Copy Link
Add to Bookmark

HOMEBREW Digest #2066

eZine's profile picture
Published in 
 · 14 Apr 2024

This file received at Hops.Stanford.EDU  1996/06/11 PDT 

Homebrew Digest Tuesday, 11 June 1996 Number 2066

Shawn Steele, Digest Janitor
Thanks to Rob Gardner for making the digest happen!

my RIMS web page ("Keith Royster")
Re: Bad DME? (Richard Gardner)
homebrew kit/brewer in Japan (Jay Weissler)
Malting and bbl size (Kyle R Roberson)
FWH in 1822 (Michael Newman)
Re: Wort Chilling (denisb@CAM.ORG (Denis Barsalo))
TRASH VI APOLOGY ("Ralph Colaizzi")
Re: Leaky Corny Kegs ("Patrick G. Babcock")
RE: removing chlorine (Marty Tippin)
Memphis Microbreweries?? (Dale Wiemer)
Re: Have I ruined Scott Dornseif's Pale Ale? ("Patrick G. Babcock")
Re: Clorine Dioxide ("Patrick G. Babcock")
selling homebrew (David Raitt)
using mullberrys ("Dave Higdon")
RE:Chlorine, wort chillers, big beers, dogs ( (George De Piro))
Spent grains (David Conger)
Re: Wort Chilling (Greg Thompson)
Suggestions for legal club samplings (Mark Montminy)
Insulating your Mash Tun (DAVE BRADLEY IC742 6-7932)
Errors-To: ( (Bob Waterfall))
Beer Bill of Rights -Forwarded (Rob Moline)
Old Faithful (Bill Giffin)
right to beer-life (Brian Bliss)
HBD Article (Randy Allen Shreve)
Re: Malting and bbl size ("Robert A. Uhl")
Dogs and hops ("Dave Hinkle")
Re: Suggestions for legal club samplings ("Robert A. Uhl")
Grassy beer/IMBR? (
In-Reply-To: Your message of Mon, 10 Jun 96 2:27:45 GMT (Pierre Jelenc)
re: when is beer beer? ("Bridges, Scott")
Fly-in homebrew (Steve Potter)
Re: esters and aeration ("Tracy Aquilla")
Too aerate or not: This new learning amazes me... ( (George De Piro))
Homebrew Laws / Satisfaction. (Russell Mast)
yeast respire? NOT! Part 1 (Domenick Venezia)
yeast respire? NOT! Part 2 (Domenick Venezia)
Home-Built Roller Mills (Michael Owings)
Wort Chilling Reply (David Holesovsky)
Re: recipe for Grolsch beer (Mark E. Thompson)


Send articles for __publication_only__ to
(Articles are published in the order they are received.)
Send UNSUBSCRIBE and all other requests, ie, address change, etc.,
to, BUT PLEASE NOTE that if
you subscribed via BEER-L NET, you must unsubscribe by sending a
one line e-mail to that says: UNSUB BEER-L
This list service is now being provided by, so some
of the commands may have changed. For technical problems send
e-mail to the Digest Janitor,
If your account is being deleted, please be courteous and unsubscribe first.


Please don't send me requests for back issues - you will be silently ignored.
For "Cat's Meow" information, send mail to or visit on the Web. Othere information is available by
e-mail from and on the AHA's web site at
An archive of previous issues of this digest, as well as other beer
related information can be accessed via anonymous ftp at
Use ftp to log in as anonymous and give your full e-mail address as the
password, look under the directory /pub/clubs/homebrew/beer directory.
AFS users can find it at /afs/
If you do not have ftp capability you may access the files via e-mail
using the ftpmail service at For information about
this service, send an e-mail message to with
the word "help" (without the quotes) in the body of the message. Some
archives are available via


From: "Keith Royster" <>
Date: Sun, 9 Jun 1996 22:59:35 +0500
Subject: my RIMS web page

Just wanted to say that I have finally completed a web page that
details the construction of my RIMS. Also, since I had just
recently given a talk at my brew club's meeting on RIMS, I went
ahead and included this information in a discussion about the
definition, pros, and cons of such a system. I would greatly
appreciate feedback concerning this new web page. You can visit it

Keith Royster -
@your.service -
Caroline BrewMasters -
Mooresville, North Carolina


From: Richard Gardner <>
Date: Sun, 9 Jun 1996 23:10:34 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: Re: Bad DME?

- - -- [ From: Bill Stoughton * EMC.Ver #2.10P ] --

>I've just had to throw out my third batch of beer due to contamination.
>All three had a strong rancid vinegary taste, with sort of an acetone
>odor. Two were ales fermented at room temperature, and one was a lager
>kept at 50F. The only common denominator among them was that I used
>some Munton's medium DME I bought at a local health food store clearing
>out its homebrew supplies--I imagine it may had been on the shelf for
>awhile. Could've the DME gone bad from age, or somehow become

Three in a row? I'd guess no. Contamination is killed off by boiling.
Vinegasr and Acetone flavors are caused by bacteria contamination. If you
boiled, and the DME was dry (as you stated), I think you have an infection
in your equipment or methods. Everything that comes into contact with the
cooled wort needs to be sanitized (bleach, and more bleach (or Iodine)). If
you are using anything wooden at this stage, don't (too tough to clean)! I
suspect one of you common pieces of equipment, like a racking hose. Or maybe
your yeast could be bad if you are yeast ranching. There is more in common
than the raw ingredients.

BTW, 50F will only give you a so-so lager; my results drastically
improved once I got a lagering refrigerator.


From: Jay Weissler <>
Date: Mon, 10 Jun 96 13:05:45 +0900
Subject: homebrew kit/brewer in Japan

I just saw a homebrew kit for sale at the National Azubu western grocery
store Hiroo, Tokyo, Japan. Now from the feedback I got from this forum a
couple months back, I thought homebrewing was illegal in Japan. Has something


Otherwise, not too much to report from Tokyo. National Azubu sells Sam Smith
line (about $4.25 a bottle) and you can find a few Japanese stores selling
Belgium beers, Bass, etc. but the Japanese and Mexican beers dominate the
shelves. The Irish bar in Roppongi has Killians lager (not red) on tap and it

is real good at $13 a pint. Japanese beer in Roppongi sells for about $8.

BTW. Anyone know where I can get the good rice for sake, or how to ask for it?

Down a few homebrews for me.



From: Kyle R Roberson <>
Date: Sun, 9 Jun 1996 21:51:28 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Malting and bbl size

I have malted home-grown barley and health-food-store
barley. If you grow your own, you can get an exotic
variety. It's not worth a big effort if it is just
Harringtons like the millions of tons grown in the US!
The secret to using health-food-store barley is to
ask for SPROUTING barley. What I got was nice, plump, two-
row Harringtons with 99+% germination.

To steep, I used my old zap-pap type bucket. I put a stopper
around my aeration hose, connected my aeration stone and put it
in the false bottom. The grain goes in the top. I connected the
air pump to a "vacation" light time to run for 30 minutes every
4 hours. Make sure the pump is above the water level. Change the
water twice the first day, then at least once the rest. Shoot for about
six changes in all.

Continental malt is pretty easy to make. Old-style Brittish malt
takes a lot of kilning. I used a home dehydrator for the low
temperature drying and the oven for the kilning. Think hard
about how you will get the kulms off!

An oil barrel is 32 gal, a beer gallon is 31 gal (US). A barrel is
not a recognized international amount, whereas a hectoliter (100l)



From: Michael Newman <100711.2111@CompuServe.COM>
Date: 10 Jun 96 04:31:06 EDT
Subject: FWH in 1822

During the recent discussions on first wort hopping someone asked if there
any references to the technique in the British literature. I was unaware of
(not that that counts for much) but I am currently reading THE PRIVATE
GUIDE by JOHN TUCK, published in London in 1822. This has been re-published by
Zymoscribe (1995). In the discussion of hopping two techniques with
to FWH are mentioned.

1. Select the hops and place in a vessel. Pour water at 160F over them until
soaked and cover closely with sacks or cloth. Strain off the liquor and run
the wort without boiling. The hops then go into the copper in the usual way.
This the the method recommended by the author. He also mentions a technique
published elsewhere ( who said plagiarism?) as follows:

2. Weigh the hops and place in a tub. Add hot water at two gallons per pound
hops. The temperature is omitted in the text. Press and work as for mashing
until evenly saturated. Cover with sacks to prevent loss of steam. Leave to
four hours, uncovering three or four times to press the hops back down into
liquor. When the first mash is drawn off the malt the extract is separated
the hops and run into the hopback or coolers. The hops go to the copper in the
usual way.

Clearly this is not the identical to FWH as written in the literature and
discussed in HBD but it has some interesting similarities don't you think? I
suppose these methods are more akin to late or dry hopping in reality. Any
comments out there?

MICHAEL NEWMAN, Salisbury, England


From: denisb@CAM.ORG (Denis Barsalo)
Date: Mon, 10 Jun 1996 07:23:05 -0500
Subject: Re: Wort Chilling

On Monday Aaron Sepanski said:

>I was wondering.... I never use a wort chiller. I usually put my wort
>directly into the fermentation tank (carboy) top it up with water, then
>set it in the bath tub. It usually takes about three hours to cool to
>about 85-95 degrees F. At this time I rack off the trub, and then pitch
>in my yeast. This gives me a pretty short lag time. What risk am I
>actually running. I've only done it the last 4 or 5 batches with no
>problems. Any opinions?

Well, first of all it depends on how you transfer your hot wort from the
kettle to the primary. If you just dump and splash it, you risk developing
metalic tastes in your beer from what's is called HSA (hot side aeration).
You would be better off to have cold water in your primary first and then
add the hot wort to it! (Is said better, not best. Read on.)
Secondly, the longer your wort stays between 130F and 80F, the greater
chance of infection you have. The idea behind a wort chiller or any wort
chilling schemes, is to get from 200F to pitching temperature as quickly as
possible and get your yeast in there before any bacteria can get hold of
your beer (Sorry, wort! It's not beer until the yeast has fermented out all
of the fermentables!) Three hours seems like a long time to me. Have you
got cold water in the bath tub? What about ice? When I first started out, I
used to cool my kettle in the laundry sink by putting the pot in ice cold
water. It usually took only 20 minutes to get from 200 to around 80F. Then
adding this to 60F water dropped the total amount of liquid down to
pitching temp.
Thirdly, unless you're using a single stage fermentation or making lagers
that will ferment in the primary for a week or so, I don't really see the
advantage of removing the trub. If you're fermenting ales, they're only
going to be in your primary for about 3 days anyways (right?), and then
you're going to rack it to a secondary. I personally have never noticed a
difference between removing the trub or not. Besides, the less you handle
your wort before the yeast sets in, the less risk of infection you will

You could just be lucky, or you live in a *really clean* environment!

Denis Barsalo


From: "Ralph Colaizzi" <>
Date: Mon, 10 Jun 1996 07:56:44 -0400

If you were one of the 300 brewers who entered TRASH VI, we owe you
a big apology!
I have just become aware of the fact that our entrants have only
received a canceled check so far from this competition. The
organizer has had a lot of personal things going on lately and I
haven't been in touch with him for a while.
You may be aware that I organized TRASH 1, II, and IV. I have no
connection with TRASH VI other than this web site. I am, however,
very concerned that our competition maintain the credibility that
we have all worked hard to establish.
I have no information to pass on at this time but I'm sure that Don
will have a very good explanation as well as an apology for all of
I hope you will be patient and not let this prevent you from
entering our future competitions. We have always had one of the
best run events and the entry count this year reflects that.

Please don't let this be the decline of the TRASH competition. We
need all of you who entered to make TRASH VII the best one ever.

You may e-mail me for opinions and gripes if you'd like.

- ------------------------------


From: "Patrick G. Babcock" <>
Date: Mon, 10 Jun 1996 08:16:28 -0400
Subject: Re: Leaky Corny Kegs

Greetings, Beerlings! Take me to your lager

On Jun 8, 11:06am, Dave Houseman wrote:
> Subject: Leaky Corny Kegs
> ...(and no, don't use any
> lubricants on the O-rings, that's one of the last things you want in
> contact with your beer)...
>-- End of excerpt from Homebrew Digest REQUEST Address Only

To wit, I reply thusly:

Gimme a break! Lubricants have been used for YEARS, nay - likely DECADES, and
quite possibly longer than that - on beer equipment! Keg lubes are jellies.
Most are silicone or vegetable based. Jellies will have absolutely NO affect
on the heading capability (as I assume you are alluding to) of your beer.
Walk into any beer-from-keg serving establishment, and you'll invariably see
some means to lubicate the probes, faucets, etc.

Now, pouring an ounce or two of Mazzola (no affiliation, just a satisfied
customer - er, no. That's Criso...) into your beer may have deleterious
effects on (might harm) your beer.

See ya!
Pat Babcock SE Michigan


From: Marty Tippin <>
Date: Mon, 10 Jun 1996 07:29:12 -0500
Subject: RE: removing chlorine

<Nate Apkon asks about pre-boiling his brewing water to remove chlorine.>

>From what I understand, only some of the chlorine will be driven off by
boiling; apparently there are some more complex chlorine-based chemicals
that won't come out with simple boiling - activated charcoal filters are
required for that task.

For about $25 you can put together a nifty filter to take all (or a very
signifcant portion) of the nasties out of your water - I've built one and
(quite conveniently... ;-) have written a web page describing how it goes
together. The page isn't complete, but there should be enough information
to get you started.

The system I built is based around a "whole-house" filter unit available at
any building supply store and (with the appropriate filter and connectors)
can serve double duty as a finished beer filter if you keg your beer. It's
quite similar to the systems sold by Crystal Clear Products and The Filter
Store Plus, as advertised in Zymurgy and Brewing Techniques.

Anyway, the web page is linked from my "Homebrew Gadgets" page at

Check it out and let me know what you think; if there's enough interest, I
might be prodded into actually finishing the page...

- -Marty


From: Dale Wiemer <dwiemer@STLMPE-4.ARMY.MIL>
Date: Mon, 10 Jun 96 7:18:34 CDT
Subject: Memphis Microbreweries??

Hi everyone,

Would anyone know of any Microbreweries in Memphis, Tn. I am going
there this weekend and would like to check any of these breweries


Dale Wiemer


From: "Patrick G. Babcock" <>
Date: Mon, 10 Jun 1996 09:04:56 -0400
Subject: Re: Have I ruined Scott Dornseif's Pale Ale?

Greetings Beerlings! Take me to your lager...

On Jun 9, 12:30pm, Scott Abene wrote:
> Subject: Have I ruined Scott Dornseif's Pale Ale?
> I by chance got a call from my friend Scott Dornseif Saturday afternoon
> requesting some yeast. So, I quickly drove over to his house to drop some
> off.
> While I was there, Scott gave me a tour of his fine new Grain Storage
> Facility (his closet). I noticed that he had an official BUD plaid tie
> (yick! BUD). He also pointed out that I was wearing plaid shorts. YIKES!
> Have I ruined his Pale Ale? Did I unconsciously go to his house with the
> intention of ruining his beer? Or did this horror just happen by "chance"?
>-- End of excerpt from Homebrew Digest REQUEST Address Only

Was the yeast you brought him exposed? If so, then: yes. Unless he was
brewing a Scotch ale or braggot, it will be a total loss.

The Man From Plaid


From: "Patrick G. Babcock" <>
Date: Mon, 10 Jun 1996 09:15:53 -0400
Subject: Re: Clorine Dioxide

Greetings, Beerlings! Take me to your lager...

On Jun 9, 10:31am, dion wrote:
> Subject: Re: Clorine Dioxide
> >>>>> "Joe" == Joe Rolfe <> writes:
> Joe> anyone in the homebrewing trade (or commercial) have any info on
> Joe> stabilized clorine dioxide as a sanitizer.
> Do you mean Oxine from Five Star? I am just beginning to use it in my
> home brewing. Especially nice to use at 5ppm and fill things with for
> storage purposes (like counterflow chillers).
> A friend of mine who owns a microbrewery is using Oxine and he really
> likes the no-rinse 5ppm final rinse for his equipment. He notes that
> with iodophor, the no-rinse concentration affects the flavor of the
> beer, but the oxine does not.
> dion
>-- End of excerpt from Homebrew Digest REQUEST Address Only

Two things.

First, is this chlorine compound safe for stainless steel? It was my
understanding that *NO* chlorine compound was safe for stainless? What say
you, Sir John of Palmer?

Second, Dion indicates that his micro-brewing friend found an effect on the
flavor of his beers in using iodophor. What concentration was he using? I was
kind of sold on this stuff under the claim that it would have no effect on
flavor or aroma of the beer (and, frankly, have noticed none during the
course of my use of it - but it is still something I'm kinda fearful of).
Anyone else find iodophor tainting their brew?

See ya!
Pat Babcock SE MI


From: David Raitt <>
Date: Mon, 10 Jun 1996 09:20:26 -0400
Subject: selling homebrew

In HBD 2063, Rob Moline writes:

> Charity Homebrew-
> When I was a member of the North Florida Brewer's League in
> Tallahassee, (Go Nole's!) they held an annual charity beer event.
> [...]
> These were public events
> and were great fun. This was back in '89 or '90 or so. Don't know if they
> still do it.

We do still do it, and have just started planning for this year's event.
There has not been any issue from the state alcoholic beverage control
board, however we are very careful to make sure that no money ever reaches
the homebrewers. Also, all of the takings (less any costs related to
publicity) go directly to the American Cancer Society, so the issue of
'selling' beer is sort of moot.

The other big worry that we have had in the past is insurance, however one
advantage of hooking up with New Directions (a fundraising arm of the ACS)
is that their general policy covers us for this one event each year.

So if anyone is in North Florida this year on October 19, you should plan on
stopping by and seeing us. It really is a lot of fun.



From: "Dave Higdon" <>
Date: Mon, 10 Jun 1996 09:43:07 EST
Subject: using mullberrys

Has anyone ever tried using mullberrys in their brew?
When would should I add them in ?


From: (George De Piro)
Date: Mon, 10 Jun 1996 10:23:51 -0700
Subject: RE:Chlorine, wort chillers, big beers, dogs

In HBD #2065, Nate asks if he must boil all of his water to remove the
chlorine. I, too, am a grain brewer in a town with outrageously high
Cl levels. I don't bother boiling the water, I just take it hot from
the tap (~150F) and let it sit uncovered for at least 12 hours.

I've never tested the water with a chlorine kit, but there is no
chlorine smell after this treatment (it's unpalatably strong before
treatment). Chlorine is fairly volatile, so it gets driven off pretty
fast. I've heard that some water companies use some sort of
chlorinated compounds (I can't remember specifically) that are NOT
very volatile. This could be trouble-you'll need to filter your water
through charcoal, then.

Aaron asks about the necessity of using a chiller to cool his wort.
The fact that you have no problems without one means that you don't
have to bother if you don't want to, but there are a couple of
advantages to using one. First, you'll save time. Three hours to
wait to pitch is a pain. With a counter-flow chiller you're wort will
be cool in ~15 minutes. Secondly, you'll precipitate more cold-break
if you chill the wort faster. Third, there's less chance of microbial
contamination because the wort gets pitched sooner and isn't sitting
around at bacteria-conducive temperatures for so long.

I'd like to put in my two cents about BIG beers winning contests.
Just look at the AHA NHC best of shows for the past two years: Pale
ale (1996) and European lager (Munich Helles, I think) (1995). Hardly
big beers.

It's much easier to hide flaws behind the huge palates of big beers,
and judges know this. While some may laugh at those who brew them (I
why wonder they brew them, myself), one of the toughest styles to brew
must be American lager. Because it tastes like colored seltzer, any
mistake you make is the prominent flavor. Judges are aware of this
and are more likely to be generous to well made, subtle beers.

On the Dog thread, I am grateful to have this knowledge. I was
composting hops, and my Labrador, Milo, sometimes loves to eat the
compost. I will stop putting spent hops out there!

In the same vein, I knew I was under-sparging my grains because he
used to eat them out of the compost heap (he loves malt sugar).
Seeing this prompted me to improve my sparging technique, which
increased my yields and stopped him from being interested in the

George De Piro (Nyack, NY)


From: David Conger <>
Date: Mon, 10 Jun 1996 10:37:10 -0400
Subject: Spent grains

>Are there any practical and economical uses for spent grain ? I've heard
>that major brewers sell it as feed for livestock. What about quantites that a

>microbrewery or even a homebrewer might have ?

I imagine it would compost well (used coffee grounds are GREAT for


From: Greg Thompson <>
Date: 10 Jun 1996 10:38:23 -0400
Subject: Re: Wort Chilling

>"AS" == Aaron Sepanski <> writes:

AS> I was wondering.... I never use a wort chiller. I usually put
AS> my wort directly into the fermentation tank (carboy) top it up
AS> with water, then set it in the bath tub. It usually takes about
AS> three hours to cool to about 85-95 degrees F. At this time I
AS> rack off the trub, and then pitch in my yeast. This gives me a
AS> pretty short lag time. What risk am I actually running. I've
AS> only done it the last 4 or 5 batches with no problems. Any
AS> opinions?

if you're not boiling your full 5 gallons, then you'd be better off
cooling the concentrated wort before adding water to bring it up to 5
gallons (or whatever). when cooling your wort down, you want to
maximize the temperature differential and minimize the quantity of
stuff you want to cool. that'll give you a more efficient cooling
process. what i do is have two or three bags of ice on hand when i
brew. when i'm done with my boil (2ish gallons of wort), i plug up
the sink in my kitchen, put the kettle in there, and then fill the
sink with cold water and ice. i periodically swirl the wort around
(with the top on at all times) and add more ice and/or water to the
sink as necessary. it takes about 30 minutes to bring the wort down
to a semi-reasonable temperature. by the time i add that to cold
water in my fermenter, it's down to a good pitching temperature.
- --
-greg a blindered horse, a wind up toy
i'm on auto pilot
i am a cog in the machine


From: Mark Montminy <>
Date: Mon, 10 Jun 1996 10:40:11 -0400
Subject: Suggestions for legal club samplings

Our small club meets at the local homebrew shop once a month to exchange beers

for a club contest we have. This meet also used to be used to sample the
entries for the month. It was recently pointed out to the owner that this was

a fairly risky thing to be doing, so the sampling has been put on hold. I'm
looking for some suggestions on ways to legalize this as simply as possible.
I guess there are at least 2 issues to be dealt with, the liability on the
store owner, should something happen as a result of someone drinking in his
store, and the legality of drinking beer in a public place. Since I'm sure
this is all based on the state and town, I don't expect a solution. I'm just
fishing for ideas that might help. Especially if someone knows what works in
eastern MA.

- --
Motorola ISG (508)261-5684 Email:
Machines certainly can solve problems, store information, correlate,
and play games -- but not with pleasure.
-- Leo Rosten


Date: Mon, 10 Jun 1996 15:45:39 +0000 (GMT)
Subject: Insulating your Mash Tun

To summarize posts I received (late last year?) on this
subject, there is no good insulating material in common use by
HBDers which can withstand the heat of a direct-fired burner.
The best thing most use (myself included) is called "Reflectix"
at the local hardware stores. Its a multiple layer of foil with
air pockets to insulate AND with layers of plastic in there too.
The latter makes this material of limited utility.
In short, many of us use this stuff, but we find it needs
replacing every 6-12mo, depending on usage. I tried it on the tun
when running my burners, and the Reflectix did indeed deform but
only at the bottom edge nearest the flame. FWIW I also sealed the
edges of this material with aluminum tape. Its hard to keep this
stuff held on the tun while heating, and if it hangs down to the
burner, you could get a fire. Instead, I know use Reflectix only
between steps, removing it when the burner is lit. YMMV as always.

Dave in Indy


From: (Bob Waterfall)
Date: Mon, 10 Jun 1996 11:54:34 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Errors-To:

Bob Waterfall <>,
Troy, NY, USA


From: Rob Moline <>
Date: Mon, 10 Jun 1996 10:08:42 -0500
Subject: Beer Bill of Rights -Forwarded

>by Jim Kasprzak, Jeff Jankowski and Ron Sperber
>with a little inspiration from
>the Founding Fathers of the United States
>1. Congress shall make no law disrespecting an establishment of beer,
>or prohibiting the free consumption thereof; or abridging the freedom
>of bar service, or of brewing; or the right of the people peacably to
>assemble, and to petition the bartender for a round of beers.
>2. A well-stocked bar being necessary to the security of a free State,
>the right of the people to brew and consume beer shall not be infringed.
>3. No beer shall, in time of heat be quartered in any house without
>refrigeration, nor in time of cold, except in a manner prescribed by law.
>4. The right of the people to be secure in their beer, bottles, glasses,
>and brewing effects, against unreasonable searches and seziures, shall
>not be violated, and no last calls shall be issued, but upon the proper
>time, supported by the clock, and particularly offering the bar patrons
>the opportunity to purchase and consume one more beer before closing.
>5. No person shall be held to consume a second-rate, or otherwise
>infamous beer, unless on presentment or indictment of a large bar bill,
>except in cases arising in block parties or backyard barbecues, or at a
>fraternity house, when in actual celebration in time of holidays or
>sporting events; nor shall any person subject for the same bar bill to
>be twice put in jeopardy of cash or credit; nor shall be compelled in
>any drinking establishment to purchase beer for anyone other than himself;
>nor be deprived of beer without due process of law; nor shall private
>stocks of beer be taken for public consumption without just compensation.
>6. In all drinking establishments, the patron shall enjoy the right to
>speedy and courteous service, by a qualified bartender of the establishment
>wherein the beer shall have been ordered, which establishment shall have
>been previously licensed by law, and to be informed of the nature and price
>of the beer; to be presented with the bar tab against him; to have
>compulsory process for obtaining the beer which was ordered, and to have
>the assistance of the bartender for service.
>7. In bills at drinking establishments, where the value in controversy
>shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of service shall be preserved,
>and no tab presented by a bartender shall be otherwise re-examined in
>any drinking establishment in the United States, than according to the
>rules of the common law.
>8. Excessive drinking shall not be required, nor excessive prices imposed,
>nor cruel and unusual beers inflicted.
>9. The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain beers, shall not be
>construed to deny or disparage others consumed by the people.
>10. The beers not supplied to the bars by mass marketing, nor brewed
>in microbreweries, are reserved to the brewpubs respectively, or to the
>This document can be found on the World Wide Web:
>Selected by Jim Griffith. MAIL your joke to
>Attribute the joke's source if at all possible. A Daemon will auto-reply.

Thought you might get a giggle.

Rob Moline
Little Apple Brewing Company
Manhattan, Kansas

"The more I know about beer, the more I realize I need to know more about


From: Bill Giffin <>
Date: Mon, 10 Jun 1996 12:20:50 -0500
Subject: Old Faithful

Good morning,

Fred and "Old Faithful" make an interesting point. Buy the best measuring
devices that you can afford and check them frequently. These are some of
the most
important equipment purchases you can make to brew well .

I use a dial thermometer that can be calibrated. It goes from 0 F to 220
F and is accurate to 1 F. It also has an 1 3/4" dial that Blind Bill can
read. I frequently check the thermometer in boiling water and adjust the
thermometer to 212 F. I am very near sea level so there is only a minor
error due to altitude. Ice water is also an easy check point as the
temperature of melting ice is 32 F.

I use a triple beam gram scale to measure hops and small amounts of
grain as well as chemicals for the adjustment of water. I also weigh
priming sugar when I use it to bottle.

For greater quantities of grain I have a platform scale which is accurate
to an 1/8 of a pound and has a capacity of 80 lbs.

I use narrow range hydrometers which are 300 mm long for greater

I feel that it is very important to be able to accurately record what you
do in your brewing. If you have inadequate measuring equipment how
can you be sure that with any degree of accuracy that you indeed had
an oz. of hops or an oz. of black malt etc.

If you come up with the best beer in the world the only way that it can
even be hoped to be repeated is to have adequate measurement as to
what went into the beer.

Tracy I have no data to substantiate the above. Therefore you may
disregard it completely.

Folks, all grain brewing is about as advanced as making biscuits from
scratch instead of using a mix and everyone knows that scratch biscuits
can be much better. The cost of the equipment needed to do all grain
brewing, including the cost of kettle, burner etc. is less then the cost of
4 cases of good imported beer, and with your first good all grain
batch you will make up for at least one case of the cost.

May you be in heaven an hour before the devil knows you are dead,

Bill Bill Giffin
61 Pleasant St.
Richmond, ME 04357

All you need is a few good friends and plenty to drink because thirst is a
terrible thing!


From: Brian Bliss <>
Date: Mon, 10 Jun 96 11:35:57 CDT
Subject: right to beer-life

Dave Cummings <> writes:
>I'd just like to say that brewing shouldn't be a political platform. We
>all should be responsible enough to know when we are ready to brew and
>have a beer.... wait... wrong topic...

I started brewing when I was too young. They didn't teach beer-making
in high school, and I wasn't patient enough to finish "The Complete Joy
of Homebrewing". I wanted to do it NOW.

Fortunately, I had a beautiful German-style ale, followed by a tasty
dark brown ale. The beers that followed were all goo in their own
right, but sooner or later it was bound to happen. Something had gone
amiss. After the initial fermentation had subsided, batch 7 tasted like

I was greiving. What was I to do? Just throw the whole batch down the
drain and pretend like the whole thing never happened? Or should I give
it the same chance every other beer has, and bottle it, only to have one
opened years later and everyone turn op their noses in disgust at it?
Then, have the same thing happen again and again, over and over again,
with what is left of the poor little brew take up precious cellar space
the whole time? This is cellar space that some other beer with more
potential, a beer that just needed a little more time, could productively
use to find a happy and rewarding life. Could I justify this sacrifice?
For batch 7, there was little hope.

But, having completed the fermentation process, batch 7 was a beer, by
anyone's definition, with a life of its own. Not just mediocre wort that
had never been touched by a yeast cell, it was a living, growing beer
(literally :-). There was only one thing a loving father could do.
I would drink batch 7, and I would enjoy it. Nevermind the astringent
taste, or the overpowering a lactic infection. I would learn to look past
all those faults, and treat batch 7 the same as I would any of my beers.
I would proudly distribute bottles to my friends. I would savor it on
a cold winter night. I would enter it competitions, and, if it didn't win,
I would console it with a bottle at home while reading the score sheets.

I would promote lactic infection as a quality, not a fault.
Political attitudes needed changing regarding the new "alternative"
beers. I would create a doctrine of beer rights, using popular slogans
such as "All beers are created equal". Beer judges just needed time to
come to appreciate what were once called defects for what we now know they
really are: blesssings in disguise.

Beer is just too precious a thing to waste.

- ------------------------------


From: Randy Allen Shreve <>
Date: Mon, 10 Jun 1996 12:52:21 -0400
Subject: HBD Article

RE: The BruHeat System

I have been lurking in the background for some number of weeks and enjoying
the varied subjects and passionate responses being passed back and forth.
If this subject has been aired in prior digests, please forgive, and
reference the digest number so I can get it from archival. anyone in the collective using the 220 volt BruHeat system? As
a newbie homebrewer (just put my second batch into the primary on Friday),
this thing seems like a dream come true to someone who is considering
entering into the all grain arena.

Anything you can pass on about the BruHeat would be greatly appreciated!

Thanks! Randy Shreve "Too much of a good thing is.....wonderful" - Mae West


From: "Robert A. Uhl" <>
Date: Mon, 10 Jun 1996 10:58:44 -0600 (MDT)
Subject: Re: Malting and bbl size

On Sun, 9 Jun 1996, Homebrew Digest REQUEST Address Only wrote:

> Continental malt is pretty easy to make. Old-style Brittish malt
> takes a lot of kilning. I used a home dehydrator for the low
> temperature drying and the oven for the kilning. Think hard
> about how you will get the kulms off!

V. interesting. Does anyone know of a net.borne reference which would
give instructions as to how to do this? I'm far from all-grain, but I
plan to do it someday.

> An oil barrel is 32 gal, a beer gallon is 31 gal (US). A barrel is
> not a recognized international amount, whereas a hectoliter (100l)
> is.

I'd have replied personally and not put this on the list, but I don't
know your addr. An oil barrel (a true barrel) _is_ internationally
recognised, or was 7 years ago, when my grandfather got out of the oil
business. I remain

Robert Uhl

Chief Programmer,
CR Systems


From: "Dave Hinkle" <>
Date: 10 Jun 1996 10:10:51 -0700
Subject: Dogs and hops

Bob Sweeny wrote in HBD #2065:

"I would like to add a sobering data point to Keith Royster's warning
about feeding hops to dogs. My chocolate labrador, Bridgett, ate some
spent hops, Cascades I believe, and starting having convulsions so severe
she could not stand up. I note for the record that carrying a convulsing 75
pound lab is one of life's least rewarding experiences. Anyway, after
performing emergency procedures including the forcing of charcol down her
with a funnel (that only took five vets) and spending a week at the animal
hospital I got my dog back. For $500. The head of the veterinary team that
worked on her said that hop poisioning appears to cause symptoms which are
very close to those caused by anti-freeze (ethelyne glycol?) and they were
mildly surprized that Bridgett pulled through."

Sorry to hear about this near tragic happening. I remember reading about a
(human) drug that can be administered that will quickly stop the run-away
hyper-thermic condition as an antidote to hop poisoning. I think it was a post

to RCB several months ago? Does anyone have this information? All I remember

was it was some kind of "[?]-blocker" given to humans to treat some specific
condition (something to do with the kidneys?). I would like to get this info
so I can forward it to my vet. Because the drug isn't normally given to
ANIMALS, it seems my vet has never heard of such a thing. If there is such an

antidote, getting this info to the veterinary community would be a great
service. No matter how careful we are, accidents can happen.

>From the other accounts I've read about dogs ingesting hops, Bridgett is one
lucky dog. I hope she doesn't suffer any health problems from the ordeal.

Dave Hinkle
Phoenix, AZ


From: "Robert A. Uhl" <>
Date: Mon, 10 Jun 1996 11:17:19 -0600 (MDT)
Subject: Re: Suggestions for legal club samplings

On Mon, 10 Jun 1996, Homebrew Digest REQUEST Address Only wrote:

> Our small club meets at the local homebrew shop once a month to exchange
> for a club contest we have. This meet also used to be used to sample the
> entries for the month. It was recently pointed out to the owner that this
> a fairly risky thing to be doing, so the sampling has been put on hold. I'm

> looking for some suggestions on ways to legalize this as simply as possible.

> I guess there are at least 2 issues to be dealt with, the liability on the
> store owner, should something happen as a result of someone drinking in his
> store, and the legality of drinking beer in a public place. Since I'm sure
> this is all based on the state and town, I don't expect a solution. I'm just

> fishing for ideas that might help. Especially if someone knows what works in

> eastern MA.

Is the meeting after hours? If so, it's not really a public place.
And even if it is, if all the participants are over 21, I should think
that it's legal. As to liability of the owner, I don't know. There
is a possibility that signing a form _might_ release him from
responsibility. Personally, I would trust my fellows not to sue me
for their own problems. I remain

Robert Uhl

Chief Programmer,
CR Systems


Date: Mon, 10 Jun 96 13:09:34 EST
Subject: Grassy beer/IMBR?

Hi All,

In a recent HBD I posted:

>I kegged a brown ale on Sunday and dry hopped in the keg with 3/4 oz.
>of Tettenanger hops in a nylon hop bag, I weighted the bag down with
>sanitized marbles and attached it to the liquid in tube with a
>sanitized binder clip. This is the first time I've dry hopped in the
>keg. I usually dry hop in the secondary.

>Here's the problem; My beer tastes grassy! Now, don't get me wrong,


Thanks to all who responded, I received a variety of responses,
anywhere from (it will mellow in 8 or 9 months) to (I like grassy
tasting beer, don't you?) I chose to follow a couple of responses,
(the hops are just green, the flavor should mellow with age) and
(remove the hops and purge several timeswith CO2).

I waited a week without touching the beer, I tried it again this
weekend... Hurray! The grassy taste went away! However, what is
that_other_aftertaste? It tastes familiar?!. Oh no!.... :^O

***** >sanitized_binder_clip_ *******

I quickly opened the keg, reached in (with sanitized arm :^O ) and
pulled out the hops bag, binder clip and all! IMBR?

I'm purging the keg with CO2 daily, does anyone think this will work?
or am I stuck with 5 gallons of Metalic Brown Ale?

Steve Gravel Newport, Rhode Island
"Homebrew, It's not just a hobby, It's an adventure!"


From: Pierre Jelenc <>
Date: Mon, 10 Jun 96 11:10:37 EDT
Subject: In-Reply-To: Your message of Mon, 10 Jun 96 2:27:45 GMT

In Homebrew Digest #2065 Dion Hollenbeck ( says:

> >>>>> "Joe" == Joe Rolfe <> writes:
> Joe> anyone in the homebrewing trade (or commercial) have any info on
> Joe> stabilized clorine dioxide as a sanitizer.
> Do you mean Oxine from Five Star? I am just beginning to use it in my

How is it stabilized? By itself ClO2 is highly unstable.

> home brewing. Especially nice to use at 5ppm and fill things with for
> storage purposes (like counterflow chillers). At least that is what I
> think now. Give me a year to evaulate. The only downside I know of
> is that unlike iodophor which can be easily tested for its
> effectiveness (test papers for ppm and smell/color) Oxine does not
> have any "easy" ppm detection method that I know of.
> It has been proven in the food handling industry from what the "White
> Paper" from Five Star says. It is FDA approved as a sanitizer at 200+

Isn't that higher than for plain bleach (50 ppm IIRC)?

> ppm concentrations and FDA approved as *DRINKING WATER* at 5ppm, which
> after 15 minutes of being a 5ppm solution, the water is sanitary.

It reacts with organic materials, so just like iodophors it can only be
used on scrupulously clean surfaces.

> A friend of mine who owns a microbrewery is using Oxine and he really
> likes the no-rinse 5ppm final rinse for his equipment. He notes that

A "no-rinse rinse"?

> with iodophor, the no-rinse concentration affects the flavor of the
> beer, but the oxine does not.

That seems contrary to accepted wisdom (taste threshold for iodophenols
being an order of magnitude higher than for chlorophenols).

And beware of dioxin formation, of course.



From: "Bridges, Scott" <bridgess@mmsmtp.ColumbiaSC.ATTGIS.COM>
Date: Mon, 10 Jun 96 13:18:00 PDT
Subject: re: when is beer beer?

>From: lmatt <>
>Date: Sun, 9 Jun 1996 17:46:59 -0400 (EDT)
>Subject: When beer is beer?
>Much has been written in the last week about defining the exact moment at
>which the wort becomes legally beer. Even an analogy to the dreaded
>abortion issue was used. My venture at a defining moment would include
>the exact time that the yeast in the wort has created .5% alcohol by
>volume/wt depending upon state. Prior to this time, you can drink and drive

>with a non-alcoholic beverage in your hand. Once the yeast has converted
>above .5% by volume/wt to alcohol, ATF and others will have their
>jurisdiction. It's a beer!!
> Larry Matthews
> Raleigh, NC

I've been behind in my HBD reading and am just now catching up on this
thread. So, at the risk of prolonging a discussion that everyone is
probably already tired of, I'd like to add a point that I haven't seen yet.
Sorry if it's been said and I overlooked it. From what I've read, legally
the wort becomes beer when the yeast is pitched. My logic comes from the
restrictions placed on BOPs. My understanding is that BOP employees can
help with everything except, you guessed it, pitching the yeast. The
"homebrewer" must do this for it to be his or her beer. Otherwise, it
ceases to be "homebrew" and becomes commercially produced and subject to
other laws. Having said that, when asked the age of my brew, I will use the
bottle/kegging date normally.


Last brewing toy purchased: a motor for my MaltMill.


From: Steve Potter <>
Date: Mon, 10 Jun 1996 13:51:49 -0500
Subject: Fly-in homebrew

In June of 1997, I am planning a fly in fishing/rough camping expedition to
Ontario. Given the choice, I would much prefer drinking home brew to
commercial beer. I have several questions about how best to do this:

1. Are home brew and commercial beer treated the same, when
importing for personal consumption on a vacation, as regards quantities?
2. Given that weight is a major issue on fly ins, bottles are out. I already
own a corneilius keg system but I think that the 5 liter party keg system
might be a better answer. Does anyone have experience with using the
5 liter keg system when refrigeration is not available? Would that change
priming rates?
3. Assuming that we go with the 5 liter kegs, what quantity of CO2
cartridges would be required per keg?

Any help would be appreciated - private E-mail would be ok.
Recommendations on the best places to go would also be accepted.
The more I learn about brewing,
The thirstier I get.


From: "Tracy Aquilla" <>
Date: Mon, 10 Jun 96 19:05:34 GMT
Subject: Re: esters and aeration

In Digest #2063:
Andy Walsh <> wrote:
>Tracy writes:
>>One way to minimize ester production is to use a higher pitching rate and
>>minimize or even completely avoid wort aeration (and keep the temp down).
>I must disagree here.
>*More* esters are produced by yeast in a poorly aerated wort than from a well

>aerated wort. If you want to keep ester levels down, use a higher pitching
>rate in a well oxygenated, trub-rich wort.
>This has been well documented in the literature. I can provide references
>for those interested.

Andy (and George de Piro below) brings up an interesting point. It should be
noted here that this is a controversial issue and there is published
evidence indicating that esters can be either increased or decreased with
respect to wort aeration, depending on certain specific conditions. I will
attempt to briefly describe these conditions here and explain why I think we
may be in disagreement on this point. According to Greg Noonan and based on
experience in the Vermont Pub and Brewery, the more oxygen provided to the
yeast, the more acidic and estery flavors are produced. "Lower pitching
rates translate into greater growth (given enough oxygen) and greater ester
formation"..."where esters are part of the flavor profile, dissolved oxygen
at pitching is absolutely required." (G. Noonan, Barleycorn Press 7(7):1
(1996). Read on for more details!

Also Andy, those references you mentioned would be sincerely appreciated,
please thank you. (George De Piro) wrote:
> In HBD 2061 Tracy states that S. cerevisiae does not respire (by
> respire I mean go through the Kreb's cycle, electron transport chain,
> etc.). I could find nothing to substantiate this statement, and
> therefore doubt its' accuracy.

S. cerevisiae can respire, and it even does so occasionally, but what I
actually said was that it does not respire _in wort_. See the journals
"Antonie van Leeuwenhoek" vol. 63 issue 3-4, pp. 343-352, and "Advances in
Microbial Physiology" vol. 28, pp. 181-209 for recent reviews of the basic
metabolism of Crabtree-positive and Crabtree-negative yeasts. In short, S.
cerevisiae cannot respire in wort because the high concentration of
fermentable sugars effectively inhibits respiration (i.e. via the Crabtree
effect), even when oxygen is available.

> Tracy also says that oxygenating the wort will cause the yeast to
> produce off flavors and esters. This is essentially wrong.

Not necessarily wrong, although I thank you for paraphrasing my statements
more accurately in the future, please. What I actually said was "by
underpitching and aerating the wort, one is providing conditions conducive
to ester production....One way to minimize ester production is to use a
higher pitching rate and minimize or even completely avoid wort aeration
(and keep the temp down)." See "Scotch Ale" by G.J. Noonan, (1993) for the
source of this information (index esters). I also said that "Aerobic
fermentation will also produce certain compounds (particularly acids) in
higher quantities than will anaerobic fermentation. This can taint the
beer." More specifically, pyruvate, malate, citrate, succinate, and even
acetate and lactate are produced (see "Malting and Brewing Science" (2nd
ed.) by Hough, Briggs, Stevens, and Young (1982), ch. 17). These are not
necessarily 'off flavors', but their levels are are nonetheless increased
during aerobic fermentation, which may not be desirable in some beers. It
should also be emphasized that I was specifically referring to beers that
are _underpitched_, although I may not have emphasized that enough. This is
a critical point because ester biosynthesis is proportional to the rate of
yeast metabolic activity (specifically carbohydrate, nitrogen/amino acid,
and fatty acid metabolism), and this activity is greatly accelerated under
aerobic conditions.

It should also be noted that the choice of yeast strain has a major impact
on the ester levels in finished beer. Some strains are known to produce
copious amounts of esters (eg. Wyeast 1968), while others are known for
being very 'clean' (eg. Wyeast 1056) and essentially free of esters (i.e.
usually below threshold). This trait, together with fermentation
temperature, probably plays the greatest role in ester production in most
beers, unless there is a problem in the brewhouse. Thus, if you really want
to avoid esters, use a clean strain, pitch at a very high rate, do not
aerate the wort, and maintain a relatively low initial fermentation
temperature. Certain strains in particular (eg. Ringwood) have a notoriously
high requirement for O2, and these strains require frequent aeration (or
even oxygenation with pure O2 gas) in order to produce the characteristic
estery, acidic ales for which they're often selected. Such mutants help to
illustrate the fact that ester production is a biosynthetic activity and
ester levels in finished beer can be significantly influenced by brewhouse
practices, such as wort aeration, and particularly by the extent of yeast
growth in the beer.

> Yeast, in the presence of oxygen, WILL RESPIRE. Respiring yeast DO NOT
> produce alcohol, and they do produce compounds that cause off flavors but

True, but not in the presence of fermentable sugars; yeast does not respire
when making beer, and respiration is precisely what a brewer does not want,

> these compound are later metabolized by the yeast (or, in the case of
> volatiles, purged from the beer by CO2), so they do not usually make
> it to the serving vessel.

Actually, yeast cells can assimilate and reduce the VDKs, but the
acetohydroxy acids (i.e. the form in which they're excreted from the cell)
are NOT assimilated by yeast, and the rate and extent of VDK reduction
depends a lot on the yeast strain and physiological state, but I digress...

> Under oxygenation of the wort is the surest way to increase ester
> production.

According to Greg Noonan, "this is another source of controversy-much of the
brewing literature states that underpitching/lack of oxygenation results in
less ester formation, but again, it just ain't so" (Greg Noonan, Barleycorn
Press 7(7):1 (1996). Greg's statement is bourne out by my reading of the
brewing literature and empirical observations.

> Without oxygen, acetyl Co A esterifies fusel alcohols, causing
> excessive fruitiness in the finished beer (this isn't just textbook
> knowledge, I did it before I knew any better. The resulting banana
> beer was unpalatable to most).

Again, such observations are somewhat dependent on the yeast strain, but
clearly ester biosynthesis is directly linked to yeast metabolic activity
(M&B Sci, ch. 17). When provided with dissolved O2 and fermentable sugar
(i.e. during aerobic fermentation), S. cerevisiae produces acetyl-CoA at a
much faster rate than during anaerobic fermentation (see the van Dijken
reference cited above), hence increasing the potential for ester biosynthesis.

> The point of this is that it would be a shame if people start
> underaerating their worts based on advice seen in the HBD. Their beer
> WILL suffer.

I agree, since most homebrewers usually underpitch severely; aeration should
be the rule for most homebrewers. Underpitching combined with underaeration
is a recipe for disaster with most yeast strains. However, for those wishing
to make exquisite Scotch Ales or Doppelbocks, I submit that some
experimentation to this effect might be well worthwhile. I know it works for

> References: Kirk, David "Biology Today" (my first college bio text)
> Miller, Dave "The Complete Handbook of Home Brewing" p. 188
> Noonan, Gregory "Brewing Lager Beer" pp.147-151

(BTW, it was none other than Greg Noonan who drove-home the point about
esters and oxygen, in response to an article I recently wrote addressing
wort aeration! I've snipped a short section of the article and appended it

Why do brewers aerate their worts? During yeast propagation, unsaturated
fatty acids and sterols are usually growth limiting for the yeast. These
lipids are essential components of the cell membrane, and if unavailable in
the wort, they can only be synthesized utilizing dissolved molecular oxygen.
Therefore, brewers may either add sterols and fatty acids to the hopped
wort, aerate the cold bitter wort, aerate the yeast culture during
propagation, or use a higher pitching rate. Commercial breweries generally
find it most convenient and economical to aerate the cold bitter wort. Wort
aeration increases the rate and extent of yeast growth and hence decreases
lag time and results in a larger population of cells. This in turn generally
leads to more complete attenuation and fewer undesirable flavors in the
finished beer.
HOWEVER, there are some side-effects of wort aeration, due precisely to
the fact that free oxygen stimulates explosive growth of the yeast culture.
Thus, it's important to note that it is possible to over-aerate, and even
easier to over-oxygenate when using pure oxygen gas. This is particularly
true in regard to the vicinal diketones (VDKs), such as diacetyl. Diacetyl
is produced non-enzymatically by oxidation of alpha-acetolactate, and
dissolved oxygen is known to promote this reaction. Like esters, the level
of diacetyl (or 2,3-pentanedione) in finished beer is mainly a function of
yeast strain (again, unless there's a problem in the brewery). However, the
levels of acetohydroxy acids (VDK precursors), organic acids (citrate,
succinate, etc.) and oxo-acids (pyruvate, oxoglutarate), fatty acids, fusel
alcohols (precursors to esters), and esters themselves are all increased by
conditions leading to rapid cell growth (and the accompanying increase in
pyruvate, oxo-acids, etc.), and wort aeration is known to contribute
significantly to such rapid growth.
It has also been reported that conditions resulting in 'restricted
growth' tend to increase ester levels as well (hence this little
controversy). This is likely due to the rapid accumulation of esters and
precursor compounds, due to a sudden decrease in growth and hence blockade
of biosynthesis. In particular, it has been reported that O2-restricted
growth of yeast results in high levels of esters, due to a

rapid decrease in 
growth rate and subsequent backing-up of the pools of compounds which
contribute to ester biosynthesis (mainly fatty acids, oxo-acids, fusel
alcohols, ethanol, and acetyl CoA). Hence, while a rapid reduction in the
rate of fermentation can increase ester excretion to above threshold levels,
extensive aerobic fermentation can increase esters to phenomenal levels (see
ch. 17 in M&B Sci for most of the details). I recently proved this to myself
with my last IPA.
Interestingly, there may also be some cases where it is preferable NOT
to aerate the cold wort. Since oxo-acids, VDKs, fusel alcohols and their
derivative esters are all metabolic by-products of yeast growth, in certain
styles of beer where these compounds are undesirable, it is often preferable
to pitch a much larger starter culture instead of allowing the yeast to
reproduce extensively after pitching ("Scotch Ale" by G.J. Noonan, 1993).
Such is the case for beers like Scotch Ales and Bocks, where the original
specific gravity is usually rather high and the finished beer is generally
intended to be very clean (i.e. free from esters, fusels, and VDKs). This is
particularly important when fermenting high gravity worts, since ester
production is naturally increased during fermentation of these worts. By
pitching as much as 15-20x10E6 cells/mL, keeping the initial fermentation
temperature relatively low, and minimizing or even eliminating the aeration
step, one can avoid extensive yeast growth and excretion of the esters which
naturally accompany reproductive activity. However, pitching rates
significantly higher than this have been reported to result in 'yeast-bite'
and are not recommended.
BUT...Since it is rare for homebrewers to obtain the optimal pitching
rate, aeration is generally the rule, particularly if one intends to obtain
reasonable attenuation of a very heavy wort. In the case of strong ales like
Barley Wine, esters are generally seen as being desirable, as is a very high
concentration of ethanol. Since high attenuation is the main goal here and
esters aren't really a problem, a high pitching rate and wort aeration are
likely to produce the best results in this case.
Brewers should also be aware that the oxygen 'requirement' of brewers'
yeast is strain dependent and what might be adequate for one strain could be
insufficient or excessive for another. Hence, it's best to be familiar with
your yeast and when aeration is deemed necessary, to aerate the wort only to
saturation (about 8 ppm O2 for most worts, when using air) upon pitching and
then stop (unless you're using Ringwood!). Also noteworthy is the fact that
oxygen is beneficial even at levels well below saturation, so aerating a
little will actually help a lot.

Well, I guess that was long enough. Stay tuned for more later.....


From: (George De Piro)
Date: Mon, 10 Jun 1996 16:00:37 -0700
Subject: Too aerate or not: This new learning amazes me...

Tracy recently responded to my posting about wort aeration. It seems
that there is evidence on both sides. Ironically, the person that we
both use most to bolster our side of the debate is the same: Greg
Noonan!!! (In his book, Brewing Lager Beer, he states, "Without
oxygen, acetyl Co A esterifies fusel alcohols...")

Well, I guess that's one way to make controversy; just be published
expressing support for both sides of an issue!!!

It's especially amusing to me because I just had a similar discussion
with my BJCP teacher.

In my experience, and I know Tracy agrees, homebrewers almost always
underpitch and therefore MUST aerate the wort. The odd thing is, that
every brewery I've seen also aerates the wort, usually with an in-line
O2 injector. Are they underpitching, too?

I'll continue looking for more info on this topic, but it makes sense
(intuitively) that if you pitch adequately, O2 requirements are
minimized. It's a shame I've forgotten so much of those 500 level
biochem courses I took in college. Perhaps I think too much of

George De Piro (Nyack, NY)


From: Russell Mast <>
Date: Mon, 10 Jun 1996 15:35:12 -0500
Subject: Homebrew Laws / Satisfaction.

> From: Rob Moline <>
> Date: Thu, 6 Jun 1996 22:59:37 -0500
> Subject: Charity Homebrew/Leaky Corny's/Homebrew Shops & the Law/Nebraska
Bound HBD Lurker
> Charity Homebrew-
> When I was a member of the North Florida Brewer's League in
> Tallahassee, (Go Nole's!) they held an annual charity beer event. With the
> assistance of a local retail liquor shop, they set up a booth, where one
> could buy a bunch of tickets for 5 bucks, and then trade each of the tickets
> for a sample of homebrew made by various local brewers.

Okay, this probably came in through another clause in the homebrewing laws.
As I understand, the federal law says you can make beer for your own
personal consumption, or for "organized tastings". Now, when I bring a
six of my latest over to Jake's place, well, in my opinion, we've just
organized a tasting. Will it wash in court? I hope I never need to find
out. But, I suspect that this Tallahassee thing gets away with it because
it is a tasting, or it sounds like it to me. A "sample" - is that drunk
on site? If so, well, sounds like you're tasting it. If it's taken home,
I think you might have a problem.

> From: (Jim Dipalma)
> Date: Fri, 7 Jun 96 10:42:49 EDT
> Subject: Re: Skunky Beer, 18th century brewing
> In HBD #2062, Pat Babcock writes:
> > Kind of like the death of innocence. The more we know, the more
> >our lives become because we narrow our choices - the things available to
> >satisfy become fewer and more difficult to find.
> Brother, ain't that the truth!! I can recall when I first started brewing
> and developing a taste for better beer. I used to buy a lot of commercial
> beer, Anchor steam, Pilsner Urquell, Bass, etc., and enjoyed them all
> immensely. Then I became a BJCP judge, and began to notice how Anchor steam
> is often oxidized by the time it gets to the East coat, how Pilsner Urquell
> is almost invariably skunked, and how Bass occasionally has very high levels
> of diacetyl. These days, I can scarcely drink a commercially brewed beer
> without picking up some kind of defect.

I think it's important to ask yourself - can you still enjoy the beer
despite of the defect? If not, you are poorer for having that knowledge.

> >But I wouldn't
> >give up the knowledge for the world...

Neither would I. But, I think I'd still be able to appreciate the joys
of a beer with whatever problem it may have. (Depending, of course, on
whether or not there was other aspects that were not problematic.) I
forget who had the quote, but someone posted awhile back that beer is
like sex, in that when it's good, it's really good, but when it's bad,
it's still pretty good. I don't know if I'd go that far, but certainly
when it's mediocre it's still pretty good.

I don't think it makes much sense to try to use the BATF definition of
when a beer is born, but it makes as much as any other definition. As
soon as you pitch the yeast, of course, SOME of the wort is turning to
beer, if you want to get quantal about it.

I usually refer to "wort", "fermenting beer/wort" and "beer", as three
different entities.

- -Russell Mast
copyright 1996, Robert Keogh


From: Domenick Venezia <>
Date: Mon, 10 Jun 1996 13:44:11 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: yeast respire? NOT! Part 1

WARNING: this could be considered a long, boring, irrelevant post, however
I find it most interesting.

ALSO: This post was split because is was rejected as too long. Has
the HBD always had a 10K message length limit?

From: (George De Piro)
>In HBD 2061 Tracy states that S. cerevisiae does not respire (by
>respire I mean go through the Kreb's cycle, electron transport chain,
>etc.). I could find nothing to substantiate this statement, and
>therefore doubt its' accuracy.

Tracy Aquilla is correct. Yeast does NOT respire in the presence of
greater than about 0.5-1% glucose, and I do have the references to
substantiate it. This means that under the batch growth conditions we
use in homebrewing yeast will NEVER respire. At pitching time
when the oxygen content of the wort is high the glucose concentration is
well over the level needed to repress respiration, and by the time the
glucose level drops to < 1% all the oxygen has been consumed for
biosynthesis of sterols.

I have not researched the effect of aeration on
flavor and ester production. I am only speaking to the issue of whether
yeast respire under the batch conditions usually used in homebrewing,
and I will state that yeast does NOT respire under those conditions.
Hence, the historical classification of brewing yeast as a "facultative
anaerobe" was in error.

The recent re-emergence of the Crabtree/Pasteur/glucose effects thread
prompted me to do a little literature search to help resolve the issue
in my own mind. What I found is applicable to the current issue.

The Pasteur effect:
- -------------------

Louis Pasteur's observation was that a lot of yeast is grown from a
little sugar in air and little yeast is grown with a lot of sugar
without air. He said, "Yeast is able to grow in a solution of sugar
in the complete absence of oxygen and air. In this case a small
amount of yeast is formed and a great amount of sugar disappears, 60
or 80 parts of sugar per 1 part of yeast ... If the experiment is done
in the presence of air ... only 4-10 parts of sugar are transformed
per part of yeast formed".

Later, when biochemists had figured out the respiration (TCA) and
fermentation (glycolysis) metabolic pathways, it became dogma that
Pasteur's observations were proof of the greater efficiency of the
respiratory pathway in yeast. Unfortunately, at the time no one
realized that yeast rarely respire and that yeast will only grow for
a couple generations without oxygen for sterol biosynthesis. Basically,
Pasteur was right in general (respiration is more efficient than
fermentation), but wrong about yeast in particular. Yeast grown in
strict anaerobic culture require certain steroids to be added to the
medium, something that Pastuer did not know. Pasteur's yeast did
poorly in anaerobic culture not for lack of oxygen, but for lack of

Yeast does not exhibit a Pasteur effect. Consider:

Glucose Growth
consumed Yield CO2 Ethanol Glycerol Acetate
Oxygen (mmol/L) (g/L) (mmol/L) (mmol/L) (mmol/L) (mmol/L)
- ------ -------- ---------- -------- -------- --------- --------
yes 42+-5 0.72+-0.04 69+-10 60+-7 9.8+-1.0 1.0+-0.1
no 42+-3 0.72+-0.08 70+-11 63+-5 13.7+-0.8 1.2+-0.1

Note that the measurements are identical (within the error bars) for
all except glycerol and acetate production. There was no difference
in sugar consumption and growth yield between aerobic and anaerobic
growth. Acetaldehyde was found at < 1 mmol/L in both cases. Why?
Because even in the presence of oxygen the yeast did not respire but
only fermented.

Lagunas,R., Misconceptions about the energy metabolism of Saccharomyces
cerevisiae, Yeast, 2:221-228 (1986)

Lagunas,R., Energetic irrelevance of aerobiosis for S.cerevisiae
growing on sugar, Molecular and Cellular Biochemistry, 27,3:139-146

Domenick Venezia
Computer Resources
ZymoGenetics, Inc.
Seattle, WA


From: Domenick Venezia <>
Date: Mon, 10 Jun 1996 13:44:43 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: yeast respire? NOT! Part 2

The Crabtree effect:
- --------------------

In 1929 H.G. Crabtree published his results on the carbohydrate
metabolism of tumor cells. He found that high fermentation
(glycolysis) rates have an inhibitory effect on respiration in tumor
cells. In 1966 R.H. De Deken showed that the Crabtree effect is also
active in yeasts. He found that glucose metabolism proceeds by
fermentation even in the presence of oxygen. This is in contradiction
to the Pasteur effect (respiration inhibits fermentation), and is
supported by the data above.

Glucose repression (catabolite repression):
- -------------------------------------------

As Tracy Aquilla and Andy Walsh have pointed out
the Crabtree effect and glucose repression are often
confused. However, it could be argued that the Crabtree effect is a
more general, almost qualitative, observation on the metabolism of
yeast and that glucose repression is a more detailed explanation of
the observation. Yeast grown in the presence of greater than
about 1% glucose will repress the production of enzymes necessary for
the metabolism of other sugars, notably, sucrose, maltose, and
galactose, and also respiratory enzymes and enzymes for the metabolism
of glycerol, ethanol, and acetate. This repression is exercised at
the level of gene transcription. After the glucose concentration
falls below 1% these other enzyme systems come back on line and other
sugars can eventually be metabolized. Finally when all of the sugar is
gone and in the presence of oxygen the yeast will then begin respiration
consuming acetate, acetaldehyde, glycerol, and ethanol.

Why? (The following are my own speculations on why.)

Evolutionarily and speculatively speaking it would be a survival
advantage to be able to metabolize sugar quickly into by-products that
are less appealing to other species (even poisonous) then metabolize
the by-products after you have beaten your competitors to the easy stuff.
This is what yeast do. They gobble up sugar very quickly and not
particularly efficiently to out-compete bacteria and such, then go back
and more efficiently metabolize their by-products. Another way to look
at it is that yeast have de-coupled (in space and time) their glycolytic
(fermentative) and tricarboxylic acid (respiratory) pathways. In most
aerobic organisms the glycolytic pathway feeds pyruvate directly into
the TCA cycle. In yeast, under feast conditions (>1% glucose), the
products of gycolysis are excreted, then under aerobic fasting
conditions reclaimed and fed into the TCA cycle.

- --------

If during brewing yeast don't breathe why do they need aeration? Just
what the heck is going on? Yeast require sterols to grow and sterol
biosynthesis requires oxygen and fatty acids. This is why we aerate.
This is way some trub is good. The bulk function of sterols in yeast is
to modulate membrane fluidity to prevent disruption under fluctuating
environmental conditions, e.g., increasing ethanol concentration. The
most important yeast sterol, ergosterol, may comprise as much as 10%
of the dry weight of yeast. In strictly anaerobic conditions yeast
can only go through a few generations before lack of sterol synthesis
stunts, stalls, or kills it. The addition of complete sterols to the
medium will enable yeast to grow under strict anaerobic conditions.
Yeast also require fatty acids to synthsize phospholipids which are
used to build cell membranes. Without a fatty acid source yeast will
not grow, hence the observation that the inclusion of trub in the
fermenter is beneficial.

Free available nitrogen:
- ------------------------

Yeast need a nitrogen source to synthesize protein. This requirement
can be met by amino acids, or nitrogen salts like ammonium.
Commercial yeast nutrient is largely ammonium sulfate, basically
fertilizer, and will satisfy yeast's FAN requirement.

- -----------

Johnston,M. and Carlson,M., Regulation of Carbon and Phosphate Utilization,
Chapter 5 of Volume II, The Molecular and Cellular Biology of the Yeast
Saccharomyces: Gene Expression, 1992 Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press.

Barnett,J.A., The Utilization of Sugars by Yeasts, Advances in Carbohydrate
Chemistry and Biochemistry, 32:125 (1976)

Kappeli,O., Regulation of Carbon Metabolism in Saccharomyces cerevisiae and
Related Yeasts, 1986

Rodriguez,R.J., et al, Structural and Physiological Features of Sterols
Necessary to Satisfy Bulk Membrane and Sparking Requirements in Yeast
Sterol Auxotrophs, Archives of Biochemistry and Biophysics, 225,2:861-871

Rodriguez,R.J., et al, Multiple functions for sterols in Saccharomyces
cerevisiae, Biochimica et Biophysica Acta 837 (1985) 336-343

Speculations on stuck fermentations:
- ------------------------------------

Causes of stuck fermentation include, insufficient aeration,
insufficient nitrogen source, and insufficient fatty acid source.

My own opinion is that most stuck fermentations are the result of
insufficient wort aeration for the strain of yeast used. As we have
seen from the above lack of sufficient aeration will cause the yeast
cell membranes to be destabilized by low sterol content resulting in
reduced metabolic activity or death. Strains of yeast vary widely in
their oxygen requirements. Personally I have found that Wyeast 1338
(European ale yeast) will completely ferment almost anything with a
single moderate aeration at pitch time. On the other hand, the
Fuller's ESB yeast, rumored to be one of the Wyeast's (which?) has a
very high aeration requirement and I have yet to get it to finish
lower than 1.020 starting around 1.056 even with massive and periodic
(during fermentation) aeration at pitch time.

If a stuck fermentation is the result of limited FAN levels then perhaps
the addition of yeast nutrient to the fermenter would restart the
fermentation, but the flavor results are unknown. Limited FAN is
probably more of a problem with extract brews rather than full grain brews.

George continues:
>Tracy also says that oxygenating the wort will cause the yeast to
>produce off flavors and esters. This is essentially wrong. Yeast, in
>the presence of oxygen, WILL RESPIRE.

Reaffirmation of a fallacy will not alter its veracity. i

>The point of this is that it would be a shame if people start
>underaerating their worts based on advice seen in the HBD. Their beer
>WILL suffer.

I agree whole-heartedly; do NOT underaerate.

Domenick Venezia
Computer Resources
ZymoGenetics, Inc.
Seattle, WA


From: Michael Owings <>
Date: Mon, 10 Jun 1996 16:35:17 -0500
Subject: Home-Built Roller Mills

As a followup to the recent articles on the HBD regarding home built roller
mills, I thought I would briefly share my experiences with a mill of
my own design I built last year as a summer project.

I settled on a basic two-roller design similar to the commercially
available mills for homebrewers. Wanting something more durable than
your average homebrewer's mill, however, I rejected stainless steel
rollers in favor of hollow industrial grade diamond cylinders filled
with a solid core of spent uranium (to add some mass). Both rollers
ride on super-cooled yttrium oxide axles suspended within u-shaped
samarium cobalt magnets -- a virtually frictionless improvement over
old fashioned steel ball bearing arrangements. Both rollers are
slightly skewed.

I have found this setup to give an adequate crush.

Note that while the diamond cylinders can be found with reasonable
ease, you'll need a good machine shop to machine the knurling onto
the cylinder's surface, and to hollow the cylinders (if not already
hollow). Lots of times they'll do the work for a six pack or so of
homebrew. Obtaining the uranium cores _can_ be somewhat difficult;
check defunct nuclear power programs, your local classified ads (look
under "Rods, Fuel") or keep an eye open at garage sales. My cores
came from the Government of Pakistan (no affiliation, just a satisfied
customer, etc.). IMPORTANT SAFETY NOTE: for goodness sake, make
sure the uranium is actually _spent_ before attempting to use it in
constructing your mill -- you may be able to borrow a geiger counter
from a friendly local university, medical center, or other facility
that handles nuclear materials. And of course, make sure the uranium
cores cannot come into contact with your grain; the resulting beer
could end up toxic, carcinogenic, or astringent.

I recently motorized this mill; if there is sufficient interest, I
shall post a report at a future date.
Michael Owings Chief of Operations
Uncle Leroi's Hazardous Materials Storage and FemtoBrewery New Orleans, LA


Date: Mon, 10 Jun 96 22:19:37 GMT

> From: Rob Moline <>
> Date: Thu, 6 Jun 1996 22:59:32 -0500

> Charity Homebrew-
> When I was a member of the North Florida Brewer's League in
> Tallahassee, (Go Nole's!) they held an annual charity beer event.
With the
> assistance of a local retail liquor shop, they set up a booth, where
> could buy a bunch of tickets for 5 bucks, and then trade each of the
> for a sample of homebrew made by various local brewers. All funds
went to a
> local charity. I know that some times they ran into a few
> obstacles that hadn't been a prob the year before, but now were. They
> seemed to overcome them with official blessings. These were public
> and were great fun. This was back in '89 or '90 or so. Don't know if
> still do it.
Hey, Rob! Good to see you in HBD!
As one of the founders of NFBL & the prime instigator of our
annual Ok-
to-BEER-fest, I'm happy to announce the 6th annual Okto-BEER-fest is on
October 19th, from 2pm till---. Unfortunately I'm moving to KCMO (see
soon, Rob) & won't be involved with this one.
All proceeds go the American Cancer Society. (I had Hodgkins
I originally pushed for this event due to my own history & I felt it
was im-
portant for us as homebrewers to do something for the community &
that homebrewing was fun & educational, & we weren't just a buncha
We originally contacted the BATF & they didn't seem to have any
with it, though we did get some flack the 2nd year. But we were helped
the beginning by affiliating with New Directions, a group of young
sionals (mostly lawyers; they ARE good for something!) who raised money
the ACS as well. with this group came their insurance as well.
the NFBL incorporated as a non-profit organization as well. We still
with ND on the event.
What we do is ASK for a &5.00 donation for the ACS. In return we
out tickets (ostensibly for tracking the distribution of the homebrew,
also for the ticketholders to have something tangible to give for the
brew.) We've had no problems other than the officious BATF person the
year, but we just sicced the ND lawyers on them! ALL the money goes to
ACS. Now, some homebrewers grumbled a while back about giving away 2-4
cases of their brew & wanted compensation. But once we pointed out
that was probably illegal (i.e. a sale) & then shamed them into being
charitable, that problem dissappeared. You'll always have a*****es in

RE: Kosher beer.

At my favorite pub the other night the bartender pointed out that
ONLY commercial beer he's seen with the Kosher symbol ("U" inside a
is Coors!

RE: Spent grains.

Fi you don't have a local livestock owner to give them to, just
them in your compost heap or garden. My wife loves it for the garden.
recently I discovered raspberries growing in my front yard! I suspect
from a framboise trub I threw out a couple of years ago!

Chacon son gout!
Marc Gaspard

- --- End of forwarded mail from Homebrew


From: David Holesovsky <>
Date: Mon, 10 Jun 1996 18:47:55 -0700
Subject: Wort Chilling Reply

> I was wondering.... I never use a wort chiller.Aaron,
You are running a risk by not chilling your beer faster, but, does it
work for you? I do not own a wort chiller and let my wort cool the same
way you do. I have not had any problems. If you read David Lines' Big
Book of Brewing(1971?) and CJJ Berry's Home Brewed Beers and
Stouts(1963), you will see they cooled thier worts the same way. Granted,
this was prior to wort chillers, but these men are the pioneers of home
brewing. If it works for you and you are comfortable with it, you are
Brewing the Best of It.


From: Mark E. Thompson <>
Date: Mon, 10 Jun 1996 15:15:17 PDT
Subject: Re: recipe for Grolsch beer

> From: David Dow <>
> Date: Sun, 9 Jun 1996 01:00:45 -0400 (EDT)
> Subject: grolsch recipe
> Hey yawl,
> I'm looking for a recipe for Grolsch beer.
> I think that I saw one on the net one day, but
> for the life of me I don't remember where:-(
> Please let me know if anyone's got one. It doesn't
> matter if it's all-grain or what; I've some thirsty
> friends who want some!
> Tanx.
> So long and thanks for the fish!
> dinky dave

I think the Charlie's Swing Top lager is what you are looking for
unless you are talking about "Grolsch Bok".

I say that it would need to be an all grain batch using something
like 80% pilsner malt 20% flaked maze to a SG of about 1.045
and one kettle addition of Saaz or some other noble to about 25 ibu.
Ferment at 50df with something like wyeast 2124 or Headstart Continental

Mark Thompson


End of Homebrew Digest #2066

← previous
next →
sending ...
New to Neperos ? Sign Up for free
download Neperos App from Google Play
install Neperos as PWA

Let's discover also

Recent Articles

Recent Comments

Neperos cookies
This website uses cookies to store your preferences and improve the service. Cookies authorization will allow me and / or my partners to process personal data such as browsing behaviour.

By pressing OK you agree to the Terms of Service and acknowledge the Privacy Policy

By pressing REJECT you will be able to continue to use Neperos (like read articles or write comments) but some important cookies will not be set. This may affect certain features and functions of the platform.