That's what I was thinking.
De-alcoholizing beer (Belgian Wit)
- Thread starter Amity
- Start date
Help Support Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum:
That's what I was thinking.
lordbeermestrength
Well-Known Member
Good idea! The only problem I see is bringing to a boil after fermentation. Seems like that would drive off a lot of the flavor compounds from the yeast/malt. But its worth a try.
HerotBrewer
Well-Known Member
Not another drinking and pregnancy thread.... Why won't they die?
Seriously though, pretty cool experiment.
Seriously though, pretty cool experiment.
dukerutledge
Well-Known Member
This sounds like an interesting approach...
FromZwolle
I don't want to be cremated, I want to be malted.
you'd likely lose way too much of the actual beery flavors that way.
Freezing beer is used to remove water and concentrate both the flavor AND the ABV (e.g. eisbocks). Removing the alcohol with this method, would logically remove a lot of the flavor.
In fact, you could achieve the exact same thing (and get a greater final volume), by simply diluting your beer with water.
In fact, you could achieve the exact same thing (and get a greater final volume), by simply diluting your beer with water.
Suthrncomfrt1884
Well-Known Member
I think this is probably your best bet, but it still wouldn't remove more than roughly half of the alcohol. Even heat is the best way to go about this...I would cook it in an oven if you have that capability.
If I was to go about brewing a "low-alcohol" beer, I would brew it as I normally would, but I would do like you say and only boil for 30 minutes. I would add everything pre-30 to the boil, and then cool as usual. Making a highly fermentable wort will give you better attentuation and hopefully not leave too many unfermented sugars behind.
I would bring it to 175-180F in an oven. If you don't have a HUGE oven, possibly use some sort of makeshift heating coil in the wort to evenly distribute heat and make sure you're evaporating everything. My first thought it to heat directly with flame, and also to recirculate 180F water through a wort chiller (heater) while it's in the wort.
This should bring you down to a reasonable level. You'll still need to make some sort of hop/orange/coriander tea in order to get your aroma/flavor.
Obviously, the best way to go about carbonating this would be with a kegging system. Adding priming sugar is going to up your alcohol a little more. You'll also have to add more yeast if you're bottle conditioning and you risk fermenting anything that wasn't previously fermented.
Malta Goya is 1.060. Clearly not what you want.
How about mashing a 1.010 beer, boiling with hops and possibly some other aromatics (cloves, etc), and carbonating.
HHP
Well-Known Member
You will never be able to separate the alcohol from the water completely with any combination of heat or cold.
With this method, I'll bet the alcohol would be trapped in the crystaline structure of the ice and you would be unable to drain it.
HerotBrewer
Well-Known Member
My copy of Clone Brews includes some very low ABV beers (2-3 percent). Might want to check that out as well.
Enough with the pregnancy and alcohol debate. This thread is about low alcohol beer.
bovinejony
Well-Known Member
Ethanol can be converted to bi-products such as aldehydes (CH3CH=O) when oxidized. However, most oxidizing agents are not the most appetizing of chemicals, so you create something like the buy a cat to get rid of a mouse scenario. I know you're SWMBO will only be pregnant for so long but a distillation process may increase your separation efficiency. The added cooling temperatures will allow for a finer selection of boil. Remember, since the wort has a **** ton of sugars and other goodies in it, that you should increase the temperature accordingly since it is most likely more difficult for the ethanol to boil out due to these intermolecular forces.
Yuri_Rage said:
I think the issue with the pregnancy here has to do with the fact that the OP is looking for ways to minimize alcohol because of it, but all the ideas (and it's important to note this includes his own) are, at best, minimally effective and totally unverifiable without an actual lab, and at worst, completely ineffective (and in at least one case, could even concentrate it...), which, given the purpose of lowering the alcohol in this case, is pretty reckless.
My idea guaranteed zero alcohol. Maybe you missed it.
carnevoodoo
Well-Known Member
I don't see this working.
The issue is that unfermented wort doesn't taste like beer. Even at 1.010, it will just be bitter sugar water. The yeast do a lot more than just convert sugar.
kinkothecarp
Well-Known Member
Right. Yeast tend to dry things out via processes outside of fermentation. Your wort will taste awful as a beer.
I don't think any solid method of homebrewing without alcohol can be readily available to us simply because of its complexities. I wonder if the distilling method someone mentioned above is even legal - isn't the product of that a form of moonshine?
Distillation with regard to beverages typically refers to concentrating the alcoholic portion of a mash through the use of heat, evaporation and condensation. That process is illegal in the US without a license, even for home/private use.
However, if you are distilling simply to separate alcohol via evaporation (and not collect it), there is nothing illegal about it.
However, if you are distilling simply to separate alcohol via evaporation (and not collect it), there is nothing illegal about it.
seabass07 said:
Pretty sure anybody using a beer-like grain bill and/or adding hops, not to mention bottling/kegging, and, well, drinking it, are obviously producing it for consumption. I hope you're not being serious, but I've lost count of how many times I've seen people on this board seriously think they've ingeniously thought up "loopholes" and other ways to beat the system for pretty much any and every law that's ever been discussed here, no doubt feeling very clever and proud of themselves for outwitting the man, despite the fact that very few (if any) of these ideas could ever stand even the slightest chance of helping them circumvent a law.
But, many people are fine with breaking the law, so I should add this: ever drink whisky? That's what happens when you distill beer, though in that particular case it's unhopped. The reason I point this out is that the distilled alcohol carries most of the flavor compounds (and a fair bit of water) with it, which is why the flavor intensifies as the alcohol content does too. However, if you distill whisky several times and you have the ability to separate nearly everything else to the point of being nearly pure alcohol, you essentially have vodka (though vodka is diluted with water back down to around 80 proof).
So perhaps if you have the equipment/capabilities to produce clean vodka (easier said than done, and quite expensive), you might be able to save some of the "waste", though since the information on that waste is nowhere near as abundant as that for the actual DESIRED product, I'm not too sure of the chemical makeup of that waste. There's probably residual alcohol left that's difficult to get rid of, but it's obviously a, smaller amount than you started with (seeing as how you end up with nearly pure ethanol that used to be mixed in it), but I have no idea how much. Still, it's an improvement, but that's just the alcohol part. What issv54 happening to the rest of that "waste"? Many hop compounds, for instance, are quite unstable, and I would imagine that, at best, you lose the hoppiness, and at worst, it creates some horrible off-flavors. Same goes for many yeast-produced compounds, and so you'd really have to choose a style with minimal hops character, and probably minimal yeast-derived flavor as well (eg Belgians, wheat beers, etc). Good filtering would probably also be needed, as subjecting all those yeast cells to the distillation process would likely be awful.
So, like with whisky, you'd probably need to focus on a very malty brew... which doesn't exactly give much room for pantydro-- *ahem* styles that are widely enjoyed by females not entirely into craft beer. But that's an issue that only even matters if you choose to ignore the fairly large legal issues. And even then, perhaps the biggest detterent is the equipment investment required to do this and have any chance at success (much more than your basic pot still, that's for sure). It would be several thousand dollars... insanely high when only needed for half a year, and especially when the potential for decent results is totally up in the air. If there were greater certainty, I'd actually strongly consider investing in it myself, as I would like nothing more than to reduce the alcohol content of my own beer, for my own consumption long-term.
(Apologies if the writing ends up a bit odd in places, I was nearly dozing off back to sleep at parts!)
I am serious. It's not a loophole if you are not doing something illegal. There's a major difference between lying about a process to pretend it's legal and doing something completely legal. I don't like "the system", but I'm not trying to beat it. Although I'm sure that's the loophole that my LHBS use to sell distillers. They say it's only for fuel use or essential oils.
edit...just looked it up...not allowed to separate the alcohol out even for fuel use without a permit. Nothing wrong with boiling it and not collecting though.
edit...just looked it up...not allowed to separate the alcohol out even for fuel use without a permit. Nothing wrong with boiling it and not collecting though.
I think we're miscommunicating. If the alcohol is evaporating into the atmosphere, which I'm pretty sure is the goal when heating the beer to remove alcohol, you are doing nothing illegal.
If you're distilling for fuel use, even with a permit, I'm betting the feds would find a problem with consumption of any portion of the contents.
Well, if you collect any portion of the distillate, you are committing a felony. I find that particular process at least as nonsensical.
I hate disagreeing with someone who agrees with me. Damn internet.
Everything I've ever read about attempting N/A beer at home makes it seem like a lot of work for sub-par results. Were I to try it myself, I'd make a low alcohol beer by including few fermentables and increasing body with lactose or maltodextrin (skipping the heat/vacuum/etc step altogether). It wouldn't be N/A, but I bet I could brew a decent 2%-ish beer if I set my mind to it.
What is the difference in the process talked about here of bring the beer to the boil temp of alcohol and the way the pros make non-alcoholic beer? It seems to me that if o'douls can make a .5% beer, then we can too. What's missing in the process?
Vacuum. Pressure is reduced to lower the boiling point. Less heat is required to evaporate the alcohol. Other volatile compounds are lost, but some of the delicate flavors remain.
lordbeermestrength
Well-Known Member
This is OT, but technically any device capable of separating alcohol from a liquid is considered to be a distillation device and falls under regulation. TECHNICALLY a freezer falls under this category. This is a federal law too, so anyone in the US who thinks they can find a legal loophole allowing them to distill will be sadly mistaken.
Making an Eisbock the traditional way also falls under regulation. Nobody will do anything about it, but it IS illegal unless you have permits.
... unless your blabbing about doing it in these threads (also: pictures.) Them guv'ments is smart peoples and they can get an IP address real easy.
lordbeermestrength
Well-Known Member
I wonder what the pressure they use is. I know that depending on the concentration of alcohol the temp/pressure requirements will change. I would guess they go as low as they can without causing the water to boil, although even at slightly reduced pressures, more water vapor will be pulled off the surface so no matter what you will lose some of the original flavor compounds.
I still think I would try an oven based heat distillation and see how it tastes.
But I do know this: my 2.7% mild is excellent by itself. I could probably make it a 1.5%-2% beer and it would still be okay.
lordbeermestrength
Well-Known Member
Sorry for the misunderstanding. I know YOU'RE not looking for one. I'm agreeing with you. Personally I don't understand why distillation doesn't fall under the same guidelines as homebrewing, i.e., you can make it for yourself as long as it is under a certain annual volume and you don't sell it. But people should understand that there really are no legal loopholes, no matter what state you live in. But once again... this is off topic
Sorry for the misunderstanding. I know YOU'RE not looking for one. I'm agreeing with you. Personally I don't understand why distillation doesn't fall under the same guidelines as homebrewing, i.e., you can make it for yourself as long as it is under a certain annual volume and you don't sell it. But people should understand that there really are no legal loopholes, no matter what state you live in. But once again... this is off topic
/offtopic
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
-
Who's smoking meat this weekend?- Latest: bailey mountain brewer
-
-
-
