Monday, May 31, 2010

Homebrew Digest #5689 (May 31, 2010)

HOMEBREW Digest #5689 Mon 31 May 2010


FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
Digest Janitor: pbabcock at hbd.org


***************************************************************
TODAY'S HOME BREW DIGEST BROUGHT TO YOU BY:

Sponsor The Home Brew Digest!
Visit http://www.hbd.org/sponsorhbd.shtml to learn how

Support those who support you! Visit our sponsor's site!
********** Also visit http://hbd.org/hbdsponsors.html *********

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

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

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


Contents:
Culturing Lactobacillus (Fred L Johnson)
Pomelo (help) ("Darrell G. Leavitt")


* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* Beer is our obsession and we're late for therapy! *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

NOTE: With the economy as it is, the HBD is struggling to
meet its meager operating expenses of approximately $3500
per year. If less than half of those currently directly
subscribed to the HBD sent in a mere $5.00, the HBD would
be able to easily meet its annual expenses, with room to
spare for next year. Please consider it.

Financial Projection As of 21 May 2010
Projected 2010 Budget $3505.65
Expended against projection $ 892.11
Projected Excess/(Shortfall) ($1395.93)

As always, donors and donations are publicly acknowledged
and accounted for on the HBD web page. Thank you


Send articles for __publication_only__ to post@hbd.org

If your e-mail account is being deleted, please unsubscribe first!!

To SUBSCRIBE or UNSUBSCRIBE send an e-mail message with the word
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to request@hbd.org FROM THE E-MAIL
ACCOUNT YOU WISH TO HAVE SUBSCRIBED OR UNSUBSCRIBED!!!**
IF YOU HAVE SPAM-PROOFED your e-mail address, you cannot subscribe to
the digest as we cannot reach you. We will not correct your address
for the automation - that's your job.

HAVING TROUBLE posting, subscribing or unsusubscribing? See the HBD FAQ at
http://hbd.org.

LOOKING TO BUY OR SELL USED EQUIPMENT? Please do not post about it here. Go
instead to http://homebrewfleamarket.com and post a free ad there.

The HBD is a copyrighted document. The compilation is copyright
HBD.ORG. Individual postings are copyright by their authors. ASK
before reproducing and you'll rarely have trouble. Digest content
cannot be reproduced by any means for sale or profit.

More information is available by sending the word "info" to
req@hbd.org or read the HBD FAQ at http://hbd.org.

JANITORs on duty: Pat Babcock (pbabcock at hbd dot org), Jason Henning,
and Spencer Thomas


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


Date: Mon, 31 May 2010 15:02:21 -0400
From: Fred L Johnson <FLJohnson52 at nc.rr.com>
Subject: Culturing Lactobacillus

Mike Eyre wants to culture a pure strain of lactobacillus for making a Berliner
Weiss and asks how to make the starter for this. Before I say more, I must
qualify all of this by saying that I've never made a starter with lactobacillus.
I've always just used a sour mash for Berliner Weiss (with mixed success), and I
think Mike's approach of making a starter is sound.

The first thing to do is to contact Wyeast Labs or White Labs and confirm with
either of them that a typical unhopped yeast starter medium (but without
aeration--see below) would be appropriate. It should be as this will be the
medium they will be growing in when they are pitched (except for the absence of
hops in the starter culture).

Note that the classic culture medium for lactobacillus under laboratory
conditions--not for brewery purposes--is not wort. Rather the amino acid source
is beef hydrolysate and the pH of the medium is typically about 6.2 (MRS
medium).

More pertinent to us brewers:

In the paper by Wee YJ, et al., "Pilot-Scale Lactic Acid Production via Batch
Culturing of Lactobacillus sp. RKY2 Using Corn Steep Liquor As a Nitrogen
Source", Food Technol. Biotechnol. 44 (2) 293298 (2006),
<http://www.ftb.com.hr/44-293.pdf>, Accessed 2010 May 31, Wee and his Korean
colleagues investigated fermentations by lactobacillus for the production of
lactic acid using inexpensive substrates, i.e., corn steep liquor and wood
hydrolysate to which glucose was added to achieve at various glucose
concentrations, plus yeast extract, diammonium phosphate and manganese sulfate.
Fermentations were performed at 36 degrees C, and pH was maintained at 6.0 in
the bioreactor by continuously adding sodium hydroxide as needed. Glucose
concentrations as low as 50 or 75 g/L in the culture appeared to produce the
maximum biomass in the smaller batches investigated (1 L and 20 L), with higher
concentrations providing no significant increase (my interpretation of the
data). Oxygen is to be eliminated if possible, as it apparently retards growth.

Whatever you do, Mike, let us know how the culture goes. Don't expect to be able
to separate the bacteria from the spent medium unless you have a centrifuge.

Fred L Johnson
Apex, North Carolina, USA


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

Date: Mon, 31 May 2010 18:55:28 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Darrell G. Leavitt" <leavitdg at plattsburgh.edu>
Subject: Pomelo (help)

Ok, here is a really strange question: If you became the proud owner of a
heap of pomelo, dried, and slightly sweetened (with some sulphur dioxide,
unfortunately) what would you make?

I suppose that it could be a part of a SOUR mash, or if one were to just
add some wine yeast to a bunch of it that was put through a food
processor?

Any ideas would be appreciated.

Darrell

------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #5689, 05/31/10
*************************************
-------

Sunday, May 30, 2010

Homebrew Digest #5688 (May 30, 2010)

HOMEBREW Digest #5688 Sun 30 May 2010


FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
Digest Janitor: pbabcock at hbd.org


***************************************************************
TODAY'S HOME BREW DIGEST BROUGHT TO YOU BY:

Sponsor The Home Brew Digest!
Visit http://www.hbd.org/sponsorhbd.shtml to learn how

Support those who support you! Visit our sponsor's site!
********** Also visit http://hbd.org/hbdsponsors.html *********

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

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

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


Contents:
Re: Homebrew Digest Donation (Pete Calinski)
Re: HBD is struggling to meet its meager operating expenses of approximately $3500 per year. (Josh Sled)
Nettle Beer Recipe & HBD short on cash$$ (slaycock)
Starter for Lacto in Berliner Weisse (Mike Eyre)


* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* Beer is our obsession and we're late for therapy! *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

NOTE: With the economy as it is, the HBD is struggling to
meet its meager operating expenses of approximately $3500
per year. If less than half of those currently directly
subscribed to the HBD sent in a mere $5.00, the HBD would
be able to easily meet its annual expenses, with room to
spare for next year. Please consider it.

Financial Projection As of 21 May 2010
Projected 2010 Budget $3505.65
Expended against projection $ 874.75
Projected Excess/(Shortfall) ($2080.54)

As always, donors and donations are publicly acknowledged
and accounted for on the HBD web page. Thank you


Send articles for __publication_only__ to post@hbd.org

If your e-mail account is being deleted, please unsubscribe first!!

To SUBSCRIBE or UNSUBSCRIBE send an e-mail message with the word
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to request@hbd.org FROM THE E-MAIL
ACCOUNT YOU WISH TO HAVE SUBSCRIBED OR UNSUBSCRIBED!!!**
IF YOU HAVE SPAM-PROOFED your e-mail address, you cannot subscribe to
the digest as we cannot reach you. We will not correct your address
for the automation - that's your job.

HAVING TROUBLE posting, subscribing or unsusubscribing? See the HBD FAQ at
http://hbd.org.

LOOKING TO BUY OR SELL USED EQUIPMENT? Please do not post about it here. Go
instead to http://homebrewfleamarket.com and post a free ad there.

The HBD is a copyrighted document. The compilation is copyright
HBD.ORG. Individual postings are copyright by their authors. ASK
before reproducing and you'll rarely have trouble. Digest content
cannot be reproduced by any means for sale or profit.

More information is available by sending the word "info" to
req@hbd.org or read the HBD FAQ at http://hbd.org.

JANITORs on duty: Pat Babcock (pbabcock at hbd dot org), Jason Henning,
and Spencer Thomas


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


Date: Sat, 29 May 2010 12:46:30 -0400
From: Pete Calinski <petec.100 at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Homebrew Digest Donation

Pat Humphrey and Others said:

"Please join me in donating"

I'm in for 5 (minimums).

Pete


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

Date: Sat, 29 May 2010 13:07:08 -0400
From: Josh Sled <jsled at asynchronous.org>
Subject: Re: HBD is struggling to meet its meager operating expenses of approximately $3500 per year.

Like Mr. Thompson, I too bear no ill will towards the HBD
administrators, and too have contributed financially in the past.
I do not know of the manner and restrictions by which the mailing list
is run; I support it more as an archive than as an active forum.

But I question the wisdom of spending $80/mo for hosting [1] when, e.g.,
Dreamhost charges $9/mo.

[1]: http://hbd.org/ledger_table.shtml

- --
...jsled
http://asynchronous.org/ - a=jsled; b=asynchronous.org; echo ${a} at ${b}


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

Date: Sat, 29 May 2010 16:05:05 -0500 (CDT)
From: slaycock at discoverynet.com
Subject: Nettle Beer Recipe & HBD short on cash$$

Greetings again!
I have been exploring the garden in my woods for food and good stuff again
and I found Nettle, as in "stinging nettle". OK, not that I have never
encountered this eye opening weed before, but now I know of some of the
culinary, medicinal and nutritional aspects of this God given weed and am
looking for more usage of this herb (why not, I've got hundreds of pounds
of it in my woods! can I smoke it too?).
I've been doing some things with it in the kitchen with teas and greens.
To top this plant off, I've heard of folks using it for making our
favorite dish..beer!

Now I want to know if any of you's have ever developed a nettle beer?
I have found old recipies in books, but am looking for someone that has
experienced this beer in this last decade or so.
Can anybody help me with a good recipe or potential issues or formulations
with working with the nettle for making beer...other than the obvious
itchy aspect of this plant.
Thanks for any help with this!!


partII
MONEY SHORTAGE
I dont post often, but I do read ALL the digest's that appear on my e-mail
in box. I'm not a computer geek, so I dont know all the "cool stuff" that
is going on in that world or how "much better" one thing over another is.
However here's what I think, I think this digest is a great forum for
communicating and learning. I have never felt that my ability to
communicate is stifled because of "something that we DON'T have here".

There may be a cheaper method of hosting this opposed to how its being
done and if that's the case, maybe its worth looking into, I know our
website for our homebrew club is way cheaper than 3g's plus a year, more
like a tank of gas a year. Can we have this same sort of format cheaper in
todays computer world? If so can the change be made without feeling any
pain?

I like THIS format, I can find "chat" forum's all over the place, but this
is pure unadulterated info to chew on that was not available at my
original cruising place years ago "the brewery". I moved here from "the
brewery" because of all the pissingandmoaning that developed over time and
became the norm with many of the posts. And this behavior was a result of
the "instant or live" forum format. (and in defense of "the brewery", I
learned TONS in my infant years of home brewing and I am grateful for that
forum and loved that forum, but it just got too petty after a while, add
to that a couple blowhard "experts" that were dominating everybody's input
and I was out of there, no fault of the brewery, just the neighborhood got
stinky) For the most part the contributors here are normally not being
jerks or condescending in how they address questions or discussions, and
that is why I stay here and haven't visited "the brewery" for years.

I have contributed over the years financially, but to my shame not
consistently. To that end I will be sending a check again Pat, or does
paypal work today? I'll figure it out.

To Pat & helpers thanks for your continued commitment to keeping this
thing running. I'm sure you've had plenty of moments, and extended
moments ready to blow up your server and stop the madness once and for
all.
Cheers to you Pat and also to all those folks that are behind the lines
and keeping this going! Not to mention your family that puts up with the
time you burn with this HBD.. I owe you a couple beers for sure!

Cheers!
Steve in KC
Highwater Brew Haus

- --
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.

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

Date: Sun, 30 May 2010 11:56:14 -0400
From: Mike Eyre <mikeeyre74 at gmail.com>
Subject: Starter for Lacto in Berliner Weisse

Hey all,

I'm putting together a Berliner Weisse recipe that I plan to brew in the next
few weeks. I've never done this style before, but do have some experience
with other sour and wild beers. My issue I'm writing about is this: My local
shop gave me (no cost) an old package of Lactobacillus that's not quite a
year old.. so, it's out of date. They only had the one in stock. Surely I can
make a starter with this and get it up to speed, though. The thing is, this
might be the right amount, if it was fresh, for 5 gallons, but I'm doing 10..
I'm having a bit of an issue finding a good way to make a starter for
lacto. I'm reading stuff about no hops in the wort to very little hops in the
wort you're using for the starter. I'm figuring a low grav wort somewhere
in the 1.025-ish range? Ferment times are eluding me, however.. I've
heard everything from a few days to two weeks is required. What volume
of starter is appropriate for Lacto for 10 gallons? I'm thinking 2 quarts-ish.
is that right? Should I cool and then decant this thing when it's done, or
pitch the whole thing? The rest of the recipe seems pretty
straightforward.. 60/40 Pils to Wheat, hop to about 5 IBU, and pitch the
lacto first and give it about two days before punching it in the face with
a neutral ale strain to finish the job. That's my plan, anyway. Any
other suggestions, in general, for a good sour brew?

Mike Eyre
mikeeyre74 at gmail.com
www.mikesupsanddowns.blogspot.com

------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #5688, 05/30/10
*************************************
-------

Friday, May 28, 2010

Homebrew Digest #5687 (May 28, 2010)

HOMEBREW Digest #5687 Fri 28 May 2010


FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
Digest Janitor: pbabcock at hbd.org


***************************************************************
TODAY'S HOME BREW DIGEST BROUGHT TO YOU BY:

Sponsor The Home Brew Digest!
Visit http://www.hbd.org/sponsorhbd.shtml to learn how

Support those who support you! Visit our sponsor's site!
********** Also visit http://hbd.org/hbdsponsors.html *********

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

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

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


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


* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* Beer is our obsession and we're late for therapy! *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

NOTE: With the economy as it is, the HBD is struggling to
meet its meager operating expenses of approximately $3500
per year. If less than half of those currently directly
subscribed to the HBD sent in a mere $5.00, the HBD would
be able to easily meet its annual expenses, with room to
spare for next year. Please consider it.

Financial Projection As of 21 May 2010
Projected 2010 Budget $3505.65
Expended against projection $ 874.75
Projected Excess/(Shortfall) ($2080.54)

As always, donors and donations are publicly acknowledged
and accounted for on the HBD web page. Thank you


Send articles for __publication_only__ to post@hbd.org

If your e-mail account is being deleted, please unsubscribe first!!

To SUBSCRIBE or UNSUBSCRIBE send an e-mail message with the word
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to request@hbd.org FROM THE E-MAIL
ACCOUNT YOU WISH TO HAVE SUBSCRIBED OR UNSUBSCRIBED!!!**
IF YOU HAVE SPAM-PROOFED your e-mail address, you cannot subscribe to
the digest as we cannot reach you. We will not correct your address
for the automation - that's your job.

HAVING TROUBLE posting, subscribing or unsusubscribing? See the HBD FAQ at
http://hbd.org.

LOOKING TO BUY OR SELL USED EQUIPMENT? Please do not post about it here. Go
instead to http://homebrewfleamarket.com and post a free ad there.

The HBD is a copyrighted document. The compilation is copyright
HBD.ORG. Individual postings are copyright by their authors. ASK
before reproducing and you'll rarely have trouble. Digest content
cannot be reproduced by any means for sale or profit.

More information is available by sending the word "info" to
req@hbd.org or read the HBD FAQ at http://hbd.org.

JANITORs on duty: Pat Babcock (pbabcock at hbd dot org), Jason Henning,
and Spencer Thomas


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


Date: Thu, 27 May 2010 22:39:37 -0400
From: mossview5 <mossview5 at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Agua

Ah, an exceptional brewer speaks! I'm glad that Joe recognized that Charlie P's
old saying of RDWHAHB doesn't cut it. Brewing with salt softened water or
water that doesn't produce the proper residual alkalinity conditions
is probably
not going to produce exceptional beer. It will produce beer, but it may not be
that good. Brewers do need to understand and be able to adjust their water to
meet their beer's needs. Those brewers that can't understand and adjust their
water will probably be stuck in the days when you could only brew dark beers
in a place like Dublin and pale beers in a place like Pilsen.

Joe's water has mostly temporary hardness, which is much easier to handle.
As Joe pointed out, he observes a significant reduction in alkalinity
in his hot
liquor tank as that hot water is decarbonated. If he went ahead and boiled his
water and then let it sit and cool briefly, he could decant the clear
water off the
sediment that will precipitate out of the water. That would both soften and
reduce alkalinity. But, in a commercial brewery (especially production
breweries), using the brewery's kettle to boil water means that they can't get
as many batches through the brewery in a day. Not such a great alternative,
but it could help. The Excess Lime treatment is still a more efficient
alternative and it doesn't tie up the kettle like boiling does.

I'm not sure why Joe wants to reduce his alkalinity to under 50 ppm.
Alkalinity isn't the main concern...its residual alkalinity (RA) that
should be a
concern to every brewer. If he is brewing with a soft water, then having a
proportionally low alkalinity will be necessary for brewing pale beers.
As I pointed out in a previous post, bringing the residual alkalinity down to
less than 50 is needed. Pilsen water has a RA of about zero and Burton
water has a RA of about zero. Both waters produce exceptional pale
beers, but their alkalinity differ substantially.

Alkalinity is a very easy thing to adjust with acid. Although Joe's water
has moderately high alkalinity, a proper acid dosage will bring it into
proper range. To reach a RA of about zero, Joe is correct that he would
need to bring his raw tap water's alkalinity to about 50 ppm as CaCO3.
That means that he would be adding about 3/4 ml of 75% phosphoric
acid or 88% lactic acid to each gallon of brewing water. That amount
of lactic might impart a taste, so I would recommend using the
phosphoric acid which is tasteless in beer.

The problem with high strength acid is that quantities of 1 gallon or
more have to be shipped as hazardous cargo. That sends the shipping
costs through the roof. Buying 3 quarts at a time can solve that problem.
I recall that Five Star would sell high strength phosphoric at one time,
but I don't know if they still will.

This should help Joe and any brewer that wants to brew exceptional beer.

Martin Brungard
Indianapolis, IN


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

Date: Thu, 27 May 2010 21:17:38 -0600
From: "Michael P. Thompson" <thompson at ecentral.com>
Subject: Re: HBD is struggling to meet its meager operating expenses of approximately $3500 per year.

I really hate to say this, but it's true. Perhaps part of the
difficulty is that HBD is cumbersome and difficult to use for
discussions, and has arcane restrictions which cost time and money,
but apparently do not filter out spam. I have run better mailing
lists for far less, and continue to do so.

There are definitely some high-quality posts on HBD which do not
appear on more user-friendly forums, but in general, one is forced to
wonder if the overall lack of participation shouldn't be sending a
message about changing the way the list is run.

I bear no rancor to the list administrators, and I have made
financial contributions to HBD, so this is not just bellyaching. But
I remember a discussion some time ago when all the restrictions and
procedures for sending out HBD were mentioned, and I wonder even more
now if those restrictions aren't stifling discussion and making the
list less useful for the general brewing public.


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

Date: Fri, 28 May 2010 08:20:08 -0400
From: "Kai Troester" <kai at braukaiser.com>
Subject: FW: sodium removal and water softening


> Let me just point out that I am not trying to brew good beer here. I am
> at such a point in my brewing career, that I aim to brew exceptional,
> outstanding beer only.

Joe,

In this case I suggest that you experiment. You don't have to make an
investment into an R/O system just to try out brewing with R/O water.
Get some /O water and brew the same beer with different types of water
including your own. This way you can figure out if an R/O system is
worth the money.

I do have an R/O system myself and installed it when we moved into the
house. The main motivation for it was an elevated level of arsenic in
our well water. If that weren't the case I'd use my well water which
is very similar to Munich water. If I need softened water I would be
using lime treatment. I did the latter successfully for 2 batches of
Maibock that I brewed last year.

To guide other brewers I wrote an article on my web page on how to
treat water with slaked lime (note the line break):
http://braukaiser.com/wiki/index.php/
Alkalinity_reduction_with_slaked_lime

My approach was to calculate the amount of lime needed based on the
water composition. You may also experiment with 80%, 100% and 120%
of that amount to see what works best. This is one of the many
suggestions I picked up from A.J.'s work.

The amount of lime needed can be calculated with my water spread
sheet: http://braukaiser.com/documents/Kaiser_water_calculator.xls
and will be most accurate if you know the pH of the water. The pH
is used to estimate the amount of CO2 that is dissolved in the
water which also needs to be converted to carbonate for successful
alkalinity precipitation. In addition to that having a GH&KH
(aquarium supply stores have this) test kit really helps since it
allows you to test your post treatment water.

A.J. already chimed in on this, but sodium is difficult to
remove since its salts are very soluble. In Technologie der
Wuerzerbereitung Narziss and Back mention ion exchange resins than
can take Ca, Mg and Na out of the water. I'm not sure if those
resins are readily available to us home brewers. And they also
need to be replenished or regenerated using strong acid. The
following reaction was mentioned where A-H is the resin structure
holding one hydrogen ion:

A-H + Na+ HCO3- -> A-Na + CO2 + H20


> (To be honest, me being on a well, for my water it would be a case of
"from
> the earth you came, to the earth you shall return" even for waste water I
> dump out, so there's not much environmental effect other than energy usage

> to pump the stuff to the surface.)

Calvin,

I don't think it is as simple as this. Well water tends to come from
aquifers that are so far below the surface that it takes a very long
time for them to recharge. The water that you pull out of them does not
necessarily return to them since it may run-off into a stream or evaporate.
I remember that National Geographic had a nice article on that where they
showed by how much a large aquifer in the Midwest has declined over the
recent decades.

A.J.,

Great point about the use of a softener before an R/O filter. I never
thought about the effects calcium carbonate precipitation close to the
membrane. Luckily my well water pH (6.5) is low enough that I should
not have to worry.

Kai


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

Date: Fri, 28 May 2010 10:18:38 -0500
From: Pat Humphrey <pat71987 at gmail.com>
Subject: Homebrew Digest Donation

Hi Everyone,

I am encouraging everyone to donate to the survival of the Digest. Even
though the traffic has been down considerably, I still feel that is a
valuable resource for the brewing community. Since the AHA has started
TechTalk it doesn't seem as if there has been too much traffic here.
However, I myself don't find it something that I normally read. It just
seems too commercialized and doesn't have the substance that the
Homebrew Digest has
or had. I certainly don't need to see recent information about Government
Affairs or Business as TechTalk has. I just want to see info related
to homebrewing in my digest. Sorry, a bit of a rant there...

Even a minimum 5 dollar donation will help. As Pat mentions, if half of the
recipients of the digest contribute this amount, it will cover the operating
costs for the year.

I will raise a pint to the digest operators, Pat, Jason and Spencer. Thanks
for all of your work to keep the digest alive.

Please join me in donating.

Cheers,

Pat H


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

Date: Fri, 28 May 2010 18:41:57 -0400
From: Fred L Johnson <FLJohnson52 at nc.rr.com>
Subject: Hops Utilization During Hot Whirlpool

Has anyone ever seen estimates of the alpha acid utilization that brewer's
get (especially commercial brewers) during the hot whirlpool period before
the wort is cooled and transferred to the fermenter? This period of time is
significant in commercial breweries. For example, in a recent interview the
Brew Strong podcast the head brewer at Fuller's indicated that they got
about 20% of their IBUs from their late hop addition (2-3 minutes from the
end of the boil. He didn't give any amounts of hops added at the end of the
boil for us to calculate a utilization rate from this late hop addition, but
he said they allowed the trub to settle for 30 minutes during a whirlpooling
period. I'll bet the utilization is MUCH greater than the calculators would
give us from an addition 3 minutes from the end of the boil. Don't these
calculators simply assume that the wort is cooled immediately after the
boil? And of course this time spent in the whirlpool should be added to
earlier additions as well.

I'm trying to refine my calculator for estimating IBUs, and I've never seen
figures for utilization rates from such late additions in which the wort is
not boiling but is still hot and moving around in a whirlpool. Does anybody
(perhaps some of the commercial brewers who read the HBD) have any knowledge
on this?

Fred L Johnson
Apex, North Carolina, USA

------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #5687, 05/28/10
*************************************
-------

Thursday, May 27, 2010

Homebrew Digest #5686 (May 27, 2010)

HOMEBREW Digest #5686 Thu 27 May 2010


FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
Digest Janitor: pbabcock at hbd.org


***************************************************************
TODAY'S HOME BREW DIGEST BROUGHT TO YOU BY:

Sponsor The Home Brew Digest!
Visit http://www.hbd.org/sponsorhbd.shtml to learn how

Support those who support you! Visit our sponsor's site!
********** Also visit http://hbd.org/hbdsponsors.html *********

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

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

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


Contents:
HBD is struggling to meet its meager operating expenses (John Schnupp)
More Aqua/ Iron ("A.J deLange")
Additional on Agua- Pt I (Andrew deLange)
Additional on Aqua Pt-II (Andrew deLange)
Re: Sodium/Chloride (mossview5)


* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* Beer is our obsession and we're late for therapy! *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

NOTE: With the economy as it is, the HBD is struggling to
meet its meager operating expenses of approximately $3500
per year. If less than half of those currently directly
subscribed to the HBD sent in a mere $5.00, the HBD would
be able to easily meet its annual expenses, with room to
spare for next year. Please consider it.

Financial Projection As of 21 May 2010
Projected 2010 Budget $3505.65
Expended against projection $ 874.75
Projected Excess/(Shortfall) ($2080.54)

As always, donors and donations are publicly acknowledged
and accounted for on the HBD web page. Thank you


Send articles for __publication_only__ to post@hbd.org

If your e-mail account is being deleted, please unsubscribe first!!

To SUBSCRIBE or UNSUBSCRIBE send an e-mail message with the word
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to request@hbd.org FROM THE E-MAIL
ACCOUNT YOU WISH TO HAVE SUBSCRIBED OR UNSUBSCRIBED!!!**
IF YOU HAVE SPAM-PROOFED your e-mail address, you cannot subscribe to
the digest as we cannot reach you. We will not correct your address
for the automation - that's your job.

HAVING TROUBLE posting, subscribing or unsusubscribing? See the HBD FAQ at
http://hbd.org.

LOOKING TO BUY OR SELL USED EQUIPMENT? Please do not post about it here. Go
instead to http://homebrewfleamarket.com and post a free ad there.

The HBD is a copyrighted document. The compilation is copyright
HBD.ORG. Individual postings are copyright by their authors. ASK
before reproducing and you'll rarely have trouble. Digest content
cannot be reproduced by any means for sale or profit.

More information is available by sending the word "info" to
req@hbd.org or read the HBD FAQ at http://hbd.org.

JANITORs on duty: Pat Babcock (pbabcock at hbd dot org), Jason Henning,
and Spencer Thomas


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


Date: Thu, 27 May 2010 01:59:13 -0700 (PDT)
From: John Schnupp <john.schnupp at yahoo.com>
Subject: HBD is struggling to meet its meager operating expenses

>If less than half of those currently directly
>subscribed to the HBD sent in a mere $5.00, the HBD would
>be able to easily meet its annual expenses,
<snip>
>Financial Projection As of 21 May 2010
> Projected 2010 Budget $3505.65
>Expended against projection $ 874.75
>Projected Excess/(Shortfall) ($2080.54)

WOW. I know it's been a long time since I posted,
and even longer since I've brewed :-(

I didn't realize that this was such a shoe-string operation. It's been a
while since I've read any of the HBD posts. I know I can't make up the
entire shortfall but as a long time reader (and now mostly lurker) you
can be assured that you'll be seeing my small contribution in your snail-
mail soon.

Where else can one get an annual subscription for a daily paper
(ok, so call it e-paper) for $5.

John Schnupp, N3CNL
Georgia, VT
'95 XLH 1200 +79,900


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

Date: Thu, 27 May 2010 12:21:54 -0400
From: "A.J deLange" <ajdelan at gmail.com>
Subject: More Aqua/ Iron

Another suggestion for Joe. Have some DI water trucked in, try brewing
a Pils or 2 with it and see if you agree with Calvin and A.J. or the
"not to worry" group. Upon deciding that low mineral is the way to go
you could then start looking into ways of getting quantities of it
into your brewery.

And one other aspect of good Pils, which is also a controversial one,
is whether decoction mashing is necessary. I say yes and also request
that anyone who thinks he can convince me other wiseto please not
disillusion me in this regard. To be somewhat more serious about the
matter, you do need to get that classic mealanoidin quality. Many feel
that simply adding some melanoidin malt is sufficient.

For Dave:

Ah, iron. Yes that can ruin your day but there are ways of getting rid
of the stuff without using a softener (and losing the calcium). For HB
quantities the simplest method is to simply aerate a quantity of the
water (setting up a garden booster pump with a shower head and
recirculating into a vessel while spraying through the head works fine
for this. The spraying lets the extra CO2 (which is what is
responsible for the low pH) escape and lets oxygen convert the
clearwater iron to Fe(III) which is the ugly, brown, gelatinous junk
you find in toilet tanks etc. Now simply filter this water (Greg
Noonan recommended filtering through kids' playsand. If can be easily
cleaned after treatment. More permanent options use the same basic
principle. Iron removal filters (usually containing a mineral called
"greensand") work the oxidation just as well and are automatically
backwashed so you don't have to worry about that. However you do it
the result is iron free water at more reasonable pH.

A.J.


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

Date: Thu, 27 May 2010 15:08:44 -0400
From: Andrew deLange <ajdelan at gmail.com>
Subject: Additional on Agua- Pt I

The original post got rejected as it was too long. As it looks as if
some discussion is going I'm resubmitting:

Further to Joe's questions: I didn't realize we were talking a
commercial application here. This changes things dramatically in terms
of the economics but the basic principals (i.e. the chemistry) don't.
The following is opinion (which you will have seen backed up here to
some extent but that doesn't mean everyone agrees with it): the secret
to excellent Bohemian Pilsner (I have no experience with German) is
very soft water and proper control of mash pH through the use of
sauermalz or sauergut because very soft water will not give you the
mash pH you need with a Pilsner malt grist. This assumes, of course,
good malt and lots of Saaz hops. The one thing I consistently notice
about commercial Pils is that the bittering is done with a high alpha
hop and then some Saaz is tossed in at the end for "aroma and flavor".
IMO this spoils a Pils but I certainly understand the economics behind
having to do things this way. If I ran a brewery I'm sure I could put
it out of business within a year.

Now, on to the water. Opinion mode is off here (but it will be coming
back on later). It's residual alkalinity is pretty high - too high to
fix with mineral salt addition so either you must decarbonate or add
acid which effectively decarbonates because it converts the
bicarbonate ions to carbon dioxide but the cost is that each
bicarbonate ion is replaced by the anion of the acid. For Pils, using
noble hops, sulfuric acid is not a good choice but hydrochloric might
be. Doing a quick calculation on what I assume you mains water to be
(see below) it would take 1.25 L of 23 Be' HCl to treat 30 bbl of
water to 50 ppm alkalinity but the residual alkalinity would be -24
(because of all the calcium). pH would be 5.6 but your but your
chloride would be a whopping 183 (no surprise there). 1.1L of HCl
would get you to 0 RA (alkalinity 74 but it's the RA that counts), a
pH of 5.1 and a chloride level of 165. Calculations assume mains pH of
7 (you didn't tell us what the actual pH is) and the other thing I
don't know is the end point you use when you measure alkalinity.

Decarbonation by lime treatment is probably not practical at 30 bbl
but people do sell lime decarbonation plant at that scale. Check
Brauwelt and similar pubs. The approximate lime dose for your water
would be about 200 mg/L but one must experiment to find the optimum
dose. For small scale I find it best to use more than the calculation
calls for in order to get the pH and calcium ion concentration high
(which means more carbonate precipitated) and to "seed" the mix with
finely divided calcium carbonate in order to provide nucleation sites.
The problem with this approach is that you finish up with water with
high pH which needs to be knocked back to something reasonable (you
want the final result of the process to be reduced, not increased
alkalinity). So you must add acid to neutralize the excess hydroxide.
If you use hydrochloric acid for this purpose you will have increased
chloride which is good in general terms but not so good in terms of
getting that "soft" quality which the best Pilsners have and which I
attribute to the water. Another approach to the excess hydroxide is to
use carbonic acid. At the HB scale this simply means sparging CO2
through the water until the pH comes to 7-ish. Or you can use just the
amount of lime stochimetrically calculated and not have to worry
about acid addition afterwards. If you do this you will be able to
decarbonate to about 50 ppm as CaCO3 alkalinity. Going to higher pH
may get you a little below this but may not be worth the effort. If
you do this manually (which I assume you would before investing in a
lime plant) you would place say 40% of the water to be treated in a
vessel which can be stirred and in which you can monitor pH. Add the
lime and seed CaCO3, mix well and check pH. If you are going to
supplement calcium chloride, do that now as the calcium will aid in
carbonate capture. Now add additional water with stirring while
monitoring pH. As the calcium carbonate precipitates the pH will fall.
The reaction isn't that fast so wait a few minutes. What you are doing
is neutralizing the base Ca(OH)2 with the acid (and it really is an
acid) HCO3- i.e. 2HCO3- + Ca++ + 2(OH)- ---> CaCO3 + 2H2O.
As the (OH)- ions get consumed the pH falls and when it arrives back
at approximately the pH of the water you started with then you have
dropped about as much bicarb (alkalinity) as you can using this method.

You are already using the other traditional method of decarbonation.
When the water sits in the HLT CO2 is driven off and chalk
precipitates: 2HCO3- + Ca++ --> CaCO3 + CO2 + H2O. This is why the
alkalinity of the water falls in the HLT from 262 to 168. As an aside,
I am assuming that the water analysis you gave in the post was for HLT
water because the calcium and magnesium numbers you gave don't balance
with an alkalinity of 262. The lime value I gave above is based on the
analysis you posted. If I guess that the original calcium was 2 mEq/L
higher (i.e. reduced in the HLT by the same amount as the alkalinity)
it would be at about 90 and the amount of trial lime calculates to 307
mg/L. This aside, you will have about 100 mg of calcium carbonate
sitting in the bottom of your HLT for each liter of water that you
ever heated in it and if you haven't been cleaning that out you should
look into it.

More to the point, you can get more CaCO3 to drop out using the same
mechanism i.e. heating. If you bring the water to near boiling (you do
not have to boil it) and sparge it with air that air will sweep out
the CO2 and aid the precipitation of chalk (Le Chateleier's
principal). OTOH if you do boil it steam will do the CO2 sweeping but
it seems to me that pumping some air in there through a carbonation
stone would use less energy than boiling though you don't have to boil
long. Again, if you are intending to supplement with CaCl2 do it
before undertaking this process. Here again adding some chalk for
seeding might help. Also note that this method will only get you down
to about 50 on the alkalinity though supplementation with CaCl2 my get
you a bit lower. The trade between lime treatment and heating/air
sparging is that the former requires more effort, the lime and the
tweaking of the process to get it right and the latter uses more
energy. Large operators usually go (or went in the past) with lime for
this reason. Today with the improvement in RO and nanofiltration
technologies breweries seem to be trending in that direction.


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

Date: Thu, 27 May 2010 15:09:24 -0400
From: Andrew deLange <ajdelan at gmail.com>
Subject: Additional on Aqua Pt-II

f you soften this water you will be swapping out 2.55 mEq of calcium
and 1.45 mEq of magnesium for 4 mEq (92 mg) of sodium in each liter
for a total of 92 + 12.24 = 104 mg/L. How do you get 175.8? If that is
the result of a measurement at the output of the softener then there
is a problem. Brine is leaking into the process stream. If the
measurement was taken right after a regeneration we can assume that
the resin bed just didn't get as thoroughly rinsed as we'd like and
that after a few gal. through the system the sodium level would drop
back to around 104. There is no practical way to get the sodium out
other than RO and we can argue as to whether that's practical. Boiling
works if he steam is separated and condensed (i.e. distillation) as
does passage through acid/base ion exchangers (swap H+ for cations and
OH- for anions - think Brita pitcher, lab pure water systems...) are
about all I can think of. Nanofiltration systems let the small ions
through. Boiling does not cause sodium to precipitate.


Opinion on again: Given that you apparently have a softener (for
boiler feed?) RO is perfect for your application if your goal is to
brew an authentic Bohemian Pilsner. It won't cost you $8000 for an RO
system of sufficient capacity. A 2500 GPD system (produce 30 bbl in 9
hrs) can be had for half that and a 500 GPD system (collect 30 bbl in
about 2 days) for around $2000. Now that's just for the system. If you
have a vessel to collect the water into then you really don't need to
do anything except plug the unit into 110, plumb the inlet, rout the
concentrate to a drain and the permeate to the collection vessel. If
you don't have a collection vessel then one of those must be acquired
and if you get fancy with level controls, pressure tanks, pumps etc
then the cost will clearly go higher. Other potential problem is that
there may be restrictions on concentrate disposal. Assuming your mains
water is at 262 alkalinity and 90 mg/L calcium your TDS going in (if
you don't feed softened water which you doubtless should) is about 480
and if you operate at 50% recovery the concentrate (waste) stream will
be at 960. Obviously if you operate the RO system at 50% recovery you
will be buying 2 gal of water from the city for every gallon that
winds up in the HLT. Also RO systems don't have 100% rejection. My
experience with RO units is around 97% with some ions being better
rejected than others. Using 97% for a quicky calculation would mean
hardness out (assuming mains feed) of about 9 and alkalinity out of
about 8 - pretty darn good for Boh. Pils. Now as noted in an earlier
post with hard water membrane life is extended if an RO unit is fed
with softened water. If you did this you would be feeding about 104 mg/
L sodium and the permeate would thus contain about 3 mg/L sodium. The
alkalinity is not effected by softening. The calcium will be very low
and probably should be supplemented. The easiest way to do this is to
blend some of your source water with the RO water. Using 97% rejection
and my assumptions about you mains water adding 1 L of mains water to
25 L of RO water would give you an RA of about 14 with an alkalinity
of 17 and an effective hardness of 10. This is pretty close to
Pilsen's water. I find water like this to make excellent Boh. Pils as
long as mashtun pH is controlled (and not a terribly bad Pils if it
isn't but definitely better if it is). Again I must caveat that there
is an opinion being offered here. And I think the major area of
contention in this case would be as to whether the calcium should be
supplemented for the sake of the yeast, bright runoff, oxalate
capture... and chloride for the sake of mouthfeel. I have not
experimented with that up to this point. I feel I am making a darn
good authentic, in the sense that water and hops are authentic and a
couple of us going to be experimenting with Weyerman's "heirloom"
floor malt in the next couple of weeks, Pils. Whether some extra
calcium chloride might make it even better is another question and one
I want an answer to.

Well it's nice to see a little activity here on the HBD and yes, you
have shamed me into sending along a wee something to Pat & Co.

Cheers, A.J.

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

Date: Thu, 27 May 2010 21:16:58 -0400
From: mossview5 <mossview5 at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Sodium/Chloride

AJ asked about Nanofiltration and why it might be better than Reverse
Osmosis.

Nanofiltration is a more porous membrane that does let more ions through.
In particular, the monovalent ions such as sodium and chloride. In my trade,
nanofiltration is a process referred to broadly as 'membrane softening'.
Since most potable water supplies tend to be more afflicted by unwelcome
hardness than saltiness, softening is a desirable goal. The real bonus to
major water producers and users is that membrane softening produces an
acceptably softened water while using much less power and wasting less
water.

Home RO units are terribly wasteful with water. For every gallon of RO water,
about 4 to 7 gallons of water goes down the drain. Commercial RO units are
much less wasteful, but they still end up sending about 1 gallon down the drain
for every gallon of RO water produced. They use very high pressure pumps to
drive the water through the membranes and the raw water typically has to be
acidified to help avoid clogging the membranes. These are complications that
few home owners would want to wrestle with.

Commercial Nanofiltration units are more efficient than the commercial RO units
since they do not require pumping to as high a pressure as RO and the amount
of wasted water is further reduced. These units can produce a gallon
of product
water while only sending about 1/3 gallon down the drain.

AJ's final point about nanofiltration was still correct. For the
small amount of
water that we require for brewing, its not really worthwhile to worry about our
wasting water and energy. Home RO systems are good enough.

Martin Brungard
Indianapolis, IN


------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #5686, 05/27/10
*************************************
-------

Wednesday, May 26, 2010

Homebrew Digest #5685 (May 26, 2010)

HOMEBREW Digest #5685 Wed 26 May 2010


FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
Digest Janitor: pbabcock at hbd.org


***************************************************************
TODAY'S HOME BREW DIGEST BROUGHT TO YOU BY:

Sponsor The Home Brew Digest!
Visit http://www.hbd.org/sponsorhbd.shtml to learn how

Support those who support you! Visit our sponsor's site!
********** Also visit http://hbd.org/hbdsponsors.html *********

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

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

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


Contents:
RE: Sodium Chloride ("David Houseman")
re: agua (Joe Katchever)
RO water - recovery rate (Calvin Perilloux)
RO Concentrate ("A.J deLange")


* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* Beer is our obsession and we're late for therapy! *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

NOTE: With the economy as it is, the HBD is struggling to
meet its meager operating expenses of approximately $3500
per year. If less than half of those currently directly
subscribed to the HBD sent in a mere $5.00, the HBD would
be able to easily meet its annual expenses, with room to
spare for next year. Please consider it.

Financial Projection As of 21 May 2010
Projected 2010 Budget $3505.65
Expended against projection $ 874.75
Projected Excess/(Shortfall) ($2080.54)

As always, donors and donations are publicly acknowledged
and accounted for on the HBD web page. Thank you


Send articles for __publication_only__ to post@hbd.org

If your e-mail account is being deleted, please unsubscribe first!!

To SUBSCRIBE or UNSUBSCRIBE send an e-mail message with the word
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to request@hbd.org FROM THE E-MAIL
ACCOUNT YOU WISH TO HAVE SUBSCRIBED OR UNSUBSCRIBED!!!**
IF YOU HAVE SPAM-PROOFED your e-mail address, you cannot subscribe to
the digest as we cannot reach you. We will not correct your address
for the automation - that's your job.

HAVING TROUBLE posting, subscribing or unsusubscribing? See the HBD FAQ at
http://hbd.org.

LOOKING TO BUY OR SELL USED EQUIPMENT? Please do not post about it here. Go
instead to http://homebrewfleamarket.com and post a free ad there.

The HBD is a copyrighted document. The compilation is copyright
HBD.ORG. Individual postings are copyright by their authors. ASK
before reproducing and you'll rarely have trouble. Digest content
cannot be reproduced by any means for sale or profit.

More information is available by sending the word "info" to
req@hbd.org or read the HBD FAQ at http://hbd.org.

JANITORs on duty: Pat Babcock (pbabcock at hbd dot org), Jason Henning,
and Spencer Thomas


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


Date: Tue, 25 May 2010 23:31:00 -0400
From: "David Houseman" <david.houseman at verizon.net>
Subject: RE: Sodium Chloride

AJ asks:

"But why would you want to use a
softener in the first place? It doesn't "remove" anything but rather
only replaces polyvalent ions (calcium, magnesium, iron, strontium...)
with equivalent amounts of (monovalent) sodium."

Good question. My well water is acidic enough to take the paint off cars
and has enough iron that laundry, toilets, tubs and glasses of water settle
out red iron deposits. The water softener does just that, takes out the
unwanted ions; and I balance the pH by injecting light soda ash solution
into the water line on the way to the softener. Water then tastes great.
Makes excellent beer when I replace the missing desirable ions. And my
sodium and chloride ions are not terribly high. Not enough to justify an RO
system. I can continue to work with what I have. Just thought that if
there were a nifty way to minimize the sodium and chloride ions I'd give
that a try.

Dave

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

Date: Tue, 25 May 2010 15:37:19 -0500
From: Joe Katchever <joe at pearlstreetbrewery.com>
Subject: re: agua

As expected, I received a whole
wagonload of responses to my query about softened water and pilsner
beers. As I also expected, the array of answers pointed&nbsp; in every
conceivable direction. Answers from, "don't do anything - just brew
with what you got and the beer will be good" philosophies to very in
depth scientific explanations. I got a few people who wanted to know
what I heard and so, in summary, here's what I got....

My question was, could I (should I) brew with softened water, or
low-mineral--high sodium water. Some say no some say sure why not.


Let me just point out that I am not trying to brew good beer here. I am
at such a point in my brewing career, that I aim to brew exceptional,
outstanding beer only.

I would like to use water with a maximum alkalinity of 50ppm, as I
understand all pilsners, regardless of their origin or mineral content
have low-alkalinity in common. With this in mind, my pilsner water
options include (1) softened water, remineralized with calcium, (2)
nanofiltered water, which removes minerals, (3) RO water (pure water),
remineralized, (4) lime treatment to lower bicarbonates and
subsequently, alkalinity.

I decided not to go with nanofiltered water or RO water, mainly because
I don't have an RO filter, or other nanofilter and, no, I don't have
the $8,000 to buy one.

There was only a lukewarm response to the idea of using softened water,
even with adding back some essential minerals. This warrants some
further exploration. The only problems seem to be not enough calcium,
which is easily fixable with a dose of CaCL; and too much sodium.
Although my sodium level of 175.8 is considered below the taste
threshold, Dave Miller says, "sulfate levels under 100ppm are usually
acceptable, but the effect of sulfate (harsh bitterness) is magnified
and worsened by potassium and sodium. My sulfate level is only 12.9, so
does this sodium level of softened water even matter? It seems, If I
COULD remove the sodium, this might be a good option. No one has
proposed any method of removing the sodium from this water. Anyone want
to chime in? How about boiling the softened water? Won't that remove
any sodium, or does it need to be distilled?

Lime treatment could be an option. I got explicit instructions from&nbsp; Mr
Martin Brungard as to how to use lime treatment to lower the
ankalinity. (thanks, Martin!), although he didn't have all the info. on
my water that he needed. I may have failed to mention that my water has
some hefty alkalinity issues: it is 262 raw and drops to 168 in the hot
liquor tank. Even at 168, it is still over three times my target. I
have more questions about this lime treatment: how much lime do I need
per gallon (roughly)? My brewing water is as follows:<br>
Ca=51.16, Mg=17.65, Na=12.24, hardness=200, sulfate=12.9, Cl=27.2 and
alkalinity= 168.

What say, sir?

On a side note: as Pat Babcock has noted in recent digests, the HBD is
way under budget and is "struggling to meet it's meager operating
expenses of approx. $3500/year." Looks like these guys are about
$2080.54 short. The janitors here run this board every day for us to
read and don't get paid for it so, if you read it (I see you do) then
toss in a few bucks. They even take Paypal!&nbsp; I'll even throw in the
$80.54 right now and I'm poor!

-Joe

Joe Katchever
Pearl Street Brewery
La Crosse, Wisconsin

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

Date: Wed, 26 May 2010 06:58:37 -0700 (PDT)
From: Calvin Perilloux <calvinperilloux at yahoo.com>
Subject: RO water - recovery rate

AJ notes in his latest posting on Reverse Osmosis units:

> In the system which replaced those small units
> I feed softened water and feel quite comfortable
> operating it at a recovery of around 40% (which
> should make all you environmental types feel all
> warm and fuzzy inside).

AJ, The tree hugger in me wonders about something...

If I'm at a recovery rate of only 17% like your old RO
units, I'd only be increasing the ion concentration in
the waste water by about (1-(1-.17)) = 20%. Hence, that
waste water could be useful for my garden, since it's
fairly close to what my garden lives on already.

If I go to a much higher recovery rate, though, that
waste water might be much saltier, 67% more instead of
20% more, and so for a high-mineral water source, instead
of using the waste on a parched garden, I might run it
down the drain.

So perhaps the low-recovery units are in fact more
environmentally friendly -- if you make use of the
waste water.

(To be honest, me being on a well, for my water it would be
a case of "from the earth you came, to the earth you shall
return" even for waste water I dump out, so there's not
much environmental effect other than energy usage to pump
the stuff to the surface.)

And now that you mention that a Home Depot RO unit is
under $300, you have me thinking of how much I've spent
at Walmart for distilled water and wondering if it's
actually cheaper to make my own. Hmmmmm...

Calvin Perilloux
Middletown, Maryland, USA

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

Date: Wed, 26 May 2010 11:28:00 -0400
From: "A.J deLange" <ajdel at cox.net>
Subject: RO Concentrate

WRT to concentrate disposal:

In my particular situation (which should be pretty similar to
Calvin's) the well typically runs 22 mg/L Ca++, 11 mg/L Mg++, 73 mg/L
HCO3-. 12.4 mg/L NO3- (as the nitrate); 7.1 mg/L Na+; 23 mg/L SO4--
(that's the one I'm really after); 28 mg/L silica with smidgeons of
copper, potassium, fluoride iron and manganese for a total TDS of 155
mg/L excluding the silica or 183 mg/L with. The magnesium and calcium
total 2.02 mEq/L and so 33 mg/L of them gets replaced by the softener
with 46 mg/L sodium for TDS (sans silica, a thing to be devoutly
wished) of about 168 mg/L (the meter on the RO unit, calibrated
against who knows what salt mixture and which doesn't respond to the
silica) reads about 140 mg/L. So, to make the math simple, at 50%
recovery the concentrate I'd be dumping out would be at 336 mg/L with
106 mg/L of that being sodium and all the other ions concentrations
about doubled (assuming 100% rejection - again for simple math). The
only one of those I might worry about WRT to a garden would be the
sodium and my gut says that even at that level it shouldn't be a
problem but Calvin may have better data on this. I'm in the rarish
hybrid situation of having county sewer but no county water so my
concentrate just goes down the drain. I'm sure it takes many hours of
operation of the RO system to dump as much sodium as a single cycle of
the softener.

If sodium discharge is a concern it is always possible to operate the
unit on un-softened water. The calculation for maximum allowable
recovery isn't that bad and I'd be happy to do it if wanted. In the
case of unsoftened water you would, effectively, be "liming" your
garden - a good thing around here as soil pH is lowish.

Of course Calvin is welcome to come by anytime for as much RO water as
he can transport and I'll even throw in some sauermalz and a beer (or
2). Given where he lives relative to me and assuming a buck a gallon
for DI water and 3 bucks a gallon for petrol I'm guessing this may not
be such a great proposition in financial terms but the beer is good
(and free).

A.J.


------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #5685, 05/26/10
*************************************
-------

Tuesday, May 25, 2010

Homebrew Digest #5684 (May 25, 2010)

HOMEBREW Digest #5684 Tue 25 May 2010


FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
Digest Janitor: pbabcock at hbd.org


***************************************************************
TODAY'S HOME BREW DIGEST BROUGHT TO YOU BY:

Sponsor The Home Brew Digest!
Visit http://www.hbd.org/sponsorhbd.shtml to learn how

Support those who support you! Visit our sponsor's site!
********** Also visit http://hbd.org/hbdsponsors.html *********

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

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

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


Contents:
Sodium/Chloride ("A. J. deLange")


* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* Beer is our obsession and we're late for therapy! *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

NOTE: With the economy as it is, the HBD is struggling to
meet its meager operating expenses of approximately $3500
per year. If less than half of those currently directly
subscribed to the HBD sent in a mere $5.00, the HBD would
be able to easily meet its annual expenses, with room to
spare for next year. Please consider it.

Financial Projection As of 21 May 2010
Projected 2010 Budget $3505.65
Expended against projection $ 874.75
Projected Excess/(Shortfall) ($2080.54)

As always, donors and donations are publicly acknowledged
and accounted for on the HBD web page. Thank you


Send articles for __publication_only__ to post@hbd.org

If your e-mail account is being deleted, please unsubscribe first!!

To SUBSCRIBE or UNSUBSCRIBE send an e-mail message with the word
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to request@hbd.org FROM THE E-MAIL
ACCOUNT YOU WISH TO HAVE SUBSCRIBED OR UNSUBSCRIBED!!!**
IF YOU HAVE SPAM-PROOFED your e-mail address, you cannot subscribe to
the digest as we cannot reach you. We will not correct your address
for the automation - that's your job.

HAVING TROUBLE posting, subscribing or unsusubscribing? See the HBD FAQ at
http://hbd.org.

LOOKING TO BUY OR SELL USED EQUIPMENT? Please do not post about it here. Go
instead to http://homebrewfleamarket.com and post a free ad there.

The HBD is a copyrighted document. The compilation is copyright
HBD.ORG. Individual postings are copyright by their authors. ASK
before reproducing and you'll rarely have trouble. Digest content
cannot be reproduced by any means for sale or profit.

More information is available by sending the word "info" to
req@hbd.org or read the HBD FAQ at http://hbd.org.

JANITORs on duty: Pat Babcock (pbabcock at hbd dot org), Jason Henning,
and Spencer Thomas


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


Date: Tue, 25 May 2010 09:41:21 -0400
From: "A. J. deLange" <ajdel at cox.net>
Subject: Sodium/Chloride

Dave asked whether there is an easy way to remove sodium and chloride
ions from softened water. Easy? Relatively. Inexpensive? Depends on your
definition but RO potentially qualifies. One can buy an 11 gallon per
day RO system from Home Depot for $279 (and lots of other
manufacturers, stores, websites... list lower priced units of around or
even greater than that capacity). But why would you want to use a
softener in the first place? It doesn't "remove" anything but rather
only replaces polyvalent ions (calcium, magnesium, iron, strontium...)
with equivalent amounts of (monovalent) sodium. Chloride is unaffected
(except perhaps for minimal amounts from residual brine) as are
bicarbonate, sulfate, nitrate.... If your goal is demineralized (or
largely demineralized) water the task is of the same magnitude at the
output of the softener as it would be if the softener were not used. Why
not just feed an RO unit directly from the mains? It turns out there is
a reason. If the water is hard (and we would'nt be having this
discussion if it weren't) there will be a gradient of calcium ions
concentration perpendicular to the membrane surface increasing in the
direction of the membrane. If the hardness is temporary (carbonate)
there will be a carbonate ion concentration gradient as well and,
depending on pH, hardness, alkalinity, and recovery rate the
concentrations of calcium and carbonate ions can exceed the solubility
product close to the membrane surface with resultant precipitation and
blockage. If the calcium has been removed by a softener then obviously
this problem is solved (and it will be some other salt which will limit
allowable recovery such as barium sulfate even though your water, we
hope, contains only miniscule amounts of barium).

So there is a reason to use a softener with an RO unit and, IMO, that's
the only job for a softener in a brewery (except perhaps boiler feed).
That said, if you go to HD, buy an RO unit and just hook it up to the
mains you will probably be fine. I had two of these units in service
(brewing only) for 4 years in one case and 5 years in the other on
nominally hard water (about 110 ppm as CaCO3 - mostly temporary) and
never changed out the membranes because I didn't have to. I'm on a well
so my pH is low (that helps) and these GE units have low, fixed recovery
(that also helps) of about 17%. On checking the GE manual for the
recovery I found that they too recommend a softener if you hardness is
greater than 10 gpg (about 179 ppm) and your pH > 7. That increases to
about twice that level of allowable hardness at pH 6.7; three times that
a pH 6.3 and so on. The manual also says the consequences of not using a
softener above these levels is shortened membrane life. In the system
which replaced those small units I feed softened water and feel quite
comfortable operating it at a recovery of around 40% (which should make
all you environmental types feel all warm and fuzzy inside).

I'm not sure I understand why Martin would favor nanofiltration over RO
for the likes of us. They will block the polyvalent ions (thus softening
the water and decarbonating it, getting rid of sulfate and nitrate) but
let the monovalents through so if deionized water is the goal additional
processing would be required to get rid of the monovalents. I guess they
are easier to clean but as I noted above I have never had to clean an RO
unit. On an industrial scale I'm sure things are dramatically different
and the processing methods chosen are determined by the particulars of
the feed water chemistry, the requirements for the processed water and a
whole lot of other considerations which include not only the capital
costs (which he mentioned as being high) but operating costs,
concentrate disposal and on and on. I know nanofiltration is becoming
popular among water authorities these days but don't see it for
homebrewers. But really, I know almost nothing about nano systems.

A.J.


------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #5684, 05/25/10
*************************************
-------

Monday, May 24, 2010

Homebrew Digest #5683 (May 24, 2010)

HOMEBREW Digest #5683 Mon 24 May 2010


FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
Digest Janitor: pbabcock at hbd.org


***************************************************************
TODAY'S HOME BREW DIGEST BROUGHT TO YOU BY:

Sponsor The Home Brew Digest!
Visit http://www.hbd.org/sponsorhbd.shtml to learn how

Support those who support you! Visit our sponsor's site!
********** Also visit http://hbd.org/hbdsponsors.html *********

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

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

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


Contents:
Re: Na ("David Houseman")
Re: aqua (Water for a Pilsner) (Calvin Perilloux)


* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* Beer is our obsession and we're late for therapy! *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

NOTE: With the economy as it is, the HBD is struggling to
meet its meager operating expenses of approximately $3500
per year. If less than half of those currently directly
subscribed to the HBD sent in a mere $5.00, the HBD would
be able to easily meet its annual expenses, with room to
spare for next year. Please consider it.

Financial Projection As of 21 May 2010
Projected 2010 Budget $3505.65
Expended against projection $ 874.75
Projected Excess/(Shortfall) ($2080.54)

As always, donors and donations are publicly acknowledged
and accounted for on the HBD web page. Thank you


Send articles for __publication_only__ to post@hbd.org

If your e-mail account is being deleted, please unsubscribe first!!

To SUBSCRIBE or UNSUBSCRIBE send an e-mail message with the word
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to request@hbd.org FROM THE E-MAIL
ACCOUNT YOU WISH TO HAVE SUBSCRIBED OR UNSUBSCRIBED!!!**
IF YOU HAVE SPAM-PROOFED your e-mail address, you cannot subscribe to
the digest as we cannot reach you. We will not correct your address
for the automation - that's your job.

HAVING TROUBLE posting, subscribing or unsusubscribing? See the HBD FAQ at
http://hbd.org.

LOOKING TO BUY OR SELL USED EQUIPMENT? Please do not post about it here. Go
instead to http://homebrewfleamarket.com and post a free ad there.

The HBD is a copyrighted document. The compilation is copyright
HBD.ORG. Individual postings are copyright by their authors. ASK
before reproducing and you'll rarely have trouble. Digest content
cannot be reproduced by any means for sale or profit.

More information is available by sending the word "info" to
req@hbd.org or read the HBD FAQ at http://hbd.org.

JANITORs on duty: Pat Babcock (pbabcock at hbd dot org), Jason Henning,
and Spencer Thomas


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


Date: Fri, 21 May 2010 07:12:04 -0400
From: "David Houseman" <david.houseman at verizon.net>
Subject: Re: Na

I agree that simply using water from a softener will be problematic for most
beers. However, adding back the Calcium needed, in the form of Calcium
Chloride or Calcium Carbonate has worked for me for many years. I keep a
number of common chemicals on hand and treat all my brewing water. I'll
admit that the sodium and chloride ions are too high but so the end result
has not suffered greatly. Now is there a convenient way add something to
the softener water to drop the sodium and chloride ions out of solution
prior to adding other chemicals?

Dave Houseman

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

Date: Mon, 24 May 2010 11:32:09 -0700 (PDT)
From: Calvin Perilloux <calvinperilloux at yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: aqua (Water for a Pilsner)

Joe,

If this is the first time you're dealing with a Pilsner,
and you haven't played with water chemistry before, then AJ's
advice is very sound to just go with reverse-osmosis/distilled
water and add a bit of your own raw water for minerals. That's
a lot easier than worrying about lime treatment to precipitate
the carbonates, not to mention checking sulfate content, which
is also important but takes time and some money.

But first, you have to decide which kind of Pilsner you want
to brew. Bohemian Pilsner needs really low-mineral water;
North German Pilsner is more forgiving, but your water still
needs treatment or dilution for best results.

In general, I follow AJ's wise advice, but I also often take
non-Reinheitsgebot shortcuts, using modest amounts of lactic
or phosphoric acid to keep the pH down, since I usually don't
have sauermalz on hand and habitually neglect to plan ahead.

Quick and dirty:

Water dilution: 90/10 distilled/raw-water for BohPils
75/25 distilled/raw-water for N. German Pils
Calcium: A few grams (0.5-1.0 tsp?) of CaCl per 5 gal
pH control: 1-2 mL of 85% lactic, or 5-10 ml 10% phosphoric
acid, but best to use a pH meter to verify.
Otherwise, when I'm lazy I use "5.2" pH buffer
from Five Star chemicals.

In my opinion: For this, definitely avoid using your softened water.

Good luck as you venture into Pilsner brewing. Get a very large
starter ready. Chill like mad to get wort to 50F or so to pitch
(seriously). Keep that fermentation temp 48-54 F. Make sure
to do your diacetyl rest if needed. Long, cold conditioning!

And yes, all that work *is* worth it in the end.

Calvin Perilloux
Middletown, Maryland, USA

------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #5683, 05/24/10
*************************************
-------

Thursday, May 20, 2010

Homebrew Digest #5682 (May 20, 2010)

HOMEBREW Digest #5682 Thu 20 May 2010


FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
Digest Janitor: pbabcock at hbd.org


***************************************************************
TODAY'S HOME BREW DIGEST BROUGHT TO YOU BY:

Sponsor The Home Brew Digest!
Visit http://www.hbd.org/sponsorhbd.shtml to learn how

Support those who support you! Visit our sponsor's site!
********** Also visit http://hbd.org/hbdsponsors.html *********

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

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

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


Contents:
Agua ("A. J. deLange")
Na ("Darrell G. Leavitt")
Re: agua (mossview5)


* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* The HBD Logo Store is now open! *
* http://www.hbd.org/store.html *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* Beer is our obsession and we're late for therapy! *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

NOTE: With the economy as it is, the HBD is struggling to
meet its meager operating expenses of approximately $3400
per year. If less than half of those currently directly
subscribed to the HBD sent in a mere $5.00, the HBD would
be able to easily meet its annual expenses, with room to
spare for next year. Please consider it.

As always, donors and donations are publicly acknowledged
and accounted for on the HBD web page. THank you


Send articles for __publication_only__ to post@hbd.org

If your e-mail account is being deleted, please unsubscribe first!!

To SUBSCRIBE or UNSUBSCRIBE send an e-mail message with the word
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to request@hbd.org FROM THE E-MAIL
ACCOUNT YOU WISH TO HAVE SUBSCRIBED OR UNSUBSCRIBED!!!**
IF YOU HAVE SPAM-PROOFED your e-mail address, you cannot subscribe to
the digest as we cannot reach you. We will not correct your address
for the automation - that's your job.

HAVING TROUBLE posting, subscribing or unsusubscribing? See the HBD FAQ at
http://hbd.org.

LOOKING TO BUY OR SELL USED EQUIPMENT? Please do not post about it here. Go
instead to http://homebrewfleamarket.com and post a free ad there.

The HBD is a copyrighted document. The compilation is copyright
HBD.ORG. Individual postings are copyright by their authors. ASK
before reproducing and you'll rarely have trouble. Digest content
cannot be reproduced by any means for sale or profit.

More information is available by sending the word "info" to
req@hbd.org or read the HBD FAQ at http://hbd.org.

JANITORs on duty: Pat Babcock (pbabcock at hbd dot org), Jason Henning,
and Spencer Thomas


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


Date: Wed, 19 May 2010 23:51:15 -0400
From: "A. J. deLange" <ajdel at cox.net>
Subject: Agua

Can you brew with water from your softener? Yes, but the results are not
probably anything you would find desirable. As you can see from the
numbers you posted the typical home water softener replaces desirable
calcium and magnesium (desirable, but not to the extent calcium is) with
undesirable sodium. Calcium is desirable for many reasons but at issue
here is that the calcium reacts with malt phosphate to offset the
alkalinity of the water to some extent and thus prevent mash pH from
rising as high as it would if calcium were not present. Magnesium has
this same effect but is half as potent as calcium in this regard. Remove
the calcium and magnesium and you are completely at the mercy of the
alkalinity (bicarbonate). Now as you note Bohemian Pilsner is brewed
with very soft water i.e. water with no calcium or magnesium but it also
has no bicarbonate (alkalinity) to offset and thus you can brew a Boh
Pils with soft water without treatment and this would be the most
authentic way to make it. RO water is fine for this but will not, by
itself, give a mash pH as low as desired. Acid will be required to do
that. Continental lager breweries get acid from lactic acid bacteria
(found on the surface of malt corns and plenty of other surfaces as
well) which are used to ferment malt or wort thus producing,
respectively, sauermalz (acidulated malt) and sauergut. It is possible
to brew Pilsner without either of these and if neither is to be used
then calcium suplementation with the chloride is probably the best way
to go. The calcium, as mentioned above, reacts with malt phosphate to
produce hydrogen ions which offset, in this case, the natural alkalinity
of the malt itself (even distilled water has an alkalinity: 2.5 ppm as
CaCO3) in addition to aiding runoff, giving brighter wort, serving as a
cofactor for enzymes, precipitating oxalate... As to an amount, 1 tsp
per 5 gallons of the dihydrate should be fine. But for greatest
authenticity and (IMO) the best Pils, use just RO water blended with a
small portion of your tap water (say 10%) and rely on sauermalz to set
mash pH.

As for the water's pH - that matters very little. What is important is
the alkalinity. You don't say what that is but we can guess that it
would be about 120 or so depending on how much sulfate you have (and
yes, sulfate is generally undesirable in continental beers). That level
of alkalinity isn't terrible especially with the level of hardness you
have but if you brew with the straight water you would have to do
something about it (add acid or supplement calcium or both) for best
results.


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

Date: Thu, 20 May 2010 07:06:38 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Darrell G. Leavitt" <leavitdg at plattsburgh.edu>
Subject: Na

Looks to me that your sodium is high, and should be closer to 5 or 6.

I am not sure how to reduce this, please let us know on HbD if you find out.

Darrell

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

Date: Thu, 20 May 2010 18:01:18 -0400
From: mossview5 <mossview5 at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: agua

Brewer Joe posed a question about using his water for Pilsner brewing.
As Joe pointed out, hard water does not make brewing a Pilsner impossible.
It only alters the taste perception. The Bohemian Pils is more delicate,
but the German Pils gets by with harder water. I've consulted for one of the
American mega brewers and have seen that their prefered brewing water
profile is about twice as hard as Pilsen water and they adjust the residual
alkalinity to about zero. This makes sense since Pilsen water is typically
considered too calcium-free for good yeast health and the low RA is in line
with brewing a pale beer. That brewer uses nanofiltration for their water
treatment since it does not strip out desirable ions to the degree that
reverse osmosis does and it is more efficient (energy and water usage)
than RO. I wish I could get a small nanofiltration system myself, but the
smallest units are going to set you back about $8000. No way can I
justify that cost for a homebrewer but it might be justifiable to a 30 bbl
brewer like Joe. I'd say that homebrewers with crappy water would just
have to put up with the cheap and inefficient home RO systems
(or they run out and buy water by the jug from someone).

The 175 ppm sodium concentration in Joe's softened water may be
perceptable to some, but most people will taste sodium when it exceeds
200 ppm. Its interesting that some people don't mind drinking high sodium
water. Hard water is endemic across much of the Midwest US. In fact, a
number of municipal water systems perform large-scale water softening
with ion-exchange. That means that every drop of water that their systems
produce are teaming with sodium. Locally, a water system has up to
250 ppm sodium in their water. I recently had an opinion article published in
the Indianapolis Star regarding this practice. You can read it here:
(I had to cut the address into 2 lines to comply with HBD's stupid line length
limit)

http://www.indystar.com/article/20100505/OPINION01/5050316/1002/OPINION/
The-hard-truth-Don-t-drink-the-soft-water

OK, enough pontificating about salt water softening. I think Joe would be
wise not to use his softened water for brewing. The sodium content that
he quotes is a bit too high for good yeast health and in conjunction with
any sulfate in the water, would probably create a significant harshness in
the flavor perception of a preferably delicate beer. 50 ppm is the typically
preferred upper limit for sodium and 100 ppm is generally an absolute
upper limit.

Unfortunately, Joe only provided the cationic content of his water.
The anionic content is also needed to be able to recommend a
good solution to his hardness concerns. The primary reason to
review the anionic content is to determine if the hardness that Joe
is dealing with is Temporary or Permanent. If it turns out that the
hardness is predominately temporary (high carbonates), then there
may be a cheap alternative for hardness reduction for Joe. In this
case, an Excess Lime treatment of his brewing water would be workable
and relatively cheap for this occassional Pilsner brewing. For the
Excess Lime treatment, pickling lime (aka slaked lime) is added to a
batch of water until the pH of the solution is raised to at least 11.

I've noted that there are references on the web that recommend that
you only raise the pH to between 9.5 and 10 for lime treatment.
There are several reasons why that is poor advice. The first is that
the degree of hardness reduction and remaining calcium varies with pH.
The second reason is that when the pH exceeds 10.5, you get the added
benefit of magnesium reduction. The third reason is that at very high pH,
there is a lower limit to which calcium and magnesium concentrations
can fall to and a brewer can rely on a relatively consistent calcium and
magnesium concentration in their finished water if they perform this
treatment process properly.

Brewers will need a large vessel to hold their entire mash and sparge
water volume. You will also need, pickling lime, a pH meter, and a
strong acid (preferably high strength phosphoric acid). Mix pickling lime
in the water until the 11 pH target is reached or slightly exceeded.
You must use a calibrated pH meter for this step. I would not rely on
pH strips. Allow the sediment in the water to settle out completely.
Decant the clear water off the sediment and place in another vessel.
Add strong acid until the pH is brought down to under 8.5. This may leave
the residual alkalinity a little too high for a pale beer, so the brewer should
be ready to add a little more acid if the room temperature pH of the mash
does not drop into the prefered range of 5.5 to 5.8. The sparge water
should be acidified to a room temperature pH between 5.5 and 6.0.

This treatment will result in a calcium content between 12 and 20 ppm
and a magnesium content between 3 and 5 ppm. These results assume
that there isn't any sulfate or chloride in the water. Since this
isn't likely,
I can calculate what the additional calcium and magnesium is in the
treated water, but that's way beyond the information I can convey here.

I normally provide this sort of analysis for municipal and industrial clients
in my job as a professional engineer with specialization in water treatment.
I trust that this information will help out Joe and other brewers that
are faced
with high temporary hardness and they want a quick and easy hardness
reduction method. The company I work for does provide professional
engineering services to large and craft brewers across the country,
so anyone with a more pressing problem is welcome to contact me for
additional help.

Martin Brungard, P.E.
Indianapolis, IN


------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #5682, 05/20/10
*************************************
-------

Wednesday, May 19, 2010

Homebrew Digest #5681 (May 19, 2010)

HOMEBREW Digest #5681 Wed 19 May 2010


FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
Digest Janitor: pbabcock at hbd.org


***************************************************************
TODAY'S HOME BREW DIGEST BROUGHT TO YOU BY:

Sponsor The Home Brew Digest!
Visit http://www.hbd.org/sponsorhbd.shtml to learn how

Support those who support you! Visit our sponsor's site!
********** Also visit http://hbd.org/hbdsponsors.html *********

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

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

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


Contents:
CAMRA/England ("Chad Stevens")
agua (Joe Katchever)


* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* The HBD Logo Store is now open! *
* http://www.hbd.org/store.html *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* Beer is our obsession and we're late for therapy! *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

NOTE: With the economy as it is, the HBD is struggling to
meet its meager operating expenses of approximately $3400
per year. If less than half of those currently directly
subscribed to the HBD sent in a mere $5.00, the HBD would
be able to easily meet its annual expenses, with room to
spare for next year. Please consider it.

As always, donors and donations are publicly acknowledged
and accounted for on the HBD web page. THank you


Send articles for __publication_only__ to post@hbd.org

If your e-mail account is being deleted, please unsubscribe first!!

To SUBSCRIBE or UNSUBSCRIBE send an e-mail message with the word
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to request@hbd.org FROM THE E-MAIL
ACCOUNT YOU WISH TO HAVE SUBSCRIBED OR UNSUBSCRIBED!!!**
IF YOU HAVE SPAM-PROOFED your e-mail address, you cannot subscribe to
the digest as we cannot reach you. We will not correct your address
for the automation - that's your job.

HAVING TROUBLE posting, subscribing or unsusubscribing? See the HBD FAQ at
http://hbd.org.

LOOKING TO BUY OR SELL USED EQUIPMENT? Please do not post about it here. Go
instead to http://homebrewfleamarket.com and post a free ad there.

The HBD is a copyrighted document. The compilation is copyright
HBD.ORG. Individual postings are copyright by their authors. ASK
before reproducing and you'll rarely have trouble. Digest content
cannot be reproduced by any means for sale or profit.

More information is available by sending the word "info" to
req@hbd.org or read the HBD FAQ at http://hbd.org.

JANITORs on duty: Pat Babcock (pbabcock at hbd dot org), Jason Henning,
and Spencer Thomas


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


Date: Thu, 13 May 2010 08:33:37 -0700
From: "Chad Stevens" <zuvaruvi at cox.net>
Subject: CAMRA/England

Looking for a CAMRA or other real ale enthusiast in England who might have
an interest in seeing American craft ale served in England.

Cheers,

Chad Stevens
QUAFF
San Diego


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

Date: Wed, 19 May 2010 16:45:58 -0500
From: Joe Katchever <joe at pearlstreetbrewery.com>
Subject: agua

Hello, geniuses of beer. Once again I appeal to your vast collective knowledge.
Back to my favorite subject: water! I have been brewing for twenty years, or
so and have never attempted a ....(drum roll, please) a Pilsner! That's right.
Closest I've gotten was a Kristal Weizen, but only close in color.

So, let me jump in: I've read all the back-and-forth about water, how Pilsen
water is soft, yet North German Pilsners are brewed with hard water and so on
and so forth. Can I brew with water from my water softener?
Here is my water analysis up and downstream from the water softener:
Raw water: Ca= 72.22 Mg= 25.75 Na= 25.88 Hardness= 268
Soft Water: Ca= 0.55 Mg= 0.1 Na= 175.8 Hardness= 1.79
With hardness as mg/L CaCo3


Now, I read in Miller's book Continental Pilsners, that too much sodium is
undesirable. The softened water does appear to have a lot of the sodium but
it does not taste salty to me. I really don't know what is
considered a "lot", anyways.

He suggests when using very soft water (i.e. softened water or RO
water) to add back some of the calcium, I assume in the form of CaCL,
not CaSO4, since he also mentions that too much sulfate is bad, too.
How much calcium do I add back in???

How about pH? My water is alkaline and it takes quite a dose of
minerals to control the pH, something like .3 oz/gallon.

Joe

------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #5681, 05/19/10
*************************************
-------