HOMEBREW Digest #1769 Fri 30 June 1995

Digest #1768 Digest #1770

		Rob Gardner, Digest Janitor

  propane cookers (Dan Sherman)
  Iodophor Sanatizer (Imakebeer)
  Vinegar (not water) (A. J. deLange)
  Dortmund 1 - Part I (A. J. deLange)
  Dortmund 1 - Part 2 (A. J. deLange)
  monosaccharides/liquid smoke/altitude/lambiks (Algis R Korzonas +1 708 979 8583)
  Less Violent Ferment (Chris Strickland)
  1995 Beer & Sweat , Aug. 12th (tbird)
  Re: #2(2) Homebrew Digest #17... (TomF775202)
  Mixing Ale / Lager Yeasts (Todd Longfellow)
  Hops Homepage (Art McGregor)
  Coriolis vs. Borealis (DCB2)
  Information request for us open competition entrants (WOLFF)
  French beer (ESLINGER)
  GB (Jim Busch)
  Small & Tiny competition results (spencer)
  CO Brewer's Fest Comments (Norman C. Pyle)
  3 tier brewery question ("mike spinelli")
  Coriolis Bowtie or Alien Intelligence? (Eamonn McKernan)
  Vinegar washing of yeast (Chuck and Grace Burkins)
  Hop plugs vs. whole hops (Glenn Tinseth)

****************************************************************** * POLICY NOTE: Due to the incredible volume of bouncing mail, * I am going to have to start removing addresses from the list * that cause ongoing problems. In particular, if your mailbox * is full or your account over quota, and this results in bounced * mail, your address will be removed from the list after a few days. * * If you use a 'vacation' program, please be sure that it only * sends a automated reply to homebrew-request *once*. If I get * more than one, then I'll delete your address from the list. ****************************************************************** ################################################################# # # YET ANOTHER NEW FEDERAL REGULATION: if you are UNSUBSCRIBING from the # digest, please make sure you send your request to the same service # provider that you sent your subscription request!!! I am now receiving # many unsubscribe requests that do not match any address on my mailing # list, and effective immediately I will be silently deleting such # requests. # ################################################################# Send articles for __publication_only__ to homebrew at hpfcmi.fc.hp.com (Articles are published in the order they are received.) Send UNSUBSCRIBE and all other requests, ie, address change, etc., to homebrew-request@ hpfcmi.fc.hp.com, BUT PLEASE NOTE that if you subscribed via the BITNET listserver (BEER-L at UA1VM.UA.EDU), then you MUST unsubscribe the same way! If your account is being deleted, please be courteous and unsubscribe first. Please don't send me requests for back issues - you will be silently ignored. For "Cat's Meow" information, send mail to lutzen at novell.physics.umr.edu ARCHIVES: An archive of previous issues of this digest, as well as other beer related information can be accessed via anonymous ftp at ftp.stanford.edu. Use ftp to log in as anonymous and give your full e-mail address as the password, look under the directory /pub/clubs/homebrew/beer directory. AFS users can find it under /afs/ir.stanford.edu/ftp/pub/clubs/homebrew/beer. If you do not have ftp capability you may access the files via e-mail using the ftpmail service at gatekeeper.dec.com. For information about this service, send an e-mail message to ftpmail at gatekeeper.dec.com with the word "help" (without the quotes) in the body of the message.
---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 27 Jun 1995 15:38:14 -0700 (PDT) From: Dan Sherman <dsherman at sdcc3.ucsd.edu> Subject: propane cookers A while ago, there were a couple of requests for info. about propane cookers. I finally have some time, so here are some sources I found when I was looking for one (most are from past HBDs). KMart -- my local KMart has a cooker made by Brinkman (170K Btu) Warehouse stores (Sam's, Price Club, Costco) -- inventory varies Some larger hardware stores -- none near me Metal Fusion (800) 783-3885 -- make the popular King Kooker line Cabela's (800) 237-4444 -- have a few in their catalog Bass Pro (800) 227-7776 -- also a couple in the catalog Camp Chef (801) 752-3922 -- make several models. The factory doesn't sell direct to the public, but they will give you a list of stores in your area that carry their products. Superb Gas Products (618) 234-6169 -- have a 35K Btu burner (Model 16-20E, I believe) that some swear by Your local scrap metal dealer -- I have heard of several people getting old gas water heaters & cutting them. These can be modified for propane, if desired. >From what I've heard, the 200K Btu jet-style burners don't offer very good heat control & are not suitable for firing a mash tun and may be problematic if you are trying to fine-tune your boil. Every person's needs differ, so I suggest calling for several catalogs and doing some legwork, since the perfect cooker could be at a store just down the road. Cheers! Dan Sherman San Diego, CA dsherman at ucsd.edu Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 27 Jun 1995 19:53:21 -0400 From: Imakebeer at aol.com Subject: Iodophor Sanatizer I'd like to keep certian brewing items ie., racking cane, carboy, stoppers, etc., in a solution that doesn't need rinsing but will keep items sterile until they are needed. Will iodophor work for this? The bottle says that no rinsing is neccessary, and to allow the items to air dry. What will happen if I just dumped the solution out and the items are still wet? Assuming this will work, what is the proper ppm needed to sanatize an item (my bottle says to use Dept. of Health Recomendations) and what amount (tsp/TBLSP per gallon) should be used? If anyone has a better solution (no pun intended), I'd take any suggestion. Thanks in advance : ) Robert Hops P.S. Has anybody who ordered Hallertauer Mittelfruh hops from the Boston Beer Company received them? Does anybody know what's up? Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 27 Jun 1995 20:39:32 -0500 From: ajdel at interramp.com (A. J. deLange) Subject: Vinegar (not water) Dominick Venezia asks about the pH of vinegar: White House distilled white vinegar "made from select sun ripened grain..." is stated to be at "table strength" of 5%. Interpreting this as 5% by weight I calculate pH 2.42 (pK = 4.76) and measure 2.47 (love it when the theory and the fact get close). As for washing, Labatt's Inge Russel writing in Hardwick, "Handbook of Brewing" says "Use food grade acid - phosphoric or citric acid are good choices". I'd say that vinegar is a food grade acid and would be inclined to give it a try. A.J. deLange Numquam in dubio, saepe in errore! ajdel at interramp.com Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 27 Jun 1995 20:56:45 -0500 From: ajdel at interramp.com (A. J. deLange) Subject: Dortmund 1 - Part I Dortmund 1 This is the fifth in a series of posts on the formulation of waters similar to those of famous brewing cities of the world. They are based on ion concentration profiles given by Dave Draper in his post in #1704 (10 April 95). See my post "Water Series" (#1763) for explanatory material (correction: in the Line 3 explanation read 1.8 ml of 1 N sulfuric acid, not 18 ml). Quick reminders: all ion concentrations and salt quantities are in ppm which is the same as mg/l. The water to which the salts are added is assumed to be ION FREE (i.e. it is DISTILLED WATER or REVERSE OSMOSIS WATER). The Dortmund 1 profile is attributed to Greg Noonan in "Brewing Lager Beer" p55. The number for carbonate actually listed in the reference is 180 ppm as opposed to the 221 in Dave's list. This is consistent with a profile given by Hardwick which lists 174 ppm for carbonate and very inconsistent with the Dortmund 2 (Papazian profile) which lists a whopping 550 ppm. If we accept Noonan and Hardwick Dortmund water is very high in calcium relative to the carbonate. If we give the software the maximum flexibility (all salts and acids and pH 6.38) and ask it to formulate water to this profile we get: Formulation I pH 6.38; use external acid; Maximum salts n: 770000 Temp: 0.000943 Energy (rms %): 19.092888 Dortmund 1 Desired Cations: 17.127 Anions: 10.187 mEq/L Ratio: 0.595 ION DESIRED REALIZED ERR, % SALTS AMOUNT Ca 225.000 132.046 -41.31 NaCl 67.716 Mg 40.000 35.377 -11.56 Na2CO3.10H2O 149.317 Na 60.000 53.916 -10.14 CaCL2 28.991 K 0.000 0.000 0.00 CaSO4.2H2O 129.010 CO3 180.000 219.611 22.01 CaCO3 228.613 SO4 120.000 131.020 9.18 MgCL2 5.650 Cl 60.000 63.796 6.33 MgCO3 71.890 H 5.487 0.000 -100.00 KCl 0.000 Na2SO4 10.162 MgSO4.7H2O 133.812 H2SO4 0.000 NaHCO3 0.000 HCl 0.000 Carbonic: 1.8291 Bicarbonate: 1.8291 Carbonate: 0.000210 mM Total Required Hydronium: 5.4872 Sulfuric Hydronium: 0.0000 mEq Hydrochloric Hydronium: 0.0000 mEq 5.4872 mEq additional hydronium required to maintain pH 6.38 Solubility Products - CaCO3: 8.70E-09 MgCO3: 2.60E-05 Ion Products - CaCO3: 6.92E-10 MgCO3: 3.05E-10 Alkalinity: 1.79 mEq; 89.58 ppm as CaCO3. Temporary hardness: 7.32 mEq; 365.83 ppm as CaCO3 Permanent hardness: 2.18 mEq; 109.09 ppm as CaCO3 We explained in an out of sequence post, Dortmund 2x, that the imbalance of anions and cations (respectively 17.1 and 10.2 mEq/L) as specified for Dortmund 1 makes it impossible to approximate sufficiently accurately. We also noted that this high imbalance means either that the specified numbers are wrong (they are inconsistent) or that there is another anion, or anions, present which are not part of the specification. More for purposes of illustration than because we recommend it, we take the approach of supposing that the other anion is phosphate and add calcium dihydrogen orthophosphate, Ca(H2PO4)2.H2O to the water in an amount necessary to get the calcium to the desired level. To do this we first modify the Dortmund 1 calcium requirement to 130 ppm as this is a level which Formulation I shows can be reached in balance (all our formulations are balanced) and ask for a new formulation based on this modified requirement. The result is: Formulation II n: 780000 Temp: 0.000925 Energy (rms %): 8.124585 Dortmund 1x Desired Cations: 12.386 Anions: 10.187 mEq/L Ratio: 0.822 ION DESIRED REALIZED ERR, % SALTS AMOUNT Ca 130.000 112.856 -13.19 NaCl 86.816 Mg 40.000 37.116 -7.21 Na2CO3.10H2O 59.198 Na 60.000 56.782 -5.36 CaCL2 4.047 K 0.000 0.000 0.00 CaSO4.2H2O 41.571 CO3 180.000 203.064 12.81 CaCO3 254.016 SO4 120.000 126.641 5.53 MgCL2 9.253 Cl 60.000 62.128 3.55 MgCO3 53.761 H 4.035 0.000 -100.00 KCl 0.000 Na2SO4 40.512 MgSO4.7H2O 195.097 H2SO4 0.000 NaHCO3 0.038 HCl 0.000 Carbonic: 0.6542 Bicarbonate: 2.7272 Carbonate: 0.001305 mM Total Required Hydronium: 4.0352 Sulfuric Hydronium: 0.0000 mEq Hydrochloric Hydronium: 0.0000 mEq 4.0352 mEq additional hydronium required to maintain pH 7.00 Solubility Products - CaCO3: 8.70E-09 MgCO3: 2.60E-05 Ion Products - CaCO3: 3.68E-09 MgCO3: 1.99E-09 Alkalinity: 2.69 mEq; 134.74 ppm as CaCO3. Temporary hardness: 6.77 mEq; 338.27 ppm as CaCO3 Permanent hardness: 1.92 mEq; 95.92 ppm as CaCO3 -MORE- A.J. deLange Numquam in dubio, saepe in errore! ajdel at interramp.com Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 27 Jun 1995 20:56:50 -0500 From: ajdel at interramp.com (A. J. deLange) Subject: Dortmund 1 - Part 2 This formulation realizes 112.9 ppm caclium and is thus shy (225 - 112.9) = 121.1 ppm Ca although it is reasonably accurate on the other ions. Note that Formulation II is for pH 7 and that external acid is used. The required calcium amounts to 112.9/40.08 = 2.797 mM/L so that if we add that many mM/L Ca(H2PO4)2.H2O we would exactly meet the calcium requirement. This is (2.797)(252.09) = 705 ppm and we would also have (2)(2.797)(97) = 543 ppm phosphate in the resulting water (and even more than this if the external acid were phosphoric). The dihydrogen orthophosphate ion is weakly acidic and would drive the pH away from 7 so to compensate for this we reduce the amount of external acid required by the amount of hydronium contributed by the dihydrogen orthophosphate ion, i.e. 0.76 mEq. This gives us Formulation III Doctored Dortmund I ION DESIRED REALIZED ERR, % SALTS AMOUNT Ca 225.000 225.000 0.00 NaCl 86.816 Mg 40.000 37.116 -7.21 Na2CO3.10H2O 59.198 Na 60.000 56.782 -5.36 CaCL2 4.047 K 0.000 0.000 0.00 CaSO4.2H2O 41.571 CO3 180.000 203.064 12.81 CaCO3 254.016 SO4 120.000 126.641 5.53 MgCL2 9.253 Cl 60.000 62.128 3.55 MgCO3 53.761 H 4.035 0.000 -100.00 KCl 0.000 H2PO4 543. Na2SO4 40.512 MgSO4.7H2O 195.097 H2SO4 0.000 NaHCO3 0.038 HCl 0.000 Ca(H2PO4)2.H2O 705. Carbonic: 0.6542 Bicarbonate: 2.7272 Carbonate: 0.001305 mM Total Required Hydronium: 4.0352 Sulfuric Hydronium: 0.0000 mEq Hydrochloric Hydronium: 0.0000 mEq 3.275 mEq additional hydronium required to maintain pH 7.00 Solubility Products - CaCO3: 8.70E-09 MgCO3: 2.60E-05 Ion Products - CaCO3: 7.32E-09 MgCO3: 1.99E-09 We have no evidence that the additional anion in Dortmund water is phosphate (nor indeed do we know whether the observed imbalance is due to an external anion at all or to error in the specified levels in the profile). Thus WE DO NOT RECOMMEND IMPLEMENTATION OF THIS FORMULATION. Use the compromise profile of the Dortmund 2X post instead. I've had a couple of questions about the algorithm. A couple of people commented on the similarity of this problem to operations research problems and wanted to know whether the simplex method or optimizers such as Solver in Excel could be used to solve it. My best answer at this point is that the problem could probably be posed in such a way that these popular tools could be used. For now the sticking point is the constraints on the two ion products (nonlinear constraints) which neither simplex nor Solver will handle (as far as I know). Neverhteless the Excel approach is very appealing as it is so widely used. I promise to think about this further as soon as I've got these profiles out of the way. Some people have wanted to know if it is possible to put their current water specs into the profile and compute ADDITIONS to get the desired profiles. Yes, it is but I don't know what any particular water being used by a par- ticular homewbrewer is so I am doing the only thing that I really can and that is to start with 0 for all ions. It's been suggested that weighting the error criteria for some ions more than others might be a useful thing to do. It is indeed and I don't hesitate to do it when I think it might help. I did do exactly this in getting the compromise Dortmund 2x formulation. Several people have asked whether the software I am using will be made available. The answer to that one is that if I can ever get it into user friendly form I will certainly make it available. At this time it is still much too experimental (I wouldn't show the source to anyone at this point on a bet). I'm learning as I'm going and doubt very much that the software used to generate today's post will be the same as the software used to do the final post. I promise to at least publish the details of the algorithm eventually. A.J. deLange Numquam in dubio, saepe in errore! ajdel at interramp.com Return to table of contents
Date: 27 Jun 95 15:02:00 -0500 From: korz at iepubj.att.com (Algis R Korzonas +1 708 979 8583) Subject: monosaccharides/liquid smoke/altitude/lambiks Andy writes: >Yeast can only ferment monosaccharides. Not quite. Maltose is a disaccharide, sucrose is a disaccharide, maltotriose is a tri-saccharide, and all are quite fermentable by brewer's yeast. Only glucose and fructose are monosaccharides among the common sugars that are found in our worts. It's true that yeast cannot ingest sucrose directly, as they do with maltose, but they excrete invertase which breaks the sucrose into its component glucose and fructose and then ingests those. Pehaps this is what you were thinking of when you posted? also: >Stuck ferments like my tripel happen because the yeast somehow loses its >ability to transport maltose inside the cell. Andy, could you give a reference for this. I highly doubt this is the reason. More likely the wort was too dextrinous. Beta-amylase breaks down the dextrins into maltose, not glucose, so there goes the maltose uptake theory. I agree with Andy though, use enzymes in the green beer only as a last resort. *** John writes: >I'm thinking about trying the recipe in TNCJOHB for rauchbier using >liquid smoke as one of the ingredients. Before making the attempt, >I would be interested to hear the opinions of those who have >already tried it. My major concern is knowing if the amount of >liquid smoke called for in the recipe is okay. I have not tried the recipe, but I have tried "Liquid Smoke." Before you use a particular brand, read the label. I didn't. While bottling, I smelled acetic acid. Checked the label: vinegar! *** Luke writes: I tried to reason out how to adjust recipes (or if I even need to) to counter the effects of altitude, ie, lower boiling temperature and therefore(?) lower hop utilization and/or isomerization. I'm afraid that I cannot provide any advice other than to avoid the formulas published in Garetz's book Using Hops. I have personally proven that these formulas are incorrect. You are right that you will need to compensate for altitude (at higher altitudes the boiling temperature is lower and you will get less utilization). *** Otto writes: >I just bought a pair of Lambics from some outfit that calls itself the >Brewery De Troch Wambeek. They put together some tropical lambics with >strawberry and banana flavors. The strawberry was just okay; for some >reason it just ended up tasting sour. It had potential...The banana on the >other hand was very good. It's no Lindeman's peche of course, but then >what is? This ale had just the right amount of flavor so that it didn't >overpower the beer. The banana flavor went surprisingly well with the >tartness of the lambic. I highly recommend you try it if that particular >action is within your means. > >But on to the homebrew question which actually has something to do with >the previous paragraph. Have any of you used fruit extracts in your lambics? >Or is it better to use fresh stuff? When is the best time to add the >fruit (or its flavor)? I've never brewed a lambic but I'm getting real >motivated to do so, and I'd appreciate the feedback from you fine fellows! I hope this doesn't sound like I'm flaming you Otto, but neither the DeTroch nor Lindeman's are very good lambiks (Flemish spelling). Along with Timmerman's (which sometimes is a bit closer to tradition) they are typical of the syrupy, sweet, unbalanced lambiks that are unfortunately growing in popularity among Belgians and non-Belgians alike. If you like these beers, don't bother with all the trouble of making a lambik, just make a fruit ale. What's most disturbing is that these sweet imposters are overwhelming the market at the expense of the traditional lambiks such as Cantillon, Boon and Hanssens. Subsequently, these true lambiks are tough to find (Hanssens is not imported into the US and Cantillon is only found in a few markets on the east coast). Those who are used to the syrupy lambiks are stunned when they taste a Boon or Cantillon geuze. These beers are *intensely* sour -- like strong lemonade without any sugar and their aromas are the most complex of any beer. Please accept my appologies that I chose your email to set the record straight. Far, far too many brewers (AND BJCP JUDGES!) are misled to believe that intensely sour lambiks are uncharacteristic of the style and that sweet, syrupy, almost cloying versions are what lambiks are supposed to be. To those of you who might say that since the majority of lambiks are the sweetened variety they define the style, I must point out that lambiks are brewed in a way (spontaneous fermentation with naturally-occurring yeasts and bacteria) that makes them the most traditional of beers. All beers used to be made this way and only lambiks have survived. The traditional methods of producing lambiks are certainly over 1000 years old, maybe 3000 years! The proliferation of sweet, syrupy fruit beers that call themselves lambiks in the last 25 years does not redefine a 1000-year-old style. Seek out a Cantillon (Washington D.C. and Boston) or a Boon geuze, throw away all your preconceived notions about modern beer, prepare yourself for a very intense experience and taste history. Al. Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 27 Jun 1995 21:41:29 -0400 From: cstrick at iu.net (Chris Strickland) Subject: Less Violent Ferment I just tried the "yeast harvesting" technique from a batch of yeast that was really violent (looked like it was boiling). Good blow-off. I pitched this yeast that I harvested and it's fermenting ok, but a much milder ferment. Any ideas on why it would be different? Listed below are the recipes: Violent Ferment: 1 pk Wyeast London Ale (liquid) 8.57 lbs of Klages (I use coffee cans, that's why the odd weight). 1 oz N Brewer 1hr boil 1 oz N Brewer 1/2 hr 1 tsp Irish Moss 15 min 1 oz Saaz for 45 min steep ferment temp ~68F Mild Ferment: Harvested London Ale (liquid) 7.32 lbs of Klages 1.5 lbs of British Pale Ale 1 lb of 60LV Crystal 1 oz N Brewer 1hr boil 1 oz N Brewer 1/2 hr 1 tsp Irish Moss 15 min 1 oz Saaz for 45 min steep ferment temp ~68F - -------------- Chris Strickland cstrick at iu.net Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 27 Jun 95 21:48 EDT From: tbird at iglou.com Subject: 1995 Beer & Sweat , Aug. 12th Dave, Here's a little something for the newsletter on Beer & Sweat. I just stole Ed's write up from last year and changed it a bit for this year. So feel free to change or modify it in any way to fit the newsletter. See ya at Main St. next Monday. Also I invited Rob Schutte to join us for a beer, he won the AHA best stout this year, and he's not yet a Bloat. That'll have to change on Monday. He want's to judge at B&S and take the beer judge exam. On that note we need to find out from Alan M. or Greg Walz if there is going to be an exam, what kind, and get something written up in the newsletter. TTFN TBird - -------------------------------------------------------- O.K. Folks it's time to clean out your kegging system and work on your best homebrew recipes, because it's almost time for the 1995 Beer & Sweat. What is Beer & Sweat you may ask? Well, Beer & Sweat is THE summer party of, by, and for homebrewers. The 7th annual Beer & Sweat is sponsored by the Bloatarian Brewing League of Cincinnati, it is one of the largest gatherings of homebrewers on the planet, and of interest to all homebrewers within driving distance of Greater Cincinnati. Beer & Sweat is unique in that it is 100 % homebrew oriented. Unlike the usual gatherings of brewers, where people keep opening a cooler and pulling out another example of a favorite commercial beer, we stress the homebrewer's craft exclusively. Beer & Sweat is also devoted to DRAFT homebrew. For example last year we had 50 kegs of top quality homebrew on hand, most containing 5 gallons each. There were also a few 10 gallon kegs, a few mini kegs, and a party pig. But with over 150 homebrewers in attendance, we still had a quantity of beer sufficient to provide the expected quantity of sweat. When does Beer & Sweat take place? Saturday, August 12, 1995, beginning at 5:00 pm, and running till the wee hours. Setup will be between 3:00 and 5:00. Where does Beer & Sweat take place? At the Drawbridge Estate ( home of the Oldenberg microbrewery). We currently have a block of 40 rooms reserved poolside in the Garrison building, so we will have a private location. Drawbridge is a mere five miles south of downtown Cincinnati, in Ft Mitchell, Kentucky. Take the Buttermilk Pike exit from Interstate 71/75 and go east one block. How much will this cost? Nothing. Apart from your meals and lodging, Beer & Sweat is absolutely free. Their is no admission fee of any kind, except the entry fee if you wish to enter a keg in the competition ( $5.00 first keg $1.00 each additional keg ). The absolutely astounding variety of top quality, fresh, draft homebrew you will be able to sample at no cost or obligation is guaranteed to boggle your mind. The Bloatarians like to have their friends over for a good time. Room rates at the Drawbridge are $55 a night for Beer & Sweat, which is almost 25% less then the normal room rate. Call 1-800-354-9793 for reservations. You must mention Beer & Sweat to get this room rate. Check-in time is 3:00 pm. We highly recommend you get a room for the night, either at Drawbridge or one of the nearby motels, past Beer & Sweats have gone very late and we don't want anyone who feels even slightly intoxicated to drive. How do I get an Invitation to Beer & Sweat? Beer & Sweat has grown to the point where we no longer feel comfortable mingling with the general public. But since you're a home brewer, you're invited. All we ask is that you bring your homebrew to share. As stated earlier, we have secured practically the exclusive use of the Garrison building at the Drawbridge. Slightly separated from the main complex, Garrison has an outdoor pool, tennis courts, and recreation area. There are plenty of ice machines and vending machines. Right next door to the Oldenberg brewery, and within a 5 minute walk of numerous fast food places. Beer & Sweat Special Competition: We encourage entries to the Beer & Sweat Open Draft Homebrew Competition. Beer & Sweat is the first and possibly still the only AHA sanctioned KEG ONLY competition. For a $5.00 entry fee (only $ 1.00 for each additional keg) you can enter a keg (no bottles) of ANY style beer, Get it set up (bring your own CO2, etc.) between 3 and 5 pm, pay your registration fee during setup, and be prepared to tap your keg yourself for the judges. Judging will take place at 5:00 pm. After the formal judging of registered entries, ALL kegs present will be eligible for the popular vote competition, and a prize will be awarded to the crowd favorite. Tell them what they can win Bob. Actually it would be Robert. Robert Pinkerton has done a great job this year of hunting and gathering of prizes (plus a lot of out right begging). The list of prizes is too long to list here but, Robert has succeeded in filling his office full of beer related prizes and can no longer find his desk. A final and complete listing of prizes will be available in the Official Beer & Sweat program, and donors will be thanked thru-out the year in our newsletter. But as a small thank-you the first 50 entries will receive a Sam Adams painters' hat and t-shirt. Each category winner will receive an award and prize (to be determined). And this year's Best of Show winner will receive the first annual Marty Vinnings Cup and even a bigger prize (still to be determined). So get going and start working on your best homebrew recipes and I'll see you at The Drawbridge Estate August 12th for the 1995 Beer & Sweat. Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 27 Jun 1995 21:55:58 -0400 From: TomF775202 at aol.com Subject: Re: #2(2) Homebrew Digest #17... >has anyone heard of the Motor City Brewing Works in Detroit? Motor City Brewing Works is using the former home of Detroit Macinaw facility. Detroit Macinaw is now defunct. Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 28 Jun 1995 05:08:17 -0600 From: Todd Longfellow <tlongfellow at parkland.cc.il.us> Subject: Mixing Ale / Lager Yeasts Ahoy! As I am new to the homebrew scene and the HBD, I have a few questions. First, other than what I've read on the HBD, I've only had the chance to read The Complete Joy of Home Brewing (CJOHB). Can anyone suggest any other reading material that might be of some worth? Second, I read the CJOHB to the end of the intermediate brewer chapters and I know that an Ale yeast is a top fermenting yeast and that Lager Yeast is a bottom fermenting yeast. Ok, in case I missed some material in the book, A) What would happen if you tried to pitch a half and half mix of Ale and Lager yeast into your wort? B) How does boiling your wort for a longer period affect the finished product? C) My primary and secondary fermentors are both 5 gallon Hinckley & Schmidt glass water jugs. Should my primary be of the plastic type or does it matter? D) I've already started my first batch, an Aussie Ale, and will be ready to bottle between the 6th and 9th of July. At what point after the bottling will the beer have the best flavor? Thats all for now, but I'm sure I'll have more. The Joker E-Mail: TLONGFELLOW at PARKLAND.CC.IL.US. Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 28 Jun 1995 07:21:52 -0400 (EDT) From: Art McGregor <mcgregap at acq.osd.mil> Subject: Hops Homepage Hi All! I found a Web page on Hops the other day, and thought it would be of interest to the group. The page is called 'Perry's Perennial Pages' and the address is 'http://www.uvm.edu/~pass/perry/'. Under the title 'Hops' there are 4 areas discussed: 1) Growing hops in New England 2) More on growing humulus lupulus 3) Hop varieties in the US 4) Current Hops Research Hoppy Brewing :^) Art McGregor (mcgregap at acq.osd.mil) Northern Virginia, USA Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 28 Jun 95 6:19:50 PDT From: DCB2%OPS%DCPP at bangate.pge.com Subject: Coriolis vs. Borealis begin 600 attach.Z M'YV0:=R,>7/&31HZ;URTF7,& at ,.'$"-*G$BQHL6+&"N"V& at #! at P0`#:"B$&# M!DB1)$V&%"G2A at P9'T'4N'&#AHP:)6/4V!A#1D\9(6%D'$JTJ-&C$^O,H1-& MSD8`;-Z,"<,&*<6H4ZM:W<JUJ]>O8,-N3>(&!!(A1$",&'G#Q at T00]`T99.F M#( at I4]V0D5.&#AT0?`^6D1.&3ADR(-"DF0."#IHR;^3D`?&FK&.[2]+(60-" MR)L[=.HR5B"F3,`S(,C4L8NP\6,0`^6D>4.7<1DS9LJ,H>,"1!(0;93^O<S7 M3.0R+$`$!+&F3!DXIT'<.8C&M5T%<Z#+_OO&C.O3<Y)WS^W4\6+`9<34\4O5 M10,%[WW\AD-X<NO+(,Z\02PDS) at Q:"CE6F'6\05"4W;-\48;"8Y1EQNA+<78 M&^L56$8(\2'Q&6QA6/::")Z!5A<(1>"F&QTB at %`:<&$4U%<:8_R`H0+R)?8& M'';E0:%38O!U!V,( at N!&92V0)P>%<_SP'DM,-NGDDU"^1X4<JX%0QI!UG(%& M<FA\5H8= at TEG5W!+H<= at &Z65)]=?;;3HQHMSM*$<8TL=Z<89;$S&%QN%'=;8 M&R`H4`8;)\J6%6QRR7&&71TB=M"<0I8QUV1IM`''&W/,D888A/Z96!A at 4O:F M=-11.-QK;Q#76Z!7K)G<;V',L49R0291&6/J_05 at 4XLB!D=3H8U!Z!R].;%A M&M[I6`<(</`Y!FN/S6'7KHKZJ<"O< at 0[K')EM9'J;&7-40>`!S*VW!V1_36= M8[!5!N9NX() at 1E1W2+<F",I^&FJ0"E#;*[/`PKCM<MZ&5AD(*.!'QFT!'11O M=U82NINA5,%6AQQ\02 at OO2FL:FR]I$GJ%,$!(>88 at 52Q$7&A,%8\QL49_S7O MAM.QH?)42C&*'I^&(=:FB\$&:D9=;) at ,J'%RR*F at F/KJ_/.;00\]J*-E[2A= MNN6*:?.J[[WWQ* at 0XS>T'&6:=R>0;DRV5!T+:PSQH"P?>EEDDS7*(M"+R4EH M4VXP]MYY)_]%UYL3>C=O'7B`H`(9;ZB at ^)!T.*["&$=FJD)O at 4/:VAQAV/<: MLOA2V/2!(+SW=%]6 at EE6&&*&P5EER"E'!V.')SYX&8S5K+)^\AXIIPH'S>'X MD-E6=VFGK05?N at *?E85"9`="_I at <*8" at X'K&TU;&JK^51M>7T)YW'OB646G7 M<OA=3UQ9[SW6QF)P3+_]1A]'/UGM(-PN;V0,(J:[D(6Y6,KJ1I>"6&<A at P)3 M[JBS/+&Q`7'Y"PCN8,.7/B%&#)ZS2Q&`A883,*8);GK1&.1%-,203SG>>=2; M#L.8UKQG5W>"UK3<=:)XO0QC5YH=AY02G<NTH3="H,(57 at 6<-&CI+V$ at at \GN MA9_W;+!X' at 2!L8K'+.U!RC]TJ,,`20="O(UP"J:JSAT40Z[SC#&#4DQ7]CKU M'HBQ[G1_$<&E`C*[%"7O+\^#PZ4T91 at at ^84PN^E8UVB4A)])T#I6XJ#%_K(< MN;#!.U2I#&KP4X8X:!$A<B`BAVSVG1:^II*7C$P:*A:?9G7(+A`[$E,,Y at 81 M]"8(:#N09EB4*>"\08$'ND/G>K< at 1(*R,-##5LH&Y:E!\H`O9^`+>S at UF=_( MQ6BI at 9MA2,>G:E4Q6P^#)`C`))EV68HN4^E9]/PW*)4IX`[;,4Q9RH`'4[JA M,.#RP2!]((0*Y2M(Y&$0A**SKNJPKDNRT4-EF**R,.#A/*E,%3P/MAS6<3-8 M6XR/ at ^3PLFK*:S#Z-(P<>O.$BWD3#NN!GK<6IC(4"&$P6*)+%*GPF..TH7KB M.L.B)#2 at O\0'::0S0Q at TDZ>-$2B?.1Q,<E" at J87U at `RC9)!&JX>? at ;CA7:R$ ME$Z7 at CLDZF5Y/ at C-$:MZH%--*X=\H=55YT`OKMJM1V]HRL+*]*:F(/*&8$*, MN.2 at TV=A%2'C4LR=0N?1,>1A<`MS"L2<"E5P]8:E at 'M,64HS$`:U$%WM(EQR MU/`&"2(F/ at 3"3QAPA`?WP(=&7R,='2"+5'UJJC(5FVM=P\>8J+QA#:U-0W-( M%Z+07&B>O[F2L#`UILF(\ at P!J= at >0[/7 at Z6O#F)0PXD\^QX>X$M26WIN&*+[ MFPHZ:CC3L:O8-%.V2LU/GI^M$7T6M) at <B>Y1Z'+#"9!HHMT at LC1"1:'LT+-% M,:1J>HS)E[="I2RGW!2C02T/H(KPLB1&)CE at Q!X( at L` at BB5G2'`1)6T2.YC; M?A:QN:-0T52D,YW.<E<VN]*B/-6&#-)M54B(E?U at E[HP`15"?FKH\I1:L1=K MM*N4<4I;U6277V+R!QL)0MI4]!G;)FDC2?`.Y*Q3EM^(2PSOLZD",A>7N8SH M/+'ARVZXY"5NRO<RDUE<XZQTT+(IUC?68\I5,0B<R0QW>2A8K<$$I.)'M6DR M< at D5?-W`5"9^LKV,9(QJ6`,H.,*(6X?3K5W>HRF!R#""A*.,X1Z8N""IN$Z2 MQ#$E+0E,IZ at XLZ\Y'NYZLR0HF?K4($ at `$4"5!OZ\H0R#7+4=6MV95Z/:U'Q8 M,`BN$)`U1%'%^ME/UE at W)&BRCE,E6QX4_(.L0Q_ATU<M at L3H8* at (KPH$N6Z3 M&Y)3!C0`V3<G0`QAB#.Z8Z>*#IU:SO*(,`0AR``(<%B4"QI[ZR;EV at QVXHYW M&#2 at U?$20A6+BGT14N(9#5(D"4AX` at ;)\,\R0`%BB;C$)T[QBEO\XAC/N,8W MSO&.>_SC(`^YR$=.\I*;_.0H3[G*5\[REKO\Y3"/N<QG3O.:V_SF.,^YSG?. M\Y[[_.=`#[K0AT[THAO]Z$A/NM*7SO2F._WI4(^ZU*=.]:I;_>I8S[K6M\[U 2KGO]ZV`/N]C'3O:RF_WL:.<Z ` end Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 28 Jun 1995 10:05:39 -0400 (EDT) From: WOLFF at eclus.bwi.wec.com Subject: Information request for us open competition entrants If anyone, other than club members, entered the US open Comp presented by the carolina HB on April 29 has had a problem receiving awards, please contact me. If you did receive an award and received it by mail ,please contact also. thanks wolff at eclus.bwi.wec.com Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 28 Jun 1995 7:28:44 -0600 (MDT) From: ESLINGER at els232.ateng.az.honeywell.com Subject: French beer Has anyone heard of a French beer called Lutece? My neighbor says they had it in Paris and it was the best beer they said it was great? Any suggestions on recipes for this beer? Thanks, Greg Eslinger eslinger at saifr00.ateng.az.honeywell.com Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 28 Jun 1995 10:38:01 -0400 (EDT) From: Jim Busch <busch at eosdev2.gsfc.nasa.gov> Subject: GB Graham says: <Export: A light, not all that flavorful interpretation of a German <pilsner. Not something to seek out. Depends on if you like Exports! Export is not pils. I find the GB Export, when on, to be one of the best US examples of the style. <Anyway, enough of that. One thing I thought about while I was there, <though, was why all of their beers are German lagers, excluding the <weizen. Most brewpubs, micros, and homebrewers brew ales, and I was <just curious as to this discrepancy. Easy. Cost and ability. Lagers take about 6 times more storage tanks than ales, and use more energy. Lagers are harder to make well, and many homebrewers are not very good at making lagers and the profession seems to be full of homebrewers turned pro. Dan Gordon was one of the first Americans to receive a Diplom Braumeister from Weihenstephan. Thats why he knows how to make lagers. Jim Busch busch at mews.gsfc.nasa.gov "DE HOPPEDUIVEL DRINKT MET ZWIER 'T GEZONDE BLOND HOPPEBIER!" Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 28 Jun 95 11:05:05 EDT From: spencer at med.umich.edu Subject: Small & Tiny competition results The First Small & Tiny Homebrew Competition was judged on Saturday 24 June. We had 35 entries (not bad for the first time), about 1/2 of which came from local brewers and the rest from all around the country. Unfortunately, some of the shipped beers seem to have suffered from our unseasonable heat wave, but the results were split almost evenly between local & shipped beers, so maybe it didn't really affect the results. Next year, I'm aiming to hold the competition in March, which should alleviate hot weather-related problems. There were 12 Bitters (Ordinary & Special) entered, so they were split into a class of their own. The next largest category was Mild, with 5 entries (split between the Small & Tiny classes.) The rest were quite a mixture of styles. Best of Show went to Hal Buttermore for his English Ordinary Bitter, although it was a very close decision. Score sheets and ribbons will not be sent out until I get back from vacation in mid-July, so please don't bug me before then. TINY BEERS 1. Tiny Classic/4b. English Mild "Manixkwerl Mild" 41 Al Korzonas CBS/BOSS/UKG 1.034 All Grain 2. Tiny Classic/24a. Berliner Weisse "Berliner" 40 Dennis Davison CBS 1.034 All Grain 3. Tiny Other/Specialty/Pale Honey Wheat American Ale "Poundable Prairie Ale" 39 Bob Paolino MHTG 1.033 Malt Extract and Mash ENGLISH BITTER 1. Small Classic/7a. English Ordinary Bitter "Bag-end Bitter" 42 Hal Buttermore AABG 1.038 All Grain 2. Small Classic/7a English Ordinary Bitter "Cornelius Bitter" 41 Al Korzonas CBS/BOSS/UKG 1.038 Malt Extract Only 3. Small Classic/7b English Special Bitter "Arbor Ale" 40 Hal Buttermore AABG 1.042 All Grain SMALL BEERS 1. Small Other/3b. Gueuze "pGueuze 1994" 41 Al Korzonas CBS/BOSS/UKG 1.038 Malt Extract Only 2. Small Other/Raspberry weizen "Goetten Weizen" 39 Tom Dimmer AABG 1.038 All Grain 3. Small Other/3c. Belgian style Lambic Fruit "Razzboise Delight" 38 Hal Buttermore AABG 1.042 All Grain =Spencer Thomas in Ann Arbor, MI (spencer at umich.edu) Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 28 Jun 95 9:08:34 MDT From: Norman C. Pyle <npyle at hp7013.ecae.StorTek.COM> Subject: CO Brewer's Fest Comments >From John Adams' review of the Colorado Brewer's Festival: >Mark's Brewing Company >225 Bunyan Ave. #B, Berthoud, CO 80513 > > *Amber Waves Ale > Malty sweet and finishes clean. The honey adds to the overall sweet > flavor. This is a very nice, quaffable ale. This isn't John's fault, as it was incorrect in the festival program, but Mark's Brewing Company's Amber Waves is not a honey beer, it is a standard American amber ale. Mark's honey/malt beer (bracket) is called Sweet Dreams. I didn't taste this beer at the festival but I suspect it is Sweet Dreams, which finishes very dry for me. The honey flavor is there, but I don't detect much residual sweetness from it. Of the two, I prefer the Amber Waves. As long as I'm on the subject, John also mentioned: >Bristol Brewing Company >4740 Forge Road, Suite 108, Colorado Springs, CO 80907 > > Laughing Lab Scottish Ale > Malty and somewhat bitter. Finishes dry and has a slight peated > malt taste. Slightly roasty and a little sweet up front but quickly > turns bitter. This was my best of show. This is clearly the best Scottish Ale I've ever tasted, due to the hop bitterness which balances the malt. Most of the Scottish Ales I've tasted were overly sweet, but this one was just right for me. I don't know if this beer is truly to style, but it is wonderful. Cheers, Norm Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 28 Jun 1995 09:11:31 -0400 (EDT) From: "mike spinelli" <paa3983 at dpsc.dla.mil> Subject: 3 tier brewery question Fellow HBDer's, I've got a question on which way to go with my brewing system. At present I have 2 converted 1/2 barrels w/ spigots and now want to complete the system with a mash tun. Should I buy a 10 gallon Gott or just pick up another converted 1/2 barrel? I use a King Cooker and am concerned w/ holding the proper mash temp. if I go w/ the 1/2 barrel. Also, if the 1/2 barrel is the way to go, what type if false bottom is recommended? Easy masher? Manifold? Round Screen? I'll post the results of answers received. Thanks...... Mike Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 28 Jun 1995 12:39:46 EDT From: uscgc2r3 at ibmmail.com Subject: Old dried malt extract and "the sparge from hell" ? Since I read about the sparge from hell, I've been thinking about my experience with some old DME. Maybe they're related (I'm pretty sure that some dried malt extract was involved in that post). After several dissapointing batches, I packed up my supplies and put them in my attic (Old house, Black roof, North Carolina, very hot). Four years later, I am motivated to begin again and I find that my three-pound bags of DME have solidified. I break off a piece and it tastes OK, but like a cold "Sugar Daddy" candy bar - so hard and sticky that I was worried that chewing it would pull my fillings loose. I broke up six pounds with a hammer into 3-4" chunks and dropped them into my 10 gallon boiler. When I reached in with the stir-stick they was a six pound mass that took constant stirring while boiling for the better part of two hours to keep from scorching and get fully dissolved. The connection to the sparge from hell may be this... I didn't inspect the bags once a week for four years, but there must have been a point at which the powder was still powder, but nearly ready to agglomerate. At this point, maybe hitting the water was enough to glue the particles together in a mass, rather than aid in neat dissolution/dispertion. In my case, it was worth the effort, as I still got a really good batch of beer. Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 28 Jun 1995 13:25:51 -0400 From: eamonn at chinook.physics.utoronto.ca (Eamonn McKernan) Subject: Coriolis Bowtie or Alien Intelligence? CHARLIE SCANDRETT maintains that the mysterious lack of a tuxedo to complement Capt. Kirk's Bowtie was due to the Coriolis effect. Now any good scientist knows that the timescale for the Coriolis effect to be significant in convective patterns and certainly for rising CO2 bubbles is far too large. Convection is too quick and the length scales are too small. The toilet bowl theory is also bunk. It would be almost impossible to detect any difference in flushing water patterns between Northern and Southern Hemispheres. Again a question of timescales. Though this is a common mistake, and I blame our education system, not Charlie, for this blunder. The really important issue here is why are the Aliens so well dressed? eamonn McKernan eamonn at atmosp.physics.utoronto.ca Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 28 Jun 1995 13:17:46 +0059 (EDT) From: Chuck and Grace Burkins <burkins at world.std.com> Subject: Vinegar washing of yeast Since when I'm not reading HBD I'm a protein chemist, I went into the lab to check the pH. I believe that vinegar is about 5% acetic acid. I diluted glacial acetic acid 20-fold with deionized water and checked the pH with a meter. The pH was 2.35. There might be, however, another reason not to use vinegar, and since I've never acid washed yeast you'll have to be the judge. I assume that you want to change the pH of the solution around the yeast (and contaminating beasties) in order to kill the non-yeast. To change the pH it is important to use a solution of sufficient buffer capacity. The buffer capacity of an acid buffer goes down by a factor of 10 for each pH unit away from the pK of that acid. The pK of acetic acid is 4.75. As a rule of thumb, I try not to work with a buffer more than 1 pH unit from it's pK. The pK for phosphoric acid is 2.12 and that of sulfuric is 1.92. These would be more suitable acids if my understanding of the yeast washing process is correct. (The other inorganic acids in Domenick 's post are probably just as suitable, but I don't have their pK's at hand). At a pH of 2.5 the buffering capacity of 5% acetic is lower than that for 20 mM phosphoric acid (1.1mL conc. phosphoric acid diluted to 1L with water). You could probably make up for the low buffering capacity by using larger volumes of vinegar, or by increasing the number of washes. I hope that this is helpful. If anybody sees's that my thinking is seriously wrong, blast away. It won't be the first time my brain malfunctioned. By the way, in the short time I've been reading HBD I've become completely hooked. I'd now rather go without my comics than go without HBD. Thank you all. Chuck Burkins burkins at world.std.com Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 28 Jun 1995 11:38:21 -0700 From: gtinseth at teleport.com (Glenn Tinseth) Subject: Hop plugs vs. whole hops Paul Farnsworth <farnsworth at eworld.com> wrote an excellent summary about hop plugs that included the following statement: "In the US ,unless you buy your hops in at least 5 kilo bales, sealed under vacuum, and keep them frozen, plugs are better than anything else you can buy." I have to disagree. Homebrewers certainly don't need to buy minibales of imported whole hops to match or beat hop plug quality. That's what your responsible and conscientious hop merchant or homebrew shop is for. Although frozen vacuum-sealed whole hops used to be rare, things have changed in the last few years. I know of several hop people and homebrew stores from whom I'd be happy to buy whole imported UK hops, turning up my nose at the more expensive and usually more damaged MH hop plugs. Unfortunately, I also know of hundreds of shops that don't take care of their hops. My motto has always been find a supplier you trust and stick with him or her. Buy imported hop plugs for their convenience or their compact form (easy storage), but not because they're better than well-cared-for imported whole hops. US variety hop plugs are worse IMHO. Not only must they make the Sept/Oct journey to England by ship, but then they're smashed into plugs and shipped back again. I've never smelled a US variety hop plug that came close to really fresh US whole hops. Here are four mail-order names I trust to take good care of whole hops: o Just Hops in Mt Zion, IL 1-217-864-4216 <kellums1 at aol.com> o HopTech in Danville, CA 1-800-379-4677 o FH Steinbart in Portland, OR 1-800-735-8793 o Evergreen Brewing Supply in Bellevue, WA 1-800-789-2739 This, of course, is my opinion, based on a little experience dealing with lots of hops ;^) Glenn Return to table of contents
End of HOMEBREW Digest #1769, 06/30/95