HOMEBREW Digest #5687 Fri 28 May 2010

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

		Digest Janitor: pbabcock at hbd.org


                 Sponsor The Home Brew Digest!
     Visit http://www.hbd.org/sponsorhbd.shtml to learn how
    Support those who support you! Visit our sponsor's site!
********** Also visit http://hbd.org/hbdsponsors.html *********

DONATE to the Home Brew Digest. Home Brew Digest, Inc. is a 
501(c)3 not-for-profit organization under IRS rules (see the
FAQ at http://hbd.org for details of this status). Donations
can be made by check to Home Brew Digest mailed to:

HBD Server Fund
PO Box 871309
Canton Township, MI 48187-6309

or by paypal to address serverfund@hbd.org. DONATIONS of $250 
or more will be provided with receipts. SPONSORSHIPS of any 
amount are considered paid advertisement, and may be deductible
under IRS rules as a business expense. Please consult with your 
tax professional, then see http://hbd.org for available 
sponsorship opportunities.

  Re: Agua (mossview5)
  Re: HBD is struggling to  meet its meager operating expenses of approximately $3500 per year. ("Michael P. Thompson")
  FW: sodium removal and water softening ("Kai Troester")
  Homebrew Digest Donation (Pat Humphrey)
  Hops Utilization During Hot Whirlpool (Fred L Johnson)

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Beer is our obsession and we're late for therapy! * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * NOTE: With the economy as it is, the HBD is struggling to meet its meager operating expenses of approximately $3500 per year. If less than half of those currently directly subscribed to the HBD sent in a mere $5.00, the HBD would be able to easily meet its annual expenses, with room to spare for next year. Please consider it. Financial Projection As of 21 May 2010 Projected 2010 Budget $3505.65 Expended against projection $ 874.75 Projected Excess/(Shortfall) ($2080.54) As always, donors and donations are publicly acknowledged and accounted for on the HBD web page. Thank you Send articles for __publication_only__ to post@hbd.org If your e-mail account is being deleted, please unsubscribe first!! To SUBSCRIBE or UNSUBSCRIBE send an e-mail message with the word "subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to request@hbd.org FROM THE E-MAIL ACCOUNT YOU WISH TO HAVE SUBSCRIBED OR UNSUBSCRIBED!!!** IF YOU HAVE SPAM-PROOFED your e-mail address, you cannot subscribe to the digest as we cannot reach you. We will not correct your address for the automation - that's your job. HAVING TROUBLE posting, subscribing or unsusubscribing? See the HBD FAQ at http://hbd.org. LOOKING TO BUY OR SELL USED EQUIPMENT? Please do not post about it here. Go instead to http://homebrewfleamarket.com and post a free ad there. The HBD is a copyrighted document. The compilation is copyright HBD.ORG. Individual postings are copyright by their authors. ASK before reproducing and you'll rarely have trouble. Digest content cannot be reproduced by any means for sale or profit. More information is available by sending the word "info" to req@hbd.org or read the HBD FAQ at http://hbd.org. JANITORs on duty: Pat Babcock (pbabcock at hbd dot org), Jason Henning, and Spencer Thomas
---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 27 May 2010 22:39:37 -0400 From: mossview5 <mossview5 at gmail.com> Subject: Re: Agua Ah, an exceptional brewer speaks! I'm glad that Joe recognized that Charlie P's old saying of RDWHAHB doesn't cut it. Brewing with salt softened water or water that doesn't produce the proper residual alkalinity conditions is probably not going to produce exceptional beer. It will produce beer, but it may not be that good. Brewers do need to understand and be able to adjust their water to meet their beer's needs. Those brewers that can't understand and adjust their water will probably be stuck in the days when you could only brew dark beers in a place like Dublin and pale beers in a place like Pilsen. Joe's water has mostly temporary hardness, which is much easier to handle. As Joe pointed out, he observes a significant reduction in alkalinity in his hot liquor tank as that hot water is decarbonated. If he went ahead and boiled his water and then let it sit and cool briefly, he could decant the clear water off the sediment that will precipitate out of the water. That would both soften and reduce alkalinity. But, in a commercial brewery (especially production breweries), using the brewery's kettle to boil water means that they can't get as many batches through the brewery in a day. Not such a great alternative, but it could help. The Excess Lime treatment is still a more efficient alternative and it doesn't tie up the kettle like boiling does. I'm not sure why Joe wants to reduce his alkalinity to under 50 ppm. Alkalinity isn't the main concern...its residual alkalinity (RA) that should be a concern to every brewer. If he is brewing with a soft water, then having a proportionally low alkalinity will be necessary for brewing pale beers. As I pointed out in a previous post, bringing the residual alkalinity down to less than 50 is needed. Pilsen water has a RA of about zero and Burton water has a RA of about zero. Both waters produce exceptional pale beers, but their alkalinity differ substantially. Alkalinity is a very easy thing to adjust with acid. Although Joe's water has moderately high alkalinity, a proper acid dosage will bring it into proper range. To reach a RA of about zero, Joe is correct that he would need to bring his raw tap water's alkalinity to about 50 ppm as CaCO3. That means that he would be adding about 3/4 ml of 75% phosphoric acid or 88% lactic acid to each gallon of brewing water. That amount of lactic might impart a taste, so I would recommend using the phosphoric acid which is tasteless in beer. The problem with high strength acid is that quantities of 1 gallon or more have to be shipped as hazardous cargo. That sends the shipping costs through the roof. Buying 3 quarts at a time can solve that problem. I recall that Five Star would sell high strength phosphoric at one time, but I don't know if they still will. This should help Joe and any brewer that wants to brew exceptional beer. Martin Brungard Indianapolis, IN Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 27 May 2010 21:17:38 -0600 From: "Michael P. Thompson" <thompson at ecentral.com> Subject: Re: HBD is struggling to meet its meager operating expenses of approximately $3500 per year. I really hate to say this, but it's true. Perhaps part of the difficulty is that HBD is cumbersome and difficult to use for discussions, and has arcane restrictions which cost time and money, but apparently do not filter out spam. I have run better mailing lists for far less, and continue to do so. There are definitely some high-quality posts on HBD which do not appear on more user-friendly forums, but in general, one is forced to wonder if the overall lack of participation shouldn't be sending a message about changing the way the list is run. I bear no rancor to the list administrators, and I have made financial contributions to HBD, so this is not just bellyaching. But I remember a discussion some time ago when all the restrictions and procedures for sending out HBD were mentioned, and I wonder even more now if those restrictions aren't stifling discussion and making the list less useful for the general brewing public. Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 28 May 2010 08:20:08 -0400 From: "Kai Troester" <kai at braukaiser.com> Subject: FW: sodium removal and water softening > Let me just point out that I am not trying to brew good beer here. I am > at such a point in my brewing career, that I aim to brew exceptional, > outstanding beer only. Joe, In this case I suggest that you experiment. You don't have to make an investment into an R/O system just to try out brewing with R/O water. Get some /O water and brew the same beer with different types of water including your own. This way you can figure out if an R/O system is worth the money. I do have an R/O system myself and installed it when we moved into the house. The main motivation for it was an elevated level of arsenic in our well water. If that weren't the case I'd use my well water which is very similar to Munich water. If I need softened water I would be using lime treatment. I did the latter successfully for 2 batches of Maibock that I brewed last year. To guide other brewers I wrote an article on my web page on how to treat water with slaked lime (note the line break): http://braukaiser.com/wiki/index.php/ Alkalinity_reduction_with_slaked_lime My approach was to calculate the amount of lime needed based on the water composition. You may also experiment with 80%, 100% and 120% of that amount to see what works best. This is one of the many suggestions I picked up from A.J.'s work. The amount of lime needed can be calculated with my water spread sheet: http://braukaiser.com/documents/Kaiser_water_calculator.xls and will be most accurate if you know the pH of the water. The pH is used to estimate the amount of CO2 that is dissolved in the water which also needs to be converted to carbonate for successful alkalinity precipitation. In addition to that having a GH&KH (aquarium supply stores have this) test kit really helps since it allows you to test your post treatment water. A.J. already chimed in on this, but sodium is difficult to remove since its salts are very soluble. In Technologie der Wuerzerbereitung Narziss and Back mention ion exchange resins than can take Ca, Mg and Na out of the water. I'm not sure if those resins are readily available to us home brewers. And they also need to be replenished or regenerated using strong acid. The following reaction was mentioned where A-H is the resin structure holding one hydrogen ion: A-H + Na+ HCO3- -> A-Na + CO2 + H20 > (To be honest, me being on a well, for my water it would be a case of "from > the earth you came, to the earth you shall return" even for waste water I > dump out, so there's not much environmental effect other than energy usage > to pump the stuff to the surface.) Calvin, I don't think it is as simple as this. Well water tends to come from aquifers that are so far below the surface that it takes a very long time for them to recharge. The water that you pull out of them does not necessarily return to them since it may run-off into a stream or evaporate. I remember that National Geographic had a nice article on that where they showed by how much a large aquifer in the Midwest has declined over the recent decades. A.J., Great point about the use of a softener before an R/O filter. I never thought about the effects calcium carbonate precipitation close to the membrane. Luckily my well water pH (6.5) is low enough that I should not have to worry. Kai Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 28 May 2010 10:18:38 -0500 From: Pat Humphrey <pat71987 at gmail.com> Subject: Homebrew Digest Donation Hi Everyone, I am encouraging everyone to donate to the survival of the Digest. Even though the traffic has been down considerably, I still feel that is a valuable resource for the brewing community. Since the AHA has started TechTalk it doesn't seem as if there has been too much traffic here. However, I myself don't find it something that I normally read. It just seems too commercialized and doesn't have the substance that the Homebrew Digest has or had. I certainly don't need to see recent information about Government Affairs or Business as TechTalk has. I just want to see info related to homebrewing in my digest. Sorry, a bit of a rant there... Even a minimum 5 dollar donation will help. As Pat mentions, if half of the recipients of the digest contribute this amount, it will cover the operating costs for the year. I will raise a pint to the digest operators, Pat, Jason and Spencer. Thanks for all of your work to keep the digest alive. Please join me in donating. Cheers, Pat H Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 28 May 2010 18:41:57 -0400 From: Fred L Johnson <FLJohnson52 at nc.rr.com> Subject: Hops Utilization During Hot Whirlpool Has anyone ever seen estimates of the alpha acid utilization that brewer's get (especially commercial brewers) during the hot whirlpool period before the wort is cooled and transferred to the fermenter? This period of time is significant in commercial breweries. For example, in a recent interview the Brew Strong podcast the head brewer at Fuller's indicated that they got about 20% of their IBUs from their late hop addition (2-3 minutes from the end of the boil. He didn't give any amounts of hops added at the end of the boil for us to calculate a utilization rate from this late hop addition, but he said they allowed the trub to settle for 30 minutes during a whirlpooling period. I'll bet the utilization is MUCH greater than the calculators would give us from an addition 3 minutes from the end of the boil. Don't these calculators simply assume that the wort is cooled immediately after the boil? And of course this time spent in the whirlpool should be added to earlier additions as well. I'm trying to refine my calculator for estimating IBUs, and I've never seen figures for utilization rates from such late additions in which the wort is not boiling but is still hot and moving around in a whirlpool. Does anybody (perhaps some of the commercial brewers who read the HBD) have any knowledge on this? Fred L Johnson Apex, North Carolina, USA Return to table of contents
[Prev HBD] [Index] [Next HBD] [Back]
HTML-ized on 05/28/10, by HBD2HTML v1.2 by KFL
webmaster@hbd.org, KFL, 10/9/96