No Reduction In Beer Output

The restrictions imposed on brewers in WW II were far less Draconian than in WW I, but kicked in far earlier.

That was mostly dictated by the different progress of the two wars. In the first conflict, UK food supplies only came under serious threat almost three years in, in spring 1917. In WW II the serious problems started after less than a year, after the fall of France in the summer of 1940.

Which is why in early 1941 brewers voluntary reduced their grain usage:

"No Reduction In Beer Output
BUT GRAIN CUT MAY MEAN LIGHTER BREWS
The ten pear cent. cut in grain for brewing implies no restriction on the quantity of beer produced, states the "Brewing Trade Review", official of the Brewers' Society.

"It is the desire of authorities the that British beer shall to be available where needed," the journal states,

"Under present conditions of effort and strain it would be indefensible if the British worker were prevented from obtaining that refreshment and relaxation which he is accustomed and for which the present circumstances accentuate the need."

With modern vastly improved methods of brewing, the journal says, it is probable that the saving in material will be much more real than apparent that the beer drinker eill have little conscience of the change. Some beer of heavier gravity may, however, disappear from the bar, it is added, and be replaced something lighter."
Morpeth Herald - Friday 07 March 1941, page 6.

You can see the effect on Barclay Perkins standard Bitter, XLK:

Barclay Perkins draught XLK 1939 - 1945
Date	Year	OG	FG	ABV	App. Atten-uation	lbs hops/ qtr	hops lb/brl	dry hops (oz / barrel)
22nd Jun	1939	1045.8	1014.5	4.14	68.35%	7.50	1.35	3.00
11th Jun	1940	1042.8	1012.0	4.07	71.96%	7.50	1.27	3.00
22nd Apr	1941	1042.8	1011.0	4.20	74.28%	6.00	1.02	2.00
8th May	1942	1035.3	1009.5	3.41	73.09%	5.61	0.82	2.00
2nd Dec	1944	1035.7	1010.5	3.33	70.59%	5.29	0.77	4.00
7th Apr	1945	1035.4	1012.8	3.00	63.98%	5.09	0.75	4.00
25th Jan	1946	1035.3	1010.0	3.35	71.67%	7.00	1.04	4.00
Sources:
Barclay Perkins brewing records held at the London Metropolitan Archives, document numbers ACC/2305/01/623, ACC/2305/01/624 and ACC/2305/01/626.

You can observe the typical WW II gravity decline: a small fall in 1940, a larger fall in 1941 and then stability until war's end.

Something similar happened with Whitbread's Bitter:

Whitbread PA 1939 - 1945
Date	Year	OG	FG	ABV	App. Atten-uation	lbs hops/ qtr	hops lb/brl
27th Sep	1939	1048.2	1012	4.79	75.10%	7.33	1.41
30th Apr	1940	1047.2	1011	4.79	76.69%	7.33	1.44
14th Aug	1940	1043.1	1011.5	4.18	73.32%	7.25	1.34
6th Feb	1941	1042.9	1015	3.69	65.03%	6.54	1.11
30th Jan	1942	1040.0	1011	3.84	72.50%	5.85	0.97
29th May	1942	1038.6	1009	3.92	76.68%	6.03	0.96
3rd Apr	1943	1038.5	1009.5	3.84	75.32%	6.03	1.01
22nd Feb	1944	1039.1	1010.5	3.78	73.15%	6.13	1.00
4th Apr	1945	1039.4	1010	3.89	74.62%	6.03	1.01
Sources:
Whitbread brewing records held at the London Metropolitan Archives, document numbers LMA/4453/D/01/107, LMA/4453/D/01/108, LMA/4453/D/01/109, LMA/4453/D/01/110, LMA/4453/D/01/111 and LMA/4453/D/01/112.

Both beers lost around 20% of their gravity over the course of the war.

Bottled Beer in the 1950s

Today's post is an excerpt from Austerity!, one of the many books I published last year. It covers the fascinating - and hugely important - story of UK beer in the immediate post-war years.

This is a section on bottled beer.


Bottled Beer
There was more variation in bottled beer, both in terms of styles and strengths. Stronger beers just didn’t sell in large enough quantities to be sold on draught. Other beers, such as Brown Ale and Light Ale, were considered bottled products. And some, like Sweet Stout, were only really practical in bottled form.

Bottled beer was all the rage in the 1950’s. It was the only type of beer whose sales were increasing. Making it vital for brewers to have good bottling facilities and the right range of bottled products. In 1900, only about 5% of beer was bottled. By 1939 it had risen to 25%, though its growth was temporarily halted by the advent of war. In 1954, it hit 35%.

Undoubtedly the percentage of bottled beer would have been higher, had it not been for WW II. There was a shortage of glass for bottles and even wood for crates, which limited the amount a brewer could produce. (During the war Barclay Perkins regularly sent letters to their tenants warning them they would only get bottled beer delivered if they returned the empty bottles and crates.) Plus bottling used more energy than producing draught beer, which was another important consideration.

Around a third of beer was in bottled form. That’s even more significant when you realise 70-80% of beer was consumed in pubs at the time. There must have been a lot of customers drinking either bottled beer or draught and bottled beer mixed. The situation now is much more complicated. A much higher proportion of drinking goes on at home, so that naturally boosts the amount of bottled or canned beer sold. On the other hand, bottled beer is much less often consumed in pubs.

Bottled sales continued rising until around 1960. The advent of keg beer made bottled beer less attractive. Keg was a similar product, but cheaper in price. The percentage of bottled (and by then canned, too) sales only began to rise again with a change in drinking habits after 1980 when beer was increasingly drunk at home.

Bottle-conditioning, already a minority sport since WW I, was on its way out in the 1950s. It was mostly restricted to Old Ales, strong Stouts, Burton Pale Ales and Guinness Extra Stout. By 1970, there would only be half a dozen left.

Most bottled beer – and certainly all the lower-gravity stuff like Light Ale and Brown Ale – was brewery-conditioned in one way or another. As was Sweet Stout for safety reasons. Some contained so many fermentable sugars any live yeast would have turned them into bombs.

The older method of producing bright bottled beer was called chilling and filtering. Beer was chilled in a tank to drop out any potential protein haze, then filtered and bottled with artificial carbonation.



Intrigued, then why not buy the whole book. It's full of facty goodness. And lots of homebrew recipes.

http://www.lulu.com/content/paperback-book/austerity/23181344

Let's Brew Wednesday - 1897 Fullers XXK

Jumping forward a decade, some significant changes have occurred in Fullers strongest beer.

One of the great mysteries of British beer history is the darkening of some styles at the end of the 19th century. The main types affected were Mild and some types of Old Ale or Strong Ale. Like, for example, London Burton Ale. This version of XXK definitely looks darker than the one from 1887.

The grist is still pretty simple. There are still just two types of malt. But this time, in addition to the base malt, it’s brown malt rather than crystal malt. Brown malt is rare in styles other than Porter and Stout, but not totally unknown. It sometimes pops up in London Mild or Burton Ales. Probably because many London breweries, which started out as Porter brewers, had brown malt in stock anyway.

I’m guessing that the sugar was No. 3 invert or something similar. It could have been something paler, like, say No. 2 invert, in which case the colour would have been 15 SRM.

The hops are all English. As I don’t know which exact varieties, Fuggles and Goldings seem like a reasonable guess. The hopping as, as you can see, pretty heavy, leaving the beer not far short of 100 (calculated ) IBUs. Though it would have been lower when the beer was drunk, due to ageing.

I’d expect XXK to have been aged for at least six month in trade casks. Possibly even longer.

1897 Fullers XXK
pale malt	12.25 lb	76.56%
brown malt	0.50 lb	3.13%
No. 3 invert sugar	3.25 lb	20.31%
Fuggles 90 mins	3.00 oz
Goldings 60 mins	3.00 oz
Goldings 30 mins	3.00 oz
Goldings dry hops	1.00 oz
OG	1077
FG	1020
ABV	7.54
Apparent attenuation	74.03%
IBU	93
SRM	20
Mash at	150º F
Sparge at	170º F
Boil time	90 minutes
pitching temp	58º F
Yeast	WLP002 English Ale

Fullers beers in 1887-1888

I thought I'd continue the Fullers theme with a look at their beers in the late 1880s. It's a bit random, I realise. Just happens to be that 1887/1888 is the first of their brewing records that I have photos of.

I really should complete the set of their brewing records. I've probably photographed around two-thirds of the bound volumes. I reckon I could polish off the remainder in one mad session. You never know what might happen to them with the change in ownership of the brewery. And they're stored in sub-toptimal conditions: in a rather damp cellar. It would be a real shame if they were lost.

At this point Fullers brewed ten different beers: 4 Pale Ales, an IPA, 2 Milds, a Porter, a Stout and a Strong Ale. It's quite an odd set. Half are either a Pale Ale or IPA, which is a very high proportion. Especially for a London brewer. Barclay Perkins and Whibread, for example, at this time each only brewed two.

A single Stout is also unusual for a London brewer. Most of their rivals brewed at least two. And usually a minimum of two Strong/Stock Ales.

Obviously the range Fullers brewed reflected the demands of their customers. And their customer base was different from that of larger brewers such as Whitbread and Barclay Perkins. While all three had a large tied trade in London, Whitbread and Barclay Perkins also sold beer in other parts of the UK and exported. Fullers, at this point, was very much tied to London. The lack of any export trade probably accounts for the absence of a really strong Stout.

It's typical of 19th-century London that there's nothing even vaguely approaching a session beer. Even the weakest beera, X and AKK, are over 4.5% ABV. The rate of attenuation isn't great, with not one beer hitting 75% apparent. Though, by the time they were sold, many of the beers would have had lower FGs, as they would have been aged after racking. This would have applied to the stronger Pale Ales, BS and XXK.

Fullers beers in 1887-1888
Year	Beer	Style	OG	FG	ABV	App. Atten-uation	lbs hops/ qtr	hops lb/brl
1887	X	Mild	1054.6	1020.5	4.51	62.44%	6.64	1.63
1887	XX	Mild	1064.8	1023.3	5.50	64.10%	6.64	1.93
1888	AKK	Pale Ale	1049.9	1014.7	4.65	70.56%	11.40	2.53
1887	AK	Pale Ale	1053.5	1014.7	5.13	72.54%	11.58	2.66
1887	XK	Pale Ale	1057.1	1016.1	5.42	71.84%	11.58	2.84
1888	XKK	Pale Ale	1059.6	1018.0	5.50	69.77%	12.35	2.92
1887	IPA	IPA	1060.9	1016.6	5.86	72.73%	12.38	3.45
1887	Porter	Porter	1055.4	1018.8	4.84	66.00%	7.56	1.97
1887	BS	Stout	1070.4	1025.2	5.97	64.17%	7.56	2.50
1887	XXK	Strong Ale	1078.7	1021.1	7.62	73.24%	11.86	4.21
Source:
Brewing record held at the brewery.

Keg Bitter

Just had my Sundey dinner. A doze now takes preference over writing loads of new words.

Instead, heres a section from one of my recently-published books, Austerity!.

Enjoy, while I head off to the settee to sooze along to Match of the Day.



At a time when the quality of cask beer was often questionable, but bottled beer was rather expensive for the average drinker, Keg Bitter was an attractive proposition Brewers often described it as being bulk bottled beer.

Crystal clear and sparkling, it had the visual characteristics associated with good-quality beer. And, being pasteurised, there was little chance of it turning sour before the keg ran dry.

The first Keg Bitters of the 1950s were promoted as high-class Pale Ales. And that’s where the origin of some truly lay. Double Diamond was a version of Allsopp’s IPA and Ben Truman was the descendent of a 19th-century bottled IPA. These beers were priced according to their perceived prestige. Keg Bitter was, on average, 3d per pint more expensive than an equivalent cask beer.

As brewers moved away from cask-conditioning, mostly for reasons of consistency and convenience, standard Bitters were also presented in keg form. Though still generally at a higher price than the cask version. It’s a trend that continues today: cask is generally cheaper than keg.

As keg began to spread to smaller breweries, more lower-gravity Keg Bitters were brewed. More like Ordinary Bitter than Best Bitter. For the most part, however, they still weren’t cheap.

It’s interesting to note the date when smaller, regional breweries started brewing Keg Bitter: around 1960. Also when they started brewing Lager. That’s probably not a coincidence. There’s overlap in the equipment used to make the two.

Keg Bitter in the 1957 to 1959
Year	Brewer	Beer	Price per pint (d)	OG	FG	ABV	App. Atten-uation	colour
1959	Simonds	Keg Bitter	22	1037.4	1007.3	3.76	80.48%	19
1959	South London Brewery	Golden Keg	18	1037.9	1005.7	4.03	84.96%	19
1959	Watney	Red Barrel	22	1038.5	1010	3.7	74.03%	24
1959	Flowers	Keg Bitter	22	1039	1010.7	3.54	72.56%	23
1959	Whitbread	Tankard Bitter	22	1039.1	1011.9	3.52	69.57%	22
1957	Watney	Keg Bitter	24	1039.4	1007.6	4.14	80.71%	23
1959	Truman	Keg Bitter	22	1040.5	1008.8	4.12	78.27%	22
1957	Courage & Barclay	Keg Bitter	22	1042.8	1006.6	4.72	84.58%	22
1959	Wm. Younger	Keg Bitter	19	1043.7	1007.8	4.68	82.15%	55
	Average		21.4	1039.8	1008.5	4.02	78.60%	25.4
	Without Younger							21.75
Sources:
Whitbread Gravity book held at the London Metropolitan Archives, document number LMA/4453/D/02/002.

 

Keg Bitter 1960 - 1965
Year	Brewer	Beer	Price per pint (d)	OG	FG	ABV	App. Atten-uation	colour
1960	Bass	Worthington "E"	18	1041.8	1006.5	4.6	84.45%
1960	Gibbs Mew	Blue Keg Bitter	18	1036	1007.6	3.55	78.89%	25
1960	Ind Coope	Double Diamond	19	1040.2	1010	3.92	75.12%	22
1960	Marston	Burton Keg	21	1036	1006.8	3.65	81.11%	20
1961	Arkells	King Keg	24	1040.5	1007.2	4.16	82.22%	20
1961	Birkenhead Brewery	Keg Gold	20	1043.1	1006.5	4.57	84.92%	23
1961	Brickwoods	Sunshine Keg Bitter	21	1035	1008.4	3.33	76.00%	28
1961	Dryborough	Keg	19	1037.6	1006.8	3.85	81.91%	10
1961	Flowers	Keg	24	1039.3	1012.5	3.35	68.19%	27
1961	Fremlin	Keg	24	1040.4	1005.8	4.33	85.64%	23
1961	Gibbs Mew	Red Keg	22	1040.4	1003.7	4.59	90.84%	21
1961	Gibbs Mew	Blue Keg	18	1034.7	1002.8	3.99	91.93%	24
1961	Home Brewery	5 Star	22	1047.5	1007.7	4.97	83.79%	18
1961	Howcrofts	Silver Keg	15	1037.3	1006.9	3.8	81.50%	20
1961	Lacon	Keg Bitter	24	1040.1	1007.1	4.12	82.29%	17
1961	Starkey, Knight & Ford	Star Keg	23	1042.3	1008	4.29	81.09%	27
1961	Tennant Bros.	Keg Bitter	21	1036.8	1005	3.97	86.41%	15
1961	Threllfalls	Keg Bitter	18	1038.5	1004.9	4.2	87.27%	17
1961	Truman	Keg Bitter	21	1039	1006.2	4.27	84.10%	16
1961	Vaux	Keg Beer	20	1034.8	1002.2	4.07	93.68%	14
1961	West Country Breweries	Star Bright Keg	16	1029.8	1004.6	3.15	84.56%	22
1961	Whitbread	Tankard Bitter	24	1038.6	1011	3.58	71.50%	18
1961	Yates's Castle Brewery	Keg	20	1037.8	1006.8	3.88	82.01%	16
1963	Watney	Red Barrel Ex. PA	31	1047.7	1012.9	4.52	72.96%	20
1964	John Smith	Golden Keg	24	1039.1	1009.4	3.71	75.96%	23
	Average		24	1039.1	1009.4	3.71	75.96%	23
Sources:
Whitbread Gravity book held at the London Metropolitan Archives, document number LMA/4453/D/02/002.
Which Beer Report, 1960, pages 171 - 173.

Three pints of Mild

That was my order at the bar yesterday. I was in my local brewery, Butcher's Tears, having a few beers with a couple of mates.

We were all on Flying Bed, a proper Dark Mild, brewed the English way. That is, not coloured with fucking chocolate malt or roast barley. No, done the proper way with crystal malt, No.3 invert sugar and caramel. A superbly drinkable beer. Enough flavour to keep your interest across a pint or five, but not so much that it overwhelms you. The epitome of a session beer.

As the pints steadily slipped by, we discussed the current insanity in the UK and the general uselessness of it politicians. All UK immigrants, we agreed we were lucky to have got out when we did. We were members of a fortunate generation, able to move wherever in Europe the fancy took us. And also the luck to arrive in Amsterdam before housing became unaffordable. What chance would current UK youth have? Fuck all, was the consensus.

Brewer Eric came and sat at our table. Handing over a bottle of S4, beer he brewed to an old Truman's recipe of mine. Which was nice. But then he got talking about the council's redevlopment plans.

Butcher's Tears is at the end of Amsterdam's most unusual street. A random collection of buildings or randomly different sizes. A row of single-storey garages. Odd bits of light industry and at its end, a lovely little brewery.

Which will have to move out in July. The council has been eyeing up this piece of, in their view, underdeveloped land for years. Gradually nibbling away at its edges one demolition at a time. This year they're going for the jackpot, clearing away most of what remains.

When I moved to Amsterdam it was an exciting, edgy city. Much of its energy was generated on the margins. In squats and repurposed industrial buildings. Every year a little more of that old city is lost. Replaced by a safe middle-class blandness.

Another piece of the fun old city is to be destroyed. It's a sad day.

But it's still way better living in Amsterdam than being trapped in the UK's madness.



Butcher's Tears
Karperweg 45,
1075LB Amsterdam.
https://butchers-tears.com/

Let's Brew - 1887 Fullers XXK

With Fullers in the news, I thought it was time to chip in something. With a look back into their brewing records. And what better beer to pick than their Burton Ale.

This beer demonstrates well the decline in gravities in the early 20th century. This was Fullers only Burton Ale and would have been available in their pubs as one of the standard draught beers. Their equivalent beer in the 1920s, BO, had an OG of just 1061º. Even OBE, considered super-strength between the wars, was only 1072º

Though I’m not 100% sure that’s what they billed it as in the 1880s. They may well just have called it Stock Ale. Exactly when such beers adopted the name of Burton is unclear to me. Maybe Martyn Cornell can pin the date down better.

The grist holds few surprises, having a typical 19th-century simplicity. The slight exception being the presence of some crystal malt, the use of which was mostly limited to Mild Ales in the 19th century. The brewing record is very vague about the sugar employed, simply describing it as “Sacc.”. No. 2 invert is my best guess.

The hops were HB, EK, W of K, illegible and Poperinge, all from the 1886 harvest. As this beer was brewed in April 1887, all were pretty fresh. This is reflected in the high (calculated) IBUs of 74.

Though that would probably have been tempered a little by the time of sale, as I’m sure XXK would have received some ageing, probably at least 6 months. I’m pretty sure that in London ageing of Burton Ales was performed in trade casks rather than vats.

1887 Fullers XXK
pale malt	13.50 lb	79.41%
crystal malt 80 L	0.50 lb	2.94%
No. 2 invert sugar	3.00 lb	17.65%
Poperinge 90 mins	0.75 oz
Fuggles 90 mins	0.75 oz
Goldings 60 mins	3.00 oz
Goldings 30 mins	3.00 oz
Goldings dry hops	1.00 oz
OG	1080
FG	1021
ABV	7.81
Apparent attenuation	73.75%
IBU	74
SRM	14
1st Mash at	150º F
2nd Mash at	155º F
Sparge at	170º F
Boil time	90 minutes
pitching temp	57º F
Yeast	WLP002 English Ale

Don't miss out on this

A chance to buy some of the wonderful books that I've published recently.

The greay thing about self-publishing is the frredon to choose any fucking subject I want. No matter how uncommercial it might be. That and the lack of deadlines. Which, weirdly, probably prompts me to come out with books more quickly and more frequently.

The most recent of these efforts is my history of UK brewing in WW I. It has everything: words, numbers and a stupid number of homebrew recipes. Plus a lovely cover by my son Alexei.

 Buy this wonderful book.

Published earlier in 2018 is my book covering British brewing after WW II. One of the gloomiest periods in Britain's history. When the beer was as weak as piss. I'm selling this well, aren't I? For those interested in such piss-weak brews, there are more than 300 homebrew recipes. Some even for beers over 3% ABV.

http://www.lulu.com/content/paperback-book/austerity/23181344

Tallking of homebrew recipes, Let's Brew! consists of nothing else. I consider it an expansion pack for my Home Brewer's Guide to Vintage Beer. With many recipes - like North American and Lager recipes - that I couldn't include in the original book for reasons of space.

http://www.lulu.com/shop/ronald-pattinson/lets-brew/paperback/product-23289812.html

Finally, what's possibly my most important book so far, a history of Scottish beer over the last 150 years or so. All material in is new, apart from a few recipes, of which there are almost 400. Why the hell hasn't this been picked up by a "real" publisher?

http://www.lulu.com/shop/ronald-pattinson/scotland-vol-2/paperback/product-23090497.html