Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #4809
HOMEBREW Digest #4809 Mon 25 July 2005
FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
Digest Janitor: pbabcock at hbd.org
***************************************************************
THIS YEAR'S HOME BREW DIGEST BROUGHT TO YOU BY:
Northern Brewer, Ltd. Home Brew Supplies
Visit http://www.northernbrewer.com to show your appreciation!
Or call them at 1-800-681-2739
Support those who support you! Visit our sponsor's site!
********** Also visit http://hbd.org/hbdsponsors.html *********
Contents:
Sanitizing Aluminum Coldplate ("Eric R. Theiner")
Santizing Aluminum Block from JockeyBox ("Rob Moline")
Re: Ballantine XXX (asemok)
Fortnight of Yeast - Commercial starters (Fred Johnson)
Larger Batch Sparge ("Martin Ammon")
Yeast viability data point (stencil)
Re: HCCP Under Linux (Option: Emulation?) ("Meyer, Aaron D.")
Re: Santizing Aluminum Block from JockeyBox (Kent Fletcher)
FOY 2005 - Yeast stress response question for Chris Powell (ALAN K MEEKER)
Fortnight of Yeast, 2005 (Matt)
FOY Lallemand Answers, Crabtree effect and Overflow Metabolism ("Dave Burley")
Dry Yeast Question (Donald Hellen)
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* The HBD Logo Store is now open! *
* http://www.hbd.org/store.html *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* Suppport this service: http://hbd.org/donate.shtml *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* Beer is our obsession and we're late for therapy! *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* Fortnight of Yeast 2005 EXTENDED through 29 July! *
* Presented in cooperation with Lallemand *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
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.
LOOKING TO BUY OR SELL USED EQUIPMENT? Please do not post about it here. Go
instead to http://homebrewfleamarket.com and post a free ad there.
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.
JANITORs on duty: Pat Babcock (pbabcock at hbd dot org), Jason Henning,
and Spencer Thomas
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sun, 24 Jul 2005 23:16:23 -0500
From: "Eric R. Theiner" <rickdude at tds.net>
Subject: Sanitizing Aluminum Coldplate
On the question of what to use to sanitize an
aluminum cold plate, I think that I would suggest
an iodophor sanitizer.
For those of you rubbing your eyes, yes, I do
make One Step, and I was very gratified to have
it mentioned... but aluminum is a pretty soft
metal, and beer is rather acidic. I wonder about
using an oxidizer (so this goes for bleach as well)
inside a cold plate that may not have much of an
protective oxidative coating in place.
I think Star San might be detrimental as well, so
that leaves iodophor (which, although acidic, is
not as acidic as Star San).
Maybe John Palmer will weigh in with a more
informed opinion.
Rick Theiner
LOGIC, Inc.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 24 Jul 2005 23:29:05 -0500
From: "Rob Moline" <jethrogump at mchsi.com>
Subject: Santizing Aluminum Block from JockeyBox
Santizing Aluminum Block from JockeyBox
>how do we sanitize the aluminum block?
The aluminium block is the heatsink for the stainless lines that the
product run through. Just use PBW, or PBW, then acid.... or any other regime
you favour.
While the stainless product lines are buried in the AL block, since you are
changing the lines, go ahead and change the gaskets....and
fittings...cheap...in the block and out....
>Or possibly a cooler with a wooden exterior, since we use it at SCA events
and the
like.
We do a great rootbeer biz with a wooden bbl, originally from decades ago
that had faucets that still had leather gaskets, but has since been modified
with a more modern plumbing. You might want to consider a similar set up.
The wooden bbl had 3 old faucets, replaced by 2. It is mounted on a cart
which contains the cO2 bottle and regulator, and the coldplate....a 2 line
small model that fits into a small esky cooler. Our rootbeer events are
short in duration, <6 hrs, and we use a keg jacket to keep the keg cold.
Gump
515-282-2739 brewery
515-450-0243 cell
"The More I Know About Beer, The More I Realize I Need To Know More About
Beer!"
- --
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.338 / Virus Database: 267.9.4/57 - Release Date: 7/22/2005
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2005 01:37:28 -0400
From: asemok at mac.com
Subject: Re: Ballantine XXX
On Jul 24, 2005, at 11:21 PM, pulsarxp wrote:
> I still think Juniper Berries were used in Ballantine XXX because it
> always had
> a pine needle aroma to it and I know of no hops nor do any of my
> friends know of any hops that give off a pine needle aroma.
No.
Juniper berries were never, ever a part of any of the Ballantine Ales.
I have had several conversations with people involved with the making
of these products at the Newark brewery (which closed in the early
70's), and even have recipe notes.
The ales were all certainly generously hopped for bitterness, but the
intense hop __aroma__ of the standard Ballantine XXX, the IPA, and the
Burton came from the very generous use of an "in house" made hop oil;
this was a distilled aromatic product made on premises at the Newark
brewery (and according to one industry source, apparently also after
the product moved to Narragansett) and that amazing and elusive hop
aroma is probably the single most identifying profile of the original
Ballantine products. The brewmaster conversations I had are borne out
in other writings by Ballantine-o-philes and industry folks whose
research says essentially the same thing. If you've been fortunate
enough to be on hand in the last few years where an old bottle of
Ballantine Burton or a pre 1980 bottle of the IPA were opened, whatever
the flavors have mutated into the most surprising thing about these
beers (remember...from 25 to more than 60 years old) is the amount of
hop aroma still intact. That's the hop oil talking!!!!
My experience with XXX and the IPA both go back to around 1968. I
suppose that some noses/palates would interpret the intense hoppiness
as "pine" (though honestly I never thought of it as such), but it is
clear and straight from the horses mouths (the guys who brewed the
stuff) that juniper berries, pine needles, or any other such flora
never infested the kettles at Ballantine!
Your best shot at reproducing the original profile of Ballantine's
products is to use hop oil, specifically distilled for the aromatic
fraction.
God...to have one of those IPA's now.... :-(
cheers,
AL
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2005 06:22:38 -0400
From: Fred Johnson <FLJohnson at portbridge.com>
Subject: Fortnight of Yeast - Commercial starters
When pitchable quantities of "liquid" yeast are provided to a
commercial microbrewery by a commerical yeast producer, in what stage
of the life of the yeast is the yeast supplied? It is my
understanding--please correct me where I am wrong--that commercial
yeast producers typically propagate the yeast aerobically with constant
infusion of medium at rates that maintain very low glucose
concentrations in the culture--conditions that avoid induction of the
Crabtree effect of high glucose. At some point in the propagation, the
infusion of the medium is discontinued and the yeast are allowed to
consume the remainder of the fermentables and to flocculate. Is this
the stage in which the pitchable quantities of yeast are sold to
commercial microbreweries? If not, tell us what the yeast producers
provide to commercial breweries.
Fred L Johnson
Apex, North Carolina, USA
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2005 06:53:58 -0500
From: "Martin Ammon" <SURFSUPKS at KC.RR.COM>
Subject: Larger Batch Sparge
With no answers to my question of July 18 I guess its time to start building
a large coil and give it a go and see what happens. I can compare the
results with beers brew with the old system. Will need a larger pump to
push that much wort.
To quote a good friend ITS JUST BEER.
Martin Ammon
aka Kansas Swagman
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2005 10:37:41 -0400
From: stencil <etcs.ret at verizon.net>
Subject: Yeast viability data point
I just finished bottling a weizen made with Brewtek CL920 that had been
purchased from Brewer's Resource in December 1997. The mini-slant had spent
most of its existence at 33-38F. It had been opened once, in Feb '98,
moistened with wort to take a sample, and put away again. The procedure, now
as then, was to add a few drops of starter wort and then streak a plate;
after 96 hours a clump was selected and ramped up in 1040 wort to make a
starter. All colonies seemed (to my uneducated eye) to have the same color
and texture. This time, I did not save the original mini-slant. The rummage-
in- the- chillbox that produced it was occasioned by the failure of a 10-month
old smackpack to quicken.
At bottling, warm and still, the beer had a room-filling clove aroma and a
flavor to match, with a hint of tartness. No noticeable banana tones. First
real tasting, 1 August.
Tentative conclusion: *Never* throw anything away
...but I knew that anyway.
stencil sends
etcs.ret-at-verizon.net
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2005 10:43:08 -0500
From: "Meyer, Aaron D." <Aaron.Meyer at oneok.com>
Subject: Re: HCCP Under Linux (Option: Emulation?)
>>>>
Has anyone else had better luck getting HCCP running under Linux? I
have a
competition coming up in a couple of months and can run it under WinXP
if
necessary, but getting it working under Linux would be better.
<<<<
Interesting read from the author in the last issue of HBD. If the
application does rely on the windows printing subsystem you might indeed
have to run it under that OS. This doesn't mean you cannot run it under
Linux though! You could run Windows as a slave OS under Linux. There are
open source projects i.e.: Bochs as well as commercial packages i.e.:
VirtualPC that which emulate x86 hardware on which you can install any
x86 OS.
I successfully installed Windows 98 on a Bochs emulation environment a
while back, was a bit slower than if it had been run on the hardware
directly but it was workable. You should be able to load anything up to
XP if desired (depending on abilities of the emulation environment.) Of
course the fatter the OS you run the slower the emulated environment and
host system are going to run. I even recall some pass-through options to
be able to print from the slave OS to a printer on the host system....
Bochs Project: http://bochs.sourceforge.net/
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2005 10:30:31 -0700 (PDT)
From: Kent Fletcher <fletcherhomebrew at yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Santizing Aluminum Block from JockeyBox
Steven asked:
> (snip) how do we sanitize the aluminum block? So far
> the only thing I can think of is to run pressurized
> one-step solution through it, or possibly a mild
> bleach solution, though I wonder/worry if there's
> any chance of that reacting badly with aluminum.
The beer never comes in contact with aluminum. The
lines are stainless steel tubing, bent in a serpentine
pattern, then cast into the aluminum block. So, you
can safely use any solution you would use on a corny
keg or other stainless brew ware. I clean mine with
PBW and then sanitize with Five Star Sani-Clean. I
just make up a keg of solution, connect to the beer
line, pump through for a minute or so to purge any
air, then let the solution do the work.
If the lines are soiled (left with beer or soda
sitting in them), you'll maximize the cleaning power
of PBW by heating the water to 160 f. But you'll have
to heat the plate as well, else the aluminum will
absorb the heat, just as it does in use with beer.
After letting the hot PBW work for a few minutes, pump
in fresh solution and repeat. You can minimize your
labor substantially by making up jumper lines, and
connecting Line 1 Out to Line 2 Out, Line 2 In to Line
3 In, Line 3 Out to Line 4 Out, etc. I have a six
line plate for the club bar, and jumpers save a lot of time.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2005 14:38:25 -0400
From: ALAN K MEEKER <ameeker at mail.jhmi.edu>
Subject: FOY 2005 - Yeast stress response question for Chris Powell
A hearty welcome to Chris Powell on FOY! The descriprion of his
earlier work reminds me of a question regarding yeast stress.
Chris, I've briefly studied the literature on yeast stress
response. It appears that important stress response genes,
such as those for heat shock proteins, are under the control
of upstream Stress Response Elements (SREs) and are
co-ordinately regulated. Studies seem to indicate that this
results in cross-protection against a given type of physiological
stress following exposure to a different type of stress. So, for
example, heat shock may lead to increased resistance to osmotic
stress. The question is, can this phenomenon be exploited in
brewing in prepariong yeast for highly stressfull fermentations?
For instance, when pitching into a very high gravity ferment, such
as a mead or barleywine (high osmotic stress), could the yeasts'
performance be enhanced by a mild stress exposure during starter
production or close to pitching? I stress (pun intended) that
this would be a mild stress, just enough to start inducing the
protective systems, but well below any level that would actually
lower the yeasts' health/viability.
Looking forward to your response, Alan
Alan Meeker, PhD
Assistant Professor of Pathology and Urology
Department of Pathology
Division of Genitourinary Pathology
Bunting-Blaustein Cancer Research Building Room 153
1650 Orleans Street
Baltimore, MD 21231-1000
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2005 13:16:10 -0700 (PDT)
From: Matt <baumssl27 at yahoo.com>
Subject: Fortnight of Yeast, 2005
Another question for the good Doctors:
I have already asked two questions, so I will understand if you are
unable to answer a third. I would like to clear up some confusion I
have about the production/reduction of esters and fusels during
fermentation. I am asking these questions in the context of "healthy"
(sugar-limited) ferments, where the yeast have plenty of O2 and
nutrients.
A. I have read statements to the effect that for a healthy
fermentation, "increased aeration leads to increased yeast growth,
which ties up acetyl-CoA and hence reduces ester formation." I have
also read statements to the opposite effect, that "increased yeast
growth leads to increased acetyl-CoA production and hence to more
esters." This apparent contradiction confuses me and I'd appreciate
any light you can shed upon it.
B. I am particularly interested in brewing Belgian-style ales with
lots of esters, but not too many higher alcohols. It is my
understanding that higher alcohols can be converted to esters by the
yeast--when does this happen? I am (purely) guessing that much of it
happens near the end of fermentation, when the acetyl-CoA is no longer
needed for growth. Can I therefore achieve my goal of high esters and
low fusels by fermenting cooler at first (producing a managable level
of fusels) and then letting the temperature rise later on (to speed the
conversion of fusels to esters)? Does the notion of a "fusel rest,"
similar to a diacetyl rest, make any sense? Is there a point at which
it is "safe" to raise the ferment temp, as the danger of producing too
many fusels has passed? I understand that there is a baseline level of
esters produced in a healthy ferment--I am just interested in how to
convert as high a fraction of fusels as possible into esters.
Thanks again.
Matt
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2005 16:58:42 -0400
From: "Dave Burley" <Dave_Burley at charter.net>
Subject: FOY Lallemand Answers, Crabtree effect and Overflow Metabolism
Brewsters:
I sent this last week or so, but realized this, like a number of other past
submissions of mine were not making it on the HBD and I was not getting a
bounce message. So a little out of date, but here is my question and
comment for the group and those fine Gentlemen from Lallemand. I have
modified my format for message approximately as that fabled Janitor, Pat
Babcock, instructs and we will see if this does it.
(Editorial note: It failed. I forced this on since his post is
coming through as multipart MIME with html attachments. Folks,
whenever pasting an URL, ensure your mailer hasn't converted it
to an HTML tag - as appears to have been the case here.)
Clayton Cone has explained that if have more than 0.2% glucose in our
starters that we cannot expect any cell wall improvement even in the
presence of oxygen, since the mechanism changes from a Pasteur Efftect to a
Crabtree effect.. Presumably the addition of oxygen to our wort at the
beginning of the fermentation will likewise make no sense. Does thismean we
ned to wait until the end of the fermentation? And why do it at all?.
So we need to develop method of stirring our starters which will keep the
glucose concentration low, but allow yeast to grow more cell wall fatty acid
contaiing substances. Since few of us have the metering and measuring
equipment to do this in a strarightforward process control way, perhaps
there is another way to do it.
1) Clayton: Any idea about how fast sucrose would be inverted e.g. if we
started with a 1% sucrose solution with appropriate nutrient levels in a
strirred, oxygenated starter , is there any chance that the rate of
inversion would be slower than the rate of consumption (I guess this would
be yeast concentration dependent) , so we can keep the glucose ( does
Crabtree also work for fructose?) concentration down and permit good
cellwall development in an oxygenated starter?
2) How about the Overflow Metabolism effect?
*
www.biotech.kth.se/courses/3A1308/Downloads/Overflowmetabolism.pdf
* * Does this affect your explanation?
Keep on Brewin'
Dave Burley
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2005 18:38:57 -0400
From: Donald Hellen <donhellen at horizonview.net>
Subject: Dry Yeast Question
I would like to know how long dried yeast stored in the
refrigerator (under 40 degrees F) can be expected to be
useful?
I'm sure that studies have been done like those with liquid
yeast discussed recently, and my own experience has shown
that we can expect at least some dried yeasts to last two
years or more.
Also, is there a significant difference between different
brands of dried yeasts in how long they can be stored and
still be usable?
- ------------------------------------
Beer--Not just another breakfast drink!
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #4809, 07/25/05
*************************************
-------
