I couldn't help myself!

[bja]

I think there are too many variables. Unfermentables, unconverted carbs, others?

Shouldn't be. If you know the temp rise and volume, you should be able to calculate BTU's which can be converted to calories. I'm betting it's minimal and not worth taking a risk.

 

[frontiercdk]

Seems logical to me, less sugars = less calories?

 

[bja]

Seems logical to me, less sugars = less calories?

Less sugar = more alcohol. More alcohol = more calories.

 

[AmandaK]

Seems logical to me, less sugars = less calories?

Alcohol has 7 calories/gram (only fat is higher at 9 calories/gram) while sugar has a smaller caloric density. So, less sugar = more alcohol = more calories.

 

[feinbera]

Alcohol has 7 calories/gram (only fat is higher at 9 calories/gram) while sugar has a smaller caloric density. So, less sugar = more alcohol = more calories.

Then, one gram of sugar must be converted into less than a gram of alcohol -- the yeast aren't somehow creating energy as they eat the sugar and spit out alochol (and CO2, and fermentation heat, and more yeast cells, etc, etc); there must be less energy in the system after the yeast are done.

Otherwise, somebody would've figured out that yeast are perpetual motion machines, and we'd be enjoying infinite free electricity from wort-fuelled power plants. Vast swaths of corn and soy fields given over to hops and barley production, and somebody would have to drink all that beer once it's done... why, yeast, why can't you be perpetual motion machines?!

 

[frontiercdk]

Beer turned out good. My wife likes it. Thanks for all the help.