Brewpub brewing techniques

ChefJoeR · 08-16-2011, 04:03 AM

O.K., I know a lot of us look at brewing as a craft, art form, obsession, etc... We have our favorite pubs, microbreweries, brewpubs that we frequent. I also read about plenty of people on here that wish to open nanobreweries, microbreweries and brewpubs.

My question is this: does it matter to you if your favorite nanobrewery, microbrewery or brewpub brews all-grain, partial or extract?

Let's face it, those of us that own or plan to own a business such as this, or any business for that matter, are primarily doing it for one reason - MONEY!! We have to look at the most economical way to produce a product and sell it for profit. This is just something that keeps brewing in the back of my head (no pun intended, I swear). What are your thoughts?

**BBL_Brewer** · 08-16-2011, 04:37 AM

I would think that from a business perspective, it would definitely be cheaper to brew all grain than it would to brew extract or partial. If you want to cut costs on fermentables, it would make more sense to me to incorporate some adjuncts.

NiteBeest · 08-16-2011, 03:07 PM

I think AG would be best. Especially when you figure that you'll be making 100s of gallons of a certain beer. When you get the set-up for your location or if you partner with a local brewery then I think AG would be the easier and more efficient option.

bruderbier · 09-29-2011, 04:18 PM

You would lose money doing partial mash brewing. I can see no benefit at all.

There is almost no advantage to brewing extract on a commercial scale.

You'd save the one-time cost of a mash/lauter tun. And you'd save the back breaking work and time of cleaning up and disposing of spent grain.

You would pay 2-3 times as much for extract over grain and give up the flexibility of formulating your recipies and could lose control over the flavor/color from batch to batch. You would also need so sort of special vessel or mechanism to steep and remove specialty grains.

It might work for a gimmicky addition to a restaurant selling a $6-7 house pint, but I don't think it would be a money maker.

Mead or cider might be a better route for someone who wants to brew commercially without dealing with grain.

ACbrewer · 09-29-2011, 04:35 PM

The only thing I can think of is a smaller micro whose AG batch is off a bit and needs to add some extract to bring up the OG. I know places like Briess make a 55gal (640lb) LME barrel and their web page implies it is just for that purpose - to bring up the OG in the event something else is off.

I bet you could run the numbers and find that the labor cost and inital equipment cost is offset in a few years by going AG over extract.

To to answer OP's question - I want it to taste good and since extract starts as grain in the field just like AG, no I don't care.

Cascadegan · 09-30-2011, 09:32 PM

When I drink a beer I care about what it tastes like (and a good label affects my decision in a way)
What's in it doesn't make a huge difference, and you no one has to know you use extract unless you give brewery tours or something

blackbird · 10-10-2011, 01:13 AM

I think most people would agree that AG is ideal. But I think if you're just getting started and are on a shoestring budget, extract has some benefits. As ACbrewer pointed out, the extra cost on equipment for brewing AG would be offset eventually, but that doesn't matter if eventually never comes. The main benefits I could see would be much less invested time, much less initial start up costs, much smaller set up to produce the same amount of beer, and energy savings. Also, it wouldn't be hard to scale up production as demand for your product rises.

**Airborneguy** · 10-10-2011, 01:22 AM

I've been to one brewpub that brewed extract, and one other that I think did but wouldn't really say. Both sucked. Now I'm certainly not saying that extract beers are inherently bad. I do believe though that a brewpub that chooses to go extract is probably making that choice based on lower start-up costs, probably does not have a brewer on hand who really should be a professional (because they would have told the finance gurus to go all-grain to save money in the long run), and likely the place will not survive. Commercially, AG offers the best profit margins over the long term.

One more point. While money is obviously VERY important, the quality of the beer will factor into how much money the place brings in. There are proper ways to cut costs without compromising quality, and then there are ways to cut costs that will impact the product. A good business person knows the difference.

**shafferpilot** · 10-10-2011, 02:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by airborneguy

i've been to one brewpub that brewed extract, and one other that i think did but wouldn't really say. Both sucked. Now i'm certainly not saying that extract beers are inherently bad. I do believe though that a brewpub that chooses to go extract is probably making that choice based on lower start-up costs, probably does not have a brewer on hand who really should be a professional (because they would have told the finance gurus to go all-grain to save money in the long run), and likely the place will not survive. Commercially, ag offers the best profit margins over the long term.

One more point. While money is obviously very important, the quality of the beer will factor into how much money the place brings in. There are proper ways to cut costs without compromising quality, and then there are ways to cut costs that will impact the product. A good business person knows the difference.

+1

blackbird · 10-10-2011, 02:59 AM

You are assuming that I meant an inferior product because of the use of extract. It looks like this is turning into another one of those debates on quality of extract vs AG brews