Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #4095
HOMEBREW Digest #4095 Sat 16 November 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:
lager yeast esters / S-23 bready fruity (long post) (Petr Otahal)
RE: SS conicals ("Wayne Holder")
Bleach ("Kevin Boyer")
Boiling Aertion Stone? (Fred L Johnson)
Bulk vs. Bottle Lagering/Conditioning (Bob Hall)
re: ss conical (Stacy)" <sgroene@lucent.com>
Hypochlorite ("Eric R. Theiner")
Re: Cleaning Aeration stone (Demonick)
dry-hopping (homebre973)
beer at deer camp! ("Micah Millspaw")
Kegs O Beer in Louisville ("Eric R. Theiner")
Re: SS Conical Project Update ("Mike Sharp")
Barley Wine priming question (Sebastien Riopel)
Re: priming? ("greg man")
RE: first all grain and keg (Kevin Crouch)
Thanx ! ("Axle Maker")
Aerobic Yeast Propagation (Fred L Johnson)
RE: first all grain and keg (Donald and Melissa Hellen)
RE: hypochlorite (Donald and Melissa Hellen)
Re: Classic American Pilsner Recipe/Report/Ranting ("Tidmarsh Major")
*
* 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: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 16:22:45 +1100
From: Petr Otahal <potahal@utas.edu.au>
Subject: lager yeast esters / S-23 bready fruity (long post)
Hi All,
Im catching up on the last few digests, after spending last week working in
the bush and this week catching up on the work I missed while away.
In digest #4089 Randy Ricchi wrote some comments about esters in lagers and
I would like to share some observations.
Randy wrote:
>I used to think that one sign of a good lager was that there were no
>esters. To me, estery meant ale-like, and lager beer meant no esters.
>Lately, I've been re-thinking that. Obviously, we wouldn't want a lager
>with the ester character of an English ale, but I believe some subtle
>ester character is needed for a beer to taste "beery".
I have to agree with you here Randy. A few months ago (maybe six or seven)
I did a bit of side by side tasting of some of our locally produced
megalagers. You might wonder why I would do such a "horrible" thing, and
Im sure I'll cop some flak from the Aussies on the list, but lets just call
it an educational exercise. Some of you may know that the megabreweries
here in Australia usually produce around three "types" of lagers (I wont
call them styles because they are all a bit too similar), and I did a
comparison of only a few of these.
Many make a lager that includes some crystal malt and is typically called a
"Draught", and quite a number make lighter coloured and v. slightly more
hoppy brews under the label "Premium" (I think these also have a higher
proportion of malt). There are also a number of lagers under the label
"Bitter", but unfortunately they are far cry from their ancestral roots in
England and aren't particularly bitter either. There are also quite a few
light beers, which in Australia refers to the alcohol concentration (light
beers are around 2.8% abv), but these aren't really worth drinking since
they are like making love in a canoe = FCTW!
The beers that I tasted were three of the Draught and three Premium varieties:
Cascade Draught
Boags Draught
Carlton Draught
Cascade Premium
Boags Premium
Crown Lager (premium type)
What is of note is that all of the Draught beers have a very slight mixed
fruit or apple aroma, the fruitiest of which is Boags Draught, whereas all
the Premium types have very little esters and are extremely clean with the
slightest touch of malt and hops.
This lack of fruitiness makes the Premiums very boring beers after a few
mouthfuls your are lucky to taste much of anything, I think this is the
whole point of these beers, there is nothing anyone could find
objectionable (except for the lack of flavour and the higher cost).
In recalling my Uni days I remember having a strong preference to Boags
Draught even though I was very uneducated in terms of how a beer should
taste I preferred the fruitiness which is quite obvious in this brew (it is
definitely not as fruity as any English ale but you can't miss it). Of the
three Premiums, Boags also has the most esters although you have to do a
lot of searching to find them (allowing the beer to warm to around 12C helps).
In my opinion a slight hint of esters can be a good thing in a lager but I
definitely think it has to be subdued and just there as a background
flavour to provide a little bit of interest (add complexity). I don't
drink these beers on a regular basis but it was an interesting exercise to
try and appraise them, unfortunately I don't have the "nasal vocabulary" to
describe the particular esters, but Im learning.
Do you think that Noonan means "estery" lager yeasts when he suggests
Aromatic lager yeasts (as opposed to Neutral lager yeasts) for some of the
recipes in New Brewing Lager Beer??
..........................................................
Onto a slightly different but related topic:
A couple of months back I made a lager with Saflager S-23, I normally use
liquid yeasts and this was the first time I had used this dry yeast, the
reason I pitched the Danstar yeast was that the WLP800 yeast I pitched
didn't seem to take hold. The beer has quite a lot of esters which seem way
out of place, there is nothing else wrong with the beer just a bready
fruity aroma, I've noticed a similar aroma with the S-04 ale yeast (which
isn't really out of place in an ale).
Has anyone else had a similar aroma experience with S-23?
I might have to try drinking it very cold on a hot day so I don't notice.
I pitched three packets (11g each) into 23L and fermented around 10-12C. I
rehydrated two of the packets, but the first one that went in wasn't
rehydrated, it was only after I pitched the first packet that I realised I
probably should rehydrate (as I said I don't typically use dry yeasts).
What makes this a little more interesting is that I then pitched another
wort onto the yeast cake and fermented around the same temp 10-11C. This
second beer is really quite clean and has none of the bready fruity aroma
of the first (it does have a very slight hint of esters which is quite
pleasing).
Anyone have a possible explanation??
Cheers
Petr Otahal
Hobart, Tasmania, Australia
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2002 21:34:23 -0800
From: "Wayne Holder" <zymie@charter.net>
Subject: RE: SS conicals
Scott Jose says:
"I too, am looking for a way to build a 12.2 conical in an economical way."
Scott, "economical" is a relative term. If you want a conical that is 100%
stainless, then you need to be prepared for the cost. If you're willing to
use cheaper materials (brass, wood, copper, etc.), then you can probably
move closer to what I would gather your definition of "economical" is.
You also said:
"Consider that you will have to come up with a seal for the lid, another $50
for the Zymico bottom dump and $100 for their racking port, and I don't know
how much for their stand kit, it looks like it really starts to add up."
Actually, the stand kit comes with a seal for the cone. It also comes with
leg extensions to allow transfer into a corny. The last time I looked the
leg extensions ($99) were an option on the Fermenator. If the $85 suggested
retail for the Konical Stanz-it(TM) is a bit too steep for your budget, then
maybe something made of wood or plaster would be more "economical".
You could save a bit of money, maybe, by not buying the TMS standard lid and
making your own out of acrylic or something of that sort.
Maybe if that crazy megalomaniac lady in Texas ever actually develops a
conical of her own, then they will finally be "economical". I've tallied up
what you could build one using Zymico(TM) kits to be around $375, depending
on what you pay for shipment of the cone. Your time and labor are not
included in that estimate, but research and assembly time, labor, and
shipping are usually never included in stories about "how I did it cheaper".
Wayne Holder AKA Zymie
Long Beach CA
http://www.zymico.com
Proud sponsor of the HBD
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 05:55:58 -0600
From: "Kevin Boyer" <kboyer@houston.rr.com>
Subject: Bleach
AJ says:
"The bleach used at water treatement plants is
much more concentrated than the bleach you buy at the store. The latter
is about 5 "trade percent" and the latter, I think, at least 50."
The maximum bleach concentration is 15%. Most common industrial strength is
10-12%. Any higher than that and the mixture becomes very unstable for
storage and transport.
Also:
"Older and smaller plants may use sodium or potassium
hypochlorite (NaOCl). ...The safety aspect is why smaller plants tend to use
hypochlorite. An
interesting bit of irony concerns the largest escape of chlorine gas in
the history of the US water treatement industry. It occurred at a
hypochlorite plant when a truck driver accidentally dumped his load of
sulfuric acid into a hypochlorite tank."
This is changing with the recent threats. Many municipalities and MUD
districts are converting over to bleach from liquid chlorine (gas) for
safety reasons. It's much more difficult to gas a huge population area when
you have to physically mix two chemicals (bleach and an acid) as opposed to
just opening one tank.
I think the lead in chlorine gas releases may have changed a couple of
months ago when a rail tank car of cl gas escaped up in MO when a loading
hose broke. You should see the video.
Kevin Boyer
Houston, TX
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 07:42:37 -0500
From: Fred L Johnson <FLJohnson@portbridge.com>
Subject: Boiling Aertion Stone?
Someone recommended boiling an aeration stone to clean it. Boiling a dirty
aeration stone is the quickest way I can think of ruining one. Boiling will
denature the proteins inside the pores. If you want to boil an aeration
stone to sanitize it, be VERY sure it is clean first.
- --
Fred L. Johnson
Apex, North Carolina, USA
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 08:55:00 -0500
From: Bob Hall <rallenhall@toast.net>
Subject: Bulk vs. Bottle Lagering/Conditioning
Recent posts have discussed bulk lagering vs. bottle conditioning in
regards to potential yeast activity and carbonation. I just opened the
latest issue of BYO and in the section "Tips from the Pros" by Thomas
Miller featuring Alec Moss of Half Moon Bay Brewing it states:
"Lagering is best achieved in bulk. You aren't going to get the same
results cold-storing your beer after it has been moved to the bottle ....
don't make the mistake of thinking that aging bottle-conditioned beer is
the same as lagering. It isn't."
I'd be interested to know if anyone has done a side-by-side comparisons or
has had other experiences that would support these statements.
Bob Hall
Napoleon, OH
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 10:08:57 -0500
From: "Groene, Stacy B (Stacy)" <sgroene@lucent.com>
Subject: re: ss conical
Scott,
When I purchased my 21.5 gallon hopper from TMS last year, I got pretty much
the same info as far as modification costs.
>From your TMS quote:
"To fab and weld bottom dump valve: Our hoppers are 1 pieces construction
with a solid bottom. To cutout bottom/drill = $30 ($5 ea + $25 setup) Weld
customer supplied fitting = $80 ($30 ea + $50 setup)"
TMS confirmed my assumption that their set-up charges are geared more
towards higher volume operations than single jobs, so I opted to only
purchase the basic hopper. (very happy with TMS service as far as the
hopper goes). I then located a small local weld shop that specialized in SS
welding, and was able to save much of the TMS quoted set-up charges. No
knock against TMS, they just aren't looking to do a lot of onesy-twosy
operations.
Another advantage of the local weld shop was I could get a good look at the
hopper before deciding for sure how to modify it, and could bounce ideas off
the welder.
I held off on adding a racking port (too lazy to clean more hardware), and
so either use a ss racking cane or a contraption I made to insert a tube
through my dump valve to rack out the bottom, but above the sediment. I
still wonder if a racking port my be in my future, but have not really
suffered without it.
I made a LEXAN lid out of a sheet I got at the hardware store. Wanted to be
able to look in on the ferment & it's more durable than acrylic.
I don't miss cleaning carboys, & there is 15 gallons of APA in the conical
now.
Happy Fermenting,
Stacy Groene
Columbus, OH
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 09:36:01 -0500
From: "Eric R. Theiner" <rickdude02@earthlink.net>
Subject: Hypochlorite
From James Keller:
>Rick Theiner says ...
>>I am 99.9% certain that chloramines and sodium hypochlorite are the only
>>chlorine compounds added to municipal water supplies.
>
>I am in one of the growing number of communities that use
>chlorine dioxide (OClO) as a sanitizer for the municipal water supply.
That 0.1% will get you every time!
Rick Theiner
LOGIC, Inc.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 07:48:53 -0800
From: Demonick <demonick@zgi.com>
Subject: Re: Cleaning Aeration stone
From: "Dennis Collins" <dcollins@drain-all.com>
>Chlorine will corrode stainless steel(and most everything else). I'm not
>sure what the effect will be on a porous item like the stone, but it
>probably isn't desired.
If I recall correctly, the issue with bleach and stainless is mostly at the
air/liquid interface, and in letting drops of bleach evaporate on a
stainless surface. This raises the local solute concentration and can
cause pitting. I doubt that a 30 minute soak in weak bleach will hurt
a stainless aeration stone. Just make sure to get all the air out of the
stone.
However, I certainly do not want to give incorrect advice, so someone who
knows about stainless and bleach please chime in. John Palmer?
The reason I like bleach is that is dissolves organic matter. Boiling or
soaking in iodophor a stone that has trub and yeast stuck in it may
sanitize it, but it is not going to remove the gunk stuck in the stone.
Domenick Venezia
Venezia & Company, LLC
Maker of PrimeTab
(206) 782-1152 phone
(206) 782-6766 fax
Seattle, WA
demonick at zgi dot com
http://www.primetab.com
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 11:59:33 -0500
From: homebre973@mindspring.com
Subject: dry-hopping
I know this topic came up recently, but I wanted to get a concensus after the
discussion. I just racked an all grain Sierra Nevada Clone that tastes great
now (when I racked it). I want to dry hop it to get only aroma and no flavor
or extra bitterness to speak of. I have some cascade plugs, and I would like
the groups advice.
Andy from Hillsborough
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 11:23:32 -0600
From: "Micah Millspaw" <MMillspa@silganmfg.com>
Subject: beer at deer camp!
>William Menzl writes about introducing others to his great CAP:
>"The real test comes this weekend at deer camp when I put it up against the
>swill the other guys drink. I sure hope they don't like anything but water
>flavor as I want to keep it all to myself!"
I have long since come to the conclusion that taking quality beer to deer
camp is a waste of effort and good beer. I bring along some cheap canned
stuff and everyone is happy. I content myself with preparing food
that is flavourful but so spicey that hurts my companions the next day.
Had excellent results with kim chi and white chili. Now thats fun !!
Micah Millspaw - brewer at large
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 12:47:50 -0500
From: "Eric R. Theiner" <rickdude02@earthlink.net>
Subject: Kegs O Beer in Louisville
I'll be in Louisville for a very brief time on Thursday and was hoping it
was possible to get my hands on a keg or two from Bluegrass Brewing
Co. (Alt and Hell for Certain are the two I'm shooting for). But I don't
know if they do kegs, or if their semi-subsidiary, Pipkin, does either.
Does anyone know about whether or not this is the case?
And if not, who's got good brew in that area that does kegs? I'm planning
on bringing something special home for Thanksgiving.
Thanks!
Rick Theiner
LOGIC, Inc.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 10:02:59 -0800
From: "Mike Sharp" <rdcpro@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: SS Conical Project Update
Christian Rausch writes about his SS Conical Project Update
Christian,
are you sure that a 1/2 inch bottom dump valve is going to be big enough? I
would have though a larger size would work better to get the yeast out.
Regards,
Mike Sharp
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 13:19:12 -0500
From: Sebastien Riopel <s.riopel@eci-co.com>
Subject: Barley Wine priming question
I recently brewed a barley wine. It is presently in secondary.
I wanted to get some suggestions as to how I should go about
bottle conditionning this beer. Here are some specifics:
5 gallon batch
Thick mash, ~158F (so lots of dextrines!) + mashout 168F
OG 1.112 (all grain single mash - no added sugar. There
was not too long ago a thread going about how much grain
could be fit in a 50L keg mashtun - well I fit 40lbs for this
recipy - ABSOLUTELY THE LIMIT at 0.75qts/lb)
FG 1.035 (at racking to secondary)
Femented with Wyeast British ale down to 1.040, then racked
on top of Scottish Ale slurry from another batch. Total
primary ferment time 2 weeks at 66F. It was quite clear when I
racked it (not cloudy with yeast and no foam on top of the beer).
I intend on letting it sit for about 1month at around 65F after
which I'm not certain what I should do. I definitely want to
bottle condition it and let it sit for at least one year. When I go
to bottle it, should I just prime the aged beer with dextrose, mix
and bottle straight, or should I hit it with a fresh pack of
yeast and wort? Would a Wyeast smack pack (regular size) be
too much yeast if made into a 1qt starter? Also, would there be
a type of yeast I should choose, ie alcohol tolerant a must like
London or Scottish or Irish? What about a lager yeast? It has
lots of dextrines and I want to condition it for about 1 month at
around 65-68F then cellar it at 55F for up to a year in a temp
controled cellar (gotta love the father in law and his wine
making!). I'm afraid that a lager yeast will ferment out the
dextrines and create bottle bombs.
All suggestions are welcome on the digest or by personnal email.
Cheers!
Sebastien
Montreal Quebec
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 14:55:54 -0500
From: "greg man" <dropthebeer@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: priming?
Let me try this question again? I was not asking for opinoins last time this
question was raised, not that I object to constructive criticism or anything
but here goes.......
How fermentable is belgin dark candy sugar? I can usually prime my beers
with 2 quarts of 1.040 starters. That seems to work good!
Now am I wrong in assuming that 1 lb of sugar will give a 1.040 gravity in
one gallon? Then if that's true I could use 1/2 to 3/4 candy sugar in say
1/2 to 3/4 of a gallon of water.
If its 70-75% fermentable than that would give me the desired result,
plus I will be adding a quart of fully fermented beer(for a little more
active yeast)
Can anyone let me know if these assumptions are correct......thanx
gregman
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 14:46:20 -0800 (PST)
From: Kevin Crouch <kcrouching@yahoo.com>
Subject: RE: first all grain and keg
Byron's <btowles@yahoo.com> asks what his first
all-grain style should be.
Aahhh, Byron san, you wish to become one with your
beer, but the object of your pursuit eludes you. A
wise man once said, "keep it simple". Build your
experience as would a skilled craftsman in any trade.
You must appreciate the essence of malted barley as
would a cabinet maker the raw grain of his wood, or
the vintner the fruit of his vine. Slowly then, the
layers of flavor complexity infused by the myriad
varieties of malts, hops, adjuncts and yeasts will
reveal their influence. Your first all-grain batch
should be about Pale Malt and one variety of hop. You
pick. A gravity of 1.050 with an American Ale yeast
will do the trick. You must have faith that this can
create an interesting beer, and will better reveal the
source of problems. I wish someone had given me this
advice 11 years ago as I have had to figure this out
on my own.
Kevin Crouch
Vancouver, WA USA
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 18:04:39 -0500
From: "Axle Maker" <axlemaker@mindspring.com>
Subject: Thanx !
Earlier this week I posted a question about a batch that did not completely
finish and then it didn't carbonate.
The over all opinion was the yeast had died due to the alcohol content.
( thanx to all that responded.)
Now I was wondering what to do the next time I suspect this is happening.
Could I re-hydrate some dry yeast and pitch that ?
Or would it better to get another pitchable tube and use it instead ?
If using a tube is the preferred method do I, or should I, make a starter ?
Thanx !
Bob Gordon
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 18:34:22 -0500
From: Fred L Johnson <FLJohnson@portbridge.com>
Subject: Aerobic Yeast Propagation
There has been some recent traffic on the HBD regarding ideal yeast
propagation conditions. I've been playing around with aerobic yeast
propagation for over two years and believe the following excerpt from a now
defunct YeastLink website may shed some light on this method used by some
commercial breweries. (Whatever happened to YeastLink?}
I'm not sure how well the table below will be reproduced, and I apologize
for the all caps font reproduced directly from the web site, but I believe
that the evidence supporting continuous aeration and feeding of a yeast
culture is very strong. Feeding must occur at a rate that maintains the
glucose concentration below the level that would stimulate fermentation.
Both continuous aeration and infusion of medium are necessary to accomplish
maximum growth. The difficult part, in my opinion, is achieving the optimal
wort infusion rate. Ideally, this rate should be varied during the culture,
to match the growth rate. Nevertheless, I figure if one infuses at a rate
that ENSURES that the concentration of glucose in the culture never exceeds
0.4% w/v, then one should be able to maximize the number of cells produced
per gram glucose.
- -----------
Excerpt from YeastLink.com follows:
THE ESSENTIAL ELEMENT OF ECONOMIC AND EFFICIENT YEAST PROPAGATION IS THE
PRODUCTION OF CELL MASS WITHOUT THE PRODUCTION OF ALCOHOL. THE FIRST
PREREQUISISTE IS AERATION, THE SECOND IS THE GRADUAL ADDITION OF WORT. IT IS
VITAL TO FEED ONLY AS MUCH WORT AS IS REQUIRED BY THE YEAST CELL. AN EXCESS
OF MORE THAN 0.4 % GLUCOSE AT ANY TIME WILL TRIGGER THE YEAST TO PRODUCE
ALCOHOL. IN THEORY, UNDER IDEAL CONDITIONS, LESS THAN ONE GRAM OF YEAST WILL
PRODUCE MORE THAN SEVERAL TONS IN FOUR OR FIVE STEPS AND A TOTAL
FERMENTATION TIME OF 72-96 HOURS.
The use of an incremental-feed system takes advantage of the fact that
residual substrate concentration may be maintained at a very low level. A
low residual level of substrate may be advantageous in
(1) Removing repressing effects of rapidly utilized carbon sources (glucose)
and maintaining conditions in the culture within the aeration capacity of
the propagator.
(2) Avoiding the toxic effects of a medium component (ethanol).
The yeast is grown in an initially weak medium to which additional medium is
added at a rate less than that at which the organism can use it. During the
exponential phase the yeast is growing at its maximum specific growth rate,
umax, for the prevailing conditions. Ideally, the substrate limited culture
has a feed rate equivalent to a dilution rate slightly less than u max.
Glucose levels in a all-malt wort are in the approximate range of 1% - 1.5
%. Brewer's yeast has a metabolic effect where the yeast will respond to
glucose levels above 0.4% with or without the presence of oxygen by
metabolizing the sugar through fermentation rather than respiration.
If the yeast propagation is aerated and the culture is fed incrementally
with sterile wort at a rate that the yeast metabolizes the glucose to keep
the level of this sugar in the propagation below 0.4%, the yeast will stay
in a respiratory or growth state. A similar process is utilized in the
production of baker's yeast although molasses is utilized instead of
brewer's wort. Under these circumstances, far more energy is available to
the yeast cell than under fermentative conditions and far more yeast is
produced while less alcohol is produced. The yeast produced from this method
are in highest growth phase (log phase) and can be pitched at a dilution
rate of 1:100 or higher. The volume of the propagation medium is 1% or less
of the batch total.
The propagation medium may be bland and slightly acidic, but can be blended
along with the yeast slurry into the batch with no noticeable off-flavors.
Generally speaking, anything that promotes yeast growth relative to
fermentation will tend to reduce the amount of flavor compounds produced by
directing the carbon of the fermented sugar into yeast mass.
Yields of yeast and ethanol
Mass (kg)
Medium Conditions Yeast Ethanol
Wort Unaerated 2.7 17.5
Wort Aerated 8.6 10.5
Wort Aerated-Incremental Feed 23 0.7
Molasses Aerated-Incremental Feed 50 0
*from Malting and Brewing Science
- --
Fred L. Johnson
Apex, North Carolina, USA
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 18:57:45 -0500
From: Donald and Melissa Hellen <donhellen@horizonview.net>
Subject: RE: first all grain and keg
Byron Towles writes:
"So, in summation, what should an All-Grain newbie make for his first
batch?"
That depends, my friend, on what kind of beer you prefer.
I like both light and dark ales. Kolsch is my current favorite on the
lighter side (also low alcohol), and Russian imperial stout on the
dark side (also high alcohol). The grain bill is a lot bigger on the
imperial stout, so you may need to make sure that you have enough
capacity to handle all of that grain (over 20 lbs.). I did my first
batch of imperial stout by doing two sparges (split the batch into
two) and boiling in three vessels on the stove top, adding more
collected wort as the boil progressed. I used a picnic cooler and a
"Phil's" mash/lauter tun setup. The picnic cooler took care of the
grain that wouldn't fit into the mash tun. I'm not certain, but I
think it was my first all-grain beer. It came out very well.
The downside of the imperial stout is that is best when aged for
months. It does taste good when it is fully carbonated even though it
has not aged but a couple of weeks, so you don't NEED to age it. It
just mellows out and gets better over time, though it is still good,
in my opinion, when it is still a young beer. The Kolsch is also
supposed to be lagered for a bit, but again, it tastes good as soon as
it is fully carbonated. (Some recommend bulk lagering instead of in
the bottle. For now, don't get too technical, just enjoy the hobby.)
For a "fast" beer, you could go with a mild ale or pale ale, or, for
darker tastes, a Guinness clone. Stouts are somewhat forgiving (read
the current BYO on oatmeal stouts), and are not difficult to make. You
can add 1/4 lb. of acidulated malt to your grain bill to get that
Guinness "twang" to your beer. Listermann carries it if you can't find
it locally.
Don Hellen
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 19:02:13 -0500
From: Donald and Melissa Hellen <donhellen@horizonview.net>
Subject: RE: hypochlorite
A J writes:
"Bottom line (as Jeff said): it doesn't matter whether the HOCl/OCl-
came from dissolved chlorine gas or dissolved hypochlorite, boiling
will remove it. So will Campden tablets (or photographer's hypo) which
will also remove chloramine (which can also be remove by boiling but
it must be an extensive, i.e. a couple of hours) boil."
What about the drops that aquarium owners use to remove chlorine?
Can these be used safely? I realize that they are not FDA approved,
but the fish live in the water after treatment.
Don Hellen
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 19:05:27 -0600
From: "Tidmarsh Major" <tidmarsh@bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: Classic American Pilsner Recipe/Report/Ranting
Jeff Renner wrote in today's digest, "Now intermittently open the
pressure relief valve of the receiving keg (or depress the gas in
fitting if there isn't a relief valve) and let the beer flow at a
moderate rate, controlling by opening and closing the relief valve.
As soon as you hear the keg blow (or when you see sludge flow in the
line), disconnect the hose."
As a variation on this method, place the full keg on a counter,
table, or somewhere else higher than the receiving keg. Add just
enough gas to get the flow started, and then connect a line between
the two gas in fittings. The beer will siphon under pressure without
the need to intermittently relieve pressure and without the need to
add additional gas.
Tidmarsh Major
Tuscaloosa, Ala.
(anxiously awaiting next week's tapping of the keg from my first
batch after moving, a Classic American Cream Ale)
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #4095, 11/16/02
*************************************
-------
