HOMEBREW Digest #3014 Mon 26 April 1999

[Prev HBD] [Index] [Next HBD] [Back]

		Digest Janitor: janitor@hbd.org
		Many thanks to the Observer & Eccentric Newspapers of 
		Livonia, Michigan for sponsoring the Homebrew Digest.
				URL: http://www.oeonline.com

  Re: Bitter Mimic (Robert Uhl)
  thomas dolby/old and stale ("Bayer, Mark A")
  Keg Conditioning ("Kris Jacobs")
  Re: Sulphate = Astringency ("Larry Maxwell")
  Fwd: [Fwd: [Fwd: free]] (Nathan Kanous)
  Hop Oil as a preservative? (Badger Roullett)
  Hops in Beer and Dutch (Badger Roullett)
  water treatment (BrewInfo)
  bubblegum (BrewInfo)
  Idophor based sanitation comments (Joy Hansen)
  More on Sanizers (Joy Hansen)
  distillation (BrewInfo)
  fun (BrewInfo)
  Nitrogen in Guinness; Beer Tower ("Daske, Felix")
  Good use for a beard (Shane Brauner)
  Dunno! (pbabcock)
  sanitising oxygen-absorbing caps (BrewInfo)
  Re: Nitrogen head (Sparrow)
  Has anyone kegged Mead? (Alan McKay)
  Brew House (vee12)
  Improved my siphoning... (Ed Choromanski)
  Recipe tried (Paul Haaf)
  Grow your own Hops (woodsj)
  Nitrogen dispense and draught dispense ("silent bob")
  re:Mazer Cup pictures ("Kensler, Paul")
  Re: Where is 'unitconv'? ("Brian Dixon")
  Over Carbonation = Acid Beer (kchris1)
  Pot caramelization? ("Brian Dixon")

Beer is our obsession and we're late for therapy! 2000 MCAB Qualifiers: Spirit of Free Beer! Competition 5/22/99 (http://burp.org/SoFB99); Oregon Homebrew Festival 5/22/99 (http://www.mtsw.com/hotv/fest.html); Buzz-Off! Competition 6/26/99 (http://www.voicenet.com/~rpmattie/buzzoff) 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. **SUBSCRIBE AND UNSUBSCRIBE REQUESTS MUST BE SENT FROM THE E-MAIL ACCOUNT YOU WISH TO HAVE SUBSCRIBED OR UNSUBSCRIBED!!!** IF YOU HAVE SPAM-PROOFED your e-mail address, the autoresponder and the SUBSCRIBE/UNSUBSCRIBE commands will fail! Contact brewery at hbd.org for information regarding the "Cat's Meow" Back issues are available via: HTML from... http://hbd.org Anonymous ftp from... ftp://hbd.org/pub/hbd/digests ftp://ftp.stanford.edu/pub/clubs/homebrew/beer AFS users can find it under... /afs/ir.stanford.edu/ftp/pub/clubs/homebrew/beer COPYRIGHT for the Digest as a collection is currently held by hbd.org (Pat Babcock and Karl Lutzen). Digests in their entirity CANNOT be reprinted/reproduced without this entire header section unless EXPRESS written permission has been obtained from hbd.org. Digests CANNOT be reprinted or reproduced in any format for redistribution unless said redistribution is at absolutely NO COST to the consumer. COPYRIGHT for individual posts within each Digest is held by the author. Articles cannot be extracted from the Digest and reprinted/reproduced without the EXPRESS written permission of the author. The author and HBD must be attributed as author and source in any such reprint/reproduction. (Note: QUOTING of items originally appearing in the Digest in a subsequent Digest is exempt from the above. Home brew clubs NOT associated with organizations having a commercial interest in beer or brewing may republish articles in their newsletters and/or websites provided that the author and HBD are attributed. ASKING first is still a great courtesy...) JANITORS on duty: Pat Babcock and Karl Lutzen (janitor@hbd.org)
---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 22 Apr 1999 12:08:57 -0500 From: Robert Uhl <ruhl at austinc.edu> Subject: Re: Bitter Mimic I received many thoughtful comments regarding my request for improving the body/flavour of my London-style bitter. My thanks to everyone who wrote me. The comments could be summarised as such: o cut out the superlight; it may have rice or other undesirable extract o cut down on/cut out the crystal o use Goldings instead of/to compliment the Fuggles o use Laaglander DME; it's thicker o use M&F LME; it's thicker o use flaked barley to improve body o partial mash with brewing salts for London o use Wyeast London yeasts (Fuller's, London, London III, British &c.) o use chocolate/dark malt instead of dark LME o no need for a 90-minute boil With all this in mind, I think that my next recipe will be something along the lines of: 6 lbs. pale LME 4 oz. chocolate malt 8 oz. crystal malt 2 Tbsp. gypsum Goldings & Fuggles to make 11-12 HBUs (boil) 1 oz. Goldings (flavour) 1 oz. Goldings (dry hop) Mashing malts with gypsum, then adding LME and boiling hops, and proceeding as usual. I think I may go with the longer boil anyway, to help darken the wort, but perhaps I'll forego that step. We'll see how it comes out. Prob. won't get to it 'til May, though. Once again, let me thank all those who wrote me regarding this. This, IMHO, is what the HBD is for: brewers sharing their expertise. I remain As ever, Bob Uhl Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 22 Apr 1999 10:19:50 -0700 From: "Bayer, Mark A" <Mark.Bayer at JSF.Boeing.com> Subject: thomas dolby/old and stale collective homebrew conscience_ james p wrote: <snip>...the HBD hardly qualifies as science at all, and what >science we do see is often bad science. >Good science requires the testing of theories and speculation with >experiments.<snip>Good science realizes that correlation does not imply > a causal effect -- >the difference between observational data and randomized experiments. boy, is this ever unfounded. every scrap of info. i've ever seen on this forum has been backed up by plenty of........wait.......what's happening?????........... >Date: Tue, 20 Apr 1999 23:24:50 -0400 >From: "Brook Raymond" <brook at worldnet.att.net> >Subject: forced CO2 contaminating? >I checked out Brewing Techniques web page and found and interesting article >describing an brewing experiment (sorry can't remember the Title at the >moment, but I'm sure many of you are aware of this study since the >participants were from HBD). >Anyway, I poked around with the data and found conclusive evidence that >contaminated samples were caused by force carbonation.<snip> About >half of the naturally carbonated samples were contaminated, but all of the >forced carbonated samples were contaminated uh, never mind. **************************************** regarding the diacetyl debate, and the overall notion that a particular substance or flavor shouldn't be considered improper in *all* styles, i have a question about oxidation. for some strong beers (belgian and english), part of the maturation process involves laying them down at cellar temps for months and months, if not years. surely this involves oxidation at some level, even if the beers are sedimented with live yeast. i recall in george fix's bt article that temperature was a more important factor than the amount of headspace air when it came to oxidation and the staling process. are oxidation products an expected part of the flavor profile of some strong aged beers? brew hard, mark bayer saint louis missouri Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 22 Apr 1999 13:46:02 -0400 From: "Kris Jacobs" <jtsnake at net-link.net> Subject: Keg Conditioning Hey guys, I have been wrasslin' with this problem of me never having any bottles to "pass around" -- if you want to try my beer, you gotta come over here and get it off the tap. My 3 best local brewing buds always have bottles to pass... :( I have decided that I might start keg conditioning. I will brew a batch, and then reserve a quart or two of wort -- can it in a hot water bath and store it in the fridge. Ferment as usual. Put that quart or two of wort into my keg, then rack from secondary into the keg, seal it and mix it up good. Fill a few bottles by pushing it right out of the keg with a little CO2. Let the keg sit, let the bottles sit, voila! Naturally carbonated beer, some in the keg, some in bottles! My only concern is how much reserved wort would be necessary to get sufficient carbonation levels in the bottles..... as for the keg, I can always "juice up" the carb level with CO2, NP. I've got a CP filler but it's a pain in the ass, IMO. Kris Jacobs Galesburg, MI Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 22 Apr 1999 10:52:37 -0700 From: "Larry Maxwell" <Larry at bmhm.com> Subject: Re: Sulphate = Astringency I have been under the belief that the reason I don't care for Bass Ale is that it has a relatively high sulphate content, which I perceive as "chalky"-tasting, like Milk of Magnesia. To my sense of taste, this chalkiness is very similar to astringency. I know exactly the tannin/polyphenol taste of chewing grape skins and, to me, it is similar. Am I correct that what I perceive as chalky is due to a high sulphate content? If so, maybe "chalky" would be a better description for the sulfate taste than "astringent." Larry in San Diego Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 22 Apr 1999 12:56:51 -0500 From: Nathan Kanous <nlkanous at pharmacy.wisc.edu> Subject: Fwd: [Fwd: [Fwd: free]] Free rinsing solution for carboys! >>> >> >>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>Hello: >>> >>>>>>>>>>We here at Miller Brewing Company, Inc. >>would >>> >>>>>>>>>> We >>> >>>>>>>>>>like to think of ourselves as a >>progressive >>> >>>>>>>>>>company, keeping up with our >>> >>>>>>>>>>customers. We have found the best >>> >>>>>>>>>>way to do this via the Internet and email. >>> >>>>>>>>>>Combining these things, we would like to >>make >>> >>>>>>>>>>a special offer to our >>> >>>>>>>>>> If this email makes >>> >>>>>>>>>>it to 2,000,000 people by 12:00 PM on New >>> >>>>>>>>>> Year's Eve of 1999, we will >>> >>>>>>>>>>send a coupon for one six-pack >>> >>>>>>>>>>of any of our Miller Brand beverages. >>> >>>>>>>>>>In the event that 2,000,000 people are >>> >>>>>>>>>>reached, our tracker/counter, >>> >>>>>>>>>>embedded in this message, will report >>> >>>>>>>>>>to us with the list of names and email >>> >>>>>>>>>>addresses. Thereafter, each >>> >>>>>>>>>>email address will be sent an electronic >>> >>>>>>>>>>coupon which you can print out and redeem >>at >>> >>>>>>>>>>any Miller Brand beverage carrying store. >>The coupons will >>> >>>>>>>>>>be sent as soon as 2,000,000 people are >>> >>>>>>>>>>reached, so the sooner, the >>> >>>>>>>>>>better. >>> >>>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>Enjoy, and Cheers, >>> >>>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>Gary D. Anderson, Chief Marketing Director >>> >>>>>>>>>>Miller Brewing Company, Inc. >>> >>>>>>>>>>http://www.millerbrewing.com >>> >>>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>_______________________________________________________________ >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. >>Visit >>> >>>http://www.msn.com >>> >>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>> >>_______________________________________________________________ >> >>> >>>>>>>>> Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. >>Visit http://www.msn.com >>> >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>_______________________________________________________________ >> >>> >>>>>>>Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit >>http://www.msn.com >>> >>>>>> >>> >>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>_______________________________________________________________ >> >>> >>>>>>Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit >>http://www.msn.com >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>>>>_______________________________________________________________ >> >>> >>>>>Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit >>http://www.msn.com >>> >>>> >>> >>>> >>> >>>>>>_______________________________________________________________ >> >>> >>>>Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit >>http://www.msn.com >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>>>_______________________________________________________________ >> >>> >>>Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit >>http://www.msn.com >>> >>> >>> >> >>> > >>> > >>> >>> >> >>_________________________________________________________ >>DO YOU YAHOO!? >>Get your free at yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com >> >> > Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 22 Apr 1999 11:30:18 -0700 From: Badger Roullett <branderr at microsoft.com> Subject: Hop Oil as a preservative? From: "Nigel Porter" <nigel at sparger.freeserve.co.uk> Subject: RE: Hop Oil as a preservative? > How about just making it without hops at all? If it could be done 500 years > ago, I'm sure that it can be done now. Unless you are planning on storing > the ale in less than ideal conditions for long periods, I cannot imagine any > problems. I also believe that some of these old ales were quite sour > affairs, so lack of hops may be an advantage. The problem here that ale in period was consumed very quickly, and usually did not last long. two weeks was about the longest you could keep it. So many of the recipes I am reproducing are only meant to be around for short periods of time. But I can only drink so much beer myself, so I want to preserve it. Also my research seems to point to the use of herbs (besides for medicinal purposes) was to mask the off flavors of infected ale. Hops was known very early on (pre 1000) for its preservative properties. The English were the last to fall sway to the "demon weed" which was being brought in by the Flemish. - ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Brander Roullett aka Badger Homepage: http://www.nwlink.com/~badger In the SCA: Lord Frederic Badger of Amberhaven "It had to be a linguistics professor who said that it's man's ability to use language that makes him the dominant species on the planet. That may be. But I think there's one other thing that separates us from animals. We aren't afraid of vacuum cleaners." --Jeff Stilson Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 22 Apr 1999 11:41:48 -0700 From: Badger Roullett <branderr at microsoft.com> Subject: Hops in Beer and Dutch From: "Charles T. Major" <ctmajor at samford.edu> Subject: Re: Hop oil as a preservative >>the source of his comment. The conversation was in the >>context of a 14th century English mead and metheglyn recipe >>that called for rosemary, among other herbs, and he noted >>that the rosemary would have provided some preservative qualities. I would love to get my hands on the recipe. what source it from? >>Another preservative common in the Middle Ages was alcohol. >>Ales tended to be stronger than beers are today, and the >>alcohol helped keep bacterial infection at bay. Yup, the Strong Ales, were quite strong. >>That said, I've got to quibble with Badger's assertion that NOPE! No quibbling allowed!! can't do it... Against the rules... ;) >>hops were unknown in England before the Dutch introduced >>them in beer. Hops are mentioned in England as early as >>the 10th century in Bald's Leechbook. I guess i meant to say they weren't common. >>Though they were not >>the brewing staple they are today, they were known in >>England and likely found their way into the occasional brew >>along with the various other herbs that formed the gruit. I agree, the Flemish, and the German brought it into regular usage as the primary ingredient much sooner than the English. >>Additionally, beer is not a Dutch loan word, but rather a native Germanic one used interchangeably with ale in >> some of the earliest Old English texts. The distinction between ale (hopless) and beer (hopped) is a late >> distinction, after the Dutch began importing weaker, hopped beer. At this point the English became >> opposed to hops in beer, not because of the hops themselves, but because of the weaker >> beer they allowed the Dutch to brew. I mean to say, that beer is what they called ale with hops... which was primarily a product of the Flemish. I am quick to type, and slow to think. When you say Late addition, do you mean Late period meaning (to my sca brain) 1500+? There really is no distinction now-a-days.. I have vague memories of Ale and beer coming into such usage around 1300? (QDA) Don't have my brewing library in my head. Badger Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 22 Apr 1999 13:53:48 -0500 (CDT) From: BrewInfo <brewinfo at xnet.com> Subject: water treatment In HBD #3003, Dave writes: >I know we all have been brought up (or steeped) in the >mantra ( or momily) that historical local beers have taken >on the character they have because of the local water. >However, from these simple observations many extreme >behaviors have arisen. Like for instance AlK's admission >that he once used up to 1/2 cup or more calcium sulfate >in brewing ( I assume 5 gallons). Such behaviors fail to >recognize that there are several things like solubility of >calcium sulfate in water that will limit the content. If calcium >sulfate were really that soluble then we couldn't use it as >Plaster of Paris. So I doubt that using such an extreme >amount did any good, since it was limited by the >solubility of the salt. Firstly, what I said was: >Personally, I love high-sulphate >Bitters and once made a 15-gallon batch of IPA into which I put more than >1/2 CUP of gypsum (I weighed it out, but turned out to be > 1/2 cup). Why then would you assume it was a 5-gallon batch. I don't like my brewing methods to be characterised as "behaviors." Also, please check the solubility of calcium sulphate before you start bashing my methods. >Secondly, extreme amounts of calcium in the brewing >liquor ( maybe by using the more soluble chloride) >precipitate too much of the phosphate and the pH falls >and, more importantly, the mash and wort is starved of >phosphate. A bad thing for the mash pH and the yeast. This is a good point and I will check my pH next time, but I'm pretty sure that it was reasonable. >Thirdly, if you will read the books I have read, they all >seem to list the water analysis of the locality. The major >INCORRECT assumption is that this is the water used >as the brewing liquor. A simple treatment such as liming >the water will remove bicarbonates and sulfates and >correct the pH to make an excellent brewing liquor. >SO just because the well head has a certain mineral >analysis does not mean that is the water that makes it >to the brewery (or even into the mains, as municipalities >treat water as well as the brewery) nor, above all, what >makes it into the mashtun. You keep reading your books (which I have read too, and probably a few more) and I'll keep brewing beer and talking to brewmasters. Like the time I was in Burton-upon-Trent and spoke with the brewmaster at the Burton Bridge Brewery, where I was told that the municipal water is now 1/2 well and 1/2 surface water so they add gypsum to get the sulphate up to the traditional 600-700ppm range. As for water treatment, I know of no brewery that removes sulphate (how would you do that economically? AJ?), but there are many in Germany that remove bicarbonate by using hydroxides (slaked lime, I believe). However, modern water treatment aside, traditionally, the beer that was brewed in these famous brewing cities (Munich/Munchner Dunkel, London/Porter, Burton-upon-Trent/Pale Ales...) was made with untreated water. Today, they can make Pils in Dublin, but back then, they couldn't. In the very next post, Dave writes: >Don't be so quick to condemn someone who >might on some occasion agree with you and >provide *scientific* support for your case. Good point... I'll have to remember that. Al. Al Korzonas, Lockport, IL korz at brewinfo.com http://www.brewinfo.com/brewinfo/ Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 22 Apr 1999 14:44:16 -0500 (CDT) From: BrewInfo <brewinfo at xnet.com> Subject: bubblegum Pat writes: >Al sez: > >> Yes. Orval has Brettanomyces among the bottling strain mixture. Brett >> is what gives Orval that "bubblegum" aroma. > >Really? I got the bubble-gum aroma from fermenting an Orval clone with >WYEAST 1214 Belgian Ale yeast. I was not aware that this was Brettanomyces nor contained any. The aroma was so intense at initial racking that I >swore someone was breathing little-league breath right next to me. It >wasn't until several weeks later that Brett. got anywhere near the carboy > - again, unless Wyeast 1214 is or contains it. My guess would be it doesn't... but I didn't say that Brett is the *only* way to get bubblegum aroma in your beer. I typically get a banana aroma from #1214, but then the esters and higher alcohols produced by the yeast are influenced by the makeup of the wort (amino acids, for example). Perhaps I was a little overly confident on my initial post... I had convinced myself of this a long time ago and what used to be posted as "I think that perhaps Brett is..." five years ago, now becomes "Brett is..." Here's the whole story. These are all the facts: 1. I isolated a yeast from a bottle of Orval around 1990 that makes beer which smells just like Orval (bubble gum). 2. It is an extremely slow-fermenting yeast (roughly 2 or 3 months until the airlock slows down and it never gets above about 6 bubbles per minute). 3. One of the yeasts that Orval pitches after the main fermentation is a Brettanomyces yeast. 4. Brettanomyces are typically very slow fermenters. 5. Both the yeast I isolated and a true Brettanomyces I purchased make *extremely* fruity beer (initially -- later you get the horseyness). 6. Both the yeast I isolated and a true Brettanomyces I purchased are acid producers -- in other words, they make "tart" beer. I put these six facts together and deduced that it is quite likely that the yeast I isolated from Orval was the Brettanomyces yeast and that it is Brettanomyces that produces the bubblegum aroma in Orval. So, while I didn't check my Orval isolate with cyclohexamide, I have reason to believe that it is a Brett yeast. Do you think my statement merited a QDA? Al. Al Korzonas, Lockport, IL korz at brewinfo.com http://www.brewinfo.com/brewinfo/ Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 22 Apr 1999 10:30:16 +0000 From: Joy Hansen <happyhansen at scronline.com> Subject: Idophor based sanitation comments Rob Moline, aka Jethro Gump, wrote in post #3030 concerning MR. JOY's pronouncements on idophor sanitizing solutions at 12.5 PPM. With respect to your experience, home brewers without CIP systems might have a different problem and results with sanitation. For one thing, the city water where I live is not chlorinated nor is it treated an any way. It's very high in bicarbonate and a 25ppm solution will discolor within 5 minutes and on standing results in a rust colored precipitate! My explanation is that an iodine complex is formed/precipitates and effectively removes the sanitation properties of aqueous iodine. Of course, the chlorine wouldn't have much effect on the idophor; however, the lack of chlorine in the city water could introduce beer spoilage organisms into the nutrient rich environment of my wort! You might agree that Star San is appropriate as a sanitizer for my situation. I must live with the foaming, the cloudy solutions, and check the ph frequently. OTOH,Star San solutions might have an indefinite storage period and could be used over and over until the pH changes? I would rather that G. Fix step into the ring and explain his tests and findings or that interested home brewers read his book. The following is what I recall from reading G. Fix's chapter on sanitation. Idophor solutions at 25 ppm with a contact time of 5 minutes are effective. Interestingly, when the ppm idophor increases above 25, the effectiveness of the sanitizing decreases. More is not better! When the temperature increases from a nominal room temperature, the higher it goes, the less effective the sanitizer is. G.Fix explains the situation in great detail and includes the calculations for determining the proper contact time of the sanitizers. My practical experience with idophor solutions involved adding idophor until I got the approximate correct concentration - add more as it loses color. Hmm, never did get around to using the test strips. The warmer the water, the better sanitizing job I thought the idophor was doing. Again, these are my interpretations and not quotes of what is presented in G. Fix book. >From my own experiences and reading, a 70% isopropyl alcohol aqueous solution is optimum for sanitizing (not sterilizing). Solutons above or below this optimum concentration become ineffectual. I suppose ethanol behaves like wise. Oh, I don't know what 10/60 means. Could it be "Contact time of 10 minutes at 60 degrees"? Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 22 Apr 1999 11:00:51 +0000 From: Joy Hansen <happyhansen at scronline.com> Subject: More on Sanizers Fred Johnson wrote in his commentary in HBD #3010 that Mr. Joy failed to identify "IMHO" and direct quotes from G. Fix. Unfortunately, I'm in California and all my brewing references are at my home in Virginia. Iopologize to the consortium for my failure. Ripley's "believe it or not" suggests that I am an analytical chemist with specialization in laboratory quality control (microbiology, chemistry, and pathology). Though not trained in the sciences other than chemistry, I learned a great deal about preventative sanitation in laboratories and abattoirs. I'm convinced that the findings and the experiment presented by G. Fix are factual and that the conclusions are appropriate for home brewer situations. I guess all that can be done after all the saying is finished is to take a swab of the surface and have it tested for viable organisms. I read the book and I believe! Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 22 Apr 1999 16:23:49 -0500 (CDT) From: BrewInfo <brewinfo at xnet.com> Subject: distillation Tony writes: >My distillation experience (yes, it is legal here in New Zealand) to date is >based on preparing simple sugar-only wort. From these, and run through a >reflux condenser, I collect a very clean & tasteless vodka, which is ideal >for creating liqueurs with, and adding to commercially available flavors. That reminds me... please excuse the non-HB question... A few days ago, there was a news story about a group of older guys who ended up in the hospital... two (I beliveve) died. The reporter said that initial reports suggest that they died from drinking homemade moonshine. One relative said that it was common in that Puerto Rican community for people to make moonshine from molasses, white sugar and brown sugar. Let us review the science once again... ethanol poisoning aside, is moonshine any more likely to kill you than store-bought alcohol? Also, methanol is impossible to make via fermentation of sugars, right? Just checking my facts so I can blast the newspeople. Al. Al Korzonas, Lockport, IL korz at brewinfo.com http://www.brewinfo.com/brewinfo/ Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 22 Apr 1999 16:31:09 -0500 (CDT) From: BrewInfo <brewinfo at xnet.com> Subject: fun Alan writes, quoting Phil: >"My friends, neighbours, relatives and even my wife and > associated girlfriends think my beer is more special than > any commercial versions available." > >Then I think you are already far, far ahead of anyone who can >go on for hours about chemical compositions and reactions. > >Sure, I use an amount of science in my beer. But when the >science begins to become more important than the beer - well - >that's when I'll turn in my brewspoon and move on. Unfortunately >I think there are a number of folks I've seen in here who >are already well beyond that point IMO. Why do you presume that the science is more important than the beer for us who like the science? I find both science and beer fun. I can go on for hours about chemical compositions and reactions, but they are not more important than the beer to me. If you think I'm passionate about the science, then you should see how passionate I am about the beer! I'd give up the science before I gave up the beer, but who says I have to give up either? Al. Al Korzonas, Lockport, IL korz at brewinfo.com http://www.brewinfo.com/brewinfo/ Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 22 Apr 1999 14:46:23 -0700 From: "Daske, Felix" <DaskeF at bcrail.com> Subject: Nitrogen in Guinness; Beer Tower In HBD #3011, Al Korzonas of Lockport, IL provides a compelling argument, and a descriptive diagram, explaining why "atmospheric nitrogen had something to do with the head [on a pint o' Guinness]". [snipped some] 25% CO2 + 75% N2 -> =========\\ || || //=========== -> beer out || || ------||-||------- | || | | N2 || | | + || | | CO2 || | | || | |~~~~~~~~||~~~~~~| | || | | beer || | | + || | | dis- || | |solved || | | gasses || | | || | | || | ------------------ Now, since N2 is virtually insoluble in the beer, then the "dissolved gasses" in the beer are really virtually 100% CO2. I don't see how the N2 can make it to the faucet until the keg is empty. << Thanx, Al, for that clear explanation. Even I <G> could understand that. - --------------------------------------------------- One good ASCII diagram deserves another(?) I've got a query... This my bar area (actually a rather large closet) in our main living space. The closet is there, and it currently houses the shelf unit and bar fridge. - ---------------------------------------------- | |/ | | | | | | | | /| | | | / | | | |/ | 2 tap | | SHELF | | _ tower | | | /| -| | | | glass- | / | _| |_________| | ware |/ | / | | COUNTER | | | | /__ _________| | wine | /| |_______________|__ | | / | | | | | etc. |/ | | BAR FRIDGE | | | | | | | | | | |_______________| | | | | / / | | 4' | | / 4' | | | | |/ / | | | - ------------------------------------------------ |<----------------- 5' --------------------->| I want to install a beer tower. The bar fridge has a nice stainless front and is sitting close to the front of the closet. There is about 2' of open space behind it. I intend to install a nice counter which will cover the fridge- the tower will be attached towards the back. There is room underneath for equipment. I am in need of some guidance. What you do not see, in the diagram, is that I intend to run the hoses from the tower through the floor, into the crawl space (5'11" but I can't call it a basement). In the crawl space I will have a temp. controlled freezer, for kegging. I have yet to purchase the tower or the kegging system. My lovely wife said that she would give me her small freezer if I take her , and the kids to Disneyland. Sounds like a deal <G>. I know, I know, bad economics - but, you gotta admire her support! The distance for the hoses will be about 8', which is also the rise of the beer. Is this a problem? How about the regulator? I think that this is something I will need to adjust, from time to time. Should I be keeping the CO2 tank and regulator in the bar? Any thoughts? kind regards, Felix Fallen Rock Home Brewery (beer from the earth) Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 22 Apr 1999 17:10:37 -0500 (CDT) From: Shane Brauner <shane at UH.EDU> Subject: Good use for a beard Here's a story... From http://cnn.com/WORLD/europe/9904/16/BC-LITHUANIA-RECORD.reut/index.html Bearded Lithuanian lifts beer keg with his whiskers April 16, 1999 Web posted at: 6:48 AM EDT (1048 GMT) VILNIUS, Lithuania (Reuters) -- A Lithuanian brewer put his 32-cm long (12.60 inches) beard to good use when he lifted a 41-kilogram (90.39 lb) barrel of his own homemade beer, the daily Lietuvos Rytas reported on Friday. Antanas Kontrimas, from the Western town of Telshiai, was already well-known in the small Baltic state for having Lithuania's longest beard. The paper said that Kontrimas steeled himself for the challenge by downing a pint of beer beforehand. He pulled off his feat in front of the cameras of a morning television show. Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 22 Apr 1999 17:35:18 -0400 (EDT) From: pbabcock <pbabcock at mail.oeonline.com> Subject: Dunno! Greetings, Beerlings! Take me to your lager... Al sez: > Do you think my statement merited a QDA? Dunno! What's a QDA? See ya! Pat Babcock in SE Michigan pbabcock at oeonline.com Home Brew Digest Janitor janitor@hbd.org HBD Web Site http://hbd.org The Home Brew Page http://oeonline.com/~pbabcock/brew.html "Just a cyber-shadow of his former brewing self..." Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 22 Apr 1999 17:50:46 -0500 (CDT) From: BrewInfo <brewinfo at xnet.com> Subject: sanitising oxygen-absorbing caps Nathaniel P. Lansing writes: >I spoke to a technician at one of the companies that manufacture >oxygen scavenging crown caps. His comments were that the only >good way to do it was with gamma radiation. Since the DOE permit >process for maintaining a gamma source is cost prohitive, the only >aqueous >solution to use for sanitizing caps would be a sodium or potassium >metabisulphite solution at 10%. The sulphite solution is a strong >reducing >agent and will not affect the oxygen scavenging ability of the caps. Firstly, please refer back to my many posts in which I point out that metabisulphite solution is not a sanitiser... bisulphite solutions are only guaranteed to *inhibit* bacteria and yeast, not kill them. Secondly, this goes against what the lead engineer of the original oxygen-absorbing caps told me personally (on the phone). He recommended bleach solution at a rate of 200ppm free chlorine or iodophor at a rate of 12.5 to 25 ppm titratable iodine. In my opinion, technicians at companies that manufacture crown caps are more likely to be experts in mechanical engineering than microbiology. Al. Al Korzonas, Lockport, IL korz at brewinfo.com http://www.brewinfo.com/brewinfo/ Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 22 Apr 1999 19:33:35 -0700 From: Sparrow <druid at princeton.crosswinds.net> Subject: Re: Nitrogen head but what if the keg were really like this? > > > 25% CO2 + 75% N2 -> =========\\ > || > || //=========== -> beer out > || || > ------||-||------- > | || || | > | N2 || || | > | + || || | > | CO2|| || | > | || || | > |~~~~~||~||~~~~~~| > |beer || || | > | & || || | > |disso||l||ved | > |gases|| || | > | + || || | > |bubbles || | > |from || || | > |dispensing tank | > ------------------ Since in this configuration the gas in tube runs to the bottom of the keg, some bubbles might be forced up thru the beer out line also. Perhaps Guinness uses a different combination of internal keg plumbing? Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 22 Apr 1999 21:18:50 -0400 From: Alan McKay <amckay at ottawa.com> Subject: Has anyone kegged Mead? Is there anything special to do? I threw one in the keg 2 nights ago - a Cherry Mead. Didn't have enough time to bottle it before moving, so in it went. Is it OK to leave the keg out of the fridge for extended periods? I'm assuming that it is. This one is a real whopper, too! It's easily full-strength - a good 17% or so. Man, does it have a kick! And it goes down smooth as a whistle, nice and fruity and lots of honey flavour left in it. And it doesn't seem to hold the carbonation for a long time, so you can pour a 4 oz glass for sipping and when it's half gone, so is most of the carbonation so there's just enough left to add some balance to it. Nice 'n' smooth ... ... and being served on moving day Saturday ;-) cheers, -Alan - -- "Brewers make wort, yeast makes beer" - Dave Miller's Homebrewing Guide http://www.magma.ca/~bodnsatz/brew/tips/ Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 23 Apr 1999 05:38:44 -0500 From: vee12 at juno.com Subject: Brew House Howdy, Does anyone on the list know of a source for plans to build a small backyard brewhouse? Butch V. Dallas Area ___________________________________________________________________ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com/getjuno.html or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 23 Apr 1999 08:38:26 -0400 From: Ed Choromanski <choroman at voicenet.com> Subject: Improved my siphoning... Hi All: I am always looking at ways to shorten my brew day (which is normally at night). I wanted to share, what I think might be an area of improvement. Siphoning from the boiler to the fermetor, this is one area (for me) that always takes longer that is should (IMHO). In my system I have a 10 gal pot that is used as the boiler. For siphoning, I use a homemade goose-neck cane (made of 3/8" copper) with a braided-stainless steel loop attached to the bottom with a Tee. The braided hose works great at filtering out the hops and break material but the flow rate always seems slower that it should. So on Wednesday night I tried an experiment. I was doing a double batch (5 gals each but different recipes) so I would have to siphon twice. The first time I did my normal procedure; whirlpool, let settle (10 min.) and siphon. This resulted in 41 min. The second time, whirlpool and siphon (but continue to whirlpool). Time to complete was 14 min. I immediate notice the flow rate through the siphon was much greater than the previous batch (actually the greatest that I have ever had). There appears to be no visually noticable degradation in the filtering of the wort. Since the above experiment was done with different recipes, this is far from a solid conclusion and warrants further (and more controlled) testing. I just wanted to share my experience with the collective and hope that this small payment pays back what I have personally gained (from lurk mode) from HBD. Cheers, Ed Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 23 Apr 1999 10:09:19 -0400 From: Paul Haaf <haafbrau1 at juno.com> Subject: Recipe tried The Irish stew recipe was very tasty. Even my wife liked it, and she loathes beer. (This is not a bad thing, it means more for me 8-) ) I did add peas to it, only because I had them, and I didn't have many carrots. Oh yeah, I also used a crock pot instead of the oven. I just finished the last of it off for breakfast. Keep the recipes coming. Paul Haaf ___________________________________________________________________ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com/getjuno.html or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 23 Apr 1999 11:45:38 -0400 From: woodsj at us.ibm.com Subject: Grow your own Hops Does anyone know where you can obtain hops to grow and harvest ? I've read some recent articles, not sure I want to get into it but I'm interested. The authors seem to have a hop-farmer connection and get cuttings from them. Are there any commercially available hop vines ? Any responses will be greatly appreciated. Jeff Woods (WOODSJ at US.IBM.COM) Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 23 Apr 1999 09:37:19 PDT From: "silent bob" <holdenmcneil at hotmail.com> Subject: Nitrogen dispense and draught dispense Hello all!! I would like to comment on the recent thread about nitrogen dispense. I am going out on a limb and diputing Al K's post (I say out on a limb because I have a great deal of respect for his knowledge, having read many of his posts). Even though the swan neck of a beer engine system quickly becomes immersed in the ale being dispensed, turbulence mixes in alot of air. Because of the low amount of CO2 in the beer, most of the gas in the bubbles is air. Since the gas in the bubbles is air, and the gas outside of the bubbles is air, very little diffusion occurs through the walls of the bubbles. This does two things: First, the smaller a bubble, the greater the surface tension of that bubble, so if a small bubble is next to a large one, the small one tends to diffuse into the larger and so on and so on. Since nitrogen diffuses slower than CO2, this coalescence occurs more slowly. Second, since their is very little concentration gradient between the gas in the bubbles and the atmosphere, the gas in the bubbles does not tend to diffuse out to the atomoshere (this process is very rapid with CO2 which is less than .5% of the atomoshere but 100% of the bubble gas in a conventionally carbonated beer). The same principals apply to beers dispensed with nitrogen and CO2 mixtures, except that the nitrogen is dissolved in the beer and is knocked out of solution when it passes through the pinholes in the "guiness tap". I hope that I have been clear, as I have tried to keep the length of this post down. Happy dispensing!! Adam _______________________________________________________________ Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 23 Apr 1999 13:30:21 -0500 From: "Kensler, Paul" <paul.kensler at wilcom.com> Subject: re:Mazer Cup pictures Big thanks to Jason Henning for posting pictures of the Mazer Cup judging on his website - it was fun to see everything and everyone. By the way, the judging sheets I received back were some of the finest (ie, filled out, legible, worthwhile comments, etc.) I have ever received back. Many thanks to the judges for doing a fine job (even though I didn't win!). Paul Kensler Plano, TX Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 23 Apr 1999 20:19:48 -0700 From: "Brian Dixon" <mutex at proaxis.com> Subject: Re: Where is 'unitconv'? Finally getting caught up with my HBD email! Alan McKay asked the whereabouts of something called 'unitconv' that converted "just about everything under the sun." He was referring to the software utility that I wrote called Craft Brew Unit Converter, which has an executable named unitconv.exe (for Win95+/NT). It converts weight units, liquid volume units, temperature, density etc. I think it's the most complete utility of it's kind, but I don't really know what's out there in the world that I haven't seen. Anyway, it's free. It's available at http://www.proaxis.com/~mutex. Have fun! Brian Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 23 Apr 1999 20:18:36 -0700 From: kchris1 at lausd.k12.ca.us Subject: Over Carbonation = Acid Beer HBD, Im always learning something... Recently the topic of over carbonating kegs leads to the beer taking on some additional acidity. This appears to be in agreement with my experience. However, I have blamed the over acidity on adding too much lactic to my sparge water or sparging too long. I couldnt figure it out even though I was using pH papers and a hydrometer. Is it possible to fix the beer after becoming acidic from over carbonating it? Fortunately, I dont have any acidic beer on tapit is all tasting great right now!!! I am interested in this topic because I am not real good at getting the right carbonation levels for the style of beer. This is because I crash cool the beer once it is in the keg and hit it with CO2 The last batch I made was a stout. I put a pot of French Roast coffee in the primary which added a very nice coffee note to the beer. Light carbonation helps let the flavors through too. Thanks for the info! Keith Chattsworth CA Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 23 Apr 1999 20:26:49 -0700 From: "Brian Dixon" <mutex at proaxis.com> Subject: Pot caramelization? Anyone experienced with pot caramelization? I tried it for the first time on a 90-Schilling Scotch Ale (from Noonan's book ... OG 1.076). Holy butter caramel, Batman! I did like Noonan said: place boil pot on burner, start sparging, turn burner on high, turn burner off when wort is deep enough to be just boiling instead of caramelizing, then finish sparging. Maybe Noonan doesn't have a 160kBTU propane burner, but man did that hot pot BONG and BANG while that wort went into it! I sped up the sparge so it was hosing out pretty fast and killed the propane when it got about 1 1/2" deep in the pot, then slowed the sparge to normal rates and finished up. My question is: Has anyone else done this? How did you do it and what were the results? Mine is finishing up in the primary right now, so it'll be awhile before I find out my results, but I was curious in the mean time.... Brian Return to table of contents
[Prev HBD] [Index] [Next HBD] [Back]
HTML-ized on 04/26/99, by HBD2HTML version 1.2 by K.F.L.
webmaster at hbd.org, KFL, 10/9/96