02:Homebrew Digest #2238 (Friday, 18 October 1996)
homebrew-di...@aob.org
and partied on my slurry. I should have capped it. It wasn't
noticable when I pitched the slurry into the starter, but it sure was
later. I didn't pay attention to the starter (hey I've cultured from
old socks, I'm a pro ...) and just stuck it in the closet. I've
always wondered how to spot a contamination. Let me assure you it's
unmistakable. The entire starter had a strange ropy cloudiness to it,
and it smelled like something went bad in Jersey. I've since learned
my lesson, and have a package of dry yeast sitting in the fridge for
emergency.
Anyway, back to my point. Here I am with a fermenter full of English
Bitter and a contaminated starter and no hope of getting any other
yeast for at least 48 hours. I quickly reached that state that all
men have come to at some time - "Fuck It", and pitched the bad
starter. The wort was hopped with about 40 IBU's. The volatile
ferment, if you could call it that, lasted about three days and was
notable mainly for the stench it continued to give off. I almost had
to toss the whole thing 'cause it was coming out the closet and
stinking up my bedroom. DMS would have been welcome. At seven days I
racked it to my secondary, on top of both the yeast cake and the
dry-hop bag from my last batch. The gravity was only 1.020. I took a
reading from it at 11 days and the gravity was still dropping,
although there are no visible signs of fermentation. The surprising
thing to me at both 7 and 11 days was that I could barely taste the
contamination. It was definately there in the form of a sourness, but
it wasn't the worst beer I've ever made (I'll leave that for another
post).
I think two things helped. The first is the wort was pretty highly
hopped to begin with, so some of the bacteria growth was probably
eliminated, and eventually the yeast could get an upper hand (the
starter had some hops but not much). More importantly, the high
bitterness covers up much of the bad taste; it simply tastes like a
bitter ale. The second thing I think helped is the dry hopping. This
gave a nice hop aroma and some flavor which also masks the sourness.
This whole episode really showed me how some of the older brews
probably tasted, and also how some of the brewing practices such as
IPA's probably came into favor. Don't view bacteria as your enemy,
see them as an opportunity to experiment:).
SM
P.S. I've named the beer E.S.Bacterium.
------------------------------
From: Joe Rolfe <on...@shore.net>
Date: Fri, 18 Oct 1996 14:37:59 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: Yeast Washing
for the persons requesting info on yeast washing.......
yes phosphoric acid can do the trick.
yes it will hamper the yeast and maybe kill thm if ph and time is
not watched - you best have a real good ph meter...
and it will make them clean bacteria wise but if you have any wild
ones in there - they will surely love it...and prosper
the ph should not go below - if i remember, 2.1 for 1 hour
there is an overnite wahs of 2.7 for 12 hours or so.... getting the yeast
real cold with a dilution of sterile water also helps.
siebels has an acid wash packet with info (no connection, just satified
customer) and it works well.
the yeast will ususally appear very sluggish after the wash, and the first
beer should be blended, the subsequent batches will be better, getting back
to normal fermentation characteristics.
the two big points watch the time of contact, pitch right away after
wash is complete, and insure consistent ph thru the slurry and stirr well.
good luck
joe
------------------------------
From: Brian Bliss <bri...@microware.com>
Date: Fri, 18 Oct 96 13:40:48 CDT
Subject: trub in fermenter
fa...@earlham.edu writes:
>I've read some passing comments to disadvantages of leaving trub in
fermenting
>wort. What's the scoop on that? How many of you rack off of trub and to what
>advantage exactly?
well, one advantage is that a little trub can provide nutrients to
enhance yeast growth, but I won't go into that part of it...
Noonan says that a major difference between scottish and english brewers
is that scottish brewers allow more trub to be transferred to the fermenter,
and that this, in combination with particualar yeast strains, is responsible
for the "smokey" phenolic character of many scotch ales, and a host of other
fermentation-by products which cause objectionable off-flavors at first, but
can degrade into much more pleasant tastes over time.
By contrast, most english ales are quite clean in this regard.
I couldn't agree more. I feel is it of the utmost importance to separate the
trub from the beer prior to fermentation for MOST beer styles, but that it is
important to allow some trub in the fermenter for scotch ale. I also allow
a little trub in the fermenter when making lambics, but that's about it.
bb
- ------------------------------
------------------------------
From: Paul Brian <pbr...@Tudor.Com>
Date: Fri, 18 Oct 96 15:01:30 -0400
Subject: freshness dating
Just another data point on the freshness dating thread-
Yesterday I noticed that Red Hook has changed from a 'best before' date to
a 'bottled on' date on their labels. I doubt it's a coincidence that this
change coincides with A-B's 'born on' campaign. And we thought the
relationship
between these two companies was just in distribution!
Cheers,
Paul
------------------------------
From: "Bryan L. Gros" <gro...@ctrvax.Vanderbilt.Edu>
Date: Fri, 18 Oct 1996 13:39:52 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: racking off trub
Michael writes:
>I've read some passing comments to disadvantages of leaving trub in
fermenting
>wort. What's the scoop on that? How many of you rack off of trub and to what
>advantage exactly?
This topic is what someone in a previous digest was referring to in Brewing
Techniques.
Basically, (from memory), someone wrote in saying they have made around 80
batches of beer and never had a decent fermentation. Long lag times,
sluggish
fermentation, and high FG. They tried improvements, bought an aerator, then
went to pure O2, bigger starters, yeast nutrient etc. Then he discovered the
problem (maybe).
Seems that he normally ran the wort from the kettle to the carboy, waited
overnight for the break to settle out, then racked off the sediment and
pitched.
Fermentation was normal when he finally pitched immediately and didn't
rack. Seems like the yeast didn't work well without the trub.
Well, various BT experts chimed in their opinions about this "experiment" and
they weren't especially convinced that trub is a necessary ingredient in a
healthy fermentation.
I've read that trub often contains things (like lipids, trace minerals etc)
which
can help yeast growth, especially if the wort is under-aerated. But if
you're
pumping in pure O2, then the yeast should reproduce and ferment normally
even w/o the trub.
Any of our resident brewing chemists want to address this issue? As for me,
I don't bother racking off the trub before primary fermentation. I'm too
lazy,
and I'm happy with the clarity and attenuation of my beer.
- Bryan
gro...@ctrvax.vanderbilt.edu
Nashville, TN
------------------------------
From: Spencer W Thomas <spe...@engin.umich.edu>
Date: Fri, 18 Oct 1996 15:23:05 -0400
Subject: Re: Drawing #1
In digest 2230, Ken Sullivan wrote:
> I designed and made a truly great wort chiller! ...
I've put together a web page with the drawings and the original
message, at my beer page, <http://realbeer.com/spencer/>. Follow the
link to "Frequently asked questions", then "Other equipment", then
"Immersion chiller by Ken Sullivan".
=Spencer Thomas in Ann Arbor, MI (spe...@umich.edu)
------------------------------
From: "Gregory, Guy J." <GGR...@ecy.wa.gov>
Date: Fri, 18 Oct 96 12:39:00 PDT
Subject: Plastic
A lot has been written lately between "Oz"zies and US readers about plastic.
centering on potential for oxidation in plastic. It turns out that the type
of plastic is important in understanding how real this potential is. Robert
M. Koerner, in his book "Designing with Geosynthetics", discusses
permeability of various plastics for use as landfill liners. The test for
permeability of these plastics is done using water vapor, according to ASTM
test D96, measuring the amount of water vapor which is transmitted through
various plastic compounds. The test uses water vapor rather than liquid
because plastics do transmit vapors and gases easier than liquids (pretty
intutitve, right?) and they can easily set up an extreme humidity gradient
to get results in less than a lifetime. Representative values from this
book are : Thermoplastic PVC (Polyvinyl chloride, 0.76 mm thick) transmits
4.4 grams water vapor per square meter per day; the thermoplasic elastomer
CSPE (Hypalon, 0.89 mm thick) transmits 0.44 grams per square meter per day;
and the crystalline thermoplastic HDPE (High Density Polyethylene, 0.80 mm
thick) transmits 0.017 grams per square meter per day.
HDPE, then, is at least 3 orders of magnitude less permeable than PVC to
water vapor.
Other vapors and gases will have similar values of permeability,
proportional to their molecular size and attraction of the material. A test
for this is ASTM D1434, I think.
In general, I think that HDPE, being non-chemically reactive (it cannot be
glued, it must be heat joined), and having a very low permeability is a
reasonable choice which will probably avoid oxidation due to the material
alone above the taste threshold of any other than the most anal beer judge.
Obviously, YMMV. In the US, paint buckets are often made of HDPE. PVC is
relatively permeable, and is indeed reactive chemically (though perhaps not
with beer) so is probably a poor choice. Lots of "food grade" buckets are
made with PVC. They get pretty limp when hot, say in a zapap lauter tun.
Scratching is another issue, though HDPE is very tough relative to PVC. I
brew in glass, because glass carboys are available and cheap here, as well
as being easy to clean. I used to brew in HDPE buckets, and made good beer
IMHO.
The tone of the conversation thus far suggests to me that we US'ers are
overafraid of oxidation reactions and scratching of proper plastic, and I
think the "Oz"zies are overconcerned about the danger of glass carboys.
Lets relax, OK? Brew with what ya got. What kinda plastic are you using,
mates? It does make a difference.
Gu...@aol.com
Guy Gregory
Lightning Creek Home Brewery
------------------------------
From: paa...@dpsc.dla.mil (Mike Spinelli)
Date: Fri, 18 Oct 96 14:48:11 edt
Subject: Price Check: Big SS Pots
HBDers,
I found a source that has food grade 55 gallon SS drums (used) for $350 a
piece.
They also have SS pots (used) in the 30-40 gallon range for $300 each. Lids
are not included with these.
Are these prices good/average or high?
Thanks
Mike Spinelli in Cherry Hill NJ
------------------------------
From: "Chuck and Grace Burkins" <bur...@oa.net>
Date: Fri, 18 Oct 1996 06:43:35 -0400
Subject: Re: glass snobs
Andrew writes:
> PS. So why is it OK in practice to lager in plastic, when plastic
is
> clearly more oxygen permeable than glass? I'm not sure, but here
are
> some thoughts:
> - the oxygen transfer into the beer through the plastic is *very*
slow.
> - lagering still tends to take place on a reasonable amount of
yeast. As
> has been posted many times before, yeast is an excellent reducing
agent.
> Megaswill is very prone to oxidation as it is devoid of live yeast.
>
How about the solubility of Oxygen being nil in a solution which is
saturated in carbon dioxide? If this was the protective mechanism,
how long into the lagering period would it last?
Chuck Burkins, Dedham, Mass. USA
bur...@oa.net
------------------------------
From: dutch <lea...@osu.edu>
Date: Fri, 18 Oct 1996 15:48:38 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: blue corn
hello all
I've been on vacation and very busy so have not gotten the hbd for two
months or so. I'm back now and am happy to see everyone is still putting out
plenty of info. I have some on brewing with blue corn meal and even though
it's a little late (I'm still busy) here it is.
Three weeks ago I brewed a batch (5 gal) of beer using 2lb of blue corn
meal. The other grains were 7 1/2lb Ireks pils malt and 1/2 lb Ireks lt.
crystal, 2-3 lovibond. Yeast american 1056 hops hal. hersbrucker @ 3.2 (1
1/2 oz to bitter no finishing woops) The run off was horrible! The blue corn
meal was ground too fine, maybe? When I started recirculating the runnings
were cloudy but cleared very quickly, good, but i latter realized that much
of what was clouding the runnings were betta glucans (I think.) These formed
an impermeable to water layer on top of my grain bed. I collected runnings
for a total of four hours including two reheatings on the stove and
restirings after the heatings. I quit with only three gal. of wort which I
diluted after boiling to make five gal. total. Each time I disturbed the bed
I recirculated the cloudy runnings hopeing the glucans would get stuck
throughout the grain bed but his did not happen. Oh before I added the corn
to the mash I cooked it for 20 min. at a simmer. I added the corn to 1 1/2
gal boiling water and it was very lumpy next time I would add the water to
the corn.
If I did this beer again with the same ingredients I would put a layer of
cheese cloth on top of the grain bed and after recircing lift the cloth and
hopefully the impermeable layer.
I said before that I thought the corn meal was too fine because I was
thinking that if the corn was not so fine the glucan particles would be
bigger and get stuck throughout the grain bed and therefor not be such a
problem. I am not sure this is would happen though. Also most books talk
about brewing with flaked corn or grits. Grits are coarser than meal and
flaked is made from grits.
On using whole corn I would not advise this. Corn has a fat high fat
content, around 20% I think. Most of this fat is in the germ which is
removed before making corn meal and grits. The corn meal I used had a fat
content of 1.4% which is a little high for brewing (I like to keep
ingredients under 1% fat.)
Now how is my beer. The stating gravity was 1038. The gravity when racking
into the secondary (4 days) was 1012. The beer was balanced toward the
sweet. I panicked when I collected so little wort and cut way back on the
hops and forgot to compensate for a somewhat concentrated boil. Other than
this the beer was good, corny but good. The color was darker than I expected
some of which was due to the blue corn and some was due to a long boil for
some of the runnings. I did not want them to get cold so on the burner they
sat. I was hoping for purple after I saw the corn in the mash but most of
the purple stayed in the glucans. They were still intensely purple when I
threw them into the compost. The beer did have a strange orange tint though
at racking. I hope to bottle it Wed. and can update anyone who is interested.
------------------------------
From: mi...@waste.com (Michael A. Owings)
Date: Fri, 18 Oct 1996 20:26:23 GMT
Subject: re: glass snobs
Actually, Mister, we prefer to be called "The World-Wide Glass
Carboy Cabal" (or WGCC for short), and you can bet that as soon as we
finish picking these shards out of our a** , we're gonna come
looking for you ...
Yadda, yadda -- but seriously -- I don't find that cleaning the
carboys is really much of a chore. Handling and storing them however
is a tremendous pain. I've broken TWO (count 'em) in the last year.
A rake fell on one stored in the garage, and as I related to the HBD
last year, I bumped another on the concrete rim of my outdoor drain
while emptying it of sanitizing solution, and it just sort of ...
Matthew Karpinski
In my experience (MA chemistry '95) and in the references I have on my
desk, O2 permeability and reactivity is relatively independant of other
gasses/compounds in solution. The company that I used to work for made
analytical standards and had to ship the ones containing reducing agents
in glass bottles so that they would not oxidize in transit.
Thus if one is going to be anal about preventing oxidation, glass is
better than most kinds of plastic.
-Matthew
--
The opinions stated are those of the author. Nobody else.
Matthew Karpinski ka...@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu