Brewing in WW II (part eleven)

We're almost at the end of another marathon series. Anyone still out there?

As I mentioned earlier, the food supply problems of WW I prompted the government to be very careful right from the start of WW II. They tried to ensure that as little food as possible was wasted. Even stuff that wasn't obviously food. Like waste yeast.

"Early in the war the salvage department of the Ministry of Supply invited the Institute of Brewing to go into the question of brewery waste products, and a committee was formed which collected the necessary information and made its report. Yeast was considered to be the most valuable of brewers' bye-products in view of the fact that one-half of its dry weight consists of readily digested protein while it also contains vitamins. Most of the surplus yeast in the large centres is utilized for human foods or is dried and used in the preparation of cattle foods. It was realized, however, that a good deal of the yeast from the smaller breweries in outlying districts and the smaller towns was not being utilized, and steps were taken to advise the farmers throughout the country of the value of yeast as a supplement to the pig food ration, with a view to overcoming this waste. Most towns and urban district councils organized a collection of household waste, and breweries in these districts had no difficulty in disposing of their waste yeast to them, and it is probable that Very little of this valuable foodstuff was wasted."
Journal of the Institute of Brewing Volume 52, Issue 3, May-June, 1946, pages 125 - 126.

The human food I guess would mostly be marmite. I didn't realise it was also used to feed animals, but I suppose that makes sense. There's no way you were going to persuade everyone to eat marmite. I wonder if it's still used in cattle food? Breweries produce a lot of yeast, far more than is needed to ferment subsequent batches. The excess needs to be disposed of somehow. Where does it go?

I mentioned that there were a host of wartime difficulties that I hadn't considered. Changes to the water supply is another one. It was all to do with the level of chlorination:

"For a number of years before the war the chlorination of water supplies as a supplement to nitration in order to reduce its bacterial content to a safe limit has been very generally practised, but the amount of chlorine present was usually too small to become noticeable and was never sufficient to have any deleterious effect when it was used for brewing. The quantity used during the war period, however, was often increased after damage of mains by bombing and much heavier quantities were necessary for short periods. No noticeable effect, however, seems to have been experienced by those breweries using the London supply. Although even an excess of chlorine is hardly likely to have any directly harmful effect either on yeast or beer, its effect on the pipes and mains through which it is conveyed does not appear to have received the attention it deserves. A case occurred in a town which had been severely blitzed, and it was found necessary to chlorinate the water supply to overcome suspected contamination. The writer found that this had been carried to excess, so much so that it had a corrosive effect on the copper-lined fermenting vessels of a brewery. Fortunately there is a simple antidote for chlorine and the necessary steps were taken to treat the water in the cold liquor tanks before any harmful effects occurred, but it is a matter that should be borne in mind, as others might not be so fortunate."
Journal of the Institute of Brewing Volume 52, Issue 3, May-June, 1946, page 126.

Is this still a problem? Mains water is often still very heavily chlorinated in Britain. I drink the tap water in Newark. It's like taking a mouthful of swimming pool. Hang on. I remember asking John Keeling about Fullers' water supply. He told me that they had to stop using their own wells because they became contaminated. They now used mains water which they first dechlorinated. I'd assumed that was flavour reasons but maybe it was really to protect their equipment.

That's the article itself done. Just the discussion to go. If I can be arsed.

Brewing in WW II (part ten)

This is turning into another long series. But it's all good stuff, well worth learning.

We'll begin with isinglass. Pretty important for British brewers of the time who delivered a majority of their beer in cask form. Of course, you can make cask beer without finings, if you're patient. Unfortunately time was also in short supply during wartime. I hadn't realised where isinglass came from.

"Isinglass was a matter of some concern during the early days as supplies were short, especially of those types which were most favoured; and while brewers were anxious to increase their reserve, the merchants could not meet all demands as shipments were delayed or did not arrive. When the Ministry of Food took control of imports those interested in the trade were asked to organize, and the Isinglass Trades Association was formed and an amount of isinglass calculated to meet the brewers' needs was allowed to be imported. After Japan entered the war, supplies from Malay and Burma, consisting of Saigon and Penang, were cut off, and the only supplies available since have been from India and Brazil. The isinglass from these sources is the cheaper and less favoured types and mixtures of these must have been used entirely in most breweries during the past few years. Beers appear to have fined well with these so-called inferior grades of finings, although probably the public has not been very critical when supplies of beer have been so short. It is probable, however, that force of circumstances may have induced brewers to alter their views with regard to rulings, and especially to the comparative value of the finer grades of isinglass. This experience with the lower grades during the past years certainly appears to confirm the views J. S. Ford expressed in his Horace Brown Memorial Lecture (ibid., 1941, 342) that, provided the isinglass was free from smell, any of the 26 varieties ranging in price from 1s. 6d. to 10s. 6d. per lb. that he had tested was suitable for fining beer.
Journal of the Institute of Brewing Volume 52, Issue 3, May-June, 1946, page 125.

I didn't realise Britain sourced most of its isinglass from the Far East. I can see how Japan's invasion of Burma and Malaya buggered that up. I also hadn't realised there were so many different types of isinglass. It sounds like brewers had overestimated the difference in quality between expensive and cheap isinglass. Basically as long as it didn't smell nasty you were OK.

Barrel staves were always going to be a problem because of where British brewers sourced them. There was little British oak, so that wasn't a realistic option. There was plenty of American oak, but it added a funny flavour to beer. Leaving Memel oak from the Eastern Baltic as the only real possibility. Until war started. Obviously shipping staves across a German-dominated Baltic was never going to happen.

"The maintenance of cask plant has been another problem which has not proved easy of solution as the usual supplies of oak staves from the Baltic were cut off, while lack of shipping space prevented the importation of anything like an adequate supply of American oak after the United States entered the war. New casks were consequently almost impossible to obtain during most of the war period, and many casks have been kept in use which would otherwise have been considered unfit. The quick consumption probably save a good deal of beer that might have become unsaleable if it had been kept for any length of time in the publicans' cellars, while empties were quickly returned. This quick circulation of casks was also of assistance, in view of the poor quality of labour available for cask washing, especially during the later period. There appears to be very little prospect of obtaining Memel oak staves in the near future, while any improvement in the supply from America is hardly considered likely. English oak can be used, but the supply is quite inadequate to make up the deficiency of casks which now exists.
Journal of the Institute of Brewing Volume 52, Issue 3, May-June, 1946, page 125.

Whitbread had wisely bought in a large supply of staves before the war started. Then saw them go up in smoke in one of the early air raids on London in 1940.

I can imagine how difficult it must have been to maintain a sufficient supply of casks when you couldn't get new ones. It sounds like there were many factors that encouraged a quick turnaround of beer, from lack of biological stability to shitty casks, to a thirsty public desperate for any beer they get hold of.

It sounds as if the problems were set to continue for a while after the end of the war as the supply of staves was little improved. With the Eastern Baltic firmly under Soviet control, there was little prospect of finding a supply there. The solution: make casks of something else:

"It will be necessary, therefore, for brewers seriously to consider the adoption of some other type of cask in order to make up the shortage. The use of stainless steel casks was being considered before the war, although the question of proper insulation raised difficulties. Laminated casks have been widely used in America and appear to have proved quite satisfactory for their conditions. These are constructed of plywood staves, the inside and outside layers being of oak while the inner layers are birch, which are bound together with a plastic material, Some of these casks have already been tried in this country with satisfactory results, and their adoption is probably the only course open to make up the present shortage."
Journal of the Institute of Brewing Volume 52, Issue 3, May-June, 1946, page 125.

I struggle to believe that plywood casks would work well. Presumably having the outer sections of oak was to have the beer inside in contact with a material that wasn't going to taint it and a touch surface on the outside of the barrel to take any knocks.

Yeast next time.

Brewing in WW II (part nine)

We'll be looking at some of the less obvious difficulties faced bt British brewers during WW II.

During both wars the government struggled to keep coal output at a sufficient level to meet demand. As things like kettles were generally pwered by coal, a shortage of it caused acute difficulties. Even more so in breweries where everything was steam powered.

"The shortage of coal created further difficulties which were often aggravated by its poor quality. This need to conserve coal raised the question of copper boiling, and brewers found they had to reduce their boiling period almost to the limit of safety. It was also often difficult, with the low-quality of coal available in some districts, to maintain a sufficient head of steam on the boilers to obtain a suitable boiling temperature. When the coal situation became difficult brewers were asked to take the necessary steps to conserve fuel as much as possible. The experience of the last war, however, had taught them a lot about the saving of fuel, and its rising price in the intervening years had encouraged efficiency in this direction, so that there were not many improvements that could be carried out. Notwithstanding this they were subjected to frequent visits from inspectors and advisers from the Ministry of Fuel, many of whom knew little more than the theory of fuel consumption."
Journal of the Institute of Brewing Volume 52, Issue 3, May-June, 1946, pages 124 - 125.

Brewers in WW I had voluntarily reduced their coal consumption. So I can believe that most of the easy ways of cutting coal consumption had already been implemented.

Did brewers reduce boil times during the war? Whitbread certainly did, as these table show:

Whitbread Ales in 1938
Date	Year	Beer	Style	OG	FG	ABV	App. Atten-uation	lbs hops/ qtr	hops lb/brl	boil time (hours)	boil time (hours)
23rd Feb	1938	33	Strong Ale	1061.6	1016.5	5.97	73.21%	8.47	2.23	1.25	1
25th Feb	1938	33	Strong Ale	1059.0	1016.5	5.62	72.03%	8.47	2.18	1.75	1.5
2nd Mar	1938	DB	Brown Ale	1054.6	1016.0	5.11	70.70%	9.98	2.36	1.25	1.25
22nd Feb	1938	Ex PA	Pale Ale	1048.1	1012.0	4.78	75.05%	7.49	1.54	1.33	1.42
1st Mar	1938	Ex PA	Pale Ale	1048.3	1013.5	4.60	72.05%	7.49	1.54	1.67	1.42
21st Feb	1938	IPA	IPA	1036.5	1006.5	3.97	82.19%	10.00	1.54	1.5	1.5
24th Feb	1938	IPA	IPA	1037.1	1007.0	3.98	81.13%	10.00	1.58	1.5	1.5
21st Feb	1938	LA	Mild	1028.3	1008.0	2.69	71.73%	7.44	0.90	1.25	1.33
22nd Feb	1938	PA	Pale Ale	1048.3	1012.0	4.80	75.16%	7.49	1.55	1.33	1.42
25th Feb	1938	PA	Pale Ale	1048.6	1011.0	4.97	77.37%	7.49	1.55	1.33	1.5
1st Mar	1938	PA	Pale Ale	1047.8	1011.5	4.80	75.94%	7.49	1.52	1.67	1.42
21st Feb	1938	X	Mild	1035.7	1010.0	3.40	71.99%	7.44	1.14	1.25	1.33
22nd Feb	1938	X	Mild	1036.1	1011.0	3.32	69.53%	7.87	1.23	1.25	1.08
25th Feb	1938	X	Mild	1035.3	1010.0	3.35	71.67%	7.44	1.11	1.25	1.25
			Average					8.18	1.57	1.40	1.35
Source:
Whitbread brewing record held at the London Metropolitan Archives, document number LMA/4453/D/01/105.

Whitbread Ales in 1945
Date	Year	Beer	Style	OG	FG	ABV	App. Atten-uation	lbs hops/ qtr	hops lb/brl	boil time (hours)	boil time (hours)
24th Aug	1945	DB	Brown Ale	1043.3	1008.0	4.67	81.52%	6.25	1.16	1	0.75
27th Aug	1945	IPA	IPA	1031.6	1006.0	3.39	81.01%	8.22	1.13	1.25	1.25
4th Apr	1945	PA	Pale Ale	1039.4	1010.0	3.89	74.62%	6.03	1.01	1.08	1
24th Aug	1945	PA	Pale Ale	1039.5	1012.5	3.57	68.35%	5.85	1.01	1.08	0.75
4th Apr	1945	XX	Mild	1028.2	1009.0	2.54	68.09%	5.63	0.70	1	0.75
5th Apr	1945	XX	Mild	1028.4	1008.5	2.63	70.07%	5.67	0.71	1	0.75
24th Aug	1945	XX	Mild	1028.1	1010.0	2.39	64.41%	5.67	0.71	1	0.75
8th June	1945	XXXX	Strong Ale	1043.4	1014.0	3.89	67.74%	6.44	1.19	1	1
2nd Oct	1945	IPA	IPA	1031.6	1006.0	3.39	81.01%	8.53	1.22	1.25	1.5
3rd Oct	1945	XX	Mild	1028.4	1010.0	2.43	64.79%	5.77	0.72	1	0.75
3rd Oct	1945	PA	Pale Ale	1038.8	1011.5	3.61	70.36%	5.85	1.03	1.08	0.75
5th Oct	1945	DB	Brown Ale	1043.6	1011.0	4.31	74.77%	6.25	1.18	1	1.25
19th Oct	1945	XX	Mild	1028.2	1008.5	2.61	69.86%	5.77	0.72	1	1.33
31st Dec	1945	XX	Mild	1027.8	1009.0	2.49	67.63%	5.77	0.68	1	1
			Average					6.27	0.94	1.05	0.97
Source:
Whitbread brewing records held at the London Metropolitan Archives, document numbers LMA/4453/D/01/112 and LMA/4453/D/01/113.

For the first copper, the average boil time fell from 84 minutes to 63 minutes and for the second copper from 81 to 58 minutes. Whereas before WW I, the shortest boil at Whitbread was 90 minutes.

The reduction was even larger at Barclay Perkins:

Barclay Perkins Ales in 1939
Date	Year	Beer	Style	OG	FG	ABV	App. Atten-uation	lbs hops/ qtr	hops lb/brl	boil time (hours)	boil time (hours)	boil time (hours)	boil time (hours)
19th Jun	1939	A	Mild	1030.8	1007.5	3.08	75.65%	7.00	0.84	2.5	2.25	2	2
19th Jun	1939	X	Mild	1034.8	1010.0	3.28	71.26%	7.00	0.95	2.5	2.25	2	2
19th Jun	1939	XX	Mild	1042.7	1015.0	3.66	64.87%	7.00	1.14	2.5	2.25	2	2
20th Jun	1939	PA	Pale Ale	1052.5	1014.5	5.03	72.38%	7.50	1.54	2.5	2.75	2
20th Jun	1939	XLK (trade)	Pale Ale	1045.7	1017.0	3.80	62.80%	7.50	1.37	2.5	2.75	2
20th Jun	1939	XLK (bottling)	Pale Ale	1035.8	1011.5	3.21	67.88%	7.50	1.15	2.5	2.75	2
21st Jun	1939	XX	Mild	1042.7	1011.5	4.13	73.08%	7.00	1.18	2.5	2.25	2
21st Jun	1939	X	Mild	1034.8	1010.5	3.22	69.86%	7.00	0.96	2.5	2.25	2
22nd Jun	1939	PA	Pale Ale	1052.8	1018.5	4.54	64.96%	7.50	1.54	2.5	2.25	2	2
22nd Jun	1939	XLK (trade)	Pale Ale	1045.8	1014.5	4.14	68.35%	7.50	1.35	2.5	2.25	2	2
22nd Jun	1939	IPA (bottling)	IPA	1043.9	1013.5	4.03	69.27%	7.50	1.28	2.5	2.25	2	2
29th Jun	1939	XLK (trade)	Pale Ale	1045.7	1014.5	4.12	68.26%	7.50	1.38	2.5	2.25
29th Jun	1939	IPA (bottling)	IPA	1043.8	1012.5	4.14	71.48%	7.50	1.32	2.5	2.25
			Average					7.31	1.23	2.5	2.37	2	2
Source:
Barclay Perkins brewing record held at the London Metropolitan Archives, document number ACC/2305/01/623.

Barclay Perkins Ales in 1945-46
Date	Year	Beer	Style	OG	FG	ABV	App. Atten-uation	lbs hops/ qtr	hops lb/brl	boil time (hours)	boil time (hours)
7th Apr	1945	XLK	Pale Ale	1035.4	1012.8	3.00	63.98%	5.09	0.75	1.5	1.5
22nd Feb	1945	XX	Mild	1031.4	1009.5	2.90	69.75%	5.49	0.71	1.5	1.5
22nd Feb	1945	X	Mild	1029.7	1008.5	2.80	71.38%	5.49	0.65	1.5	1.5
13th Jul	1945	XX	Mild	1031.4	1010.0	2.83	68.15%	4.96	0.67	1.5	1.5
25th Jan	1946	XLK	Pale Ale	1035.3	1010.0	3.35	71.67%	7.00	1.04	1.5	1.5
25th Jan	1946	IPA	IPA	1031.5	1009.0	2.98	71.43%	7.00	0.93	1.5	1.5
			Average					5.84	0.79	1.5	1.5
Source:
Barclay Perkins brewing record held at the London Metropolitan Archives, document number ACC/2305/01/626.

The first copper fell from 150 to 90 minutes, the second copper from 142 to 90 minutes. And while there had been up to four coppers pre-war, by 1945 there ewere never more than two.

The two sets of tables also show the fall in hopping rates. At Whitbread, the average hopping rate per quarter fell from 8.18 lbs to 6.27 lbs.  Or 23%. At Barclay Perkins from 7.31 lbs to 5.84 lbs. Which is s lightly smaller percentage fall: 20%

Now some research done into boiling:

"Investigations which were carried out in the method of operating the small scale brewing plant at Birmingham University for the purpose of carrying out brewing trials with the new varieties of hops grown at East Malling Research Station brought to light some interesting facts with regard to flavours transmitted to beer under different boiling conditions. It was found that the temperature at which the copper boils is an important factor, and that if the temperature which corresponds to that obtained in an open brewing copper is not exceeded, the characteristic flavour which would be expected to be obtained from a physical examination of the hops can be readily detected in the beer. When this temperature is exceeded, however, as it would be for instance if a pressure copper was used, this characteristic flavour disappeared and a dead level of flavour is obtained, no matter what hops are used."
Journal of the Institute of Brewing Volume 52, Issue 3, May-June, 1946, page 125.

That's quite an odd claim: that you got nno hop flavour if you boiled at a higher temperature than an open copper. You may remember that different types of brewers used different designs of copper. In London, where Porter brewers wanted to build colour, sealed, domed coppers were used. While Burton Pale Ale brewers - who wanted to keep their beer as pale as possible - used open coppers.

Next time it's isinglass.

Brewing in WW II (part eight)

We're finished with raw materials and have got to brewing itself.

Brewers in WW II faced a whole host difficulties, which weren't limited to difficulties in obtaining raw materials. There was plenty else to contend with.

"Reviewing the actual operations carried out in the brewery and considering the innumerable difficulties with which the brewer was faced, with limited supplies; the very variable and often extremely poor quality of his principal materials; reduction of gravities; increased beer duty; regulations of all kinds which necessitated the filling up of countless forms; vexation of the black-out and in many cases endurance of continuous air raids of every kind; shortage of transport; the almost insuperable difficulty of obtaining new plant; with shortage of labour becoming ever more serious, his lot has not been a happy one. There were never any signs, however, that he was defeated, and, formidable as these handicaps were, he was not subjected to quite the same restrictions as he was during the war of 1914-1918, but there was an ever-increasing demand for more and more beer, which created its own difficulties, although it was perhaps not without certain advantages.
Journal of the Institute of Brewing Volume 52, Issue 3, May-June, 1946, pages  123 - 124.

The war lasted six years and in the normal course events plenty of things would need to be replaced. Not just obvious things like crates, barrels and bottles, but bits of machinery that broke or wore out. I assume that with new equipment impossible to come by that the only alternative was to patch things up.

One of the reasons there were so many mergers in the 1950's and 1960's was that many family-owned breweries were worn out, with decades-old equipment and often whole brewhouses that needed to be replaced. The war was partly to blame for this lack of investment. Though falling beer volumes couldn't have helped either. Both world wars cast a long shadow over British brewing. It wasn't until the 1990's that Britain escaped from the wars' grip.

But remember that, no matter how bad things were for brewers in WW II, it was way better than WW I:

"He was certainly in a more favourable situation than his forbears, and even his predecessors who were brewing during the first world war, as from an art brewing has gradually been developed into a science, and from the intelligent application of results obtained by the old method of trial and error, scientific research has solved some of the mysteries of the early days and has made it possible to diagnose the troubles experienced in brewing to-day and to apply the necessary remedy. Notwithstanding the many alterations in his normal practice that he has been called upon to make or the improvisations he has been forced to carry out which perhaps he would have hesitated to apply in normal times, a more comprehensive knowledge of the fundamentals of brewing has given him confidence in carrying these out with a certain measure of success. From the very beginning not only shortage of labour in the brewery but depletions of the brewing room staff made it impossible to maintain the necessary efficiency which was reflected in the beers produced. This was especially pronounced in those years when the malts were of poor quality and the years succeeding 1940 when the hops were so short in amount. Difficulty in maintaining the brewing plant in a state of cleanliness, and more especially the cask plant, a state of affairs which got worse towards the end of the war when the quality of the labour available reached a very low level, took its toll, with its natural consequence on the quality of the output. After the first two years of the war the high wages earned by munition workers and the gradual concentration of troops caused an increasing demand for beer, and when the American troops arrived the demand far exceeded the supply and there was a shortage of beer throughout the country. Dr. Oliver, in reviewing the 1941 season, stated that the outstanding feature was undoubtedly the poor bacterial stability of the beers, but what might have been something short of disaster was avoided by a demand which exceeded supply and with acceptance of beer which in normal times would have been returned."
Journal of the Institute of Brewing Volume 52, Issue 3, May-June, 1946, page 124.

I'm not totally convinced that brewing had become dramatically more scientific between 1918 and 1939.

Interesting to see where the demand for beer came from: well-paid munitions workers and American troops. There were certainly plenty of the latter - 1.5 million by the time of D-Day. That's a lot of extra throats to slate. And most of them would have drunk beer.

The author seems to be saying that of all the wartime problems, it was labour shortages which damaged the beer produced most. I can understand that a skilled brewer - especially in the days before automated brewhouses - couldn't be trained up in an afternoon. but keeping the cask plant clean? That's not rocket science. Labour is something I've not really considered, because it doesn't show up nicely in brewing records or statistics.

I'm not sure I'd call poor bacterial stability an "outstanding feature". In layman's terms, he's saying lots of the beer was off or on the turn. Reminds me of Eisenacher Helles in the DDR days. You had to run back from the shop if you wanted to drink it before it turned bad.

I feel like a table coming on. One that summarises the war years:

UK beer production, average OG, imports and exports 1938 - 1948
Year	Production (bulk barrels)	Production (standard barrels)	Consumption (bulk barrels)	Exports (bulk barrels)	Imports (bulk barrels)	Average OG	Net excise receipts (pounds)
1938	24,205,631	18,055,539	25,087,393	281,284	1,163,046	1041.02	61,241,404
1939	24,674,992	18,364,156	25,229,287	283,974	838,269	1040.93	62,370,034
1940	25,366,782	18,738,619	25,922,694	266,766	822,678	1040.62	75,157,022
1941	26,203,803	18,351,113	26,768,038	225,552	789,787	1038.51	133,450,205
1942	29,860,796	19,294,605	30,813,374	94,796	1,047,374	1035.53	157,254,430
1943	29,296,672	18,293,919	30,027,441	107,019	837,788	1034.34	209,584,343
1944	30,478,289	19,193,773	30,973,081	77,597	572,389	1034.63	263,170,703
1945	31,332,852	19,678,449	31,968,011	130,443	765,602	1034.54	278,876,870
1946	32,650,200	20,612,225	33,391,810	187,418	929,028	1034.72	295,305,369
1947	29,261,398	17,343,690	30,011,879	109,680	860,161	1032.59	250,350,829
1948	30,408,634	18,061,390	31,067,391	205,098	863,855	1032.66	264,112,043
Source:
Brewers' Almanack 1955, p. 50 and 57.

You can see how gravity fell 7 points during the war and another 2 after it had finished. But it never got quite as low as in WW I. You might be surprised at the amount of beer being imported in the war years. A single word explain it: Guinness. 99% of that figure will be Guinness Extra Stout from the Irish Republic. Not sure about the exports, but my guess would be that it was for British servicemen abroad. note just how much money beer tax brought in for the government. The figure more than quadrupled between 1939 and 1945.

"That was the year when the supply of hops was so short and so many brewers were forced to reduce their hop rates to far below the safe limit. There is no doubt that quick consumption and the fact that the public was prepared to accept anything in the shape of beer rather than go without saved many brewers from what in normal times might have been disaster. As already stated, the difficulty in maintaining a healthy and vigorous yeast had a deleterious effect on the beer, which suffered from "yeast bite" in varying degrees or possessed an unclean flavour. There is no doubt that there would have been considerable trouble with cask frets if the beer had not been consumed so quickly and the public had been more discriminating, while the under modification and poor quality of many of the malts used, especially in 1942 and during the past year, produced fining difficulties and hazy beers which often went unnoticed. Fortunately there was no hot spell of weather to make things really difficult."
Journal of the Institute of Brewing Volume 52, Issue 3, May-June, 1946, page 124.

Let's get this straight, underhopping and weak yeast from crappy malt meant lots of beer wasn't of acceptable quality, but people drank it anyway because there wasn't anything else. It often wasn't clear and would have become over-lively in the cask if it hadn't been drunk immediately Not exactly a ringing endorsement of wartime brewing. Having seen how little beer was properly clear in London in the 1920's - probably half at most - if things got worse during the war pretty much all beer must have been hazy.

Coal, boiling and Isinglass next time.







* http://www.eur.army.mil/organization/history.htm