Silk City Distillers

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/store/10.1002/j.2050-0416.1975.tb03788.x/asset/j.2050-0416.1975.tb03788.x.pdf?v=1&t=isna5vg3&s=2dff8519bbf1579b74def060c32b4379620221b0

No right or wrong here. In or out is going to yield two different profiles. There are a few journal articles on this, let me see if I can dig them up later. One thing that stood out to me, is that distilling with yeast will increase the total esters in the distillate. If I recall, it's somewhat indiscriminate, so while you'll get more fruity esters, you'll also get some of the funkier esters as well, and a number of other compounds (fatty acids, etc), which you might find desirable or undesirable based on what you are going for.

Also, you need to be careful of your use of the words "Intrinsically Safe", as the terminology has a very specific engineering meaning. The concept of intrinsic safety is predicated on reducing ignition potential by eliminating or significantly reducing the amount of electrical or thermal energy in a system. These are things you are going to find very difficult to accomplish in a distilling apparatus, especially if they contain things like heating elements, motors, high voltage circuitry, capacitors, switches, etc. Certification agencies like UL and FM have specific testing methodologies to certify devices as Intrinsically Safe. It's very different from the concept of Explosion Proof, or even just safety best practices and common sense. Take a look at UL 913. These are very rigorous standards. Intrinsic Safety is a very serious certification. It's not a certification that would generally apply to a countertop appliance that would plug into a household outlet (that pretty much eliminates the possibility of Intrinsic Safety certification). This is a standard to ensure that people don't die in hazardous areas like refineries, or miners don't blow themselves up by lighting a shaft up.

I also applaud you for your focus on safety, which is almost entirely absent from that segment of the market. However, if you are exclaiming the fact that you solved the problem, you first need to ensure everyone understands the problem, and in that lies significant risk for yourself. Can you imagine talking to the consultants at Underwriters Laboratory? Product Manufacturer: "Distilling is an incredibly dangerous activity, and there needs to be considerable safeguards in place, which I've solved for with x, y, z, you see here, I've done this. We've taken care of that, it's entirely safe now." UL: "So, your saying that this product performs an incredibly dangerous activity?" Product Manufacturer: "Well, no, um, well, yes, distilling is dangerous, but, um, you see I've taken care of that here, and there, with this doohickey, and that, and there is absolutely no risk of explosion." UL: "So, your saying that this product can explode?" Product Manufacturer: "No, no, you aren't understanding me. Yes, the process is extremely dangerous, and there exists the risk of a vapor explosion, and considerable risk to life, limb, and property, but I've engineered solutions to fix all of that." UL: "Thank you for your time today."

Wish you the best of luck, it's an exciting project. But, what I don't get is, if you have to go to the liquor store to buy the 4 gallons of wine Wouldn't you just buy a bottle of vodka and skip the whole middle part? What's the value proposition for the consumer? It's certainly not ROI and saving money, because 4 gallons of wine is going to cost the same as a mid/lower shelf bottle of vodka. And with a $500 cost of entry... in my opinion, the home distilling trend has everything to do with creativity and experimentation, just like the home brewing trend. It's about hands on, it's about learning. I don't think the average consumer is going care much about a tiny elegant continuous still design. That's geek territory, and an obscure corner of geekdom at that. That said, I'm sure there are dozens of people that pony up $200, every day, to buy that little countertop air still thing.

For the spirit used in maceration, I would imagine all the way up to GNS/Neutral level. Most lay-discussion on the internet focuses on using vodka, but that's only because 190 proof neutral spirit is only available to the public in some 36 states, and even then it might be a bit more difficult to find.

Yes. But... We must always guard against the danger of getting lost in the romanticism of nostalgia. We can respect the old ways and be thankful that we have the ability to stand on the shoulders of giants, but that doesn't mean that we should not push the limits, leveraging new technologies and new techniques, to create new, unique, and better products than our elders had before us. Just because they are the old ways, do not mean that they are the best ways. Don't mistake my words, I'm not saying that a new way is better because it's new, or that an old way isn't the best way. Just like our elders had the responsibility of growing and enriching their craft, so do we. If it means an old way must go, it must go. I believe the old artisans would approve. I'm sure I'm not the only one who reads this article as being condescending. I'm sure it wasn't written to come off as condescending, but it is nonetheless. I admit, it's nice to look back on the good old days. Everything was better back then, wasn't it? Men were men, honesty was a virtue, and someone's word actually meant something. Having studied neuroscience and cognitive psychology for many years, with a focus on emotion, memory, and cognitive bias, I can't help but read these kinds of nostalgic pieces and imagine how much of that retrospection was clouded by biases and flaws (or omissions) in our memories. There is a well known cognitive bias called Rosy Retrospection. Despite the cute name, it's the basis for those feelings of romantic nostalgia we have for the past. However, it also means that perhaps the past was not how we remember. I still remember the taste of the champagne that I sipped after toasting with my wife at our wedding reception, or the taste of that whiskey me and the boys sipped when getting the news that there was a little one on the way, god it was so good. The reality of it is, the good old days weren't. I'm not complaining that our brains have a propensity to fade unpleasant memories, and retain (and even embellish) the good ones. Life would be awful otherwise, wouldn't it? But, the old stories come together, and history is written with these biases. So when we look back, we need to understand that the negatives were probably omitted, and the positives are certainly more positive than they were. So, now we get to the truth, let's be realistic here. Commercial producers, even small ones, have been producing awful spirits for as long as people have been drinking them. You would be remiss to simply assume just because some producer produced something seventy five years ago, it was absolutely fantastic, magical, unparalleled in quality and without compare. Because, you know what, most of it was probably pretty bad. Craft was probably the last thing in many of their minds. Losing a batch to a raging bacterial infection meant your kids going hungry, so they produced it anyway. I've tasted lots of very old product, you know, the kind with fancy scores and reviews, when people fawn over names, and was amazed that after dozens of years your could still taste the fact that they didn't bother to take much of a heads cut, hell, any cut at all. The raw distillate was probably so god awful that it needed 25 years on oak just to be remotely drinkable. What I don't understand is, why make these overly broad, sweeping assumptions about the new breed of craft producers? Yet at the same time paying some kind of religious homage to those who came before? Frankly, neither deserve it.

Taking it to the next level, anybody willing to chat about hearts cut percentage as a percentage of total yield/theoretical yield? Probably a touchy subject.

Hot would make things easier, but if you don't have active cooling, you are going to have a heck of a time managing fermentation temperatures if you are pitching into a hot tank.

Do you have a pump? Why not just pump from the bottom of the IBC to the top. It probably wouldn't take more than 10 minutes to get a good thorough mixing and aeration.

Shrug, works great for us...

Fancy way of saying liquid malt extract?

Agree on the lack of economics, even accounting for the higher ppg of dme, you would still clock in at least double.

There are a couple of older threads that raise the question, but none seem to provide an answer. Although, they do indicate that some portion of readers will look at this as absolute heresy and demand someone be burned at a stake, or that this will just make America an even fatter nation.

Was having a conversation with someone about where lines are drawn and the topic came up, and I thought to myself, "Well, hell, it's a good question." DME is essentially dry maltose sugar, and LME is essentially high-maltose sweetener. If those were acceptable (they are in brewing), would corn-based extracts be acceptable as well? Pure corn starch? Pure corn syrup? Where's the line? Is there even a line? You could reduce it to absurdity and ask if Corn Syrup and LME would be an acceptable mash bill in a bourbon? Not saying it would be good, bad, or even yield a product that was (organoleptically) anywhere near a whiskey (I'd imagine it would be closer to rum), but would it be acceptable? Really just more curious than anything else.

Is DME approved as a fermentation stock for malt whiskey?

Your local health department is going to have more to say than the FDA. They might require all sorts of new fixture if this wasn't a food processing facility before. We needed three basin sinks, hand wash stations, mop sinks, etc. Operate without floor drains? No way you could be meticulously clean without floor drains. You'll be mopping the floor all day long. i couldn't fathom how you could possibly clean equipment, hoses, etc without the ability to spill and spray down, but that's just me. Heck, a 2 inch hose is going to hold a couple gallons of mash or beer, and when you disconnect that hose, the remainder is going to pour out. I love linear floor drains and wash down hoses.

A nice hammer does not a carpenter make.

Pretty sure your video just ruined the day of that guy that posted the "Slow Distillation" thread. Nice job on the video, and kudos for bucking tradition.

I don't see how simply dropping the gelatinization temperature is going to result in a higher efficiency, that's counterintuitive. Industrial continuous processes regularly use jet cooking at temperatures and pressures far in excess of what we would consider typical temperature ranges (for unmalted grains, obviously). @RogerI've always questioned that chart - Corn gelatinization between 62-78c? No way. We hold 90-95c, and going lower than that does impact efficiency. I wouldn't even dare to try 62c, it would be like heating your still by burning dollars under it. Maybe pure corn starch at 62c? Theoretical temperatures for pure starch granules? When using other unmalted grain (oat, for example), we gelatinize with the corn, to full temp. You invested all that energy to bring the liquid to that temperature, why wouldn't you take advantage of the higher temp?

How does your water test before RO? Are you sure you even need to? Your water could be ideal. RO with chemical additions could be completely counterproductive. Personally, I'd be more concerned with removing chlorine, chloramines, and VOCs, if they are a problem, of course.

McMaster Carr is great when you need anything tomorrow, but god knows you are paying a major premium for the convenience of it dealing with a vendor like that. $400-600 for a barely decent 2" globe valve? That's robbery. Here are some nice options: Here is a nice 1/2" Velan - $30 obo - http://www.ebay.com/itm/Velan-Globe-Valve-S-2074B-02TY-1-2-S-W-Class-800-/262446837817?hash=item3d1b0cf039:g:IJcAAOSwciVXP4Tu Or a 3/4 - $90 obo - http://www.ebay.com/itm/VELAN-S-2074B-02TY-3-4-A105N-A-NSNB-VALVE-/291685709852?hash=item43e9d2b81c:g:dsEAAOSwWTRWwhkN Here is an absolutely beautiful stainless 1" globe, $80, this is probably close to $1000 valve. - http://www.ebay.com/itm/Velan-1-Globe-Valve-Stainless-Steel-S-2074B-13MY-062-/121649886720?hash=item1c52e5f600:g:DNsAAOSweW5VUlzd A nice option might be to use the 1" globe in parallel. Keep it set in the sweet spot. For heatup, open the 2" ball, when you get near operating temp, close the ball and rely on the 1" globe.

We have a 2" Velan globe valve that is relatively precise, it helps that it has a nice sized hand wheel (it's an overkill class 800 valve). However, if you already have a 2" ball valve for gross changes, it might be more cost effective to parallel (tee in) a smaller 1/2 or 3/4" globe valve for fine control. This would give you the best of both worlds, fast large changes with the ball, and high precision changes with the small globe. Having parallel steam valves in this configuration is pretty common, as large globes lose precision at the low end of their range. Steam wouldn't be blowing past the ball valve unless it was damaged, and that would be a constant occurrence.

I'd call up Lesaffre/Fermentis - I bet you they have an alternate product name for commercial. They can probably point you to the right distributor, or just sell to you direct in commercial quantities. Ran into a similar situation with Lallemand, and after calling Lallemand (who are fantastic by the way), it doesn't make sense to purchase through third-parties.

And just like that, you just saved him a couple thousand bucks.