Jump to content

Leaderboard


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 06/14/2020 in all areas

  1. 1 point
    Thanks @Ish200 . That is indeed way more than I've been using. I thought I had searched the forum well before posting, but later I did find someone say ph 3.8 is ideal.
  2. 1 point
    My advice is to have this shitty distributor arrange transit of your product from their chosen freight forwarder in CA. If they're not offering this then they are somewhat shittier than most.
  3. 1 point
    The alcohol laws in the US are mind boggling.
  4. 1 point
    Inhibited Sulfamic acid is one of the very best for this application when dealing with carbonates and silicates from hard water. I have found it to be Superior in performance to many, For SS you can also use 5 Star Acid 5 or 6.
  5. 1 point
    I just take my shirt off. Everyone's a winner
  6. 1 point
    Check with @Southernhighlander
  7. 1 point
    This is exactly how our 3 plate Kothe still is setup. The manual bypass valve is important, as you need to be able to flow water to make sure the water retained in the dephleg is starting out cold and not hot from a previous run.
  8. 1 point
    We charge fairly low, so that our aggregate product proof is near bottling proof, with minimal water additions necessary to adjust to final proof. Very much the opposite of many folks.
  9. 1 point
    Forget it. You'll need to buy very large amounts to make it worthwhile, and correctly dry the products. For example, my spice trader takes juniper berries which are typically 40% moisture and dries them to around 18% moisture. By the time you have everything in place (to process raw product) you have replicated a lot of what a spice trader does (at great expense). Definitely not worth it.
  10. 1 point
    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 !
  11. 0 points
    Basically from what I was told, if it looks like something you wouldn't run in your old lawnmower then it's done. We had some heating elements that were not low watt density and the system was open to the air, so they had quite a bit of oil coked on them. Heatup and cooldown of the system caused air exchange, which greatly increased oxidation. The types of things learned years after building the still... The still ran fine for years, but you could tell performance was suffering. I did try replacing it with a non-oil based high performance heating fluid (glycol based if I remember right?), and that was a mistake--it smelled like permanent markers when the still was running, but again that was likely due to the high watt density. Switched to steam about a year ago, and my god is it worth the up front cost.
  12. 0 points
    I had no issues. Send an email to admin@distilling.com, they are very responsive
  13. 0 points
  14. 0 points
    Has anyone tried both software packages? They seem to have similar capabilities and I'm trying to choose between the two. I've heard only good things about Distill x 5 and mixed reviews of Whiskey Systems software.
  15. 0 points
    Perhaps theoretically, but the concern is reintroduction of contaminants via dust or otherwise, post distillation. This kind of cross-contamination issue is the rationale behind the peanut warning (above). Even if the product doesn't contain them, there is a risk that the product might have been contaminated, because of proximity, people, etc. Clearly, this is a kind of "worst-case" scenario, and probably not common for most of us. But ... it does come up when discussion gluten free wheat spirits. Can gluten make it through the distillation process? No. But what happens when the nano-distillery is milling wheat 10 feet from the bottling area?
  16. 0 points
    Thanks again Galapadoc As far as I can figure, Its all a bit vague. When I called Health and safety I was told there was no wrong way to develop a HACCP plan. I found the online .gov site that develops the plan for you by answering questions. The penultimate section basically asked you to prove your assumptions with evidence. I think I have what I need. If there are any issues then I can look further, I was hoping that someone that had been through all this might have jumped in but hey ho 😕 Thank you for your help !!! Thanks Thatch If I need to dig further I can ask around there ! Cheers !
  17. 0 points
    By the way, if an article you want is behind a paywall and the abstract doesn't give you all the details you need, try Sci-Hub. https://sci-hub.tw/ You just enter the PMID number found below the title of the paper on PubMed and, if it's one of the millions of papers they managed to get their hands on, you can download the PDF.
  18. 0 points
    You're gonna want to use PubMed for something like that. Way too much noise using Google. However, it doesn't look like either of the things you want to find are true. There are a lot of things that can contaminate fermented beverages even over 15% and turns out there are a lot of different allergen problems as well (I learned something new). Here are some articles I found on a cursory search. You could go into more detail and refine what you're looking for. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/ Biological Contaminants 1. Beverage spoilage yeast detection methods and control technologies: A review of Brettanomyces. Tubia I, Prasad K, Pérez-Lorenzo E, Abadín C, Zumárraga M, Oyanguren I, Barbero F, Paredes J, Arana S. Int J Food Microbiol. 2018 Oct 20;283:65-76. doi: 10.1016/j.ijfoodmicro.2018.06.020. Epub 2018 Jun 26. PMID: 30099997 Review. 2. Traditional grain alcohol (bai jiu, [Symbol: see text]) production and use in rural central China: implications for public health. Qian L, Newman IM, Xiong W, Feng Y. BMC Public Health. 2015 Dec 19;15:1261. doi: 10.1186/s12889-015-2594-4. PMID: 26687080 Free PMC article. 3. Microbial diversities and potential hazards of Korean turbid rice wines (makgeolli): Multivariate analyses. Kim NH, Jun SH, Lee SH, Hwang IG, Rhee MS. Food Microbiol. 2018 Dec;76:466-472. doi: 10.1016/j.fm.2018.07.008. Epub 2018 Jul 17. PMID: 30166175 4. Mycotoxins and beer. Impact of beer production process on mycotoxin contamination. A review. Pascari X, Ramos AJ, Marín S, Sanchís V. Food Res Int. 2018 Jan;103:121-129. doi: 10.1016/j.foodres.2017.07.038. Epub 2017 Oct 12. PMID: 29389598 Review. 5. Influence of microbial and chemical contaminants on the yield and quality of ethanol from wheat grains. Bartkiene E, Juodeikiene G, Zadeike D, Baliukoniene V, Bakutis B, Cizeikiene D. J Sci Food Agric. 2019 Mar 30;99(5):2348-2355. doi: 10.1002/jsfa.9433. Epub 2018 Dec 30. PMID: 30338535 6. Starter cultures as biocontrol strategy to prevent Brettanomyces bruxellensis proliferation in wine. Berbegal C, Spano G, Fragasso M, Grieco F, Russo P, Capozzi V. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol. 2018 Jan;102(2):569-576. doi: 10.1007/s00253-017-8666-x. Epub 2017 Nov 30. PMID: 29189899 Free PMC article. Review. 7. Microbial contamination of fuel ethanol fermentations. Beckner M, Ivey ML, Phister TG. Lett Appl Microbiol. 2011 Oct;53(4):387-94. doi: 10.1111/j.1472-765X.2011.03124.x. Epub 2011 Aug 2. PMID: 21770989 Review. 8. Ingredients and contaminants of traditional alcoholic beverages in Tanzania. Nikander P, Seppälä T, Kilonzo GP, Huttunen P, Saarinen L, Kilima E, Pitkänen T. Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg. 1991 Jan-Feb;85(1):133-5. doi: 10.1016/0035-9203(91)90187-4. PMID: 2068743 Allergens 1. Allergic and intolerance reactions to wine. Wüthrich B. Allergol Select. 2018 Sep 1;2(1):80-88. doi: 10.5414/ALX01420E. eCollection 2018. PMID: 31826033 Free PMC article. Review. 2. Development of a mass spectrometry immunoassay for unambiguous detection of egg allergen traces in wines. Pilolli R, Chaudhari R, Palmisano F, Monaci L. Anal Bioanal Chem. 2017 Feb;409(6):1581-1589. doi: 10.1007/s00216-016-0099-3. Epub 2016 Dec 7. PMID: 27928610 3. Implementation of an Enzyme Linked Immunosorbent Assay for the Quantification of Allergenic Egg Residues in Red Wines Using Commercially Available Antibodies. Koestel C, Simonin C, Belcher S, Rösti J. J Food Sci. 2016 Aug;81(8):T2099-106. doi: 10.1111/1750-3841.13378. Epub 2016 Jun 29. PMID: 27356183 Free PMC article. 4. A Rapid Assay to Detect Toxigenic Penicillium spp. Contamination in Wine and Musts. Sanzani SM, Miazzi MM, di Rienzo V, Fanelli V, Gambacorta G, Taurino MR, Montemurro C. Toxins (Basel). 2016 Aug 8;8(8):235. doi: 10.3390/toxins8080235. PMID: 27509524 Free PMC article. 5. Impact of wine manufacturing practice on the occurrence of fining agents with allergenic potential. Deckwart M, Carstens C, Webber-Witt M, Schäfer V, Eichhorn L, Schröter F, Fischer M, Brockow K, Christmann M, Paschke-Kratzin A. Food Addit Contam Part A Chem Anal Control Expo Risk Assess. 2014;31(11):1805-17. doi: 10.1080/19440049.2014.963700. Epub 2014 Oct 9. PMID: 25208236 6. Towards absolute quantification of allergenic proteins in food--lysozyme in wine as a model system for metrologically traceable mass spectrometric methods and certified reference materials. Cryar A, Pritchard C, Burkitt W, Walker M, O'Connor G, Burns DT, Quaglia M. J AOAC Int. 2013 Nov-Dec;96(6):1350-61. doi: 10.5740/jaoacint.12-438. PMID: 24645514 7. Potential food allergens in wine: double-blind, placebo-controlled trial and basophil activation analysis. Rolland JM, Apostolou E, Deckert K, de Leon MP, Douglass JA, Glaspole IN, Bailey M, Stockley CS, O'Hehir RE. Nutrition. 2006 Sep;22(9):882-8. doi: 10.1016/j.nut.2006.06.002. PMID: 16928473 Clinical Trial. Any scientific study even remotely related to human or animal health can be found on PubMed. Happy Hunting!
  19. 0 points
    Based on what Ive read, I'm sure slow proofing vodka wouldn't hurt, but it's not as critical, because it has far fewer oils in suspention than something that is typically double pot distilled like a brandy, or has a lot of oils from botanicals like a gin.
  20. 0 points
    Pitching yeast into a mash that already has alcohol in it is stressful and damaging to them. At the beginning the yeast are building their membrane walls and reproducing and the presence of alcohol can affect this behavior. There are some components of heads/tails that can be consumed & cleaned up by yeast during fermentation, but I would add to an already working fermentation if that was the goal.
  21. 0 points
    I totally agree with what you're saying about the local rate of water addition, but I think there is also a chemical transformation (or maybe it's physical, I am an accountant by education...) related to adding the water in small (slow) doses over a longer period of time. Each addition of water is accompanied by an infusion of oxygen from the mixing process and then this is given time to settle and normalize with the environment before the next addition. It seems to better protect the nose/perfume of the spirit. A cognac distiller told me the dilution must happen slowly enough that almost no raise in temperature occurs (for the mixture of alcohol and water). I certainly can't explain exactly what's going on, but my experience doing it both ways directs me going slowly, which aligns with the guidance given by enough distillers who I respect to think that it is a real phenomenon. I look at it as the difference between chopping garlic and smashing it. Scientists have proven why there is a difference in flavor (in the 90s there was a big boom in garlic research), but my great grandmother who couldn't read also knew that it happened without caring why.
  22. 0 points
    Slickfloss, I know 5 or 6 different ways to use them to help with distillation. However anymore I think thumpers have fallen out of favor with packed columns and plates being easily used or doublers more in fashion at commercial distillers. Being able to control energy very easily these days the other advantages of thumpers is also diminished. I'd love to hear your comments that you deleted and it surely wouldn't offend me in any way. This is the way we all learn! With that said, the only real use of thumpers I do anymore is to put the grains in them for a fast strip run that is crazy smeared and fully flavorful, but most of the stuff I personally make these days is fermented off grain so...
  23. 0 points
    They do have a certification, but it has very little meaning. I know of an ADI 'Certified Farm Distillery' that has never produced anything from raw material, their products are a GNS based vodka (no redistillation), a GNS based gin, and a pre-aged kentucky bourbon which they illegitimately label as distilled in Oregon. So these certifications are all kind of meaningless without enforcement. The only certification I can think of that has any enforcement at all is the certified texas whiskey program https://texaswhiskey.org/
  24. 0 points
    I've worked at two places that dilute from still strength to bottling strength in a day or two, and a place that takes 4-6 weeks. My organoleptic experience is that there is a significant quality impact to diluting brown spirits like whiskey and brandy rapidly. Taking time to do it might be a luxury, but we produce a luxury product and an extra month is negligible if it's already waited 4-6 years in barrel. Tank stratification was an issue at one place where the gin was proofed rapidly in a 2000 gal tank, but thorough mixing is required whether you are diluting a small amount or a large amount, fast or slow.
  25. 0 points
    DD: I have never and would never run as you describe. Not saying you can't or don't do it successfully but I don't and would never even try. I originally was going to respond to all the things you said, but deleted it. OP: Sounds like you had some success omitting the thumper for the stripping run, but what you're doing is still not the best if what you're looking for is flavor. What type of spirit are you trying to make? The set up you have described can be modified to be more intelligent for a whiskey/rum stripping run if thats what you're doing. When you run with that set up you're stripping and applying reflux, which is going to have flavor consequences. What proof do you pull at running your strip as described? Lets go back to my original advice. What if we used low wines in the thumper.
  26. 0 points
    It's a Bain Marie with electric elements. I talked to the still manufacturer and he confirmed that if still is less than 30% full the surging will get worse and worse. I filled it with hot water before trying again, and it ran super smooth. The agitator is vertical, not offset, and there is a fin on the side that works as a vortex breaker. My theory is that if the liquid drop below the fin, the vortex causes some sort of vacuum effect. I wish I had tried running it without the agitator to confirm my thinking.
  27. 0 points
    I didnt see, or take offence. many different ways to get a job done, everyone favors their own, thats just how life works.
  28. 0 points
    @DrDistillation I've heard the chain and cup arrangement you're describing called a "dipping dog", maybe fancy people call it by the french name. 😎
  29. 0 points
    Can I be so bold as to summarize? This is a common thought, but it's totally wrong. You can not control the temperature of boiling. The temperature the pot will boil at depends on how much alcohol there is. More alcohol, boils lower. You can only control heat input, this is, the SPEED of boiling. More power in, more vapor generated, but the temp doesn't go up. Less power may may the temp fall, but this is only after it's stopped boiling and producing vapor. Over the course of the run, the temp in the pot will rise, but this is a function of the alcohol being removed, and the boiling point increasing as a result.
  30. 0 points
    There is no video in the spoiler link. I don't know much about streaming shows but I think you should be able to get back issues on Disney + but don't know if it is there yet. Once you watch the show you will be able to see my process. Spent grain is fed to my sheep. When they are in the shearing shed their shit falls through slots in floor and eventually dries out. That is where Gordon the shit shoveler was put to work. Rye grain is sprouted (malted) in an industrial clothes dryer. A timer turns on several times a day and waters the grain and turns the drum for a few seconds for a few days. I load peat or "rapidly aged peat" into an old propane cylinder, once it is smoldering I introduce a small controlled amount of air into the bottom so it makes smoke only and doesn't start burning with a flame. The wet green malted grain in the clothes dryer now turns at regular clothes dryer speed and the smoke is piped into the middle. The wet grain tumbles through the smoke.
  31. 0 points
    http://adiforums.com/topic/11780-greetings-from-nj/?tab=comments#comment-67938
  32. 0 points
    Did not understand the above comment. Please expand on this if you are only using beer as the coolant. Please can you post post a process flow diagram of your smaller unit running at 1.5KW.
  33. 0 points
    Yes they (botanicals) are considered part of the formula that calculates organic. The thing your going to have to watch is that if your organic certified neural is only say 96% organic then if you add anything to the recipe that's not it can push you easily over that 95% organic threshold. Just because something says organic (like your neural) doesn't mean you start with it being 100% organic then allowing you to add 5% of non organic items.
  34. 0 points
    Depending on which Organic organisation / country you certify with, they have differing levels of non organic ingredients allowed. I am not sure what the USDA specifies. But, in principal; The botanicals are considered ingredients, but their small quantities may make them exempt from being organic input. Pesticides and other agrichems will pass through a still. As I think the USDA uses the 5% rule (5% of ingredients can be Non organic, but not GMO), if you secure a Organic CERTIFIED NGS you will be good to go. Do speak to the organic certifiers, they will know whats allowed and what is possible. Customers do care about OC. It also gives you a solid differentiator. OC production is more expensive, mainly due to the additional costs of process cleaning, paperwork, more manual labour, less chemicals.
  35. 0 points
    That sounds like an interesting vodka. I love tasting lots of different spirits and judging them according to the merits of their identity. My favorite Vodka is Grey Goose and I like it neat but I rarely drink it because I personally like whiskey and bourbon and almost everything else better. I have tried many different vodkas with hints of flavors such as vanilla from certain types of wheat etc, but i like the more neutral, very fresh and crisp ones best. I like tasting light whiskeys and Canadian blended whiskeys and I have my favorites among them but I prefer more flavor and body then they impart. I enjoy 18 year Glenfiddich or Blanton's Single Barrel a great deal more. It sounds like your vodka with the whiskey highlights would be like an ultra light whiskey. I would love to try it. I'm one of those people that is crazy about trying new spirits of any type and new foods. Can I buy your products on line?
  36. 0 points
    Thank you everyone for your responses. It was actually a mistake that we made here at ground level. We were using a tube that was not rated to handle 190 proof alcohol. We were getting traces of the rubber in the alcohol and that was leaving the blue tint. Make sure everything you're using is rated for high proof alcohols.. Thank you for your help!!
  37. 0 points
    Joe - Sadly you completely misinterpret the data. While it could certainly be argued that 99.9% of your customers (those buying bulk spirits from you) do not care where their bulk products comes from, that is not the same as 99.9% of end customers "not-caring" about where the products originated. For example 80% of people who go anywhere on vacation bring home some form of Geographically branded merchandise. In the old days it was snow globes of the statue of liberty and T-Shirts, now it's more typically craft beer, wine or spirits. The wine industry is very strict about viticulture, fortification origin, etc and the beer industry is all local, but unfortunately Big Alcohol has embraced laws that obfuscate the actual origin of spirits to the detriment of the true craft / local centric culture. You even appear to veil the actual origin of some of the bulk products you sell on this very site, I would assume as an attempt to even further push the false narrative that what people don't know, won't hurt them. A self serving and self fulfilling prophesy that goes something like " If I dump enough cheap Bio-Ethanol on the system by pretending that it's ok with the end consumer, eventually every distiller in the country will have to stop making their own alcohol, because they will not be able to compete with the price points and margins of fake craft products ". I completely reject your assertion that 99.9% of "end customers" are either too dumb, cheap, or non-caring, to pay a premium for a hand crafted product. In fact that's not even the argument of the fake craft distillers who buy bulk products which they pretend are their own craft spirits. That actual hidden argument goes something like, " if the end customer is actually so stupid that fake distillers can dupe them into paying more, regardless of where the spirits actually comes from, then it should be considered "craft industry standard". This obvious because otherwise all " fake craft distillers" selling NGS Vodka, Gin and flavored liqueurs would be pricing their products the same as can be found on the bottom shelf of any inner city liquor store. Or better than that, at $1.20 +/- cheaper that "Barton'esq" Vodka, because "fake craft" distillers have the FIT reduction that large producers don't. But they don't do that. Why ? Because as long as they can, the fake craft distillers will charge the absolute maximum possible for the products they spend pennies on, provided that the customer doesn't find out. The success of craft spirits, craft beer and farm wine, is dependent on our ability to actually charge enough to offset the higher cost of production to make those goods in-house. All of that is contingent upon the trust that the customer places in our industry to not deceive them. We spend a lot of time and energy educating our customers about the process of making our spirits, and we hear time and again how they hear exactly the same things from another local "distiller". The only difference is that on the back of their bottles in really fine print it say "100% NGS". We, and I use that collectively for all real distillers, unwittingly support the fake distillery industry, and we need to figure out how to fix that. I am sorry that your attempt at running a true craft distillery failed, even thought literally hundreds of us are thriving. and I appreciate the concept of you as a distiller selling your bulk products into the base of the 3 tiered system and to manufacturers who do not pretend to be actual distillers. That market place is very price sensitive, and your products obviously fit that bill. At the same time, try not to destroy the industry that we chose to operate in, by pushing the false narrative that end customers are too stupid or too cheap to care about their purchase decision. What's on your label ?
  38. 0 points
    the problem is, that labeling does not clearly show the consumer who made the product. So they can not make an informed decision. I have many customers who have no idea that a distillery can buy alcohol and package it. I am no against people selling GNS or sourced whisky, just don't try and convince the customer that you made it. Be truthful and say you bought it, then let the consumer decide.
  39. 0 points
    If that is directed at me, sorry you feel that why. My reply was both serious and meant to be informational, and pretty much common wisdom among those of us that have actually tried to do what you are talking about (as I have). I tried to share what I learned from my experience as a craft distiller that makes a vodka (among other things). If you are a small craft producer, and you want to make vodka, then making it from an interesting source material, and distilling so that it has a mouth feel and a trace of flavor that the customer finds pleasant or intriguing, can be the features that make your product worth consideration to buy over mass-produced high-purity products that you can't compete with on quality or price (e.g., Absolut or Smirnoff). In that case, avoid turbo yeast, because it will generate poor flavor. And if you are just trying to make something without flavor by getting to highest purity, then it would be far cheaper to redistill bulk NGS. Again, no need for turbo yeast. You asked for people's advise, I gave you my advise (no turbo yeast) and why. If you don't want people's advise, don't come on this forum and ask for it. And there is no need to be rude when they give it to you. Honestly, my comments don't benefit me in any way, they were meant to benefit either you or others who might read the thread. This is not a private thread, so neither should you be trying to censor me or others for answering your public question. I suggest if you can not remain civil, you not use this site.
  40. 0 points
    CDEs comments are indeed good, but let me add a twist wrt gelatinization. First point - I am not addressing the issue of 'gums' mostly polymers of pentosan sugars that cause a lot of viscosity in the case of rye, for example. There are two categories of grain starch, amylose and amylopectin. Amylose is mostly 'straight' chain glucose with 1,4 bonds and typically ~300 glucose molecules in length. Amylose is soluble in water and doesn't cause anything like the viscosity problems of amylopectins. I write 'straight' however they are really a spiral (like DNA) and the spiral traps iodine for the iodine starch test. Amylopectin is not a real pectin (does not contain regular terminal methyl groups like fruit pectins), but a single grain starch granule may consist of ~300,000 glucose (up to 1.2mill units) units in a tree structure. The tree consists of segment of amylose (1,4 bonded glucose) typically around 18-22 glucose in length, which then split in a 'Y' with a 1,4 and a 1,6 bonded group. [imagine a 14-15 stage binary tree w/ 20-unit amylose units per segment] .The amylopectic is the stuff that absorbs the water in gelatinization. As the tree unfolds, the very polar water molecules become trapped between the branches of the 'Y' (the glucose hydroxyl groups are the cause). Amylopectin is the stuff that thickens a gravy or a mash as the starch granules swell, expand and trap water. Common grains consist of ~70-80% starch (maize is on the top end, most small grains closer to 70%) and the starch is typically ~25% amylose and ~75% amylopectin. The exception is that "waxy" grains and especially waxy maize can be ~100% amylopectin. So as you cook starch in a water slurry the amylopectin starch begins to unravel and trap water. If there is insufficient water then retrogradation sets in which the internal tangling of the amylopectins. A common example of retrograded starch is stale bread. Another is the 'skin' that forms on wet dough if allowed to dry. The retrograded starch is not susceptible to enzyme or acidic hydrolysis - it's indigestible and a distillers loss. So the practical deal is that w/o enzymes, grain grist may require 10x to 12x the grist mass of water to prevent retrogradation during cooking. That means to prevent retro' you can only add ~2/3rd lb of grist to a gallon of water! The solution to get to ~2lb/gallon is to add a little 'debranching' enzyme to the grain cooker and this can drastically reduce the amount of water needed, as the debranching enzymes cut apart the amylopectin tree and reduce the water trapped. Alpha-amylase is a choice. I can't speak to the proprietary 'visco' enzymes, but they are certainly the right direction to create normal cereal cooking. Enzymes don't directly cause or improve gelatinization (that's a matter of water, heat and pH) but enzymes are necessary for a practical thick cereal cook w/o excessive retrogradation. We should also mention beta-glucanases which assist in clearing the cellulosic "wrapper" from around the starch granule mega-molecules. This is fairly effective in malting, but for raw grists a rest may have some advantage. The starch will gelatinize at temperature in any case, but the glucanas residues can create a gel and add to viscosity.


×
×
  • Create New...