Jump to content


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 12/04/2017 in all areas

  1. 6 points
    To sum this thread up: If you are a brewer, winery or distillery you need to do the following to be craft. Grow your own trees Cut them down yourself Make your own barrels Buy raw land Zone raw land into farm Turn raw land into farm Plow, plant, and harvest seeds by hand Mill them grains by hand with a mortar and pestle Mash them in a butter churn Ferment them using your own harvested and selected yeast. Build your equipment yourself using steel and copper from your own environmentally friendly mines and steel factorys. Distill them using only power from solar panels, wind turbines, or geothermal systems which you built yourself from parts sourced only from other craft renewable energy manufacturers. Use proofing water which you made yourself from only naturally occurring hydrogen and oxygen. Again, sourced from equipment you made yourself. Blow your own glass using silica which you also mined and refined yourself Each label must be hand painted on the bottle by nobody else other than the distiller themself Each cork must be made from your own cork farm, and it must be completely renewable The tamper seal must be made from biodegradable materials which, you guessed it, is also made completely on site. You must self distribute using a bicycle with no more than 10 speeds/gears (>10 speeds makes you a corporate pig) and sell only to mom-and-pop stores. You must be on site for each bottle that is sold by the select liquor stores so that you can explain to each customer how you are completely transparent. When that customer has died of boredom from your story (because they just wanted to buy a bottle of vodka) you must be a paul bearer in their funeral to show that you are comitted to a lifelong relationship with every customer. If you stray from any of the above bullets then YOU ARE NOT CRAFT and are basically lying to your customers and a complete scam artist who is only out there to deceive customers and make a buck.
  2. 4 points
    Friends don't let friends run stills unattended, any questions?
  3. 4 points
    The presentation I put together on continuous column distillation is focused on a comparison of the efficiency of batch distillation versus continuous distillation. The discussion on the science of single pass continuous distillation (finished spirits) including the separation of heads / hearts / tails is a much deeper discussion that my ppt only briefly touches on. The file is to big to upload here if any one would like to see it send me an email Distillerynow@gmail.com and Ill send you the presentation
  4. 4 points
    You really can't go wrong with the Anton Paar DMA 5000. Great ease of use, fast, precise and accurate, and legal. https://us.vwr.com/store/product/20269910/density-meters-dma-generation-m-anton-paar I think I have an extra 10% VWR coupon code if needed.
  5. 3 points
    The issue about turning elements on sequentially over time is in reference to a demand meter. Depending on your service, once you hit your "maximum daily demand" which I believe is over a 15 minute period, you will thereafter be charged that "demand" every day for the rest of your operational life. However your cost per KW will be lower, billed on top of that flat demand charge. As for remote start up, perhaps you could run a feed back loop program to your iPad that is lying beside you in bed, that also activates a remote wire clipped to your nuts. Then when your still starts at the distillery you will simutaneosly gets zapped in the nuts to force you to get up to protect your investment. All of course at a lower cost per KWH.
  6. 3 points
  7. 3 points
    The Corson's attorney sent the cease and desist letter below to me in 2017. Please see my replies below the letter. They were of course bluffing. They threatened lots of people with law suites at that time. They had no case and I knew it. Everything I said about them was true. You tell them any time they would like to bring suite, my attorney and I are ready. They have no case and we will bleed them dry. Do not contact me again and tell the Corson's that if they or anyone from their organization contacts me again I will report them for harassment. Mr. Hall, You are responding to my secretary, Ms. Bush. Please kindly direct any further communications regarding this matter to me. In your email you allude to the fact that you have an attorney. If that is the case, please immediately forward my cease and desist demand to him or her. As I indicated in the several voice messages I left for you, if you are in fact represented by counsel then I can only speak with your counsel. It is because I received no further information about who your counsel is that the cease and desist demand was forwarded to you directly. The cease and desist demand stands. I respectfully request that you forward that demand, and this email, to your attorney immediately. Thank you. My Reply to the above. You tell the Corson brothers they can kiss my harry hillbilly ass, Tory called here cussing me like a dog threatening to sue me and I told him I would stomp his ass if he ever talks to me like that in person. You picked the wrong person to try and intimidate. Bring on your law suite, I'm ready and waiting
  8. 3 points
    This is an interesting thread to which I will bring a dose of oh god the boredom of regulation. You make a production gauge. When you do so you have to designate the product. Assume the production methods used meet the production procedures (19.77) you have on file for for bourbon, corn whiskey, and whiskey distilled from bourbon mash and also meet the the grain/proof standards (80% or more corn at not more than 160) for each. Once produced, you must immediately make a production gauge (19.304). The rules for production gauges state, "Spirits in each receiving tank will be gauged before any reduction in proof and both before and after each removal of spirits." (19.289). I read this to say that you can can have more than one removal of spirits ("each removal") from a receiving tank - or more than one receiving tank ("each receiving tank"). So, let's assume, in either case, three gauges, each of which is deemed a separate production gauge (19.304). I see nothing that prohibits you from entering two of those to the storage account, where you put them into a stainless tank and cut them to 125 or less - this must be done after the production gauge (19.289), designating the first "bourbon designate" and the second "whiskey distilled from bourbon mash designate" (19.305). Then, you transfer (19.324) the first to new charred and the second to used oak as "bourbon" and "whiskey distilled from bourbon mash," respectively, and proceed through a nanosecond or more to create age. The spirits in the third gauge go directly to processing, where you bottle them as unaged corn whiskey. I see nothing in the regulations that prohibit that and 19.304, 305, .324 and .289 seem to authorize it. At the least, it would be an interesting challenge to a TTB investigator or auditor who sought to challenge what you did. I think they would lose the argument that you violated any provision of the regulations. The caveat is that your records would have to include the gauge record (19.618 and 19.619) for each of the three production gauges, showing the quantity and designation in each case, and create the trail that would establish that the products are eligible for the designations you give them. Note that I have not mentioned a formula once, although someone's comment above that you have to have a formula for bourbon is correct, not to show what you did to it, but to show that you did nothing to it that would change the class and type under the special rules that apply to bourbon and not to other American type whiskeys. Now, the above discussions about the methods and procedures you use to create the spirits are a lot more interesting, but wasn't the original question :-).
  9. 3 points
    Back from the dead, nearly 10 years later.
  10. 3 points
    We have a forklift. Cant imagine life with out it. We move barrels with it. And smoke cigarettes at the same time, and run with scissors.
  11. 2 points
  12. 2 points
    There are various reasons For distillery success or failure vs the average business type (restaurants included ) such as: Many Small Craft distilleries are secondary to an individual's source of income. Small operations that are run primarily by families who are employed at other jobs, and they are working due to the passion of their endeavor. This type of operation can usually survive as a hobby that may break even. alternatively Retirement / heritage distillery where an individual has left their primary job or business and has a million or more to invest in a new field. They can float through the first few years while their decent local product matures long enough to be palatable. If collocated as a ditillery-pub with decent food, it can be a good model. alternatively Either of the above can also be operate as fake distilleries, where they re-bottle and rebubble bulk products, giving them a better chance to survive by charging True Craft prices with minimal input expense. ( There is no other industry that has a national infrastructure set up to supply fake craft to business that then attempt to dupe customers). alternatively Group funded operations that have sufficent backup cash to run without fear of making payroll. Again these can be run true or fake, or a hybrid of both which is quite popular wherein they rebottle bulk with the "premise" that at some point they will produce their own. Because distilleries come in so many shapes, sizes and models, and are governed by so many different state laws, you really need to drill down to find the reasons for success or failure of any given brand. None of this by the way touches on the plethora of fake "Big Liquor" craft offerings which are sucking up shelf space with the same old products they have been making for 50 years. prost
  13. 2 points
    Doc's, I give my customers free consulting on their equipment needs, equipment placement, equipment safety, hazardous environments, spirit production, spirit storage, bottling equipment etc etc. I also give out all of the trade secrets that I know such as how to created $37,500.00 worth of premium vodka in one of my 300 gallon pot stills in 4 hrs. How to produce higher proofs with fewer plates etc. The things that I don't know anything about are zoning and TTB applications and paperwork. I am the only vender that I know of that does this kind of extensive consulting at no charge. Most vendors just want to sell you equipment and they will try to upsell whenever they can. I am here to help make you successful and I never upsell. If I help make you successful you will come back and purchase more equipment from me when you expand. All of the above gives me advantages over my competitors and gives my customers advantages over their competitor that are not my customers. Also if you purchase my equipment you get a free 3 day one on one distilling workshop at a distillery that has been running my equipment for 7 years. We are about long term relationships and the success of our customers. If you still need equipment and you want some free consulting etc,. email paul@distillery-equipment.com
  14. 2 points
    You are a lucky one. Those piss-ants sent me a dangerous still. It took a lot of work and a lot of money to get it operational. Not to mention that I had to buy another still to try and catch up with demand due to the constant lies from those pieces of shit about delivery times. I am not one to wish bad things on people normally but it would actually make me smile to see them go to jail.
  15. 2 points
    What I'm saying is if you are working with rye and wheat in high percentages, or unmalted grains in high percentages, going in hot, even if you are able to easily do it, is less ideal because you can't take advantage of glucanase and protease enzymes and/or rests. So your rye-dominant workflow is going to be very different from your corn-dominant workflows. Why not just deal with one cereal mash workflow and optimize it based on the equipment? Document your optimal cereal mash workflow and it becomes much easier when dealing with assistants, training new brewers on the system, etc. Your dosages, hold times, wait times, heat times, pH adjustments, etc - all become very very predictable and repeatable. I don't see how there is time savings, waiting for the mash tun to heat up to add the grain, versus adding grain at a cooler temperature and then heating. Either way he will have to wait for the tun to heat up. I've actually found that going in cool, and allowing some time for the grist to hydrate and swell during the heatup, actually results in reduction of time spent at temperature. Think about it, if it takes you 1hr to go from 70 to 190f. If you add the grist at 70, you have an additional hour in the water and at least near gelatinization temperatures. So you'll either have higher yield, or a shorter gelatinization hold. That's a great decision to have to make. The point of this thread isn't about optimal/efficient/time saving mash processes, it's about getting this guy a process that'll give him an easy workflow with very high probability of success, with the equipment he's got (shared on another thread). That's all I documented above. It's overkill on many levels, but that's not the point. That's not the process I use, but then again, I've got my process dialed in for my equipment, and my equipment is different from his.
  16. 2 points
    The TTB is accepting public comments regarding changing the CFRs until March 26, 2019. The proposal is incredibly lengthy: https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2018-11-26/pdf/2018-24446.pdf Here is the TTBs summary, with links: NEW RULEMAKING IS THE NEXT STEP IN OUR LABELING PROGRAM MODERNIZATION We are pleased to announce the publication of a rulemaking document (Notice No. 176) in the Federal Register of Monday, November 26, 2018, in which we propose to update, simplify, and clarify the labeling and advertising regulations for wine, distilled spirits, and malt beverages. This rulemaking is the latest phase of our multi-year effort to Facilitate Commerce through a Modern Labeling Program Focused on Service and Market Compliance, one of the five strategic goals outlined in our current Strategic Plan. In recent years, we have made significant improvements to modernize our labeling program and reduce approval times for labels and formulas by employing a range of strategies, including: Eliminating the need to obtain formula approval in certain instances; Expanding the list of changes that can be made to approved labels without getting a new Certificate of Label Approval (COLA); Updating COLAs Online and Formulas Online to better meet user needs and expectations; Increasing guidance about label and formula requirements by improving content on TTB.gov and offering webinars; and Adding staff to improve overall service levels. When finalized, the updated labeling and advertising regulations will facilitate industry compliance by simplifying and clarifying regulatory standards, incorporating guidance documents and other current policies into the regulations, and reducing regulatory burden on industry members where possible. We encourage public comments on the regulatory amendments proposed in the rulemaking document (Notice No. 176), particularly from affected industry members. In addition, we welcome suggestions for other changes to these regulations not specifically proposed in the rulemaking. We are accepting comments through March 26, 2019. Please see the notice for instructions on how to submit a comment.
  17. 2 points
    The problem is not simply the equipment that they were building. It's the guys behind the company. Their attitude towards business and customers is their true downfall IMHO. Fixing the equipment issues doesn't fix the people issues.
  18. 2 points
    @richard1 thanks for your input but I would disagree. When a company is producing equipment with flaws that have the potential to kill you, it needs to be known. When the same company producing dangerous equipment is threatening to sue people if they speak out about the flawed equipment it needs to be known. Yes we have nearly beat this horse to death, but Corson is still making dangerous distilling equipment and taking on new customers. I am in no way a competitor of corson, Im merely a professional distiller and consultant who wants to see our industry be as safe as possible. Corson is well aware of this forum and has plenty of opportunity to defend their reputation.
  19. 2 points
    Transpiration is the process of whiskey moving in and out of the wood, or even through the wood. This process occurs in a regular barrel by virtue of the osmotic pressure changing from the changing temperature and humidity on the outside of the stave relative to the inside for the whiskey-filled barrel. If you have free floating staves or wood inside the liquid, you don't have this effect. To some degree, you might try to artificially replicate this effect by pressurizing and de-pressuring the whiskey in the barrel; there is a US craft distillery who does this for their "fast aged" whiskey, although again, they have not accelerated aging, but transpiration and thus extraction. Aging is aging, you don't accelerate by temperature swings, but elevated temperatures will increase the reactions of aging compared to lowered temperatures, although all the different chemical processes do NOT change their rates of reaction to the same degree with a change in temperature. In fact, some reactions can change by orders of magnitude with temperature, and others almost not at all! Many people unfamiliar with the science of barrel aging will confuse aging, extraction, and transpiration. The transpiration affects both extraction and "filtration", the latter in the case of charred barrels. It can also cause a concentration in the solutes with longer aging (so-called "angel share" effect). Hence, why using a sealed non-oak container with oak adjuncts inside is NOT the same as using an oak barrel as far as transpiration. The UV treatment methods are currently patented. We have not tried them ourselves. This is an example of an expensive technology that could be used to do a rapid "aging", because it will increase the speed of some of the aging reactions without having to overly elevate the temperature. However, it will not necessarily be exactly the same result, because photo-induced chemistries will increase at rates different from those from changing temperature, and which reactions increase is different, so the result is different from long aging. Sound and ultrasound can increase extraction. Ultrasound can maybe increase some chemical reactions (photoacoustic chemistry), although I have not seen evidence of a good result for this. Oxygenation by itself is actually a potential problem, unless balanced with appropriate technologies to use the oxygen in reactions normally associated with aging, like esterification. In any case, I am not arguing you can't throw all the technology plus the kitchen sink at the problem to get something comparable to longer aging in shorter time. You might well be able to, but it probably will be expensive to do, and may not taste exactly the same, and is not aging in any case, and the TTB won't let you call it that. Aging occurs, according to the TTB, in OAK BARRELS, and means length of time, legally. Period. And the flavor profile from long aging is complicated, and affected by many environmental factors, so replicating it with other technologies is a challenge. In the end, you make your whiskey, you properly label it, you tell the consumer (hopefully) what you did, and they like or not and pay you accordingly! FYI, I am a retired physicist who spent 40+ years studying photochemical-induced organic reactions, among other things, and so this colors my perspective.
  20. 2 points
  21. 2 points
    Probably not a scammer. It is appropriate to do 30 seconds of diligence before you derail a thread in the B2B world in my opinion. I wouldnt expect to be impressed by the knowledge of a banker who is hunting for opps at a client's request, they are just try to do business, probably looking for help, not insults. https://www.coldwellbanker.com/Coldwell-Banker-Distinctive-Properties-11781c/James-Kuehn-453643a
  22. 2 points
    We are going to market soon with a rum that's aged in cab sauv barrels that underwent no aggressive swelling prior to our refill and all the remnants from the previous fill are significantly impacting the flavor profile. It's pretty tasty.
  23. 2 points
    Almost ever commercial level product has a hard drive or hard drives and records over the video.... when properly programmed. There are a number of things that you want to be able to set,,, one is motion recording. This will only record and use drive space ( or potentially bandwidth) when the camera sees motion. The frame rate... which can be set as high as 30 frames per second. Should be down around 7 unless your looking at alot of fast moving activity. Etc etc. There are alot of tweaks that can be done in order to save both drive space and bandwidth. On top of that you set this system to recycle say anywhere from 2 weeks to 2 months depending on the amount of drive space you use. With motion detection on that varies with how much activity your camera sees and whether you have set them up correctly. A number of companies make decent systems with good or better remote access and expandable drive space. The cheapest ive used is HIK Vision. There stuff is good.. not my favorite and their support is ok. For you that want to build out your own pc id use Geovision. Software is free with them. Their support is just ok.... i no longer will build out a pc for this. PCs run into issues over time. Id stick with a more hardware based solution such as the HIK or one of the better brands. I love 3xlogic. Not expensive, made in usa, excellent tech support, great online access options, hardened recorder... lots of options. You cant go wrong with 3x. They also have the Infinias line of access control that integrates with your video so card access also gives you a recording tied to it making looking up stuff super easy. And god forbid your not their and the cops show up and need a video to go... you can do that remotely for them and all someone has to do is stick in a blank dvd for you. We spend ridiculous amounts on a still and barely blink.... step up a little and get a good surveillance system. Perhaps you will never need it. But the day you do you will feel it was the best money you ever spent. Scott
  24. 2 points
    You guys are made of money to be using $12 a pound citric or gallons of Heinz 57. Damn, you probably even use the more expensive squeeze bottle versions too. Meanwhile, the rest of us are stuffing our pockets full at Burger King. I phone up my local chemical supply and walk out with a 50 pound bag of FCC/USP Grade Citric Acid for about $60. No sales tax on that either. Mash Acidification - Check Still Copper Rejuvenation - Check Tricking your 5 year daughter to stick her finger in and taste it - Priceless
  25. 2 points
    You should use Organic ingredients since they produce a far superior spirit.
  26. 2 points
    Pete B, I was making an assumption when I said it could be sparged. I have never tried it so I am not certain. My grandfather never sparged it. He ground the malted corn with his big hand cranked grinder. My grandfather raised registered Black Angus Cattle. The old style that were short, stocky and wide with pretty heads and turned up noses. You don't see them in the states much these days as the Angus breed in the states is typically bigger boned now with a larger carcass size. Anyway, here is how he would malt his corn. He would malt several hundred lbs at a time. He would only use 2 varieties of white corn. Hickory Cane or Hickory King. These were the only 2 varieties of corn that he thought were "fit to make his likker". He said yellow corn would not malt properly and that these 2 varieties of white corn would produce the best likker. Most of the rest of the men of Southern Appalachia of his time, felt the same way. In fact it's my understanding that those were the varieties that were originally used by Jack Danials and that they changed to yellow dent later to save money. Our animals were fed those varieties and those 2 varieties were also used to make corn meal all over Southern Appalachia. Where I grew up we only ate corn bread made from white corn meal with no sugar added. So to malt we would dig out most of the fresh manure in the side shed of our barn. We would take wet burlap feed bags and put 3 layers down over the manure that was left in the side shed. We heated water and the corn kernals were soaked twice. We would spread a 1" thick layer of the big white kernels and cover with a layer of warm wet burlap. It seams like there was more than one layer and we covered it with a couple of layers of wet burlap, then we would pile on the manure covering everything very well with the manure. The manure would build up heat as it broke down. The heat would sprout the corn extra fast and it would never mold. I don't really know why it didn't mold. My grandfather would check it and in a few days we would uncover the corn and it would all be sprouted. We would use burlap feed bags to rub the sprouts off an then my grandfather would grind it into a course meal. He would put it in his fermenters It seams like we dried it in the barn loft a few times but I'm not sure that we always did it that way. I was pretty young at the time. he had a 400 gallon copper turnip head still built into the side of a hill in a shed. It was single wall copper. He fermented using wooden fermenters that were in the ground. I remember cleaning them with lye or lime. They had to be cleaned after each fermentation. I think they were built out ofwhite oak boards. Maybe the ly helped to counteract the tannic acid in the wood. I'm not sure. He never added any sugar. Besides the malted corn he added his own strain of yeast. If he was making his " Charter Whiskey" he would add backset (dunder) and some kind of white powder that he said would keep the bitterness out. It smelled something like raw potato but I don't know what it was or how he replenished it. If the whiskey was going in the aging barrel, he always used dunder to sour his mash. If it was going to be sold as a white whiskey he would never add dunder. He would add a mucky looking stuff to the fermentation from a wooden bucket. It smelled like butter. it would give his white whiskey a buttery corn on the cob flavor. The turnip head on his still was almost 1/3 of the size of the pot. He put the mash in the still solids and all when fermentation was complete. The still was fired with propane but years before he had fired it with wood. The still was all copper. The still was rocked up with an arch under it so it never scorched the mash, however the mash had to b stirred until just before it started to boil then he would put the head on and attach the line arm.
  27. 2 points
    Waaahhh Mom, it's really hard. Do I have to really do it if I can scam the customer instead? Please don't make me? I've got an idea, lets encourage Amazon to apply for their DSP and then the totes can be shipped right to their warehouse where they can add the drops of flavor and ship it direct. They can brand it "One Click Craft". Lets just eliminate the middle man all together : You !
  28. 2 points
    I have a dream that one day we can strike the word "infection" from the distilling vocabulary. We love mixed bacterial fermentation, and routinely use at least a half dozen strains of non-yeast microbes in fermentation. Even the brewing community has begun to embrace mixed-culture fermentation in a big way. Yesterday's infection is today's purposeful inoculation. Keep in mind that a whiskey wash that doesn't go through a boil post saccharification is going to be absolutely loaded with a plethora of non-yeast bacteria that will flourish during fermentation, especially protracted duration fermentation. Fermenting in open top tanks? Fermenting in wooden fermenters? This is all about cultivating non-yeast microbes. As interesting as different yeast strains are, bacteria are 10x so. Indigenous yeast and bacteria are part of the terroir that defines a product. Operate long enough, and it's likely that your distillery develops it's own unique profile of house strains, which have become dominant in the environment, both yeast and bacteria. I'm not saying to operate in a unsanitary way, or to eschew sanitizers and GMP, there are plenty of bugs to be avoided at all costs. I am saying that this is the next frontier in craft distilling, and we need to stop worrying and learn to love the funk.
  29. 2 points
    Jeff, Under a given set of conditions, there is an optimum cooking temperature and time to obtain the best quality of distillate and the best alcohol yield. I believe the question you have is about cooking small grains at high temperatures. There are a lot of ways to prepare grains for fermentation, but the simple goal of cooking is to gelatinize the starch granules, to make them available for hydrolysis by enzymes to convert to fermentable sugars but the complicated goal is to efficiently obtain proper gelatinization of starch, properly free up amino acids the yeast require, convert to fermentable sugars, reduce contamination and obtain a flavor extraction from the grains. The infusion mashing process we use, (simply cooking small grains at lower & proper temperatures), here at Wilderness Trail is designed around maximizing flavor first, energy second and time third. You do not have to boil your grains up to 210F and you certainly do not want to cook any of your small grains (wheat, rye, barley, malted barley, etc) in that range, again you can but it will not be the highest quality distillate you can obtain in the end if you do that. You can cook corn to 210F and it doesn't do much more than waste energy cooking it that high, part of the high heat is to sterilize the grains of bacteria and you take care of that around 190F and you only need to cook corn around 190F-185F for proper gelatinization, we cook our corn at 190F, it saves energy from going higher, we convert all of the available sugars and sterilize our grains, that is why you do it. For wheat the actual gelatinization range is 136F-146F but we start adding our wheat around 155-160F. For Rye the actual range is 135F-158F and we add and cook our Rye no higher than 160F for good reasons. Our Malted barley never goes in higher than 145F to preserve the enzymatic activity and to keep the grains intact. Think of it this way, gelatinization is like popping popcorn under water, its a dramatic change in the grains composition.. and throw in some smaller ductile grains like wheat or rye and you blow them apart under the same conditions as well as a lot of protein you don't want to break down. The reasons you do not cook grains beyond their proper gelatinization range is more about flavor than yield because if it is too rigorous, thermal decomposition of grain components will cause objectionable popcorn phenolic odors, yield is more impacted by poor grains, under cooking, poor conversion and yeast conditions. By using the infusion mashing process for small grains, you keep the branched chain amino acids and proteins in place with the grains that the yeast will use to properly make a flavorful result. If you boil your small grains, you are creating unbranched chain amino acids, degrading proteins and frankly blowing apart the flavor you are trying to extract. Small grains also get scorched very easy and there are Maillard effects that create all kinds of new chemicals from the high heat of small grains you don't want, plus why would you, the process doesn't require it. The yeast take these unbranched chain and Maillard effect's and turns them into higher alcohols (fusels) and other chemicals that alter the flavor and result of the beer & distillate. In short summary for our whiskeys, we cook our corn to 190F and hold that for 40 minutes, we cool to 160F by adding some water additions of the overall mashbill and add our wheat or Rye and hold that for 30 minutes, we add more water additions to get to 145F which is when we add our Malted Barley which rest for 30 minutes. We add the rest of our water additions for our ferm set and the chiller takes it down to 90F. We send that to our fermenters, which are set to hold at 85F for three day beer and 78F for 4-5 day beer. By shortening the initial cook of the total water, your initial cook is thicker, for us that is around 18 beer gallons and that allows you to use less energy to heat up the initial cook and reserve the rest of the water for cooling capacity as well as when you add your grains you are also using that to help cool your mash down. For example I mentioned we add our wheat at 160F but after the grains are added the temperature drops to around 150F+ and rest out to a little above 145F. We primarily make a wheated Bourbon but we also make a Rye Whiskey, which again even though the Rye will be the majority of grains, we still cook our smaller amount of Corn up to 190F and then cool it down to 160F before adding the majority of the mashbill of Rye. Infusion mashing is scientifically proven to offer a more flavorful distillate and smoother distillate, mainly for the reasons listed above. Shane Baker Co-Founder, Master Distiller Wilderness Trail Distillery
  30. 2 points
    I assume you are referring to general distillery trade waste, not from the sinks and bathrooms. We operate in a rural area also and initially we had to truck all our trade waste off for external disposal, at great cost. We now treat the waste on-site. No septic, or air assisted bio-cycle system will cope with distillery trade waste for three reasons; The pH is way too low THE BOD is too high (typical of boiled waste) The amount of residual alcohol is often too high in 'small' distilleries (we often dump our stillage at 2% residual alcohol, as its too expensive to strip-out the remainder) We established an on-site treatment system FOR THE TRADE WASTE ONLY (all sink and bathroom effluent is treated in a standard AWT septic system) comprising of three 10kl concrete tanks. The waste is transfered on a batch basis from one to the other, and then finally sprayed out onto rural pastures. The tanks work as follows; Tank 1 takes the raw waste, and holds until we have about 10kl, we then pH adjust to 7.2 with Calcium Carbonate. Residual chlorine is resolved with H2O2. BOD is measured, as well as copper, lead and N2 levels (local EPA requirement). Calcium Carbonate dissolves very slowly so we need to recirculate this tank for about 24 hours Tank 2 has a pump over aeration system that fixes the BOD and dissolved O2 levels, this again takes about 24 hours of circulation. Bentonite is added in the last hour of aeration just before transfer to tank 3. Tank 3 is the settling tank, we settle the sludge for 24 hours, the clear water is then fed by pump to an open field for irrigation. The sludge is drained monthly, and dumped onto open compost mounds. This system has been working flawlessly for 2 years and has proved very cheap to operate.
  31. 1 point
    We have just built a high end and extremely efficient unit which will go for performance testing later this month. The major characteristics of our unit are high flow, very high surface area for heat exchage as well as being designed for grain in mash chilling. Here's a pitcure straight out of production and prior to clean up and final fitting of attachments and controls.
  32. 1 point
    Tube in shell chillers are simple and work extremely well. I highly recommended them for grain-in mashes. I got some ridiculous quotes from certain suppliers, but Jesse at Trident Stills hooked us up with two at a really reasonable cost. https://www.tridentstills.com
  33. 1 point
  34. 1 point
    Yeah @Aux Arc answered for me. If you are just starting to get into a rhythm and don't have a regular production schedule, using backset/stillage in your mash is a little bit of a challenge, since you need to keep it around. The spent wash from the pot, after distillation - separated from the spent grain. You shouldn't need pH stabilizer, adjust using your acid of choice along with the backset. Question 3 - Anything malted goes in on the way down, at 150-152f. These grains will easily gel at those temperatures, and that temp range will preserve enzyme function. Glad to see you worked through the challenges, keep truckin.
  35. 1 point
    As quinoa is one of the least-utilized grains in alcohol production, we thought we'd give it a go. I thought I'd share some of our experience trying to make a go of it, since so little is out there. We experimented with quinoa as an adjunct, flavoring grain, in a predominantly corn mash bill. Even in smaller quantities, quinoa dominates the aroma and flavor. It has an incredibly distinctive nose, and if you've ever cooked quinoa at home, eaten quinoa, you'll be familiar with it, because that aroma dominates the distillate. I really need to emphasize this, we talk about tasing and smelling aromas of the underlying base grains in whiskies, corn, wheat, this is an entirely different level. The distillate is amplified quinoa. It permeates. Everything. Clothes. Hair. Quinoa. Everywhere. As terrible as it sounds, there is this very redeeming nutty, caramel, chocolate, roasty flavor. Doing some research, I came across some old brewing articles that referenced 2-pentylfuran as being a key contributor to the quinoa aroma. 2-pentylfuran not very common among conventional grain, but prevalent in some of the ancient grains (Kamut). Also very common as a Malliard reaction output, common in other roasted items like bread, coffee, chocolate. It's a really appealing profile. We tried experimenting a bit with chocolate, coffee - the problem is they amplify the flavor profile to the point at which the distillate starts to get this kind of savory flavor profile (think the savory aspect of a roast). Very interesting, screws with your mind, because there is something, almost a kind of umami, in the flavor profile of the distillate. In the end we gave up on trying to build a corn-based mash bill - it was impossible to dial back the quinoa impact without distilling far above 160. After a few more trials, we started to like distilled far cleaner. Ultimately we decided to go 100% quinoa, and use the very unpopular light whiskey category, stripping, then distilling it a hair above 180 proof. It's still choc-ful of quinoa flavor, very, very strong. However, much more approachable as a whiskey. Went to sleep in some fresh dump used char-4s. Operationally, quinoa is incredibly difficult to work with. The tiny size makes milling very, very difficult. We couldn't get a tight enough gap on the roller mill to get a good crack, the 1/8th inch screen on the hammer mill really didn't do a good job. The flour screen we have on the mill is painfully slow, and is a dusty mess. If you look at the structure of quinoa, it's a little different from a typical cereal grain. There isn't a big pocket of starch, with the germ off to the end. The starch is encapsulated at the center of the quinoa seed. The tiny size, the grain structure, made the cereal mash among the worst we've ever mashed. It simply does not mash. We held it in the 190-195 range for more than 6 hours, impossible to get a negative starch test. We ended up letting the cook go overnight, yes, overnight. In the morning, still could not get a negative starch test. Lots of high temp alpha amylase, glucoamylase, beta glucanase, protease, xylanase - we finally decided to call it quits and cool to pitch. The best we can surmise is that without milling it to micron-sized flour, the tight pocket of starch gets trapped by the seed structure, and slowly "leaks" out as it hydrolyzes. Anyone who thinks that protracted cooking will simply cause the seed to expand, burst, and fall apart - nope, sorry, there was still obvious whole quinoa particles in the mash, after nearly 18 hours of cooking. We didn't notice it so obviously during the test batches, however most of the test batches were corn-predominant, so the lower-yield wasn't as obvious. Yield was mostly terrible. 1200 pounds of quinoa in, roughly 35 proof gallons out. We fermented down to about 1.01, on the grain, with active enzyme. What was really interesting was the amount of bulk that was remaining in the mash. Attribute this to the much lower starch content of quinoa relative to other grains. We had another 1200 pounds of quinoa for batch 2, we decided to give it to our farmer as feed. The effort involved is simply not worth it. To get any chance of reasonable yield, we'd need to have gone to fine flour, even then I think we'd be dealing with an impossible to dewater stillage/sludge. We'll see how the distillate ends up, I think there will be fans, but ultimately, it'll be a very polarizing whiskey. Maybe I'll be wrong, and maybe it'll be fabulous, and maybe I'll regret giving away a metric ton of quinoa as goat feed (they love it by the way). That said, if you really want to try it, go for it. You'd probably get enough impact with as little as 5% of the mash bill - given the high price of quinoa, it's a much more cost effective approach. The most difficult grain we've ever worked with, and we've worked with Millet (Size challenges) and Whole Oats (worse than rye)
  36. 1 point
    The high temperature amylase I use is Spezyme Alpha, liquid Amalyse
  37. 1 point
    Just for info, Those supplied safety valves are combination over pressure relief as well as vacuum relief. w.r.t over pressure relief their standard is generally 1 bar (~15 PSI) BUT I have seen some with lower values. This is all to do with internal spring sizing. That said, these are not calibrated valves and are at best approximate. The big danger with these valves is that the vented product exits from the side ports and is a danger to anyone in close proximity. The vent needs to be directed down to a safe area.
  38. 1 point
    Talk to Norit (which appears to now be called Cabot). Cabot Norit Activated Carbon Americas 3200 University Avenue Marshall, Texas 75670 United States Phone+1 903 923 1000 http://www.cabotcorp.com/company/worldwide-locations/north-america
  39. 1 point
    Oregon Spirit Distillers purchased a 3000 liter stripping still from Affordable Distilling and have been operating it for 2 months. It was delivered on time, the price was right, and it preforms better then expected. Paul, you should be proud of your work, your team and the business you have built.
  40. 1 point
    @needmorstuff : you can ask these suppliers for a sample, that's what I've done before I decided.
  41. 1 point
    i may be wrong but victoria spirits may have the german built still im thinking of .
  42. 1 point
    I'm writing on behalf Louis Fahrasmane regarding the use of citric versus sulfuric acid for rum production in new American distilleries. The improper selection of acids to acidify a ferment could be the biggest, easiest to resolve quality setback to new rum producers. Fahrasmane is probably the last surviving rum micro biologist to survey and investigate productions at the end of the last golden era. He expressed interest in writing an article on the topic of acid options to help the American industry. I have collected many of his team's papers and have translated quite a few from French on the blog (go to the bibliography at the end): https://www.bostonapothecary.com/thirty-years-of-rum-technology-at-inra/ This is the next great set of rum research that comes after the work of Arroyo. The INRA team even discovered the last great rum yeast that most people are using. My understanding is that many new American rum producers acidify their ferment primarily with citric acid, but also sometimes malic, tartaric, or even lactic acid. This is done instead of sulfuric acid possibly because of safe handling concerns and the learning curves of new distillers. I think this originates in a few contemporary books aimed at home distillers and not commercial distillers, but it would be great to hear some anecdotes. A 1985 paper from Fahrasmane (last missing page here), shows how citric acid modifies yeast metabolism and produces an abundance of ordinary congeners that have to be cut away thus shrinking the hearts fraction and forcing distillation at a higher proof. I think Fahrasmane did more earlier work on this and it was part of his PhD thesis. Fahrasmane would love to know what people are currently practicing and where the ideas came from if they are from specific texts. It would be great to hear production anecdotes of anyone switching from citric to sulfuric acid. I'm hoping to get an informal survey so feel free to start a discussion in thread or reply privately. I'll be translating all the replies to French and sending them to Fahrasmane. If you are currently using sulfuric, but are aware of citric acid anecdotes, feel free to share what you know. I would love help making this article by Louis Fahrasmane a success and hopefully we can encourage him to keep writing articles for the new rum industry.
  43. 1 point
    Way too small. There are so many more costs that I think you will find that to be profitable for production will take more than you think. In addition to rent there is insurance, then add any cost for software (accounting and/or ttb), then add a phone/internet and ? That will easily add another $1k per month. So now you need $3k per month just to cover overhead. If your material costs run 30% and a $35 sell price (very high IMHO). That's 125 bottles per month to cover costs. Which is 25 gallons or 250 gal of fermentation, that's 10 runs per month of 26 gallon still as a single run. More of a strip and finish Figure it on a more reasonable $100/gallon sale price and the math is tougher, 43 gal per month or 430 gallons of fermentation. That is 17 runs per month just to cover costs. Now at 2 years in and running 120gal still, I wish I had started at 300+ gallons. It takes no more work to make 300 gal vs 26, just the cost up front.
  44. 1 point
    There is a South African distilling products company called Distillique and they have an excellent guide to sizing systems on their webpage. Check it out.
  45. 1 point
    The NVR (network video recorder) is a linux box with a hard drive. All of the cameras are hardwired and use POE. Really good stuff. PM me if you want to pick up a call to discuss.
  46. 1 point
    Honestly unless you have come up with some incredible speciality spirit, and are realitvely new, you would be better off to just enter any of the myriad of "Pay to Play" HoneyBooBoo competitions out there. It seems like most people who play that game enter contests far away from their actual location, so it adds more drama to the purchased medals. Also make sure it has an official sounding name like "The Elon Musk Intergalactic Bourbon Challenge" We have a Quasi-illery near us that actually entered and won a bunch of medals in a "competition" for several different unreleased aged whiskeys that were still halfway through their way to being straight (+/- 16 months). A rye, bourbon, corn, etc. must have been awesome ! Playing Devils advocate, wouldn't that mean that the actual spirit you eventually release is different than the one you purchased the medal for, making said fake award even less valid ? But people seem to buy it, so follow the sheep. ps: They also were victorious with their 100% NGS vodka and gin. prost
  47. 1 point
    I suppose, since they are one mash when combined. More problematic, what if you had two different beers after fermentation, then combined them. I would want to query a TTB officer on that!
  48. 1 point
    Try making some malt whiskey, which is normally done off-grain (from a wash). You can also try making a wash from malt rye, but as pointed out by someone else, you will get more suspended solids. In either case, key might be allow trub or lees with solids including yeast to settle out, and remove, before transferring to the pot for distillation. Otherwise, I recommend working out with Southernhighlander to see if he can provide an affordable jacketed pot that could be swapped for what you have now.
  49. 1 point
    Not sure of the quality but "affordable distilling" on eBay has an electric one (150g) for $14.5k.
  50. 1 point
    Exactly, Paul,,,no floor traffic for vendors!
  • Create New...