From: homebrew@lupulus.ssc.gov
Subject: HOMEBREW Digest #1008
Organization: The Internet
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 08:46:07 GMT


HOMEBREW Digest #1008		             Mon 09 November 1992


	FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
		Rob Gardner, Digest Coordinator


Contents:
  Lil' Ol' WineMaking Shop (whg)
  Re: commercial beers to report alcohol strength? (Richard Foulk)
  Dialysis and non-alcoholic beer (Dominic Ryan)
  Light an Fermenting (Estes)
  Going to St. Louis (Estes)
  Smithwicks (Ulick Stafford)
  efficiency (Russ Gelinas)
  Handling liquid yeast, follow-up (Corby Bacco)
  N.P.R. History of Beer (yoost)
  Phenolics - a reference please (G.A.Cooper)
  Bulk prices on Dry Malt Extract ("C. Lyons")
  Belgian White Beers, Charlie-style ("Tom Childers")
  SG in test jar (CCAC-LAD) <wboyle@PICA.ARMY.MIL>
  trub filter (Roy Styan)
  re:  SG readings (Carl West)
  when to rack off trub? (Peter Maxwell)
  re: SG readings (Dick Dunn)
  oxygen absorber caps (Ellen E Chinn)
  I want to get started brewing beer soon.  Please help me. (thutt)
  recipe jerk (Rob Bradley)
  Godzilla vs Mothra (chris campanelli)
  recipes wanted (Sandy Cockerham)


Send articles for __publication__ to homebrew@hpfcmi.fc.hp.com
  (Articles are published in the order they are received.)
Send UNSUBSCRIBE and all other requests, ie, address change, etc.,
  to homebrew-request@hpfcmi.fc.hp.com
Archives are available via anonymous ftp from sierra.stanford.edu.
    (Those without ftp access may retrieve files via mail from
    listserv@sierra.stanford.edu. Send HELP as the body of a
    message to that address to receive listserver instructions.)
**Please do not send me requests for back issues!**
*********(They will be silenty discarded!)*********
**For Cat's Meow information, send mail to lutzen@novell.physics.umr.edu**

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

Date: Thu, 5 Nov 92 15:13:36 CST
From: whg@tellabs.com
Subject: Lil' Ol' WineMaking Shop



A few months ago a number came across the digest for a place called the
Lil'Old Winemaking Shop (or some such name) in Sugar Grove IL.  I've been
unable to find this number which I'd like to give to a new convert who
lives in that area.  Could some kind soul please pass this info back to
me?  If you do, you can come over for a HB.

Thanks,
Walt
Walter Gude    ||   whg@tellabs.com

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

Date: Thu, 5 Nov 92 23:52:31 HST
From: richard@pegasus.com (Richard Foulk)
Subject: Re: commercial beers to report alcohol strength?

>
> I don't have the news clip in front of me, but earlier this week it
> was reported that Coors won a court ruling permitting the reporting
> of alcoholic strength on its packaging.  The article suggested that
> Coors wants to do this to dispel a perception that its beers are
> "weaker" than the competition's.  [...]

I thought Coors *was* weaker.  Isn't Colorado law more restrictive
than other states in that regard?


Richard Foulk		richard@pegasus.com

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

Date: Fri, 6 Nov 92 09:17:38 -0500
From: ryan%phmms0.mms.smithkline.com@smithkline.com (Dominic Ryan)
Subject: Dialysis and non-alcoholic beer

# Fm: Jack Schmidling
#
# >From: "Daniel Miller" <dmiller@mailbox.syr.edu>
#
# >I had the opportunity to talk with an employee of the A-B brewery here
# >in sunny Syracuse at a Halloween party last Friday... , I did find out how
# >they remove the alcohol from their NA beer.  Turns out they use dialysis.
# >Sorry, wasn't able to get more details.  Another data point to experiment
# >with.
#
# Yah, right. Amazing how many obscure processes they come up with and how they
# never have any details on them.  The truth of the matter is that they simply
# add water till the alcohol content is less than .5% then carbonate it.

Dialysis it hardly an obscure process, woudn't it be sufficient to
allow that you are unfamiliar with it?  I personally have no knowledge
of what A-B uses to produce their non-alcoholic beer, but dialysing out
the alcohol makes perfect sense.

Dialysis is based upon the fact that some thin membranes are permeable
to small molecules but not large ones.  Examples of the latter are
proteins and complexe carbohydrates and B-complex vitamins.  Examples
of the former are water and alcohol.  By placing normal beer in such a
semi-permeable membrane and placing the membrane in pure water the alcohol
with diffuse out of the beer and into the water while the water on the
outside will diffuse in.  This continues until the concentration of alcohol
is the same on the outside as on the inside.  If the water on the outside is
constantly renewed such as by keeping fresh water flowing around the
membrane then the alcoholic strength can be reduced to a very low level
while not loosing any of the components of beer that you want to keep
except perhaps some of the aromatics from fragrent hops, but then there is
not exactly an abundance of those in A-B stuff anyway :-).  Another *big*
plus is that the beer does *not* need to be heated.

There are several important uses of this sort of
'better-living-though-chemistry' technology.  Perhaps the best know is
kidney dialysis.  There the waste being removed is urea and a few other
components.  Another very important use is water desalination and
purification.  This is often called 'reverse-osmosis' since the water
is driven out of the water/salt mix under pressure across a membrane
and collected on the other side.  The normal tendency would be for
water to want to dilute the sea water but pressure on the inside of the
membrane opposes this; maintaining this pressure is one of the things
that makes this process expensive.

Most of these techniques require flow conditions that are carefully
controlled and monitored.  The beer would flow from one direction on
one side of the membrane and water from the other direction on the
other side.  The membranes can get expensive and the whole process
becomes a chemical engineering problem to do well.  It should be
cheaper and better than evaporation.  I tend to doubt that A-B dilutes
their regular beer by about seven-fold in order to reduce alcohol from
3.5% to 0.5%.  A simple test should help to discover this, evaporate
down a bottle of regular beer and a bottle of non-alcohol beer and
weigh the residue.  A diluted bottle will have seven times less residue.
Nor do I think they would dilute it and then evaporate back down.  Dialysis
would be much cheaper.

M. Dominic Ryan                         SmithKline Beecham Pharmaceuticals
(215)-270-6529              internet:   ryan%phmms0.mms@smithkline.com


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

Date:         Fri, 06 Nov 92 09:31:29 EST
From: Estes <WOESSNER@VM.CC.PURDUE.EDU>
Subject:      Light an Fermenting

  I know that light can have a negative effect on beer.  But I want to know
what effect it has if any on beer during primary and secondary fermentations.
I brew in five gallon glass fermenters.  I do so in a closet in my appartment.
There is one 40 WATT light bulb on the ceiling of the closet.  It is six feet
above the carboy.  It is common for this light to be on for an hour each day.
I have not noticed any bad effects as of yet, but being a new brewer (on the
fifth batch) I would like to know if I should cover the carboy to keep out the
light.  As of this week I have put a blanket over the carboy to keep out the
light.  This is ok but not terrible convinant (sp??).  If there is other ways
of blocking the light or any problems with the light.  Please respond.  I would
enjoy a discussion on this problem.

                                               Thanks in advance,

                                                   Estes of Manang

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

Date:         Fri, 06 Nov 92 09:42:18 EST
From: Estes <WOESSNER@VM.CC.PURDUE.EDU>
Subject:      Going to St. Louis

  I am goung to a conference in St Louis on friday.  The conference will be
during the day, so I will have time during the nights to visit the local pubs.
I will be staying at the Atams Mark (sp??) hotel.  I know I should be able to
spell such simple words but I CAN'T.  Anyhow, I would like to know of any brew
pubs in St Louis.  Exspecailly arround the hotel.  Anyone who has such info
please foward a list of brew pubs to me.  Please include adresses and landmarks
to aid in findin the quality brew, since my directionally cappabilities are
only serpassed by my spelling. Also any good restruants and non brew pubs in
the area would also be helpfull.  I'm looking foward to having a good time
during my first trip to St Louis.

                                      Thanks in Advance,

                                        Estes of Manang  (lafayette IN. really)

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

Date: Fri, 6 Nov 92 09:54:34 EST
From: Ulick Stafford <ulick@bernini.helios.nd.edu>
Subject: Smithwicks

>From: tony@spss.com (Tony Babinec)
>Subject: smithwick's
>
>Upon returning to the States, I looked up Smithwick's in my CAMRA guide,
>and found nothing.  Then I looked it up in Jackson, and found Smithwick's
>listed under Ireland.  According to Jackson, Guinness and Allied Breweries
>have formed Irish Ale Breweries, with breweries in Dundalk and Kilkenny.
>Smithwick's tasted like a bitter, not an Irish ale.  It is a very
>drinkable beer.  To my knowledge, it is available in Ontario, but not
>the States.  Maybe some importer will wise up!

A drinkable, but unremarkable Irish Ale.
Smithwicks is more an Irish Ale than the piss produced by Coors or the
stuff made in France or Canada.  Smithwicks is the best example of a
commercial Irish Ale, and if it tastes like a Bitter that's because
it's a very similar beer, and the only difference is country of origion.
It is possible to get MacArdles in a few places in Ireland, but Phoenix
ale is only found in the vicinity of Waterford.  There are now no
other Ales produced, to my knowledge, in Ireland, apart from Bass in
Belfast.

In Ireland Ale sales are dropping like a Lead balloon, suffering market
share loss to lager.  Stout sales are relatively strong, but that is because
the Guinness sold in Ireland is usually a lighter, more drinkable beer than
export Guinness, and is more easily drunk in copius quantities than other beers.
In Ireland we say Smithwicks is like making love in a canoe, but then I
have heard of people calling Watney's Red Barrell a good beer.  What is
laughable is that these self same people will criticize Bud drinkers for
having no taste.  By coincidence Guinness make Bud under licence at the
Smithwicks brewery in Kilkenny!

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
+ 'There was a  master come unto the earth, + Ulick Stafford, PP-ASEL       +
+    born in the holy land of Indiana,      + Dept of Chemical Engineering, +
+ in the mystical hills east of Fort Wayne'.+ Notre Dame, IN 46556          +
+      B'fhearr liom bheith ag eitilt.      +    ulick@bach.helios.nd.edu   +
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++


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

Date:    Fri, 6 Nov 1992 10:39:19 -0500 (EST)
From: R_GELINAS@UNHH.UNH.EDU (Russ Gelinas)
Subject: efficiency

  At the risk of beating this to death, let me try again.  We must first
agree that different types of malt have different "theoretical maximums"
of extraction.  For instance, 2-row pale malt may be 36pts/lb/gallon,
whereas 6-row lager may be 31pts/lb/gallon, and wheat may be 39ppg.
So if someone makes a batch with all 2-row, and gets 30ppg, he has a
percent efficiency of 83% (30/36).  If someone else makes a batch with
6-row lager, and gets the same 30ppg, his percent efficiency is a whopping
97%.  An all wheat batch with 30ppg would be 77%.  Each batch had the same
ppg, but each was *differently efficient in the amount of available sugars
that were extracted*.  Percent extraction (%E) is the only way to compare
the true efficiency of the 3 batches.

  The obvious chink in the armor is agreeing on just what those theoretical
maximums actually are.  But even so, let's take an example:

tm=theoretical maximum points/pound/gallon
Calculations are based on points per one gallon.

10 lbs. 2-row, tm=36       10x36=360
1 lb. crystal, tm=30       1 x30= 30
 .5 lb. black,  tm=29       .5x29= 14.5
                                 -----
                                 404.5 maximum possible points in one gallon

Let's say we extracted 6 gallons of 1.050 wort.  That's the same as
6x50=300 points in one gallon.  Percent efficiency would be 300/404.5, or 74%.

Now, let's say the above tm's are wrong, and they should be 32, 27, and 25
respectively.  That would give 359.5 maximum possible points.  The percent
efficiency this time would be 300/359.5, or 83%.  So yes, the %E depends
on the tm's, but even with variations, we don't see the wild fluctuations
that can result from a straight ppg efficiency rating.  And there is *some*
consensus among brewers of just what those tm's are (Dave Miller is too
high :-).

The point is, we are trying to measure the efficiency of our *process*,
of our crush/mash/sparge.  Because %E takes into account the vagaries of
the different grains, it eliminates that factor in the final result, and
allows a true, and comparable, measure of efficiency.

Russ

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

Date: Fri, 6 Nov 92 09:04:21 -0700
From: cbacco@ursa5.cs.utah.edu (Corby Bacco)
Subject: Handling liquid yeast, follow-up

Thanks to all who replied.  The general consensus was to pour off the spent
neutrient/food (beer) leaving the sediment (and yeast), mixup some more food
for the yeasties (in this case I used some wort from our last brewing session
and a little yeast neutrient), pour this in, mix it up and watch the little
buggers go.  I did this Wed. morning, we brewed that night, and I just checked
this morning (Friday) and things are bubling along nicely.

			Thanks again,
				     Corby


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

Date: Fri, 6 Nov 92 11:16:55 -0500
From: yoost@judy.indstate.edu
Subject: N.P.R. History of Beer


This a.m. on national public radio I heard a man who taught at a University in
Philadelphia talking about an article or book he had written about the history
of BEER and some new discovery that dates it back 5,000 years !

If the person who wrote that article is reading this or if someone is reading th
is who knows the origin would you please post it.

I found it most interesting especially the part about the 'God of Brewing'. :-)

 -John W. Yoost

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

Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 16:42:40 +0000
From: G.A.Cooper@qmw.ac.uk
Subject: Phenolics - a reference please

I am aware of the production of chlorinated phenols from the combination
of chlorine in the water with phenols in the ingredients (malt mainly).
I am also aware of the production of phenolic taints by micro-organisms.
What I seek is a reference (or references), preferably a brewing industry
publication or a learned journal, which will give a fairly complete
overview/analysis of the problem.

Can anyone out there help? (or give me pointers for help)

Geoff


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

Date: Fri, 6 Nov 92 08:45 EST
From: "C. Lyons" <LYONS@adc1.adc.ray.com>
Subject: Bulk prices on Dry Malt Extract

   I've been looking for a place to buy spray dried malt in bulk,
to save on the overall cost.  The dried malt gives me a higher OG
per dollar over malt syrup.  I recently found a Home Brew distributor
located in Merrimack NH, "Merrimack Brew Haus" (603-424-9854).
Their prices are the best I've come across.  A 55lb box of Munton & Fison
dry malt extract goes for $130 ($2.36/lb).  This compares with the
$3.30/lb I have been paying.  The MBH sells other brands of dry malt
for less, but I've been happy with the M&F brand and am waiting
to hear of a good comparsion on the HBD before I switch.  Prices on
other goods seem reasonable also; hop pellets: $0.75/oz; 3.3lb M&F plain
syrups: $7.80; etc.

   Insert normal disclaimer here!  I have no connection with this
distributor.  I just like their prices.

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

Date: Fri, 6 Nov 92 09:04:25 PST
From: "Tom Childers" <TCHILDER@us.oracle.com>
Subject: Belgian White Beers, Charlie-style



(Thanks to Steve Stroud for posting some excellent information on Celis
beer hopping and spicing!)

I recently got hooked on Belgian beers, and just did a batch of Papazian's
"Who's In The Garden Grand Cru".  This extract recipe came out extremely
well, even though there is no wheat in it, and the recipe only calls for a
partial (1.5 gallon) boil.  Instead of wheat, the recipe calls for almost
3 lbs of honey, which seem to add a lot of complexity and lighten the body
a bit in somewhat the same way wheat would.  Also, the recipe includes 1-1/2
oz crushed coriander and 1/2 oz orange peel (considerably more than the 1/3
oz quantities per 5 gallons that Celis uses) and uses Hallertauer instead of
Saaz and Cascades.  I fermented with Wyeast Belgian at 70-73 deg F.

Comparing this beer side-by-side with Hoegaarden White was kinda fun.  Both
beers are slightly hazy, with a similar mild spicy scent.  The real thing
had a distinctive wheat flavor, and was somewhat lighter-bodied than the
Papazian imitation, however the hop type and intensity seem identical.  I'm
going to try adding wheat, reducing the honey and going for a full boil next
time (with smaller amounts of hops and spices).  I highly recommend the
recipe, which I will dutifully reproduce for those without a copy of the book:

Who's In The Garden Grand Cru (Charlie Papazian, TNCJOHB)

  5 lb light/extra light dried malt extract
  2-3/4 lb light honey
  1 oz Hallertauer (boiling), 5-6 HBU
  1/3 oz Hallertauer (flavor)
  1-1/2 oz freshly-crushed coriander seed
  1/2 oz dried orange peel
  1/2 oz Hallertauer (aroma)
  Belgian ale yeast

Use 1-1/2 gallon boil for first three ingredients, 45 minutes; add flavoring
hops and 3/4 oz coriander, 10 minutes; add 3/4 oz coriander and orange peel,
5 minutes; add aroma hops, 2 minutes.  Add to 3-1/2 gallons cold water in
primary, ferment as usual.  OG 1.055-1.059, FG 1.004-1.008.

Tom Childers
tchilder@us.oracle.com


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

Date:     Fri, 6 Nov 92 12:03:03 EST
From: William Boyle (CCAC-LAD) <wboyle@PICA.ARMY.MIL>
Subject:  SG in test jar

A question came up about SG readings and if you could put
some fermenting wort in the test jar with the hydrometer and
just monitor the test jar to when the beer is done.

This probably will not work, I just bottled a stout which
showed some real strange behavior.

The stout turned out to be just under six gallons, I have a
five gallon carboy, slight problem.  What I did was put the
yeast in the five gallon container and started racking, when
the bottle had around four gallons in it I stopped.  I then
racked one gallon off of the four (this had all the yeast in
it) so I had a one gallon jug with 1/4 (approximately) the
yeast. I then finished racking the last bit from the brew
pot.  This gave me five gallons with 3/4 (approximately) of
the yeast.  The two bottles were stored next to each other so
the temperature was the same.  The next day the five gallon
batch was blowing off, while the one gallon never did.  The
one gallon did ferment, the air lock did bubble.  Two weeks
later the five gallon had stopped bubbling, but the one
gallon was still going slow and steady (as it did the whole
two weeks).  The FG on the one gallon jug was a few (3)
points higher then the five gallon jug. You explain it, I
have no idea why this happened but it did. If this is normal
I don't think your Idea will work.

                                               B^2


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

Date: Fri, 6 Nov 92 10:02:31 PST
From: rstya@map.mda.ca (Roy Styan)
Subject: trub filter

I've reciently redesigned my hopback. It is now a long cylindrical tube
(made out of stainless steel wire mesh), pinched off at one end, with the other
stuck in the outlet of the brew kettle.


                           |
                           |
                           |
                           |
                 ##########|-------   <------ outlet
   hopback -->   ##########|-------
                           |
             ---------------

Works great for hops, but all this talk about trub started me thinking.  What
if I filled the tube with some sort of material that would let the beer through,
but not the trub?  The tube has a large surface area and I suspect it won't get
clogged. Does anyone out there do something like this?  If so, what
material do you use?  It would have to be something that allows cold wort
to run freely by gravity, and can withstand a vigorous boil.  Stuff it with
cotton balls?  Wrap it with a few layers of cheese cloth?

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

Date: Fri, 6 Nov 92 12:06:02 EST
From: eisen@kopf.HQ.Ileaf.COM (Carl West)
Subject: re:  SG readings

Peter Maxwell says:

>I'm nervous about continually opening
>the secondary fermenter to siphon off a sample...

I've had the same concern. The idea that came to mind was to have a two
hose system and an airlock that has a lot of `slack' in it so that I
could draw off a sample without drawing air or water back through the lock.

I thought about this for a while, and then discovered that it was
already out on the market. It's the Brew-Cap. I like it 'cause it lets
me close the fermenter once and leave it closed until I bottle, while
allowing me to draw off the trub and yeast and take samples for readings
whenever I want.


Beyond being a happy customer, I'm not connected in any way
with the Brew-Cap folks. (I thought of it way too late :)

Carl

WISL,BM.

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

Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 11:11:35 -0800 (PST)
From: Peter Maxwell <peterm@hpdtlpm.ctgsc.hp.com>
Subject: when to rack off trub?

Rob Bradley writes ...

> In 1990, I experimented racking off the trub in the 12-24 hour range.
> I believe this was recommended in the HBD around #600.  I didn't notice
> any particular improvement the first couple of times and then I got a
> batch with an INCREDIBLE, UNDRINKABLE amount of diacetyl.  End of
> experiment.  Back to racking on day 4.
>

Was this diacetyl produced BECAUSE you racked off earlier?  What happened?
How could racking earlier than day 4 result in this?

You also mentioned that this was your procedure for ales.  How does it
differ for lagers?  When the weather gets colder here I intend to try a
lager and would like to know if there are any other gotchas regarding
racking off trub.

	Peter

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

Date: 6 Nov 92 12:45:58 MST (Fri)
From: rcd@raven.eklektix.com (Dick Dunn)
Subject: re: SG readings

Peter Maxwell <peterm@hpdtlpm.ctgsc.hp.com> writes:

> The thought then occurred to me : why not take a sample at the time the wort
> is being transferred and simply keep the hydrometer sitting in this, taking
> a reading each day?  The assumption is that the sample has all the same
> characteristics as the main batch, including fermenting yeast and will
> continue the same way.  My question is: is this reasonable?  Will such a
> small volume continue fermenting at the same rate as the main brew?

In general, it doesn't work out that well.  In particular, if you draw off
the sample early, the main batch and the sample will diverge fairly quickly
(at least in my experience).  Moreover, the divergence seems to go in the
wrong direction for estimating when you've fermented out--the sample
ferments faster.

[Why the divergence?  Probably at least the following two factors: The main
batch will have substantial top-to-bottom gradients of yeast and sugar con-
centration; it would be hard to get a "representative" sample, esp. with
comparable gradients.  The surface:volume ratio is different for the sample
and the main batch.]
  ---
Dick Dunn    rcd@raven.eklektix.com   -or-   raven!rcd    Boulder, Colorado
	...Simpler is better.

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

Date: Fri, 6 Nov 92 12:41:16 -0800
From: zuzu@ucscb.UCSC.EDU (Ellen E Chinn)
Subject: oxygen absorber caps

I bought some of these from the AHA a few months ago - it seemed like
a good idea for beersthat might be aged for some time, like the
ollalieberry wheat beer that I used them for. The most recent Williams
catalog lists them and says that they are activated by moisture.
I have 2 questions: 1) do these things actually work or are they
just another attempt to extract a few more pennies from homebrewers?
2) if they are activated by moisture,then steriliziation by boiling
(or autoclaving) would render them useless, no? Any thoughts?
Thanks, Jon Southard



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

Date: Fri, 06 Nov 92 15:56:39 EST
From: thutt <thutt@mail.casi.nasa.gov>
Subject: I want to get started brewing beer soon.  Please help me.

- ---------------------------- Forwarded with Changes
 ---------------------------
From: LISTSERV@UA1VM.UA.EDU at SMTPLINK-CASI
Date: 11/6/92 9:05AM
To: thutt at casi
Subject: Rejected posting to BEER-L@UA1VM
-
 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
     I have had an interest in getting into the homebrew 'business' for
     sometime, and have been lurking here for about a week now.  I would
     like to know the equipment I would need to get started, and the
     approximate cost.

     I make my own bread and find it hard to find special flour, so I am
     concerned that it will be hard to find the proper materials for
     brewing beer.  Is this the case?  (Anyone in Baltimore than can offer
     locations to purchase equipment and supplies?)

     Finally, the local Price Club has a `MicroBrewery' (which prompted me
     to finally look into the idea, although I have wanted to brew my own
     beer for quite some time).  Any experiences with this?  Would I be
     wasting my money on a `chemistry set' like this?  (i.e. would I be
     better off buying my equipment separately).

     Any help you can offer would be _greatly_ appreciated.

     Taylor Hutt
     thutt@mail.casi.nasa.gov

     Championing worldwide usage of Oberon-2!


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

Date: Fri, 6 Nov 92 16:35:31 -0500
From: bradley@adx.adelphi.edu (Rob Bradley)
Subject: recipe jerk

In #105, John-Eric Langdale

>Although we did stumble onto a source who claims his pumpkin beer
>recipe is the one we tasted; he refuses to give up his recipe.

Imagine the noive!  Somebody who refuses to share his recipes must
be quite a jerk.  Or else he's hoping to go into business with it.
In any case, don't invite him to join the BF!!

John-Eric:  please keep the lines down to <80 characters!  Thanks.

Rob

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

Date: Fri, 6 Nov 92 12:48 CST
From: akcs.chrisc@vpnet.chi.il.us (chris campanelli)
Subject: Godzilla vs Mothra

A funny thing happened the other night.  I went to a fight and a
hockey game broke out.  Rather, I went to a homebrew meeting and
a calm discussion took place.  Big deal you say?  Big deal I say
considering who was doing the discussing.  The two parties
involved were Al and Jack.

Really.

This Clash of Titans took place at the monthly Chicago Beer
Society homebrewers gathering.  The two met, exchanged beers and
talked about this and that.  Each brought an array of beers and
it was deemed by many that the beers from both sides were decent.
No knives, guns, chains or keyboards.

Who would have believed that a calm, orderly exchange of ideas
and opinions could occur without any trouble whatsoever.  I
personally had expected otherwise and wore body armor in
anticipation.

Far be it for me to be optimistic but I would venture to say that
at this point anything is possible.  Peace in the Middle East,
democracy in South Africa or maybe another Olympics in Sarajevo.
Somtimes one can hope.

The funniest thing about the whole night was the reactions of
several HBD subscribers who saw Al and Jack for the first time.
The common observation was that they always thought that Al was a
lot older and that Jack was a lot younger.


chris campanelli


PS.  I just bet that Al and Jack become best buddies in the whole
world and that they and their respective wives all get together
and play bridge or something.  Just you wait and see.

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

Date: 06 Nov 1992 18:28:38 -0500 (EST)
From: Sandy Cockerham <COCKERHAM_SANDRA_L@LILLY.COM>
Subject: recipes wanted

In several issues of HBD, I have heard brewers talk about Texas Browns
and California Reds. Has anyone formulated recipes using extracts?
I sure would be interested in them!           Thanks.   Sandy

From: COCKERHAM SANDRA L            (MCVAX0::RX31852)

To:   VMS MAIL ADDRESSEE            (IN::"homebrew@hpfcmi.fc.hp.com")

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


End of HOMEBREW Digest #1008, 11/09/92
*************************************
-------

Newsgroups: rec.crafts.brewing