Understanding impact of Commercial enzymes on Mash Bill

[Deepak Panwar]

Hi everyone,

I am currently trying to understand cost implication of either using commercial enzymes (instead of malted barley) or not using anything (no enzymes or malted barley) in bourbon whiskey production

Following are the 2 scenarios that I am trying to study:

• What would be the impact on the raw material cost, if we use commercial enzymes instead of using malt barley?
• What would be the impact on the raw material cost, if we do not use any commercial enzymes or malt barley?

Based on some research, i identified one article containing details of raw material composition and cost associated with bourbon whiskey production. 

Mash Bill	% in Mash Bill	amount of Input required	Cost of Mash Bill
Corn	70	750	375
Rye	20	200	92
Malted Barley	10	100	60
Yeast			50
Total Mash Bill Cost			577

source: https://www.thedailybeast.com/why-is-bourbon-so-damn-expensive

Can you help me in understanding how will the 2 aforementioned scenarios change the cost?

Regards,

Deepak

 

 

Edited September 4, 2018 by Deepak Panwar

[Hudson bay distillers]

just curious ,if you dont use any malted grain or any commercial enzymes how do you plan on converting your starch to sugar . 

tim 

[Skaalvenn]

I think we can all agree that your grain costs and I'll go up, heh,  significantly,  if you don't use malt or enzymes.

Don't take it as an insult; but it's like asking if your still will be cheaper to run if you don't heat it.

[indyspirits]

And where in the world are you paying 50 cents/lb for corn?  Bourbon is expensive solely because the market supports the asking price.

 

 

[Deepak Panwar]

Hello Everyone,

Thanks for your inputs. After further studying various articles, I too realised that the prices quoted in the article are higher plus the scenario 2 does not exists. 

• Now if we just compare use of commercial enzymes with malted barley. how would the raw material cost would vary?

Mash Bill	% in Mash Bill	Amount of Input required when using malted barley
Corn	77	X
Rye	13	X
Malted Barley	10	X

• What would be the amount of raw materials required (in pounds) considering 1000 gallon is the target?

Also, i got to know that using commercial enzymes increases the overall yield and hence the amount of raw materials (corn and rye required) is less. Can you help me with calculating the amount of corn and rye required for manufacturing 1000 gallons using commercial enzymes (may be 1 oz or amount used for producing 1000 gallons bourbon whiskey)?

Your inputs would be very helpful.

Regards,

 

[indyspirits]

We use malted barley not because of diastatic power, but because it has a different flavor profile that raw.

[Silk City Distillers]

Probably going to be strung up for even suggesting this, but in doing a bunch of work with 100% malted and unmalted rye - I find the flavor profile of enzyme converted unmalted rye to be far superior to malt rye.  Granted, there is a huge difference in the location and grower of the base grain, and that may be a big factor, but the difference is not subtle.  To me, unmalted grains come across smoother, more subtle, the rye is substantially less peppery and assertive.

For years I bought into the common thought that malt was far superior to unmalt+enzyme in every single way, no question...  But is it really?

Fire away.

[Tom Lenerz]

1 hour ago, Silk City Distillers said:

Probably going to be strung up for even suggesting this, but in doing a bunch of work with 100% malted and unmalted rye - I find the flavor profile of enzyme converted unmalted rye to be far superior to malt rye.  Granted, there is a huge difference in the location and grower of the base grain, and that may be a big factor, but the difference is not subtle.  To me, unmalted grains come across smoother, more subtle, the rye is substantially less peppery and assertive.

For years I bought into the common thought that malt was far superior to unmalt+enzyme in every single way, no question...  But is it really?

Fire away.

Silk, what are your experiences with raw vs. malt barley? 

[Silk City Distillers]

None - nobody grows any around here.

But I thought this  one was interesting, brewing related but clearly related.  Look at the congener composition of malt barley beer vs enzyme converted barley beer.  Unmalted is cleaner from a congener perspective.  Keep in mind, unmalted raw grain is low in FAN (aka Amino Acids) - Amino acids are necessary precursors to many higher alcohols/aldehydes/etc.  

brewing_unmalted.pdf

[Silk City Distillers]

I would have imagined there would be a ton of literature from the Irish whiskey distillers - since they use high proportions of unmalted grain, compared to say Scotch, but surprisingly there is not.

[Huffy2k]

5 hours ago, Silk City Distillers said:

the rye is substantially less peppery and assertive.

Depending on the objective for your rye whiskey, this may or may not be a good thing.. 

[captnKB]

solid can of worms you have opened @Deepak Panwar

Im excited to watch the discussion unfold.

[Silk City Distillers]

8 hours ago, Huffy2k said:

Depending on the objective for your rye whiskey, this may or may not be a good thing.. 

It's still unmistakably rye.

WhistlePig's 10+ year old Ryes sourced from Alberta Distillers are all 100% unmalted enzyme converted ryes.

[Tom Lenerz]

Silk, this is interesting info to digest.

My limited experience with raw vs. malted barley showed the raw having a major flavor contribution at only 4.5% of the mashbill in a rye whiskey experiment we conducted.  It overpowered the malt and corn content, and even competed with the rye for dominance which was about 2/3rds of the mashbill.

We have not done much with rye malt yet, so I have nothing to comments there.

[Still_Holler]

I thought most popular Rye Whiskey are made with unmalted Rye or otherwise it would have to be labled as Rye Malt Whiskey which I rarely see in stores? I am getting ready to do my first batch of Rye Malt Whiskey mash bill of 220 lbs malted rye and 140 lbs of corn. Question for you Silk, do you mash in the malted rye at 170f like you would with unmalted or will that kill the enzymes?  Does it need to be 140f like for malted barley? Thanks.

On 9/4/2018 at 4:33 PM, Silk City Distillers said:

Probably going to be strung up for even suggesting this, but in doing a bunch of work with 100% malted and unmalted rye - I find the flavor profile of enzyme converted unmalted rye to be far superior to malt rye.  Granted, there is a huge difference in the location and grower of the base grain, and that may be a big factor, but the difference is not subtle.  To me, unmalted grains come across smoother, more subtle, the rye is substantially less peppery and assertive.

For years I bought into the common thought that malt was far superior to unmalt+enzyme in every single way, no question...  But is it really?

Fire away.

 

[Silk City Distillers]

We treat all malt the same way, not based on ideal gelatinization temp but the denature temp of the enzymes.

We tend to mash in malt around 156-158, which gives us a mash temp around 152.

[indyspirits]

5 hours ago, Silk City Distillers said:

which gives us a mash temp around 152

No concern about dextrine formation at that temp?  We mash in around 152 - 156 with a target of 149.  

[Silk City Distillers]

Nah, we have played around with numbers and high 140s seems to take much longer to convert, with no real impact to final yield.  We ferment on grain and obviously don’t boil, so we aren’t denaturing any remaining active enzyme.

I’be found that adding Gluco positively impacts yield in either case.  Though it’s fairly minor.

 

[indyspirits]

Hmmm. That's surprising. We too add GA to hedge our dextrine formation bets. Wondering if we're just wasting money.

 

 

[Old385]

Just had an interesting assessment done that raised embrows. Appreciate a perspective from the group. Touches a couple points woven into this thread. In my MB I use both barley and rye malts. Also use liquid Alpha, beta and gluco and realizing good yields. Mash in at 155 and rest at 145. Alpha on the way up and beta/gluco on the way down. Consultant indicated I need a cook temp of 185 and top end rest of 90 mins to “kill bacteria” and “gelatanize” completely even though I’m milled corn. What am I missing folks?

[indyspirits]

Is this a bourbon mash bill, i.e. is there corn in there with the rye & barley?

Edit: Read and re-read that you're using milled corn so the answer to my question is "yes".   

The consultant is partially right.  The starch in corn is bound in a tight matrix, the best way for the alpha to get at is is to soak it in hot water.  There's a paper out there that says 183 is fine. We always heat to 190, add HTA, and hold until negative starch test, lower the temp to under 160 they add our barley / rye / quinoa / oats / whatever.   I have very rarely experienced an infected bourbon mash.  If you cool quickly then pitch an appropriate amount of yeast it will out-compete any wild bugs.  Heating your other-that-corn grains to 185 will server only to denature naturally occurring enzymes.

 

[Old385]

16 minutes ago, indyspirits said:

Is this a bourbon mash bill, i.e. is there corn in there with the rye & barley?

Edit: Read and re-read that you're using milled corn so the answer to my question is "yes".   

The consultant is partially right.  The starch in corn is bound in a tight matrix, the best way for the alpha to get at is is to soak it in hot water.  There's a paper out there that says 183 is fine. We always heat to 190, add HTA, and hold until negative starch test, lower the temp to under 160 they add our barley / rye / quinoa / oats / whatever.   I have very rarely experienced an infected bourbon mash.  If you cool quickly then pitch an appropriate amount of yeast it will out-compete any wild bugs.  Heating your other-that-corn grains to 185 will server only to denature naturally occurring enzymes.

 

Thanks Indy. Comfy with the gelatinization role so that makes sense. Understood that was targeted solely at the corn. The consultant suggested that all grains could be added on the way up which didn't make sense to me. I am four grain so adding the wheat and rye/barley malts on the way up seemed useless since as you point out they would denature anyway. Only the HTA as I understand can survive the 190f journey. He also suggested a top end rest for 90 mins. Currently I drop to 150 and add malts/wheat, rest then drop pH to 4.7 and fold in my Beta/Gluco for the last rest. Then crash to 80 and pitch and go to ferment. Recently, gravities started to climb which got me back on the research trail. Normal for me was 72 for my bourbon and 82 for my rye. Bourbon is up to 82 and finishing high at 8-12. Thanks for taking the time to respond.

[indyspirits]

Starch test will tell you if there's any remaining starch and, well, if there's no starch it must have all been cleaved to long chain sugars.  Ours is anywhere between 45 mins to 75 mins depending, I assume, on the quality of the grind and maybe the "freshness" of HTA??  Youre spot on in that adding all grains on the way up is a fools errand. Sounds like you have it will under control. 

 

 

[Old385]

1 hour ago, indyspirits said:

Starch test will tell you if there's any remaining starch and, well, if there's no starch it must have all been cleaved to long chain sugars.  Ours is anywhere between 45 mins to 75 mins depending, I assume, on the quality of the grind and maybe the "freshness" of HTA??  Youre spot on in that adding all grains on the way up is a fools errand. Sounds like you have it will under control. 

 

 

Thanks again for your time. Happy Thanksgiving.