Hewlette

Gentlemen, Allow me one last clarification. My first post was solely in response to comments made in this forum when someone here posted an article written about my company. The article was not a sales pitch but a story of local interest written by a local newspaper journalist. The story was not entirely accurate. For example we never said multiple distillation of neutral spirits results in 40% evaporation loss. It was, however, generally accurate. My post was not to sell anything just to clarify. In that regard, we fortunately do not have to distill. We purchase bulk distillate of all types. The distillate we buy is not generally finished product. Take bourbon for example. One or two year old bourbon is finished as to distillation but hardly "drinkable". That is why you age it much longer. Our efficiency comes from the fact that our process enables us to transform that young bourbon into a liquid having the taste characteristics of a bourbon that has been aged 7 or more years. You may doubt that we can do this. But if we can, you should not doubt that this is more efficient than long barrel aging. I appreciate and thank all of you for your points of view. Earl Hewlette

Our products (vodka, gin, bourbon, tequila, spiced rum, and blended whisky from Scotland) have now won 30 medals in 5 international blind taste competitions. The Moore School of Business of the Univ of SC recently conducted a consumer blind taste panel with almost 100 participants. Our vodka outscored Belvedere and Grey Goose. Our bourbon outscored Knob Creek and Woodford Reserve. Our Tequila outscored Cabo Wabo and tied Padron. Our Spiced Rum out scored Sailor Jerry and was second to Captain Morgan, primarily because they outscored us on aroma. We have data comparing the phenolics gallic acid, vanillic acid and vanillin of a leading 12 year old single malt Scotch with those of a 3 year old Scotch subjected to our process for a few days and they are almost identical -- on paper and in taste. n the case of rum,the process is used instead of barreling. In the case of bourbon, because of TTB standards of identity, the process is used after barreling. But imagine how many oak trees could be saved if the regs permitted oak chips instead of requiring new oak barrels! U.S. Patent No. 7,063,867 issued 2006. Canada issued a patent for the process AND the product in 2010. Pending in EU and other countries.

I'm the CEO of Terressentia Corporation, the company described in the article, and have read the posts here with interest. While the story is generally accurate, it has spawned some misconceptions that I would like to correct. First, we are very careful about following TTB labeling regulations. Second, we do not artificially flavor whiskey, nor do we make it out of GNS. Third, the idea of using some form of energy driven oxygenation and filtration to improve the taste of spirits is not new but we perfected and patented a process that does just that. In short, we react away a substantial amount of the minor alcohol congeners and the free radicals that are a by-product of distillation while at the same time creating some glycerides from the acids that are present. The result is that, in the case of neutral spirits, we improve the taste better than multiple distillation or filtration can, and, in the case of young whiskies, we can replicate in a few weeks the effects of barrel aging over many years. It is true that we cannot replace the mystique of "old" but if you want the taste for a fraction of the cost of "old", we can do it. Most of us resist change, particularly technological change, but we should think about embracing efficiency and economics when they make sense. Earl Hewlette earl@terressentia.com 843 225 3101