they" come up with those yeast descriptions?
Have you ever wondered whether there really are discernable differences
among closely related yeasts? Our club did a yeast "experiment" to get
some answers.
DISCLAIMER: The standards used and the results obtained are in no way meant
to hold up to scientific scrutiny so RDWHAHB.
Five gallons of Helles wort were divided into five separate one-gallon
jugs, each pitched with a different lager yeast strain. They were all
fermented at the same temperature, bottled, aged, chilled and taste tested.
A simple, sensory (aroma/taste)
1 - 5 point system was used, with 5 being highest (most preferred). NOTE:
Although appearance notes appear in the descriptions, it was given no
bearing on the ratings. It is provided for informational purposes only.
Letters were arbitrarily assigned (why those letters?-dunno it was done by
several SWMBO's) to corresponding yeasts by non-tasters. Letters were
chosen so there would be no confusion between numerical rankings and
identifiers. Only non-tasters (SWMBO's) knew which beers were produced by
which yeast. There were five judges, one of which is BJCP National.
Yeast descriptions from yeast producers:
Pilsner Lager
(WLP800)
Classic pilsner strain from the premier pilsner producer in the Czech
Republic. Somewhat dry with a malty finish, this yeast is best suited for
European pilsner production. Attenuation: 72-77; Flocculation: medium to
high; Optimum Ferm. Temp: 50-55
German Lager
(WLP830)
This yeast is one of the most widely used lager yeasts in the world. Very
malty and clean, great for all German lagers, pilsner, oktoberfest, and
marzen. Attenuation: 74-79; Flocculation: Medium; Optimum Ferm. Temp: 50-55
Southern German Lager
(WLP838)
This yeast is characterized by a malty finish and balanced aroma. It is a
strong fermentor, produces slight sulfur, and low diacetyl. Attenuation:
68-76; Flocculation: medium to high; Optimum Ferm. Temp: 50-55
YCKC Ayinger Lager (provided courtesy of Jeff Renner--edited)
It was hand carried to Ann Arbor from Germany by Herr Durst maybe five
years ago or more for Dan McConnell, owner of YCKC. Durst was here for a
tour of US breweries and trade shows to drum up business with GW Kent's
owner Randy Reichwage.
The yeast came from a brewery in Aying in Bavaria, but I can't say that it
is THE Ayinger brewery or not. There are several in that town, I believe.
It is a great lager yeast. It has typical lager yeast physical
fermentation characteristics, and seems to me to produce a balance between
malt and hops.
I participated in a blind taste test of five or six one gallon pilsner
batches that Arbor Brewing Co (an Ann Arbor brewpub, and my "local")
produced. They wanted to choose a better lager yeast than the one they
were using.
Five or six one gallon pilsner worts were fermented with different yeasts
at 50F, including probably 34/70, Anchor, A/B, Ayinger, and not sure what
else, then lagered at 50F. ABC's two owners, the brewer, Dan and I were on
the panel. The Ayinger was the unanimous first choice. I thought it blew
the others out of the water. It was clean but not sterile tasting, and
allowed the malt and hops to come thru.
Saflager (no description available)
Results:
I = WLP838 20 Crisp, second cloudiest, somewhat spicey hop
aroma, clean, most hop aroma
B = Ayinger 18 Seems darkest of the entries (disturbed yeast
sediment), very neutral, very clean aroma, a little malt aroma
A = WLP800 13 Disturbing harshness
F = Saflager dry lager 13 No notes
M = WLP830 11 Malty, cooked veg., DMS, best clarity
Conclusions:
Readers are left to draw their own conclusions, if any can be drawn with
but one trial. However, I would not hesitate to use either of the two top
ranked yeasts. They were rated so close together in the scoring, and there
was a noticeable gap between them and the rest of the pack. WLP830 may
have picked up a "bug"*. The fact that comments were lacking on the
Saflager, indicates it was not objectionable and could be a lifesaver in a
pinch.
*Post from J. Renner 10/7/02: "Rolling Rock is very high in DMS (dimethyl
sulfate) and is an excellent example for palate education. DMS is a
product of the malt, not of brewers yeast, although bacterial infections
can also produce it."
Thanks to anyone who provided yeast info., especially Jeff Renner.
Hope this helps.
Rick Foote
Chicken City Ale Raisers
Murrayville, Georgia
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 7 Oct 2002 16:18:06 -0400
From: "Dave Burley" <Dave_Burley@charter.net>
Subject: Re: Ion/water softener and pH
Brewsters:
Jeff comments on my recent comments about well water and correcting the
mineral content and pH. Jeff, you're right. I jumped to reverse osmosis
which is what I did myself after ion exchange from ion exchange alone which is
what Michael does. Call it being out of practice after 6 weeks of picking
grapes and making wine and trying to catch up on my HBD. Or no excuse for
reading between the lines when nothing was written there. Thanks for pointing
it out.
Most of my message you can ignore if you don't have RO. But if Michael's water
is very hard, using just an ion exchange bed will produce water with a high
sodium level ( two sodium ions for every calcium ion originally there) which
is not good for beer nor for drinking on a daily basis, perhaps. Reverse
osmosis, aka RO, of the water with an under the sink model from Sears or Home
Depot ( approx. $200 and easily self installed) for drinking and such will
solve that problem as I did. I then upped my personal mineral intake with
supplements as I suggested for this situation. Since the output of this unit
was only a few gallons per day I would collect water in gallon jugs over
several days in anticipation of brew day.
I have used my RO water as is - straight from the tap - , that is without
calcium addition for making Pilsners. There is sufficient calcium in the malt
to produce about 20 ppm Ca as I recall. I had no pH problems with the mash.
In fact, the pH hit around 5.6 or so which I consider to be ideal for Pilsners
as it emulates the Urquell mash pH.
As an aside, RO treatment is superior to water treatment schemes involving
boiling, as you know the exact mineral content ( none) and this unit also has
a carbon filter which removes any organics from the water.
Remember, this passion for a lowish mash pH comes from British ale brewing and
where single infusion brewing is king. The pH of British mashes is chosen to
be in the range where the enzymes operate fastest as that is the optimal use
of mash tuns. We have no such economic requirements.
Also, British malts being higher roasted on average than the Pils malts also
reach this lower pH naturally. The lower enzyme activity of the British and
higher roasted malts would benefit from this lower pH and this may have been
more necessary than in todays' sophisticated malting houses. In any event, the
activity of the enzymes in this pH range is pretty broad. Straight RO water
works fine. I do add calcium for the British mashes just because it is in the
taste profile. Some of the Southern German beers also require sulfate, which
I add usually as calcium sulfate, but have added other more soluble sulfates
at times.
As a matter of general comment, perhaps too much is made of adjusting the mash
pH and a lot of misunderstanding that it is the <mash> pH measured at room
temperature ( not mash temperature) that is quoted most often. It is
definitely not the brewing water ( liquor) pH which is of importance.
Although some of the more expensive multibanded pH papers ( @ $15-20/roll) can
be useful in the lighter colored beers, but not with the stouts and such, I
would advise the purchase of a pH meter and associated standard buffers,
versus pH papers.
I recently purchased a pH meter from from OMEGA ( www.omega.com) for $35 that
works excellently and the replacement electrode is only $22. Delivery was
overnight, since my old pH meter bit the root after 7 or 8 years and I was in
the middle grape picking and wine making. Works fine for my needs and should
work fine for beer making. Just be sure the wort is at room temperature ( as
it should be anyway) since the electrode is not temperature compensated. BTW
make sure if you use pH papers that the wort is at room temperature as well,
as these are only calibrated at 20C.
Keep on Brewin'
Dave Burley
- ----- Original Message -----
From: "Jeff Renner" <JeffRenner@comcast.net>
To: "Posting Address Only - No Requests" <homebrew@hbd.org>
Cc: "Dave Burley" <Dave_Burley@charter.net>; "Michael Hackney"
<mhackney@micromationsciences.com>
Sent: Monday, October 07, 2002 9:00 AM
Subject: Re: Ion/water softener and pH
> "Dave Burley" <Dave_Burley@charter.net> wrote:
>
> >Michael Hackney has recently moved from a city water supply to a well and
> >wonders if pH paper is adequate to check the pH of the water for
adjustment.
> >
> >The pH of the water is irrelevant as the calcium, and to some extent the
> >magnesium content, of the mash liquor (brewing water) and the grist makeup
> >control the pH of the mash.
> >
> >If your water source is a well ( as mine was when I lived in NJ) and you
> >soften it and ion exchange it ( as I did) you should have no problem
except
> >carbon dioxide in it. A quick boil or air scrub should solve that problem
if
> >you want to.
> >
> >I'd use the water ( which should be ion free) as you get it and modify it
> >with calcium for ales and the like. For lagers, I wouldn't touch it. If
you
> >insist, then add 20 ppm as calcium chloride.
>
> I'm confused, Dave. Michael says he softens his water, and I
> presume, as you did, that it is softened by ion exchange, not by
> reverse osmosis. Ion exchange softeners.
>
> For those who don't know (Dave does), this exchanges two sodium ions
> for every calcium or magnesium ion (these are what makes water
> "hard". This makes the water "soft" - i.e., it makes good lather
> with soap. This is because calcium and magnesium ions in hard water
> substitute for the sodium on the soap molecule, which makes the soap
> insoluble, and if it can't go into solution, it can't clean.
>
> Back to your message. In your fourth paragraph above, Dave, you say
> Michael should use his water "as you get it." Do you mean as it
> comes out of his well, or out of the softener? Either way, it
> doesn't make sense. You seem to have jumped to ion-free RO water.
> Did the HBD server steal some text again?
>
> Michael - here's my advise. Your ion-exhange softened water will
> have no calcium (calcium is necessary for mashing) and lots of sodium
> (which is bad for beer, although it doesn't affect the mashing
> process).
>
> Your well water may need treatment for brewing, but you should
> probably get an analysis. A water softener company or Sears can do
> this for you if you tell them you are considering buying a softener.
>
> My well water here in Michigan is moderately hard (calcium and some
> magnesium) and relatively high in alkalinity. It works fine as is
> for dark and even copper-colored beers, but for all pale malt mashes,
> it is too alkaline. For these beers, I boil and decant, which
> removes much of the alkalinity. Since it also removes much of the
> calcium, I also add either CaCl2 or CaSo4 (gypsum), depending on
> style.
>
> pH paper for the mash and runoff is a good way monitoring how your
> brew is going and if the water is suitable for the style you are
> brewing.
>
> Jeff
> --
> Jeff Renner in Ann Arbor, Michigan USA, JeffRenner@comcast.net
> "One never knows, do one?" Fats Waller, American Musician, 1904-1943
>
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 7 Oct 2002 13:20:23 -0700 (PDT)
From: Kevin Crouch <kcrouching@yahoo.com>
Subject: Free the Melanoidins
Peers,
Last night I cracked open a bottle of Dunkle that I
brewed over a year and a half ago and had all but
given up on 9 months ago. It spent 5 warm months under
my house this spring/summer (65-70 dgF) so I was
prepared for pure unadulterated insipidity. To my
surprise, that authentic toasty aroma from the munich
malt (100% of the grist) was now evident and a
delicate melanoidin-laced maltiness shone through on
the palate, both of which were absent after a month of
lagering (35 dgF) and 4 to 5 months in the cellar at
50DF. Before, it had a dull taste, but lacked any
outstanding defects; it just simply seemed to have no
flavor at all. Now, it is a wonderful authentic
dunkle.
At first I thought that I had oxidized all the
delicate flavors, or that I had gotten old malt, or
poorly made malt, though it was from Briess. However,
after trying this beer last night I'm wondering if
maybe the Carbonate content of my water was too high
at the time...it varies from 75 - 125 ppm with the
high point during the wet winter season and I brewed
this beer in February. Can excess bicarbonate stifle
malt flavors? I imagine that some bicarbonate made it
into the finished product because I only have 12 ppm
Ca in my water supply.
Now, I've read some vague stuff about warm
conditioning replacing a long lagering period, and I'm
wondering, is there some relationship between warm
conditioning and and the liberation of these malty
flavors from the grips of whatever is in the beer?
Not that I'm into cutting corners, but so far for me,
the best flavor development of this melanoidin
character has been after periods of warmth rather than
after cold conditioning. Any comments on this?
Malt Addict
Kevin Crouch
Vancouver, WA
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 07 Oct 2002 13:41:15 -0700
From: Mark Alfaro <malfaro@qcpi.com>
Subject: RE: RIMS Cleaning -- Is CIP OK?
In HBD# 4060, Lou King asks,
Are there people out there who use RIMS and have had success pumping
PBW (or something else) through their RIMS chamber, etc?
Lou,
I always do CIP with my RIMS. When the mash is finished, I scoop the spent
grains out of my mash tun (a converted 15.5 gal Sanke) then give the tun a
quick rinse to let the remaining grain particles wash out of my center
drain into a bucket. I then reconnect the pump and return manifold and dump
in 1 gallon of hot water from the sparge tank along with 4 capfuls of BLC
(beer line cleaner). I turn on the pump and let the hot cleaner solution
recirculate for about 20 minutes. When this is done, I drain it and rinse
out the mash tun, reconnect the pump and circulate clear hot water for
about 10 minutes. I do not turn on the heater at all during this process.
Once the clear water rinse is finished, I circulate a double strength
solution of iodophor and water, not because I want to sanitize it, but I
want to treat the stainless with an acid after the caustic alkali treatment
from the BLC. I have opened my heater chamber on occasion and have not seen
any evidence of crud, so I feel that my CIP regimen is effective.
Regards,
Mark Alfaro
Chula Vista, CA
1950, 262.1 AR
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 7 Oct 2002 14:25:44 -0700
From: "Todd" <bis9170@hotmail.com>
Subject: RE: Zepto-sized brewing in a growler??
Robert:
For some time now I've been using an old
but sturdy 1-Gallon glass Gallo wine jug
for making test batches, but only for
fermenting. Once the beer drops clear
and fermentation is done (no more than a
2-3 days, when you compare the amount of
wort to the amount of yeast I pitch), I
siphon off the beer into a couple 12-oz
bottles, prime with PrimeTabs
(NAJASCYYY), and can enjoy the fruits of
my labor (well, actually, it's not that
laborious!) a week or two later.
Carbonation? I'd be much more nervouse
about that. If I recall, I seem to
remember a HBD poster once asking if
they could carbonate beer inside a 5- or
6.5-gallon glass carboy -- which was
followed up by an emphatic "No! Don't do
it! It'll explode!" I let the folks with
the 40-lb heads that subscribe to the
HBD answer up as to how's and the why's
this isn't a good idea. But in regards
to your growler, my
common-sense/gut-feeling tells me that
that may not be a good idea.
Just my two pfennigs.
Cheers!
Todd
( P.S. Here's a link to my standard
1-gallon Test Batch Bitter Ale:
http://members.cox.net/bis9170_f/Bitter%
20(Test%20Batch)_1.pdf )
Eye Chart Brewing Company
"Beers So Bitter, Your Eyes Will Cross!"
http://www.eyechartbrewing.com
> Has anyone brewed a complete batch in
a growler?
> Obviously, fermentation wouldn't be an
issue, since
> you're using a cork and airlock to
release CO2.
> What about carbonation? A growler will
hold fermented
> beer from a microbrwery for a couple
of days, but its
> not exactly designed to naturally
carbonate in it.
> Anyone have any sucesses/failures
attempting this?
> I want to experiment with some
zepto-sized batches,
> rather than make 2.8/5 gallons at a
time, and so
> figured I'd ask here whether anyone
has done this yet,
> or not.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 07 Oct 2002 17:42:18 -0400
From: "John O'Connell at Work" <oconn@mindspring.com>
Subject: Good Eats beer episode
To all,
If FoodTV is to be believed, Alton Brown's Good Eats homebrewing episode
"Amber Waves" will be showing at 9:00 pm on this Wednesday, October 9.
And, if FoodTV is true to form, it will repeat several times, including
midnight EDT Thursday, and 9:00 pm on Saturday, October 19. Check the site
to make sure.
Here is a link to the recipe he uses: since he has only 30 minutes, it's
partial mash
http://www.foodtv.com/foodtv/recipe/0,6255,23949,00.html
Just so you know,
John O'Connell
Atlanta, GA
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #4061, 10/08/02
*************************************
-------
