Febrewary 2008

“News About Brews”

Porter Mania

This month's meeting at Brian S's was all about Porter.  We had a fairly good turnout, despite the anticipated snow that night.  I did expect more than 10 entries for the porter competition, but given the weather I guess that was a pretty good showing.  Plus, we didn't want a sequel to Night of the Living Porters anyway.

Steve enlightened us on the history and characteristics of porters and supplied examples of each sub-style for our tasting pleasure.  Then we dove into the competition.  There were no Baltic Porter entries (unfortunately), but there were some brown porters and a number of robust porters.  The beers were all good.  Then we all trekked home through about 3-4 inches of snow and (in my case) barely cleared roads.  Hope everyone had an uneventful trip home that night.

Don't forget that next month's meeting is the cooking with beer meeting.  It's a week later than our usual meetings, being the third Tuesday in March.  There should be an e-mail coming out soon so that Kevin can get a head count for planning purposes.  Be sure to let him know if you'll be attending.

                                                                                          Brew On!

                                                                                          Jimmy B

////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

Index

////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

At A Glance…

Things You May Want To Know, Or Not

/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

Sip by Sip

Minutes of the Previous Meeting

/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

Date:  Febrewary 12^th, 2008

Location:  Brian Shurtleff's, Norton MA

Number of Members Attending:  18

Business

Porter presented by Steve Gravel

Steve gave us a history of the Porter style as well as discussing the characteristics of different porter sub-styles.  Samples were passed around, including:

Brown Porter

    - Samuel Smith's Taddy Porter

    - Fuller's London Porter

Robust Porter

    - Anchor Porter

    - Sierra Nevada Porter

Baltic Porter

    - Sinebrychoff Porter

    - Zywiec Porter

    - Smuttynose Baltic Porter

  His presentation can be found below.  This document may also end up on the SSBC Yahoo Groups Files section, but is not there as of publishing time.

Porter Competition

There were 10 entries for the Porter competition - 4 brown porters and 6 robust porters.  All were good.  A couple even had special ingredients like Vanilla Bean or oatmeal and maple.

The Winners

3rd - Wade Hicks

2nd - Frank White

1st - Jim Blanchette (recipe below)

////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

Recipe of the Month

////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

A ProMash Recipe Report

Recipe Specifics
----------------

Batch Size (Gal): 5.50 Wort Size (Gal): 5.50
Total Grain (Lbs): 10.38
Anticipated OG: 1.072 Plato: 17.45
Anticipated SRM: 32.7
Anticipated IBU: 39.2
Brewhouse Efficiency: 75 %
Wort Boil Time: 60 Minutes



Grain/Extract/Sugar

%         Amount     Name                                     Origin Potential SRM
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
38.6     4.00 lbs.   Muntons DME - Extra Light     England 1.046 3
38.6     4.00 lbs.   Alexander LME - Pale             America 1.037 2
3.6     0.38 lbs.     Malto Dextrin                                         1.043 0
6.0     0.63 lbs.     Chocolate Malt                        America 1.029 350
4.8     0.50 lbs.     Crystal 60L                             America 1.034 60
4.8     0.50 lbs.     CaraMunich Malt                     Belgium 1.033 75
2.4     0.25 lbs.     Black Patent Malt                     America 1.028 525
1.2     0.13 lbs.     Roasted Barley                         America 1.028 450

Potential represented as SG per pound per gallon.


Hops

Amount     Name                     Form     Alpha     IBU     Boil Time
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
1.25 oz.     Northern Brewer    Pellet     7.20     36.3      60 min.
0.25 oz.     Cascade                 Pellet     5.75     1.5        15 min.
0.25 oz.     Willamette              Pellet     5.00     1.3        15 min.


Yeast
-----

Safale S-05 (or WYeast 1056 Amercan Ale/Chico)




Notes
-----
 

Water additions (I have soft water) -
.25 tsp gypsum
.25 tsp salt
1 tsp chalk

/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

It’s All in the De-t-Ales…

Articles, Reviews and Information

/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

Contents:

Porter Presentation

by Steve Gravel

Porter - History of Beer

Porter became the fad of the day in the 1700’s around jolly old England. It initially gained popularity among the transport workers in Central London, those brawny common folks who would endure hard labor with no more than a few pints of porter and a few pounds of bread per day. The endurance of the laboring class did not go without recognition, and before long, porter gained credit as the catalyst for this endurance. As a result, the well-bred and distinguished citizens embraced this beverage as well, igniting an explosion within the brewing industry. Porter became so popular, in fact, that brewers who could adapt to a grand scale were able to make comfortable fortunes producing this one style of beer.

In 1802, a writer named John Feltham wrote a version of the history of porter that has been used as the basis for most writings on the topic. Unfortunately, very little of Feltham's story is backed up by contemporary evidence. His account is based upon a letter written by Obadiah Poundage (who had worked for decades in the London brewing trade) in the 1760s. Unfortunately, Feltham badly misinterpreted parts of the text, mainly due to his unfamiliarity with 18th century brewing terminology. Feltham claimed that in 18th century London a popular beverage called "three threads" was made consisting of a third of a pint each of ale, beer and twopenny (the strongest beer, costing tuppence a quart). About 1730, Feltham said, a brewer called Harwood made a single beer called Entire which recreated the flavour of "three threads", and which became known as "porter".

Another belief is that Entire was also a name for the combination of the 1^st, 2^nd and 3^rd runnings of a mash.  In 1700 London, the brewers practice was to conduct an initial mash at 150°, drain the wort, mash again at 160°, drain again and mash for the third time at 180°.  Typically the three separate runnings would be sold separately as “Ale”, “Beer” and “Twopenny”.  Entire was thought to be a combination of the three runnings, hence the “Entire” beer.

Porter is actually mentioned as early as 1721, but no writer before Feltham says it was made to replicate "three threads". Instead, it seems to be a more-aged development of the brown beers already being made in London. Before 1700, London brewers sent out their beer very young and any aging was either performed by the publican or a dealer. Porter was the first beer to be aged at the brewery and dispatched in a condition fit to be drunk immediately. It was the first beer that could be made on any large scale.

Early London Porters were strong beers by modern standards. Early trials with the hydrometer in the 1770s recorded Porter as having an OG (original gravity) of 1.071° and 6.6% ABV. Increased taxation during the Napoleonic War pushed its gravity down to around 1.055°, where it remained for the rest of the 19th century. The huge popularity of the style prompted brewers to produce Porters in a wide variety of strengths. These started with Single Stout Porter at around 1.066°, Double Stout Porter (such as Guinness) at 1.072°, Triple Stout Porter at 1.078° and Imperial Stout Porter at 1.095° and more. As the 19th century progressed the Porter suffix was gradually dropped. British brewers, however, continued to use Porter as the generic term for both Porters and Stouts.

The large London Porter breweries pioneered many technological advances, such as the use of the thermometer (about 1760) and the hydrometer (1770). The use of the latter was to transform the nature of Porter. The first Porters were brewed from 100% Brown Malt. Now brewers were able to accurately measure the yield of the malt they used, it was noticed that Brown Malt, though cheaper than Pale Malt, only produced about two thirds as much fermentable material. When the malt tax was increased to help pay for the Napoleonic War, brewers had an incentive to use less malt. Their solution was to use a proportion of Pale Malt and add coloring to obtain the expected hue. When a law was passed in 1816 allowing only malt and hops to be used in the production of beer (a sort of British Reinheitsgebot) they were left in a quandary. Their problem was solved by Wheeler's invention of the almost black patent malt in 1817. It was now possible to brew Porter from 95% Pale Malt and 5% patent malt, though most London brewers continued to use some Brown Malt for flavor.

Until about 1800, all London Porter was matured in large vats (often holding several hundred barrels) for between six and eighteen months before being racked into smaller casks to be delivered to pubs. It was discovered that it was unnecessary to age all Porter. A small quantity of highly aged beer (18 months or more) mixed with fresh or "mild" Porter produced a flavor similar to that of aged beer. It was a cheaper method of producing Porter, as less beer needed to be stored for long periods. The normal blend was around two parts young beer to one part old.

October of 1814 went down in history for an event that crushed the dreams of scores of London porter lovers. One of the most grandiose vats (860,000 gallons) at the Meux Brewery gave way, sending a tsunami of porter through the streets. Homes crushed like toothpicks under the force of the brew. A human being didn’t stand a chance! In fact, eight folks lost their lives in the debacle, through drowning, drunken poisoning, or injuries beyond the limitations of the medical community of the time.

After 1860, as the popularity of both Porter and the aged taste began to wane, Porter was increasingly sold "mild". In the final decades of the century many breweries discontinued their Porter, though continued to brew one or two stouts. Those which did still persist with Porter brewed it weaker and with fewer hops. Between 1860 and 1914 the gravity dropped from 1.055° to 1.040° and the hopping rate from two pounds to one pound per 36 gallon barrel. It was a mere shadow of the beer which had once been so respected and admired.

During the First World War in Britain, shortages of grain led to restrictions on the production of strong beer. Less strict rules were applied in Ireland allowing Irish brewers such as Guinness to take advantage and dominate the bottled Stout market. However, most English breweries continued to brew draught stouts until Second World War and beyond. They were considerably weaker than the pre-war versions (down from 1.055º-1.060° to 1.040-1.042°) and around the strength that Porter had been in 1914. Porter, with its strength slot now occupied by Single Stout, slowly withered away. The last English Porters were brewed around 1940.

Pale Ale Presentation

by Jason Colby

American Pale Ale – Presentation to the SSBC, 11/13/07 – Jason Colby

Little bit of history
In the beginning, all beer was dark. This was true even in what we think of as the ancestral home of Pale Ale, Great Britain. Beer was dark for technological reasons – maltsters weren't able to control the temperature of their kilns precisely enough to produce truly pale malt – say, single-digit Lovibonds – until the advent of coke as a fuel in the 18th Century. (Eventually even greater control over malting temperatures lead to the production of pilsner malt – but that's beyond the scope of us here today. Maybe we'll hear more about that in April.) Even then it took awhile for brewers to start using this technology to make pale beers. The popular beers of the time were brown, or darker, and brewers probably didn't want to alienate their core customers by brewing anything as "radical" or "extreme" as a pale beer.
Shortly after pale ales began to gain a small foothold, they were largely swept away again by the huge sudden popularity of porter (which, hey, we're going to hear more about in February). It really wasn't until the export trade to India began to be important that Pale Ales, particularly extra-hoppy ones, began to rise in popularity, first abroad and than at home in England. The production of these beers was centered in Burton-on-Trent, whose relatively hard water was ideal for this style of beer.
When the American craft beer movement began, American brewers took the basic outline of British Pale Ales, adapted them to fit domestic ingredients, and the American Pale Ale was born. As for a date, well, Cascade hops weren't released publicly until 1972, and Anchor Liberty Ale was born in 1975, so right around there is probably when you'd date it.


Style Description
APA is designated as BJCP style 10A.

Aroma: Hop aroma moderate to strong, typically but not necessarily a "citrusy" American hop aroma. Malty aroma is there to support the hop aroma. Some specialty malt aroma may be present. Fruity esters moderate to none. So, there's hops, and then there's everything else.
Appearance: Golden to deep amber (SRM 5-14). At the low end you don't want it to look like a pilsner, and at the high end you don't want it to look like an amber or a brown. Should have good head retention. A slight hop haze is okay if dry-hopped, but should otherwise be crystal clear.
Flavor: Hops are prominent, both in bitterness and hop flavor.
"Citrusy" American hops are again most common, but are not required.
Malty flavor is present, but again as a supporting player. Specialty malts may add a hint of flavor but should be restrained. Caramel flavors should be restrained or absent. Fruity esters should be restrained or absent. Moderate to high hop bitterness with medium to dry finish. No diacetyl. So, again, there's hops, and then there's everything else. It's a balanced beer, but it's definitely balanced towards the hops.
Mouthfeel: Medium-light to medium body. Carbonation moderate to high.
Overall impression: Refreshing and hoppy, with sufficient supporting malt.
OG 1.045-1.060, FG 1.010-1.015, 30-45+IBU, SRM 5-14, 4.5-6%ABV.

Recipe Guidelines
Malt: Typically made with American 2-row, although some brewers prefer English pale malts such as Maris Otter which give a slightly darker color and a greater perception of maltiness. A small amount of light to medium crystal malt is usually included, typically <10% of the total grain bill. And that might be it, although small amounts of other "character" malts might be added if a more complex malt background is desired – biscuit malt, munich malt, vienna malt, etc.
Wheat or carapils might be included for body and head retention.
Hops: This is often the area where APA brewers like to be creative, and just about anything might be mixed in depending on the brewer's mood that day. Varieties are typically American "citrusy" types, such as the classic Cascade. Other American hops might be used alone or in combination with each other: things like Chinook, Columbus, Centennial, Amarillo, maybe N Brewer. Recipes will generally include a 60-minute bittering addition as well as one or more sizable hop additions towards the middle and end of the boil, and may be dry-hopped as well.
Yeast: This is pretty simple. The job of the yeast in an APA is to do its job cleanly and stay out of the way. American Ale strains like WLP001, Wyeast 1056, or dry US-05 are easy choices. Some brewers have also been experimenting with the Rogue "Pacman" yeast strain, which can ferment at very cool temperatures.
Other: Some brewers will add salts to their water, such as gypsum, which can affect the perception of hop bitterness.

Similarity to other styles
English Pale Ales – APAs will exhibit American hop character, and much lower yeast-driven flavors such as fruity esters.
American Amber Ales – Ambers will have more crystal malts, including darker crystals, and ambers may also show more roast-malt character.
It used to be that ambers were generally of lower bitterness and hop character than pale ales, but that's less true these days.
American IPAs – As the bitterness and gravity of American IPAs moves upwards, the smaller end of the IPA style can starts to taste like the bigger end of the APA style. There's no really firm distinction between the two. To me, both styles can have high hop flavor, but the first impression of a sip of IPA is a firm bitterness, while the first impression of an APA is more balanced between the bitterness and the other flavors.

Examples (hooray!)
SNPA – The standard APA. This is the best selling craft beer in the US, according to the Brewer's Association.* 5.6% ABV, 37 IBU.
Bittered with magnum and perle, finished with cascades. Malt bill is just pale 2-row and caramel.
* (Followed by 2 Samuel Adams Boston Lager 3 Blue Moon White 4 Samuel Adams Seasonal 5 New Belgium Fat Tire 6 Samuel Adams Light 7 Shiner Bock 8 Widmer Hefeweizen 9 Samuel Adams Brewmasters Collection 10 Redhook ESB 11 Pyramid Hefeweizen 12 Deschutes Mirror Pond Pale 13 Redhook IPA 14 Alaskan Amber 15 Deschutes Black Butte Porter – source:
Stan Hieronomus's blog)

Anchor Liberty – Introduced in 1975 by Fritz Maytag's Anchor Brewery in SF to commemorate the bicentennial of Paul Revere's ride. 6% ABV.
Cascade hops featured, including dry-hopping.

Phin and Matt's Extraordinary Ale – Brewed by Southern Tier Brewing Co. in Western NYS. 5.6% ABV, 37 IBU. Pale and caramel malts, cascade in the kettle, styrian golding in a hopback, and dry hopped with cascade. According to internet chitchat, this beer is brewed with very little "bittering" hops (possibly none), getting most of its IBUs from later kettle additions.

Jackman's Pale Ale – Brewed by Left Hand Brewing Co. 5.2% ABV, 42 IBU. Pale and caramel malts. Cascade and centennial, dry hopped w/ mt. hood. (Was only able to get 3 of these, so the pours may have to be a bit smaller.)


On to the homebrews!

Bill Gasset - Willamette
Brian - Kurowski Magnum
Fred - Cascade (fresh)
Frank White - Perle
Wade Hicks - Simcoe
SteveG - Tettnang
Kevin Farrel - Centennial
Al Filion - Warrior
Jim Blanchette - Amarillo
Jim Bowser - Northdown

Brewing Calculations

by Brian Kurowski

Converting Degrees Plato to Specific Gravity

Estimate:            Degrees Plato = (Specific Gravity -1)/4 *1000

Exact:               Degrees Plato =135.997(SG)³ -630.272(SG)² +1111.14(SG)-616.868

Calculating % Alcohol

ABV = (OG - FG) * 0.129

Calculating Beer Color

Lovibond is basically the same as SRM

The equation for calculating SRM is: 

  SRM color = 1.4922 * (MCU ** 0.659)

Where 

MCU = (SRM_color * Grain_weight_lbs)/Volume_gallons

Calculating Mash Temperatures

Mash temperatures achieved can be calculated by the First Law of Thermal Dynamics

Q = M * Cp * Delta T

Important Cp’s

Grain = 0.38

Water = 1

The (M* CP) term for your mash tun can be calculated with some simple experimentation with Water.

Calculating Bittering Units (IBU)

An IBU is defined as 1 mg/l of iso-alp

ha-acid in a solution

Factors affecting hop bitternes

The calculation of IBU’s in the final beer is not an exact science. The basic equation used is:

IBU = (W_oz * Utilization % * Percent Alpha Acid * 7,489)/ V_gal

 There are three equations for calculating utilization commonly used in homebrew calculations called Rager, Tinseth and Garetz.

Rager utilization estimates are believed to be optimistic. Garetz has been accused of extrapolating scant laboratory information, and over generalizing because of it. His numbers have been labelled unrealistic on the pessimistic side. Tinseth has just presented a revised method and set of tables, and though they are thought to be quite accurate, they have not stood the test of time. The calculated numbers tend to fall in between Rager's and Garetz's. Note also that these are all estimates. Actual IBUs can be measured in a laboratory, but the average homebrewer has no access to such equipment.

Rager Equation

According to Rager, if the gravity of the boil exceeds 1.050, there is a gravity adjustment (GA) to factor in:

otherwise,

Rager's numbers are often used for pellet hops thrown loose in the boil.

Garetz Method

The Garetz numbers below represent average yeast flocculation; he also provides tables which represent fast and slow yeast flocculation.

According to Garetz, there are several adjustment factors, that he brings together in the formula with the term "combined adjustments" (CA):

where GF is the Gravity Factor, HF is the Hopping Rate Factor, and TF is the Temperature Factor. To calculate it all, he starts with some he calls CF:

to account for concentrated boils of extract brews.

Next, calculate Boil Gravity (BG):

Then calculate GF:

HF is calculated as follows:

TF is based on elevation as follows:

These are all put into the following formula, along with the utilization from the table, and the IBUs are calculated. Note two things: 1) the utilization and alpha acids should be expressed as whole numbers (7% = 7), and 2) this process is iterative, since it contains a term (HF) based on your goal IBUs. You must guess at the final result, do the math, and rerun the process, each time adjusting the value downward. It takes a little practice, but can be done.

Metric Units

Non-Metric Units

Garetz goes to allow for a yeast factor (YF), pellet factor (PF), bag factor (BF), and filter factor (FF), and comes up with:

This allows you to adjust the formula based on your own brewery and practices.

Tinseth Method

Glenn Tinseth's method doesn't involve as many factors, but is still a bit more complex than the original Rager method.Tinseth notes that his table is optimized for fresh whole cones loose in the boil, although easily adjustable for other forms of hops. He builds the gravity adjustment into the utilization tables and offers the following: