HOMEBREW Digest #3298 Thu 13 April 2000

[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: Tequiza and Agave ("Flash")
  Wanted: Manuals for a SelfMade Microbewerie ("A.Carminati")
  mysteries of iodophor revealed (Marc Sedam)
  Free Sake fungus - Australian brewers only (Graham Sanders)
  Philly Competition Results (Joe Uknalis)
  Water retention by hops (John_E_Schnupp)
  Hops planting question - Jeff Lutes ("Sieben, Richard")
  Re: Rims (Susan/Bill Freeman)
  Bob Bratcher Writes ("Pannicke, Glen A.")
  cleaners and sanitizers available to homebrewers (Jim Liddil)
  Subject: Chicken Feed ("Houseman, David L")
  RE: RIMS Soldering question (Jonathan Peakall)
  Defending Fouch (fred_garvin)
  re: Bob Bratcher Writes ("Nigel Porter")
  Attenuation Question ("Darrell Leavitt")
  re HSA ("Stephen Alexander")
  Re: Infusion Mashing Help ("Frank J. Russo")
  "scientific' brewing ("Alan Meeker")
  Change of Addresses (David Houseman)
  Fire Extinguisher (Epic8383)
  Re: Barley wine carbonation (Spencer W Thomas)
  RE: Yeast Question ("Rob Moline")
  re: Chicken Scratch (Dick Dunn)

* Beer is our obsession and we're late for therapy! * 18th Annual Oregon Homebrew Festival - entry deadline May 15th * More info at: http://www.hotv.org/fest2000 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 canoot reach you. We will not correct your address for the automation - that's your job. 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 at hbd.org. JANITORS on duty: Pat Babcock and Karl Lutzen (janitor@hbd.org)
---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2000 14:27:00 -0700 From: "Flash" <ferment at flash.net> Subject: RE: Tequiza and Agave Joe O'Meara asks about making a Tequiza clone. I have not tried to make a clone of Tequiza - and don't want to. Sorry for the comment, but I just don't like that beer. I can tell you a few things about Tequiza. I know they use a small portion of Agave Nectar in (I believe) post fermentation, and I mean a very small. Just for flavor. That is to say they don't use very much and not as a primary fermentable. Note: Some of what I am saying is speculation based on what I have been told by the main importer of Agave, and my experience with using agave, not any first hand knowledge from AB. They are very mum about these things. Agave, by the way, for those who don't know is what tequila is made from. Agave first of all, is very expensive compared with what A-B would be willing to spend for a fermentable. Wholesale cost exceeds that of malt extract. I can't see A-B using something that expensive as a major fermentable in a brew that doesn't cost much more than Bud. I have however made some brews I like much better than Tequiza, which is not too difficult. Anheuser-Busch it seems can screw up any new brew they do and simply brew to the lowest common denominator. The wonder bread of beer.. It is too bad too that Anheuser-Busch was first to come out with an agave drink. I can't see any craft brewer trying to brew with it after trying a Tequiza. But it is uncharted territory and the potential is tremendous. My favorite recipe so far is basically 50% agave nectar and 50% wheat extract (Alexander's). Low hopping with something like a crystal or ultra low alpha hop and sweet orange peal in the fermentor. I use lagar yeast for its clean profile. There are some ale yeast such as White California or wyeast 1056 that would also do fine. More about agave can be found at: http://www.steinfillers.com/agave.htm Don Van Valkenburg Stein Fillers Brewing supply www.steinfillers.com Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2000 22:25:30 -0300 From: "A.Carminati" <carminat at cpovo.net> Subject: Wanted: Manuals for a SelfMade Microbewerie I'm a brazilian interested in making a micro-brewerie here. I already receive "home beer digest" emails. I'd like to receive some hints on what book to read to begin a microbrewerie which can produce about 3000 litres/month. Thanks in advance Alexandre Carminati carminat at email.com Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2000 22:36:26 -0400 From: Marc Sedam <marc_sedam at unc.edu> Subject: mysteries of iodophor revealed http://www.calweb.com/~robertac/iodophor.htm Someone on another forum found this site. It talks about iodophor, it's proper use, and what concentrations show up on the palate. Good, interesting stuff worth looking at. I'm merely passing it along. Cheers! Marc Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2000 13:38:18 +1000 From: Graham Sanders <GrahamS at bsa.qld.gov.au> Subject: Free Sake fungus - Australian brewers only G'day to my fellow brewers Thanks to Mutuso in Japan, I have got hold of and have bred up the Sake fungus. Since this stuff is soooooooo dificult to get in this country, I am offering to my countrymen a free sample in the spirit of the homebrew community. If you are interested contact me, but for my sanity and not wanting to be swamped, only people who are really interested in making sake should naturally ask for it. Mate-ship is alive and well in the Land Down Under. Shout Graham Sanders Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2000 00:30:28 -0700 From: Joe Uknalis <birman at netaxs.com> Subject: Philly Competition Results Homebrewers of Philadelphia & Suburbs are pleased to announce the results of our 18th annual competition (HOPS-BOPS). Hearty congratulations to Craig McKelvey on winning best of show with his Bavarian wheat, Alpengluen edlweizen. Full results can be found at: http://www.netaxs.com/~shady/hops/archives/hops-bops_2000/results.html Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2000 22:34:32 -0700 From: John_E_Schnupp at amat.com Subject: Water retention by hops In an attempt to become more accurate with my water usage calculations I would like to know the amount of water trapped in the hops. I don't recall seeing this anywhere (there are numbers for water retention by grain). I've done some guestimates by squeezing as much wort out of my brewing hops and measuring the "sludge" left in the brewpot. However, there is still water trapped in the hops due the hops being re-hydrated. I could buy a bunch of hops and runs some tests to determine this but if anyone has this information, it would help prevent me from wasting hops and money. TIA, John Schnupp, N3CNL Dirty Laundry Brewery Georgia, VT 95 XLH 1200 Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2000 08:02:50 -0500 From: "Sieben, Richard" <SIER1 at Aerial1.com> Subject: Hops planting question - Jeff Lutes Jeff, my soil is a heavy clay and pebbles (glacial till) here in McHenry county, IL. Years ago when I started my veggie garden of 9'x20', I added a cubic yard or so of natural peat that was available for free from the local peat bog! It made the garded very water permeable such that I would only have to deep water the garden one time per week in the peak of summer. Anyway, this garden became my hop yard, and I added even more peat then to keep the soil loose. I also added composted cow manure, one bag for each hop mound and mixed it well with peat and some of the existing soil. I did get hop production the first year, some varieties even gave me nearly 1lb. dry weight. good luck on your hop ranch! Rich Sieben Island Lake, IL Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2000 08:42:53 -0500 From: Susan/Bill Freeman <potsus at bellsouth.net> Subject: Re: Rims Scot, You have the basics for a RIMS system. There must be a heat exchange somewhere along the line and therefore you must have at least 2 pots or containers. The Polarwear pot with its false bottom will serve as the mashtun. I hope that this pot has a valve low on its side for wort pickup. A second pot with a copper coil in it similar to an immersion chiller and heated by your burner will serve as the heat source in place of an electric element. Run hoses from the Polarwear valve to the pump, then from the pump to one side of the copper coil, and hence back to the mashtun from the other side of the coil. Throttle the OUTFLOW from the pump to keep it from taking a suction on the mashtun grain bed. Stop the pump altogether when you reach the mashtun temp you want or add a simple bypass valve that cuts out the coil f. Recirculation up to just prior to pumping the finished wort to whatever you collect the wort for boil will help clarify it. With a little "slight of hand" the mashtun can then be cleaned out and used for your boiler. (A third boil pot can be added later.) When mashing in with my system, I thoroughly mix grist and strike water and let it sit for 20-30 minutes. Then I start recirculation and or temp steps. Recirculation goes until I finally start to pump off finished wort. Mashing in I use 1 quart/pound of water - during recirc that usually rises to 1.25 qurts/pound. Hope this helps. My system can be forund at http://www.brewrats.org/hwb/er Bill Freeman aka Elder Rat KP Brewery - home of "the perfesser" Birmingham, AL Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2000 09:43:36 -0400 From: "Pannicke, Glen A." <glen_pannicke at merck.com> Subject: Bob Bratcher Writes Phil writes of an HBD party: >Yes it would certainly make an interesting party if we all did actually get >together. Well I'll rack up the balls and gas up the rice lager, the >Billiard room is just waiting for a ding dong party. But let me know >approximate numbers so I can round up the appropriate number of scantily >dresses women, looks like it's going to be a wild one! Meeting HBD people face-to-face would be interesting however, there are some I would still prefer to meet from a distance - at least at first. Now as to Phil's idea of a party, I'd have a few concerns about what he means by "rack up the balls" and a "ding dong party". I wasn't too worried when he mentioned that he hallucinates over naked deceased film stars knocking on on his bedroom window late at night but even the promise of scantily clad women just can't overcome my perception of what ball racking and ding dongs entail... As for some of the missed humor which sometimes results in lots of scratching and hissing, I think I'll end all my posts from now on as such: ;-) ;-) ;-) closed-captioned for the humor-impaired ;-) ;-) ;-) Glen Pannicke Merck & Co. Computer Validation Quality Assurance email: glen_pannicke at merck.com Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2000 06:50:58 -0700 (MST) From: Jim Liddil <jliddil at VMS.ARIZONA.EDU> Subject: cleaners and sanitizers available to homebrewers I am scheduled to give a talk at the AHA conference this summer on the subject of advances in cleaning and disinfection for homebrewers. In this vain I would like to request that any manufacturers who make such products and can provide info please contact me. I am alos intersted in general technical info about mechanisms of action in both cleaning and sanitation of surfaces Jim Liddil North Haven, CT jliddil at liddil.com Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2000 10:18:36 -0400 From: "Houseman, David L" <David.Houseman at unisys.com> Subject: Subject: Chicken Feed Good idea about feed corn; I hadn't thought of that. But I did buy a 100lb bag of feed barley for malting at my local Agway for about $15. I malted some to see how it would go and it worked fine but never got around to my Big Malting Adventure. Anyone wants to share this barley they are welcome to it. Maybe I should malt it and go get the feed corn as well. With the hops growing in my yard I should be able to produce homebrew CAP VERY cheaply ;-) Dave Houseman Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2000 07:24:14 -0700 From: Jonathan Peakall <jpeakall at mcn.org> Subject: RE: RIMS Soldering question Howdy All, Many have pointed out that solder is a less than perfect conductor, and point out that a physical connection is best. While I always crimp a terminal before I solder it, I am reluctant to "crimp only" as some of my RIMS is stored outside, and after years of marine activities, have seen far too many "crimp only" connections fail due to dielectric corrosion build up in the crimped area. Like whole panels you could snap every wire right at the terminal with a tiny tug. And of course, numerous failures and brown outs throughout the vessel. So my question is, by how much does solder decrease the conductivity/efficiency of the connection? Are we talking a few percentage points or a lot? I want to try to gauge if for me, in my application, if soldering the leads is worth it to prevent corrosion problems or not. So cool to have so many brains to pick! Jonathan Peakall Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2000 11:19:56 -0400 (EDT) From: fred_garvin at fan.com Subject: Defending Fouch As employers go, I would have to say Mr. Fouch is better'n most. Totally unwarranting attacks such as this: PhilJill says: > Now I know I have been asked not to comment here, but I think what Bob has to say is true. Well I know Bob you are not implying that you would like to see Fouch in the flesh, nobody wants to see that!! Just in his tutu is quite far enough. > Mr. Fouch almost never wears the tutu anymore, and when he does, it's a real treat, since he's lost 30#'s on the Atkins diet. And as far as a fair employer, he only made me pay the deductable when I got my club foot stuck in the KY wall dispenser. Yes, Mr. Fouch is A-O.K. in my book. Oh- and to get those annoying "Elect McCain" bumper stickers off the SUV, lather it up with some mayonaise. Let it sit for 15 minutes, and it'll peel off like a dream! It doesn't seem to work with beer lables, though. Fred Garvin Bent Dick Kraft Korner Kentwood, MI - --------------------------------------------------------------------- Get free email from CNN Sports Illustrated at http://email.cnnsi.com/ Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2000 18:36:27 +0100 From: "Nigel Porter" <nigel at sparger.freeserve.co.uk> Subject: re: Bob Bratcher Writes Phil (with some help from Jill) wrote: >Yes it would certainly make an interesting party if we all did actually >get together. Maybe you could ask your nice Kiwi bosses if you can borrow a plane, and you can do a quick zip round the world to pick us all up and take us to a suitable party location. Nigel Brewing in Guildford Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2000 13:53:07 -0400 From: "Darrell Leavitt" <Darrell_Leavitt at esc.edu> Subject: Attenuation Question I have started to pay more attention to attenuation, and notice that the info sheet that WhiteLabs sends does not have attenuation info for both the Champagne Yeast, and for the Sweet Mead Yeast. Is there a good reason...or an understandable reason for this? ..Darrell <Terminally INtermediate Homebrewer> Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2000 14:14:31 -0400 From: "Stephen Alexander" <steve-alexander at worldnet.att.net> Subject: re HSA Pivo says ... >Stephen Alexander writes: >> I wrote both last year [...] ENZYMIC >Oooops. I guess I missed that (an embarrassed look). I must apologize too. I made a reference to the paper & result in #3708 but my detailed post never made it to HBD. We were in the middle of one of the book-burning/anti-librarian/anti-dogma/don't-call-him-Jeff-Irvine/anti-scien ce frenzies that always seem to center around you. (and you claim *I* waste bandwidth). What I wrote was in part: >[...] there is a book edited by Piggott and Peterson called >something like 'Analysis of Flavour', by Blackie Press. In one of the >articles Heineken correlates the progressive development of trans-nonenal >in sealed containers kept at ambient temps (20-30C as I recall) over 6 >months to the presence of oxidized oils in the wort. They then correlate >the levels of oxidized oils in wort to the amount of lipo-oxygenase enzyme >(fatty acid oxidizing enzymes) in the original malt. They prove nothing, >but show a forceful correlation between the potential oil oxidizing enzyme >in the malt and the final trans-nonenal levels in the various beer samples. >Bottom line is that the wet-cardboard antecedent was apparently created in >the mash tun - or in the barley if you like. I posted the same idea in early 1998 tho' w/o sources. The idea of lipo-oxygenase causing oxidized linoleic and eventually trans-2-nonenal has been around a while. See Eric Panther in HBD #3097, which covered much of what I recently reported, one by Mort O'Sullivan in #2711, and in a post by Charlie Scandrett in #2084. >I tried to find where you said that, but couldn't (searching "hsa and >alexander" DOES bring up a pile). Maybe if you approached this as a brewing topic instead of a personal vendetta you'd find what you were looking for. I posted enzymes => trans-2-nonenal just last week. You replied but didn't bother to read the post you were replying to. If you were really interested in the topic, it has appeared in HBD several times since June 1996 and is easy to find in the archives. >Let's see... this time you were saying that enzymatically destroyed wort >was at HSA risk. > >A different time, a different argument. I am continuously trying to get a better picture of the cause and prevention, so yes - my views have become refined over the past 20 years and will undoubtedly shift even more in the future. Learning is a process which involves making ever finer distinctions. It takes time. I won't apologize for refining my view based in new information. Now go back and read (at least once) what I posted last week. Both enzymic and non-enzymic oxidation. enzymic mostly responsble for nonenas and pals, non-enzymic oxidation involved in other lesser flavor and problems. Dave Burley notes that if you can't taste the difference (nonenzymic) you can certainly see the difference as a darker color. Kunze calls it a coarser flavor. Many of these off-flavors develop over time as various chemical changes take place in the beer. The yeast strongly reduce the beer during fermentation, but afterward the stuff starts to decline. I do want to say that I do appreciate your experiment. It was well conducted and does demonstrated an example of a lack of flavor impact due to post boil oxygenation of a beer tasted at an age of 6-8 weeks. It does not appear based on present results to say much about staling aldehydes, nor the more typical slow development of stale flavors. What I am saying is that the type of oxidation you introduced does not have much impact on the worst and most familiar oxidation flavor, and that these are not likely to be evident after less than 2 months anyway. >Now let's see. If I interpret you correctly this time, Then extract >brewers needn't worry about HSA at ALL! The manufacturer may have created precursors, and the dry storage may oxidize the lipids (non-enzymic) too (it does in other dry foods). I don't think the extract brewer has much control of the nonenals. Brewers can of course impact the non-enzymic oxidation. And that HB sized batches and methods (extract or all grain) have a great potential for oxygen contact compared w/ commercial size brews. >Now what am I to think of all the times people were poking each other in >the ribs and guffawing over Charlie Papazian publishing a picture of >himself pouring an extract beer through a colander? That he was forming polyphenolics, sulphites and maybe staling his melanoidins - but not forming staling aldehydes. >[...] It's just difficult to keep up with which hypothesis you >are toting this week. I revise, not change, my view over 20 years and it's too much for you. Now I see why you are such a traditionalist. Do you still keep leeches and bleed your patients ? >I really think YOU should design and do the experiment.... That would be a waste of time. If someone reports data from the lit they are hounded by people like you for not presenting their own experience. If you post personal experience then it is picked apart, with some validity, for being an amateur experiment with the attendant limitation or only a few data points - or personal bias is invoked. There are better experiments and results already in the lit. You don't believe those, why would you believe mine? Don't get me wrong, I am interesting in such an experiment, but it wouldn't begin for several months (I already have 2 experiments in the queue), but I don't see any reason why you would believe it more than the current presentation. Convince me otherwise. Despite the title of your last post, this is NOT Steve's model. The authors were credited in the post you didn't bother to read. I was attempting to REPORT salient parts of this work, not SUPPORT it. You are as always welcome to reject these papers if you choose - but try reading them first. >I'd be more interested in seeing where you found the limits were [...] I've posted on this in response to you in the past. Why do you need a rehash ? Perhaps you falsley believe that because I post from lit that I don't also brew and taste - hogwash. >It may save you some sleep as well. Well if I oversleep I can always follow your example, respond without reading and base my conclusions on one non-definitive experiment. That should save a lot of time. -S Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2000 16:09:14 -0400 From: "Frank J. Russo" <FJRusso at coastalnet.com> Subject: Re: Infusion Mashing Help - ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2000 03:08:24 -0400 From: "Jeremy J. Arntz" <arntz at surfree.com> Subject: Infusion Mashing Help .......question about using nylon mesh bags as opposed.... - ------------------------------ I have used nylon bags in my sparge vessel. I also tried a number different weave patterns. My reason for using the nylon bags was to speed up the sparging without a loss of efficiency. I since have stopped using the nylon bags. I often got stuck sparges when I should not have and it was do largely to the pores in the mesh becoming blocked. I also did not see an increase in efficiency but rather a loss. There was an advantage in I could remove the nylon bag and hand squeeze the grain to remove the most amount of liquid possible. I recommend you go ahead and purchase or make the false bottom for yourself. Just my 2 cents. Frank Russo FJRusso at Coastalnet.com "There is only one aim in life and that is to live it." Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2000 16:40:07 -0400 From: "Alan Meeker" <ameeker at welchlink.welch.jhu.edu> Subject: "scientific' brewing A few comments on Alex's recent post: >If your beer tastes great and is appreciated by >legions of your friends and family then who gives a crap about 3/4 of the >dissertations on HBD? Nothing wrong at all with the old "If it ain't broke don't fix it" philosophy. If you're happy with your beer and aren't looking to diversify or need to troubleshoot then you're probably right - scroll down. >While I view their information as >extremely valuable and thought-provoking, very little of their ramblings >actually help me brew better beer. Of what value are the "ramblings" to you then? Have you actually tried applying the info posted to this forum? Are you saying that your beer is absolutely the best that it can possibly be?? >do I really need to know about how many yeast cells it takes to >make my wort turn into beer? Hardly and certainly not on this "amateur" >forum. One could argue just the opposite - that the "amateur" nature of the forum makes it even /more/ important to discuss basic principles (such as pitching rates) that are likely to have big effects on the quality of the finished beer. Regarding the Paul Valery quote: > "Science means simply the aggregate of all the recipes that are always > successful. The rest is literature." This is a pretty poor definition of science! Science is certainly more than some aggregate of "recipes." The knowledge base makes up only half of science, the other half being the /process/ of science whereby new knowledge is constantly being generated and integrated with prior knowledge, hypotheses are tested, older results are re-evaluated, etc... > Let us not forget, however, that beer >is an ancient drink most likely discovered by accident. It has been enjoyed >for centuries by royalty as well as plebeians. It is a simple drink, >concocted not by man, but by yeast. To overly complicate the process is >folly. Yes but what the "ancients" were probably drinking would probably cause one to spit it out were we to try drinking it today! Also, I don;t see a lot of beer being made in nature by yeasts without some help from homo sapiens. And why is it folly to treat beer-making as a complex process if one wishes to? >Brewing beer is as simple as using the >freshest ingredients and following basic brewing and sanitation techniques. >Is there REALLY anything else? Sure there are a myriad variables and >unknowns, but like Eric stated in his post, I too, quite frankly, find it >hard to brew lousy beer. There's plenty else. And, if you find it hard to brew a lousy beer I consider you very lucky indeed!! I've brewed plenty of beers that sucked and many that were major disappointments. I'm not content to sit back and be happy with the ones that do work out. When a beer doesn't come out the way I wanted or even worse, has a major flavor defect, I want to get to the bottom of it and correct the flaw!! I HATE making sucky beer, it's frustrating and my time is just too valuable to burn on making bad beer. It is for this reason that I read and ponder the posts on the HBD as well as reading virtually every piece of info I can get my hands on. Also, as a scientist I actually enjoy learning as much as I can about the process. Perhaps I'm over-complicating things but my beers are generally improving over time as I try to apply some of the things discussed on this forum. Then there's also the old adage about chance favoring the prepared mind... -Alan Meeker Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2000 18:49:32 -0400 From: David Houseman <dhousema at cccbi.org> Subject: Change of Addresses I'm in the middle of getting ready for the first round AHA nationals in Philadelphia and have mailed almost 600 notices to all the judges in this region of the BJCP. There have been an amazing number of returns for "change of address; forwarding order expired" and the like. Since I don't have email addresses for all of these, nor do I have the new addresses, I can only post on a number of fora to remind all the BJCP judges to get in touch with the BJCP program administrator (see the BJCP web site) and notify Russ of your new snail mail and email addresses. David Houseman BJCP MidAtlantic Representative Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2000 22:49:25 EDT From: Epic8383 at aol.com Subject: Fire Extinguisher Fellow Brewers, As a 'lurker' who reads but rarely posts, I must say I agree with the most recent posts concerning the blatent lack of respect on HBD. Our beloved hobby (addiction?) is in enough trouble without the incessant backstabbing and downright nastiness evident in recent posts. What better way to scare off the few newcomers than to over-analyze every aspect of the brewing process, then flame anyone who dares disagree. So please, everyone have a little respect for each other and our noble craft. Remember that is both science AND art, and a little creative license is what makes the difference between us and them. Sincerely, Gus Rappold P.S. Anyone have a favorite all-grain Belgian Trippel recipe? Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2000 23:00:17 -0400 From: Spencer W Thomas <spencer at engin.umich.edu> Subject: Re: Barley wine carbonation Dale Fogg asks about carbonating a barley wine. I'd add a little bit of yeast to it (like a Wyeast pak, for example). Then agitate your bottles daily until they're carbonated. This really DOES help. I did an experiment a few years back with side-by-side bottles. I agitated some (turned them over and back) daily, and left the rest alone. The agitated bottles carbonated and the others did not. =Spencer Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2000 22:09:10 -0500 From: "Rob Moline" <brewer at isunet.net> Subject: RE: Yeast Question Rick, The thing that will make your efforts more difficult is because you don't have a stainless (or glass for that matter, wouldn't that be nice?) fermenter that is cylindro-conical in shape. With a cylindro-conical...you can easily wait until the feremntation is finished...then drop out the yeast...discarding the first portion...that is the thick pasty stuff that is laden with trub...and collect the desireable middle portion....and once that is collected...easily discard the final yeast slurry... Rule one in yeast harvesting is to get the 'middle cut' of the final yeast bed....If one collects the first yeast that flocc's or the last yeast that flocc's, it is most predictable that successive generations of the yeasts from those collections will be either too flocculant, and hit the bottom before they have finished all the sugars in solution......or they will be too powdery ..and take excessive time to flocc...and thence leave a clear beer. So, how to collect the middle? I would suggest that you use you own experiences with a particular yeast strain....and after what you judge to be the first third has fallen out, do a racking transfer to a seconday vessel.....leaving behind the first third...and therefore taking the final 2/3'rds with the brew... Then probably around the time that the fermentation stops showing evidence of activity, rack the beer back to the original vessel, which you will have cleaned and sanitised in the interim. This will then leave the middle third in the secondary carboy for you to collect! So, by this method..you will also have left the trub behind in the primary....with the most flocculant cells.....set yourself up for collecting the middle third in the secondary carboy...and have the least flocculant and powdery cells in the teriary carboy for extended maturation and clearing time...or you could also use a fining agent like gelatine in the tertiary to enhance clearing. Of course, this in no way 'guarantees' the perfect middle cut of the yeast....but in the circumstances that you describe, which probably mirrors most homebrewer's practices...I think it's the best compromise. As for storage routines the WEB is full of them....but what I would suggest would depend on how long you plan to store them. Let me know, and I will see if I can't point you in the right direction. As a dry yeast user, I personally don't have much need for storage, except to advise the dry yeast is best stored in a freezer or fridge. Distilled water storage seems to be a simple, yet effective solution for short term purposes, while longer term storage on slants, and plates is recommended. For really long term storage, immersion in liquid nitrogen at -80 is the way to go! A search on the Northern Light engine on "Yeast Storage" offers 20,634 items. So, there is plenty written on the subject. Good luck, sir! Cheers! Rob "The More I Know About Beer, The More I Realize I Need To Know More About Beer!" - -----Original Message----- From: Rick Oftel [mailto:Rick.Oftel at toro.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 12, 2000 1:44 PM To: brewer at isunet.net Subject: Yeast Question Rob, I have a yeast question. Not sure if it is worthy; you decide. Question: I ferment in two stages (glass) and would like to know the best way to harvest and store yeast. I have not been very successful in removal of cold break since my counterflow cooler outlet dumps into the fermenter and the primary fermenter always has a thick bottom layer of yeast and trub. Any ideas for separation and or storage? Return to table of contents
Date: 12 Apr 00 21:33:14 MDT (Wed) From: rcd at raven.talisman.com (Dick Dunn) Subject: re: Chicken Scratch Glen Pannicke <glen_pannicke at merck.com> wrote: > Joe Kish suggested using cracked corn in CAPs: > > >Go to an Farm animal feed store and buy a bag of 'cracked > >corn', also called Albers' Chicken Scratch. It's not as fine as > >corn meal so it won't give a stuck mash. ... > One question on this subject though... I know that different varieties of > corn have been developed and marketed for use as animal feed vs. people > food. I'm not sure that there is a huge difference in flavor contributions > between feed corn and people corn when it comes to beer ... Realize that what's commonly sold as "chicken scratch"--also called "scratch grains"--is a combination of grains, of which corn is only one and not even necessarily predominant. "Cracked corn" is different (although it can be fed to chickens too). Albers isn't a brand I've seen here, so I don't know whether it really is all corn. The other grains in what we use appear to be a little millet, maybe milo, and something I don't recognize (not wheat or barley as far as I can see). I think I'd be most concerned about cleanliness and what sort of foreign matter might be mixed in with the scratch grains. There's certainly bits of plant stems and who knows what else. After all, if you're feeding it to chickens, stems and even outright dirt won't matter. - --- Dick Dunn rcd at talisman.com Hygiene, Colorado USA ...Simpler is better. Return to table of contents
[Prev HBD] [Index] [Next HBD] [Back]
HTML-ized on 04/13/00, by HBD2HTML version 1.2 by K.F.L.
webmaster at hbd.org, KFL, 10/9/96