Ultimate session beer experiemnt

[DannPM]

Here's the secret though, brew an imperial version, make sure it is designed to finish at 1.020 or so and water down on the backside at packaging to desired lower abv.

Same concept as discussed all over this thread but a much easier way to achieve it imo.

 

[gstrawn]

Gotta ask, why a session beer so low? I consider a session beer anything under 6% abv personally. Under 4 imo is near-beer.

Yep I agree. I hardly ever brew anything under 6%. Its an experiment, see what these mash temps run. They're 2 gallon batches that cost me less the $5 a piece. Im seeing what happens and thought some people would benefit from that. This is an extreme and I realize it will likely be a bad beer, but that's why its an experiment

 

[rico567]

Gotta ask, why a session beer so low? I consider a session beer anything under 6% abv personally. Under 4 imo is near-beer.

Your tolerance must be quite high. For me, 6% means: >3 pints in < 3 hours = designated driver. And I'm 6' 6" and 280 lbs. If you think I'm wimpy, you might want to check that out the next time you have access to one of those blow-into-a-tube drunkometers. And the traditional definition of "near beer" was applied to that 1/2 of 1% stuff brewed during Prohibiion (at least it was brewed for a brief period, never went over that big......)

Oh, also........subscribed.

 

[Yooper]

This is something I've been trying to do for a long time, but with an IPA-like hop profile. I just can't seem to get what I want at under 4.5% or so.

I want the feeling of an IPA- malt backbone with firm bittering and great hops and flavor- but the ABV of a mild. I've had some decent beers, but nothing that I would call a raging success.

 

[elproducto]

Gotta ask, why a session beer so low? I consider a session beer anything under 6% abv personally. Under 4 imo is near-beer.

I have to disagree 100%. I've brewed many beers at 4% and under and they can be complex, full-bodied and very flavorful. I actually prefer them because you can have 2 or 3 in a sitting and not feel like going to bed.

I've brewed a great Ordinary Bitter at 3.6%, and an American Stout that was nice and roasty/bitter at 3.4%. BM's Centennial Blonde is 4%.

Don't compare Bud Light to good craft session beers, you are doing them a disservice.

 

[Yooper]

I have to disagree 100%. I've brewed many beers at 4% and under and they can be complex, full-bodied and very flavorful. I actually prefer them because you can have 2 or 3 in a sitting and not feel like going to bed.

I've brewed a great Ordinary Bitter at 3.6%, and an American Stout that was nice and roasty/bitter at 3.4%. BM's Centennial Blonde is 4%.

Don't compare Bud Light to good craft session beers, you are doing them a disservice.

That's exactly the point of a "session" beer- something you can enjoy drinking without being unable to finish mowing the lawn or drive the kids to a friend's house. I'd love to be able to have a beer or two with a friend and not be the least bit impaired. But it has to be a great tasting beer!

I'm 135 pounds. I have a pretty good tolerance for my size. But that doesn't mean I want a little buzz after putting away one beer. I want to have all of the flavor and richness of a great beer, but without the alcohol and excess calories besides!

 

[Sithdad]

I just brewed up a dark mild yesterday. No-sparge 2 gallon test batch. OG was 1.031. Using Wyeast London ale III. Should come in at 3% abv. I'll thread-jack and post back when I have something to report.
My next batch will be a session APA, much like what Yooper's been trying to do. Once I perfect making session beers that's all I'll make.

 

[Nashbrewer]

This may not be the best place for this discussion, but I've seen a couple of these ultimate low cal beer posts and have a question for you awesome chemistry people out there.

Alcohol is metabolized as follows:
Alcohol + alcohol dehydrogenase =acetaldehyde
acetaldehyde + aldehyde dehydrogenase + oxygen = acetic acid
Acetic acid is then converted to Fatty acids or Carbon dioxide and water.

Other than the possible fatty acids produced from the acetic acid, do any of these reactions create glucose or fat that the body can use for energy?

If the fatty acids are the only source of possible energy, is there a way to tell how much if any of the ethyl alcohol may produce those?

If it is minimal or negligible would not a dry beer give you the lowest real world body usage calories even if the calorie test still shows the alcohol as having more calories?

 

[DannPM]

Your tolerance must be quite high. For me, 6% means: >3 pints in < 3 hours = designated driver. And I'm 6' 6" and 280 lbs. If you think I'm wimpy, you might want to check that out the next time you have access to one of those blow-into-a-tube drunkometers. And the traditional definition of "near beer" was applied to that 1/2 of 1% stuff brewed during Prohibiion (at least it was brewed for a brief period, never went over that big......)

Oh, also........subscribed.

I guess I would consider a session beer something I can have a bottle of and not really get a big buzz, aka something that isn't 8.5%+ abv lol like a tripel or a dark strong. My tolerance is only average.

 

[DannPM]

Elproducto, I never said they couldn't be flavorful, I was asking why.

Yooper, I find a little impairment helps me finish mowing the lawn? Lol

 

[ayoungrad]

If the fatty acids are the only source of possible energy, is there a way to tell how much if any of the ethyl alcohol may produce those?

If it is minimal or negligible would not a dry beer give you the lowest real world body usage calories even if the calorie test still shows the alcohol as having more calories?

Not sure if I'm understanding you correctly, but here is my generalization to attempt an explanation:

Everything that can be absorbed into our blood stream is metabolized into useable molecules by our bodies. The most common pathways result in molecules of glucose and subsequent release of energy utilized to perform tasks (like thinking, walking, breathing). Even fats are eventually metabolized into glucose. Fat requires the most energy to form glucose, followed by alcohol, then sugar/carbohydrates.

Although the exact definition of a Calorie involves energy needed to heat water, it can be thought of as the amount of energy needed to metabolize a given substance. Alcohol cannot be utilized directly by the body in its original form and requires quite a bit of metabolism. That metabolism takes a lot of energy (Calories). And so, alcohol requires a larger number of Calories to obtain the same amount of energy release compared with other substances, like sugar.

Bottom line is that alcohol does, in fact, have higher Calories (takes more energy to metabolize) than other substances so low calorie beers tend to be low alcohol beers as a general rule.

 

[Guess42]

@ayounggrad

calories that we are talking about are not the calories the body puts into a molecule to get rid of it, but what the energy that the body can get from it. It takes some energy to use sugar, but the body gets more energy out of sugar than it puts in and so there is a net caloric gain.

@ can't remember who
the transformation of ethanol to acetaldehyde I believe transforms NADP+ to NADPH, which is stored energy.

 

[gstrawn]

Well this thread blew up while i was away....

Here's the secret though, brew an imperial version, make sure it is designed to finish at 1.020 or so and water down on the backside at packaging to desired lower abv.

Same concept as discussed all over this thread but a much easier way to achieve it imo.

But i don't want a watered down beer. I want full flavor low alcohol.

This may not be the best place for this discussion, but I've seen a couple of these ultimate low cal beer posts and have a question for you awesome chemistry people out there.

Alcohol is metabolized as follows:
Alcohol + alcohol dehydrogenase =acetaldehyde
acetaldehyde + aldehyde dehydrogenase + oxygen = acetic acid
Acetic acid is then converted to Fatty acids or Carbon dioxide and water.

Other than the possible fatty acids produced from the acetic acid, do any of these reactions create glucose or fat that the body can use for energy?

If the fatty acids are the only source of possible energy, is there a way to tell how much if any of the ethyl alcohol may produce those?

If it is minimal or negligible would not a dry beer give you the lowest real world body usage calories even if the calorie test still shows the alcohol as having more calories?

acetylaldehyde can be metabolized in a way other. I believe it can be converted to pyruvate which is an intermediate in glucose metabolism and is comparable. Don't quote me on that exact mechanism but it is some sort of metabolic intermediate. Also alcohol dehydrogenase produces NADH which powers the electron transport chain. Ultimately the metabolism of glucose is producing NADH and other similar electron carriers to power this chain. So yes, there are other mechanisms for alcohol metabolism. My biochem professors actually mentioned at one point that alcogol metabolism is the most rapid and efficient energy producing pathway, he said that it runs in a higher priority than any other pathway, including glucose, lipids, and proteins.

 

[Nashbrewer]

I'm sorry it appears my point was lost in translation.

Calorie = amount of energy required to heat 1 kilogram of water 1 degree celcius.
All alcohol per gram has 7 calories, according to previous post.

However the body produces acetaldehyde first which is a free radical and is extremely hazardous to the body. This is the product from alcohol that causes liver damage, this is not stored energy.

Then it produces from acetaldehyde, acetic acid, which is used to create fatty acids, or CO2 and H2O. This is the way most of the alcohol is metabolized.

In this process the only thing that the body uses for energy storage is fatty acids. How much if any is likely to come from alcohol to turn into fatty acids?
How much of that 7 calories of energy remains when it is turned into fatty acids. This is the real world calorie content of alcohol metabolism, and should be significantly lower than 7 calories per gram.

What is that real world calorie result is my question.

There are other ways of metabolizing alcohol, according to the website's I've looked at on this however this one above is what is used in the vast majority of conversions. The other primary one does create NADP+, but it does not appear to come from acetaldehyde:

Another system in the liver which oxidizes ethanol via the enzyme cytochrome P450IIE1 (CYP2E1) is called the MEOS system. The reaction catalyzed by MEOS is:

CH3CH2OH + NADPH + O2 -> CH3CHO + NADP+ + H2O.

Though of minor significance in comparison to ADH metabolism of ethanol, the MEOS system seems to play an increasingly important role at higher concentrations of ethanol.

 

[gstrawn]

acetic acid goes to acetyl CoA, the precursor of the citric acid, or TCA cycle. this pathway is where the majority of glucoses energy is metabolized.

 

[Nashbrewer]

Thank you that answers the majority of my question. (I'm not biochem student.) :rockin: Back to your regularly scheduled low cal beer talk.

 

[mlyday]

One of the first few beers I brewed was the brewest best scottish ale, that came in a 3.25-3.50 %abv. The roasted and smoked malts give it alot of flavor, without the alchohol. I loved that beer, I could drink 3 a night without much buzz at all. Sadly it is gone now.

 

[ayoungrad]

calories that we are talking about are not the calories the body puts into a molecule to get rid of it, but what the energy that the body can get from it. It takes some energy to use sugar, but the body gets more energy out of sugar than it puts in and so there is a net caloric gain.

My info was definitely a generalization (as I mentioned) but those Calories are one in the same.

 

[elproducto]

Elproducto, I never said they couldn't be flavorful, I was asking why.

Yooper, I find a little impairment helps me finish mowing the lawn? Lol

To be fair, you did equate sub 4% beers to "near-beer", no?

 

[gstrawn]

Thank you that answers the majority of my question. (I'm not biochem student.) :rockin: Back to your regularly scheduled low cal beer talk.

HAHA i answered your question without reading your post! I just put that in there because i looked it up and it worked perfectly

 

[ayoungrad]

calories that we are talking about are not the calories the body puts into a molecule to get rid of it...

Just wanted to touch back on this after thinking about it. Yes, you are right, it is the net gain. I think maybe I should stick to details that I've studied within the last 10 years. But the bottom line is the same, as mentioned.

 

[Nashbrewer]

Did you ever brew the Hoppy low cal beer? If so how did it go?

 

[gstrawn]

I did brew, and it turned out bad. Not because of the idea but because my super high mash temps were too high. Kind of astringent. If I had the time and a 1 gallon mash tun, which I suppose would be easy enough to procure, I would do 3 batches at 158, 160, and 162. I think the possibility is there, and I think I can prove that. I am not very confident in my ability to produce the recipe to fit the bill. I'll have to try it again but I have too many too brews for that garbage right now!