Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #4154
HOMEBREW Digest #4154 Sat 25 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: Water Heater Element Mounting - Ouch! (Robert S Wallace)
RE: "Soft" wheat?!!! (Brian Lundeen)
Re: No carbonation in first batch of HB ("Asher Reed")
re:water/grist ratio + ("Steve Alexander")
Re: Diode Installation for RIMS ("Jim Yeagley")
Yeast Question (Chuck Doucette)
Yeast Controversy ("Shawn E Lupold, Ph.D")
LBSH Chatter ("mfrench518@earthlink.net")
Corny keg o-ring replacement (=?iso-8859-1?q?Joris=20Dallaire?=)
re: Pink Lager ("The Artist Formerly Known As Kap'n Salty")
Evaporation Rate (MOREY Dan)
Re: question about starters (Demonick)
OT: Charging People for Air (Jonathan Royce)
Re: question about starters (Jeff Renner)
Re: Used 3 Gallon (Jeff Renner)
various topics...NEW, now with no complaints! (Marc Sedam)
Colonial Brewery Co., Cold Spring MN (ensmingr)
Re: business ethics (Robin Griller)
starters an such ("greg man")
Re: No carbonation in first batch of HB (Teresa Knezek)
Yeast book (Arnaud VIEZ)
Is efficiency affected by mash water:grain ratio? ("Lou King")
More LHBS Chatter ("Chris Eidson")
*
* 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: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 23:25:14 -0600
From: Robert S Wallace <rwallace@iastate.edu>
Subject: Re: Water Heater Element Mounting - Ouch!
At 12:22 AM 1/24/2003 -0500, "Dan Listermann" <dan@listermann.com> wrote:
>Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 09:00:06 -0500
>Subject: Water Heater Element Mounting - Ouch!
>
> David Hooper <dhooper@everestkc.net> Writes:
>
><Dan, can you go into a little more detail how you set this up? Did you
><drill holes in the sides of the pot and then install the elements?
>
>I had a welder cut holes for 1" half couplings to be welded to the pot. A
>word of warning. Most couplings are NPT. Heater elements appear to be
>NSPT ( national straight pipe thread.) NPT will screw on to NSPT, but it
>can be a tight fit. NSPT seals on a gasket and must go in deep enough to
>do this. Sometimes NPT will get too tight before sealing. I had to buy a
>1" NSPT pipe tap. Tapping, even retapping, stainless steel that large is
>not easy.
>I have not found a good source for NSPT stainless couplings.
>
>Dan Listermann
I also am building an electric HLT (controlled by a
thermocouple-sensed Omega temp. controller) and had the same problem of
finding the correct fitting.
Dan is correct that water heater elements are straight threaded
(not tapered). My local plumbing guru (I do essentially all of my own
plumbing and he knows me well) told me I needed a 1 inch stainless (304)
MERCHANT COUPLING (equals NSPT) - it wouldn't matter if the coupling were
a half or full coupling, since I'm having my mig welder fix the keg wall at
the center of the coupling; (I drill my own holes in the keg). It took my
plumbing retailer a few calls to three different suppliers (even here in
the midwest!) but he located the correct part within a day, and three days
after my initial request the piece was in my hand!! Cost was about $ 8.50
plus $ 2.00 freight. I don't know who the supplier is, but will make an
attempt to find out...
As soon as I got the part, I tried every water heater element on
the rack in the store that wasn't blister-packed (about 7) and each and
every one threaded perfectly, bottoming out on the neoprene gasket. I'll
now get a few more holes drilled in the keg (I'm also installing 1/4" NPT
stainless couplings for thermocouple and sight glass ports) and will
shortly visit my welder to finally complete the electric HLT.
Good luck finding the correct coupling - it CAN be done, but like
many things, it's not what you know......it's who you know....find a good
plumbing supplier and your problems may be solved.
Cheers,
Rob Wallace
Robert S. Wallace, Ph.D.
Associate Professor of Botany
Department of Botany - Iowa State University
Ames, Iowa 50011-1020 U.S.A.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 00:04:53 -0600
From: Brian Lundeen <BLundeen@rrc.mb.ca>
Subject: RE: "Soft" wheat?!!!
Jeff Renner mocks my manliness when he writes:
> You can grind soft wheat pretty easily in a Corona mill.
I can't comment on using a Corona mill, but I thought I would drop a nut
trying to hand crank this stuff through my Valley Mill. Needless to say, the
next Wit project will wait until I have motorized my mill. Of course, I
didn't purchase my wheat through a trustworthy LHBS, but a health food
store, instead. It is entirely possible a conversation along the lines of
the following took place:
Store employee: I got a guy wanting to buy a sack of soft white wheat.
Grain sales rep: Yeah, I can get you wheat.
Employee: But is it soft white wheat?
Rep: (pause) Yeah, sure, the label can say that.
Of course, that's just being cynical. Surely a health food store wouldn't
provide misleading information about a product it sells. Which reminds me,
I'll have to stop in there again soon. I'm running low on gingko biloba and
powdered shark's cartilage. ;-)
Cheers
Brian
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 07:40:32 +0000
From: "Asher Reed" <clvwpn5@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: No carbonation in first batch of HB
Don't worry about it, this is not unusual -- give it 2 more weeks and try it
again, you should notice some bubbles by then... Moving the beer to a
location that is a little warmer won't hurt -- I'd say, if after a month it
is still flat, you might need to rehydrate some dry yeast and add a few
drops to each bottle -- or a pinch of dry yeast to each bottle. It is no
doubt tedious uncapping, adding yeast, and recapping, but it works most of
the time and is better than drinking flat beer or dumping it down the drain.
Good luck.
>I'm really new to home brewing (I've been enjoying beer for a long time,
>just not brewing it). I've got a couple of questions I can't fine the
>answers to in any of my brewing books... I brewed my first batch (5 gallons
>of malt extract-based Brown Ale) around new years and bottled on Jan
>12,2003. OG=1.048, FG=1.018, boiled 3/4 cup corn sugar with 2 cups of water
>for 10 minutes and gently stirred it into the beer. It's been stored at
>63-66F since then. Just couldn't wait so I chilled and poped a bottle on
>Jan. 19 (7 days later) and no carbonation had developed. Did I just not
>wait long enough? Should it be stored a little warmer (68-70F) to get the
>yeast active? The beer looked very clear when I racked it into my bottling
>bucket. Did enough yeast get into the bottles? I'd really appreciate any
>ideas anyone has, especially since I have a batch of Pilsner brewing right
>now... and will be wanting to bottle it soon...
>Thanks, Tom. From Paradise, in the foothills outside of Chico, CA.
>
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 03:38:12 -0500
From: "Steve Alexander" <steve-alexander@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: re:water/grist ratio +
Del, (Nathaniel P. Lansing) writes ...
<<
[water infusion may be used to achieve mashout so]
The net effect is a very dilute mash
probably exceeding the 6:1 ratio in the foam rest study I had
referenced.
>>
Del - you are confusing two unrelated arguments..
1/ The total amount of water that passes thru a grist bed should be limited
to around 8X as an upper bound to prevent excess leeching of lipids,
polyphenols silicic acid etc.
2/ 6X water used in the very thin mash of the experiment you cited will
certainly produce different results than any real-world infusion mash at
2.5X. Just because *some* mashouts are diluted (tho' not to comparable 6:1
level) doesn't mean the mashouts begin with the same level of foam
potential. The very different thicknesses during the low mash insure the
two worts will be different.
If you'd like me to repeat why each of these is so and recite the quotation
and papers let's do it OFFLINE.
<<
But lets look at the the "suggestion" that we stay slightly below an 8:1
water/grist ratio [..]
>>
You've misread the statement.
You should add water to the boiler and NOT oversparge whenever you are
making a low gravity beer. You could run all your water through the
gristbed but then you'd damage the beer flavor.
When making a high gravity CAP (1.062 - really?) or a barleywine you of
course use less water than 8X. No one ever said you must sparge till
you've used 8X water/grist. It's an upper bound.
<<
At a cursory glance any rule as too grist/water ratio comes apart.
This is why I always gripe loudly when some sort of rule is put out
as some sort of gospel that must be followed.
>>
Nothing came apart but misinterpretation of what was clearly written. You
can't fault the rules when you didn't bother to read them or apply them
correctly.
<<
It's something that one must figure out by the
by the "seat of one's pants"
>>
The problem with doing things by the seat of your pants is that the results
generally belong in the toilet. The formulae for calculating water use have
been posted dozens of times and the 8X upper bound is trivially easy to
include. It's rudimentary algebra.
<<
So what's the problem with suggesting people try
to reach at least 163 F before sparging if they want to improve foam-
stand.
>>
Nothing at all. But you repeatedly implied that no-mashout beers were
lacking because they neglected the 163F/71C foam rest. They really aren't
lacking compared to other conventionally produced beers.
<<
Now, this part is only slightly argumentative on my part, partly real
curiosity; is it enzymatic? [...] Is the glycoprotein
formation from larger saccharides and peptides an interrupted
Amadori rearrangement?
>>
The JASC paper you referenced in 2000 suggested the ~71C foam rest was
enzymatic and from the glycoprotein molecular weights reported these are not
related to any of the Maillard proposed reactions.
<<
And, I thought I had mentioned them actually measuring foam with
shaumhaeftvermoegen results at 68C 140cm3, results at
71 C 160cm3.
>>
There are two accepted methods of measuring foam - NIBEM and Ross&Clark.
Both give results in a sort of collapse-time in seconds, not cm3. I
interpret "shaumhaeftvermoegen" as a (definitely misspelled) term meaning
foam-adhesion (or maybe retention) which sounds right - but the results of
140cc is not reasonable. You'll have to understand the method of
measurement to really even understand what the paper is claiming they found.
You apparently don't know.
This all begs the real question did they compare foam against a
conventional mashed control.
-S
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 08:14:09 -0500
From: "Jim Yeagley" <jyeag@core.com>
Subject: Re: Diode Installation for RIMS
Subject: Diode Installation for RIMS
Uh, sir, step away from the RIMS and put down the soldering iron.........
and while you're at it, put that diode back in your pocket!
/removes tongue from cheek
Seriously Martin, while I can't proclaim to be an expert, and I can offer no
"right way," I don't think a diode would be the proper choice of component
to use. Maybe a resistor, but not a diode. Again, I could be wrong, but
I'm guessing a diode would create a 60hz buzzer out of your heating element.
Your calculations for resistance and power look right.
Heatsink? A big resounding YES, albeit to the proper component. You are
expecting this component to be able to dissipate at least part of the power
meant to come off your element, so there -will- be heat generated.
If you have an electric oven, it wouldn't be a bad idea to pull it away from
the wall and check out the schematics that are probably plastered to the
back panel. You can then see how they handle the temp control, and follow
that lead.
Sorry to not have a specific answer and/or recommendation, but at least
maybe I have added enough doubt?
Jim Yeagley
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 05:14:49 -0800 (PST)
From: Chuck Doucette <cdoucette61@yahoo.com>
Subject: Yeast Question
I am looking for some advice/help on culturing a
starter from a bottle
of Paulaner HefeWeisin (sp?). I fell in love with this
beer recently
and am going to attempt to clone it. I would like to
use the same yeast
that Paulaner uses, assuming that is the same yeast to
be found in the
bottle. Is this possible? Or does Paulaner use a
conditioning yeast
other than the one used for promary fermentation?
TIA for any help.
Chuck Doucette
O'Fallon, IL.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 09:32:54 -0500
From: "Shawn E Lupold, Ph.D" <lupolds@jhmi.edu>
Subject: Yeast Controversy
My two cents on yeast banks.
It's difficult to make two trips to the LHBS in a brewing week. I don't
have a grain mill, or space to mount one, so I like to buy and mill my
grain as close to brewing day as possible. This usually doesn't give
enough time to build a nice yeast starter. With the yeast bank, I can
reliably grow a nice big yeast starter and have fresh grains ready to go
on Saturday morning. Yeast banks also provide more variety, including
yeast cloned from bottles of your favorite commercial beers. This
provides the freedom to experimentally mix yeast for fermentation or to
use separate bottling yeast without the hassle of repeated 40 mile
drives to the LHBS.
As far as cost, yeast banks don't really save money. They save time.
Believe me; I spend plenty of money at the LHBS without the yeasties.
Shawn
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 09:34:40 -0500
From: "mfrench518@earthlink.net" <mfrench518@earthlink.net>
Subject: LBSH Chatter
>Gee Mark (or is it Mark... ), does that mean we all should quit brewing
beer
>and giving it to our friends... I'd hate to think that I'm taking money out
>of my local retailer's pockets, and depriving Anheuser Busch profits that
>drive their R&D and new product development... bummer...
Gee Bob, that's elegant, eloquent and smooth like silk. That's exactly what
I'm saying. Nobody should brew beer but A-B, not me, not you, not anybody.
I have full faith and confidence that you'll find a unique and creative use
for the Fermenator. ;^)
I respect Brian's rabbit argument - at least there's some thought behind
it. Brian, you're right, the argument that the yeast is their property
would probably not stand up in court. Most of us, though (even in NYC)
don't live in the fantasy world proscribed by the courts - we live in the
real world. Let's take your assumption that Chris White's lab is basically
just a bunch of guys pulling yeast out of beer bottles, cleaning it up and
growing pure strains for sale. They do this for a profit. In the real
world, White Labs has to turn a profit, or cut product lines or employees
until they are profitable. I like having eight English ale strains
available with a mouse click, and can't afford the time or money to fly
around England harvesting strains. If this business is unprofitable, you
will find that over the long haul our selection of yeast will be narrowed
down to the best selling strains, and the Platinum series and other
esoteric strains will disappear. This is my point - pay the man for his
work. I guess that even after 15 years in NYC, I still believe that there's
no free ride - you want quality and selection, you pay for it. Or you get
government yeast. Maybe it's just the petulant Texan in me. :^D
As far as supporting your local home brew shop - no argument there - you
basically just restated my premise. Anyway, I think this has been beaten
to death - have a great weekend and good brewing!
Mark (not Mark)
- --------------------------------------------------------------------
mail2web - Check your email from the web at
http://mail2web.com/ .
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 09:48:41 -0500 (EST)
From: =?iso-8859-1?q?Joris=20Dallaire?= <jorisdallaire@yahoo.ca>
Subject: Corny keg o-ring replacement
Hello,
One small question. I have to replace the o-ring on
the gas inlet of some of my cornys. I know my local
bar supplies vendor has some, but i wonder if these
can be replaced by standard o-rings found at hardware
stores? Thank you.
Joris Dallaire
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 08:59:26 -0600
From: "The Artist Formerly Known As Kap'n Salty" <mikey@swampgas.com>
Subject: re: Pink Lager
In hbd #4153 Hayes Antony <HayesA@aforbes.co.za> wrote:
> I poured a lager saved over from my phenolic period the other day. It had
> developed pink tinges. It was a nice pale straw colour a year ago. Does the
> colour change perhaps give a clue as to what was causing the phenol taste in
> my beer (4-vinyl guiacol was the best guess)?
I guess I _could_ bore you a lot of technical jargon and details of
the organic chemistry involved in the transition, but I think the
direct approach would perhaps be better in this case:
Your beer is gay.
My guess is that the long period of time spent isolated in the keg
gave rise to introspection and self-discovery. Try to be supportive
and accepting.
- -- taFkaks
====
Teleoperate a roving mobile robot from the web:
http://www.swampgas.com/robotics/rover.html
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 09:18:43 -0600
From: MOREY Dan <dan.morey@cnh.com>
Subject: Evaporation Rate
Bill Tobler asks:
How do these big breweries keep the evaporation rate down below 5%? They
must have a partially closed system. My boiloff is up around 15%. That's a
good rolling boil uncovered.
First, it is a misconception that evaporation rate is proportional to
volume. If you only started with a cup of wort, would you expect over 3/4
of a cup after your normal rolling boil? I would expect to see a dry kettle
with some heat damage. My normal evaporation rate 1.35 gal/hr. I have
measured this several times. I have a kettle loss of 1/2 gallon, so for a
one hour boil, I start with 6.85 gallons of wort for my boil. This gives an
evaporation percentage of nearly 20%. For a ten gallon batch however, this
percentage drops to about 11%. I definitely don't recommend using a percent
evaporation constant for recipe formulation especially if you vary batch
sizes.
Evaporation is a process of mass transfer, similar to heat transfer but
instead of being driven by a temperature difference, it is driven by the
water vapor pressure difference at the surface of the wort to the water
vapor pressure of the atmosphere. So evaporation rate is primarily
influenced by kettle geometry, local humidity, and elevation. My
observations suggest that the energy transferred to the wort is also an
influence, however this is usually controlled to achieve the "proper" boil.
The equation for evaporation in a column at constant pressure and
temperature is:
N = (C*Dab/L)*ln((1-xal)/1-xa0))
where,
C is the total molar concentration of "a" (water) and "b" air.
Dab is mass diffusivity
L is the path length (surface of wort to the top of the kettle)
xa0 is the concentration of water vapor at the wort surface.
xal is the concentration of water vapor in the local atmosphere.
Since wort boiling is not a constant temperature process (temperature
difference between wort and air), the constants C, Dab, will be functions of
position (height above the wort). We cannot use the above equation to
directly solve for the evaporation rate because C and Dab are not constant,
but the form of the solution will be the same so we can conclude:
1. Increase the head space in the boil kettle will decrease evaporation.
2. Increased humidity will decrease the evaporation rate.
While I studied mass transfer, I do not use it at my job. There is probably
a chemical engineer out there that can give a better explanation. I
recommend you measure your evaporation loss over several batches and
calculate a volume rate per hour and use this for recipe formulation instead
of using X% loss.
Cheers,
Dan Morey
Club B.A.B.B.L.E. http://www.hbd.org/babble
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 07:20:14 -0800
From: Demonick <demonick@zgi.com>
Subject: Re: question about starters
>What if I made a 1/2 to 3/4 gallon starter an poured it into a sanitized 6
>gallon carboy.
This will work. The headspace is no problem. The carboy will remain
sanitized for 3 days.
The only problem is the starter beer. It is difficult to decant the
starter liquid out of the carboy. Your carefully crafted grain bill
and wort will be "contaminated" by the 3/4 gallon starter. For a 5 gallon
batch and a 3/4 gallon starter, the starter would be 15% of the final
volume. This would have the same impact as 1.5 lbs of grain in a 10 lb
grain bill - a quite significant contribution to the final brew's
character.
If you have a beer fridge, you can cool the starter and let the yeast
flocculate and cake. Pouring off the liquid portion would be easier in
this case.
Cheers!
Domenick Venezia
Venezia & Company, LLC
Maker of PrimeTab
(206) 782-1152 phone
(206) 782-6766 fax orders
demonick at zgi dot com
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 08:01:25 -0500 (EST)
From: Jonathan Royce <jtroyce@earthlink.net>
Subject: OT: Charging People for Air
Ronald La Borde said:
Actually, I think that greedy people would charge for
the air we breathe if they could only find a way.
To which I say:
Actually, I think Nike has already accomplished this. They
replaced the foam & rubber that used to be the sole of your
running shoe with air, then doubled the retail price. People
ate it up. Got to love capitalism. ;-)
-Jon
Woodbury Brewing Co.
www.woodburybrewingco.com
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 10:49:42 -0500
From: Jeff Renner <jeffrenner@comcast.net>
Subject: Re: question about starters
"greg man" <dropthebeer@hotmail.com> asks:
>What if I made a 1/2 to 3/4 gallon starter an poured it into a sanitized 6
>gallon carboy. Waited three days an then pitched the wort on top of the
>starter?
That would work great. All that extra air is good for the growing yeast.
The only problem I would have is that I don't like to include the
starter "beer" in my good beer. I make my starters with dry malt
extract at 1.030 and a pinch of nutrient, and aerate. That makes
good yeast, not good beer.
> The thing that bugs me about this idea is the thought of all that extra
>head space, could it harm the starter? More air can't be a bad thing right?
>And after It ferments the co2 would be like a blanket on top of the starter
>protecting the beer, Because co2 weighs more than ambient air is that
>correct?
More air is good for multiplying yeast (but bad for beer flavor).
The CO2 will actually mix with the air in the carboy due to air
currents (from evolved CO2 and temperature fluctuations) and Brownian
movement over the period of time we are talking about, so I think
there will be some O2 in contact with the surface of the starter.
But, as I said, that's a good thing. You could even encourage this
by taking the stopper out of the carboy and "pouring" the CO2 out.
The less than sterile air that replaces it shouldn't be a problem if
you don't have a contamination problem in your house. If you do,
well, you already had 5.5 gallons of that air in the carboy to start,
what's another few gallons?
> Problem number two is of course will the fermenter still be sanitized
>after 3 days?
Should be no problem as long as you don't have contaminants running
around and you practice normal sanitary practices.
Here's what I would do, though, and have done in the past - make your
starter in the carboy but wait until it stops and the yeast has
settled out, then decant the starter "beer." Then run your chilled
wort in on top of the yeast.
Jeff
- --
Jeff Renner in Ann Arbor, Michigan USA, JeffRenner@comcast.net
"One never knows, do one?" Fats Waller, American Musician, 1904-1943
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 10:56:44 -0500
From: Jeff Renner <jeffrenner@comcast.net>
Subject: Re: Used 3 Gallon
"Berggren, Stefan" <stefan_berggren@trekbike.com> asks:
>I am on the look out for a used 3 gallon keg(ball lock) or a decently priced
>new 3 gallon keg. Does anyone have any leads on
>these elusive little monsters?
Adventures in Homebrewing http://homebrewing.org/ in Dearborn, MI has
pinlock ones for $40. They mail order.
I got one that's in nearly new shape and love it. The rest of my
kegs are ball lock, so I just bit the bullet and bought a set gas-in
and beer-out pinlock fittings.
Jeff
- --
Jeff Renner in Ann Arbor, Michigan USA, JeffRenner@comcast.net
"One never knows, do one?" Fats Waller, American Musician, 1904-1943
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 11:14:59 -0500
From: Marc Sedam <marc_sedam@unc.edu>
Subject: various topics...NEW, now with no complaints!
I'm feeling a bit like Khalil Gibran today.
ON YEAST STRAINS...
I did see the comment about "R&D" and found it amusing. There certainly
is some "D" involved in the yeast banking process, i.e. cleaning up the
strain, measuring attenuation, making sure it's the "right" strain, etc.
Not much "R" though. I gave two strains to Chris because I correctly
thought that he would be interested in selling a new product. But an
"exclusive" strain of yeast is only exclusive until another yeast
rancher gives it out. These are not genetically modified strains and
are really more tangible property than intellectual property.
ON YEAST STRAINS AND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY (Disclaimer: I'm not an
attorney but manage the intellectual property assets of a major research
university, so I am at least paid on the expectation that I know what
I'm doing.)...
The issue at hand is the trademark that any of the individual yeast
suppliers use to identify the yeasts, not the reculturing and supply of
slants of the yeast in question. If your lab is "offering for sale"
WLP833, for example, you can be asked to stop selling the yeast under
someone else's name. It's the same reason why the Ayinger yeast is
called "German Bock Yeast", as WL doesn't want anyone from Ayinger
coming down and saying that WL is profiting off their brewery's name.
It's a trademark issue, not a patent issue. The existing strains of
yeast available are not patented nor are they patentable. Life forms
can be patented (a fairly landmark IP case) but only if their creation
"could not have been made but for man's intervention" or some such
phrase. At it's simplest, you can patent a life form that you've
changed to have useful properties (like a bacteria which can digest
petroleum) but not one whose properties you've simply observed. You can
patent unadulterated genes from life forms which you observe to have
useful properties, but that's another story. Oh, and no one has
patented the "human genome". **FAUX-LAWYER MODE ON** Celera Genomics
tried to patent DNA fragments during their process of mapping the
genome, but the US Patent and Trademark Office ceased to issue patents
on these fragments (called expression tagged sequences, or ESTs) since
the applications were filed without having any idea what use, if any,
the ESTs had...thereby failing to be patentable on both novelty and
indefiniteness rejections. **FAUX-LAWYER MODE OFF**
My $0.02 on the issue is that yeast banking/sharing is totally OK as
nearly all of these strains would not have even been able to be offered
for sale if an industrious brewer didn't keep them alive and provide
them, directly or indirectly, to the yeast distributors. FWIW, I think
the price of fresh yeast is totally reasonable considering that you
NEVER hear a complaint about a contaminated batch.
ON THE LENGTH OF THE BREW DAY...
I've never really understood why it takes people so long to brew. If
it's taking you 6-7 hours during the brewday, you probably don't have
the right equipment to make your life easier. Assuming I crush the
grain and measure out the water prior to the actual brewing day (taking
maybe 20 minutes) I can brew up a 10 gallon batch of all-grain beer in
just over four hours. If you have the money (and that's a big
assumption, I know) here are three purchases that can shave literally
hours off your brew day.
1) Cajun cooker-- Boiling wort takes POWER and no kitchen stove is
capable of doing the job at a more than barely passable level. I have a
15,000 BTU gas burner on my brand new kitchen stove and it took me
nearly an hour to bring six gallons of water to a boil. Any cajun
cooker can do the job in about 15-20 minutes. You can find these for
$30-40 at any mega-hardware store, sometimes even with a nice (and
perfectly safe) aluminum brewpot.
2) Pump-- Many online HB shops carry the mag drive pumps. I asked for
one for Christmas one year thinking it would be cool. Now it's
indispensable. I let the mash sit for 30 minutes then hook the pump up
to recirculate the wort in the mash. Within three minutes the flow is
free of particulates and within 15 minutes the wort is crystal clear.
Recirculation during mashing helps to clarify the wort, maintain a
consistent mash temperature, and permits direct firing of the tun (if
you're so inclined). I usually run off the wort at a half gallon per
minute and regularly hit 81% efficiency, and higher if it's a decoction.
My wort is so clear that I can see the bottom of my 7 gallon brewpot
when making a CAP. The pumps are expensive ($120-150, inclusive of
fittings and hose), but so very worth it. I also use the pump to pump
hot wort through the CFC. To be accurate the pump pulls the wort
through the chiller first, so only cooled wort reaches the pump head.
3) Counterflow chiller-- I know that there are many immersion chiller
fans, but for my time and water-savings dollar the CFC rules. This is
especially true for 10 gallon batches. When chilling I probably run the
pump (see above) at about a gallon per minute and the cooling water at a
slightly higher rate. I rarely use more than 15 gallons of cooling
water total, the first five of which (the really HOT water) is recycled
for cleaning the rest of the equipment, with the remainder used to water
my trees. I think my CFC was $70.
In the periods that the mash is mashing and the wort is boiling you have
about 2 hours of true "down time." During the mash I sanitize all of the
fermentation equipment and get the yeast ready. During the boil I clean
out the mash tun and any other equipment used. It's a busy four hours,
but I usually have no more than an additional half hour of clean up
afterwards. I should say that although I do now have a dedicated area
to brewing complete with water and electrical sources, I could do it in
nearly the same amount of time when I was in a cramped apartment.
Cheers all!
- --
Marc Sedam
Chapel Hill, NC
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 12:19:01 -0500
From: ensmingr@twcny.rr.com
Subject: Colonial Brewery Co., Cold Spring MN
Greetings,
A relative, knowing I like beer, gave me a Christmas gift, "12
Greatest Brews of the World". I think it was purchased from
Walmart or some such store. The beer labels say they were made by
Colonial Brewery Company of Cold Spring, MN. The bottles are very
nice, with attractive labels and embossed images of grains and
hop cones.
That said, all the beers are very disappointing. There was
negligible difference -- in color or taste -- between the Cream
Ale, Amber Ale, Bock, and Brown Ale. I haven't yet tried the
stout, wheat beer, and several others. Although I'm a BJCP judge,
I'm not a beer-style-nazi. I simply believe that the advertising
of Colonial Brewery Company is horribly misleading. The
accompanying brochure for this product says it was developed in
consultation with Dr. Joseph Owades of the Center for Brewing
Studies, Sonoma, CA. Owades is credited as the inventor of "lite
beer". He now seems to have invented "lite cream ale", "lite
brown ale", "lite bock", etc. What's next for Owades, "lite
imperial stout" and "lite barley wine"?
My advice: Stay away from the "Twelve Greatest Brews of the
World". They're not.
Cheerio!
Peter A. Ensminger
Syracuse, NY
http://hbd.org/ensmingr
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 12:46:57 -0500
From: Robin Griller <rgriller@chass.utoronto.ca>
Subject: Re: business ethics
Hi all,
Eric Theiner says that it would be unethical for him to force someone to
do business with him. I couldn't disagree with him more: if, for example,
African Americans and Jews are excluded from 'doing business' by, as has
happened, banks, golf clubs, etc., then it is highly unethical for anyone
to *not* force said businesses to stop such racist practices. I most
certainly would favour forcing businesses that exclude people from custom
on racial grounds to smarten up if they can't be pushed into bankruptcy.
Robin
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 13:25:55 -0500
From: "greg man" <dropthebeer@hotmail.com>
Subject: starters an such
Wow my idea must have been a hit, I got a lot of posts!!! I'm gonna try
this with my next batch. I would suppose the greatest advantage to doing it
this way is you could now make starters for an accurate pitching rate.
According to ray daniels that would be 1.2 gallons for an optimal starter.
(with a 50ml smack pack). I don't know if his numbers are correct because
this Is something I'm still learning about.
My normal practice is 1/2 gallon for ale's an 3/4 for lagers. This seems
to work pretty good with out any extra long lag times.
Now some of you mentioned decanting the young beer off the yeast. I've
heard this before but was wondering if it really matters all that much? Will
it impact the flavor of the beer negatively in some way?
After all If you pour the starter in that's more beer for you :)
But it does make up percentage wise 10-20% of the final beer.....
I guess if you do pour it in you can no longer call it an all-grain beer.
Actually I used to make starters out of the grain that I would eventually
be brewing with. That worked better than anything I have ever done, but it
is time consuming an I got lazy. For those of us that make 1 qt ready
starters I say go for all-grain. These kind of starters have much more
nutrients in the wort. An my lag times from those beers was sometimes only
2-4 hours!!!!!!!!!(for ales). Seems like the yeast got of to a better start
that way, as we all know extract is cut with some sugars.
Anyway thanks for the posts Guy's I'll try this idea with the new
party-gyle batch I'm doing. I'll let you all know how it comes out!!!
" Brewing is much like painting. People may enjoy a work of art, but few
see the mistakes. Only the artist truly knows if he has succeeded or
failed."
ME
gregman
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 09:43:11 -0900
From: Teresa Knezek <teresa@mivox.com>
Subject: Re: No carbonation in first batch of HB
On or thereabout 1/24/03, Tom Okerlund spoke thusly:
>stored at 63-66F since then. Just couldn't wait so I chilled and
>poped a bottle on Jan. 19 (7 days later) and no carbonation had
>developed. Did I just not wait long enough? Should it be stored a
>little warmer (68-70F) to get the yeast active?
Oooh! A question I can answer with something resembling authority! :-)
The yeast should stay at fermentation temperature to carbonate the
bottles, since carbonation comes from yeast fermenting the priming
sugar. So if you've put your yeast to sleep by over-chilling it, just
put the bottles somewhere warm for a couple of weeks and they should
wake up and do the job.
I keep my cases of bottles in the bathroom closet with my fermenters
for two weeks while they're conditioning. After two weeks, you can
store them somewhere cooler... personally, I've been leaving them in
the closet.
- --
Teresa - Two Rivers, Alaska [2849, 325] Appt. Rennerian
"It has been my experience that folks who have no vices
have very few virtues." -- Abraham Lincoln
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 25 Jan 2003 00:19:23 +0100
From: Arnaud VIEZ <aviez@teaser.fr>
Subject: Yeast book
Hello happy brewers,
Someone mentioned a book by Pierre Rajotte, "First steps in yeast
culture". Where is it possible to get it? I could not find it on any
homebrew site (or Amazon or BeerBooks etc.).
TIA,
arnaud@brasserie-du-coin.com
(Vitry-sur-Seine, 5kms from Paris, France)
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 20:57:42 -0500
From: "Lou King" <lking@pobox.com>
Subject: Is efficiency affected by mash water:grain ratio?
Normally I have been mashing with 1.15 qts water:lbs grain ratio, but I
wanted to experiment with a higher ratio, and used 1.25 last weekend.
Unfortunately, I thought I undershot my mash temp by several degrees,
and added another gallon of hot water or so to my 10 gallon batch.
(20.5# grain, 6.5 gallons to start, plus whatever I added in a panic).
[Tangential interlude: As it turned out, my mash tun thermometer said
148 after adding water, but a glass thermometer indicated 153 -- I need
to calibrate the mash tun thermometer, and I don't know how long it has
been off -- this is the first time I undershot like this, and I have
been using promash for strike temp calibration until now. I am hoping
the glass thermometer is accurate as I plan to calibrate the mashtun
thermometer using that.]
So the first runnings naturally had a lower specific gravity than usual
1.078 SG vs. 1.086 SG the last time I did this recipe. I say naturally,
because it seems to me that more water in the mash would produce thinner
first runnings.
I sparged normally and stopped when I hit 1.012 SG. In the comparison
batch I stopped at 1.013, but I'm not sure how much water was in the
kettle when I hit this SG to compare the two batches.
It seems to me that this path would likely produce less efficiency, and
this was the result I saw 72% (OG in kettle pre boil 1.041)with 1.25++
vs 85% (OG in kettle 1.046) with 1.15 (kettle efficiency per promash
calculations). Both batches were topped off to 13.5 gallons before
measurement. After boil OG was pretty close at 1.048 (1.25++) vs. 1.049
(1.15), which confuses me somewhat.
The other difference to remark on: my LHBS was out of American Pale
Malt, so I used German Pils for the base malt.
1. Is this kettle efficiency difference to be expected with a thinner
mash?
2. Any idea why the post boil OG was nearly the same in the two batches?
Lou King
Ijamsville, MD
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 25 Jan 2003 03:11:49 +0000
From: "Chris Eidson" <eidsonc@hotmail.com>
Subject: More LHBS Chatter
Before the LHBS thread dies out, I would like to put in a little plug for my
local homebrew shop, Alabrew (NAJASC). The shop is well stocked compared to
others I have visited and prices are quite reasonable. The owners are
active in the local homebrew scene as well as the HBD, plus they are just
nice folks. A good story to illustrate this -- Kim (one of the owners) one
time recommended that I go to Northern Brewer for a particular item that he
thought was a great deal and would be beneficial to my brewing. I have used
some internet homebrew proprietors in the past and probably will continue to
do so occasionally in the future, but my first choice is always going to be
my local shop.
Chris Eidson
Birmingham, AL
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #4154, 01/25/03
*************************************
-------
