• Please visit and share your knowledge at our sister communities:
  • If you have not, please join our official Homebrewing Facebook Group!

    Homebrewing Facebook Group

De-alcoholizing beer (Belgian Wit)

Homebrew Talk

Help Support Homebrew Talk:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
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.
 
seabass07 said:
Isn't it legal to distill alcohol for fuel use? If it's not going to be consumed, there isn't a problem. Just light it on fire and call it fuel.

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!)
 
Yuri_Rage said:
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.

You would need to collect it, as it would require multiple distillations to achieve this particular goal.
 
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.
 
You would need to collect it, as it would require multiple distillations to achieve this particular goal.
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.
 
Yuri_Rage said:
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.

You're right, but you lose a lot more than just alcohol that way, so that particular process doesn't make a whole lot of sense.
 
You're right, but you lose a lot more than just alcohol that way, so that particular process doesn't make a whole lot of sense.
Well, if you collect any portion of the distillate, you are committing a felony. I find that particular process at least as nonsensical.
 
Yuri_Rage said:
Well, if you collect any portion of the distillate, you are committing a felony. I find that particular process at least as nonsensical.

I totally agree. Hence my position that there really isn't a very good way of doing this in the home.
 
Yuri_Rage said:
I hate disagreeing with someone who agrees with me. Damn internet.

Haha... well here then. I should have added that not everybody cares.about legality... just look at the interest in uh... "hemp" beer every time the topic pops up.
 
Granted, committing a felony to REMOVE alcohol from your beer just sounds bizarre.
 
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.
 
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.


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.
 
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.

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.
 
Again...not looking for a loop hole.

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 :)

:mug:

/offtopic
 
Making an Eisbock the traditional way also falls under regulation. Nobody will do anything about it, but it IS illegal unless you have permits.

Freezing alcohol to remove the water is NOT illegal since it's not concidered distillation. There's no still involved and it doesn't incorporate heat.
 
Suthrncomfrt1884 said:
Freezing alcohol to remove the water is NOT illegal since it's not concidered distillation. There's no still involved and it doesn't incorporate heat.

+1

I was just listening to a basic brewing radio where the host did just this with a barley wine. After a lot of listeners questioned the legality of what he had done he also contacted the TTB to determine the legality of the process and the response he got was that it did not violate any federal statutes. Local regulations may be a different story though
 
+1

I was just listening to a basic brewing radio where the host did just this with a barley wine. After a lot of listeners questioned the legality of what he had done he also contacted the TTB to determine the legality of the process and the response he got was that it did not violate any federal statutes. Local regulations may be a different story though

This!

Eisbier is legal by federal law but I'm pretty sure there are a couple states that have outlawed it.
 
Freezing alcohol to remove the water is NOT illegal since it's not concidered distillation. There's no still involved and it doesn't incorporate heat.

It really doesn't matter if there is no "traditional" still involved. If you can explain to me how legally you would not be considered a distiller if you freeze distill a beer, I would be very interested to hear it.

TITLE 26 > Subtitle E > CHAPTER 51 > Subchapter A > PART I > Subpart A > § 5002
(4) Distiller
The term “distiller” includes any person who—
(A) produces distilled spirits from any source or substance,
(B) brews or makes mash, wort, or wash fit for distillation or for the production of distilled spirits (other than the making or using of mash, wort, or wash in the authorized production of wine or beer, or the production of vinegar by fermentation),
(C) by any process separates alcoholic spirits from any fermented substance, or
(D) making or keeping mash, wort, or wash, has a still in his possession or use.

Keep in mind the verbiage "any source or substance" and "by any process."

I don't see how if the gov't wanted to crack down on you they couldn't. The bottom line is, whatever you do they won't care. But if they changed their minds, they have legal justification to shut you down.
 
If you plan on using your freezer for making an eisbock, as ludicrous as it sounds, you need to register it to stay within the confines of the law:

TITLE 26 > Subtitle E > CHAPTER 51 > Subchapter B > § 5179
(a) Requirements
Every person having in his possession or custody, or under his control, any still or distilling apparatus set up, shall register such still or apparatus with the Secretary immediately on its being set up, by subscribing and filing with the Secretary a statement, in writing, setting forth the particular place where such still or distilling apparatus is set up, the kind of still and its capacity, the owner thereof, his place of residence, and the purpose for which said still or distilling apparatus has been or is intended to be used (except that stills or distilling apparatus not used or intended to be used for the distillation, redistillation, or recovery of distilled spirits are not required to be registered under this section).
 
(B) brews or makes mash, wort, or wash fit for distillation or for the production of distilled spirits (other than the making or using of mash, wort, or wash in the authorized production of wine or beer, or the production of vinegar by fermentation),
(C) by any process separates alcoholic spirits from any fermented substance, or
(D) making or keeping mash, wort, or wash, has a still in his possession or use.

This is an interesting thread and first I've seen on this forum where people were um, "passionate" about their views.

That said I'd like to understand something. The intent of the above points under regulation is for distilling to make "spirits".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distilled_beverage

"The term spirit refers to a distilled beverage that contains no added sugar and has at least 20% ABV."

If you look at point B, it refers to "production of distilled spirits".. I do not believe this is the same thing as beer, wine or hard cider. Also, as a home brewer if you did not intend on making distilled spirits then how does this regulation fall under a homebrewer say making an eisenbock?
 
If you want to use Wikipedia to bolster your legal case, go ahead. If you actually read the definitions in CHAPTER 51 > Subchapter A > PART I > Subpart A > § 5002 you'll see this gem:

(8) Distilled spirits
The terms “distilled spirits”, “alcoholic spirits”, and “spirits” mean that substance known as ethyl alcohol, ethanol, or spirits of wine in any form (including all dilutions and mixtures thereof from whatever source or by whatever process produced).

This means it is WHATEVER they want it to be. All I am saying is that you will not be able to find a legal recourse if the BATF wants to hammer you.
 
Back
Top