Showing posts with label home brew. Show all posts
Showing posts with label home brew. Show all posts

Thursday, November 3, 2016

Home Brew Tutorial | How to Can & Preserve Starter Wort




This tutorial was conceived in 2 parts.
  1. Part one shows how to make a yeast starter.
  2. Part two shows how to can and preserve the yeast starter for later use.

There are a couple different ways to can and preserve your starter wort.

Method 1: ...Is to use a pressure cooker. The key is setting the pressure to 15 psi which causes the wort to boil at 250˚F (121˚C) instead of the 212˚F (100˚C) which is standard boiling temperatures. The higher temperature is hot enough to kill Clostridium Botulinum in a reasonable amount of time.

Method 2: ...Is what I detail in this video.  The boiling water method is presented here because it has been used successfully for many years, 
  • But be aware, this method does allow for the minute possibility of botulinum poisoning. Although the probability of this is extremely low, the consequences can be severe if it does occur.



In this tutorial, I will be walking you through the steps of canning/preserving a (yeast) starter wort.
"Why would I want to do this?" You may be asking yourself. The answer is simple.

Have you ever had a scheduled brew day, let's say tomorrow (or this weekend) but you still haven't gotten your yeast starter going? Then you say to yourself, "Ugh! Prepping a starter is going to take me 2 hours." Which is time most people don't have (or want to take) to produce such a small thing.

But what if you could get multiple batches worth of starter taken car of all at once; multiple brew-day's worth?

THAT is why you would want to can and preserve it.


Here are the simple steps to canning and preserving your starter wort.

  1. After making your starter wort, keep it hot.
  2. Take all of the mason jars that you need and boil them in a hard rolling boil for 10 minutes (at altitudes of less that 1,000ft). 
    • Boil an additional 1 min for each additional 1,000 ft of elevation.
    • NOTEhttp://www.healthycanning.com/sterilizing-canning-lids-jars/ Ball recommends NOT boiling the lids for any canning times of more than 10 minutes. Just make sure they are cleaned immediately prior to using.
      • If you choose, let them soak in StarSan after cleaning.
  3. Turn off the heat source and Remove the jars from the hot water.
    • TIP: Keep the jars full of the hot water until you are ready to fill with wort.
    • TIP: Retain the hot water for the next step but do not continue boiling the water.
  4. Fill each jar with wort and immediately apply the lid.
  5. Once all jars are full of wort, place them on the canning rack, and put them back in the pot of hot water. Then turn the heat source back on.
  6. Boil for at least 15 minutes. (Longer if you feel like it).
  7. After boiling remove from the hot water and let the jars stand where they are without bothering them.
    • After a while, you will begin hear "Dink!" "Dink!" This is the jar pressurizing (like jelly jars at the store). 
    • You'll notice the little button on the lid is now pressed down.  This is a good thing.


NOTE:
You can do as large a volume of Wort as you choose.  Just understand that you will have to repeat the steps above for each additional volume of wort.


NOTE:

I feel obligated to post the following warning, just as a precaution, even though, BALL says this is highly unlikely as long as you use common sense cleaning and sanitizing methods before hand.


BYO states…  http://byo.com/stories/issue/item/434-canning-yeast-starters

Botulism Warning

In home food preservation, foods are divided into “high-acid” foods, with a pH below 4.6, and “low-acid” foods, with a pH above 4.6. High-acid foods can be safely canned using the boiling water method. It is recommended that low acid foods be canned in a pressure cooker, where the increased pressure means that water boils at 240 °F (116 °C) or higher. The pH of boiled, unfermented wort is around 5.0–5.2, making it a low-acid liquid. 

The reason for the high-acid/low-acid distinction is that spores of the bacterium Clostridium botulinum can survive in low-acid foods, even if they have been heated to 212 °F (100 °C). Clostridium botulinum produces 7 different classes of botulinum toxin, labeled A through G, and all are powerful neurotoxins. Botulinum type A, the most toxic, is 15,000 times more potent than VX nerve gas. 

Botulinum toxins stop impulses in the nervous system from triggering muscular contractions. Symptoms of botulism usually arise 24–36 hours after exposure to the toxin and include dry mouth, weakness, double vision, vomiting, depressed breathing and a progressively intensifying paralysis leading to death. 

The presence of Clostridium spores in raw honey is why doctors recommend not feeding it to infants or small children. 

Although spores of the bacteria are found almost everywhere, cases of botulism are actually relatively rare. Most years, around 110 cases are reported in the US, with most occurring in infants or small children that have eaten honey or other affected foods. On average, less than 30 cases per year result from improper home canning. 

In fermented wort (i.e. beer), the alcohol content, low pH (4.0–4.4) and anti-bacterial components in hops prevent C. botulinum from surviving. In preserved, unfermented, lightly-hopped wort, it is possible for the bacteria to grow. Although the bacteria will die if the wort is fermented, any toxins produced by the bacteria will not be neutralized. 

To minimize the possibility of botulinum poisoning, can your starter wort using a pressure cooker or add acid — such as phosphoric or lactic acid — to your starter wort such that its pH is 4.6 or below if you are using the boiling water method. (High hopping levels alone are likely not enough.) 

The boiling water method is presented here because it has been used successfully for many years, but it does allow for the possibility of botulinum poisoning. Although the probability of this is low, the consequences can be severe if it does occur.

Wednesday, November 2, 2016

Home Brew Tutorial | How to Make a Starter Wort (Yeast Starter)




This tutorial was conceived in 2 parts.
  1. Part one shows how to make a yeast starter.
  2. Part two shows how to can and preserve the yeast starter for later use.


In this tutorial, I will be making a 1 (one) gallon yeast starter.  While I only, technically, need a small amount as a starter, I want to can and preserve the remainder of the starter wort to use at a later date.
  1. In John Palmer's book "How to Brew", he states:
    1. Mix 1/2 cup of DME to 1 (one) pint of "finished" water.
      • This will give us a Gravity of 1.040.
        • Note: For higher gravity beers, you'll want to make higher gravity starter.
    2. For 1 (one) gallon of finished starter, mix 4 cups of DME.  Plus add an extra pint of water to compensate for boil off and boil over.
  2. Get water to boiling, then add DME.
  3. Boil for 10 to 15 minutes.
  4. John Palmer says that during the boil, you can also add a small amount of Hops and Yeast nutrient to the starter.
    1. The hops are used keep the the unfermented wort sterile since it is a natural antimicrobial.
    2. Add the yeast nutrient to the starter to help get the yeast growing faster. And it also helps to rejuvenate old/expired yeast packs.
  5. Once your are finished boiling, cover and chill to pitching temperatures.
NOTE:
  • If you are planning to can the yeast starter, only remove what you plan to use now and chill separately.
  • Allow the remainder to stay hot until you are ready to can and preserve it.

Monday, October 24, 2016

Home Brew Tutorial | How to Remove Labels from Beer Bottles with 3 Tools



In this tutorial I will show you the way that I de-label my used craft beer bottles so that they are clean a ready to use for my home brewed beer. I will use only three tools
  1. Hot Water
  2. Razor Blade (Brand new) (Do not use an old blade)
  3. Wet Rag





Yes.  De-labeling bottles sucks!  But, unless you want to pay ridiculous amounts of money for case of empty bottles, then this is a necessity for home brewers.  

I've tried this many different ways, but the procedure that I detail below (and in the video) is the best, most efficient way that I've found.


  1. Fill your sink with hot tap water (While at the same time filling your bottles).
    • This allows the hot water to make contact with both sides of the label as well as weighs down the bottle so it doesn't float.
  2. Once all of the bottles are filled, fill the remainder of the sink with hot water until all of the bottles are covered sufficiently.
    • I can usually fit about 12-16 bottles in my sink.
  3. Allow the bottles to soak for at least 10 minutes
    • Longer with yield better results.
  4. Peel the labels off then re-submerge for another 10 minutes (or so). 
    • Use this time to put the rag in the water. You want the rag nice and hot.
  5. Carefully, use the razor blade to scrape the glue off.
  6. Use the wet rag to wipe off any residual glue.
  7. Place the bottle upside down to drain and dry.


Pointer:
Be aware that some craft beer companies use different glue types.  And because of this, the difficulty of  removing the label and glue can range from super easy to nearly impossible.

For Example:

  • Sierra Nevada and New Belgium are super easy.
  • Thomas Creek is probably one of the most difficult.  It's almost like they use super glue to put the labels on. But if you have some patience and a sharp razor blade then you will get them clean.


Tuesday, November 5, 2013

IPA Experiment | Does Chloride to Sulfate Ratio impact perception of Bitterness






Recently, BeerAndWineJournal.com and Basic Brewing made a call for all of their readers and listeners to participate in an experiment.

"Does the Chloride to Sulfate ration in your brewing liquor influence the perception of hop bitterness in the final beer."

Here are the basics:
We were to brew an IPA using the parameters outlined.  Then during bottling, add specific amounts of Gypsum (Calcium Sulfate) after each gallon.  Then during the sampling, we needed to observe whether the different Gypsum additions had any impact on the bitterness of the finished beer.


Brew Day: 10/5/2013 
Dry-hopped: 10/17/2013
Bottled: 10/22/2013
Bottle conditioned till 10/31/2013

(The following is quoted from beerandwinejournal.com)

Brewing the Base Beer

The experiment is simple, brew 5.0 gallons (19 L) of IPA with a 1:1 chloride-to-sulfate ratio, then adjust the ratio as you bottle. To do this, on brewday, start with distilled water, RO water or tap water that has been diluted with distilled water to 25 ppm bicarbonate or less. Then, add calcium to your water by adding both calcium chloride and gypsum. For 10 gallons (38 L) of water, add 4.0 g (a little over 1 tsp) of calcium chloride and 4.0 g (about 1 tsp) of gypsum to get to 50 ppm calcium, with a 1:1 chloride-to-sulfate ratio. Make the wort, ferment it and get ready to bottle.

Bottling

When you bottle, you will bottle 1.0 gallon (3.8 L) of beer at the existing 1:1 chloride to sulfate ratio. For each subsequent gallon (3.8 L) you bottle, you will add gypsum to yield bottles at 1:2, 1:3, 1:4 and 1:5 ratios, respectively. Here’s how to do that. Bottle the first gallon (3.8 L) as you normally would, and label these bottles with a “1.” Then, add 1.5 g of calcium sulfate to the remaining 4.0 gallons (15 L) of beer. To prevent foaming, wet the gypsum before adding it (see below for more). Stir to dissolve the gypsum into the batch, but not so much that you splash and aerate the batch. Let the beer sit for 2 minutes (so the dissolved gypsum evens out), then bottle the second gallon. Label these bottles with a “2.”
For the third gallon (3.8 L), add 1.0 g of gypsum and label the bottles “3.” For the fourth and fifth gallons, add 0.75 g and 0.33 g of gypsum, respectively. Label the bottles “4” and “5,” as appropriate.

My IPA Recipe/Procedure

Grain:
13lb - 2 Row Pale Malt
1lb   - C-60

Hops:
1oz Magnum - 1st Wort
.5oz Magnum at each time - 55 min, 45 min, 35 min, 25 min
1oz Cascade - 5 Minutes
1oz Cascade - Flame Out
2oz Cascade - Dry Hopped for 6 days

Yeast:
Wyeast 1056 (1qt starter from smack pack)

Mash:
152 F for 7hrs (much longer than was necessary but I had family matters to attend to during this time)

Boil:
1 hour


Bottling

Priming Sugar:
4.2oz Dextrose

Each gallon consisted of two (2) 8oz Coke bottles and nine (9) 12oz amber bottles. This only equals 124oz.  Even though a full gallon is 128oz, I didn't feel this was a big deal.

After each gallon bottled, I would add Gypsum in the following amounts.

1st Gallon   - 1:1 Ratio - I did not add any addition Gypsum for the first gallon.
2nd Gallon - 1:2 Ratio - Added 1.5g Gypsum
3rd Gallon  - 1:3 Ratio - Added 1.0g Gypsum
4th Gallon  - 1:4 Ratio - Added .75g Gypsum
5th Gallon  - 1:5 Ratio - Added .33g Gypsum

I then let the beer bottle condition for nearly 9 days.


Results of the Experiment

To give a better indication of sensory observation, I decided to do a blind tasting of each sample.

I blindly covered all distinguishing marks on each bottle using masking tape.  I then label each bottle and 5 glasses with A-B-C-D-E



Any deviations from the process recommended in article:

  1. Even though my bottling bucket read perfect measurements after each gallon bottled, the 1:5 ratio only had 100oz bottled instead of 128oz.
  2. My digital scale only measures in whole grams. It does not do decimal points. I measured as closely as possible. Did some math and cut lines like a coke (cocaine) head. So hopefully I was close enough. 

Sensory observations:

page3image1024

Head & Retention

All samples had heads consisting of small (almost nitrogen-like) creamy bubbles.

A (1:3)-Small head and sticking around
B (1:5)-Small head and Falls fast.
C (1:1)-Nice thick head. Had 2nd best staying power.
D (1:4)-Nice Thick head. Had the best staying power.
E (1:2)-Nice head on the pour but it fell quickly. But not at bad as A & B.


At beginning of the Experiment (50F)
Order of head retention from least to greatest.
B (1:5) - A (1:3) - E (1:2) - D (1:4) - C (1:1) (at beginning of the experiment)


After Swirling At end of experiment (60F):
E (1:2) - Had absolutely no head retention after being swirled. It fell immediately. 
A (1:3) & B (1:5) – Not as bad as E but almost.
C (1:1) – Was closed to D, but not equal.
D (1:4) – Had the best head retention over time.


Aroma
They were all citrusy.
The bouquet was the same throughout all of them.


Mouthfeel
On all of the samples, the mouthfeel was very big. Not like James Spencer's All- Rye beer, but from the perfect carbonation. Very very creamy. 



Bitterness
page4image960
Beginning of Tasting (50 degrees F)
They were all very similar. To pull out anything, I had to do about 15 minutes of sipping. I let them warm up and re-sampled. It's very difficult to tell a difference in any of the samples.
A & E are nearly identical in every way.
A (1:3), B (1:5), & E (1:2)- Have a mellow bitterness. It doesn't bite.
D (1:4) - Is a step above A B & E in the bitterness and flavor.
C (1:1) -Noticeably different. With the most distinctive bitterness. A little sharper than the rest. Not harsh, but more distinct.


End of Tasting (around 65 degrees F) Most bitter to least bitter:
C (1:1) – Most distinctive. Still stands out.
E (1:2) & A (1:3) – Are about the same. Much less than C (1:1) but not as minimal as D (1:4) & B (1:5).
D (1:4) & B (1:5) – Definitely the least perception of bitterness. 




What are your conclusions?

page5image1064

My results seemed to show that the More Calcium Sulfate that is added, the less sharp the bitterness becomes.

The perception of bitterness in the 1:2 thru 1:5 changed slightly a the beer warmed. However, 1:1 remained the most distinctive.

I think that if I'd brewed, specifically (from start to finish) a 1:2 and a 1:3, etc that the results might have been more pronounced.

I think that the chemicals didn't meld well with the alcohol in the finished beer so therefore did not result in a pronounced difference between the samples.

Note:
    The differences in the samples were so slight that if you weren't spending

the time to sip each individual sample, you would never know the difference. NEVER. 



Youtube Videos


For each date listed below, I will be posting a youtube video.  Just click on the link and you will be taken to the correct video.

(Brew Day: 10/5/2013 --- Dry-hopped: 10/17/2013)
Bottled: 10/22/2013Bottle conditioned till 10/31/2013







Wednesday, February 20, 2013

Beer Review | Russian River: Pliny the Elder


The review is a supplement to the youtube review that I did.  You can view that review at the link below.  http://youtu.be/vZmlaD5cjaQ


http://www.youtube.com/nowitstimeforbeer
http://www.facebook.com/itstimeforbeer

http://russianriverbrewing.com
http://russianriverbrewing.com/brews/pliny-the-elder

http://www.ratebeer.com/beer/russian-river-pliny-the-elder/8936/
http://beeradvocate.com/beer/profile/863/7971

Russian River Brewing Company:Pliny the Elder
Rating: 'B+'

This is the first time I have ever tasted Pliny the Elder.  Heck, this is the first time I've ever seen a real bottle of it.  So that being said, I plan to give this an honest review that is not jaded by an opinion gathered from previous experiences.  But I will also be giving a true review of this particular bottle.  I am leaving the “Hype” out of this review.  It will get an unbiased review.

Is it really as good as everyone says?

My brother-in-law picked this beer up for me while working in Portland OR.  I live in the upstate of South Carolina.  And the only place they distribute on the East Coast is Philadelphia, PA.  So I can't even get this where I live.

The side of the bottles says, “Pliny the Elder is best enjoyed fresh.” This particular bottle was bottled on August 31st, 2012.  So that makes this bottle 3 months and 17 days old (as of the day I filmed this review which was December 17th, 2012).

I'm not sure what they consider fresh, so hopefully three months in the bottle hasn't affected this beer too much.  But personally, three months isn't that old.  But other factors may also affect this beer including how the store handled and stored the beer.

Style: Double IPA
Color: Dark yellow bordering on light amber.
ABV: 8.0%
IBU: The website says, “Bitterness is High” but other sources say it's about 100 IBU's.
Hops: Amarillo, Centenial, CTZ,  and Simcoe

Bottle Code:
It's plainly printed on the side of the label.  It says “Bottled On: 08/31/12.”  So I assume that mean August 31st, 2012.

Cost: Varies depending on where you buy it.
 Costs range from:
  - $5.00 - $8.00 for 17.25oz bottle (510 mL).
  - $7.50/$5.00/$4.50/$6.00 for a pint on draft, depending on where you get it.

Distribution:
Up and down the West Coast.  But the only place it's distributed on the East Coast is in Philadelphia, PA.

The Pour:

It started off with a nice 2-fingers worth of head.  There was nice lacing on the glass as the head settled down.

Look:

The beer is really cloudy.  From the looks of it, they either do not filter it or it's bottle conditioned.
There's not a ton of carbonation but there was definitely a steady stream of bubbles.

Aroma:

Citrusy hop aroma. Grapefruit is the main citrus smell.  It's not overpowering but it is definitely the main aroma of the beer.
It's very malty but mostly citrus.
It smells just like Bell's HopSlam.
There is no alcohol aroma.

Taste:

It was good.  For an 8% ABV beer, you don't taste the alcohol at all.  In this respect, it is nothing like HopSlam, which is very boozy.
There is a hop citrus and pine.
The flavors don't linger.
Regarding the bitterness; it's not that bitter.  It's about on par with any other regular IPA.  Weak compared to other Double IPA's.
It definitely does NOT taste like a double IPA.  The flavors are very muted compared to other beers in the “Double IPA” category.  Honestly, it just tastes like a regular IPA.  Sierra Nevada: Torpedo Extra is a stronger tasting IPA than this beer.  And that is only a 7.2% ABV beer.  Almost up there with Pliny but not quite. But it's also only classified as a regular IPA.  And the hop character of the Torpedo Extra is three times what is coming through in Pliny.
I've had many other Double IPA's that completely overshadow Pliny's hop character. Hoptologist, Avery's Maharaja, RJ Rockers Rockhopper IPA.

Verdict:

I'm a bit conflicted.  Should I give this beer a higher rating because of it's reputation?  The answer is clearly “NO.”  If that were the case, I feel like I should judge it more harshly than I would other beers.  It must prove itself to me.  I do not have to prove myself to it.

I've been waiting to taste this beer for years.  I've read all of the reviews.  And, in my opinion, this beer is way overhyped.
Was is good?  Yes.
Was it great?  No.
To me, it was just another everyday IPA.  If I were to put this up against other regular IPA's I wouldn't be able to pick it out.  There was nothing over-the-top about this beer.  Nothing really stuck out.
I personally wouldn't classify Pliny as a Double IPA.  There was nothing “Double” about it.  The alcohol wasn't that high.  The hop character was very muted for the style.
The other beers I mentioned above (Hoptologist, Avery's Maharaja, RJ Rockers Rockhopper IPA) were far beyond the Double IPA drinking experience of Pliny.
When you open up any of those bottles, you are immediately hit in the face with Hops.

I will concede that some of this lacking-of-flavor could be due to the age of the bottle.  But I don't feel that 3 months is enough time to mute the hope character this much.
I recently drank a bottle of “Clown Shoes: Supa Hero” that was almost a year out of date.  However, it tasted like a fresh, super hopped, Double IPA. It was 8% ABV and was only listed as a Regular IPA.  It was the same price as Pliny but was still massively hoppy.

So those that are whining and fussing about this beer being to old for a true review, I say “Bulls*&t!!!”  If Clown Shoes can produce a beer that holds up after being a year out of date, then Pliny should be able to hold up after 3 months.

Because of all these factors, this is getting a “B+” from me.  It is not worth any more than that.

Worth the Money:

For the reputation alone, I'd say that it's worth $6.00 per bottle.
But if I'm basing it solely on the drinking experience that I'm getting from this beer, I would say, “No. It's not worth the money.”

For those of you out there crying “Foul” and are huffing and puffing that I got an old bottle... My feeling is if a beer with this kind of reputation loses everything after 3 months when I can find a comparable beer in style in price from a different brewer that is 12 months out of date and it still knocks my socks off, Pliny IS NOT worth $6.00 per bottle.


That's my opinion.
If you disagree, leave me some comments below.

“Drink what you like.  Enjoy what you drink.”