Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #4139
HOMEBREW Digest #4139 Tue 07 January 2003
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:
Re: Dry Yeast is a joke ("Todd")
re:dry yeast sucks ("Nathaniel P. Lansing")
Hah! (Bob Sheck)
very high gravity brewing (ensmingr)
re: Yeast & Maylasia ("Steve Alexander")
Re: Dry yeast ("Chad Gould")
Dry Yeast ("Dan Listermann")
Re: Dry Yeast Jokes ("Drew Avis")
Dual use of Beer Equipment for Wine Making ("Romanowsky, Paul")
RE: Dry yeasts (Brian Lundeen)
Poor Carbonation in homebrewed Root Beer ("Romanowsky, Paul")
Staining with the use of Iodophor ("Romanowsky, Paul")
Reclaiming yeast from one batch to another ("Romanowsky, Paul")
Full 5 gal boil of Extract brew ("Romanowsky, Paul")
Who..hold on a sec. Bill, Was Dry Yeast is a joke (Wil)
Lallemand (Bill Wible)
White Labs strains (Bill Wible)
re: Flouride ("Steve Alexander")
re: denaturing enzymes via pump ("Steve Alexander")
RE: RO Water ("Mike Sharp")
re dry yeaat ("Steve Alexander")
Update from BrewingTechniques (BrewingTechniques)
Mash tun for 10 gallon batches ("Brian Schar")
Coconut Cup (jakem1)
Re: re dry yeaat ("Helomech")
Beer Consulting revisited ("Kenneth Peters")
*
* Show your HBD pride! Wear an HBD Badge!
* http://hbd.org/cgi-bin/shopping
*
* The HBD Logo Store is now open!
* http://www.cafeshops.com/hbdstore
*
* 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, 5 Jan 2003 21:28:30 -0800
From: "Todd" <bis9170@cox.net>
Subject: Re: Dry Yeast is a joke
> Subject: Re: Dry Yeast is a joke
> First, I own a homebrew shop, and
> Time after time, I steer these people to liquid yeast,
> and time after time, their beer consistently improves
> 1000%.
Just a quick comment. While I don't doubt that you are exteremely reputable
and ethical in your LHBS business, it sends a bad message when you talk
about being both a homebrew shop owner, *and* that you always steer folks
towards the more expensive liquid yeasts. Talk about having a ton of
expereince in the homebrewing hobby, how many years you've been a BJCP
Judge, etc, etc... But when you throw in the fact that you stand to profit
from steering your customers away from an inexpensive product towards a more
profitable product, it sends up a credibility red-flag (in my book, at
least). (Most dealers do this, FWIW)
That's all semantics, however. The crux of the matter (is dry yeast worth
it?) is that it's a documented fact that many fine award-winning brews have
been made with dry yeast. If your extensive experience has said otherwise,
then that is indeed note-worthy. But there is too much evidence to the
contrary to throw out the blanket statement that "all dry yeast is a joke".
There's just too much of a disconnect between the results you have seen to
the results that the vast majority of homebrewers (world-wide) for that
staement to hold much water.
(FWIW: I personally use liquid yeast exclusively, only due to that fact that
White Labs is only a few miles down the road.)
Cheers,
Todd
Eye Chart Brewing Company
San Diego, CA
"Beers So Bitter, Your Eyes Will Cross!"
http://www.eyechartbrewing.com
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 6 Jan 2003 01:01:34 -0500
From: "Nathaniel P. Lansing" <delbrew@compuserve.com>
Subject: re:dry yeast sucks
Bill writes:
>>Sorry to disappoint you, but:
>>First, I own a homebrew shop, and I'm probably more up to
>>date on the current dry yeasts that are available than
>>any of you are.
You won't disappoint any of us, your customers probably,
but none of us.
You mentioned:
>>I get beers brought to
>>me for evaluation. Always the same problem - phenolic,
>>like band aids and chloroseptic. Always the same story,
>>always extract beers, made with dry yeast.
Well I searched the archives and came up with the following
someone posted about that type of off flavors.
>>I can't give you scientific theory as to why bleach has to be rinsed
well,
>>other that the fact that it is a chemical that leaves residue. And I'm
>>not 100% positive about that.
>> I remember reading someplace that chlorophenols are detectable in beer
>>by the 'average' person at extremely low levels....
>>Bleach can contribute chlorophenols. That's all I know.
Remember posting that?
Get on the phone and get some spec sheets for the dry yeasts
out there. You will see that they are well within "brewery" tolerances,
something like 16 CFU/ml, breweries hold a spec of 4 to ~40
CFU/ml.They (dry yeasts) are also devoid of wild yeasts, the
source of phenolic "yeast flavors"(excepting *special wheat yeasts).
I know many people making beers without phenolic off-flavors all
using dry yeasts. Very commonly yeast problems comes from storage,
checked that? Is everyone filtering their make up water?
Too many unanswered questions to blame the yeast.
"A man's got to know his limitations."
NL
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 06 Jan 2003 01:43:47 -0500
From: Bob Sheck <bobsheck@earthlink.net>
Subject: Hah!
This is a no-brainer.
Fill your carboy up to the neck with water.
Then dump it in your plastic fermenter vessel.
Get a indelible marker and make a line at the level of liquid.
Then on the next brew, make sure you get enough liquid into the fermenter!
Duh!
Bob Sheck // DEA - Down East Alers - Greenville, NC
bsheck@earthlink.net // [583.2,140.6] Apparent Rennerian
Home Brewing since 1993 // bobsheck@earthlink.net //
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 06 Jan 2003 02:06:53 -0500
From: ensmingr@twcny.rr.com
Subject: very high gravity brewing
Greetings,
Having made a smoked potato beer, a wasabi beer, and a blueberry
braggot (not all of them successful), I'm now interested in
making a *very* high gravity beer, something on the order of 20%.
Anyone else done this?
White Labs makes a yeast (WLP099) that is supposed to go to 25%
and their web site ( http://www.whitelabs.com/gravity.html )
lists these suggestions:
*Aerate very heavily, 4 times as much as with a normal gravity
beer. Less oxygen dissolves into solution at high gravity.
*Pitch 3-4 times as much yeast as normal.
*Consider aerating intermittently during the first 5 days of
fermentation. This will help yeast cells during a very
difficult fermentation.
Aerate with oxygen for 30 seconds or air for 5-10 minutes.
*Higher nutrient levels can allow yeast to tolerate higher
alcohol levels. Use 2 times the normal nutrient level. This
is especially important when
using WLP099 to make wine and mead, which have almost no nutrient
level to begin with.
*Do not start with the entire wort sugar at once. Begin
fermentation with a wort that would produce a 6-8% beer, and add
wort (it can be concentrated) each day during the first 5 days.
This can be done together with aeration. This is mandatory if the
reported 25% ABV is to be achieved.
All these suggestions seem very sensible. My only additional
thoughts would be to repitch an appropriate yeast(s) each time
more wort is added. I'd like to hear from anyone who has made (or
tried to make) a very high gravity beer. TIA.
Cheerio!
Peter A. Ensminger
Syracuse, NY
http://hbd.org/ensmingr
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 6 Jan 2003 06:02:44 -0500
From: "Steve Alexander" <steve-alexander@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: re: Yeast & Maylasia
BillW says ...
>And despite your bleak observations, the Wyeast and White Labs
>vials work just fine.
I've made some good ales with that sort of pitching rate (60B cells in 5gal)
but it's a disaster for lagers unless you are looking for esters and a
painfully slow fermentation. The 60B cells that *optimistically* appear in
the WY and WL tubes are not sufficient for lagers or high gravity ales.
Even low grav ales can suffer at this rate.
If you've ever fermented a lager on a big active slurry you'll recognize
what a clean fermentation is supposed to taste like and you cannot possibly
get that with 3B cells per liter. Heck, I have friends who believe the only
good lager fermentation is one made on the 'yeast cake' of a previous
'sacrificial' batch and I think they are just about right.
Bill also says ...
>Dry yeast is a joke.
Could you expand on that Bill ? Why is it a joke ? Lallemand and DCL
taken together have a limited range of yeast strains, but I've heard nothing
but positive feedback on the quality and the Lallemand is cheap too.
-S
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 6 Jan 2003 08:10:19 -0500
From: "Chad Gould" <cgould11@tampabay.rr.com>
Subject: Re: Dry yeast
> Second, I used dry yeast myself as recently as November
> 12th, 2002, according to my records. It was Munton's Gold.
> It was brewed in a Munton's Gold kit. These are supposed
> to be superior kits, and the gold is supposed to their
> superior yeast.
> Occasionally, I do make the products that I sell myself,
> for evaluation purposes, and I even follow the exact kit
> instructions sometimes, too, to see how good or how bad
> they are.
I suspect that half of the problem was that this was a kit? Many of the
beers that come in kits contain mediocre instructions (e.g. too short of a
fermentation/conditioning time), and/or a lot of refined sugar (which
combined with aged malt extract leads to all sorts of funky taste problems).
Liquid yeast gains you a much greater variety of flavors. But I can't see
steering people away from liquid yeast. The extract-based blonde ale I made
with Danstar Nottingham turned out very nice - quite clean, if a tad
"British" (diacetyl, I guess? But pleasently so.). Since this was a low
gravity beer, I think I would expect to notice clovey/phenolic aromas quite
easily. I normally use Wyeast for the greater variety, but it's nice to know
that I can use dry yeast in a pinch.
Munton's Gold may be one of those yeasts that turn quite phenolic in high
temperatures -- in which case, the solution is to ferment at a lower
temperature. Or maybe one isn't rehydrating the yeast in 95F water
beforehand (for optimal yeast cell count)? Or maybe the yeast packet is old,
improperly stored, and dead? Or maybe chlorine from bleach or water is
biting through in this recipe?
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 6 Jan 2003 08:53:37 -0500
From: "Dan Listermann" <dan@listermann.com>
Subject: Dry Yeast
Bill Wible <bill@brewbyyou.net>wrote:
<Second, I used dry yeast myself as recently as November
<12th, 2002, according to my records. It was Munton's Gold.
<It was brewed in a Munton's Gold kit. These are supposed
<to be superior kits, and the gold is supposed to their
<superior yeast.
snip
<The resulting beer was awful. Phenolic as all heck.
snip
<I know it had to be the yeast.
<I can't tell you how many times I get beers brought to
<me for evaluation. Always the same problem - phenolic,
<like band aids and chloroseptic. Always the same story,
<always extract beers, made with dry yeast
I really like Munton's Gold yeast. I got away from it for a while trying
other yeasts on the market and recently used it again in a mild and a nut
brown. The first thing I thought when I tasted these brews was that I
really missed Munton's Gold yeast. For fruity beers, it is hard to beat.
Band aid phenolic is usually associated with chlorine. The two main sources
of chlorine in homebrewing are its use as a sanitizer with insufficient
rinsing or high levels in municipal tap water. I can't recall ever sensing
chlorophenols in any beer I have made with Munton's Gold or any other yeast
for that matter. I don't use chlorine to sanitize and Cincinnati's water
has very low chlorine levels. I do get customers who bring beers in with
this fault. They either used chlorine to sanitize or live in the outlying
areas that have water that has higher chlorine levels in it. Chlorine as a
sanitizer is very easy to over do because it is so cheap. Municipal water
works frequently increase chlorine levels in the summer.
Dan Listermann
Check out our E-tail site at www.listermann.com
Free shipping for orders greater than $35
and East of the Mighty Miss.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 6 Jan 2003 10:23:39 -0500
From: "Drew Avis" <andrew_avis@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: Dry Yeast Jokes
Bill sez:
"I own a homebrew shop, and I'm probably more up to date on the current dry
yeasts that are available than any of you are... Don't tell me, I'll tell
you."
And then goes on to explain he brewed a Munton's kit with Munton's Gold
yeast, which turned out poorly.
Bill, you're free to your own opinion, but it certainly contradicts the
experience of many brewers (including brewpubs and micros) that have been
using dry yeast to make exceptional beers. Might be time to actually try
some DCL and Lallemand yeasts in an all-grain wort?
Don Hellen and H. Dowda ask about US sources for the complete DCL line,
including K-97. Can't help you there, but if you can't find one, I wouldn't
be afraid to order from Canada. I've ordered stuff from the US that has
showed up here in 3 days, and shipping (via US Post *NOT* UPS) is
reasonable. Add the exchange rate discount, and you're doing well. BTW PW
*did* carry K-97, and may still do so - although they have an excellent web
site it's not always up to date - I always call in my order and get
clarification on what's available (often lots of stuff not on the site).
Drew "No I Don't Own Stock In DCL or PW" Avis, Merrickville, Ontario
http://www.strangebrew.ca
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 6 Jan 2003 10:36:34 -0500
From: "Romanowsky, Paul" <paul.romanowsky@siemens.com>
Subject: Dual use of Beer Equipment for Wine Making
Since my Beer brewing experiences have been nothing but GREAT!, I'm going to
be taking another step and start making my own Wine.
My question is:
Is it OK to use some of the same equipment I use for my Homebrew to make
Wine? I figure anything Glass or Stainless is OK to use for both, such as
Carboys, Hydrometers, my 15 Gal fermentor made from a 1/2 keg, etc. BUT,
what about any Plastic or Rubber equipment, such as fermentor pails, racking
cane, tubing, rubber stoppers, plastic spigots, Wine Thief, etc???? Can I
just use a cleaner to clean this equipment between Beer and Wine batches or
should I buy all separate equipment for my Wine making and leave my Beer
equipment for only making beer???
Also, are there any good e-mail newsletter sites such as this one for WINE
Making??
Thanks to all responding in advance.
Paul R
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 6 Jan 2003 09:43:48 -0600
From: Brian Lundeen <BLundeen@rrc.mb.ca>
Subject: RE: Dry yeasts
Bill Wible writes:
> First, I own a homebrew shop, and I'm probably more up to
> date on the current dry yeasts that are available than
> any of you are.
Unlikely. There is a staggering amount of knowledge in this forum.
> Second, I used dry yeast myself as recently as November
> 12th, 2002, according to my records. It was Munton's Gold.
> It was brewed in a Munton's Gold kit. These are supposed
> to be superior kits, and the gold is supposed to their
> superior yeast.
>
> The resulting beer was awful. Phenolic as all heck.
> I know it had to be the yeast.
Have you done reasonably controlled comparisons, like fermenting two
identical kits of the same age, under the same conditions, one with dry, one
with liquid? For the example you mentioned above, it would be useful to know
the pitching temperature of the wort, and the ambient temperature where it
was fermented.
How many dried yeasts have you tried? Have you explored the range of DCL
yeasts? Unless you have considerable experience brewing with ALL dried
yeasts, I don't see how you can expect such a blanket statement as "dry
yeast is a joke" to be taken seriously.
And you still haven't explained how Rob Moline wins awards at major beer
festivals with dry yeast fermented beers.
As for being "BJCP Recognized, just promoted", all that means is that you
didn't achieve the requisite 60% mark on your first attempt(s), and scored
somewhere in the 60-69% range on your latest try. I would say somewhere in
that missing 30+% are the reasons why you hang on to such beliefs, Bill. I
know a BJCP Certified judge (that's 70-79%) who uses DCL yeasts almost
exclusively. Are you saying he can't pick out phenolics?
All in all, you have not put forward a very convincing argument. I just hope
inexperienced brewers coming into this forum ignore your advice on this
topic.
Cheers
Brian Lundeen
Brewing at [819 miles, 313.8 deg] aka Winnipeg
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 6 Jan 2003 10:47:32 -0500
From: "Romanowsky, Paul" <paul.romanowsky@siemens.com>
Subject: Poor Carbonation in homebrewed Root Beer
Well, I tried making my first batch of Root Beer. OK, it's not real beer,
but where do I turn with my questions if not to this forum?? Anyway, it was
my first try at it. Also, my first experience with dry yeast, (been beer
brewing with liquid yeast from the get go with nothing but great results,
Wyeast and WL). I followed the instructions that came with the Root Beer
extract to the letter. For the yeast I did what it stated: Used warm tap
water, (which I checked the temp with my beer thermometer), at 98 deg F.
Sprinkled the yeast in, (Muntons, I got from my HBS), stirred and let sit
for 15 minutes and then stirred into the extract and water mix. The water
used to mix the extract was also at 98 deg.
Well it's been over a week with the bottled soda sitting in a closed room
with temp set at 70 deg. NO CARBONATION at all. What should I now do to
correct this. Should I dump all bottles back into a pot and remix in some
more yeast and rebottle? Should I just open all the bottles and just
sprinkle a few particles of yeast in each and recap?? I've tried shaking
the sediment on the bottom up and just let them sit in the 70 deg some more
but still it's flat. Any help would be appreciated. Thanks
P.S. Anyone use liquid yeast for making soda??
Paul R
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 6 Jan 2003 10:59:43 -0500
From: "Romanowsky, Paul" <paul.romanowsky@siemens.com>
Subject: Staining with the use of Iodophor
I've been using One-Step for my Cleansing and Sanitizing of beer equipment
up until now. So far never had any nasties take up residence in my brew.
Could be just lucky. Well, I've been reading the article on cleansers and
sanitizers in the Jan-Feb issue of Brew Your Own. Also been listening to
what all you chaps have to say about the same issue. I've come to the
conclusion that I should start using Iodophor for my sanitizing needs and
leave One-Step just for use as a cleaner, especially since I've moving on to
all grain and kegging. My one reservation I have about the use of Iodophor
is the problem that Iodophor might STAIN items that come in contact with it.
Could someone out there please elaborate on this for me?? Exactly how bad
is this staining it can cause. Does it just have the tendency to stain in
the concentrated form or will it stain also when properly diluted??? My
better half will definitely have issues with me if I start staining her
floors, counter tops, large fiberglass laundry sink, etc. and I don't need
to hear that noise if you know what I mean. Yeah she loves drinking the
homebrew, but don't start destroying her kitchen or laundry room!!!!!!!!
How about some feedback on this issue from those with experience using
Iodophor. Thanks.
Paul R
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 6 Jan 2003 11:09:09 -0500
From: "Romanowsky, Paul" <paul.romanowsky@siemens.com>
Subject: Reclaiming yeast from one batch to another
I've been using Wyeast XL smack packs and White Labs pitchable tubs now for
some time. Great results with both. But with the $6.50 price tag per
package, I would like to try to reclaim yeast from one batch to another.
I've never tried this before and have seen posts on this site talking about
it but no one ever goes into great detail on exactly how it is done. I use
either plastic pails or glass carboys to primary ferment and then rack off
to a secondary 5 gal carboy when I brew. When and how do I extract good
yeast from a fermenting batch. Then once I have this, what are the next
steps to take in preserving this yeast for a future batch, (please address
sanitation, yeast nutrient needs, yeast reproduction, etc.). Thanks
Paul R
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 6 Jan 2003 12:02:19 -0500
From: "Romanowsky, Paul" <paul.romanowsky@siemens.com>
Subject: Full 5 gal boil of Extract brew
I have just gotten equipped with a new brew kettle made from a 1/2 keg and
also purchase a King Cooker propane burner. Since I received an Extract and
Specialty grain kit, (IPA), for Christmas, that is the first batch I'm going
to brew with it. My question involves brewing this type of extract kit
using a full 5 gal. boil. Two Questions:
1. I want to end up with a full 5 gallons of wort after the boil is
complete. So how much water should I start with taking evaporation during
the 60 minute boil into account.
2. What about hops as far as quantity goes. One friend has told me that I
will want to use less than called for in the extract recipe because hop
utilization will be greater with a full boil. Any thoughts on that? Is
there a rule of thumb to follow here.
Thanks in advance
Paul R
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 06 Jan 2003 19:03:37 GMT
From: Wil@maltydog.com
Subject: Who..hold on a sec. Bill, Was Dry Yeast is a joke
First Bill, I have to say that I think you over reacted. Chill, have a
home brew. Learn from what others have done poorly in the great state
of Tx. ;-)
Next, I have owned a home brew store as long as your entire home
brewing carrier (7 years). I started home brewing in St, louis when I
was just starting collage at WUSTL. (ummm long time ago) I remember
when Wyeast just came out! It was a dry time before that ;-)
I have used just about every yeast I could get my hands on, Dry ale,
Dry lager and 3 to 4 different types of liquid yeast.(anyone remember
something called "pitch 5" or am in being over come by the cold
medicine I'm taking) I have re-hydrated and not re-hydrated, I have
pitched right from the slap pack and made starters, I have pitched
vials of yeast and gallons of yeast, I have racking onto yeast in
carboys and buckets and I have started yeast from slants. I have
abused yeast and flushed yeast. I have even given ampho-B to my
patients in the ICU that had systemic yeast infections, err, that's
another story......But I will not go as far as to say "Don't tell me,
I'll tell you" as you did in your post. But you should listen!
Just FYI, Bill
I have just recently stopped buying pre made kits (brewers best, true
brew) and switch to packaging my own kits using bulk malt, grains,
pellets hops etc. and yes, dry yeast. In doing so I had to (its a tuff
job) test brew all the recipes using dry yeast and I must say, I have
gallons of great tasting beer. The American style kits use nottingham
and the British style kits use Muntons. I have them on tap in my store
and people love em and buy them! read on....
I have learned you can make great beer only if you have GOOD FRESH
ingredients and if you are willing to put the time and effort into
using them CORRECTLY. This is the reason you will only find 3 types of
canned, hopped, "kit" beers in my store at this time.
(I stock the ones people that have to have that type of kit ask for
the most). They just don't make GOOD beer and as far as I can remember
they NEVER have, dry yeast or no dry yeast!!!
So stop blaming the yeast and look at the big picture.
I would have to say that it was the "kit" beer that was bad, not the
yeast, after all, you can't polish a turd.
>Date: Sat, 04 Jan 2003 14:28:33 -0500
>From: Bill Wible <bill@brewbyyou.net>
>Subject: Re: Dry Yeast is a joke
>
>First, I own a homebrew shop, and I'm probably more up to
>date on the current dry yeasts that are available than
>any of you are. So lose the "here in the 21st century"
>attitude right here, right now. Don't tell me, I'll
>tell you. I'm not a child in your classroom.
> <snip>
Wil Kolb
The Beer Man
Plaza at East Cooper
607 B Johnnie Dodds Blvd
Mt. Pleasant SC 29464
843-971-0805
Fax 843-971-3084
Wil@maltydog.com
www.maltydog.com
www.thebeermanstore.com
Wil@thebeermanstore.com
God bless America!
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 06 Jan 2003 15:02:32 -0500
From: Bill Wible <bill@brewbyyou.net>
Subject: Lallemand
Wow, everybody sure has their opiions in yeast!
Thanks for the posts and emails!
I may just have to brew something and try the Lallemand,
since everybody says its so great. Persoanlly, I have
nt used this before.
Windsor or Nottingham. For an APA, which would you
recommend? I think I'll split my next batch and see.
Bill
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 06 Jan 2003 15:18:47 -0500
From: Bill Wible <bill@brewbyyou.net>
Subject: White Labs strains
"As of next Monday, January 6th, the following
strains will be discontinued: WLP009 Australian
Ale, WLP036 - Dusseldorf Alt, and WLP730 -
Chardonnay."
"The new platinum strains for Jan & Feb will be
WLP033 - Klassic Ale, and New! WLP510 - Belgian
Bastone. White Labs will start shipping these
strains the week of Jan 6th."
Bill
[482.2, 105.9] Apparent Rennerian
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 6 Jan 2003 15:41:34 -0500
From: "Steve Alexander" <steve-alexander@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: re: Flouride
Asher Reed says ....
>I believe the only water purifiers that will remove fluoride from water are
>distillers and reverse osmosis filters.
Probably the only common methods.
> You don't want to use water that
>has been treated to either of these methods for brewing.
Huh ? Aside from the fact that a little bit is of calcium is always
desirable - there is absolutely no reason not to use distilled & RO water
for brewing. am I missing something Asher ?
-S
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 6 Jan 2003 15:48:40 -0500
From: "Steve Alexander" <steve-alexander@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: re: denaturing enzymes via pump
Marc Sedam says ...
>Air bubbles in the pump head can be a recipe for disaster in
>terms of denatured enzymes and oxidation [...]
Hmm - well I agree about the oxidation issue, but shear forces in
recirulation systems denature enzymes and it's measurable. The HBers small
bore pumps and outlet side throttles add to the problem. I doubt that
oxygen is much of a factor in denaturing enzymes but maybe you can elaborate
Marc ?
-S
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 6 Jan 2003 12:50:03 -0800
From: "Mike Sharp" <rdcpro@hotmail.com>
Subject: RE: RO Water
Asher Reed speaks on the subject of RO Water:
"RO filters are capable of purifying water to a greater extent than
distillers, entirely removing "contaminants" as small as mineral ions such
as: calcium, sulfates, magnesium, sodium, and chloride -- the removal of
which will effect hardness and pH. "
This is not very accurate. Depending on the system, they may do a rather
poor job of demineralizing (ie: 70-100 uS <microSiemens>, but good enough
for drinking purposes) or in the the best systems (not found in the home),
they might produce pretty pure water (1-10 uS). But they neither remove all
of the contaminants, especially the ionic ones, nor do they produce water
that is categorically better than distillation.
Long explanation follows:
To explain, I need to describe the differences between the two general
classes of RO systems...Which I characterize as Passive and Active. The
typical home RO system runs at water line pressure, typically no more than
60 psi, and the permeate fills a pressurized accumulator. As the
accumulater fills with water, the permeate side pressure rises, and the
Delta-P across the membrane decreases. Because there is no active pressure
source maintaining a certain positive pressure, I classify this type of
system as Passive. These systems have generally low recovery (the ratio of
permeate to feedwater), typically less than 50%. 25% or less isn't
uncommon, meaning at a 25% water-to-water recovery, it takes 20 gallons of
feedwater to produce 5 gallons of permeate. The low recovery isn't due to
the pressure, but rather because you have no pump to recycle the water.
Recovery is independent of pressure (to dispel a common misconception).
A "typical" Active RO system uses a positive displacement pump (in smaller
systems, it's usually a vane pump similar to a carbonator pump) to
pressurize the membrane feedwater. These run at high pressures, up to 250
psi on the inlet side of the membrane, and the permeate is usually at
atmospheric pressure. The pressure is constant, and optimized for the
membrane polymer and configuration.
The recovery on this type of system is limited by the quality and ionic
content of the feedwater. One "selects" a recovery so as to keep the
retentate ion concentration low enough that no precipitation occurs in the
membrane. With proper pre-treatment, and depending on the ions involved,
recoveries of 75% or better are possible (meaning it takes 7.5 gallons of
feedwater to make 5 gallons of permeate). You "select" a recovery by
adjusting the ratio of retentate waste flow and retentate recycle flow.
This means the retentate (aka: concentrate or reject) flow is recycled to
the suction side of the pump, so that most of the water flow in the membrane
is in an endless loop. A percentage of the flow is wasted through a valve
to drain. Whatever you set this flow to, compared to the permeate flow,
figures into your actual recovery. This _entirely_ depends on the membrane
(which might impose certain limits due to compaction), and the impurities in
the pretreated feedwater.
In any RO system, the permeation rate of ionic contaminants is essentially
constant, regardless of the system pressure. What that means is that
calcium, sulfate, carbonate, chloride, etc. are passing through the
membrane, each at a rate that's proportional to their ozmotic pressure,
which is related to the ion's size and charge, and the concentration on the
permeate side. Water, which is slightly polar, passes much more readily
than an ion. If we increase the pressure, the flow of water increases, but
the flow rate of ions _does not change_. This is important, because a
passive RO system operating at an average pressure well below 50 psi is not
going to produce water anywhere near as low as the conductivity of an active
RO system operating at more than 5 times that pressure. My experience
(speaking as one who used to be in the business of designing and building
ultra high purity systems) is that a typical "home" RO system produces water
around 70-100 microSiemens. A well designed active RO system should produce
water at about 10 microSiemens (or about 0.1 megaOhm/cm) or better. This
water approaches the quality of water produced by a good distillation unit.
Home RO doesn't even come close.
Now, it's important to realize that some water systems--especially ones on
wells or old municipal distribution systems--might have impurities that are
problematic for brewing. If so, and assuming other treatment options aren't
feasible, then active or inactive RO treatment is probably necessary.
Manganese green sand can effectively remove iron, activated carbon can
remove chlorine (though it introduces bacterial contamination as a side
effect), and so on.
Water with very low alkalinity, will need acidification, I suppose.
Certainly to duplicate certain styles you might need to adjust the brewing
water. But in my mind, it's remains to be seen whether a home RO system can
produce water of that quality. Home RO systems produce decent drinkable
water, but it's not all that extraordinarily pure. Lots of municipal water
systems deliver water of that ionic quality, some are even better.
Yes, RO systems waste water, and a "home" RO system wastes more than a good
one does. But since every glass or two of the resulting beer eventually
results in a toilet flushing somewhere, I don't think it's much of an issue.
;^)
By the way, personally, I neither treat my water (Puget Sound water is
pretty decent by itself, and I think it makes excellent beer by itself), nor
do I generally bother with adjusting the mineral content to match a specific
style...but then my wall isn't littered with ribbons and gold medals,
either! ;^)
Regards,
Mike Sharp
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 6 Jan 2003 16:17:32 -0500
From: "Steve Alexander" <steve-alexander@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: re dry yeaat
Helomech says ...
>Actually DRY YEAST is just fine for brewing certain beers.
>You just need the right one, and to make a starter with it.
To the contrary - dry yeasts are the only ones where you can bypass the
starter and pitch after rehydrating.
-S
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 6 Jan 2003 13:21:20 -0800
From: BrewingTechniques <brewtech@earthlink.net>
Subject: Update from BrewingTechniques
I just wanted to update the online community about status of
BrewingTechniques back issue shipments. All back issue orders to
confirmed past subscribers were shipped out from Eugene, Oregon, on
or before December 23.
I apologize for the delay. The issues were ready to go in August,
but Consumer's Edge Network, whom I had contracted to handle back
issues, failed to follow through. I took things over personally in
November, and with the help of my son got them out as quickly as I
was able.
Important: If you are a past subscriber and have an unsatisfied
claim, please contact me directly at brewtech@earthlink.net. I have
the full database and can search all records and resolve any
questions.
If you have received confirmation from me by email and have not yet
received your issues, please give it another week. If they still
haven't arrived by next week, please contact me at
brewtech@earthlink.net.
I suspended the processing of paid orders (did not collect funds)
until I could satisfy the "make-good" obligations. Now that these
obligations have been satisfied, I am resuming the processing of back
issue orders (archive and ordering information at
http://brewingtechniques.com). If you placed an order and have not
yet heard from me, please re-contact me about that now, either
directly or through the web site. All proceeds of all sales go
directly to the honorable dissolution of BrewingTechniques' remaining
affairs.
I want to thank the brewing community for its ongoing support,
especially the many individuals who have written to register their
appreciation of BT and to express personal encouragement. I really
appreciate that.
Cheers,
Stephen Mallery
BrewingTechniques
http://brewingtechniques.com
brewtech@earthlink.net
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 6 Jan 2003 14:45:47 -0800
From: "Brian Schar" <schar@cardica.com>
Subject: Mash tun for 10 gallon batches
I am a long-time extract and partial-mash brewer. I invested in a 15-gallon
brewpot and outdoor cooker about a year ago when I moved to a rental unit
with a crummy electric stove that wasn't powerful enough to get 3 gallons of
wort boiling. I would like to step up and start making some good all-grain
beer. My problem is that I'm not sure what to use for a mash tun.
The consensus on HBD seems to be that the 10-gallon Gott coolers are the
thing to use for all-grain brewing. However, I'm not going to be able to
fit enough grain in one of those for a 10-gallon batch of beer. From what I
hear, the Gott coolers hold anywhere from 17-25 pounds of grain--not enough
grain for any but the lightest beer styles. Ideally, I'd like to be able to
get some kind of cooler, screw in the Zymico fitting and Bazooka ( to avoid
messing with the false bottom), and mash. Any recommendations? Or should I
resign myself to continuing to partial mash, but with less extract and more
grain?
Brian Schar
Belmont, CA
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 06 Jan 2003 16:43:53 -0800
From: jakem1@ix.netcom.com
Subject: Coconut Cup
Howdy from the members of M.A.S.H. in chilly Miami!
Just a reminder that it is almost time for this year's (and 6th annual)
Coconut Cup homebrew competition. Along with opening up the contest to all
BJCP categories, we will also be again doing our special COCONUT BREW
category. Judging will be on Feb. 1 & 2. If you're interested, and we're
hoping you are, check for details, entry forms, bottle labels, and guidelines
at: http://hbd.org/mash/cococup.htm. If you're in the area-or want to be-we
can always use more judges. Need help or information? Contact me at
jakem1@ix.netcom.com.
Brrr, Jake Miller, Competition Organizer
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 6 Jan 2003 18:55:40 -0600
From: "Helomech" <Helomech@neb.rr.com>
Subject: Re: re dry yeaat
- ----- Original Message -----
From: "Steve Alexander" <steve-alexander@worldnet.att.net>
To: <Helomech@neb.rr.com>
Cc: "Posting Address Only - No Requests" <homebrew@hbd.org>
Sent: Monday, January 06, 2003 3:17 PM
Subject: re dry yeaat
> Helomech says ...
>
> >Actually DRY YEAST is just fine for brewing certain beers.
> >You just need the right one, and to make a starter with it.
>
> To the contrary - dry yeasts are the only ones where you can bypass the
> starter and pitch after rehydrating.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Yes you sure can, but if you rehydrate it and add some cooled sterile wort a
few hours before you need to pitch it, you start with a bigger batch of
cells and get a swifter / better fermentation (in my opinion).
You can also just sprinkle dry yeast on top of your wort and wait 3 days for
it to start a decent fermentation (such as the instructions that come with
garbage beer kits, like Mr. Beer).
It's all about better beer, dry yeast works well and costs lees for many
recipes, I also use prepared slants and smack packs for other recipes.
By the way, next time you want to answer something I post - do it in the
group.
That way the discussion gets carried to where it can do the most good -
other brewers.
Helomech
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 6 Jan 2003 19:35:13 -0600
From: "Kenneth Peters" <kpeters6@cox.net>
Subject: Beer Consulting revisited
Gee, what a great resource this is! I have received numerous private emails
discussing my post of 5 Jan proposing that someone (or some business) provide
beer consulting services to home brewers. Several very generous folks even
offered to help me out if I would send them my problem brew. The response
greatly exceeded my expectations. Thanks to all. I did receive an email from
an individual who has been considering doing this very thing. He is a brewer
trained in the UK in the 70's and now teaches Fermentation Science at a Texas
University, operates a consulting firm aimed at commercial breweries and has
been active in the home brewing arena for many years. Here is a partial quote
of what he proposes to offer:
"Since this topic has come up several times, I am thinking of offering
the taste panel service again for $ 10 for home brewers. I have a panel of
trained tasters and I am a National BJCP judge so this is the real thing. What
do you think------- "
I really have no idea of how many others might use such a service, but I would
be interested. I wonder what the national interest would be? Thanks again, Ken
Peters
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #4139, 01/07/03
*************************************
-------
