Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #4443
HOMEBREW Digest #4443 Sat 03 January 2004
FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
Digest Janitor: janitor@hbd.org
***************************************************************
THIS YEAR'S HOME BREW DIGEST BROUGHT TO YOU BY:
Your Company Name and Contact Info Here!
Visit http://hbd.org/sponsorhbd_table.shtml for more info!
Support those who support you! Visit our sponsor's site!
********** Also visit http://hbd.org/hbdsponsors.html *********
Contents:
Of barrels and beer (Michael Grice)
Re: More Power To The Powerless (Wes Smith)
Water, Water And Wollondilly Wonders ("Phil Yates")
Re: More Power To The Powerless ("Greg 'groggy' Lehey")
RE: Copper and Sodium Hydroxide (Bill Tobler)
re: Cider--How to Sweeten ("-S")
Re: Storing CFC, was Copper and Sodium Hydroxide ("Mark Kellums")
Yeast Culture ("Spencer W. Thomas")
oak in beer / New Holland Dragon's Milk ("Spencer W. Thomas")
Plambic Digest Back in Business (Alexandre Enkerli)
Oak barrels ("John Adsit")
re: Carbo Calories (huh - what did they say ?) ("-S")
Preferred shares of Yakima Brewing ("Jim Chenette")
re: Carbs (NO Spam)
Calories ("A.J deLange")
Re: Brumalt enlightment & Floor Malting (Wes Smith)
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* The HBD Logo Store is now open! *
* http://www.hbd.org/store.html *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* 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, 2 Jan 2004 00:02:20 -0600
From: Michael Grice <grice at binc.net>
Subject: Of barrels and beer
Internation Man of Mystery -S wrote:
>This all begs the real question of oak barrels in beer - why are some
>people hell-bent on introducing tannins and oxidation (barrels transpire
>some O2) to beer, after going to great lengths to prevent this sort of
>damage ? >From all I read traditional oak fermenters and shipping barrels
>were covered with pitch to seal them and prevent beer+wood contact.
>Even the vanillin and vanilla-like phenolic flavors which are a major
>benefit of oaking wine taste smokey and out-of-place in beer to my tongue.
>I don't get the point
> ... now if you had a juniper-wood barrel you might have something !
Steve, you're making the assumption that all oxidation is bad. In
wine, low amounts of controlled oxidation seem to be beneficial for
aging. Evaporation from oak barrels also seems to do a nice job of
concentrating flavors (assuming you top off the wine, of course). My
hypothesis is that this would also be beneficial for any beer which
requires a little aging. I guess it would depend at least in part on
how much of a role the oxidation of tannins play in the aging of wine
(versus the oxidation of other compounds).
Even without that, a barrel is a nice place to age a beer with brett and
lactic bugs such as a plambic or an oud bruin. Oak is more permeable to
air than glass and apparently less permeable to air than the plastic
commonly found in fermenters. Do lambic brewers use pitch on their
barrels? I can't find my copy of Guinard, but from skimming through "A
Liddil Lambic Lesson" on the web I gather that plambic homebrewers
don't. The wood would give the brett a place to grow, too.
Granted, I'd personally prefer a used barrel without any oak flavor for
any such efforts. But we are homebrewers, are we not? There is nothing to
prevent a brewer from oaking a beer which has not traditionally called
for it.
I hear some people like smoked beers. I hear other people even put
vegetables in their beer! I realize you're not in one or more of those
camps, but I do think a little oak might be nice in a porter (assuming
it were subtle).
Michael
Middleton WI
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 02 Jan 2004 18:06:30 +1100
From: Wes Smith <wsmith at rslcom.net.au>
Subject: Re: More Power To The Powerless
What on earth is going on out at the Baron of Berrima's cattle ranch?
Shearing wombats? What size handpiece do you recommend? Oh, and theres also
the crutching clippers - funny, I dont think I've ever seen wombat dags.
Just as well I am brewing a Hefewizen this weekend - I think the poor soul
is desperate and in need of libatious sustenance. Or perhaps he's stuffed
the new Ag bike into a wombat hole and is taking revenge...
In any event there is keg of Wes's wheat not far away Phil - hang in there.
Wes.
>Without getting scientific, I figured 10kva would cover all my brewing
>activities along with a few other past times such as shearing wombats.
>
>Cheers
>Phil
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 2 Jan 2004 20:11:28 +1100
From: "Phil Yates" <phil.yates at bigpond.com>
Subject: Water, Water And Wollondilly Wonders
Firstly I note Groggy Greg says he's running 15 computers at any one time.
And I had a brief look at his diary.
What you doin down there man? I thought Australia was being run from
Canberra!!
I guess I've got the best of both worlds here, having rain water (if it ever
rains again) and what I think is good quality bore water. Rain water for
Pilsners and Bore water for Ales.
I've had both tested and have several measures to consider, namely:
pH, Iron, Total Hardness, Total Dissolved Solids, Carbonate Hardness.
I won't bore (excuse the pun) anyone with the actual readings but would be
more than interested to discuss them off line.
Of course, in addition and less than an hour west of us, lies the famous
Wollondilly river whose pristine waters are sort after world wide. It is
said, on a good day, naked fairies can be seen frolicking amongst the rocks
of the Wollondilly river. I've never seen this phenomenon but it hasn't been
for want of looking.
It eventually ends up as water supply for Sydney folk, but not before it has
been dosed with chlorine and heaven knows what else. Still, Sydney brewers
seem very happy with their water.
I'll be very happy to compare notes with other users of rain water. I've
just got to get over one eeny weeny problem, Hughie refuses to let it rain!!
Cheers
Phil
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 2 Jan 2004 19:29:40 +1030
From: "Greg 'groggy' Lehey" <grog at lemis.com>
Subject: Re: More Power To The Powerless
[sorry for the duplicate, Phil, but the janitor monster ate my sig again]
On Friday, 2 January 2004 at 15:49:51 +1100, Phil Yates wrote:
>
> Southern Highlands of NSW Greg, we enjoy a cool climate. Well we did, this
> summer would burn the back end out of a malt roaster! I take your point
> about not going over board regarding an emergency generator for brewing.
> Perhaps I should add that apart from brewing fridges etc, I wouldn't mind
> running some lights and of course the water pump without which, no brewing
> can be done at all. I was told to allow quite a bit more for electric pumps
> starting up, as opposed to just running them.
Sure, it turns out that our generator isn't intended mainly for
brewing. Here's what we run off it:
- All lights in the house.
- Water pump. This is in fact a problem, not because of the power it
uses, but because of the extremely high startup current, which
causes the generator to nearly stall.
- Fridges, deep freeze, one microwave.
- All appliances.
- All computers (about 15 running at any one time).
In fact, about the only things that aren't run off it are the air
conditioners, washing machine and dryer, the other microwave, the (3
phase commercial) dishwasher and the (3 phase commercial) deep fryer.
The last two each draw 8 kW.
Even with all that, the generator isn't overloaded. I suspect that we
could run the washing machine and dryer off it too.
> Jill's dad offered a spare thumping big 35kva generator he had. The
> beast is run by a giant caterpillar diesel engine and could probably
> light up the entire hamlet of Berrima. I could start selling
> electricity to the locals on brew days!
Indeed, that would do the trick. Diesel has the great advantage that
doesn't have the same duty cycle restrictions that petrol does. They
also use less fuel, and they handle incidents like the one described
in http://www.lemis.com/grog/diary-dec2003.html#20 much better :-)
You could definitely run the air conditioners off it too.
> Without getting scientific, I figured 10kva would cover all my
> brewing activities along with a few other past times such as
> shearing wombats.
My wombat shearer uses a piddly 150 W. Don't worry about that. You
can get battery operated ones, too, which is helpful with
uncooperative wombats that you have to chase.
Greg
- --
Finger grog at lemis.com for PGP public key.
See complete headers for address and phone numbers.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 02 Jan 2004 07:22:14 -0600
From: Bill Tobler <wctobler at sbcglobal.net>
Subject: RE: Copper and Sodium Hydroxide
Fred wants to clean his CFC with Caustic, a 20% solution. I work in a
Chemical plant as an operator and we use 8.5% Cell Effluent (Caustic) as a
feed stock. If you get it on you, it starts burning your skin in less than
a minute, in your eyes, and you are in big trouble. Rubber gloves and
Chemical goggles are required when handling. With a 20% solution, I would
think protective clothing would be required too. It doesn't rinse well, and
you usually have to do an acid rinse after to neutralize the caustic. I
believe that breweries use a 2% solution of NaOH to clean their kegs, then
follow with an acid rinse. IMO, using a chemical that strong for a "hobby"
is just not worth it. I think a 2% solution is reasonable with proper care
and caution.
Here is what I do, FWIW. My kettle drain valve goes to a pump then a CFC
and on to the fermenter. The suction hose to the pump has a quick connect
to the kettle. I connect the suction to my garden hose, which can have hot
or cold water to it. I run hot tap water through everything into the sink
for 5 minutes. I blow the water out and leave it till next time. To
sanitize, I either circulate with boiling water or fill the system with Star
San, then blow it out with CO2. I CIP the kettle, pump and CFC after every
4 or 5 brew sessions with hot PBW.
I hope everyone had a good Holiday!
Bill Tobler
Lake Jackson, TX
(1129.7, 219.9) Apparent Rennerian
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 2 Jan 2004 08:50:48 -0500
From: "-S" <-s at adelphia.net>
Subject: re: Cider--How to Sweeten
Major JT Weaver asks how to sweeten dry fermented cider.
I also fermented out about 20 gallons of cider this Fall. Trying to stop on
ongoing fermentation with sorbate and hitting a target sweetness is
difficult. Prescribed amounts of sorbate will only prevent renewed
fermentation and not entirely stop an ongoing ferment. I decided to bypass
this difficulty.
It's much easier to allow the fermentation to finish then sweeten the dry
drink. You could rack, add sorbate then sweeten with sucrose (table sugar
solution boiled to sanitize) solution. Instead I've added aspartame (as
contained in Equal(tm)) which adds a very nice sort of sweetness to wines
and cider. Equal contains a minor amount of fermentables as a bulking agent
(dextrose and maltodextrin). If you can find aspartame with only
maltodextrin for bulking - use it !
I experimented by adding a gram of Equal + water mixed in a 10CC plastic
syringe, then slowly adding a measured amount to a 100cc glass of cider.
I found that to my taste adding 1.2 to 1.3 grams per liter of fermented out
~12P cider is about right for a clear but understated sweetness. For a 5
gal batch that's about 23-25 packets of Equal, but *do* try this yourself
and determine what level of sweetness matches your taste. Some people
would probably double that amount.
Aspartame adds a warm round sweetness which nicely matches the flavors in
fermented beverages. It has been used as an additive for wines, but it is
illegal to do so since it's considered an adulterant - no safety issues.
>JOSEPH T. WEAVER DVM, Maj, USAF, BSC
>CENTAF(F)/SG PUBLIC HEALTH OFFICER
>AL UDEID AB, QATAR
I'll bet there are some interesting stories behind that sig !
-S
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 2 Jan 2004 08:51:54 -0600
From: "Mark Kellums" <infidel at springnet1.com>
Subject: Re: Storing CFC, was Copper and Sodium Hydroxide
Fred,
Why not store your chiller with just plain water? My usual practice after
using the chiller is to rinse with hot tap water for several minutes. Before
each use I run two or three gallons of boiling water through it to sanitize.
While this might not be the ideal solution it has worked very well for me
over the past several years.
I suppose running boiling water through it before and AFTER using it would
be the best way to go about it, but after brewing all day I'm just to lazy
to do that.
Hope this helps.
Mark Kellums
Decatur Il.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 02 Jan 2004 09:54:47 -0500
From: "Spencer W. Thomas" <spencer at umich.edu>
Subject: Yeast Culture
"Beer man" writes:
>Pierre Rajotte's book First Steps in Yeast Culture is the essential read on
>the topic.
>
Unfortunately, this seems to be out of print. I recently did a web
search and was unable to find a place still selling it (including the
AOB/AHA). I'd be happy to be proven wrong on this -- I thought it was a
great book (I have my own copy, I was trying to find one for a friend.)
=Spencer
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 02 Jan 2004 10:00:00 -0500
From: "Spencer W. Thomas" <spencer at umich.edu>
Subject: oak in beer / New Holland Dragon's Milk
-S asks "why oak in beer?"
Steve, I don't know if you get New Holland products in your area, but
maybe if you're up our way again you can look for their "Dragon's
Milk". Here's a description I posted to the AABG club email list:
Spencer W. Thomas wrote:
> I'm sitting here enjoying New Holland Brewing's Dragon's Milk. To
> quote from the bottle:
>
> Dragon's Milk is a 17th century term used to describe the strong
> beer usually reserved for royalty. This strong ale was aged in oak
> casks for over 120 days. The aging process extracts flavors from the
> wood, which contribute to its complex character. Hints of bourbon
> flavor perfectly compliment its roasted malts to produce a beer fit
> for a king.
>
> This beer did not make me sit up and shout with the first sip.
> Instead it steathily wormed its way into my psyche. It's a darkly
> intriguing and impentrable beer. At one moment it's all pruney fruit,
> and the next it's woody and spare. It is a perfect complement (not
> "compliment!") to Miles Davis's "Bitches Brew," which is playing as I
> write this review. Both are elusive -- I think I've captured its
> essence and then it slips between my grasping fingers in a new direction.
>
> Here's my attempt at a BJCP-ish description of this nectar: Aroma is
> woody and fruity with hits of smoke and ash. Oak is evident, and the
> fruit hints at dark cherries and prunes. Some sweet malt fills in the
> gaps. A touch of vanilla hints at Bourbon. Color is a ruby-garnet red
> with a reddish-tan head that subsides into swirls of tiny bubbles.
> Flavor starts sweetish with a shift to bitter and back. A hint of
> ashes adds interest. Raisins, prunes, and cherries abound above a
> woody, oaky base. Alcoholic heat and a subtle spiciness wake up the
> palate. The banquet of flavor subsides into a long, fruity,
> bittersweet finish. The body is surprisingly light for a beer of this
> strength. It is warming and mouth-filling but not at all heavy. (For
> overall impression, see above. :-)
>
> I refuse to assign a numeric score. It's not that kind of beer.
>
> =Spencer
>
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 2 Jan 2004 11:57:17 -0400
From: Alexandre Enkerli <aenkerli at indiana.edu>
Subject: Plambic Digest Back in Business
[Forwarded from Montreal Madman Masher John Misrahi]
Hi guys,
the site is back at
https://secure.neap.net/mailman/listinfo/plambic
You just have to go to that site, and enter your email address and name
to
subscribe.
Sadly, the archives were lost. To the guy who said he had them saved
since
july, if you want to send them to me in a single email, that would be
great!
As mentioned previously, everyone has to re-subscribe.
Sorry!
John
Montreal, Canada
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 2 Jan 2004 09:33:46 -0700
From: "John Adsit" <j.adsit at comcast.net>
Subject: Oak barrels
Steve wrote:
> This all begs the real question of oak barrels in beer - why are some
people
> hell-bent on introducing tannins and oxidation (barrels transpire some O2)
> to beer, after going to great lengths to prevent this sort of damage ?
> >From all I read traditional oak fermenters and shipping barrels were
covered
> with pitch to seal them and prevent beer+wood contact. Even the vanillin
> and vanilla-like phenolic flavors which are a major benefit
In agreement, I would like to repeat something I have written several times
before. When I did the Heineken tour in Amsterdam, it included a film on the
history of barrel making for beers. They showed how the barrels were lined
with pitch (using a smoky fire, believe it or not). They emphasized that the
reason for this was the unpleasant flavors that oak imparts to beer. They
referred to the great advance in going to metal kegs to get rid of that
possibility altogether.
John Adsit
Boulder, CO
j.adsit at comcast.net
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 2 Jan 2004 11:51:05 -0500
From: "-S" <-s at adelphia.net>
Subject: re: Carbo Calories (huh - what did they say ?)
After converting terms and using the definitions
oep (original extract in plato)
rep (real final extract in plato)
fsg (final specific gravity)
Dom Venezia wrote ...
[cal_per_100ml = 4 * (rep - 0.1) * fsg ]
while AJ deLange concluded ...
[ cal_per_100ml = 4* (rep - ash - protein) * fsg ]
and then suggests we can ignore the ash & protein terms.
There is something very right with both solutions, but there is also
something very wrong. The amount of NON-carbohydrate extract is not
ignorable and cannot be modeled as a constant 0.1P term, nor should all
carbohydrates be considered equally for the Atkinsonian dieters. For Atkins
dieters we'd really see:
atkins_carbo_cal_per_100ml =
4* (rep - nonglycemic_carb_extract - ash - protein) * fsg
Nitrogen sources (protein, amino acids, DNA, RNA) alone amount to 5% to 6%
of sweet wort extract. The amount of amino acids used by yeast is around
0.15% of extract, and just under 1% of extract is lost in hot and cold
break. Several studies show that the total carbohydrate content of hopped,
boiled wort is right around 91-92% of extract [see M&BS chapter 14] ! Of
the carbohydrates several percent are in the form of pentose sugars and
beta-glucans which will not contribute to the rapid rise of bloods sugar
level which is of concern in Atkins (questionable) theory of dieting. These
non-Atkins carbohydrates act like fiber. They are digested by gut bacteria
and contribute to beer's gaseous reputation.
Overall I'm convinced that *about* 10% of the original extract should be
removed from Atkin's consideration of carbohydrate calories. I'm not wed to
this figure, maybe it's as low as 6% or as high as 12% but it's not
ignorable and not 0.1P.
I suggest the following equation:
*** Atkinsonian_cal_per_100ml = 4 * (rep - 0.10*oep) * fsg
multiply by (3.55 / 4) to get Atkins Carbs in grams per 12 fl.oz serving.
===
It's useful to consider the concept of REAL attenuation. That is the
fraction of the original extract lost to the final beer.
RA% = 100 * (oep - rep) / oep
A wort with 77% apparent attenuation will have a real attenuation near 62%.
RA% is roughly equal to AA% * 0.81 . 62% real attenuation mean the yeast
consume 62% of the extract mass - primarily the carbohydrates that Atkins is
concerned with (Acarbs).
With minor variation wort extract is then about 90% Acarbs by weight. In a
77%apparent attenuation beer the yeast will consume about 62% of the extract
mass, almost exclusively Acarbs, leaving about 28% Acarbs and 10% non-Acarbs
of the original extract mass (plus alcohol, water, ...).
5gal(19L) of 12P wort will contain about 2400 grams of extract with about
2160 gm of Acarbs. If 62% of the total mass is fermented, this will reduce
the Acarbs by about 1488 gm, leaving (2160-1488) about 672gm of carbs or
about 12.5 gm per 12 oz serving.
Ways to reduce the Acarbs per drink include "diluting" the carbs, by
starting with a lower OG, but 9P is about the lower bound to produce
drinkable beer. At 9P and 77% apparent attenuation the carbs are still
around 9gm of Acarbs per 12fl.oz serving.
Alternatively if we can get the yeast to ferment more Acarbs there is
significant improvement in their levels. It's possible to add
amyloglucosidase to achieve apparent attenuation in the high 90% or even
100%. [[ Crosby & Baker vends this enzyme for Micro use and , these guys
http://www.grapeandgranary.com/ (no affil, customer,yada) were nice enough
to order me a 1L bottle (several lifetime supplies) for about $27US. Use is
about 0.8 to 1ml per 5 gallons, so a bottle will handle 1000 5gal
batches ]]. This drops the Acarb concentration down to MichUltra type
levels. Surprisingly the beer body is not at all bad in these extreme
attenuation beers, but I've been using some wheat in the grist for improved
protein body.
Note that converting sugars to ethanol only causes a modest decrease in
total caloric value. Beer has about 90% of the total calories as its
unfermented wort !
-S
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 02 Jan 2004 13:50:04 -0500
From: "Jim Chenette" <jimchenette at hotmail.com>
Subject: Preferred shares of Yakima Brewing
I read in the realbeer newsletter, dated 11/26/03 under the title "Blame the
Vitamin C", that Yakima Brewing and Malt plans to sell shares of stock. The
article goes on to say that, "about 99% of Yakima Brewing's common stock
shares are held by it's parent company, Black Bear Brewing Co. of Atlanta."
So here is my question....does anyone have a any idea of how to get a hold
of Black Bear? All the web links I have found for Black Bear are not
working, www.blackbearbrew.com. Bert Grant is who started the Grants Brewpub
in Yakima, Washington and I cannot even get them to answer the phone. I am
also looking to make a clone of Grant's Mandarin Hefeweizen, a wheat,
fruit-flavored beer that is made using mandarin orange juice flavoring, does
anyone have a good recipe for a Hefe? Thanks for the help.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 02 Jan 2004 16:19:07 -0500
From: NO Spam <nospam at brewbyyou.net>
Subject: re: Carbs
>From the Editorial page of the current Mid-Atlantic
Brewing news:
"Isn't it odd that just as America's small brewers
are experimenting with ever more aggressive beers,
America's large breweries are attempting to bleach
out whatever flavor remains in their products?
Consider: the hot, new style among craft brewers
is the imperial IPA - a true connoisseur's drink,
big in alcohol, full of malt, bursting with hops."
...
"Among macrobrewers, however, the trendy new product
is something called low-carb beer. Michelob Ultra,
the pioneer, has been a smashing success, and now
everyone wants a piece of the action. Coors reportedly
has a low-carb entry in the works called Aspen Edge.
Miller is said to be planning its own version for early
2004. Other breweries are attempting to reposition
existing light beers. Pittsburgh Brewing Co, for
example, has been noting that its IC Light is almost
identical to Michelob Ultra in both carbohydrates and
calorie content."
...
"One website I consulted lists Michelob Ultra as
having 2.6 grams of carbs and 95 calories per
standard 12 oz serving. Miller Light, by
comparison, has 3.2 grams of carbohydrates and
96 calories. That means if you switch from
a regular light beer to Ultra, you're saving
a mere 0.6 carbs and just one calorie. Even
if you drink a six pack a day, you're reducing
your intake by only 3.6 carbs and 6 calories.
What does that equal, a few french fries?"
...
"In a recent ad, Anheuser Busch billed its
Michelob Ultra as "the ultimate reward for
an active lifestyle." But if you exercise
regularly and watch your food intake, there's
no reason you can't reward yourself with a
real beer, like a Porter, Imperial IPA,
or a Dopplebock.
Conversely, if you stuff yourself with pork
rinds and nachos and remain wedged in an
armchair for hours on end, switching to a
low-carb beer isn't going to help much.
It's like washing down a jumbo banana split
with a Diet Coke - a futile gesture and too
little, too late."
I highly recommend reading this article.
Bill
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 2 Jan 2004 23:19:09 +0000
From: "A.J deLange" <ajdel at cox.net>
Subject: Calories
HBS&Y are of the opinion that the upper range of protein concentration
in beer is 0.63%. Ash constitutes no more than a couple of tenths of a
% as well. Ignoring these is certainly an adequate approximation for
those who calculate alcohol content and true extract from OG and FG
measurements, especially if those are done with a hydrometer. If more
accuracy is required the beer must be ashed and the nitrogen content
measured by Kjeldahl digestion or combustion. The protein is then
determined by multiplying by a fixed factor (6.25) and thus represents
an approximation even in the prescribed ASBC methods. Ashing and
Kjeldahl digestion are both PsITA (or is it PITAs) but can be used if
one needs the attendant level of accuracy. For even more info one
could, I suppose, do HPLC analysis of the residual sugar spectrum. Some
sources simply say "4*solids".
RE:
"Beer has about 90% of the total calories as its unfermented wort !" I
guess that's a testament to the relative efficiencies of oxidative
phosphorylation as opposed to fermentation.
Cheers, A.J.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 03 Jan 2004 10:52:35 +1100
From: Wes Smith <wsmith at rslcom.net.au>
Subject: Re: Brumalt enlightment & Floor Malting
Further to Greg and Thomas's input I went and had another look at Brumalz
and discovered I had posted the wrong spelling. It should have been
bruehmalz exactly as Thomas has indicated - with the "ue" as a single U
with the "eyes" over the top.
In an off digest post, Joe Woyte had some more input:
Wes--
Just checked my German-English Dictionary. No "Brumalt," however, some
words stuck out that might offer a clue: (All U's below signify and umlaut
"u" and ss signifies and est-set):
brUhen (verb): to blanch or pour boiling water over (as in coffee or tea)
brUten (verb): to incubate
brUtendheiss (adjective): sweltering or boiling hot
-Joe Woyte
It would seem then, that the name brumalt or bruehmalz refers to the
process whereby the germinating malt was stacked in piles and left to
"swelter" or even "incubate" under tarps for the last day or so of the
germination phase and prior to kilning.
Greg also asks about Floor Malting. This was the original time honoured
method of malting whereby the steeped grain was spread out on a stone or
concrete floor to a level of about 150mm (6" in the old money) and turned
regularly by hand to control moisture levels and CO2 respiration. In this
process, the malt would take 7 to 10 days to fully germinate prior to being
loaded into the direct fired kilns. For more information, have a look in
the HBD Archives - I recall this subject being discussed at several points
over recent years.
Wes.
>Date: Fri, 2 Jan 2004 13:17:18 +1030
>From: "Greg 'groggy' Lehey" <grog at lemis.com>
>Subject: Re: Brumalt enlightment
>
>On Wednesday, 31 December 2003 at 18:50:06 +0100, Thomas Rohner wrote:
> > Hi Wes
> > as a german speeking guy, i hop i can translate it for you.
> > It's not Bru-malt (at least that's what i think) it's Bruehmalz.
>
>This seems reasonable.
>
> > (Normally it would be a u with those double dots on it, instead of
> > the ue, but i can't post this character on the HBD) The word means
> > exactly what you guessed, bruehen=brewing.
>
>Well, brauen means "to brew". Bruehen is more difficult to translate.
>My dictionary says that it means "to blanch, to pour boiling water
>over". In a brewing context you might use it to represent "to steep",
>though I have no idea if this is the case.
>
> > But it comes from the malting method. In the traditional floor-
> > malting, they used thicker layers of wetted grains. By doing that
> > the stuff heated up(brewed). That's what the maltsters want to
> > avoid, for regular malts.
>
>What is traditional flour malting?
>
>Greg
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #4443, 01/03/04
*************************************
-------
