Sunday, November 29, 2009

Yay! Us!

CAMRA members across Cumbria have voted our No. 2 Stout
Champion Stout of Cumbria, 2009.

Thank you! You're absolutely right!

We have no beer in the house, so we're celebrating with a bottle of Ridge Zinfandel Paso Robles 2006. Yum.

Thursday, November 19, 2009

How green you are, how green you are...

We got mentioned by name by Woolpack Dave, so I'm afraid I had to comment on the eco thing. It's interesting how defeatism and selfishness seem to be so acceptable nowadays. Crikey, using the word "nowadays" makes me sound ancient. My old mate Bobby P sees a lot of selfishness and stupidity among the younger folk, and was often heard to refer to them as "Thatchers brats". Of course, they don't know what he means, because that would be history, innit.

I realise that blogs, and blog comments particularly, aren't really the place for reasoned argument, references, footnotes and shit. But hells teeth, the unsupported opinions advanced as facts... (by people commenting on Dave's interesting and thoughtful piece)

"Fact" 1. ...the more ethically-sourced and artisan the beer is, the less eco-friendly it's likely to be...

Well, this seems to be confusing efficiency with "eco-friendly". Let's imagine GreenShedBev are producing a unit of some artisanal product with 10 units of renewable power and 300 litres of water from a secure hydrological unit. Whereas the more efficient GlobalHyperBevCo can turn out a unit for 5 non-renewable power units and 295 litres of water from a threatened aquifer. See?

"Fact" 2. ...what you, I, or everyone we know does, won't make a jot of difference...

This is simply wrong isn't it? If there's anything to the Six degrees of separation thang, then between us, we know everybody. Just about. Or is the point here that it's the people we don't know - the others who will continue to upstuff things? So there's no point in us good folk trying?

"Fact" 3. ...hemp wearing anti global yogurt weavers an easy sting in the marketing dept...

What's so funny about peace, love and understanding?
Tosser.

Thursday, November 12, 2009

Indulgence Or Innovation?

Beer festivals aside (it's difficult making a living off "festival beers"), non mainstream styled beers are a difficult sell. Should we blame the publicans for this? No, they have to buy what their regulars will drink. I have customers worried about a "Best Bitter" being too bitter, or a 4.4% being too strong. What should I do?

We need to sell the beer. The beer has to sell. So that we can make some more.

Perhaps it's just too easy to throw a huge pile of hops and malt into the big bucket, give it a couple of weeks, then sell a few 9s of novelty beer via Boggart. Perhaps this is a recipe for a "minimum viable product". Or it's not, and it's just homebrew writ large. Or self-indulgent toss. Or the beer equivalent of Dōjinshi, fan-fiction, whatever. Heck, I don't know.

Friday, October 23, 2009

Vodka

I do, from time to time, drink vodka. I also occasionally have a martini. I do not make a martini with vodka. That's not a martini. Now we've got that out of the way, back to the vodka.

In our house we usually drink vodka from the freezer in tiny little glasses that Becky brought back from the USSR in the olden days. For these puposes I favour Stolichnaya, a russian grain vodka (you knew that). Not perhaps the smoothest, but works well at sub-zero temperatures (I love the way vodka goes viscous). I know some people prefer others - I can see something like Absolut being nice at higher temperatures. If you're mixing, why not Smirnoff? It's whatever floats your boat.

The point of vodka is that (to a given number of decimal places) it's ethanol and water. That's all. Although, funny thing, when a chum made some vodka out of HPLC grade ethanol and water, I didn't particularly like it. We drank it, sure. I guess that there's something in the vodkas I like (impurities that is) which makes them taste / feel different from a straight ethanol solution.

There are some vodkas out there that pride themselves on their purity. It's not a concept that I've ever been happy with. Frankly, it's not natural. It's got a sort of "tidy desk = tidy mind" vibe to it which makes me feel queasy. But that's probably just me.

It's the purity of vodka which makes it perfect for the marketing droids. There's really nothing there except the marketing, after all.


Speaking of marketing, jesusjohn pointed out (over at impymalting) the kind of thing that's involved in turning neutral grain spirit into a "billion dollar brand". Lots of skyy adverts here.

Tuesday, October 20, 2009

That big stout thing...

... is out of the fermenter and sitting in a bunch of 18's, along with some booze soaked toasted oak chips. I'm going to leave it for a few weeks, and see what happens.

It looks like our yeast did pretty well without special measures (apart from over-pitching a bit), in that we seem to have about 8.6% ABV at the moment. I suspect that if I'd roused it a bit, we could have hit 9%
Next time, perhaps...

Saturday, September 26, 2009

Sugar in brewing.

Recently there's been an interesting post by Ronald Pattison (xtreme beer-history buff) on use of "sugar" in brewing. In the comments following it's become apparent that some people hold very strong views on the subject. It's looking like one of those religious issues. It also seems that some people are quite confused about the whole thing.

Nowadays we use sucrose or invert sugar in brewing not so much for economy, but rather to allow us to control the fermentability of our worts. To understand how this works, it's important to be aware of the difference between what's commonly called sugar (sucrose) and sugars generally. It might be better to talk about carbohydrates really, but I'm comfortable with sugars v. sugar , so try to keep up. Wort carbohydrates include the monosaccharides fructose & glucose, the disaccharides sucrose & maltose, maltotriose (a trisaccharide), and more complex sugars (often called dextrins). Our yeast can only eat fairly simple sugars - the 'mono' and 'di' saccharides and some others.

A typical British Pale Ale wort with an original gravity (OG) of 1040 might contain a little more than 9 grams of sugar per 100 millilitres, of which less than 7g will be fermentable (including 0.5g sucrose - table sugar). This leaves something like 2g / 100ml of the higher sugars to contribute to taste and body in the finished beer and final gravity (FG) of around 1008.

Broadly, we can say that a beer with high levels of unfermented sugars will be sweeter, with more body than a beer with relatively low levels of these dextrins. But of course, we don't always want sweet beers with lots of body. Indeed, Belgian brewers speak of the digestibility of their beers, by which I guess they mean the relatively light body (considering the alcoholic strength) of many of their offerings. Digestible beers don't fill you up. A relatively light body, with dryness are also characteristics of some British beers, it's part of what makes our session beers so sessionable - so how do we go about achieving this?

To a certain extent we can control the fermentability of the wort by controlling mash temperature. The various enzymes in the malt have different optimum temperatures for their actions. So a little bit warmer (say 67C) might give us a less fermentable wort (lower proportion of fermentable sugars), while a bit cooler (64C) might give us a more fermentable wort leading to a drier (thinner) finished beer.

We can also make a difference by our choice of yeast. Yeast tends to consume sugars in sequence. It's like a child eating the chips first, then the sausage, followed by the beans. So the simpler sugars are utilised first, the more complex ones (which require the mobilisation of more yeast cell machinery) only when the easy stuff is used up. A yeast that's highly flocculent, i.e. falls out of suspension quickly, will tend to leave a higher proportion of the more complex sugars unfermented, even though it has the right machinery. A less flocculent yeast might produce a drier beer, by hanging around for long enough to have a good go at all the fermentables. Some yeasts are constitutionally unable to use maltotriose - they just don't have the tools for the job.

We can control the fermentable / unfermentable balance of the wort by directly adding fermentable sugars while keeping the OG the same (i.e. reducing the amount of malt somewhat). We can chose to add mainly simple sugars, a useful technique allowing us to use more flocculent yeasts (good for producing clear beers in a short time with simple equipment), without leaving too much unfermented at this stage.

This is the basis for brewers adding invert sugar to their wort. Invert sugar is sucrose (table sugar) which has been treated to break it down into glucose and fructose. This is often done by heating an acidified solution of sucrose. It's Quite Interesting to note that as the hydrolysis proceeds, the optical properties of the solution change, with more fully hydrolysed solutions rotating polarised light in the opposite direction to a sucrose solution - which is why we call it invert sugar...

The fermentability of commercially available invert sugars seems to be in the range 94% - 99%, although some of the really dark ones, which will have more unfermentable stuff in them, will be less fermentable (90% or so). Other, starch derived products can be got with more or less whatever fermentability you want, and are commonly used as brew-length extenders (which is a good way of saying profit enhancers).

Anyway, throwing good old sucrose into the boil works well (although you'd be advised to make a solution / syrup up first unless you particularly want to be chipping burnt toffee of your elements all the next day). In the acid conditions of the boiling wort a proportion of the sucrose is hydrolysed for you. I should think.

Friday, September 18, 2009

That time of year again.

In Ulverston (where we are) there's a sort-of dress-up weekend during which the out-going types are encouraged to wear clothes harking back to the 1850's (approximately). Given that we aren't really dressing up kind of people, our contribution to the Dickensian Festival is a strong ale (6.5%) called (as a nod to Dickens) "Genuine Stunning", and that's what we're making today. Last year, we didn't sell any to anyone in time for the festival, but at least we knew.

There's a free pint for the first person to spot the secret ingredient. But you'll have to wait until November before we let it out.