Infomation market place... A place where knowledge is power... where the brain thrives..

Tuesday, May 15, 2007

How does soy promote weight loss? University of Illinois scientist finds another clue

Public release date: 1-May-2007




Contact: Phyllis Picklesimer

p-pickle@uiuc.edu

217-244-2827

University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign


Research shows that when soy consumption goes up, weight goes down.
A new University of Illinois study may help scientists understand
exactly how that weight loss happens.


"We wanted to compare
the effects of soy protein hydrolysates and soy peptides with those of
leptin because we hypothesized that soy might behave in the body in a
similar way. Leptin is a hormone produced in our adipose tissue that
interacts with receptors in the brain and signals us that we’re full so
we stop eating," said Elvira de Mejia, a U of I assistant professor of
food science and human nutrition.


The researchers wanted to see if soy protein hydrolysates could affect these regulatory hormones and their receptors.


"And
we found that soy did have an effect on these mechanisms and hormones
that are induced in the body to help us degrade lipids and reduce body
weight, but it did so by boosting metabolism and not by reducing food
intake," she said.


To compare soy peptides with leptin, de
Mejia’s graduate student Nerissa Vaughn, with the help of associate
professor Lee Beverly, implanted cannulas in the brains of lab rats;
they then injected leptin as a positive control. When the scientists
could see their model was working, they injected two formulations of
hydrolyzed soy protein and soy peptides so the scientists could monitor
the effects of each on food intake and weight loss.


Injections
were given three times a week for two weeks; during that time, the
animals had unlimited access to food and water. Food intake was
measured 3, 6, 12, 24, and 48 hours after injection, and the rats were
weighed 24 and 48 hours after injection. All rats received the same
amount of exercise, and all rats lost weight.


But, after the
third injection, de Mejia and Vaughn noticed a significant weight loss
in the group of animals that had received one of the soy hydrolysates,
even though the animals hadn’t changed their eating habits. In this
instance, soy protein appeared to have caused weight loss not by
reducing food intake but by altering the rats’ metabolism.


The
experiment not only showed that soy peptides could interact with
receptors in the brain, it also demonstrated that eating less isn’t
always the reason for weight loss, the researcher said.


"Weight loss is a complex physiological event. It’s not always as simple as ‘Eat less or exercise more,’ said de Mejia.


"Losing
weight is a cascade of many steps, beginning with the production of
certain hormones and continuing with their action in the brain. Some
people are resistant to these hormones, just as other people are
insulin-resistant. These people never receive the message from the
brain that tells them they’re full," she added.


de Mejia plans
to continue investigating the effects of soy proteins on weight loss.
She believes soy contains anorectic peptides that signal a feeling of
satiety as well as peptides that boost the metabolism. Her next step
will be to fractionate and purify the soy hydrolysates so that she can
identify each peptide and understand its bioactivity.




###

de Mejia and Vaughn presented their findings Sunday, April 29, at
the Experimental Biology meeting in Washington, D.C. The study was
funded by the Illinois Soybean Association and SAI Company.





Research says boiling broccoli ruins its anti-cancer properties

Public release date: 15-May-2007




Contact: Peter Dunn
p.j.dunn@warwick.ac.uk

0247-652-3708
University of Warwick




Researchers at the University of Warwick have found that the
standard British cooking habit of boiling vegetables severely damages
the anticancer properties of many Brassica vegetables such as broccoli,
Brussel sprouts, cauliflower and green cabbage.


Past studies
have shown that consumption of Brassica vegetables decreases the risk
of cancer. This is because of the high concentration in Brassicas of
substances known as glucosinolates which are metabolized to cancer
preventive substances known as isothiocyanates. However before this
research it was not known how the glucosinolates and isothiocyanates
were influenced by storage and cooking of Brassica vegetables.


The
researchers, Prof Paul Thornalley from Warwick Medical School at the
University of Warwick and Dr Lijiang Song from the University of
Warwick’s Department of Chemistry bought Brassica vegetables,
(broccoli, Brussel sprouts, cauliflower and green cabbage) from a local
store and transported them to the laboratory within 30 minutes of
purchasing. The effect of cooking on the glucosinolate content of
vegetables was then studied by investigating the effects of cooking by
boiling, steaming, microwave cooking and stir-fry.


Boiling
appeared to have a serious impact on the retention of those important
glucosinolate within the vegetables. The loss of total glucosinolate
content after boiling for 30 minutes was: broccoli 77%, Brussel sprouts
58%, cauliflower 75% and green cabbage 65%.


The effects of
other cooking methods were investigated: steaming for 0–20 min,
microwave cooking for 0–3 min and stir-fry cooking for 0–5 min. All
three methods gave no significant loss of total glucosinolate analyte
contents over these cooking periods.


Domestic storage of the
vegetables at ambient temperature and in a domestic refrigerator showed
no significant difference with only minor loss of glucosinolate levels
over 7 days.


However the researchers found that storage of
fresh vegetables at much lower temperatures such as −85 °C (much higher
than for storage in a refrigerator at 4–8 °C) may cause significant
loss of glucosinolates up to 33% by fracture of vegetable material
during thawing.


The researchers found that preparation of
Brassica vegetables had caused only minor reductions in glucosinolate
except when they were shredded finely which showed a marked decline of
glucosinolate levels with a loss of up to 75% over 6 hours after
shredding.


Professor Thornalley said: "If you want to get the
maximum benefit from your five portions-a-day vegetable consumption, if
you are cooking your vegetables boiling is out. You need to consider
stir frying steaming or micro-waving them."

###

Broadcast quality TV
footage on this story will be available from a Research-TV VNR
available from APTN today Tuesday 15th March , 12:15-12:30 GMT details
on how to obtain that footage are available from http://www.research-tv.com/ 024 76 574702.










Calcium plus vitamin D supplements may help prevent weight gain in postmenopausal women

Public release date: 14-May-2007




Contact: Jeff Hausman


916-614-4506

JAMA and Archives Journals


Postmenopausal women who take calcium and vitamin D supplements may
gain less weight than those who do not, although the overall effect is
small, according to a report in the May 14 issue of Archives of
Internal Medicine, one of the JAMA/Archives journals. The benefit is
greater in those who had not previously been getting the daily
recommended amount of calcium.


"Because weight loss or
prevention of weight gain is likely to have significant health benefits
for middle-aged women, early to middle menopause may be a critical
period of life in which to slow the trajectory of weight gain," the
authors note as background information in the article. Some evidence
suggests that calcium and vitamin D may play a role in effective weight
management. These nutrients may stimulate the breakdown of fat cells
and suppress the development of new ones.


Bette Caan, Dr.P.H.,
of Kaiser Permanente Northern California, Oakland, and colleagues
studied 36,282 postmenopausal women age 50 to 79 who were enrolled in
the Women's Health Initiative clinical trial. The women were randomly
assigned to receive a dose of 1,000 milligrams of calcium plus 400
international units of vitamin D (18,176 women) or placebo (18,106
women) daily. They were weighed each year for approximately seven
years.


At the beginning of the study, 39.63 percent of the
women met current recommended daily intake of 1,200 milligrams of
calcium, 53.94 percent reported taking any calcium supplements and
28.95 percent reported taking supplements of 500 milligrams of calcium
or more. At the end of the study, women who took the supplements
weighed an average of 0.28 pounds less than those who did not.


Among
women who were getting less than the recommended amount of calcium
daily before the study, those who took the supplements weighed an
average of 0.42 pounds less than those who did not. After three years,
when compared to women taking placebo, these women had a lower risk of
gaining weight in both small amounts (2.2 to 6.6 pounds) and moderate
amounts (more than 6.6 pounds) and had a higher likelihood of
maintaining a stable weight (within 2.2 pounds of starting weight) or
losing weight (more than 2.2 pounds).


"Prevention of weight
gain is an important public health goal, and caloric restriction and
daily physical activity should still be considered the basic tenets of
weight management," the authors conclude. "Further research should be
undertaken to address the effect of calcium supplementation combined
with caloric restriction and physical activity on weight gain
prevention."

###

(Arch Intern Med. 2007;167:893-902. Available pre-embargo to the media at www.jamamedia.org.)


Editor's
Note: This study was supported by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood
Institute, Department of Health and Human Services. Many clinical
centers received assistance from the General Clinical Research Center
program of the National Center for Research Resources. The active study
drug and placebo were supplied by GlaxoSmithKline Consumer Healthcare.
Please see the article for additional information, including other
authors, author contributions and affiliations, financial disclosures,
funding and support, etc.







Drinking farm milk reduces childhood asthma and allergies but raw consumption remains unsafe

Public release date: 10-May-2007




Contact: Annette Whibley
wizard.media@virgin.net
Blackwell Publishing Ltd.






Researchers study 15,000 children in five countries



Drinking
farm milk can protect children against asthma and hayfever, according
to a study of nearly 15,000 children published in the May issue of
Clinical and Experimental Allergy.


But consuming farm milk
that hasn’t been boiled poses serious health risks and further research
is needed to develop a safe product that still provides good protection
against these common childhood diseases.


Researchers from
Europe and the USA studied 14,893 children aged between five and 13 in
Austria, Germany, the Netherlands, Sweden and Switzerland.


The
children were drawn from farm children, rural and suburban communities
and Rudolph Steiner schools, which primarily cater for families with
anthroposcopic lifestyles, who restrict their use of antibiotics,
vaccinations, fever-reducing drugs and often follow a biodynamic diet.


Parents
were asked to complete detailed questionnaires about their child’s
consumption of milk, butter, yoghurt, eggs and fruit and vegetables and
whether they were farm-produced or shop-bought.


They also
answered questions about their child’s height and weight, whether they
were breastfed and any allergies or asthma problems affecting the child
or their family.


Allergy- related blood tests were also
carried out on just under 4,000 children from across the five countries
and the questionnaire results were validated with random telephone
interviews with 493 respondents


The researchers discovered that children who drank farm milk were much less likely to suffer from hayfever and asthma.


Lower
levels of diagnosed asthma were also observed for all farm-produced
dairy products and eating farm eggs also provided protection against
hayfever. However, these foods only provided increased protection when
the children also drank unpasteurised farm milk – not in isolation.


None of the farm products had any effect on eczema levels.


"All
the children drinking unpasteurised farm milk and eating other
farm-related dairy products showed the same level of protection against
asthma and allergies, regardless of whether they were living on a farm
or not" says lead author Marco Waser, a doctor in natural sciences from
the Institute of Social and Preventative Medicine at the University of
Basel, Switzerland.


"This is an important finding as it rules
out other protective factors that farm life may provide, such as
exposure to microbial compounds in animal shed and farm homes. For
example, earlier studies have shown that farm children are less likely
to be affected by pollen.


"Our research showed that the
children who enjoyed the best protection from asthma and allergies had
been drinking farm milk since their first year of life."


About
half of the parents who told researchers that their child regularly
drank farm milk said that they did not boil the milk before giving it
to them. The protective results were the same, regardless of whether
milk was boiled or not.


However, as drinking raw milk is not
recommended, especially for young children, this may have encouraged
parents to say they boiled milk when they didn’t, indicating a higher
level of raw milk consumption.


"The results of this study
indicate that all children drinking farm milk have a lower chance of
developing asthma and hayfever" says Dr Waser.


"However raw
milk may contain pathogens such as salmonella or enterohaemorrhagic E
coli and its consumption may have serious health risks.


"We
need to develop a deeper understanding of why farm milk offers children
this higher level or protection and investigate ways of making the
product safer, while retaining these protective qualities.


"At
the moment we can only speculate about why farm milk protects children
against asthma and allergies. Perhaps it is because farm milk has
different levels or compositions of pathogenic and non-pathogenic
microbes to milk sold in shops.


"It is interesting that there
was no difference in the farm milk results regardless of whether it was
boiled before consumption. As boiling is likely to have been
over-reported, this could indicate that pasteurisation is not as
important as previously thought, as compounds other than microbes may
offer a protective role.


"But despite our findings, we
cannot recommend consumption of raw farm milk as a preventative measure
against asthma and allergies."


More than 35 researchers took
part in the PARSIFAL study – Prevention of allergy risk factors for
sensitisation in children related to farming and anthroposophic
lifestyle.




###

The work was carried out with research grants from the European
Union, the Swiss National Research Foundation, the Swiss-based
Kuehne-Foundation and the Swedish Foundation for Health Care Science
and Allergy Research.



Notes to editors


• Inverse
association of farm milk consumption with asthma and allergy in rural
and suburban populations across Europe. Waser et al. Clinical and
Experimental Allergy. 37, 661-670. May 2007.


• Aimed at
allergy practitioners and research scientists with an interest in
allergic diseases and mechanisms, Clinical and Experimental Allergy (www.blackwellpublishing.com/cea)
provides clinical and scientific articles and carries regular reviews
and editorials written by leading authorities in their field. Truly
international in appeal, it publishes clinical and experimental
observations in disease in all fields of medicine in which allergic
hypersensitivity plays a part. It is the official Journal of the
British Society of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (BSACI) www.bsaci.org



Blackwell Publishing is the world’s leading society publisher,
partnering with 665 medical, academic, and professional societies.
Blackwell publishes over 800 journals and has over 6,000 books in
print. The company employs over 1,000 staff members in offices in the
US, UK, Australia, China, Singapore, Denmark, Germany and Japan and
officially merged with John Wiley & Sons, Inc's Scientific,
Technical and Medical business in February 2007. Blackwell’s mission as
an expert publisher is to create long-term partnerships with our
clients that enhance learning, disseminate research, and improve the
quality of professional practice. For more information on Blackwell
Publishing, please visit www.blackwellpublishing.com or www.blackwell-synergy.com.



Can an omega-3 fatty acid slow the progression of Alzheimer's disease?

Public release date: 10-May-2007




Contact: Linda Joy

nianews3@mail.nih.gov

301-496-1752

NIH/National Institute on Aging




Nutritionists have long endorsed fish as part of a heart-healthy
diet, and now some studies suggest that omega-3 fatty acids found in
the oil of certain fish may also benefit the brain by lowering the risk
of Alzheimer’s disease. In order to test whether an omega-3 fatty acid
can impact the progression of Alzheimer’s disease, researchers
supported by the National Institute on Aging (NIA), part of the
National Institutes of Health, will evaluate one in a clinical trial,
the gold standard for medical research.


The study will be
conducted nationwide by the Alzheimer’s Disease Cooperative Study
(ADCS), a consortium of leading researchers supported by NIA and
coordinated by the University of California, San Diego. The trial will
take place at 51 sites across the United States and seeks 400
participants age 50 and older who have mild to moderate Alzheimer’s
disease. Joseph Quinn, M.D., associate professor of neurology at Oregon
Health and Science University, is directing the study.


Researchers
will be evaluating primarily whether the omega-3 fatty acid DHA
(docosahexaenoic acid), taken over many months, slows the progression
of both cognitive and functional decline in people with mild to
moderate Alzheimer’s. During the 18-month clinical trial, investigators
will measure the progress of the disease using standard tests for
functional and cognitive change.


“The evidence to date in
observational and animal studies on omega-3 fatty acids and Alzheimer’s
disease warrants further evaluation in a rigorous clinical trial,” says
NIA Director Richard J. Hodes, M.D. “This study is one of a number we
are undertaking in the next few years through the ADCS to test
compounds that might play a role in preventing or delaying the symptoms
of this devastating disease.”


“By participating in this study,
volunteers will make an invaluable contribution to Alzheimer’s disease
research progress,” says Quinn, the study’s principal investigator. “We
are indebted to those who graciously volunteer to participate in
clinical studies.”


The trial will use DHA donated by Martek
Biosciences Corporation of Columbia, Md. Participants will receive
either two grams of DHA per day or an inactive placebo pill. About 60
percent of participants will receive DHA, and 40 percent will get the
placebo. Doctors and nurses at the 51 research clinic sites will
monitor the participants in regular visits throughout the trial. To
ensure unbiased results, neither the researchers conducting the trial
nor the participants will know who is getting DHA and who is getting
the placebo.


In addition to monitoring disease progression
through cognitive tests, researchers will also evaluate whether taking
DHA supplements has a positive effect on physical and biological
markers of Alzheimer’s, such as brain atrophy and proteins in blood and
spinal fluid.




###

To learn how to participate in the study, contact NIA’s Alzheimer’s
Disease Education and Referral (ADEAR) Center at 1-800-438-4380 or by
email to adear@nia.nih.gov. To view a list of the research sites, go to http://www.nia.nih.gov/Alzheimers.


NIA
leads the federal effort supporting and conducting research on aging
and the medical, social and behavioral issues of older people,
including Alzheimer's disease and age-related cognitive decline. For
information on dementia and aging, please visit the NIA's ADEAR Center
at www.nia.nih.gov/alzheimers, or call 1-800-438-4380. For more general information on research and aging, go to www.nia.nih.gov.


NIH--the
nation's medical research agency--includes 27 institutes and centers
and is a component of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
It is the primary federal agency for conducting and supporting basic,
clinical and translational medical research, and it investigates the
causes, treatments and cures for both common and rare diseases. For
more information about NIH and its programs, visit www.nih.gov.






Estrogen is important for bone health in men as well as women

Public release date: 10-May-2007



Contact: Gwen Ericson

ericsong@wustl.edu

314-286-0141

Washington University School of Medicine



Although women are four times more likely than men to develop
osteoporosis, or porous bone, one in 12 men also suffer from the
disease, which can lead to debilitating - or even life-threatening -
fractures, mainly of the spine, hip and wrist. The underlying causes of
osteoporosis are numerous, but in women, low estrogen levels after
menopause have been considered an important factor.


As for men
- new research at Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis
has shown that low amounts of active estrogen metabolites also can
increase their osteoporosis risk.


"Most people don't think
about estrogen in men, but men actually have somewhat more estrogen on
average than do postmenopausal women," says Reina Armamento-Villareal,
M.D., assistant professor of medicine in the Division of Bone and
Mineral Diseases and a bone specialist at Barnes-Jewish Hospital. She
is senior author of a new study in the journal Calcified Tissue
International.


"Research by other groups had suggested that
estrogen may be more important than testosterone for maintaining bone
health in men," she says. "So we designed a study to look at male
estrogen levels and bone density."


When estrogen circulates in
the body, it passes through the liver where several enzymes convert the
standard hormone to other forms - some of these forms, or estrogen
metabolites, are active and some are inactive. Individuals differ in
how they process estrogen, so the levels of these estrogen metabolites
will vary among people. No previous studies have addressed the role of
estrogen metabolism and the forms of circulating hormone in male
osteoporosis.


The Washington University researchers found that
the amounts of active estrogen metabolites are a strong predictor of
bone mineral density in the men they studied. Testing hormone levels
and bone density as measured by DXA (dual X-ray absorptiometry) scans
in 61 men age 50 or older, the researchers saw that men with higher
levels of active estrogen metabolites also tended to have higher bone
density. Conversely, men with lower levels of these hormones tended to
have lower bone density.


Testosterone levels did not affect
bone density in these study subjects. Testosterone seems to be
responsible for the larger size and thicker outer layers of male bones,
but estrogen is possibly a key hormone for maintaining peak bone
mineral mass in men, according to the authors.


The researchers
also looked at whether other factors, including smoking, alcohol
consumption, daily calcium intake and body mass index (BMI) affected
bone density. Only BMI correlated with bone density: Men with higher
BMI tended to have higher bone density, possibly because they also had
higher levels of active estrogen metabolites.


Fractures due to
osteoporosis are a significant health threat in the elderly. According
to Villareal, 25 percent of those who suffer a hip fracture die within
a year, and 40-50 percent have some degree of disability or need
nursing home care. "It's a very serious problem," she says. "People of
retirement age are looking forward to their leisure time, but if they
fracture a hip, there are so many things they won't be able to do."


Villareal
thinks the health-care system may need to reflect what research is now
revealing about estrogen in men. "It would be a good idea to measure
estrogen levels in older men who present with low bone mineral density
or osteoporosis," Villareal says. "Not only does estrogen and its
metabolism affect bone health in men, but it may also influence the
risk for prostate cancer."





###

Napoli N, Faccio R, Shrestha V,
Bucchieri S, Battista Rini G, Armamento-Villareal R. Estrogen
metabolism modulates bone density in men. Calcified Tissue
International April 4, 2007 (advanced online publication).


Funding
from the National Institutes of Health and the General Clinical
Research Center at Washington University supported this research.


Washington
University School of Medicine's full-time and volunteer faculty
physicians also are the medical staff of Barnes-Jewish and St. Louis
Children's hospitals. The School of Medicine is one of the leading
medical research, teaching and patient care institutions in the nation,
currently ranked fourth in the nation by U.S. News & World Report.
Through its affiliations with Barnes-Jewish and St. Louis Children's
hospitals, the School of Medicine is linked to BJC HealthCare.






100 percent of pregnant women have at least one kind of pesticide in their placenta

Public release date: 14-May-2007




Contact: María José López Espinosa

mjlopes@ugr.es

34-958-240-758

Universidad de Granada




Human beings are directly responsible for more than 110,000 chemical
substances which have been generated since the Industrial Revolution.
Every year, we "invent" more than 2,000 new substances, most of them
contaminants, which are emitted into the environment and which are
consequently present in food, air, soil and water. Nonetheless, human
beings are also victims of these emissions, and involuntarily (what is
known in this scientific field as "inadvertent exposure"), every day
humans ingest many of these substances which cannot be assimilated by
our body, and are accumulated in the fatty parts of our tissues.


This
is especially worrying for pregnant women. During the gestation period,
all the contaminants accumulated in the organism have direct access to
the microenvironment where the embryo/foetus develops. The doctoral
thesis Exposición materno-infantil vía placentaria a compuestos químicos medioambientales con actividad hormonal
(Maternal-child exposure via the placenta to environmental chemical
substances with hormonal activity), written by María José López
Espinosa, from the Department of Radiology and Physical Medicine of the
University of Granada (Universidad de Granada [http://www.ugr.es]),
analyzes the presence of organochlorine pesticides –normally used as
pesticides- in the organisms of pregnant women. The analysis was
developed at San Cecilio University Hospital, in Granada, with 308
women who had given birth to healthy children between 2000 and 2002.
The results are alarming: 100% of these pregnant women had at least one
pesticide in their placenta, but the average rate amounts to eight
different kinds of chemical substances.


Fifteen different pesticides in the organisms of pregnant women


In
her study, through the analysis of the placentas, López studied the
presence of 17 endocrine disruptive organochlorine pesticides (i.e.,
pesticides which interfere with the proper performance of the hormonal
system). The results showed that the most frequent pesticides present
in the placenta tissue are DDE (92.7%), lindane (74.8%), endosulfan
diol (62.1%) y endosulfan-I (54.2%). Among these, the most prevalent
was endosulfan-diol, with an average concentration of 4.15 nanograms
per gram of placenta (156.73 ng/g lipid). Surprisingly, the UGR
researcher discovered that some patients’ placentas contained 15 of the
17 pesticides analyzed.


A total of 668 samples from pregnant
women were used in this study, which was approved by the Ethical
Commission of San Cecilio University Hospital. Mothers were informed of
the study’s goals before giving their express consent.


Thanks
to gynaecologists, the nurses and the midwives who participated in the
study, biological samples were extracted from the blood, the umbilical
cord and the placenta during childbirth. The following day, an
epidemiological survey was carried out by trained survey statisticians.
The survey contained questions on the general data of the parents,
their places of residence, profession, medical history, anthropometric
information, age, tobacco habits, lifestyle and diet during pregnancy,
among other factors.


The study made at the UGR [http://www.ugr.es]
has facilitated research into the association of the characteristics of
parents, newborn babies and childbirth with exposure to pesticides
found in the mothers’ placenta. Among the aspects associated with a
higher presence of pesticides we find an older age, higher body mass
index, less weight gained during pregnancy, lower educational level,
higher workplace exposure, first-time motherhood and lower weight in
babies.


"Serious effects on the baby"


According
to María José López, "we do not really know the consequences of
exposure to disruptive pesticides in children, but we can predict that
they may have serious effects, since this placenta exposure occurs at
key moments of the embryo’s development".


The research group
to which María José López belongs, directed by Prof. Nicolás Olea
Serrano, has conducted several studies which associate exposure to
pesticides with neonatal malformations if the genito-urinary system,
such as cryptorchidism (undropped testicles) and hypospadias (total
fusion of the urethral folds).


The UGR researcher underlines
the fact that, in spite of "inadvertent exposure", "it is possible to
control pesticide ingestion by means of a proper diet, which should be
healthy and balanced, through consumption of food whose chemical
content is low. Moreover, daily exercise and the avoidance of tobacco
(which could also be a source of inadvertent exposure) are very
important habits which help to control the presence of pesticides in
our organisms.




###

The UGR researcher’s work is framed within the objectives
established in the research project "Increasing incidence of human male
reproductive health disorders in relation to environmental effects on
growth-and sex steroid-induced alterations in programmed development"
(Environmental Reproductive Health), directed and carried out by a
multidisciplinary group of clinicians, basic researchers and
epidemiologists at several institutions from countries such as Denmark,
Finland or England and financed by the European Union (QLK4-1999-01422).


Reference
María José López Espinosa. Department of Radiology and Physical Medicine of the University of Granada.
Tel.: +34 958 24 07 58 / +34 958 24 28 65. E-mail: mjlopes@ugr.es.






Fatty acid catabolism higher due to polyphenol intake

Public release date: 14-May-2007




Contact: Vincent de Boer
vincent_deboer@hms.harvard.edu

617-432-7087
Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research




Polyphenols, dietary substances from vegetables, fruits and green
tea, bring about a change in the energy metabolism. Dutch researcher
Vincent de Boer has discovered that polyphenols increase the fatty acid
breakdown in rats and influence the glucose use in fat cells.


De
Boer carried out his doctoral research at RIKILT - Institute of Food
Safety in Wageningen. Much research into the health effects of
polyphenols is carried out in vitro. However in the body, polyphenols
are quickly and easily converted into polyphenol metabolites. This
research was carried out with rats to study the mechanisms and effects
of a polyphenol-rich diet. Relevant polyphenol metabolites that are
found in humans were also examined.


Quercetin is a polyphenol
that is highly abundant in the human diet, such as onions, apples and
tea. The study revealed that quercetin metabolites mainly end up in the
lungs of rats. Subsequently De Boer discovered that lung cells had a
greater fatty acid catabolism if the animals constantly received
quercetin in their feed.


Energy regulation

The energy-sensing protein SIRT1 is an important regulatory
protein that can prolong the life span of model organisms such as yeast
and fruit flies. In humans, SIRT1 is possibly involved in the
regulation of energy use. The SIRT1 activity can be simulated by
various polyphenols. De Boer discovered that polyphenols from green tea
stimulated the activity of isolated SIRT1. The quercetin molecule also
did this, but an important human quercetin metabolite had the opposite
effect. Therefore in intestinal cells, quercetin had no effect on the
activity of SIRT1. In experiments with fat cells, both quercetin and a
quercetin metabolite were found to change the glucose use in the fat
cell.


A change in the energy regulation might be an
important process for the realisation of possible health effects of
polyphenols in the food. This provides new starting points for further
research into the molecular mechanisms of polyphenols. This will allow
the health effects of polyphenols to be accurately described.


Polyphenols

Polyphenols are substances of plant origin that occur in
numerous fruits and vegetables. Due to their possible health effect,
polyphenols are currently sold as nutritional supplements. Yet the
scientific basis for the health claims for polyphenols is mostly weak.
Results from in vitro studies are often directly translated into
possible beneficial health effects in humans. De Boer’s research shows
that in vivo research with polyphenol metabolites is necessary to study
the effects of polyphenols.


Rubicon

Vincent de Boer recently received a Rubicon fellowship from NWO
for his new research into the role of mitochondrial SIRT1 analogues in
aging and energy metabolism. He will carry out his research at the
Department of Pathology at the Harvard Medical School in Boston.




###

Note for editors, not for publication


Vincent de Boer (Harvard Medical School)

The doctoral thesis will be defended on 11 May 2007 (at Wageningen University and Research Centre)

Supervisor Prof. Ivonne Rietjens, associate supervisors Dr Jaap Keijer and Dr Peter Hollman




Spreading viruses as we breathe

Public release date: 14-May-2007




Contact: Sandra Hutchinson

s3.hutchinson@qut.edu.au

61-731-382-130

Queensland University of Technology




Keeping at arm's length won't protect you from catching an
infectious disease, according to new research by Queensland University
of Technology which reveals airborne viruses can spread far and wide.


Professor
Lidia Morawska, director of QUT's International Laboratory for Air
Quality and Health, said the study dispelled the myth that viruses
emitted from humans only travel a metre in the air.


Professor
Morawska and a team of QUT scientists have been studying the way
droplets carring viruses are dispersed in the air when people speak,
cough, sneeze and breathe.


"The current belief is that if you
are an arm's length away from someone you are protected from any
viruses they might be carrying," she said.


"When we talk about infection spread we are talking about droplets emitted from humans being dispersed in the air."


As part of the study QUT designed and built a machine to measure the distance a droplet travels in the air prior to drying.


"This droplet could potentially be carrying a virus," she said.


"The
significant part of our research has found that rather than the droplet
falling directly to the ground after leaving the mouth, the liquid
component of the droplet dries in the air and the dry residue travels
large distances.


"When a droplet dries in the air the residue
is carried in the air, and therefore there is a risk that people can
inhale that air and become infected."


Professor Morawska said a droplet drying on a surface could be infectious but the greater danger was droplets drying in the air.


"A droplet can travel for 10cm before it dries in the air, it doesn't immediately fall to the ground."


She
said the study, funded by the Australian Research Council, was
motivated by an outbreak of SARS in Hong Kong where more than 300
people were infected within the space of a few hours.


"We wanted to know how this virus was able to travel from building to building in such a short time," she said.


Professor
Morawska said her research had shown that one person infected with the
disease could easily spread the virus by simply breathing.


"Understanding
the way viruses spread from human expiration means we can look to
better design spaces, ventilation systems and filters," she said.


Professor
Morawska said the next stage of the research would investigate the
global effect of dried droplets in health care facilities to see how
viruses were spread around the world.






Full-term, low-birth-weight babies at significantly greater risk for early respiratory symptoms

Public release date: 15-May-2007




Contact: Suzy Martin

smartin@thoracic.org

212-315-8631

American Thoracic Society




Through age 5, children born at full term with low birth weight show
significantly greater risk for developing respiratory symptoms,
including wheezing, coughing and pulmonary infections, according to a
large longitudinal study on birth weight and development. The
children's symptoms grew worse if they were exposed to environmental
tobacco smoke.


The research results appear in the second issue
for May 2007 of the American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care
Medicine, published by the American Thoracic Society.


Professor
Johan C. de Jongste, M.D., Ph.D., of the Department of Pediatric
Respiratory Medicine at Erasmus MC/Sophia Children's Hospital in The
Netherlands, and eight associates studied 3,628 children who took part
in the 1996 Prevention and Incidence of Asthma and Mite Allergy (PIAMA)
birth cohort study, which analyzed children's allergic reactions and
history of asthma.


The researchers concluded that the effect
of birth weight on respiratory symptoms increased, from ages 1 to 5, in
direct relation to birth weight per kilogram less in each child.
However, after age 5, the effect lessened and was not significant by
age 7. The authors defined low birth weight as 5.5 pounds at birth.


"Size
and maturity are major factors in the development of the lung," said
Dr. de Jongste. "In children with diminished prenatal growth, and
consequently low birth weight, a disturbed lung development is
associated with a relatively small airway caliber. This can cause
decreased lung function and more respiratory symptoms later in life."


According
to the investigators, the effect of birth weight on respiratory
symptoms was significantly greater among children exposed to tobacco
smoke in their home. They also noted that maternal smoking during
pregnancy was "clearly associated with a reduced birth weight."


By
age 2, cough was the most frequently reported symptom among the
children. Between the ages of 4 and 7, about 70 percent of the kids
with respiratory symptoms reported cough.


During the full
7-year follow-up, 38.9 percent of the study population had at least one
wheezing episode; 51.7 percent reported cough at night; and 37.3
percent a lower respiratory infection at a specific point in time.


"Overall,
70 percent of the cohort had reported at least one respiratory symptom
at some point in the first 7 years of life," said Dr. de Jongste.


A
child born at a low birth weight had an additional 6 percent chance of
respiratory symptoms if he or she was exposed to environmental tobacco
smoke at home after birth. The risk for children who are exposed both
in utero and after birth rose to 12 percent.


"To separate
the effect of a birth weight in children born at term from the sequelae
of prematurity," the researchers excluded all premature infants from
their study.


Drs. de Jongste and colleagues concluded that low
birth weight is an important risk factor for the development and
persistence of respiratory symptoms during preschool and early
elementary school. The association was strongest at age 4 but had no
effect after age 6.


"In addition, all parents should be
strongly encouraged to stop smoking because it has clear health
benefits for their offspring," said Dr. de Jongste. "Our data suggest
that focusing on parents of low-birth-weight children is of specific
interest because their children may be especially vulnerable to
environmental tobacco smoke."


###

Contact:
Professor J.C. de Jongste, M.D., Ph.D., Erasmus MC/Sophia Children's
Hospital, Department of Pediatric Respiratory Medicine, P. O. Box 2060,
3000 CB Rotterdam, The Netherlands

Phone: +0031 10 463 6263

E-mail: j.c.dejongste@erasmusmc.nl






Coenzyme Q10 does not improve Parkinson's disease symptoms

Public release date: 14-May-2007




Contact: Alexander Storch

Alexander.Storch@neuro.med.tu-dresden.de


JAMA and Archives Journals


Small doses of the antioxidant coenzyme Q10 appear to increase blood
levels of this naturally occurring compound in patients with
Parkinson's disease, but does not improve Parkinson's disease symptoms,
according to an article posted online today that will appear in the
July 2007 print issue of Archives of Neurology, one of the
JAMA/Archives journals.


Parkinson's disease is a
neurodegenerative disorder characterized by tremors and difficulty with
walking or other movements. The biological mechanisms underlying the
condition are not fully understood, but researchers suspect a
malfunction of the mitochondria, parts of the cells that help convert
food to energy, according to background information in the article.
Coenzyme (CoQ10), an antioxidant sold as a dietary supplement, is also
involved in mitochondrial processes. "Because of these functions, CoQ10
has attracted attention concerning neuroprotective actions in
neurodegenerative disorders linked to mitochondrial defects or
oxidative [oxygen-related] stress, such as Huntington's disease and
Parkinson's disease," the authors write. Previous studies indicate that
high doses of CoQ10 (1,200 milligrams) may slow the deterioration
associated with Parkinson's disease.


Alexander Storch, M.D.,
of the Technical University of Dresden, Germany, and colleagues
conducted a randomized clinical trial of a 300-milligram dose of CoQ10
in 131 patients with Parkinson's disease who did not have changes in
motor functions and were on stable treatment for their condition. Those
assigned to the treatment group took 100 milligrams of CoQ10 three
times daily for three months, followed by a two-month "washout" period.
The researchers assessed Parkinson's disease symptoms before treatment
began, each month during treatment and again after the washout period.
Blood tests were performed at the beginning of the study, after three
months of treatment and after the washout period.


A total of
106 patients completed the full three months of the study—55 in the
CoQ10 group and 51 in the placebo group. The compound was well
tolerated overall, and the percentage of patients who experienced
adverse effects—including viral infection, diarrhea and hearing
loss—did not differ between the two groups. Blood levels of CoQ10
increased in the treatment group from an average of 0.99 milligrams per
liter to an average of 4.46 milligrams per liter after three months.


"Although
we demonstrated a significant increase in plasma levels of CoQ10 toward
levels observed with high doses of standard CoQ10 formulations in
Parkinson's disease and other disorders, our study failed to show
improvement of Parkinson's disease symptoms and did not meet its
primary or secondary end points," which were changes on scales that
measured Parkinson's disease symptoms and their effects on physical and
mental functioning, the authors write. "Our study further demonstrated
that 300 milligrams per day of nanoparticular CoQ10 is safe and well
tolerated in patients with Parkinson's disease already taking various
antiparkinsonian medications."


"Since we did not find
symptomatic effects of CoQ10 in Parkinson's disease, our study does not
support the hypothesis that restoring the impaired energy metabolism of
the diseased dopaminergic neurons leads to symptomatic benefits in
Parkinson's disease," the authors conclude. "Future studies will need
to explore the protective effects of CoQ10 at the highest effective
dose (equivalent to about 2,400 milligrams per day of a standard
formulation) over a long treatment period and in a large cohort of
patients both sufficient to clearly define the protective potential of
this compound in Parkinson's disease."

###

(Arch Neurol. 2007;64:(doi:10.1001/archneur.64.7.nct60005). Available pre-embargo to the media at www.jamamedia.org.)






Researchers attach genes to minichromosomes in maize

Public release date: 14-May-2007




Contact: Katherine Kostiuk

kostiukk@missouri.edu

573-882-3346

University of Missouri-Columbia




Technique may lead to resistant crop development, medically important proteins and metabolites



COLUMBIA,
Mo. - A team of scientists at the University of Missouri-Columbia has
discovered a way to create engineered minichromosomes in maize and
attach genes to those minichromosomes. This discovery opens new
possibilities for the development of crops that are multiply resistant
to viruses, insects, fungi, bacteria and herbicides, and for the
development of proteins and metabolites that can be used to treat human
illnesses.


In a paper published in the Proceedings of the
National Academy of Sciences (PNAS), Weichang Yu, Fangpu Han, Zhi Gao,
Juan M. Vega and James A. Birchler built on a previous MU discovery
about the creation of minichromosomes to demonstrate that genes could
be stacked on the minichromosomes.


“This has been sought for a
long time in the plant world, and it should open many new avenues. If
we can do this in plants, many advances could be done in agriculture
that would not otherwise be possible, from improved crops to
inexpensive pharmaceutical production to other applications in
biotechnology,” said Birchler, professor of biological sciences in the
MU College of Arts and Science.


A minichromosome is an
extremely small version of a chromosome, the threadlike linear strand
of DNA and associated proteins that carry genes and functions in the
transmission of hereditary information. Whereas a chromosome is made of
both centromeres and telomeres with much intervening DNA, a
minichromosome contains only centromeres and telomeres, the end section
of a chromosome, with little else. However, minichromosomes have the
ability to accept the addition of new genes in subsequent experiments.


Birchler
said there have been unsuccessful efforts to create artificial
chromosomes in plants but this is the first time engineered
minichromosomes have been made. Minichromosomes are able to function in
many of the same ways as chromosomes but allow for genes to be stacked
on them. Although other forms of genetic modification in plants are
currently utilized, the new minichromosomes are particularly useful
because they allow scientists to add numerous genes onto one
minichromosome and manipulate those genes easily because they are all
in one place, Birchler said. Genetic modification with traditional
methods is more complicated because scientists have little control over
where the genes are located in the chromosomes and cannot stack
multiple genes on a separate chromosome independent of the others.


By
stacking genes on minichromosomes, scientists could create crops that
have multiple beneficial traits, such as resistance to drought, certain
viruses and insects, or other stresses. In addition, minichromosomes
could be used for the inexpensive production of multiple foreign
proteins and metabolites useful for medical purposes. Because of their
protein-rich composition, a part of the maize kernels (called an
endosperm) can be used to grow animal proteins and human antibodies
that treat diseases and disease symptoms. Minichromosomes could enable
new and better production of these foreign proteins and antibodies. In
addition, scientists also may be able to use them to develop plants
better suited for biofuel production.


“The technique used to create our engineered minichromosomes should be transferable to other plant species,” Birchler said.


He
said he hopes that he and other scientists can use the technique to
create minichromosomes in other plant varieties and produce more
resistant plant strains, develop more medically useful proteins and
metabolites, and study how chromosomes function.






Higher intake of fish and vitamin D levels linked to lower risk of age-related macular disease

Public release date: 14-May-2007



Contact: Tracy Clemons



301-251-1161

JAMA and Archives Journals


Individuals who have higher dietary intake of foods with omega-3
fatty acids and higher fish consumption have a reduced risk of advanced
age-related macular degeneration, while those with higher serum levels
of vitamin D may have a reduced risk of the early stages of the
disease, according to two reports in the May issue of Archives of
Ophthalmology, one of the JAMA/Archives journals.


Age-related
macular degeneration (AMD) occurs when the macula, the area at the back
of the retina that produces the sharpest vision, deteriorates over
time. It is the most common cause of blindness among older adults in
the United States, affecting more than 7 million individuals older than
40 years, according to background information in the articles. The
prevalence of AMD is likely to increase as the population ages. There
is currently no known way to prevent the condition, but research has
begun to identify potentially modifiable risk factors and
nutrient-based treatments.


The Age-Related Eye Disease Study
Research Group assessed 4,519 individuals who were age 60 to 80 when
they enrolled in 1992 through 1998. At that time, photographs were
taken of their retinas to determine if they had AMD, and if so, to
which of four stages the condition had progressed. The participants
also completed a food frequency questionnaire that measured how often
they consumed foods rich in certain vitamins, minerals and other
nutrients, such as omega-3 fatty acids commonly found in tuna, salmon
and other fish.


A total of 1,115 participants did not have
any symptoms of AMD at the beginning of the study, and were compared
with those who did, including 658 individuals with neovascular (severe)
AMD. "Dietary total omega-3 long-chain polyunsaturated fatty acid
intake was inversely associated with neovascular AMD, as was
docosahexaenoic acid," or DHA, a fatty acid that previous evidence
suggests affects the retina, the authors write. "Higher fish
consumption, both total and broiled/baked, was also inversely
associated with neovascular AMD." Eating more than two medium (4-ounce)
servings of fish per week or more than one medium serving of broiled or
baked fish was associated with the lowest risk for advanced AMD.


Omega-3
fatty acids may influence processes involved in the development of
blood vessel– and nerve-related diseases of the retina, the authors
write. For instance, DHA may protect the retina by influencing which
genes turn on and off, while fatty acids overall may eventually form
compounds that promote cell survival and proper blood vessel function,
reduce inflammation and maintain energy balance.


"These
results and those from other observational analytic investigations
suggest that modifying diet to include more foods rich in omega-3
long-chain polyunsaturated fatty acids could result in a reduction in
the risk of having neovascular AMD," the authors conclude. Clinical
trials would provide further information about whether diet changes or
supplements could prevent the development of advanced AMD.


In
a related study, Niyati Parekh, Ph.D., R.D., of the University of the
Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey, New Brunswick, and the University
of Wisconsin–Madison, and colleagues analyzed data from 7,752
individuals (including 11 percent with AMD) who were part of the
National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, a large study
designed to represent the entire U.S. population. Participants were
enrolled in the study between 1988 and 1994. They had physical
examinations that included blood and urine samples, photographs of the
retinas, and interviews and questionnaires regarding sociodemographics,
lifestyle habits and food intake.


"Levels of serum vitamin D
were inversely associated with early AMD but not advanced AMD," the
authors write. When participants were split into five groups based on
level of vitamin D in the blood, those in the highest group had a 40
percent lower risk of early AMD than those in the lowest group. "Milk
intake was inversely associated with early AMD. Fish intake was
inversely associated with advanced AMD."


Vitamin D may reduce
the risk of AMD by reducing inflammation or by preventing the growth of
new blood vessels in the retina, which contributes to some forms of
AMD, the authors speculate. "This study provides evidence that vitamin
D may protect against AMD," the authors conclude. "However, at this
time there is insufficient epidemiologic evidence of the relationship
between vitamin D level and AMD to make recommendations regarding
optimum serum vitamin D levels or milk and fish intake to protect
against AMD or its progression. The results of the present research
warrant further investigation for confirmation of the vitamin D-AMD
association in other population studies."

###

(Arch Ophthalmol. 2007;125:661-669, 671-679. Available pre-embargo to the media at www.jamamedia.org.)








Qing (Manchu) Dynasty

  • 1644: Li Zicheng captures Beijing; Li Zicheng is defeated by the Manzhou under Wu Sangui.

  • 1661-1722: Reign of Kang Xi.



  • 1723-1736: Reign of Yong Zheng.

    • 1728: Encyclopedia published.


  • 1736-1795: Reign of Qian Long.

    • 1755-1759: Chinese Turkestan is brought under Qing control.
    • 1760-1770: Tea trade with Europe increases.
    • 1793: Lord Macartney's (England) embassy is unsuccessful.


  • 1816: Lord Amherst of England's embassy is unsuccessful.

  • 1839: Lin Zexcu is made commissioner in Canton.

    • Opium imported by Britain is burned


  • 1839-1842: The First Opium War.

    • 1841: Hong Kong is taken by Britain.
    • 1842: Treaty of Nanjing ends the First Opium War


  • 1850-1864: Taipeng Rebellion

  • 1851-1862: Xian Feng is emperor.

    • 1811-1872: Zeng Guofan, scholar and official.
    • 1812-1885: Zuo Zongtang, leading modernizer.
    • 1823-1901: Li Hongzhang, modernizer and scholar official.
    • 1850-1864: Hong Xiuchuan leads the Taiping Rebellion.
    • 1856-1860: Anglo-French War (The Second Opium War).
    • 1860: Treaty of Tientsin is ratified.

      • Summer Palace is looted by British and French troops.
      • Prince Gong is acting head of state.



  • 1862-1875: Tong Zhi Restoration.

    • 1853-1868: Nien Rebellion.
    • 1866: Navy Yard is established at Fuzhou.
    • 1868-1873: Muslim Rebellion.
    • 1870: Tientsin Massacre.
    • 1872: China Merchants Steam Navigation Company is established.

  • 1875-1908: Guang Xu is emperor.

    • 1838-1908: Cixi (Tz'u Hsi), empress dowager.
    • 1894-1895: Sino-Japanese War.
    • 1896: Postal Service is established.
    • 1898: Hundred Day's Reform.
    • 1898-1900: Boxer Rebellion.
    • 1904-1905: Russo-Japanese War.
    • 1905: Traditional Civil Service System ends.



Sunday, May 13, 2007

Agrifund promises big returns on farms

5:00AM
Friday May 11, 2007

By Malcolm Burgess



The promoters of a public share offering seeking $60 million to
invest in farms and agriculture businesses are promising investors
annual returns of at least 15 per cent - despite uncertainty over how
long the price of farm land will keep rising.

BT Funds Management
and AGInvest yesterday started an offer to raise money for the unlisted
Agri Private Capital Fund, which will invest half its capital in "high
potential pastoral farms" and the rest in small- to medium-sized
agri-businesses.

The new fund adds to a growing range of
investment opportunities open to the general public wishing to invest
in New Zealand agriculture. These include PGG Wrightson offshoot NZ
Farming Systems Uruguay, Dairy Equity and the soon to be listed Dairy
Trust.

Andrew Watters, principal of specialist farm equity
manager AGInvest, said the offer would run for around three months or
until the $60 million mark was reached, although there were provisions
for it to exceed that amount.

On the farming side, the fund would
look for properties to develop to achieve "at least a 25 or 30 per cent
increase in productivity", said Watters.

Agri-businesses of interest would be unlisted, small- to
medium-sized businesses with a track record of paying cash dividends,
and with the opportunity for earnings and revenue growth, he said.

"We think there are more than 100 of these that are under the radar of most people's perceptions.

"Examples
of what these companies might eventually look like could come from
[PGG] Wrightson Seeds, Gallagher and Tru-Test - all companies that
started off as SMEs but have grown out of the agricultural sector to
get more global scope and reach."

Asked if a projected internal
rate of return of more than 15 per cent a year would rely on land
speculation, Watters said although two-thirds of the dairy sector's 12
per cent annual rate of return over the past decade was down to capital
growth, AGInvest had managed to operate in an environment where land
prices had always been considered overvalued.

He said AGInvest
had managed a 74 per cent a year return for shareholders when it sold
former corporate dairy farm owner Dairy Brands in 2001 after acquiring
management rights in 1999.

The Real Estate Institute of New
Zealand says the March rural property market was up 10.2 per cent on
the year before, despite a warning by the Reserve Bank last year for
farmers not to buy land in the expectation that double-digit growth in
property values would continue.

Watters said one of the fund's key investments would be Fonterra shares through farm ownership.

The
agricultural sector had a strong outlook with European production
shrinking, the use of the United States corn crop for biofuel
increasing and a steady population increase to feed.

New
Zealand's unique geography also meant the country would be one of the
least affected by climate change, which was likely to affect major
competitors such as Australia.


Back to the land

*
Agri Private Capital Fund will invest half of its capital in
high-potential pastoral farms and the rest in small to medium
agribusinesses.

* The fund expands the limited opportunities the
general public have to invest in agriculture, New Zealand's largest
sector, which makes up 17 per cent of GDP.

* The Reserve Bank
last year warned that farmers could not expect double-digit annual
growth in land prices to continue, but March figures show the rural
property market up 10.2 per cent.

Overseas bidders eye up $50m Kiwi paradise


Bidding for Kauri Mountain Farm, located on a peninsula east of Whangarei Harbour and valued at $50 million-plus, is now open to overseas parties.

Bidding for Kauri Mountain Farm, located on a
peninsula east of Whangarei Harbour and valued at $50 million-plus, is
now open to overseas parties.




5:00AM
Sunday May 13, 2007

By Ann Newbery

Eight hundred acres of prime Whangarei coastal land worth an
estimated $50 million-plus could be carved up by foreigners - and the
Green Party is not impressed.

Up for grabs is Kauri Mountain
Farm, located on a peninsula east of Whangarei Harbour, with one
boundary including about 5km of the famously beautiful Ocean Beach and
another extending to the peaks of Mount Mania.

It has been on the
New Zealand market for several months, but now owner Zack Smith, a
second-generation Northland farmer whose family has owned the land for
decades, has opened bidding to overseas parties.

He is asking for
expressions of interest by June 29 and will consider all options for
the sale of Kauri Mountain Farm, including breaking the land up, as
well as joint ventures for developing the property.

The Herald on Sunday
understands that inquiries have already been received from overseas.
Murray Owles, a spokesman for the vendor, confirmed the property is
being marketed to Australia, Asia, the US, and Europe.


The property - only slightly smaller than New York's Central Park -
is being advertised as a "coastal paradise with endless development
opportunities", including subdivision.

That prospect has Russel Norman, Green Party co-leader and economic spokesman, hot under the collar.

Norman said New Zealand could expect to see more and more of the country being sold in similar fashion.

"It's
just crazy," he said. "There is no need for us as a country to open up
all of our prime land and have it bought up by overseas people. What is
the gain in the national interest to have our land bought by people who
don't live here?

"All it's doing is driving up the property market and making it more expensive for people who live here to buy land."

Owles
said the size of the coastal property made it unique on the New Zealand
market. "It is just the ultimate in global coastal living really," he
said.

"It's got everything - the harbour on one side just over
the mountains, and Ocean Beach, which would be as good a surf beach as
anywhere in the world, and it's your own."

The publicity
statement for the property says it could be split into anything from 15
to 31 lots, but this would require appropriate resource consent and
local council approvals.

Overseas bidders are being directed to
the Overseas Investment Office (OIO), which much approve a transaction
if it will result in foreign investment in sensitive land, significant
business assets or fishing quota.

In a statement to the Herald On Sunday,
a spokesman for Finance Minister Michael Cullen said: "We have welcomed
foreign investment [to New Zealand] for over 150 years. It's what helps
drive our economy."

But the Government also recognised that such
land sales were an important issue for New Zealanders: "That's why we
tightened controls over the purchase of sensitive land."

Russel
Norman said the Green Party had little faith in the work of the OIO and
its predecessor, the Overseas Investment Commission (OIC).

"Our
view has long been that the OIO, and before that the OIC, isn't strict
enough at all. They tightened up some of the rules around coastal
property in terms of the oversight of those sales, but when you look at
how many they've turned down, it's still minuscule," he said. "They're
basically still rubber-stamping it all."

That was denied by Cullen's spokesman. "Foreigners are turned down from time to time; there is no rubber stamp," he said.

"It is worth noting... nine out of 28 OECD countries have no restrictions on foreign purchases of property."



15 Ways to Make Your Food Safer


Food Safety Strategies From the Market to the Table



By
Miranda Hitti
WebMD Feature


Reviewed by
Louise Chang, MD





Tainted animal feed. Spinach scares. Peanut butter recalls. Food safety has
been big news lately, which is making many people think twice about what's on
their plates.


First, the facts. The FDA says some U.S. hogs, poultry, and
farmed fish recently ate animal feed containing Chinese ingredients tainted
with an industrial chemical called melamine. But the FDA says people who ate
meat from those animals are likely at "very low" risk of
melamine-related health problems.


The source of the
salmonella outbreak in Peter Pan and Great Value peanut butter has been
found, and maker ConAgra plans to start shipping Peter Pan Peanut Butter to
retailers this summer. And Last fall's E. coli outbreak in
fresh bagged spinach is over.


Despite the spate of food safety snafus, America's food safety system works,
CDC senior epidemiologist Linda Demma, PhD, tells WebMD.


"I certainly don't think it's broken. I think we can improve, but I
don't think it's broken," says Demma, who works in the enteric disease
epidemiology branch of the CDC's division of foodborne, bacterial, and mycotic
diseases.


"All the food safety agencies are working very hard to collaborate and
come up with some ideas on how to improve the meat and produce industry as a
whole," Demma says, adding that food industries "are being very
cooperative."


In light of food safety issues, the FDA recently created a new FDA job --
assistant commissioner for food protection -- and appointed David Acheson, MD,
FRCP, to fill that post. Earlier this year, the FDA issued new guidelines for
the fresh-cut produce industry, which market packaged, minimally processed
fresh fruits and vegetables.


While food safety controls are being tweaked, here are 15 tips on making
your food safer, from the market to the table.



1. Consider your source. Eating locally grown food is
becoming more popular, but that doesn't necessarily mean it's safer than
supermarket produce.


"Just because you grow it in a farm down the street, it doesn't make it
any safer or worse than any other produce that you get," Suresh Pillai,
PhD, tells WebMD.


Pillai is a professor of food safety and environmental microbiology at Texas
A&M University.


Locally grown food "is pretty much on par with what you would find in a
supermarket," in terms of food safety, Demma agrees. "Of course, there
[are] other reasons to buy and eat locally," she says.


At farmers markets, you may get the chance to meet and talk with the people
who produced your food.


Farmers markets have become more common, with 4,385 U.S. farmers markets in
2006, up from 1,755 farmers markets in 1994, according to the U.S. Department
of Agriculture (USDA).


Eating food shipped from overseas? The melamine-tainted animal feed
ingredients came from China. But that doesn't mean that all imported food is
suspect.


"The assumption that the imported products are unsafe is absolutely not
true," Pillai says. "In fact, there are as many outbreaks associated
with foods grown in the United States. So blaming it on imported products, I
think, is a cop-out."



2. Map your supermarket route. Don't cruise the store aisles
aimlessly. Gather nonperishable items first, fresh or frozen goods last. That
strategy minimizes the time that perishable goods sit in your shopping cart
instead of in a freezer or refrigerator.



3. Be choosy. Select fresh produce that isn't bruised or
damaged. Check that eggs aren't cracked. Look for a clean meat or fish counter
and a clean salad bar. Don't buy bulging or dented cans, cracked jars, or jars
with loose or bulging lids. If fresh-cut produce (such as half a watermelon or
bagged salad mixes) is on your shopping list, choose those that are
refrigerated or surrounded by ice.



4. Pack it up. At the grocery store, bag fresh fruits and vegetables
separately from meat, poultry, and seafood products.


Bring an ice chest to keep frozen or perishable items if it will take more
than an hour to get those items home.


No ice chest? If it's hot outside, put the groceries in the air-conditioned
passenger area of your car instead of putting them in the trunk, which may not
have air-conditioning.



5. Keep your kitchen clean. Wash your cutting boards, countertops,
refrigerator, pots, and utensils regularly in hot, soapy water, especially
after they've been in contact with raw meat, poultry, and seafood.



6. Check your cutting boards. They shouldn't have lots of cracks and
crevices where bacteria can lurk.



7. Sanitize. The FDA recommends periodically sanitizing your cutting
boards, countertops, and kitchen sink drain with a homemade mixture of one
teaspoon of chlorine bleach to one quart of water.


Sponges and dishcloths can house bacteria, so wash them weekly in hot water
in the washing machine.



8. Store your food properly. Refrigerate frozen and perishable items
as soon as possible.


Don't store foods near household chemicals or cleaning products. Some
produce -- like onions and potatoes -- don't need to go in the refrigerator,
but don't store them under the sink, where they could be damaged by leaky
pipes.



9. Check the refrigerator and freezer temperature. Set the
refrigerator temperature to 40 degrees Fahrenheit, set the freezer to zero
degrees Fahrenheit.


Use a refrigerator thermometer to check those temperatures periodically.



10. Wash your hands. Before you handle food, lather up with soap and
hot water, washing your hands for at least 20 seconds. Repeat after handling
produce, meat, poultry, seafood, or eggs.



11. Wash fruits and vegetables in running water. A small scrub brush
may help, but don't use soap or other detergents to wash produce.


What about produce washes? "All of these solutions and washes may have
some applications but studies show that washing with water is as safe as
anything else," says Pillai, who calls water the "most effective, the
safest, and the cheapest" way to wash produce.



12. Thaw foods in the refrigerator, not on the countertop. It may
take longer, but it's safer.



13. Cook foods thoroughly. Use a meat thermometer to make sure meat
is fully cooked. Never put cooked meats on an unwashed plate or platter that
has held raw meat.



14. Store leftovers safely. Refrigerate leftovers in tight containers
as soon as possible and use them within three days. When in doubt, throw it
out.



15. Maintain perspective. "There's no such thing as a zero
risk," says Pillai. ”There's no such thing as a sterile product."


Everyone in the U.S. should get more education about food safety "so the
responsibilities are being spread all across from the proverbial farm to
fork," says Pillai.


While you can't control everything that affects your food, "you should
not lose a sense of reality," says Pillai. "I still believe that we
have one of the safest supplies of food in the world."








WebMD Feature







Published May 10, 2007.


SOURCES: WebMD Medical News: "Tainted Animal Feed May Be in Fish."
WebMD Medical News: "Peanut Butter Salmonella Source Found." WebMD
Medical News: "E. coli Spinach Outbreak Hard to Trace." Linda Demma,
PhD, senior epidemiologist, Enteric Disease Epidemiology Branch, Division of
Foodborne, Bacterial, and Mycotic Diseases, CDC, Atlanta. Suresh Pillai, PhD,
Professor of Food Safety and Environmental Microbiology, Chairman of the
Biotechnology Program, and Director of the National Center for Electron Beam
Food Research, Texas A&M University. U.S. Department of Agriculture:
"Farmers Market Growth." FDA's Center for Food Safety and Nutrition:
"Consumer Advice and Publications on Food Safety, Nutrition, and
Cosmetics." National Digestive Diseases Information Clearinghouse:
"Bacterial and Foodborne Illness."





Reviewed on
May 11, 2007





8 Ways to Burn Calories and Fight Fat


These healthy habits may help give your body a calorie-burning boost.


By
Elaine Magee, RD, MPH
WebMD Weight Loss Clinic-Feature


Reviewed by
Louise Chang, MD




For years, products have been marketed with the promise of helping you burn
more calories. But is there really anything you can do to increase the number
of calories your body burns each day?


Well, yes and no, experts say. The truth seems to be that the No. 1 way to
burn more calories is the old-fashioned way -- by moving more.


"Essentially, we know of no way to burn more calories or up our
metabolism than to move more," says Barry M. Popkin, PhD, director of the
Interdisciplinary Obesity Program at the University of North Carolina, Chapel
Hill.


Still, research suggests that there may be a few other ways you can increase
calorie burn. Here are eight possible ways to burn more calories and fight
fat:


1. Exercise to Burn Calories


Christopher Wharton, PhD, a certified personal trainer and researcher with
the Rudd Center for Food Policy and Obesity at Yale University, put it simply:
"The more time spent exercising and the more vigorous the exercise, the
more calories will be burned."


Indeed, obesity expert George Bray, MD, with the Pennington Biomedical
Research Center in Baton Rouge, La., believes that taking a brisk walk every
day is probably the single most important piece of advice for anyone wanting to
burn more calories.


Obviously, when you exercise, your body burns calories to fuel your
activity. But exercise is the gift that keeps on giving. That's because even
after your workout has ended, your body is still burning more calories.


While it's hard to pinpoint just how long this effect lasts (it varies
depending on body composition and level of training), "it’s safe to say
metabolic rate can be elevated with aerobic exercise for at least 24
hours," says Wharton.


If you want to prolong this calorie-burning effect, Wharton advises
exercising for longer periods.


"Studies have shown that with increases in exercise time, the elevation
in resting metabolic rate is prolonged," he says.


2. Do Strength Training to Build Muscle


When you exercise, you use muscle. This helps build muscle mass, and muscle
tissue burns more calories -- even when you're at rest -- than body fat.
According to Wharton, 10 pounds of muscle would burn 50 calories in a day spent
at rest, while 10 pounds of fat would burn 20 calories.


"The most effective way to increase metabolism and burn more calories is
by aerobic exercise and strength training. Both are important," Megan A. McCrory, PhD, a researcher with
the
School of Nutrition and Exercise Science at Bastyr University, says in
an email interview.


Strength training becomes especially important as we get older, when our
metabolisms tend to slow down. One way to stop this is to add some strength
training to your workout at least a couple of times a week. The largest muscles
(and therefore the largest calorie burners) are in the thighs, abdomen, chest,
and arms.

3. Drink Caffeinated Green or Black Tea


Caffeine is a stimulant, and stimulants tend to increase the calories you
burn. One likely reason is that they give you the short-term impression that
you have more energy, which could mean you move more. Caffeine may also cause
metabolic changes in the body that can result in more calories burned.


"Even older studies have suggested that 250 milligrams of caffeine
consumed with a meal can increase the calories spent metabolizing the meal by
10%," says Jamie Pope, MS, RD, LDN, a nutrition lecturer at Vanderbilt
University School of Nursing. Over time, this could be significant, Pope says
in an email interview: "About 75 calories per day translates to over 2,100
calories in a month’s time."


Over the past few years, some studies have hinted that green or black tea
may have benefits beyond the caffeine they contain.


One study noted a reduction in food intake in rats that were given a
polyphenol found in green tea. Another study, in humans, concluded green tea
had heat-producing and calorie-burning properties beyond what can be explained
by caffeine. When 31 healthy young men and women were given three servings of a
beverage containing green tea catechins, caffeine, and calcium for three days,
their 24-hour energy expenditure increased by 4.6%, according to the research
from Lausanne University in Switzerland.


Drinking tea with meals may have another fat-fighting effect. Tea extract
may interfere with the body's absorption of carbohydrate when consumed in the
same meal, according to a study published in the September 2006 issue of the
American Journal of Clinical Nutrition.


While all these possible effects are slight, there is yet another bonus to
drinking tea. Having a zero-calorie cup of tea instead of a beverage with
calories (like a soda) will certainly reduce the number of calories you take
in.


4. Eat Smaller, More Frequent Meals


Every time you eat a meal or snack, your gastrointestinal tract turns on, so
to speak, and starts digesting food and absorbing nutrients. It costs calories
to fire up the human digestion machine, so it makes sense that the more small
meals or snacks you eat through the day, the more calories you'd burn.


There isn’t much solid evidence for this effect, McCrory notes in an email
interview. But many experts believe that, compared to eating one or two very
large meals, this is a more healthful way of eating anyway. And if it leads to
even a few extra calories being burned, even better!


5. Don’t Skip Breakfast


Evidence supporting a link between skipping breakfast and increased body
weight is growing, according to a recent editorial in the Journal of the
American Dietetic Association
.


Some research has shown that when people skip breakfast, they tend to eat
more calories by the end of the day. Other studies have suggested that skipping
breakfast is associated with a higher body mass index in teens.


While we could use more research in this area, eating a healthy breakfast
certainly makes sense as a lifestyle habit.


6. Eat Low-Fat Dairy


The calcium from low-fat dairy doesn't specifically help burn more calories,
but it may do a couple of things to help discourage body fat. Results from a
recent Danish study suggest that we might absorb fewer fat calories from a meal
when we consume calcium from low-fat dairy.


In another recent study, eating more calcium-rich foods -- including low-fat
dairy products -- appeared to be linked to lower amounts of belly fat,
particularly in young adult white males.

7. Drink 8 Cups of Water a Day


"Just about everything you call on your body to do burns calories,
including absorbing and utilizing water while maintaining fluid balance
(sometimes by excreting excess)," says Pope.


Drinking almost eight cups of water (2 liters) may help burn nearly 100
extra calories a day, according to findings of a small study from Germany,
notes Pope.


That may not sound like much, but it could add up to 700 calories a week or
2,800 calories a month. And that's by doing something we should do anyway to
keep our intestines and kidneys happy, and to help keep us from confusing
thirst with hunger. (Pope does add a caution not to overdo it; it is possible
to drink dangerous amounts of water.)


8. Fidget


Any type of movement requires energy, and fidgeting definitely qualifies as
movement.


"Older studies suggest additional calories can be burned each day with
fidgeting," says Pope.


One study even found that informal movement such as fidgeting may be more
important than formal workouts in determining who is lean and who is obese.


Diet and exercise are good topics to discuss with your doctor. Before
starting a new exercise regimen or supplementing your diet, it would be good to
talk it over with your doctor. If you have certain medical conditions or are
taking certain medications, there may be activities or dietary supplements that
you should avoid.


WebMD Weight Loss Clinic-Feature







Published May 11, 2007.


SOURCES: George A. Bray, MD, Boyd Professor, Pennington Biomedical Research
Center, Baton Rouge, La. Barry M. Popkin, PhD, director, Interdisciplinary
Obesity Program, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill. Christopher
Wharton, PhD, certified personal trainer; researcher, Rudd Center for Food
Policy and Obesity, Yale University. Megan A. McCrory, PhD, research associate
professor, School of Nutrition and Exercise Science, Bastyr University,
Kenmore, Wash. Michael Corcoran, MS, graduate research assistant, Lipid
Metabolism Laboratory, Tufts University. Jamie Pope, MS, RD, LDN, lecturer in
nutrition, Vanderbilt University School of Nursing; author, The T-Factor Fat
Gram Counter.
Rudelle S. et al., Obesity, 2007; vol 15: pp 349-355.
Brooks, BM, et al., Journal of the American College of Nutrition, 2006;
vol 25: pp 523-532. Niemeier H.M., et al., Journal of Adolescent Health,
December 2006; vol 39: pp 842-849. Affenito, S.G., Journal of the American
Dietetic Association,
April 2007; vol 107 pp 565-569. Zhong, L., et al.,
American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, September 2006; vol 84: pp
551-555. Corcoran MP, et al., American Journal of Clinical Nutrition,
March 2007; vol 85: pp 662-77. Astrup A., et al, American Journal of
Clinical Nutrition.
March 2007; vol 85: pp 678-687. Dulloo, AG, et al.,
American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, December 1999; vol 70:
pp1040-1045. Kao Y. et al., American Journal of Clinical Nutrition,
November 2000; vol 72 pp1232-1233. WebMD Medical News: "Fidgeting
Separates Fat from Fit Couch Potato."





Reviewed on
May 11, 2007



Saturday, May 12, 2007

The Six Greatest Ab Exercises of All-Time

Sculpt rock-hard abs with these new takes on a few old classics















Long-Arm Weighted Crunch



This exercise targets your upper abs. Lie on your back with your
knees bent and your feet flat on the floor. Hold a light dumbbell in
each hand and extend your arms straight back beyond your head. Now
crunch your rib cage toward your pelvis, keeping your shoulders still
and your arms straight. Don't generate momentum with your arms. Perform
12 to 15 repetitions.



















Seated Ab Crunch

Sit
on the edge of a bench. Grip the edge of the pad and lean back
slightly, extending your legs down and away and keeping your heels 4 to
6 inches off the floor. Bend your knees and slowly raise your legs
toward your chest. At the same time, lean forward with your upper body,
allowing your chest to approach your thighs. Return to the starting
position. Perform three sets of 12 repetitions.



















Corkscrew

This
exercise targets both the lower abs and the obliques. Lie on your back,
with your legs raised directly over your hips. Your knees should be
slightly bent. Place your hands at your sides with the palms down. Use
your lower abs to raise your hips off the floor and toward your rib
cage, elevating your feet straight up. Simultaneously twist your hips
to the right. Hold, then return to the starting position. Repeat,
twisting to the left. Do 10 repetitions to each side.



















Weighted One-Sided Crunch

This
exercise targets both the upper abs and the obliques. Lie with your
knees bent and your feet flat on the floor, and hold a dumbbell with
both hands by your right shoulder. Curl your torso up and rotate to the
left. Lower yourself, finish the set on that side, then switch
directions and repeat, holding the dumbbell next to your left shoulder.
Perform three sets of eight repetitions to each side.



















Kneeling Cable Crunch



Kneel facing the pulley and hold the ends of a rope attached to the
high cable along the sides of your face. Bend forward, aiming your
chest at your pelvis. Return to the starting position, then repeat the
movement, this time aiming your chest toward your left knee. Return,
then repeat to your right. That's one repetition. Perform three sets of
eight repetitions.



















Crunch/Side-Bend Combo

This
exercise targets both the upper abs and the obliques. Lie on your back
with your knees bent, feet on the floor, and hands behind your ears.
Curl up so your shoulder blades are off the floor. Bend at the waist to
your left, aiming your left armpit toward your left hip. Straighten,
then bend to your right. Lower yourself to the starting position and
repeat. Perform three sets of eight repetitions to each side.










Friday, May 11, 2007

Bottle a day could help keep Big C away

5:00AM Saturday February 10, 2007
By Errol Kiong


Children from Cambridge Kindergarten drinking milk in 1946

Love it or loathe it, those warm half pints of milk a generation of Kiwis were forced to swig at school may prove beneficial against developing bowel cancer decades later.

Otago University associate professor Brian Cox thinks so and is embarking on a survey of 1000 people to investigate the link between the school milk programme and a reduced risk of developing bowel cancer.

Work by Professor Cox, director of the Hugh Adam cancer epidemiology unit, found the risk of developing bowel cancer among men and women born between 1941 and 1956 was 60 per cent lower than for previous generations.

"The generations before then all had a similar risk for a very, very long time and then, suddenly, you've got this dramatic reduction.

"It quite clearly shows that something quite profound happened in terms of the upbringing of that generation before they reached 25 which determined their risk of bowel cancer as adults."

Professor Cox believes the answer may lie in the fact that this group grew up during the time when all schoolchildren between 7 and 12 received a free half pint of full cream milk each school day.

Studies have shown that supplementing the adult diet with calcium supplements reduces the occurrence of certain types of bowel cancer and the free milk would have provided about 75 per cent of the daily calcium requirement of a child.

"We took somewhat of a leap and wondered whether calcium in childhood might alter one's adult risk of bowel cancer."

Professor Cox said there might be other factors involved but the milk theory was chosen to be tested first because many people would have memories - good and bad - of the school milk programme, which ran from 1937 to 1967.

"I remember some kids throwing up when the milk was too warm. There were other kids who would try and drink three half-pint bottles like they thought it was beer or something."

Professor Cox and colleague Dr Mary Jane Sneyd now plan to test the theory with the survey of people aged 25 to 69, some of whom have bowel cancer.

Through questionnaires, participants will be asked about their school milk consumption and other aspects of their diet.

The study, which was made possible through one of 23 grants totalling $553,000 from the Genesis Oncology Trust this summer, is to be completed this year.

New Zealand has one of the highest rates of bowel cancer in the world. In 2002, 2588 cases were diagnosed and there were 1135 deaths.

Milk monitor

* The school milk programme ran from 1937 to 1967.

* All children aged between 7 and 12 received a free half pint of full cream milk each school day.

* The risk of developing bowel cancer among those born between 1941 and 1956 has been found to be 60 per cent lower than in previous generations.

* Studies have shown that supplementing the adult diet with calcium reduces the occurrence of certain types of bowel cancer.

* The free school milk would have provided about 75 per cent of a child's daily calcium requirement.

Hot food news from 6000 years ago

5:00AM Saturday February 17, 2007
By Steve Connor



SAN FRANCISCO - Chilli peppers have achieved the culinary accolade of being the oldest-known kitchen condiment after scientists found evidence that people were cooking with them more than 6000 years ago.

An archaeological study has discovered that hot chilli peppers were added to change the flavour of otherwise bland-tasting food long before the construction of the first pyramids in ancient Egypt.

The first people to cook with chili peppers lived in the lowland areas of what is now Ecuador, but the spicy treat soon spread through South and Central America.

It went global after the Spanish conquistadors arrived in the New World.

The study was published this week in the journal Science.

When the first Europeans came to the Americas, various varieties of chili peppers were widely grown as a crop throughout the New World.

But scientists knew little about when or how it became such an important feature of the diet.

Part of the problem was that vegetable matter quickly degrades and is lost to scientific analysis.

But Linda Perry of the Smithsonian Institution's National Museum of Natural History in Washington solved the problem with the discovery that peppers could be identified at an archaeological site from tiny fossilised grains of starch.

"Sorting through microscopic particles and finding a type that distinguishes such an important plant group is like opening a window to the past," Dr Perry said.

"Suddenly we are able to gain incredible insight into ancient agriculture, trade and cuisine by making these plants visible nearly everywhere they occurred."

The oldest starch grains from chilli peppers were found at two sites in Ecuador dating to 6100 years ago.

Grains have also been found as far afield as the Bahamas, Panama and Peru.

"Before our research, there wasn't much archaeological evidence to show that prehistoric people in Central and South America were eating domesticated chilli peppers," said Deborah Pearsall, professor of anthropology at the University of Missouri-Columbia in the US.

"Chili peppers don't preserve well because when you cook with them, you eat most of them; you don't have husks or shells that are thrown away and preserved.

"That's why we used a technique that involved analysing microscopic starch grains on cooking and grinding tools to find this new evidence.

"We knew from historic and ethnographic records that people were eating domesticated chilli peppers, but this archaeological evidence confirms those findings.

"It also shows us that chilli peppers are one of the oldest domesticated food sources in the Americas and that people in distant areas all ate them."

Chili peppers belong to the capsicum group and are technically classed as fruits.

Scott Raymond, of the University of Calgary in Canada, who took part in the study, said growing chilli pepper as a crop probably occurred in the lowlands of South America, rather than the highland regions associated with the Aztec and Inca cultures.

And he sees a simple reason for its worldwide popularity.

"Chilli is an excellent disguiser. If something's not tasting quite right, you can always throw a few chilli peppers into the pot."

- INDEPENDENT

Hot food news from 6000 years ago

5:00AM Saturday February 17, 2007
By Steve Connor



SAN FRANCISCO - Chilli peppers have achieved the culinary accolade of being the oldest-known kitchen condiment after scientists found evidence that people were cooking with them more than 6000 years ago.

An archaeological study has discovered that hot chilli peppers were added to change the flavour of otherwise bland-tasting food long before the construction of the first pyramids in ancient Egypt.

The first people to cook with chili peppers lived in the lowland areas of what is now Ecuador, but the spicy treat soon spread through South and Central America.

It went global after the Spanish conquistadors arrived in the New World.

The study was published this week in the journal Science.

When the first Europeans came to the Americas, various varieties of chili peppers were widely grown as a crop throughout the New World.

But scientists knew little about when or how it became such an important feature of the diet.

Part of the problem was that vegetable matter quickly degrades and is lost to scientific analysis.

But Linda Perry of the Smithsonian Institution's National Museum of Natural History in Washington solved the problem with the discovery that peppers could be identified at an archaeological site from tiny fossilised grains of starch.

"Sorting through microscopic particles and finding a type that distinguishes such an important plant group is like opening a window to the past," Dr Perry said.

"Suddenly we are able to gain incredible insight into ancient agriculture, trade and cuisine by making these plants visible nearly everywhere they occurred."

The oldest starch grains from chilli peppers were found at two sites in Ecuador dating to 6100 years ago.

Grains have also been found as far afield as the Bahamas, Panama and Peru.

"Before our research, there wasn't much archaeological evidence to show that prehistoric people in Central and South America were eating domesticated chilli peppers," said Deborah Pearsall, professor of anthropology at the University of Missouri-Columbia in the US.

"Chili peppers don't preserve well because when you cook with them, you eat most of them; you don't have husks or shells that are thrown away and preserved.

"That's why we used a technique that involved analysing microscopic starch grains on cooking and grinding tools to find this new evidence.

"We knew from historic and ethnographic records that people were eating domesticated chilli peppers, but this archaeological evidence confirms those findings.

"It also shows us that chilli peppers are one of the oldest domesticated food sources in the Americas and that people in distant areas all ate them."

Chili peppers belong to the capsicum group and are technically classed as fruits.

Scott Raymond, of the University of Calgary in Canada, who took part in the study, said growing chilli pepper as a crop probably occurred in the lowlands of South America, rather than the highland regions associated with the Aztec and Inca cultures.

And he sees a simple reason for its worldwide popularity.

"Chilli is an excellent disguiser. If something's not tasting quite right, you can always throw a few chilli peppers into the pot."

- INDEPENDENT

Milkshake lovers wanted for scientific study

2:34PM Monday February 19, 2007

A Massey University scientist is testing the theory that dairy protein is more filling than carbohydrates and fats, and could be beneficial for people trying to lose weight.

PhD student Sylvia Chung wants 50 volunteers to drink special milkshakes as part of her research on satiety -- the feeling of fullness after eating.

The popularity of high-protein diets has sparked public interest in the relationship between protein and weight loss, Ms Chung said.

"Dairy product consumption has been associated with the maintenance of healthy body weight in humans," she added.

Based at Massey's Palmerston North campus, Ms Chung will be examining the effects of whey protein, which occurs naturally in milk, and a popular dietary protein supplement, on fullness and weight management.

Volunteers - who must be from Palmerston North - will be asked to drink a milkshake before lunch on four different days, and then answer questions about how full they feel.

- NZPA

McDonald's unhappy with Prince's remark

11:46AM Thursday March 01, 2007

Memo from McDonald's to the Prince of Wales: We are not amused.

McDonald's said today it was disappointed by Prince Charles' statement that the hamburger chain should be banned, adding that the heir to the British throne was unfamiliar with its recent efforts to introduce healthier fare.

Earlier this week, Prince Charles suggested during a visit to the Imperial College London Diabetes Centre in Abu Dhabi that McDonald's, often criticized over its high-fat menu choices, should be banned.

"Have you got anywhere with McDonald's? Have you tried getting it banned? That's the key," the prince said to a nutritionist at the center.

"The comment made by the Prince of Wales appears to be an off-the-cuff remark that, in our opinion, does not reflect either our menu or where we are at as a business," Nick Hindle, a spokesman for McDonald's UK business, said in an emailed statement.

A spokesman for Prince Charles said "he was keen to emphasise the need for children to enjoy the widest variety of food and not to eat any particular sort of food to excess."

Prince Charles has long been an advocate of organic food, running an organic farm on his home estate. Late last year, he published a cookbook in which he aimed to rebel against what he called the "soulless, mass-produced food that had come to dominate the modern diet."

But McDonald's said the future king was "clearly unaware of some of the moves we have made over time to improve choice and variety on our menu ... including the introduction of fruit, carrot sticks, salads and organic milk."

The hamburger chain added that it has "made great progress in support of sustainable agriculture."

- REUTERS

Prince Charles suggests McDonald's ban

5:00AM Wednesday February 28, 2007
By Matthew Beard


The Prince of Wales entered the debate on childhood obesity by appearing to call for a ban on McDonald's.

During a tour of the United Arab Emirates, the Prince told a nutritionist that the "key" to remedying childhood obesity was getting McDonalds "banned".

His comments came during a tour of the Imperial College London Diabetes Centre in Abu Dhabi, where he was told about initiatives to improve the nation's diet and fitness levels.

The Prince, who visited the centre with the Duchess of Cornwall, advocates organic food and runs a farm on his Highgrove Estate that does not use artificial pesticides or fertilisers.

The Prince was chatting to Nadine Tayara, from the centre, when he asked her: "Have you got anywhere with McDonald's? Have you tried getting it banned? That's the key."

A McDonald's spokeswoman said the Prince's remark was "disappointing". Other members of his family had visited the chain and "have probably got a more up-to-date picture of us," she said.

"This appears to be an off-the-cuff remark, in our opinion. It does not reflect our menu or where we are as a business."

- INDEPENDENT

Fatty food may get hidden away in shops

5:00AM Tuesday March 06, 2007
By Errol Kiong


Full-fat milk, cheese and yoghurt will be tucked away on the lower shelves of supermarkets in a proposed trial to change food consumption patterns and curb skyrocketing obesity rates.

The Counties Manukau District Health Board, fresh from a successful trial to replace full-sugar Sprite with artificially-sweetened Sprite Zero in McDonald's outlets, has now set its sights on dairy foods.

Board spokeswoman Amanda Dunlop said the project was still in its infancy but would look at aspects such as the availability and placement of low-fat dairy products on supermarket shelves, as well as its pricing compared with its fuller-fat cousins.

"We're only just now exploring what this initiative might look like."

But one option is a move to elevate low-fat cheese, milk, milk powder, and yoghurt on to eye-level shelves.

"Currently the fuller versions are there and we are talking with a retailer about putting lighter versions in that prime real estate."

Some supermarkets also do not stock low-fat versions, so the project is looking at increasing their availability.

Ms Dunlop said the pricing of low-fat products would also be discussed.

"There's a general perception that the healthier option is more expensive. In terms of milk, for example, it may not necessarily be so.

"It's very early days. Maybe it's just informing our population that they are the same price - to dispel that perception that the healthier choice is more expensive.

"Or maybe we need to look at the actual prices and how we can support people to make that behaviour change."

The health board has already had preliminary discussions with supermarket operators and food suppliers, who are supportive.

"We're very keen to work together and to trial something here in Counties Manukau. If we show it can work, just like the Sprite Zero project, there's an opportunity for it to be rolled out nationally."

Further talks are scheduled at the end of the month.

The project coincides with the health board's mass marketing campaign about healthier food choices and physical activity starting next month, and builds on initiatives such as the Sprite Zero trial conducted under the Let's Beat Diabetes banner.

Professor Jim Mann, from Otago University's department of human nutrition, said the dairy foods project could have a wider impact than the Sprite Zero move.

"To actually have good food ... available at reasonable price is pretty darn good."


Retail Therapy

* The proposed trial in Counties Manukau will look at the placement of low-fat dairy products on supermarket shelves. Retail research has shown that customers are most drawn to products placed at eye level in the central area of fridges and shelves.

* Pricing will also be examined. While some low-fat dairy products may be more expensive, others, such as milk, cost the same.

* A separate project by Auckland University has started recruiting 1200 supermarket shoppers in Wellington to see if a discount of 12.5 per cent (the rate of GST) on healthier foods would spur people to choose healthier options.

Flavouring

Summary
There are now many commercial flavourings available, which turn vodka into pretty decent gin or whiskey, or all manor of liqueurs.

If you're looking for essences, contact Brewhaus

Or you can soak it with oak chips and make whiskey, or soak fruits in it to make your own liqueurs.

Most of the fun comes from trying out different flavours, and making up your own liqueurs. Whiskeys etc usually require a bit of time spent with oak - something like 80% of the flavour is said to come from the wood.

It is quite tricky however to copy exactly the flavour of a favourite spirit. There are many factors which influence the flavour, and we can't easy copy them, nor quickly mature a whisky;

* The two main sources of organoleptically (smell/taste) important compounds are
o the yeast used during fermentation, and
o the oak barrels used to mature the spirit in
other factors include
o the proportions of grains used
o mashing technique,
o fermentation environment, and
o type and operation of the distilling equipment.
* Most manufacturers use a form of S.cerevisia, though some may also use some brewers yeast too.
* Sometimes, bacterial activity is actually encouraged in the wash to some extent. These include lactic acid bacteria, Gram positive & Gram negative bacteria. These will excrete compounds that add to the organoleptic qualities. These bacteria need to be really carefully controlled and managed, kept well below certain levels. (This would be a real fine balancing act, by experienced brewers - don't try it at home kids)
* Most wash is fermented out to around 10-12% alcohol, though some may be 8% (quite different to the 23% we're targetting - thus get a different concentration of the flavours)
* The use of copper in the still to fix some of the sulfur containing compounds (hmmm... go the guys with an all-stainless setup - though I've heard of copper strips being hung in the headspace)
* Maturation involves three different actions ...
o extraction of compounds out of the oak, including lignin, tannins, oak lactones, sugars, glycerol, and fructose. This can be affected by the % of the alcohol, and even how the wood was dried. Around 25-30% of the colour is developed in the first 6 months.
o modification of the compounds, to form aldehydes (particularly acetaldehyde), acetic acid, and esters (ethyl acetate) - this takes time
o subtraction of volitile compounds by evaporation and absorbtion into the charred surfaces - this takes time, and needs to be quite selective
* the flavours which add to the taste/smell can be present in very small concentrations - only one volitile compound (isoamyl alcohol) exceeds 0.01%, whereas most of the others present are less than 50 parts per million (ppm). Some importants ones are there in parts-per-billion . Heaps of different ones are listed in the books. You're not going to find all these in the essences, nor in the exact right proportions.


I haven't listed all this to discourage us, but rather just to point out the difficulties if trying to match an old favourite. The best option is to experiment around with the different flavours, techniques etc, and see what works for you. If you catch onto something good, please share it with the rest of us. Although I've made some fairly quaffable spirit from neutral alcohol, I still haven't quite cracked how to make something comparable with any of the decent traditional single malts. But, I've only just begun !

For a huge description of all the different styles of spirits, their production, etc, see the educational material from the University of Nevada Las Vegas Hotel Administration Course : (local index)
Using an Essence or Flavour still
One great tool to have is a small stove-top pot still that you can use to make your own essences in. Mine is simply a 1L glass coffee pot, with a large cork in the top, through which a condensor sits. Total cost < $20.



With this, you can either do

* "alcohol extractions", where you macerate your flavours in alcohol for a while, then distill them off;
* "water extractions", where you use water instead, or
* "steam extractions", where you hang the herbs etc in a wee wire basket above the boiling water, for steam to pass through before you collect & condense it.


One great sucess I've had is making my own "smokey peat" flavour for trying to imitate those strong Islay Scotch whiskies like Laguvulin. To make my "essence of compost", all I did was get a handfull of peat (sold at gardening shops as compost - yeah - they look at you strange when you only ask for a handful, not a trailor load, then explain why), put it a a can with a lid, then heat up the can over a flame for 15 minutes. Don't have the lid tight (or else the whole thing can blow up), but just sitting lightly in place. It may smoke a little, so have the fume extraction on, or do it outside. Leave the lid on while it cools, so that the smoke will cool & collect on the peat. Once cool, soak it in some 75%+ alcohol. Distil it off sometime later, to make a fantastic smokey peat essence.

For more about peat, see http://www.ucmp.berkeley.edu/plants/bryophyta/sphagnointro.html

Motie elaborates ...

The stuff you want is Peat potting soil. Don't try it in a small container. It will explode. Think of it as a very crude distilation. Your still won't run without a venting of pressure. It's more like the creosote from a very smokey wood fire. If you are familiar with gasification, you will understand the explosion part. When heated in the absence of air, it will give off Carbon Monoxide and Hydrogen Gas, along with the smokey stuff and water vapor. These are very poisonous gases to breath, and explosive besides. I'm not experienced at what you are attempting to do, but I do smoke fish and make jerky in a smokehouse.

If I were to attempt to make a liquid smoke flavoring, I would definitely do it outside. I would build a small enclosed fire in a bucket or something similar, using charcoal or wood. Burn it to a bed of coals. The very damp Peat potting soil would go on top of the coals. A container of some type would go on top of the Peat, and a roundbottom pot full of very cold water suspended just above that. The wet Peat smoke and steam would pass by the container, up to the cold round bottom of the pot above, and condense on it. Hopefully, the drops would follow the bottom of the condenser pot, and drop into the container below. I can't guarantee the method, but that is how I would make my first attempt. This gets away from the pressure issues of a closed, heated container, and away from the production of Carbon Monoxide Gas. Any Hydrogen Gas produced can burn in the fire and be eliminated.

The moss you have is NOT Peat. If you can't get Peat potting soil, sometimes planting pots are made of compressed Peat. Dry cowpies are what it looks like. Brown, slightly fibrous. Moisture content can vary widely, and is adjustable by you. If you make a slurry, it looks like fresh cowpie without the odor.(Or bits of corn! LOL)

Yield of Essential Oils
Wal writes ...

The http://www.benzalco.com/herb_distil_info.html dealing with essential oil distillations appears to be defunct now for some reason. It had a list of botanicals and their percentage oil yield, which luckily I downloaded. Another still cuurent site with some similar information is from the 'Food & Technology Course' at Ohio State University - http://class.fst.ohio-state.edu/fst621/Lectures/flavors.htm Since botanicals are used to flavor alcohol, I think it is useful to combine the information that is relevant to Distillers. There is divergence in some botanicals in these 2 sources - I will put the Ohio State Uni. figures in brackets. It is apparent that there is a wide range which depends on geographical source and climatic conditions. That is why gin distillers to have a consistent quality have to test their purchases and use essential oil quantity as a basis of their formulation.

Name %Yield
Almond (kernel) (0.5-2.0)
Allspice/Pimento (seed) 4.5 (5.0)
Allspice/Pimento (leaves) (0.5-0.7)
Angelica (root) 0.3-1.0
Angelica (seed) 0.6-1.5
Anise (seed) 1.5-4.0 (2.5-3.0)
Arnica (root) 1.0
Arnica (flowers) 1.0
Basil,sweet (leaves & tops) 0.5-1.0 (0.2)
Bay (leaves) 3.0 (1.0-3.5)
Calamus (root) 1.5
Caraway (seed) 3.2-7.4 (3-6)
Cardamon (seed) 8.0 (3.5-7)
Cascarilla (bark) 3.0
Cassia (bark) 1.5
Celery (seed) 3.0 (2.0-2.5)
Chamomile (flowers) 0.3-1.0
Cinnamon (bark) 0.1
Clove (buds) 14-21 (15-20)
Coffee (roasted beans) 0.12
Coriander (seed) 1.0 (0.4-1.0)
Cumin (seed) (2.0-3.0)
Dill (seed) 2.5-4.0 (2.0-3.5)
Eucalyptus (leaves) 1.0-7.0
Fennel (seed) 4.0-6.0
Geranium ssp. (leaves) 0.3-2.0
Ginger (root) 3.0 (1.5-3.0)
Grapefruit (peel) (0.3)
Hops (flowers) 1.0
Hyssop (leaves) 1.0
Iris/Orris (root) 0.2
Juniper (berries) 1.5
Lavender (flowers) 0.5-1.0
Lemon (peel) 2.0 (0.3-0.4)!
Lemon Balm/Melissa (leaves) 0.015
Lemongrass (leaves) 1.0
Lemon verbena (leaves) 1.5
Mace (aril) 17-20
Majoram (leaves) 0.9
Mustard (seed) 1.5 (1.0)
Nutmeg (seed) 15-25 (6-18)
Orange (peel) 1.5-2.0 (0.3)!
Orange (flowers 0.1
Organo (leaves) 1.2
Parsley (seeds) 6.0
Pepper, black (seed) 2.5 (1-3)
Pepper, white (seed) 1.5
Pepper, cubeb (seeds) 2.0
Peppermint (leaves) 1.0-2.5 (0.3-0.5)!
Pettigrain,citrus (young shoots) 0.5
Pine, needles (leaves) 0.5-3.0
Pine, sap (resin) 15-35
Poplar (spring buds) 0.5
Rose (flowers) 0.006
Rosemary (leaves) 2.0 (0.5-0.7)!
Sage (leaves)
The major constituent is Thujone 2.5 (0.7-2.0)
Savory, summer (leaves) 0.1 (0.5-1.5)
Spearmint (leaves) 2.0 (0.7)!
Star anise (seeds & pods) 3.0
Tangerine/Mandarin (peel) 0.5
Tarragon (leaves) 0.08-1.5
Thyme (leaves) 2.5 (0.7)!
Tumeric (root) 5.0
Valerian (root) 1.0
Wintergreen (leaves) 0.6 (0.7)
Wormwood (leaves & tops) 0.5-2.0
Yarrow (leaves & tops) 0.15
Zeodary (root) 1.5

Making Schnapps
See all the recipes in the Fruit Wash page too.

Jack reports an easy way to make schnapps ...

On page 173 of Dave Broom's book: Spirits & Cocktails (1998, Carlton Books Limited) he says that to get around the problem of soft fruits having a low amount of sugar, which prevents them from being made into wine and distilled :"the fruit is macerated in alcohol before it's given a single distillation in order to concentrate the flavored spirit."

I decided to test this out. I bought a bottle of pure black cherry juice (no "flavored" apple or grape juice- the real thing at $5US per quart). I mixed the juice with an equal amount of 50% abv sugar spirit and it was redistilled (no soak time, just mix the juice and go) until about 1/2 a quart was collected. after being allowed to cool down it tasted wonderfull- full black cherry flavor, without making the stuff into wine first.

I plan on using bags of frozen berries (rasberries, blueberries, etc) that can be found in the freezer section of the grocery store ($5US for 3/4 a pound)- I'll use one bag per quart of spirit. Since I'll be using the whole fruit, I'll let it soak for 2 weeks first. This should be more than enough to make a bottle of great schnapps, allowing me to catch the perfect flavors of the single fruit, without having to risk it turning sour as it's fermenting into wine (plus- no worries about added sugar ruining the final flavor).

He then confirms this technique..

I've got the Schnaps stuff sorted out- using carbon polished sugar spirit at 40 to 50%abv. Apples seem to have enough of their own sugar to make this route unneeded for them, but for blueberries, cherries, etc, it works great. Mix up by volume- 2 parts of alcohol and one part fruit. Let this soak for one month, then redistill on a water bath still (a heating element is not going to work). Make sure to leave the fruit in the alcohol when you distill it. No sugar is to be added- the end result is a fiery spirit with a great bouquet of whatever fruit you used- this is TRUE schnaps- not the over sugared, watered-down, artificially flavored garbage that passes for schnaps here in the US. Enjoy!

He also recommends ..

The "brewmart" brand french-style apple cider kit (in a can), when mixed with ten pounds of sugar, 5 gallons of water, and a wine yeast (K1V-1116), and distilled twice in a potstill (colect one-third of the 5 gallons on the first run, collect the middle one-fourth to one-third on the second run)- and you get a really good apple schnaps or aged on charred american oak you get a great calvados-type brandy- heck of a lot cheaper, too. The can kit only costs me $20US at my homebrew shop. definately worth every penny.

Wal writes ...

Maraschino (pronounced Maraskino) is a clear, relatively dry liqueur made from sour or morello cherries (Prunus cerasus marasca), including the crushed pits which give it a subtle bitter almond flavour. Originally made in the region known as Dalmatia (now a part of Croatia). Since 1947 it is made in the Veneto region of Italy by the Luxardo company.

First, crushed cherry stones are macerated in alcohol and then redistilled to produce an alcohol with a bitter almond flavor. Marasca cherries are partially fermented and the fermentation is stopped when there is still residual sugar, by the addition of alcohol. This is then pressed out and the free run is used to produce a sweet cherry brandy liqueur (Cherry Brandy). The alcohol which had been redistilled from macerating crushed cherry stones is added to this pressed cherry pomace and macerated for 2 months. Then it is redistilled and aged for 3 years in ash vats. The final alcohol content is 32%.

Kirsch is a clear, non sweet, eau-de-vie made from a sour or morello cherry mash in a similar manner to calvados and slivovitz.

Butterscotch Schnapps
Wal writes ...

Most of the commercial lollypop schnapps probably use artificial flavorings. You could try the baking section in a supermarket to get a low cost butterscotch flavor. Add cream as a thickener to get a 'Baileys' effect. Or you could experiment with a basic butterscotch extract which is really a runny butterscotch sauce, and add this to a neutral alcohol.

Basic Butterscotch Extract
o 200 g unsalted butter
o 200 g light brown sugar
o 500 ml light or heavy cream
Melt and bring to boil.
For a 20% sugar & 20%abv 'Butterscotch schanapps' add the above butterscotch extract to 500 ml of 40%abv neutral spirit.
I appears that one should use the very minimum of butter (say 1 tbsp butter to 1 and 1/4 cups brown sugar) if you want to make your own butterscotch flavoring. Various nut oils (almond, hazel) in nut based liqueurs seem to disperse well in alcohol, but butter is usually solid at room temperature, so would need an emulsifier like lecithin.

Some rethinking. For a butterscotch schnapps you could use less butter - say 1/4 cup or 50 g. Adding lecithin should help to homogenize the product.

Butterscotch flavor is a flavor of butter and brown sugar. See articles on
Butterscotch: http://www.baking911.com/candy_butterscotch.htm
Butterscotch Sauce (which should work as a flavoring for alcohol) http://www.baking911recipes.com/other_sauce_butterscotch.htm
What is Butterscotch? http://www.prenzel.com/distilling/index.htm
Butterscotch schnapps http://www.webtender.com/db/ingred/114

Noticed that the Butterscotch Schnapps in the liquor stores do not have cream, so we can make a butterscotch concentrate using brown sugar, unsalted butter and light corn syrup or golden syrup (light molasses). This is then added to neutral alcohol to your desired strength. Most liqueurs are 20-30%abv. Here is an untried suggestion based on www.baking911.com recipe for Butterscotch Sauce:

Butterscotch Schnapps
o 250 g (1 and 1/4 cups) light brown sugar
o 50 g (1/4 cup) unsalted butter
o 150 ml (2/3 cup) light corn syrup (or golden syrup)
o 1 tsp vanilla extract (optional)
o 750 ml (3 cups) neutral alcohol (20-40%abv)
o 1 tsp glycerine (smooths the liqueur)
Combine the sugar, corn syrup, butter in a heavy-bottomed saucepan. Bring to boil, stirring, over medium heat. Turn the heat to medium- low. Boil the sugar, without stirring to soft ball stage (234F). Cool, add vanilla, glycerine and alcohol.


Excessive butter, could be a problem for a butterscotch liqueur/schnapps. Maybe 15 g unsalted butter to 250 g light brown sugar would be more safer. An emulsifier (lecithin?) would help disperse fats. Or maybe use browned sugar (caramel) and an artificial butter flavor that is used in cooking?

Janette wrote ...

Wal, I made very similar butterscotch schnapps the other month. My only problem was with the butter settling on the top. ( which is why you suggested the lethicin) I cured it by sitting the liqueur in the fridge in a bowl with lid, after 30 minutes, I skimmed the hardened butter off the top and what ever is left in there has no problem staying blended with the other ingredients. Even though I took about half the butter out of it, I would still use the same recipe as you do want the butter flavour in it, just not all the fat. Tastes great drizzled over a banana split!

Flavouring

Summary
There are now many commercial flavourings available, which turn vodka into pretty decent gin or whiskey, or all manor of liqueurs.

If you're looking for essences, contact Brewhaus

Or you can soak it with oak chips and make whiskey, or soak fruits in it to make your own liqueurs.

Most of the fun comes from trying out different flavours, and making up your own liqueurs. Whiskeys etc usually require a bit of time spent with oak - something like 80% of the flavour is said to come from the wood.

It is quite tricky however to copy exactly the flavour of a favourite spirit. There are many factors which influence the flavour, and we can't easy copy them, nor quickly mature a whisky;

* The two main sources of organoleptically (smell/taste) important compounds are
o the yeast used during fermentation, and
o the oak barrels used to mature the spirit in
other factors include
o the proportions of grains used
o mashing technique,
o fermentation environment, and
o type and operation of the distilling equipment.
* Most manufacturers use a form of S.cerevisia, though some may also use some brewers yeast too.
* Sometimes, bacterial activity is actually encouraged in the wash to some extent. These include lactic acid bacteria, Gram positive & Gram negative bacteria. These will excrete compounds that add to the organoleptic qualities. These bacteria need to be really carefully controlled and managed, kept well below certain levels. (This would be a real fine balancing act, by experienced brewers - don't try it at home kids)
* Most wash is fermented out to around 10-12% alcohol, though some may be 8% (quite different to the 23% we're targetting - thus get a different concentration of the flavours)
* The use of copper in the still to fix some of the sulfur containing compounds (hmmm... go the guys with an all-stainless setup - though I've heard of copper strips being hung in the headspace)
* Maturation involves three different actions ...
o extraction of compounds out of the oak, including lignin, tannins, oak lactones, sugars, glycerol, and fructose. This can be affected by the % of the alcohol, and even how the wood was dried. Around 25-30% of the colour is developed in the first 6 months.
o modification of the compounds, to form aldehydes (particularly acetaldehyde), acetic acid, and esters (ethyl acetate) - this takes time
o subtraction of volitile compounds by evaporation and absorbtion into the charred surfaces - this takes time, and needs to be quite selective
* the flavours which add to the taste/smell can be present in very small concentrations - only one volitile compound (isoamyl alcohol) exceeds 0.01%, whereas most of the others present are less than 50 parts per million (ppm). Some importants ones are there in parts-per-billion . Heaps of different ones are listed in the books. You're not going to find all these in the essences, nor in the exact right proportions.


I haven't listed all this to discourage us, but rather just to point out the difficulties if trying to match an old favourite. The best option is to experiment around with the different flavours, techniques etc, and see what works for you. If you catch onto something good, please share it with the rest of us. Although I've made some fairly quaffable spirit from neutral alcohol, I still haven't quite cracked how to make something comparable with any of the decent traditional single malts. But, I've only just begun !

For a huge description of all the different styles of spirits, their production, etc, see the educational material from the University of Nevada Las Vegas Hotel Administration Course : (local index)
Using an Essence or Flavour still
One great tool to have is a small stove-top pot still that you can use to make your own essences in. Mine is simply a 1L glass coffee pot, with a large cork in the top, through which a condensor sits. Total cost < $20.



With this, you can either do

* "alcohol extractions", where you macerate your flavours in alcohol for a while, then distill them off;
* "water extractions", where you use water instead, or
* "steam extractions", where you hang the herbs etc in a wee wire basket above the boiling water, for steam to pass through before you collect & condense it.


One great sucess I've had is making my own "smokey peat" flavour for trying to imitate those strong Islay Scotch whiskies like Laguvulin. To make my "essence of compost", all I did was get a handfull of peat (sold at gardening shops as compost - yeah - they look at you strange when you only ask for a handful, not a trailor load, then explain why), put it a a can with a lid, then heat up the can over a flame for 15 minutes. Don't have the lid tight (or else the whole thing can blow up), but just sitting lightly in place. It may smoke a little, so have the fume extraction on, or do it outside. Leave the lid on while it cools, so that the smoke will cool & collect on the peat. Once cool, soak it in some 75%+ alcohol. Distil it off sometime later, to make a fantastic smokey peat essence.

For more about peat, see http://www.ucmp.berkeley.edu/plants/bryophyta/sphagnointro.html

Motie elaborates ...

The stuff you want is Peat potting soil. Don't try it in a small container. It will explode. Think of it as a very crude distilation. Your still won't run without a venting of pressure. It's more like the creosote from a very smokey wood fire. If you are familiar with gasification, you will understand the explosion part. When heated in the absence of air, it will give off Carbon Monoxide and Hydrogen Gas, along with the smokey stuff and water vapor. These are very poisonous gases to breath, and explosive besides. I'm not experienced at what you are attempting to do, but I do smoke fish and make jerky in a smokehouse.

If I were to attempt to make a liquid smoke flavoring, I would definitely do it outside. I would build a small enclosed fire in a bucket or something similar, using charcoal or wood. Burn it to a bed of coals. The very damp Peat potting soil would go on top of the coals. A container of some type would go on top of the Peat, and a roundbottom pot full of very cold water suspended just above that. The wet Peat smoke and steam would pass by the container, up to the cold round bottom of the pot above, and condense on it. Hopefully, the drops would follow the bottom of the condenser pot, and drop into the container below. I can't guarantee the method, but that is how I would make my first attempt. This gets away from the pressure issues of a closed, heated container, and away from the production of Carbon Monoxide Gas. Any Hydrogen Gas produced can burn in the fire and be eliminated.

The moss you have is NOT Peat. If you can't get Peat potting soil, sometimes planting pots are made of compressed Peat. Dry cowpies are what it looks like. Brown, slightly fibrous. Moisture content can vary widely, and is adjustable by you. If you make a slurry, it looks like fresh cowpie without the odor.(Or bits of corn! LOL)

Yield of Essential Oils
Wal writes ...

The http://www.benzalco.com/herb_distil_info.html dealing with essential oil distillations appears to be defunct now for some reason. It had a list of botanicals and their percentage oil yield, which luckily I downloaded. Another still cuurent site with some similar information is from the 'Food & Technology Course' at Ohio State University - http://class.fst.ohio-state.edu/fst621/Lectures/flavors.htm Since botanicals are used to flavor alcohol, I think it is useful to combine the information that is relevant to Distillers. There is divergence in some botanicals in these 2 sources - I will put the Ohio State Uni. figures in brackets. It is apparent that there is a wide range which depends on geographical source and climatic conditions. That is why gin distillers to have a consistent quality have to test their purchases and use essential oil quantity as a basis of their formulation.

Name %Yield
Almond (kernel) (0.5-2.0)
Allspice/Pimento (seed) 4.5 (5.0)
Allspice/Pimento (leaves) (0.5-0.7)
Angelica (root) 0.3-1.0
Angelica (seed) 0.6-1.5
Anise (seed) 1.5-4.0 (2.5-3.0)
Arnica (root) 1.0
Arnica (flowers) 1.0
Basil,sweet (leaves & tops) 0.5-1.0 (0.2)
Bay (leaves) 3.0 (1.0-3.5)
Calamus (root) 1.5
Caraway (seed) 3.2-7.4 (3-6)
Cardamon (seed) 8.0 (3.5-7)
Cascarilla (bark) 3.0
Cassia (bark) 1.5
Celery (seed) 3.0 (2.0-2.5)
Chamomile (flowers) 0.3-1.0
Cinnamon (bark) 0.1
Clove (buds) 14-21 (15-20)
Coffee (roasted beans) 0.12
Coriander (seed) 1.0 (0.4-1.0)
Cumin (seed) (2.0-3.0)
Dill (seed) 2.5-4.0 (2.0-3.5)
Eucalyptus (leaves) 1.0-7.0
Fennel (seed) 4.0-6.0
Geranium ssp. (leaves) 0.3-2.0
Ginger (root) 3.0 (1.5-3.0)
Grapefruit (peel) (0.3)
Hops (flowers) 1.0
Hyssop (leaves) 1.0
Iris/Orris (root) 0.2
Juniper (berries) 1.5
Lavender (flowers) 0.5-1.0
Lemon (peel) 2.0 (0.3-0.4)!
Lemon Balm/Melissa (leaves) 0.015
Lemongrass (leaves) 1.0
Lemon verbena (leaves) 1.5
Mace (aril) 17-20
Majoram (leaves) 0.9
Mustard (seed) 1.5 (1.0)
Nutmeg (seed) 15-25 (6-18)
Orange (peel) 1.5-2.0 (0.3)!
Orange (flowers 0.1
Organo (leaves) 1.2
Parsley (seeds) 6.0
Pepper, black (seed) 2.5 (1-3)
Pepper, white (seed) 1.5
Pepper, cubeb (seeds) 2.0
Peppermint (leaves) 1.0-2.5 (0.3-0.5)!
Pettigrain,citrus (young shoots) 0.5
Pine, needles (leaves) 0.5-3.0
Pine, sap (resin) 15-35
Poplar (spring buds) 0.5
Rose (flowers) 0.006
Rosemary (leaves) 2.0 (0.5-0.7)!
Sage (leaves)
The major constituent is Thujone 2.5 (0.7-2.0)
Savory, summer (leaves) 0.1 (0.5-1.5)
Spearmint (leaves) 2.0 (0.7)!
Star anise (seeds & pods) 3.0
Tangerine/Mandarin (peel) 0.5
Tarragon (leaves) 0.08-1.5
Thyme (leaves) 2.5 (0.7)!
Tumeric (root) 5.0
Valerian (root) 1.0
Wintergreen (leaves) 0.6 (0.7)
Wormwood (leaves & tops) 0.5-2.0
Yarrow (leaves & tops) 0.15
Zeodary (root) 1.5

Making Schnapps
See all the recipes in the Fruit Wash page too.

Jack reports an easy way to make schnapps ...

On page 173 of Dave Broom's book: Spirits & Cocktails (1998, Carlton Books Limited) he says that to get around the problem of soft fruits having a low amount of sugar, which prevents them from being made into wine and distilled :"the fruit is macerated in alcohol before it's given a single distillation in order to concentrate the flavored spirit."

I decided to test this out. I bought a bottle of pure black cherry juice (no "flavored" apple or grape juice- the real thing at $5US per quart). I mixed the juice with an equal amount of 50% abv sugar spirit and it was redistilled (no soak time, just mix the juice and go) until about 1/2 a quart was collected. after being allowed to cool down it tasted wonderfull- full black cherry flavor, without making the stuff into wine first.

I plan on using bags of frozen berries (rasberries, blueberries, etc) that can be found in the freezer section of the grocery store ($5US for 3/4 a pound)- I'll use one bag per quart of spirit. Since I'll be using the whole fruit, I'll let it soak for 2 weeks first. This should be more than enough to make a bottle of great schnapps, allowing me to catch the perfect flavors of the single fruit, without having to risk it turning sour as it's fermenting into wine (plus- no worries about added sugar ruining the final flavor).

He then confirms this technique..

I've got the Schnaps stuff sorted out- using carbon polished sugar spirit at 40 to 50%abv. Apples seem to have enough of their own sugar to make this route unneeded for them, but for blueberries, cherries, etc, it works great. Mix up by volume- 2 parts of alcohol and one part fruit. Let this soak for one month, then redistill on a water bath still (a heating element is not going to work). Make sure to leave the fruit in the alcohol when you distill it. No sugar is to be added- the end result is a fiery spirit with a great bouquet of whatever fruit you used- this is TRUE schnaps- not the over sugared, watered-down, artificially flavored garbage that passes for schnaps here in the US. Enjoy!

He also recommends ..

The "brewmart" brand french-style apple cider kit (in a can), when mixed with ten pounds of sugar, 5 gallons of water, and a wine yeast (K1V-1116), and distilled twice in a potstill (colect one-third of the 5 gallons on the first run, collect the middle one-fourth to one-third on the second run)- and you get a really good apple schnaps or aged on charred american oak you get a great calvados-type brandy- heck of a lot cheaper, too. The can kit only costs me $20US at my homebrew shop. definately worth every penny.

Wal writes ...

Maraschino (pronounced Maraskino) is a clear, relatively dry liqueur made from sour or morello cherries (Prunus cerasus marasca), including the crushed pits which give it a subtle bitter almond flavour. Originally made in the region known as Dalmatia (now a part of Croatia). Since 1947 it is made in the Veneto region of Italy by the Luxardo company.

First, crushed cherry stones are macerated in alcohol and then redistilled to produce an alcohol with a bitter almond flavor. Marasca cherries are partially fermented and the fermentation is stopped when there is still residual sugar, by the addition of alcohol. This is then pressed out and the free run is used to produce a sweet cherry brandy liqueur (Cherry Brandy). The alcohol which had been redistilled from macerating crushed cherry stones is added to this pressed cherry pomace and macerated for 2 months. Then it is redistilled and aged for 3 years in ash vats. The final alcohol content is 32%.

Kirsch is a clear, non sweet, eau-de-vie made from a sour or morello cherry mash in a similar manner to calvados and slivovitz.

Butterscotch Schnapps
Wal writes ...

Most of the commercial lollypop schnapps probably use artificial flavorings. You could try the baking section in a supermarket to get a low cost butterscotch flavor. Add cream as a thickener to get a 'Baileys' effect. Or you could experiment with a basic butterscotch extract which is really a runny butterscotch sauce, and add this to a neutral alcohol.

Basic Butterscotch Extract
o 200 g unsalted butter
o 200 g light brown sugar
o 500 ml light or heavy cream
Melt and bring to boil.
For a 20% sugar & 20%abv 'Butterscotch schanapps' add the above butterscotch extract to 500 ml of 40%abv neutral spirit.
I appears that one should use the very minimum of butter (say 1 tbsp butter to 1 and 1/4 cups brown sugar) if you want to make your own butterscotch flavoring. Various nut oils (almond, hazel) in nut based liqueurs seem to disperse well in alcohol, but butter is usually solid at room temperature, so would need an emulsifier like lecithin.

Some rethinking. For a butterscotch schnapps you could use less butter - say 1/4 cup or 50 g. Adding lecithin should help to homogenize the product.

Butterscotch flavor is a flavor of butter and brown sugar. See articles on
Butterscotch: http://www.baking911.com/candy_butterscotch.htm
Butterscotch Sauce (which should work as a flavoring for alcohol) http://www.baking911recipes.com/other_sauce_butterscotch.htm
What is Butterscotch? http://www.prenzel.com/distilling/index.htm
Butterscotch schnapps http://www.webtender.com/db/ingred/114

Noticed that the Butterscotch Schnapps in the liquor stores do not have cream, so we can make a butterscotch concentrate using brown sugar, unsalted butter and light corn syrup or golden syrup (light molasses). This is then added to neutral alcohol to your desired strength. Most liqueurs are 20-30%abv. Here is an untried suggestion based on www.baking911.com recipe for Butterscotch Sauce:

Butterscotch Schnapps
o 250 g (1 and 1/4 cups) light brown sugar
o 50 g (1/4 cup) unsalted butter
o 150 ml (2/3 cup) light corn syrup (or golden syrup)
o 1 tsp vanilla extract (optional)
o 750 ml (3 cups) neutral alcohol (20-40%abv)
o 1 tsp glycerine (smooths the liqueur)
Combine the sugar, corn syrup, butter in a heavy-bottomed saucepan. Bring to boil, stirring, over medium heat. Turn the heat to medium- low. Boil the sugar, without stirring to soft ball stage (234F). Cool, add vanilla, glycerine and alcohol.


Excessive butter, could be a problem for a butterscotch liqueur/schnapps. Maybe 15 g unsalted butter to 250 g light brown sugar would be more safer. An emulsifier (lecithin?) would help disperse fats. Or maybe use browned sugar (caramel) and an artificial butter flavor that is used in cooking?

Janette wrote ...

Wal, I made very similar butterscotch schnapps the other month. My only problem was with the butter settling on the top. ( which is why you suggested the lethicin) I cured it by sitting the liqueur in the fridge in a bowl with lid, after 30 minutes, I skimmed the hardened butter off the top and what ever is left in there has no problem staying blended with the other ingredients. Even though I took about half the butter out of it, I would still use the same recipe as you do want the butter flavour in it, just not all the fat. Tastes great drizzled over a banana split!

Polishing Neutral Spirit

Summary
Soaking neutral alcohol with activated carbon for a week (or even months) will help remove some of the off-flavours - this is known as "polishing" the spirit.

The spirit should be diluted to 30-50% before polishing.

Don't polish spirits that you want to keep the flavour of (eg whisky or schnapps).


If you are making NEUTRAL alcohol, make sure it is polished using activated carbon or better (see below). Soak it for at least a week (and up to a couple of months) to remove any aldehydes, aminos and fusil oils that could be present. I use about 1 cup of carbon to 4-5L of spirit. This will take out the rough edge usually associated with typical moonshine, and leave vodka's clean, tasteless & odourless, ready for flavouring.

If you DON'T want vodka, then DON'T use carbon.

The carbon works by being a type of "molecular seive", trapping the molecules which are larger than ethanol. They become trapped in the pores inside the carbon, and also by surface energies on the carbon. So it won't remove methanol, but only larger molecules (eg the fusels). Likewise, the trapped molecules are sometimes held fairly loosely to it, so if you try to filter too fast, they can be washed off the carbon and back into your spirits.

Make sure that you always pass your polished spirit through a paper filter. Many of the impurities are held by very fine carbon dust - and will still affect the flavour. If you pass even crystal clear polished spirit through a paper filter, you will notice that it becomes grey or black. You'll notice the cleaner flavour too. It doesnt take much - just a littl bit of tissue paper or cotton wool in the bottom of a filter, and you'l trap that loaded dust.

If you're looking to buy carbon, see Brewhaus.

Grant writes ...

activated carbon acts in three ways:

Adsorption - relying on electrostatic Van der Walls forces. This attractive "force" forms relatively weak bonds between the carbon and adsorbate. In theory activated carbon could release or desorb what it removed at some point, but from practical experience desorption rarely occurs.

Absorption - refers to the diffusion of a gas or compound into the porous network where a chemical reaction or physical entrapment take place. Ozone for example is absorbed into activated carbon where it oxidizes a portion of the carbon's surface. Ozone (O3) is reduced to oxygen (O2) thus "detoxified". Ozone does not accumulate or build-up in the carbon structure.

Chemisorption - an irreversible chemical bond between the carbon surface and the adsorbate. Pollutants are tightly bound to the sorbent.

The filtering of alcohol primarily involves the removal of organics via adsorption. After the activated carbon has reached exhaustion and all the adsorptive sites are filled, it can be regenerated. Chemisorption is associated with the removal of inorganic chemicals and the carbon used to remove these compounds is generally not regenerated.

to which Mike Nixon adds ..

Adsorption is primarily an electrostatic phenomenon and chemical bonds play no part in it. The porous nature of the carbon is induced in order to increase the surface area available, a typical value often quoted (and true) is approximately one football field area per cubic centimeter of carbon. This process of inducing porosity is what is meant by the term "activation". Geometry also plays a part in this, enhancing the weak electrostatic attraction for certain sizes and shapes of molecules in a manner similar to that used by enzymes which have shaped "pockets". In this manner, materials can be processed to selectively adsorb some molecules better than others, as in respirators. Carbon that has not been treated in this way will still adsorb molecules but, for practical purposes, the effect will be insignificant if the surface area has not been increased. Adsorbed molecules held on the surfaces both inside and outside of the carbon may be released by heat and subsequent vaporisation. Please do not confuse rinsing new carbon to get rid of salts etc before initial use with heating after use to release adsorbed molecules.

Specifically, we are interested in removing compounds that have taste or odor and which, like those that contribute color, tend to bind strongly. With these, the only bonding is by weak Van der Waals forces. There is no significant redistribution of electron density in either the molecule or at the substrate surface, and subsequent release of the molecules by heating is easy. Heating in an oven to 160 deg C is quite sufficient to clean used carbon to the extent that it can be used again, particularly when the carbon is first soaked in water to provide active flushing with steam as it boils. Of course, this will not release all the adsorbed molecules … heating to a much higher temperature in an inert atmosphere is needed to do that thoroughly … but 90+% efficiency is good enough for all practical purposes, and has been used as a cost-effective recovery process by sugar refineries ever since 'white' sugar was processed.

Wet activated carbon primarily removes oxygen from air, not nitrogen. Thus, an asphyxiation hazard exists inside enclosed spaces containing wet activated carbon. Dry activated carbon requires no special precautions. Rinsing activated carbon before first use is a sensible procedure as many carbons, particularly the 'stone' carbons, are produced using chemical etchants which may still linger in the final product (eg. zinc chloride and phosphoric acid). Those are the impurities you want to remove before letting newly procured carbon anywhere near liquids that you are later going to drink.

I've found, however, that it does pay to filter even when the liquid seems crystal clear. Microscopic particles of carbon dust don't settle out, and they are chock full of congeners. Used to worry me that my carbon wasn't working properly until I tried filtering what seemed to be "pure" stuff. The flavour/smell improved immediately and the residue on the filter paper confirmed the presence of that suspended carbon. BTW, I don't bother with expensive filters ... just take a couple of feet of toilet paper and roll it up into a cigar. This gives me a tube of filtering paper that I can cut into whatever lengths I like (usually two) and then gently push into the neck of a large funnel. The harder I push, the finer the filter. Works a treat!


If you are trying to make a flavoured spirit, eg whiskey, grappa, etc DO NOT polish it, because you will remove the flavour that you have worked so hard for.

Don't add any essences or flavouring until AFTER you have polished the spirit. If you add them beforehand, the carbon will adsorb a minor amount of the flavour compounds and aromatics from the essence.

Do not try to reuse your carbons as they are - they are loaded with all the crap that you don't want. You'll need to clean them (see below) before you reuse them.

Another trick is to add some activated carbon to the wash (eg with the sugar) for during the fermentation period. This will take out the cogeners as they form. Just make sure that you filter/decant off this carbon with the yeast, so that it doesnt go into the still (and release the nasties when heated). Its a good way of reusing older carbon that has been used & washed several times, and may be losing its effectivness.

To avoid having the "rough moonshine edge" or "off-taste / wet cardboard smell" in your spirit to start with, don't collect them. These impurities will be present more when using a pot still, less if using a reflux still, and just about absent if using a fractionating column. So one way is to use a taller packed column and increase the amount of reflux occuring. They can also indicate that you've tried to collect too much of the alcohol, and have run into the "tails"; so finish collecting a little bit earlier next time.
Checking for Fusels
Jack recommends a simple (no chemicals needed) test to check for the presence of fusels :

I came across this "test" to see if spirits contain a large amount of heads/tails. It requires no chemicals (mention permanganate salts in California and everyone thinks your running a drug lab or something), and no skill. Heres how:
o Take a glass that you would normally drink out of and rinse it heavily with water- there should be no soap residue. Then dry the cup with a clean towel (to prevent mineral salts from being left behind after the water evaporates).
o Pour in a little of the spirit you are testing, and swirl the glass around until the spirit has totally coated the inside of the glass.
o Once there is a thin "film" of alcohol covering the inside of the glass- pour out the excess alcohol (drink it), and leave the glass somewhere where it won't be broken.
o The next morning, smell the glass -
+ If there is a nice perfumed aroma (for aged or other flavored spirits) or absolutely nothing (for vodka), congratulations- you've made good booze.
+ If there is any brackish, sour, solvent-like, or wet cardboard flavors- shame on you- you got greedy and ended up with heads or tails in your spirit.
That's all there is to it. Suprisingly effective test, considering how easy it is.

Dilute the Alcohol
Make sure that your alcohol is diluted to 30%-50% before polishing it - the carbons will work more effectively. This would appear to be due to a number of reasons;

* the fusels dissolve better in high grade alcohol and less so if the alcohol is lower in percentage. If the alcohol is diluted, and the fusels are less dissolved, they are then more easily captured.
* carbon/alcohol affinity channels better at these %concentrations, allowing more exposure to interface (ie a greater specific gravity differential, i.e. the "thicker" the better)
* at the diluted ratio the "nasties" are also diluted [does that make them easier to catch ????]
* always use clean water to dilute as this lessens the load on the carbon
* high % alcohol could act as an aggressor to the carbon and cause "nasties" to be leached out the wrong way, eg carbon to alcohol

Ideally the water used should be distilled water but ordinary clean tap water if it is not too hard will do at a pinch and last resort although it has a minor affect on final taste.
Types of Carbon
For heaps of information about Carbon, and how it works, go to the Norit site and read the section under Tech Info titled Introduction to the Porous Structure of Activated Carbon

There is also a free ebook about activated carbon at http://www.home-distillation.com/free_ebook.html

Reactivity of carbon is measured using iodine. If you can't purchase the spirit specific carbons, you may have to look around a bit for an alternative. You can see below that Charcoal is fairly useless; try to see what you can get by way of water filters etc.

* Filter carbon : 1050 mg/g iodine absorption
* Treatment carbon : 750
* Contact Reactive carbon : 750
* Charcoal : 45
* Reactivated carbon : 90

Do not use aquarium carbon. This can sometimes be made from very dodgy sources and contain crap which will leach into your spirit. You fish won't mind, because water doesn't do this, but you will.

If you can't source any highly reactive carbon, but want to make your own charcoal, see How to Make Charcoal at Home by Dan Gill.

If you can't find activated carbon in your local brew shop ...

* Jan recommends .. Activated carbon suppliers in Australia. The best one is in Brisbane called: GOLDCARB. 64 GARDINER ROAD. WATERFORD. QLD.4133 FAX.07-3807-8288 Phone.0418-725 783.Several grades are available and all the carbon he sells is top quality. He is a manufacturer overseas and imports it into Australia. I highly recommend him. Price depends on quantity
* David suggests for the US ... Check out "Calgon Carbon Corporation"
* Kev offers ... http://www.greatexpectations.co.nz/ ship internationally
* In the UK try http://www.chemvironcarbon.com and http://www.activated-carbon.com/index.html These are the big importers of Activated Carbon in the UK, most comes from China. You can purchase small quanitys for "pre-filtering of water for Beer and Wine making", water distilling, esential oil making, etc., etc. A phone call could not hurt. Patrick.
* Randy adds.. Activated Carbon is also used in the filtration of water for minicipal drinking water systems. They use the name anthracite. This is a food grade product. It also is sold in various granual sizes. http://www.activated-carbon.com is an example. I didnt see that they sold via the webpage. For convienience, Gert Strand or one of his authorized local distributers is a much easier (and possibly safer) solution. http://www.brewhaus.com in Canada supplies Gert Strand products here in North America.
* Patrick ..I decided to look at US suppliers of Activated Carbon and found a few. Most say they supply the same quality carbon in 55lb bags for $1.00 a lb US! One company in particular has it for .85 cents lb. in 55lb bags. http://www.generalcarbon.com/liquid03.htm

Leigh adds ...

I don't know whether anyone knows this or not but you know those gas canisters used for fumes and gases on full and half face mask respirators? I get the expired ones from work, which are only thrown out anyway, because they contain activated carbon of very high quality and filtering capability. They are also very conveniently packaged in airtight sealed bags so keep indefinitely until you are ready to use them. They may be past their safe 'Use by Date' for breathing through a respirator but for what we use them for I'm sure they have years galore ahead of them. I'd be careful when using specialised gas canisters though as I don't know for sure if they include additives in canisters for acidic, alkaline or ammonia rich environments. A, B or E canisters should be fine though.

Note that if your spirit is still turning cloudy, it might be due to problems other than fusel's present ... Jessie advises ..

I have discovered yet another cause of liquor "turning cloudly." In my case it always happened when I cut it down to drinkable strength of about 80 proof . It didn't matter what temp I distilled at, it would always happen, leading me to believe that fusel oils were not the cause. This problem had me puzzled for quite sometime, but I was always able to clean it up with activated charcoal so I didn't worry with it to much. Just the other day I discovered it was the plastic tubing I use to connect the still head to the condenser! apparently the plastic is slightly soluble in alcohol and it comes out of solution only when water is added. Plastic is no good for stills!


How does the carbon work ? Mike's simple summary ...

First thing, some substances have the ability to attract and hang on to certain molecules by electrostatic attraction. Forget all the buzz words like Van der Waals forces, London forces, etc ... they all come down to essentially the same thing as a charged comb attracting bit of paper, the only difference being the distance the attraction works over. Carbon is particularly good at this attraction thing, which may explain why diamonds attract so many bits of fluff :-)

The other thing about carbon is that it can be prepared so that its structure resembles a sponge, with millions of tiny passages and holes in it. This preparation is loosely called "activation". These passages and holes can control what molecules get deep inside the carbon, and which cannot ... a purely physical matter of size. It is this physical structure that primarily governs whether a particular 'activated' carbon can be used to 'target' molecules of a particular range of sizes. If you are making a respirator, then you will want to know all about that, and some respirator cartridges are best for one range of gases, but not others. In our case, we need not be so fussy as all we are dealing with are very small molecules of water and relatively huge hydrocarbon molecules ... the alcohols etc. The water can penetrate all the way into the average 'activated' carbon, but the large hydrocarbons can only penetrate by various amounts according to how big they are. Just a simple sieve thing.

The other thing about a sponge structure is that it presents a huge surface area for molecules to stick to. So 'activating' carbon not only greatly increases its ability to deal with quantity by having a huge surface area, but also offers a degree of selectivity by physically controlling access to this surface area.

The question of which hydrocarbons are attracted strongly to the carbon surfaces they encounter, and those which are attracted weakly, can get a bit complicated. It is not simply a matter of size. Some hydrocarbon molecules, which alone would be attracted weakly, can form a loose association with water and then be strongly attracted to carbon. Water has a boomerang shape, with the two hydrogen atoms at the tips of the boomerang and the oxygen atom in the middle. This gives it a strong negative charge on the hydrogen side and a strong positive charge on the oxygen side (egghead/cocktail party term #1: it's bi-polar). This enables water molecules to stick to parts of some hydrocarbons and give them a bunch of electrostatic anchors to hang onto a carbon surface.

Bottom line is that if a big hydrocarbon molecule can get to a carbon surface, and it is 'sticky' enough, then the carbon will hang onto it (egghead/cocktail party term #2: it adsorbs the hydrocarbon molecule).

Bottom line to bottom line ... it won't necessarily stay stuck! Other molecules can come charging in and knock that molecule off the carbon surface it was stuck to (egghead/cocktail party term #3: adsorption is subject to dynamic equilibrium).

So now you have all the basic buzzwords that will have all the girls hanging on your every word at your next party :-) In the meantime, back in your shed, you have a batch of booze to clean with carbon. What would be your best way of dealing with it?

If you pass the booze through a tube filled with carbon, will the molecules you want to trap got enough time to infiltrate their way into the carbon granules and get stuck? Alternatively, would it be better to dump both the booze and the carbon into a container and let it get on with it over a period of time? Your choice, but I know what mine would be.

It is pretty obvious that if you use a container and soak, then you will have to filter off the carbon in the end. If, however, you decide to pass it through a tube of carbon, will you need to do that? After all, lots of people call that carbon slug a 'filter'. Will that get rid of all the microscopic particles of carbon that are so small you cannot even see them? Not likely. So 'real' filtering is needed as well, for all those tiny particles will be laden with the hydrocarbons you have been trying to get rid of! One filtering enough? Not really ... keep filtering until the filter paper remains clean.

Should you start out with high %abv booze and process that, or would it be better to dilute it to 40-50% ? One school of thought says it doesn't matter, and another says that the agile wee water molecules help the lumbering big hydrocarbon molecules to move around ... like fast sheep dogs agitating a slow mob of sheep. My choice, based on graphs describing the dynamic equilibrium process, would be to dilute. Final results seem to bear this out.

Methods
I do a two stage polishing process. Firstly i soak my alcohol with carbon for a couple of weeks - eg just pour the carbon into the storage container, swirl it around, then let it sit, giving it a shake every so often. When it has sat long enough, I then pass it through a second filter. This is a longish tube with a small hole in the base of it. I pack a little filter/tissue paper into it, then fill it with finer/secondary carbon. I attach a softdrink bottle of the spirit upside down to the top of the column, and let the alcohol slowly drip through - about one drip per second. (Actually, to be honest, I quite often dont do the second step - simply decant the clean alcohol out of the container while all the primary carbon is still sitting on the bottom. Tastes just as good.)

There are products available to help you do this easier. One is a container which you mount on the wall, which is plumbed with a valve and hose sticking out the bottom of it. Attached to the hose is an inline filter (the sort used for garden hoses). The filter is packed with the secondary carbon. When the spirit has had enough primary polishing, simply open the valve, and run it out through the inline filter. Simple.

Glenns set-up is very similar ...


When you have finished filtering your spirit, do a final filter using say 250-500mL of water. This will flush the remaining alcohol which is wetting the carbon, and save you from throwing it away. Put this back in with the next wash you distill.

Kez has optimised this ...

I think I had a stroke or genius yesterday in filtering my spirit. I usually run a litre of water thru at the end to get the final amount of spirit out of the tube of carbon. To see when the water begins I just sit at the end and taste the spirit until it tastes diluted, which is a pretty grey area after about 20 tastes (yuk).

So yesterday I put in a litre of hot tap water instead of cold.
This told me 2 things.....
1. I could feel in the tube where the water was and it told me that all the carbon was being used in the filtration.
2. When the water was about to come thru cutting down on about 18 tastes, YES!

To celebrate my new knowledge I had a couple of scotches. I love it when a plan comes together.


To remove any of the very small carbon carbon particles left in the spirit, you can pass it through very fine filter material - down to 1 micron pore size. This will leave it crystal clear and clean.

From Cheryl (Victoria, Canada)...(posted on http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Distillers)

What I have found that works well for me is, I add a 1/2 tbsp virgin oak per 2 litre container, in with the activated charcoal and treat for only 2 days (or it takes on the color, of the oak) then filter, add water to 50% and, perfect vodka.

Jack does similar ...

Most people are familiar with "sugar vodka" and the numerous off flavors and strange tastes and smells that a pure sugar wash can create, even when carbon polished. It seems that everytime someone throws every random failed batch of wine/beer/etc into a still and "salvages" the alcohol, the vodka it produces tends to be the "smoothest batch I've made". Even though it was made from homebrewer "remnants". Rather than trying to rely on a bunch of wine or beer I'm not happy with, and can only turn into vodka, I found a method to get the smooth taste of a "random batch vodka".

Simply make a pure sugar mash, using turbo yeast or whatever else you have handy. Ferment it out and distill it to 95% (or the best of your stills' capability). Dilute the spirit down to 40 to 50% and age it for a month on some uncharred American oak chips. About 2 tablespoons per gallon. Let this sit a month, until a nice oak flavor can be tasted in the spirit ( I try for Glenmorangie Scotch/gold in color), almost like a bland, one-dimensional, failed bourbon whiskey. THEN filter out the oak chips, add your carbon, and treat it as you normally would any sugar vodka. I have tried this with a small test batch, I am now soaking oak chips in ALL my vodka- even the stuff already carbon polished (I'll just re-polish it). After carbon treatment, there is no color and no wood flavor. The taste, however, is markedly improved. It tastes just like the wonderfull once-a-year-distill-all-the-remnants-I've-never-gotten-around-to-bottling batches people come up with now and then, but it can be done consistantly now! Appearantly the acid and tannin content in the oak mellows the spirit out through various chemical alterations/combinations, and these beneficial changes are noticable even when the flavoring compounds they form have been removed by carbon. Your sugar vodka will be the best in the neighborhood after this-and just as water-clear. Give it a try!

The following method is recommended by Gert Strand, in order to get optimum performance from the carbon.

Activated carbon will work best when used in a granulated form as a filling in a filtration column using the following method.
o Fill a tube 1.5 meters in length and at least 40 mm diameter with pre wetted granulated, activated carbon. Beware! The tube must be at least 38 mm diameter or it will introduce a "wall effect" where alcohol slips through the column without being purified. The filtration must go as slowly as possible without stopping, or the effects are much reduced. The filtration rate must not rise above approx 400ml per hour. Place one coffee cup of Norit activated carbon (0.25 to 1 mm) at the bottom of the column to reduce speed. With some carbons the speed can be higher.
o To get achieve maximum effect from activated carbon the filtration must take place through the carbon bed without channeling, and in addition, the tube must be free of any air. To accomplish this proceed as follows;
o Put the carbon in a bucket or kitchen pot and completely cover with 2-3 times more hot or boiling water. Mix for a minute and pour out any excess water. Repeat 4-5 times to wash out soluble material from the carbon.
o Place filter papers in the tube. Fill the tube fill with warm water, then top up with the pre-wetted carbon so it flows into water and no air at all remains in the tube.
o Filter 2-3 liters or more of water through the column to wash out any water soluble substances present in the carbon.
o Start pouring the alcohol to be filtered directly "onto" the water so that no air comes into contact with the carbon in the tube. Filter all of the alcohol in one run, again to prevent any air from coming into contact with the carbon. Run about 1 liter of water through at the end of the alcohol to flush out the last of the alcohol. Taste the alcohol and stop collecting when you detect water.

Craig reports using a Brita water filtering system too - with good results.
Jack agrees ...

I just started playing with my 5litre pot still again. The lack of copper in the design is causing a seriously nasty flavor in the spirit. Everything from kirsch, brandy, rum, and corn whiskey has come out tasting like rotten eggs. By stuffing a copper scouring pad into the lyne arm of the still, I took care of most of the smell, but some was still present. After several runs, the copper scouring pad was to dirty to leave in the still, so I ran the still (rum) without it. Sure enough- rotten egg smell intense enough to burn the nose. So rather than wait 2 weeks for the gas to evolve off on it's own, I put the spirit in a 2-litre soda bottle, and attached a Brita "sport bottle" carbon filter to the top. I ran some tap water through it to get the carbon dust out. I then filled the bottle with the rum. Bingo! the sulfur smell is GONE. Absolutely no trace of rotten eggs. Here is the good part, the rum flavor hasn't been stripped out at all! For those of you who have made a wine, and distilled it into brandy- forgetting that you added winemaker's sulfite- and got rotten egg brandy, just pass it through the small sport bottle carbon filter- it will remove the gas, but not the flavor. Now I don't have to wait for the stuff to sit for 2 weeks and worry about the sulfur. Heck, now I can drink it warm- from the still to the filter to the glass! Many thanks to "PK" and his brown sugar rum recipes- I'm havin' a glass of it right now!


AuntyEthyl describes his setup ...

This system, uses a tube that is essentially sealed, so unlike other designs, you can fill and forget, rather than watch for overflow or needing to top it up all the time. It is also designed around a 25ltr wash, so will process about 10 ltrs of 40% spirit in a single pass in about 36hours.

Secondly I apologise for the drawings, when it comes to Artistic, I'm all Autistic.

Materials

1 x 500mm long 50mm diameter upvc pipe
1 x 50mm end cap
1 x 50mm threaded adapter
1 x 50mm threaded end cap with O ring
1 x poly pipe barbed adapter (see drawing/see text)
1 x Caulking gun glue tube nozzle
1 x Aquarium air tap
1 x 1 meter+ of silicon aquarium air hose

20ltr drum with tap
Container to collect treated spirit (I use a fermenter)
Some coffee filter paper
Activated carbon
Some untreated spirit
Note. The poly pipe barbed fitting is the barbed part of the poly pipe adapter that screws to a tap and has the barbed part to attach some poly pipe.

After studying my ordinary drawings, drill a hole in the centre of the end cap to suit the nozzle. This can be glued into position with silicon, from the outside. The end cap can then be glued onto the end of the main pipe. The barbs on the poly pipe fitting need to be filed down flush with the outside of the fitting, then a suitable hole drilled into the centre of threaded cap, and the poly pipe fitting glued into place. The threaded adapter can be glued onto the other end of the pipe.

With the main filter unit built, all you need is a short piece of plastic tubing to fit over the barbed poly pipe fitting, then other end fits over the end of a standard drum tape (not the cobra/flip type tap)

To the caulking gun nozzle attach a short peice of silicon tube. The other end is attached to the air tap. A longer peice of silicon tube is used from the tap, leading into the collection container.

When you are ready to use...
o Cut two layers of coffee filter paper to fit inside of the main pipe. Push these inside the main pipe until they rest at the bottom against the end cap.
o Fill your main pipe with activated carbon, to 50mm from the top.
o Pour the carbon into a glass bowl and pour boiling water over carbon. Stir, leave sit for a couple of minutes and pour off the water.
o Repeat about five times until water above the carbon is clear.
o Rinse filter housing. And fold silicon tube and clamp with a clothes peg. Fill tube with fairly warm to hot water.
o Pour off excess water from carbon and using a desert spoon fill tube with the carbon. Once filled, screw on threaded cap and top up water in filter. Push the clear plastic tube over the tap of the drum which has been filled with untreated spirit at 50% or less, the drum has also been suspended from the garage roof truss.
o Turn on the drum tap and adjust the aquarium air tap until the flow is quite fast, feel the filter pipe, as the spirit flows thru the pipe will cool, letting you know how far the spirit has flowed.
o Let the spirit flow fast until about two thirds of the water has been displaced. The water can be chucked, adjust the air tap until the spirit is just flowing, about 2 drips a second.
Relax and wait for some smooth tasting, non smelling spirit.


You could even set up a recirculating system to do the filtering .... Jan asked about this ..

I like to have a small pump to force the alcohol through a carbon filter as i find that the drip method id too slow in winter. I intend using a windscreenwasher pump and feed the alcohol in the bottom of the filter and draw off the top.i intend to achieve a fast drip with by-pass hoses. Any better suggestions are much appreciated.

to which David replied ..

We found the easiest way rather than using a pump which is ideal for circulating the alcohol through the carbon and which can greatly accelerate the aging and purification of the alcohol was to have a closed vessel with an outlet close to the bottom to which the final polishing carbon filter is connected and into which the already treated alcohol can be poured, decanted, or pumped, the vessel closed, slightly pressurised, and then slowly filtered.

This produces a vastly superior product in a fraction of the time. Using a 2 or 3 stage process like this can lead to vastly shortened treatment times with each stage in the treatment process optimised.

In the vessel mentioned above I have a tyre valve fitted into the stainless steel lid and by using a bicycle tyre pump together with a precise pressure guage I can quickly pressurise the setup to about 2 psi which seems to be about the ideal pressure and which allows me to final polish 1 litre of spirit in about 1/2 hour. The final product is as fine treated product as you will find being crystal clear and even when left for weeks has absolutely no settlement or sediment. When left to just decant by itself (everything running downhill and thus gravity controlled) it took 24 hours + previously to filter the same volume. In this setup as stated I found 2 psi to be the best pressure although you may find it varies a bit with your own setup. Exceeding this pressure quickly led to possibly channeling with the alcohol being forced through too fast and some very minor carbon settlement resulting.

At the end of the day I found treatment and filtering rates were largely determined by the type and degree of fineness of the filter material used. Constant circulation led to shorter treatment times and ultra fine filtering led to a superior product. The main things are not to be too frugal with the carbon or to expect too long a life out of the filters. If using this method I suggest you do your own trials and tests especially of settlement and sediment. Even the clearest alcohol initially when left for some time will show very minor settlement. It is this aspect that with experience and patience you can gradually get perfect.

Kez has constructed a similar filter ..

..I used a bike valve to pump it up, even bought a psi gauge but found that it wasn't necesary to check the psi. I can do a litre of spirit in 30 mins and as you can see made it a flow through system so I just need to fill the container and open and close the tap.



Jan writes about freezing when filtering ...

About carbon filtering: I Dilute the spirit app. 50/50 then use one spoonful carbon / litre (US. Quart), leave it for two days with occasional shaking.- filter through a coffee filter. THEN ---- I freeze it !!! Three days in the deep freeze at -25 deg. C. This makes the water and remaining fusels AND fine carbon particles stick together. Run it through a coffee filter as fast as it allows (filter density). What I'm left with is pure, clean, no smell alcohol which can be diluted to preferred strength (35 - 40 %).

Baker quotes from "The Alcohol Textbook" by Jacques, Lyons, & Kelsall:

Production of vodka

The 1982 US Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (BATF) regulations define vodka as neutral spirit so distilled or so treated after distillation, with charcoal or other materials, as to be without distinctive character, aroma, taste or color. The use of charcoal filtration is now optional, whereas in earlier regulations it was mandatory and even the time and amounts of fresh charcoal to be used were specified. This change is in recognition of the relatively recent improvements in the quality of neutral spirits. Vodka is generally taken to be odorless, tasteless and colorless ethanol, but in the past in Eastern Europe vodka was lightly flavored with grasses or herbal extracts.

It should be stressed that not only is the charcoal treatment nonessential, it is also not particularly effective and will not make a poor quality, improperly rectified neutral spirit into a good quality vodka. Neutral spirit should be diluted to about 55% before charcoal filtration. The old BATF regulations (1961) specified dilution to between 55% and 40% at a minimum contact time of 8hrs with 10% of the charcoal replaced every 40hrs to give a minimum usage of 6 lbs of new charcoal per 100 gallons of spirit treated.

This was usually achieved by passing the diluted spirit through a series of eight or nine cylindrical charcoal filtration beds in a slow, continuous flow with one of the beds changed every day. The fresh bed would be connected last in the series. This meant that the beds were constantly being rotated; so the preferred arrangement was to set the beds in a circle to facilitate the changing. A simple alternative treatment method is to add charcoal to diluted neutral spirit in a tank and agitate or circulate it through a pump for a suitable length of time.

The water used in the initial and final dilutions should be clean, odorless and preferably demineralized. The demineralization is generally for aesthetic purposes as consumers do not like to see a white film of salts around the side of a bottle or glass if the vodka has been allowed to evaporate.

In countries where laws require that all spirits be aged in wooden barrels, it may be necessary to add a small amount of sugar and/or glycerin to be able to classify vodka as a liqueur or a compound spirit rather than as an immature spirit. The amount of sugar or glycerin used is normally the minimum required to provide proof obscuration. This occurs when there is sufficient dissolved material to cause the apparent proof obtained by direct testing to differ fractionally from the real proof obtained by distilling the ethanol from a sample in a laboratory still and retesting after redilution to the original sample volume.

Great care should be taken in the bottling of vodka to prevent contamination with residues of other odorous products. The tanks and bottling systems should be washed thoroughly if previously used for other products. However, some bottlers prefer to keep a set of tanks and a bottling line dedicated solely to handling vodka. For further reading on vodka processing seethe reviews by Simpson (1977) and Clutton(1979).

Reusing Carbon

You can reuse your carbon by washing it, and heating it up so that it will release any of the trapped fusels. Les explains ...

I have now reused my cabon which I use in the stainless steel filtering column as described in Gerts manual 4 times with excellent results.I am using 1 kilo which I boil for approx 30 minutes then rinse several times with cold water. Because I am fortunate to live in the sub tropics I place the carbon on a steel tray to a depth of 4 mm and leave in the sun until dry. The end result is nice shiney carbon no smell whatsoever. This product could be reusable for a long time.I generally run 8 litres of 45-50% through the filter each run.

FizzyNick adds ..

The physical and chemical properties of carbon work in our favour and mean that you have nothing to fear in heating it in an oven. Thanks to the carbon atom having a strong covalent bond (x4) it is very stable under normal conditions. The oven will never reach a high enough temperature to even start to effect it. The heating of the carbon should allow for the disappation of the built-up cogeners in pores of the granules or powder. Due to the fact that the nasty alcohol molecules will be released over a period of hours there is an almost nil probability of an explosion due to alcohol vapour build up. If you have a fan assisted oven this is even better as it will help to circulate the alcohol being released more evenly.

The bottom line is you could heat the carbon at top setting on your fan assisted oven for a year and still be in no danger. Wouldn't like to see the bill for the electricity though :)

As far as steam is concerned [from a domestic steam-cleaner] I do not think that would work. The alcohol molecules need to be vapourised from the fissures of the carbon. Water molecules (steam) would not do any more good than actually boiling the carbon in a pan of water as they would not necessarily displace the alcohol from the fissures.

Note that this is simply a "cleaning" of the dirty carbon - you are not reactivating it fully back to its prior state. Smudge writes ...

Whilst its true carbon is activated by contact with steam, don't think you can do it yourself while you're boiling the jug for a coffee:

GRANULATED CARBON ACTIVATION

Most Carbon is activated using steam. Activation is also accomplished using chemicals. Wood based carbons steam activation involves a two step process, carbonization and activation. Carbonization occurs in an oxygen deficient environment at high temperatures, 700 degree Celsius. Activation of carbon occurs by using steam where temperature of the carbon is raised to 1800 degrees.

REACTIVATED CARBON

Reactivating carbon is a simple process where the spent carbon is thermally reactivated . Reactivation occurs a temperatures between 1400-1700°F where ether volatile organics or oxidized off forming CO2 and water. The non volatile organic compounds are carbonized to form char. In the final phase of the process steam is used to reactivate the carbon. Approximately 80-90% by dry weight of the carbon is recovered in this process. The remainder is made up with virgin carbon. Reactivated carbon performs exactly the same in adsorptive capabilities as virgin carbon.

Information courtesy of www.onionenterprises.com

Mike writes of his technique for cleaning carbon for reuse ..

I think you will find that the extreme heat procedures you read about concerning commercial reactivation of carbon are not necessary in a hobby situation. I regularly treat my carbon after use, and find that it serves me very well. Rather than calling it "reactivation", it is perhaps better to describe the process as "cleaning", as "activation" really means treating raw carbon so that it has a suitable internal structure with a very large surface.

Try this:
o Wash used carbon in plenty of running water to get rid of all external rubbish. I do this simply by rinsing under a tap with the carbon in a sieve.
o Then boil it in an open pan of water for around quarter of an hour. This will get rid of the bulk of the volatiles. If you want to do a really thorough wash, carry on by boiling it up in an ordinary pressure cooker for 10 minutes. This will get rid of even more than open air boiling.
o Finally, strain off all the carbon and rinse under a tap for a minute, then spread it all out on a wide baking tray covered in ordinary baking foil (saves rusting the tray!).
o Shove that in the kitchen oven to dry slowly at around 160C/320F, making sure that you periodically open the oven door to vent the smelly steam that comes off.
It takes time to drive all the water off, but organic molecules still held inside the carbon will come off with the steam quite readily at this low temperature. Don't try heating at the highest temperature your oven is capable of .. not only is it unnecessary, you will also run the risk of ending up with a pile of gray ash! Try it. I think you will find that it's more than adequate.

Peter describes his microwave technique ..

before i go through it i will say microwaving charcoal can be VERY DANGEROUS! I got the idea of microwaveing it after reading that carbon can reach extremely high temperatures in a microwave. You can get carbon crucibles for melting steel and silver. So it reaches well above 1000C. I thought this would be ideal to burn off and residual nasties stuck in the carbon and also to sterilise it.

I get my carbon in a plastic filter from work. I cut the filter open with and dump the dirty carbon into a 40litre container and fill it with hot water in my shower. I let it settle and decant the dirty water. I repeat this until the water is clear, usually 4 times. I then boil it up in a pressure cooker to really clean it and sterilise it. I then drain it off rinse again and put it in a pyrex lasagne type container. I microwave it on full for 5 mins at a time stirring it after each 5 mins. After about 20 mins it is dry but keep a close eye on it. I then microwave it for 40 seconds at a time stirring each time. it looks dry but after a while it starts to gives off dry vapours again.

It gets extremely hot so a pyrex dish is essential. it is important to stir to prevent hot spots. Once i didnt stir for a while and when i did stir it was glowing red in the middle! after about 10 blasts at 40 seconds the vapors stop coming off and i then stop and let it cool overnight. the vapours have a choking smell and are a bit like smoke since they are "dry" but they dont stink the room or anything.

How much ? I didnt weigh it but it looks 500g judging from the 1 kilo bags i used to get. The microwave is 800W, but microwaves do vary in efficiency. Mine seems to heat small cups of water faster than my last 800W maybe it has hot spots or something. I would go very slowly your first time maybe 2 mins at a time until appears totally dry. When it is dry it just falls off the spoon like sand. if you cant leave it in the microwave to cool down (incase "she" finds it) be very careful where you leave it. I took it out once and put it on some newspaper and the paper started to smoke! it works very well when recharged, but i always put lots in each gallon jar anyway.

Mike warns about using a microwave :

Carbon is a good conductor of electricity, so microwave radiation is readily absorbed. However, high voltages are generated across the gaps between the granules. Sparks result when the voltage jumps across these gaps. Air is a good insulator, so this sparking will readily occur when the carbon is dry, for the voltages can be very high indeed. Strong eddy currents in the carbon heat the granules as it does have some resistance, so plenty of heat is generated, usually ending up with the carbon igniting.

It's slightly different when the carbon is wet. Water is generally considered to be a good conductor, but that is only because it can readily dissolve salts that disassociate in solution into electrically charged ions, and these carry the current. Water that has been through the distilling process has no salt content, and any salts present in the carbon/water mix will generally be those lingering on after the manufacturing process. The water separating the carbon granules is therefore a fairly good insulator and sparking will also be experienced, usually with generation of a bit of hydrogen and oxygen as the water is broken down by electrolysis. The heat generated will initially go towards heating and vaporizing the water, so keeping the carbon below its ignition point. However, when all that water has boiled off, the dry carbon will then heat up - as before - and ignite. One "interesting" side effect you might notice if treating damp carbon in a microwave is that you can end up with an explosion, for that dampness may well contain a goodly proportion of alcohol if you haven't first washed the carbon thoroughly. The atmosphere in the microwave can quickly reached critical proportions with the oxygen in the air, and a spark is a tried and true way of igniting that mix! You can even get the same effect in an ordinary oven from a red-hot heating element if the carbon still has a lot of alcohol left in it ... ending up with a muffled thump and the oven door blowing open!! (Been there, done that, and would be wearing the T-shirt if it hadn't been scorched!)

Moral? Do NOT dry carbon in a microwave oven as the risks of fire or even explosion are too great, and wash carbon thoroughly in lots of clean water before drying in an ordinary oven ... keeping the oven door slightly open to vent any flammable gases that will almost certainly be given off, as no amount of ordinary sluicing in water will get rid of all the alcohols deep inside the carbon granules. Proof that they are indeed still there will become more than evident to your nose as they are vaporized ... so keep the kitchen windows wide open if you don't want the whole house to reek of congeners!

Drying Ethanol
The maximum purity you will get by distilling alcohol is around 96%. This is because the ethanol and water form an azeotrope. If you do manage to dry your alcohol beyond this, if exposed to air, it will simply suck in moisture from the air, and dilute itself back to th 96.48%. There are however various methods used to dry ethanol beyond there. Its important to do so if using the ethanol as a fuel, or using it to make biofuels. The water can be absorbed from the ethanol using zeolites (a molecular sieve), or even simple corn-grits. Note that you wouldn't use the limestone or copper sulphate techniques for drinking grade ethanol.

Fred writes ...

I get my ethanol alcohol at the liquor store that is everclear. I put about 1 inch of potassium carbonate anhydrous in the bottom of the quart bottle of the alchohol to absorb any fissel oils or water since alchohol is very hydrscopic to moisture. You just pour it dry and any water will be absorbed


Ken wrote ...

... I finally have something to report, namely, how BEAUTIFULLY zeolite (aka "molecular sieve") works to suck the last bit of water out of distilled ethanol. I got a sample of Type 3A Molecular Sieve from a place in So. Calif. called Adcoa: http://www.thomasregister.com/olc/adcoa/molecula.htm

I got a can of the 4-8 mesh -- little balls of rock about 1/8" dia. -- they absorb about 20% of their weight of water over the course of a few hours. Take a liter of 95% ethanol, throw in 250g of stuff, swirl occasionally, filter out the next day thru a strainer, and presto! Anhydrous ethanol. Not expensive either -- $2.05 a pound US in 10 lb quantities, and reusable indefinitely. You drive off the water under a broiler for an hour.

The following is message #1019 from the Biofuels newsgroup at http://groups.yahoo.com//

Zeolites

The easiest way to get water out of ethanol is probably with molecular sieves (3A zeolite). It takes about 10g of sieve for each ml of water. 5kg cost about $100 and canbe reused hundreds, if not thousands of times. You could probably even rig up a solar oven or something to dry the stuff.
-- lhom@o...

Are you talking about the manufactured m.s. balls or the powdered or hammer-milled type here?
-- DAVID REID"

I suppose it wouldn't really matter. Larger mesh beads (1/8", 1/16") would be easier to recover, but it might take a little bit longer to sop up the water and regenerate the sieve. Powder would take more time to recover (you probably can't just decant, you'd probably have to filter) but would be faster in the adsorption and regeneration, I guess.
-- lhom@o...

These are your answer and 3A is definitely the right one but there are a number of problems and obstacles to overcome.
-- DAVID REID"

Quite a high start-up cost though, to dehydrate only 10 litres of 190 proof - although that will give you about 50 litres of biodiesel, if that's why you want to dry it. Also it takes 300-350 deg C to regenerate zeolite, more energy input, but maybe not more so than other methods which require redistilling. Maybe you could utilise the original boiler heat while distilling the ethanol to dry the zeolite.
-- Keith Addison

Molecular sieves work via adsorbtion. There are lots of little H2O binding sites on the surfaces of the molecular sieve particles (or beads, et cetera). H2O molecules 'stick' to these binding sites, EtOH molecules generally don't. Your sieves come wet. Heat them to about 200C for about 1/4 hour to drive off water. You don't have to do this, but you'll get better adsorbtion if you do. Best to do this at reduced pressure, if possible. Dump your dry sieves into the EtOH/H2O solution. Let it stand for 24 hours. Decant. You now have something very close to absolute ethanol. Keep it out of contact with air. It will take up water very rapidly, and you'll be back to 95% in no time.
-- "Greg Ederer"

Zeolite links:

http://www.bol.bg/zeoweb/zindex.htm - A piece of info about zeolites
http://www.zeolyst.com/html/faq.html - Zeolite FAQ
http://www.mall-net.com/mcs/zeolite.html - Zeolites
http://www.christison.com/zeolite1.htm - Zeolites brochure for website.
There's a great intuitive explanation of molecular sieves at: http://www.science-projects.com/analogies.htm#molsi

First, make sure it's dry, by heating to about 600 deg. F for several hours, thencooling back down in dry air. Toss in the required amount with your hydrous ethanol (molecular sieve zeolite absorbs like 25% of its weight in water) and stand back -- it can get HOT. Takes a few hours to get saturated. Oh, I'm sure the pros will talk all about columns of X dia. and Y length, with flow rates of blah, blah, but the simple ways are best. Good luck -- BTW, I only have free samples of this stuff. Did you actually have to PAY for it, and if so, how much (if you don't mind my asking :-)).

Check out http://www.sorbentsystems.com/desiccants_charts.html for some good info and graphs.
-- K


Corn grits

If there's ethanol in your gas tank, there's a 50-50 chance that it was filtered through corn grits using a technique developed at Purdue University. When the corn grits get saturated with water you just make more ethanol out of them!

Drying of ethanol vapors - http://www.esb.ucp.pt/~bungah/downstre/vapordry.htm

Ladisch and his students at Purdue University found that drying of ethanol vapors saved energy and was economic. The corn industry makes ethanol by fermentation and has corn grits readily available. Passing the wet vapor over corn grits or other drying agents removes most of the water to yield a product that is close enough to absolute ethanol. When the drying agent approaches exhaustion, it is regenerated by heating and reused. Eventually the drying agent breaks down but has potential uses elsewhere in corn processing.
Source: Mike Ladisch; phone 317-494-7022; Internet,ladisch@e...


Limestone

Check Chapter 12 of the Alcohol Fuel Manual in the Files section at the list Website, "Drying the alcohol". You can access it with your browser (html files). Click on "manual - Alcohol Fuel Manual", the chapters are inside the folder. The file is called "manual12.html - Alcohol Fuel Manual Ch12". The list website is here: http://www.egroups.com/group/biofuel

The lime and calcium hydroxide settle out or are left in suspension, so distillation should remove it all. You'll need unslaked lime, ie quicklime (calcium oxide). The masonry shops only sell hydrated lime these days (calcium hydroxide). According to Stephen Mathewson's recommendations in the Alcohol Fuel Manual you'll need 35 pounds of lime per gallon of water = about 10 gallons of 180-proof ethanol.


Copper Sulphate

Here's an old chemistry trick: take the highest grade ethanol you can make and run it through a column packed with dried copper sulphate. In Europe CuSO4 is used to spray wines, so it's quite easy to obtain. 1 molecule of dry CuSO4 takes up 5 molecules of water forming a crystal hydrate: CuSO4*5H2O. If you haven't got a column just toss the crystals into a vessel, add hydrouos ethanol and stirr occasionally. The color of the crystals changes when they are "full".

Dry the crystals in an oven (solar possibly) and reuse XXXX times. P.S.: The process is slow.

Always use crystalline hydrate forming compounds:
plaster (CaSO4*2H20)
burned limestone (CaO + H2O = Ca(OH)2)
copper sulphate (CuSO4*5H2O)
sodium carbonate (Na2CO3*2H2O) etc.
-- "Aleksander Kac"

Diluting your Alcohol

Summary
Dilute your spirits to less than 40% before drinking them.

You need a hydrometer to measure how strong your spirits are.


Depending on the reflux ratio of your still, you can produce a product up to 95 % ethanol (190 proof). You can't drink it this strong (remember - ethanol can be poisonous); it needs diluting. Get a spirit hydrometer (or one for wine), measure the % alcohol, and dilute it down to around 40 % (whiskey) or 22 % (liqueurs).

When you use a hydrometer, make sure that the alcohol is at the right temperature. If the alcohol is still warm, it will be "lighter" than at the "standard" temperature (usually 20oC), and thus the hydrometer will sink lower in it, making you think that its got more alcohol in it. Wrong. This is where most of the claims of getting 97% purity etc come from - only 96.5% is possible without using a vacuum still, or by drying the alcohol (even then, if left in an open container, it will suck in moisture from the air and dilute itself back to 96.5%). Most hydrometers come with a chart for making temperature adjustments.

The instructions which came with my hydrometer advise the following corrections to the final specific gravity reading ...
Temperature Correction (g/mL)
10 °C -0.002
15 °C -0.001
20 °C none
25 °C +0.001
30 °C +0.003
35 °C +0.004


Pilch gives the following advice ...

Measuring & Adjusting the Strength of Your Alcohol

An Alcometer (as apposed to a Wash, Wine & Beer Hydrometer) is used to test the strength of your spirit. Additives such as flavouring and Liquid Glucose will distort the hydrometer readings. Alcometers should only be used to test spirit in the following conditions:
o before any additives such as flavouring or liquid glucose are mixed.
o at temperature of 16 degrees C or refer to the Temperature Correction Chart below. Taking readings of warmer liquids may damage your hydrometer.
o The Alcometer is floated in the spirit to measure the alcohol content. As alcohol is thinner than water, the higher in strength the alcohol is, the further down the hydrometer floats. The reading is taken where the surface of the spirit cuts the scale of the hydrometer.

Temperature Correction for Alcometer
Temp / %V 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
10 2.47 2.39 2.20 2.07 1.91 1.75 1.47
15 0.41 0.40 0.37 0.35 0.32 0.29 0.25
20 -1.64 -1.59 -1.47 -1.38 -1.28 -1.17 -0.98
25 -3.70 -3.58 -3.30 -3.11 -2.87 -2.63 -2.21
30 -5.75 -5.57 -5.14 -4.83 -4.47 -4.09 -3.43
35 -7.81 -7.56 -6.97 -6.56 -6.06 -5.55 -4.66


Take good care of your Alcometer as it's very fragile. Wash and sterilize with cold water only.
Prior to Carbon Purifying, the spirit should be watered down in strength to 38-40% by volume prior to drinking. It is very important not to make higher strength spirit.

Calculation
Litres collected x Alcohol strength / Alcohol strength required = Total litres to be made up to. e.g 4.5 litres x 45% / 40% = 5.06 litres.
If you collect 4.5 litres of spirit and this measured 45% after carbon purifying, then multiply 4.5 x 45. Divide this by 40% and you will need to make the total spirit up to 5.06 litres with water. In other words add .56 of a litre of water. This is a rough guide only but a very good one to follow.

Watering down the spirit to 40%, or less is very important as people unused to high strength spirit can easily overdose resulting in Nausea and in extreme cases death.
LIKKER 'n' LEATHER, 9 Dutton Street Walkerston. QLD 4751,Ph 49592859

Dilution Calculators

If you want to know how much water to add to dilute your alcohol down, just multiply the amount of spirits you have by (strong/weak) - 1

eg: if you want to dilute 2L of 75% alcohol down to 40%, you will need to add 2 x ((75/40)-1) = 1.75L of water
Dilute of % alcohol Down to %
By adding Water


If you want to know how much alcohol to use to make a known quantity, multiply the final amount by (weak/strong)

eg: to make 1.125L of 40% alcohol using spirit at 75%, you will need to use 1.125 x (40/75) = 0.6L of the 75% spirit, then top it up to 1.125L using water.
To make of % alcohol using % alcohol
Use of Alcohol
and of Water

Proof or Abv ?
Note that there are a couple of different ways of describing the alcohol strength. Some people tend to talk about "Proof" whereas others (myself included) tend to stick to "ABV" - the amount of Alcohol By Volume. Basically 100 proof = 50% abv.

But its not always so ... Harry explains ...

In the US a very simple relationship is defined between 'proof' and % AbV. It is that proof = 2 × %AbV So, 180 proof (US) = 90 %AbV.

It the UK it was laid down by an Act of Parliament in 1816 that "a quantity of 100 proof liquor would have the same weight as 12/13 ths of the same volume of pure water at 51°F." (That is twelve thirteenths) So,
100 proof (UK) = 57.06 %AbV
200 proof (US) = 100 %AbV = 175.25 proof (UK)
100 proof (US) = 50 %AbV = 87.6 proof (UK)

To avoid confusion, most alcohol for export from the UK is labelled at AbV.

A bit of history...

What is Proof?

Proof is another (older) measure of the strength of an alcoholic liquid. It had its origins in days when a simple test was needed that the liquor did indeed contain a *correct* measure (or more) of alcohol. And it was indeed a simple test.

Some of the liquor was poured over a little gunpowder and ignited. If the alcohol content was adequate, then it would burn 'just right' with a steady blue flame and eventually ignite the gunpowder. If there was insufficient alcohol then it would fizzle out and the gunpowder would be too wet to burn. The 'just right' condition 'proved' the liquor and it was declared to be '100 proof'.

This simple test was clearly cumbersome to perform and was later replaced by using a specially graduated hydrometer to measure the specific gravity. This was far more objective and allowed precise statements to be made as to how much different it was from being 100 proof. This gave rise to "under-proof" and "over-proof" measures.

Keep your powder dry (or wet it with the right stuff!) At one time (in the days of sailing ships, cannons and gunpowder) the makers of Plymouth Gin distilled a special gin for the Royal Navy. It was 57%AbV or 100 proof. Why? In order to keep it secure it was stored in the magazine close by the gunpowder. So, even if it leaked and wetted the gunpowder, at 100% proof the gunpowder would still explode. Though that need has been long gone, they still market the stuff!

Distilling the Wash

Summary
Once the still is up to temperature, and the distillate has started dripping, make sure you throw away the first 50 mL per 20 L of wash, as this may contain any methanol that is present.

You should expect to collect the equivalent of approx 1L of 40% alcohol per kg of sugar used; the actual % purity will depend on the type of still you are using.

Stop collecting the distillate once you notice them containing some fusels, or if the temperature gets above about 94 oC (it doesn't become "dangerous" or "deadly", just that it tastes foul).

If you collect the distillate in small amounts (say 1/2 L or so), you can segregate the drinkable spirit from that with fusels in; the latter can be added to the next wash, and be collected cleanly then.

"Genuine" whiskey can be made by passing a grain wash through a pot still twice.


The alcohols in the wash begin to vapourise from the wash around specific temperatures. If by themselves they would be ...

* Acetone 56.5C (134F)
* Methanol (wood alcohol) 64C (147F)
* Ethyl acetate 77.1C (171F)
* Ethanol 78C (172F)
* 2-Propanol (rubbing alcohol) 82C (180F)
* 1-Propanol 97C (207F)
* Water 100C (212F)
* Butanol 116C (241F)
* Amyl alcohol 137.8C (280F)
* Furfural 161C (322F)


Once together, a mixture of several of them will be slightly different however. You no longer get them coming off seperately, but always as a mixture. Fortunately for us though, each of the species will tend to dominate around its boiling point temperature, thus we know whats "mostly" coming off at that point. By tracking the temperature of the vapour, you have a fairly good idea when you're collecting the Ethanol your after (78-82 °C), vs when it is starting to get lean and you're into the higher alcohols.

Note that you may also need to adjust the temperature if you are distilling at altitude - the higher above sea level you are, the lower boiling temperatures become because of the reduced air pressure.

Mark writes

Here is what I found. I'm at 7000 foot, i did a test run and water boils at 199 here. Thats 93% of 212. so i cut my tables by that. Maybe this will help others. http://www.hi-tm.com/Documents/Calib-boil.html

Jack adds though ..

Actually, % of alcohol is a more reliable method of measuring cutoff points than temperature is. Thermometer placement in a still can cause a major difference in how the temp is read. Everyone's still is different- the % is more likely to give predictable results, where the temp can be off by more than 10F either high or low- giving the wrong results when duplication of anothers' run is being tried.

Sometimes with the tails though, even the % isn't accurate enough, with smelly tails sneaking through with little apparent notice. This is when you should also let your nose guide you - collect a few drops on the back of a spoon every so often, and check what they smell like, on a regular basis.
Filling the Boiler
When filling the boiler, make sure you leave enough headspace above the liquid, so that if it foams up a bit, that the foam won't get pushed up the column. Typically it should only be around 3/4 full.

You also want to ensure that there will be enough liquid at all times to completely cover the elements. This is particularly relevent when you've already done some "stripping" runs first, and you're now starting with something quite high in purity (eg 45%) and the reduction in volume will be greater.
If starting with L of wash at % alcohol
through a still that collects its distillate at %
should result in L water left in the boiler when finished

Some washes may tend to foam up a bit & get pushed out through the column & condenser, contaminating the clean spirit. This sometimes means that for some washes you may have to leave your boiler 1/3 to 1/2 empty at times, in order to accomodate that foaming. Hogan writes about how to deal with this ...

someone was descibing the use of malt extract for making whiskey and commenting that it foamed a lot in the distiller. The extract will contain a lot of proteins and when boiled it will foam a good bit. You need to let it foam as much as possible (without boiling over, of course). If you have a big pot, that helps. But you can remove the pot from heat or turn it down (if a gas heat source) let it sttle a bit and fire it back up. You are looking to achieve something called hot break. The foam will soon stop rising. This process coagulates the protiens so that they are larger and will settle out, producing a clearer liquid.

Removing the Methanol
Be ruthless about tossing the first 50 mL (off a 20L wash) that you collect, as this contains any methanol (causer of hangovers - small quantities, or blindness - larger quantities). Even though I'm pretty sure I only collect less than 10mL at the methanol stage, I still discard 50mL, just to make sure. No need for penny-pinching when you're making 3L of the stuff, for less than $5. If you're using a potstill, you may need to increase this amount you toss up to 100-200 mL.

Jack writes ..I have tasted potstill alcohol that has been made both ways- when only 50ml (per 20L) was thrown out, the stuff was very sharp tasting. It became alot smoother when a full 100ml was thrown out at the start of the run.

This first portion is often called the "foreshots". They are different from the "heads". Ian Smiley (http://www.home-distilling.com/) describes foreshots as "the low boiling point compounds that come out of the still first. They contain acetone, methanol, various esters and aldehydes, and other volitiles. Foreshots are to be considered poisonous and should be discarded." Whereas heads "come out after the foreshots, and are almost pure alcohol, except that they are contaminated with trace amounts of unwanted cogeners ..." To get a really clean distinction between the foreshots and the heads, first ensure that you've let your column equilbriate under total reflux, then hold the reflux ratio high, such that you remove the foreshots only very slowly (eg 1 drip per second), thus allowing an equilbirium to be maintained at the top of the column, encouraging the methanol to collect there.

If you're after making pure neutral spirit for vodkas or gin you may choose to keep the heads (eg the next 250 mL-1L of spirits) separate from the following couple of litres (middle run) on the basis of their taste. These heads can still be used to make liqueurs, whisky, rums, etc, or redistilled later if desired totally neutral. The only problem with heads is their non-neutral taste.

The distinction between the various phases depends on what sort of still you have. They will all tend to merge from one to the other. This is particularly the case with a pot still, where you notice the temperatures always slowly changing as the distilling run progresses. Using a reflux still or fractionating column will allow the various stages to appear more distinct, as the temperature will be more stable, due to the more distinct seperation of each compound.
Running the Still
For neutral spirits. there are many different ways of running a still to achieving the same results.

To get high purity, you require your column to be doing many redistillations. To get enough redistillations happening, your packing must offer sufficient "theoretical plates". The HETP that you get from packing depends on many factors, but includes the surface area, the thickness of the liquid spread out over it, and the ratio of liquid to gas. As the alcohol in the pot depletes, in order to keep the same purity, you need more redistillations happening. The usual way to do this is to improve the HETP by increasing the ratio of liquid to vapour (eg the reflux ratio)

As its a ratio, you can do it either by increasing the amount of liquid being returned (eg increase the amount of cooling water to through tubes/top condensors, or closing the offtake in a Nixon-Stone ), or by reducing the amount of vapour (by reducing the power input to the boiler). Both will have the same result.

Just how much action is required depends on what the column is like to begin with. If its a tall column, packed with something with heaps of surface area (scrubbers), etc, it may already have enough redistillations happening in it to satisfactorily cope with very low alcohol input. Thus there would be no need to adjust it much during the course of the run. You'd basically turn it on, set it and leave it (though you still need to catch it right at the end).

If however the column isn't quite so great, you might need to do some serious readjusting of the reflux ratio right through the run in order to keep it doing what you desire.

Likewise, with the tall column, maybe you elect to run it heaps faster at the start (and not suffer any ill consequences), but then progressively turn it back down as things progress. Eg - do you run it the whole run at say 10 mL/min offtake, and never touch it, or say start at 50 mL/min and then slowly wind it back to 10 mL/min over the following hours.

None of these are wrong or right, just different. So when you hear of guys doing 17hr runs, thats fine if it suits them. I prefer the latter of fiddling to get the shortest time. Each to their own. With rushing, I have more "oops" happening - finding that I haven't been checking it quite routinely enough, and that its just spent the last 10-15min at too high a temp. But I'm still happy with the final taste, so thats fine for me. Others may shun my juice.

Choose for youself - try a run at a really slow offtake & little control needed, and compare against a "hands on, push it fast" approach. Maybe choose the middle ground.

Likewise as to go to electronic control or not - its just a personal choice, based on if the smoother control is worth the cost, if whether it will work for your style of operation & still design, if you dabble in that sort of thing, or if you prefer the hands on and driving.
When to Finish
This really depends on what your still is like - they can all be different. The general rule is to finish distilling when the vapour temperature near the condensor is around 92-94 ° C. Depending on how much of the "tails" you collect, your spirits will aquire a different flavour. If making a neutral spirit, you wouldn't want any tails present, so you'd finish sooner (around 82 C?), however if making a flavoured spirit, you'd want a trace of them present. Note that you can always collect the tails seperately from the "middle run", and redistill them at a later date to get the ethanol from them.

If your column is a very high purity one, you may infact find yourself finishing before 82 C, with only a small amount left to collect as tails after that.

If you're doing a flavoured spirit, eg a schnapps or whisky, often the "cut" to finish will be based on taste rather than by temperature alone.

One clue that you've gone too far is if the distillate takes on a white/milky appearance. This is because the fusels (propyls, amyls & butyls) are partialy/totally insoluble with the higher %alcohols. You won't spot them if you keep your tails separate, as they are soluble within their own family in a weak ethanol solution. You may spot them though by seeing if a drop on the end of your finger gives a sun glint, and/or feels well lubricated (the old moonshiners trick). You may also see a slight film/slick on the surface of the distillate if using a clear container. If you can see them, then you can probably smell them too.

Another indication that its time to finish is when the temperature begins to fluctuate a bit. Tarvus writes :

...with my Stillmaker type reflux still, I notice that the temperature holds steady until near the end of a cut. I should note that I use a digital thermometer that registers to the nearest 1/10th of a degree fahrenheit and refreshes itself every 10 seconds.

For example, near the end of the time the foreshots are exhausted and the ethanol begins running, the temp will fluctuate dramatically after having held rock steady until then. The same seems to happen at the end of the ethanol run. When I see the temp starting to get squirrely, I stop the run. Maybe I leave a bit of usable ethanol in the wash, but it's worth knowing the stuff I collect is pure! :)


Let the distillate drop cleanly into the recieving vessel, so that it splashes. This will help it lose any fusels that may be present. For the same reason, it is better that the distillate is still warm to the touch, not cold. Don't put the end of the tubing under the level of the liquid, as this will cause any fusels that might be coming out as vapours to condense (and taint the flavour).

Greed is a bad thing. This is what gets your mates saying that your spirits taste "off" (you stopped noticing a while back, but everyone else still comments). You are either trying to rush things (good distillate requires time & patience), or you're wringing the neck of the beast and taking the run too far. You can't get ALL the available alcohol out of the wash. The better your still (eg the more "theoretical plates" / smaller HETP it has) the better your chances, but you still run the risk of contaminating your clean spirit with the tails, and having it smell & taste bad. But heres a few things to try ..

* Segregate your distillate into 1L (or pint) bottles as you collect it. Work out which of them are OK, and which aren't; eg the first 2-3L might be fine, but you start noticing the tails in the last couple. Only keep the first ones for drinking, but put the other bottles aside. Either toss these in with the next wash as you go to distill it, or keep them from several runs, dilute 50/50 with water, and give them a run through the still on their own (see - you're not wasting it, just delaying when you get to keep it). This will allow you to really push the end of the run, as you won't be allowing it to contaminate your good drinking spirit (but don't get silly - stop when you can notice the fusels !).
* Get a better still (eg more packing, taller column, with greater reflux) The tails won't appear until quite late in the run (eg may only have to put the last 0.5L aside, not the last 2-3 L).
* Be patient - take the time & run the still with a higher reflux ratio (collect less, return more back down over the packing). Use more cooling water in the reflux condensor section.
* The still needs to run smoothly, with even temperatures. Stop it surging - the distillate should be coming out nice & steady - either a thin dribble or separate drops. Somethings wrong if its coming in spurts ; more even temperature control needed, keep the packing clean (back-flush it after every run), make sure the packing isn't too tight, have the right column size for the amount of power you're putting it (not a real skinny column with heaps of vapour going up it), don't have cool breezes blowing on the outside of the column giving spot cooling (keep the column insulated)
* Take the time to polish neutral spirits well. Get a batch ahead of yourself, and always have one sitting on carbon, until you need to use it.


A 20L wash (at 12%) should produce approx 3L of 75% ethanol via a basic reflux still, or 2.3L of 95% ethanol via a fractionating reflux still.
of wash at % alcohol
through a still that collects its distillate at %
should result in alcohol collected
should result in water left in the boiler when finished
Note: this assumes 95% collection efficiency

Donald advises ..

Residual tails should be cut by hydrometer in pot stills then redistilled with the next batch. Column still tails should be redistilled in process, as much as possible then pumped though an activated charcoal filer. A drinking water type filter cartrige is best, pump it through several times for vodka results. Chilling the distillate will improve filtration.

Neutral spirits require little to no age (0-30 days). Using refined raw materials helps produce more neutral distillate and reduces tails.

Tails are always volitle, oily and rancid. Once they come over they will dominate/spoil the flavor of the entire batch. I suggest having 3 recieving containers on the output side: center cut, orgaoliptics, heads/tails. That way if tails start on the oganoliptics the entire batch is not at risk. The danger/fun is that the organoliptic range changes with the raw material. In general tails are: Early- tequila, Armagnac, Cognac. Moderate- Brandy, Irish style (3x) whiskey, Corn whiskey, Rye whiskey, Bourbon, American whiskey. Late- Malt whiskey and distilled spirit specialties.

Each style and flavor profile has it's own target cuts for optimun results. The cuts differ a few points between companies and account for "house flavors" & "regional traditions". The shape and composition of each still (or addition) effects the reading of cuts as well. A short pot still will give a stronger and hearty spirit with early oily tails, whereas a taller onion dome pot still will give a lighter spirit with a later tails. This means that with good hydrometers, anybody with any still, can produce the target flavor with the proper cut. Much money is spent on still improvement, before tool improvement.

Save money by using good tools and accurate measuring equipment.

Mark has built a really neat device to allow him to monitor the alcohol purity during the course of the distillation. It floats a hydrometer in the distillate as it is received. Just remember to correct the readings for the higher temperature ....

You may be interested in something that I built so that I could monitor the quality of the output from my still. The device basically takes the output from the condenser and runs it past a hydrometer. I built this from a 6" length of 3/4 copper tube with a 1" tube flanged down and silver soldered at the top. I then connected a piece of 3/16 copper tube to the bottom of the 3/4 copper (input) and at the other end silver soldered on a funnel I then connected another piece of 3/16 copper to the 1" copper tube that collects the overflow from the 3/4 tube (Output tube). This connection was a little difficult as the 3/16 tube will not fit in between the 3/4 and 1" tube. To do this I drilled a small 1/8" hole into the side of the 1" tube and but welded it on. You could probably increase the 1" tube to 1.1/2" tube to make this easier The reason that the tube sizes are small is to ensure that the hydrometer can quickly follow any changes in output. A down side to the 3/4" tube is that if you have a high flow rate the hydrometer will give higher reading as flow of alcohol causes the hydrometer to rise. So if you are considering construction and you have high output rates you may need to increase the size of the tubes. This will of course decrease the sensitivity. I would also suggest to make sure that you hydrometer will fit inside of the 3/4" tube with some clearance for the output to flow past(My hydrometer is 1/2' diameter).


To keep aware of the temperature getting too high at any stage, theres several digital thermometers coupled with alarms available. See http://www.kitchenkapers.com/36290.html Brian wrote: ...

If you get a Polder type electric thermometer they can be programmed at set temp to alarm. They also have a nice timer feature...helpful in charting your temps/time and the probe is 1/8 in Stainless which fits easily in a compression fitting at the top of the column.

When measuring the density of the distillate, you need to correct the reading for temperatures higher or lower than than which your hydrometer was designed for. Most are happy at 20C. Geoff has calculated the corrections required at different temperatures; download his Temperature correction table, an example of which is the following graph :


Jack advises ...

Collecting spirit by temps alone is really unreliable- everyone has the thermometer set in the still in a different point- for some it could give false high readings- low for others- practice helps you figure out how to read your specific thermometer- going by the strength of the alcohol is far more reliable- and repeatable.

Now, for the good stuff: Most pot stills that are run commercially are run until one-third of the mash volume has been collected (3 gallons of wine gets reduced down to 1 gallon of "low wines"). The second run has the spirit collected when it starts coming out of the still at 75%abv, and you stop collecting at 55%abv. The stuff that came out stronger than 75%abv is thrown out as heads. The stuff that comes out lower than 55%abv is saved as feints, and added to the next run. The feints are added to the next beer stripping run if a lighter, more neutral spirit is wanted- common in Cognac distilleries, not with whisky, though. If the feints are added to the next spirit run, the resulting spirit is a bit more flavorfull- this is how whiskey is distilled. The total spirit collected tends to average somewhere in the mid-60%abv when collected in this style.

The 75% to 55% cutoff points are known as a "middle-third cut" among distillers, and is the industry standard for most (except Glenmorangie, which collects only from 75% to 65%abv- this is called a "middle-fifth cut").

Details from "Increasing Direct Marketing for Fruit Farmers by Connecting Producer to Producer through Research and Development of a Value-Added Product" at http://www.ams.usda.gov/tmd/FSMIP/FY2001/MO0341.pdf include some details about the cuts made when making brandy from apples:

* each cut done by "sensory analysis" - diluting to 40% with distilled water first
* cut from heads to heart when no longer sensed ethyl acetate present
* cut from heart to tails when aroma changed from fruity to musty/rancid
* no pattern for when to make the cut - varied for each different fruit, and from batch to batch. Using set amounts etc would have resulted in lower quality brandy.
* fruits only fermented out to 5-7% alcohol
* lower quality fruit had more heads/tails

Salt
Maurice advises ..

..put a teaspoonful of ordinary table salt into the wash ..the spirit comes over much better..

Salts are sometimes used during extractive distillation (eg when trying to distill past the 95.6% azeotrope) so as to depress the volatility of the water (eg effectively increase its boiling point, so you get a greater % of ethanol off compared to normal). Because the salt is non-volitile, it will always remain in the pot, and not turn up in the distillate.

The "Household Cyclopedia" recommends ...

Table-salt thrown into the still, in the proportion of 6 oz. (180 g) to 10 galls. (38 L) of any liquid to be distilled, will greatly improve the flavor, taste, and strength of the spirit. The viscid matter will be fixed by the salt, whilst the volatile matter ascends in a state of great purity.


David cautions though ..

make sure you use ordinary non-iodised salt not iodised. Virtually all salt sold in NZ in containers for domestic consumption is iodised. Also be aware that salt is sodium chloride and that chlorides attack stainless steel and can bad pit it. It can also and will generally shorten your element life.


Bokakob advises ..

The best time to introduce salt in the distillate is when distilling second time. The first distillation, stripping, is used to reduce the amount of liquid and some of impurities. The second run is the place where this salt helps in separating boiling point of water. I always add regular salt for the second distillation in proportion of about two heaping table spoons for about 8-10 liters of 65% abv.


Ken recommends using Sodium Carbonate to reduce the amount of fusel oils present ..

.. try sodium carbonate @ 4.5 grams/ litre, add it when the wash temperatire is at 35-40 degrees C, add slowly then continue with your distillation in the normal manner. Sodium Carbonate is used in the production of soap and it combines with the oils to form a compound that does not evaporate at the normal distillation temperatures that we are using. Voila, cleaner spirit, less carbon treatment needed and more happy faces.

Alex finds

... that adding baking soda delineates the border between the good and the bad stuff very sharply. In regular distillation tails presence increases gradually and it is very difficult to decide when to start separating it from the good collection. In presence of baking soda this division is much more defined. (I added 3 full heaped table spoon of regular baking soda per liter of pure alcohol.)


Rob details the bicarb advantage too:

Assumptions and facts:
1. A well run column distillation will separate a mixture into fractions based on the boiling points of the components.
2. There will be some overlap in most real-life stills.
3. ethyl acetate can be smelled at very low concentrations
4. acetic acid cannot (it has a higher flavour threshold)
5. under neutral or acidic conditions acetic acid will esterify to some extent in the presence of ethanol.
6. sodium acetate is not volatile
7. sodium bicarbonate will neutralise acetic acid.
8. sodium bicarbonate may hydrolyse ethyl acetate to a greater or lesser extent.
9. Adding sodium bicarbonate at some point between a stripping run and final distillation has the effect of decreasing the volume of fractions collected which smell of ethyl acetate.
10. Adding sodium bicarbonate at some point between a stripping run and final distillation has the effect of making the main fraction "cleaner smelling"
11. without bicarb the main fraction _can_ smell of ethyl acetate (ymmv)
12. Sodium acetate is not esterified by ethanol.

Questions:
1. Why is there ethyl acetate in the fractions after the heads? (no NaHCO3)
2. What does NaHCO3 addition do?
3. How do we best (read easiest) use it?

Rob's Answers/Opinions (currently!):
1. During distillation (after column stabilization) ethyl acetate is being formed in the boiler/column. This is why it continues to be present even after heads removal. (see assumptions 1, 5, 11)
2. Bicarb addition neuralises acetic acid, preventing ethyl acetate formation, distillation of acetic acid, and hence future esterification. (see assumptions 6, 7, 9, 10, 12)
3. Bicarb addition can hydrolyse ethyl acetate, thus decreasing it's quantity (see assumptions 8, 9)
4. There is actually a tiny amount of ethyl acetate about, but it is highly noticable (assumption 3). Using bicarb (as opposed to hydroxides) actually has a rather small effect on the amount of esters in the mix. What it does (primarily) is to prevent further formation, and hence allowing the still to do its job without the moving target of continually increasing ester concentrations in the boiler.
5. Based on this lot, adding bicarb at the start of the final distillation is sufficient, as neutralisation of acetic acid is instantaneous.

Mike warns though ..

It's OK to add baking soda or other alkali to a STRIPPED wash, but NEVER put it in the primary ferment and then distill. If you do, and your still contains ANY copper, you will severely corrode the copper, and get blue, ammonia-smelling distillate. Not fun!

Why? Yeast and yeast nutrient both contain lots of ammonium salts (like DAP), which are very stable under acidic conditions, but which release lots of ammonia as the approach neutral conditions. Actually, you will start getting ammonia at about pH 5! Ammonia gas is very corrosive to copper, and you will find your condenser coil packed up with blue crystals after such a run (and blue alcohol too !)

Schweitzer's reagent is cuprammonium hydroxide, and is formed when copper hydroxide dissolves in a dilute ammonia solution). It is a deep blue colour, and is particularly known for its ability to dissolve cotton. The chemist who first discovered this property was Eduard Mathias Schweizer (1818 -1860), so it seems that it should really be called Schweizer's reagent.

It forms in stills when ammonia released from alkaline washes (nitrogen source may be plant material or yeasts) reacts with copper hydroxide formed by the action of steam on copper oxides coating the inside of copper columns or components. It may be avoided by ensuring that the liquid in the boiler is slightly acid (pH less than 7).

Boiling Chips
If you're heating your still over an external heat source, then you should have a couple of boiling chips inside it to help break the boil. These are any rough-surfaced, inert object - like bits of broken pottery (unglazed so as to avoid lead based glazes), broken glass, or even a couple of marbles.

The rough surface acts as a site where the bubbles can start to form easier. If your pot is nice and smooth on the inside, then its difficult for the bubbles to form, and you can end up super-heating the liquid. When it does boil, it might be quite violent, and give surges of vapour up the column, ruining that nice equilibrium you're trying to create. Boiling chips, although making the job a little noisier (rattle like hell!), do help give a smoother simmer.
Cloudy Spirit
Sometimes your spirit may turn a bit cloudy when its been left by itself. This can be due to a couple of reasons ..

* Fusel oils : you've got some tails in there. They may be tend to form a slight "oil slick" on the surface. You may have some sucess in carefull decanting off from underneath it and then passing it through a coffee filter to try and capture it. Obviously the way to avoid it is not to collect the tails in the first place - see above.
* Mineral precipitates : your drinking water may have a high limestone content (calcium carbonate) , that has somehow come over with the distillate. Haven't heard how to fix this one, other than softening your water before you use it, or going to the trouble of using distilled water in the first place.
* Dirty carbon : Johan advises .. activiated carbon is normally not perfectly clean it contains diffrent kind of salts. Before you mix activated carbon and alcohol clean the activated carbon by boling it in a saucepan and then discard the water, taste it to see if there is any impurity. This will make your activated carbon much more effective as well!


Blue Spirit

Sometimes the spirit may get a slight blue tinge to it. This is usually a sign that you've used too much nutrient in the wash. Mike explains ...

I [previously] replied, saying it was probably due to copper salts coming from acid wash. I WAS WRONG!!!!

In fact, I've learned that it is just the opposite! Acid washes do not corrode the condenser (unless, perhaps, they've been allowed to sit far to long and have gone acetic), but neutral to alkaline ones DO. Heating an ALKALINE wash, particularly one with lots of nitrogen-containing compounds that have been put in as nutrients, liberates ammonia, which corrodes the heck out of reflux coils and dyes the distillate a distinct greenish blue.

The Upshot: if the WASH is turning blue, it's probably due to acid wash corroding a copper sheathed element or a copper boiler, but if the collected DISTILLATE is blue, (and probably ammoniacal, but not always), the wash should be acidified!

Turbos contain a lot of nitrogen-containing compounds, and at neutral to high pH, these can liberate free ammonia. At low pH, they are bound up with the acid as salts, and do not liberate ammonia. So, by adding nutrients to an already nutrient rich turbo, you can inadvertently push the mix over the line and get ammonia with your distillate.


Using a Pot Still
A pot still is fairly straight forward to use. Turn it on. Once the temperature is up to about 60 °C turn on the cooling water to the condensor. Make sure you throw away the first 100 mL per 20L wash, as this will contain any methanol that might be present. Segregate the distillate into 500 mL lots as it comes off. Only keep (for drinking) that which doesn't contain fusels (smell off) - probably below about 92 ° C, however you should keep distilling past here, untill about 96 ° C, as this fraction, although high in tails and not good for drinking this time, can be added back to the next wash and cleaned up OK then.

Graham describes using his ...

I single distill as I have no need to purify my spirits. The concentration at the top of the tower can be controlled with how much heat i apply at the bottom. If I want a pure spirit, I apply a low heat and can run it off at over 90%. with a bit of a twig I have hit the magical 97.5%. But you get utterly no flavours. I apply more heat, so I get a run at about 70 to 80% and get the flavours I need. Its true people, about about 80% you start to lose flavours.

I normally cut my runs when the alcohol drops to about 40%. The heat put in compared to what I get isn't worth it.

>How do you judge the "cut points" for foreshots and feints ?

Ah the terms they use for this "firsts and lasts", "Heads, Hearts and tails". for those who dont know, The flavour of any spirit come from a wealth of compounds, alderhydes, amy alcohols (fusal oils), esters, acids and even methanol. The desirable ones are commonly called congeners. The art of any distiller is knowing when to start collecting the heart and stop it again. Start it too late and stop it too early, and you collect mostly pure ethanol and no flavours. Start too early and stop too late, well you make something that will have a lot of flavour, but will give you ripper hangovers, could even kill you.

The art is to collect enough of the congeners in the last of the head and beginning of the tails to get the flavours, but not enough to make it undrinkable. You do this by watching the thermometer at the top of the still. When the firsts start, it will sit at 65C-70C. This is mostly methanol coming off. This you dont want. Then it will suddenly rise as all the methanol is removed. It will rise to 78-low 80s (depending on heat and what you want).

This is the heart. Now for a good rum, you want lots of flavour (and the headache with it) so you start collecting as soon as it starts to rise. For a whiskey, I tend to collect when the temperature hits 78C. For clean spirits, I wait till the temperature stabilises. The same occurs at the tails. The temperature suddenly heads for the 90's, and thats agian when you decide to cut it as the higher alcohol start to evaporate and collect. This I do by the the highly accurate method of tasting it.


The Omnipresent Mecakyrios advises how he uses a Doubler with a pot still ...

Here is what I have done in the past when using a doubler:

I would fill the boiler to the normal capacity with my wash. I would fill the doubler 1/3 full with wash as well (sometimes I would put in 50/50 wash and neutral spirit in the doubler). I would run my batch. If I still had another run to do that day I would throw our the spent wash in the boiler, fill the boiler with the new wash to be ran, add the liquid that was in the doubler into the boiler with the new wash, fill the doubler with new wash adding to it the tails of the run that I had just finished, and start the run. I keep doing this until I have no more wash to be ran.

At the end of a day's run, I toss out the boiler and doubler liquids. I keep the tails until my next run. Sometimes, if I have patience enough, I will store the distillates of that days run and add them to a previous run's distillate. In other words, let's say that a month ago I did a run and had collected one unit of distillate from the first run of the day, a second unit from the second run of the day and a third unit from the last run of the day. I will combine all of the units together and mix them up real good. I will then take one unit worth of distillate and set it aside. I will take the remaining distillate and put it into a container and label it with the date. The unit that I had put aside is for me to drink while I wait for a whole month to go by. Then let's say I did a run today and had collected three units of distillate. I will combine these, put one unit worth aside and add the rest to last months run. I will continue to do this until I have a month of down time.

During the down time I clean out the still real good and take the bottle of several months worth of distillate and draw of one unit worth for me to drink, the rest of the several month collection is bottled, sealed, labeled and stored away and forget about it until a special occasion happens when a good aged product is called for.

Jack writes ...

I use an enlarged ice water/wok type of still, so a thermometer cannot be used- I just go by volume. With a mash starting at about 5 to 10%abv, do the first run, and collect 1/3 of the total mash volume (I.e. Put 3 gallons of mash in the still, keep collecting until you get one gallon out of it). On the second run, I collect one fourth of the total I put in. I.e. distill 2 gallons (8 liters) of low wines, keep collecting until I get 1/2 gallon (2 liters). I also collect heads on the second run at a rate of 150ml to 200ml per each five gallons of (starting) mash volume. Making sure a thermometer is reading the same every time I do a run was too much of a hassle.

Scrounge adds ...

I don't bother with temperature - I used to but after a couple of runs I discovered that relying on the thermometer lead to rather unpleasant off notes.

My still is 6l, I usualy put in a 3l wash ( or 1.5l if it's a lumpy fruit wash ), I discard the first 10ml and then put a jug under the outlet, every 50ml I swap jugs and transfer the spirit to a bottle. I sit there with a shot glass, a spit bucket and a glass of water and every so often I collect a few drops from the outlet and taste. It's up to my tongue where I stop collecting.

Big tip - before mixing fractions try mixing a small quantity separately - some fo the later fractions have a bad habit of suddenly clouding when added to the earlier.

My final ABV - using a set of volumetrics in the lab is 60% on the first run, for Eau de vie I don't often do a second run but sometimes I will add all fractions from previous runs to last was and collect that with a lot of care.

If it's relevant my lyne arm is 1m long and has a slight upward incline.

Jack uses a combination of freezing and his potstill, to maximise the flavour ...

I found by trial and error the flavor on "double run" whiskey wasn't as good as single run whiskey (although I got less whiskey doing it that way- tighter middle cut). Instead of running my still twice, I now use the technique that was/is used to make apple jack.

I take my 5 gallon batch of mash/wine, and I fill 10, one gallon milk jugs half-full (one half gallon being 2 quarts) of the liquid. I then put these jugs into the freezer for two or three days, until they freeze into a solid block of ice. I then set the jugs upside down on a one quart canning jar. The alcohol will drip out as the ice melts (don't add any heat- let it go at it's own pace). When the one quart jar is full, I put the liquid (in the jar) into my carboy to let the yeast, etc settle out overnight. The block of ice in the jug is washed down the drain with hot water- there is no alcohol in it. Since the alcohol melts faster than the water, it tends to come out first- so instead of 5 gallons of 7-10% mash/wine, I now have 2.5 gallons of 17-20% mash/wine.

It takes no real effort on my part, but gives the same results as a beer stripping run, roughly doubling the alcohol content by cutting the volume in half. It doesn't stale the flavor like distilling can do at all, quite the contrary, it makes it stronger- this same method is used by some winemakers to make fortified wines at home (like port, sherry, etc.), without using distilled spirits. By cutting the volume in half, and doing it by freezing, not distilling, the flavor is preserved a little better, but the alcohol is high enough that a spirit run can be done. It typically takes one to four hours for the quart jars to fill up- it depends on the starting alcohol content- the lower it was at the start the longer it takes to melt out. It saves a lot of time for me, since I have a lot of freezer space.

When I make my malt whiskey, it used to always foam over in the still- by freezing it like this, then diluting the mash back to 5 gallons with water when I put it in the still- the starches causing my foaming problem have been diluted to the point that they can't lace together and foam up in the still. In the potstill, it just saves me 4 hours of work on an extra run. While the stuff is melting, I check my e-mail, work out, read, or whatever I feel like doing that I can't do when running a still, because that requires all my attention.

Bill writes ...

I have clear tubing from pot to worm and can see the vapors forming, so I know when to start cutting back on the heat, as soon as it starts to run I toss the first 100ml or so then just fine tune the heat so that I get a slow steady stream, run it down to 40% collect the bottoms for the second run, dump the lees and start another run.

I usually run it through at least twice and usually three times to get it as refined as possible. No hint of fusel oils at all, as proved by drinking it in massive quantities all one night with absolutely no hang over the next day. I use a propane camp stove to heat the pot as i find it has greater control capabilities.

I have been trying the hyper yeast from Gert Strand, am not impressed with the results, a little too yeasty in the aftertaste, could be something i've done wrong, but tried three batches with basically the same result. I will probably go back to using my old receipe for base whiskey, 2 cans of frozen orange juice, 2pkts champagne yeast, 4kilos white sugar and water to 25 litres; you can then feed the resulting mash as the gravity drops till saturation.

Tried a rum with fancy molasses 1 gallon 2 yeast water to specific gravity that appeals to you and your yeast, had a friend that works for a distillery, he went on a junket to pourto rico, where they have a distillery, he brought back a bottle of their finest, we did a blind taste test and couldnt tell the difference. Of course after several more taste tests, we couldnt have told the difference from dish water, needless to say I didnt let him drive home as he would have blown the ass off a breathalizer.

John gives his views ...

A potstill is a direct descendant from the medieval alembic still favored by alchemists, and often shown in old woodcuts. The alembic still was a cooker or boiler with a small conical lid with a sideways protruding tube. Its curving form causes it to be named "swan's neck". The latter led into the cooling coil which sat in a waterfilled vat. The modern potstill has a column (variable length) inserted between the cooker and the swan's neck.

In terms of the modern reflux column which, even in our amateur hands, can consistently deliver 95-96% pure spirit, the pot still is very inefficient. It delivers only impure mixtures of ethanol, water, and congeners. For that reason one usually double-distills (redistill) the wash - the first time delivering a distillate at ca. 30-40% abv, and when re-distilled raises this to 70-80%abv. Even then the product still contains congeners in addition to the ethanol. However, it are the congeners that impart the flavour of the grain or fruit. And most of these come from the 'tails'. As Ian Smiley puts it, the tails 'bleed' into the middle cut. While the reflux still can produce mind-stomping purity, the pot still must be run with a sense of art.

> Why double distill? The abv would be right on from the first run (35-40%). Is the first run still too harsh to drink?

One double distils to increase the alcohol content, but more so to concentrate the congeners. Note that in pot stilling the focus is on the 'also-rans', the congeners, and not on the alcohol!! The pot still is all about flavour. The first distillate from say a malt / barley run is insipid, but better than the wash was. However, when that distillate is run through again, and more water is discarded, the congeners are further concentrated. The final taste of a single malt whisky is likely about 70% congeners from the wash, and 30% from the cask wood.

The art lies in knowing how much of the congeners to allow into the middle cut.

Cut-off point? That depends on one's sense of taste, and on what sort of whisky or brandy one wants - highly flavourful, just right, or overwhelming. Ian Smiley devotes several fine pages on this point - viz. pp. 72-74. (Making Pure Corn Whiskey. 1999. ISBN 0-9686292-0-2; http://www.home-distilling.com/) . It is a matter of deciding how much of the tails one collects into that middle run.

>What are your feelings on the notion of increasing the sugar content in a berry based wash by adding sugar ?

I suppose that depends on which is desired - fruit flavour or ethanol strength. One could argue that blended scotch whisky is in fact sugar based, as a blended whisky is a mix of single malt whisky and grain alcohol, where the latter is highly purified grain distillate, devoid of grain taste. Just the opposite, in eastern Europe slivovitz (plum eau de vie) is double distilled from soft ripened plums, often weeks old, left to ferment in tubs with natural yeasts. Now, that distillate should be plenty flavourfull but in some regions more ripened plums are added to the distillate to further enhance the plum flavour.For me, it is all about flavour, so I go for the fruit or grain.

Michael writes about distilling a wash made from beer kits, to make whisky ..

Coopers Lager comes out very much like a scotch whisky.... There are also malt extracts available at any home brew shop that can be added. Both liquid and crystalline form. These are for use in beer brews, but will make the transition to distilling just as well. Putting two beer kits into the brew keg makes for a stronger flavour too.

I do a stripping run first. Reflux down as low as possible. I have a still spirits still which I have modified into a compound still. I have the original head and a second lid so that I can use this as a basic pot still. The short column originally had a cooling jacket and a marble. I have disconnected the jacket and removed the marble.

Final cut point is a matter of taste and flavour. I am generous with it at this stage since I am going to do a second distillation and can be more picky there.

I don't seperate out any heads from the stripping run. The reason for this is that I then stick it into my compound head, water it down and bring the still to full reflux. I let this stay for an hour, and then take off my heads as normal. Once I have got the heads out of it, I turn the still off and let it cool. Then I run it through the pot still again, taking more care that the final cut point tastes good. Water back to 50% and oak. Voila!

Stripping
Pot stills can be used to "strip" the wash, prior to a reflux distillation. By passing the wash once through a pot still, it will be increased in purity from say 10-15% up to 40-60%, reducing it in volume by 4/5th. This way, you can strip say 100L of wash down to 20L of semi-clean spirit to then load into the reflux still for a single pass (rather than having to do 5 reflux passes of 20L of wash). This will not only save you plenty of time, but it will also help result in a somewhat cleaner spirit, as any yeast, etc get removed during the stripping run. You could also use a reflux still to do the stripping in, by simply not making it reflux any of the liquid.

When you do your stripping run, it can be beneficial to add some sodium bicarbonate (baking soda) to the first-run alcohol, prior to the second ru n. As explained up in adding salt this will help clean up the taste greatly.

Mike explains the chemistry ...

Has anyone stopped to wonder where all that sodium in that baking soda goes when it's done its job of turning ethyl acetate into booze? Indeed, where all that ethyl acetate has come from in the first place?? Have those who advocate boiling right after adding baking soda stopped to wonder what happens to the stuff when it is boiled in water???

Taking the last first, if an aqueous solution of sodium bicarbonate (baking soda) is warmed then it starts to decompose with the formation of sodium carbonate, water and carbon dioxide, the decomposition being complete on boiling. Good grief . that's why Granny uses it for her soda bread. The carbon dioxide leavens it! The reaction is: 2Na.HCO3 = Na2.CO3 + H2.CO3 [and H2CO3 -> CO2 + H20] [water + sodium bicarbonate = sodium carbonate + carbonic acid + lye] and the carbonic acid further disassociates to form carbon dioxide and water, particularly when heated [H2.CO3 = CO2 + H20]. Add tartaric acid and you have a quicker reaction with more CO2, and you then call the stuff baking powder which Granny uses to make her nice light scones.

Working back a bit, where did all that ethyl acetate come from? Well, we all know about vinegar (acetic acid, a fatty acid), and that a 'dirty' ferment or a bruiser of a fast yeast can result in quite a bit of that. What may not be generally known is that fatty acids react with alcohols to form esters, and acetic acid and ethanol get together to form ethyl acetate which is . you've guessed it . an ester with the composition C2H5.COOH

So now we add baking soda (sodium bicarbonate) to try turn all that that ethyl acetate, which started out as vinegar, into booze. Why bicarb? Well, although it's an acid salt of carbonic acid, it turns out that in an aqueous solution it's alkaline, due to hydrolysis. The Na.HCO3 disassociates to form Na+ and HCO3- ions, and the H+ ions from the water (H.OH) combine with the HCO3- ions to form undisassociated carbonic acid H2CO3. This leaves heaps of Na+ and OH- (hydroxyl) ions mooching around . and those two together spell sodium hydroxide . a strong base. So what happens when these ions bump into ethyl acetate? The sodium ion grabs hold of the COOH bit to form NA.COOH, sodium acetate, and the hydroxyl ion grabs the C2H5 bit to form good old C2H5.OH, booze!

But hang around a bit! What happens to all that sodium carbonate [NaCO3] that was left behind when the baking soda disassociated? Well, it's quite handy because it too disassociates in an aqueous solution to form more carbonic acid and lye, with an excess of hydroxyl ions floating around [Na.CO3 + 2H.OH = H2CO3 + Na.OH + 2OH-]. Now this deals to any excess acidity you might have, the OH- ions grabbing acid H+ ions to form water. Not only do you get more Na.OH for conversion of acetate to booze, but the solution is buffered to a pH of just over neutral 7.

This gives us the clue that oyster shells or chalk [CaCO3] will do the same thing, and will also work to convert ethyl acetate to booze as the stuff disassociates in the same way [Ca.CO3 + 2.H.OH = H2CO3 +Ca.OH + 2OH-]. In this case it's the Ca+ ion that grabs the COOH bit of the ethyl acetate to form calcium acetate [Ca.COOH] and the hydroxyl ion grabs the C2H5 bit to form what we're after . C2H5.OH, booze. The only thing to consider is the relative solubility of baking soda compared to chalk, but those who use hard water to dilute their strippate may be on a winner!

Now those who haven't fallen asleep already will be wondering why they can't just add a good dose of lye (Na.OH) to the brew and be done with it. Snag is, how do you know when enough is enough? Put too much in and you have a surplus of lye in the brew, and nothing to counter that. Keeps the boiler clean, but corrodes the hell out of it. In contrast, by using baking soda or oyster shells/chalk you end up with sodium/calcium acetate, and that is also a pretty good buffer, like the sodium/calcium carbonates.

Much too has been made about how long this treatment takes. What has to be borne in mind is that it is a relatively slow reaction compared with inorganic reactions that go at the speed of zip. So all it comes down to is how impatient you are. Some might argue that heating the solution up will speed the reaction as it will hasten the formation of the carbonate. Well, they may have a point . up to a degree. However, just remember what happens when you boil hard water . the carbonates are precipitated out, as anyone in a hard water district will know from scaled pipes and kettles. Chuck the bicarb or shells/chalk in and boil immediately and you will get very little conversion, leave it for a couple of months and can be sure you've done the job fully. Similarly, chuck citric acid in and you will stop the reaction dead in its tracks as it will neutralise the bicarb/carbonate treated solution (each citric acid molecule has no less than three H+ ions to give up . hence its use in scented "bath bombs" to get all that luxurious, soft water that keeps the bubble bath foaming). My money is in listening to those who have achieved very good conversion of the bulk if the ethyl acetate by giving it a week or so to work before distilling.


Mike lists three advantages for stripping runs:


a) Rapidly boiling the wash and condensing everything that is vaporized, without bothering to separate the heads and tails, is an easy way of reducing the volume of liquid you will subsequently process with care, saving a lot of time overall
b) The reduced volume of liquid you get from a stripping run is clear of all solids, salts and dissolved gases.
c) The liquid you get has a very much higher concentration of volatiles, enabling far better separation in the subsequent rectification run as you start out in the middle of the equilibrium chart (the one that plots the concentration of volatiles in the vapor against their concentration in the liquid the vapor came from ... the one that looks like a fat cigar leaning at 45 degrees)

In essence, it is much easier to clean a muddy kid after a football game if you first give the brat a quick hose-down to get rid of most of the mud, and then then shove him in a clean, hot bath with a cake of soap with instructions to wash behind his ears, than it is to try and do it all in a bath full of muddy water. Whiskey distillers, who have to tackle the difficult job of dealing with a mash full of solids, first concentrate on separating the low wines from the mash in a big still, where the only problem is to prevent burning, and then move on to a smaller still where they concentrate on getting the right cut from the clean low wines. Experience has taught them that this is a very effective and efficient procedure that results in a much better product than if they tried to do the whole job in one go. It is definitely well worthwhile.

Peter adds ..

* You can save up many batches and dedicate a whole day to run the whole lot properly in a reflux still. if you collect 4x25 litre batches you will only have to collect a bit more heads and tails than if you ran just a single 25litre wash. but you collect much more of the middle "drinkable" cut. also if you save up the batches you probably wont need to dilute it back down to prevent elment burn out.
* You dont need much care and attention when doing stripping runs. i leave the still running and check it every 15mins or so. i collect everything.
* If you dont have time for a reflux run you can strip a wash. this is useful if you dont want an uncleared wash hanging about for a month or so waiting to be contaminated.
* You dont have to worry about foaming or nasty smells getting into your prized reflux column. since the stripped wash is relatively pure you wont have to clean the column as often/carefully. i leave my stripped wash sitting on carbon.
* For me, electricity is cheaper than finings

So, to do a stripping run, either use a pot still, or a reflux (but with no reflux generated). Fire it up, and run it as hard & fast as possible. No finesse required. Quit collecting the spirit once the vapour temperature reaches 96C. When you go to redistill this product, properly, you only need to add water if there will not be enough liquid left at the end of the run to safely cover any internal elements.

DP writes more on this, and how it can be used to clear up heads ...

Carbon and methanol (snore) have had more than their share of posts in this newsgroup. Esters, on the other hand, are a subject that gets far less attention than it should. I feel there is too much focus on ethanol and water, and not the properties of the impurities we are really trying to remove. My still already removes more than enough water - I have to add water back before I use it's output so clearly removing water is not my main objective. Everything seems to hinge on the assumption that if your still is good at separating alcohol and water then it must be good at removing everything else. This assumption is loose at best and ignores the fact that with a little encouragement some of the worst impurities will remove themselves.

Esters are flavour compounds responsible for many of the characteristic tastes we know very well:


Propyl acetate (Pears)
Octyl acetate (Oranges)
Isoamyl acetate (Banana)
Ethyl butyrate (Pineapple)
Butyl acetate (Apple)
Methyl trans-cinnamate (Strawberry)
Ethyl cinnamate(Cinnamon)

(See http://www.leffingwell.com/esters.htm. There are many others and a web search will turn up many more if you're interested.)

Esters are the product of a reaction between an organic acid and an alcohol. Read the back of a wine bottle you'll see wine described as tasting of all sorts of different fruit (except grapes, of course because any fool can do that). Yeast, by its very nature, produces a range of organic acids and a range of alcohols during the fermentation process. These combine to form a range of esters responsible (along with other chemicals) for the flavours in wine that aren't in the original grape juice. This is where the interests of a winemaker differ from someone trying to make clean neutral spirits - winemakers see ester formation as desirable. Yeast makers even advertise their yeasts on how good they are at producing damn esters.

The problem with esters is that a little goes such a long way. Most have detection thresholds measured in parts per billion (ppb). Ethyl butyrate – the fruity pineapple ester listed above - has an odour detection threshold in water of 1ppb. As a comparison, ethanol in air has an odour detection threshold of about 50 parts per million (ppm). In other words, it's odour is 50,000 times more powerful than ethanol. For those of you obsessed by percentages, your distillate could be 99.9999999% ethyl butyrate free and you'd still be able to smell the damn stuff. Great if that's what you want, bad if you don't.

The ester of the most relevance to home distilling is ethyl acetate. Ethanol oxidises to form acetic acid. Acetic acid and ethanol react to form ethyl acetate. It's no real surprise that you are going to end up with some of this stuff in your brew - yeast puts it there. The good news is its odour detection level is a relatively high for an ester at 5000 ppb (or 0.0005%); the bad news is it has a nasty solvent-like smell you're probably already familiar with. And there's more bad news…

By itself, it boils at 77 degrees, which is pretty close to the boiling point of ethanol. It forms azeotropes with both ethanol and water, and another when all three of them are mixed together (although all at mixture ratios you are never likely to see). I have heard many claims that ethyl acetate can be effectively removed by a still. It's more correct to say that using a still, a good operator can separate the ethanol that contains ethyl acetate (the heads, etc) from the ethanol that doesn't. To me this is not "effective" as the heads contain far more ethanol than anything else and I make ethanol to drink and not tip down the drain. As I said, stills are great for separating alcohol from water, but that doesn't make them the best tool for every job. Removing ester-related flavours with a still has all the finesse of opening walnuts with a sledgehammer. The secret is knowing your enemy:

Food is acidic. Just about everything we eat has a pH less than 7 (See http://www.phsciences.com/about_ph/ph_foods.asp). Acid inhibits bacteria growth and is the environment in which esters are formed. The chemical reaction that produces esters, however, can be reversed – when taken out of an acidic environment esters hydrolise back into the acid and alcohol from which they were originally formed. This is why food acids are so often added to preserved food – it helps preserve the flavour as well as preventing spoilage.

Ethyl acetate is formed during fermentation. After distillation it's no longer in and acidic environment and starts to decompose back to ethanol and acetic acid. Acetic acid gives vinegar its characteristic taste and although pungent, it's far less detectable than ethyl acetate – not great, but less bad. As decompostion produces an acid it tends to slow the rate of further decomposition, but eventually it does happen. If you have the time, people have been getting good results from sticking alcohol in barrels and waiting a decade.

If you don't have the time then don't worry lots of things can be used to speed up the process: agitation/aeration, light (called photodecomposition) do this. The resulting acetic acid has a boiling point of 118 degrees C so it's much easier than ethyl acetate to separate from ethanol in a subsequent distillation. If you add some mild alkali (sodium bicarbonate, sodium carbonate or calcium carbonate) into the mix you can speed up the decomposition time and also precipitate out the acetic acid. By adding a couple of teaspoons of sodium bicarb to your nastiest smelling heads and aerating them with an aquarium pump and air-stone for a week you will end up with something that smells OK. Not quite good enough to drink, but more than good enough to redistil.

This is the real way to solve the ethyl acetate problem – not by pouring your (mostly ethanol) heads down the drain. You get to recover all the ethanol that the ethyl acetate had spoiled and (the really elegant part) some of the ethyl acetate is actually turned back into ethanol. The point to remember is the same process will reduce all ester-related flavours, and not just ethyl acetate, including the ones that exist in immeasurable, but still detectable quantities. You don't even need to know what esters they are!! They all breakdown into different components, which you may not particularly want either but will all have less impact on overall flavour than the original ester.

Once I learned this I changed my process to double distil everything. After the first distillation I throw in some sodium carbonate and aerate for a week before distilling again. I don't separate the heads from the second distillation because there's nothing to separate and the result doesn't need carbon filtration. More importantly, nothing I boil off ever goes down the drain - not a single drop. My end-to- end efficiency from sugar to drinkable spirit is 90% with the cost of consumables and wastage very low. Plenty depends on your ingredients, equipment and process, but you get the basic idea.

Alex adds more information:

Chemical Cleansing Fresh Home Made Alcohol

This is a free type translation/interpretation of a freely available material found on web pages dedicated to production of alcohol at home. There are no claims of any kind for this data.

The first chemical reaction of saponification binds fusel oils and makes it insoluble. In order for this reaction to work, alcohol must be tested for pH. If reaction shows that home made alcohol does contain dissolved acids then regular baking soda should neutralize the reaction. The proportion is 5g~8g of baking soda per each liter of alcohol.

After adding baking soda and stirring it well, potassium permanganate is added. Potassium permanganate should be dissolved in small quantity of clean water beforehand. The ratio is 2g of potassium permanganate dissolved in 50 mL of clean water per each liter of home made alcohol. The mix of alcohol, baking soda and potassium permanganate is stirred well and left alone for 15~20 minutes for reaction to finish.

After this stage is complete, additional baking soda is added to the mix in the same proportion as above, stirred and left alone for 8~12 hours for precipitation of solids.

Next day any sediment is filtered and alcohol goes through the second distillation. This method of removing fusel oils is rather efficient and removes up to 95% of its content.

After the second distillation, home made alcohol is slowly filtered through activated charcoal.

Double Distilling for Whiskey etc
Here we try to replicate the traditional style as used in commercial distilleries world wide. See Making Whiskey - A Personal Experience by Roger Dowker for a detailed description of the commercial process, including when the various cut-off points are.

The trick to this appears to be the stuff legends are made of, and closely guarded by those who know. It's the matter of how much of the first condensate, or foreshots, to discard and how much of the middle cut to keep before discarding the last runnings, or feints.

Steve writes that its difficult to do this by temperature alone, nor to have a single set of guidelines ...

The cut points have to be determined either organoleptically (by taste or smell) which takes experience, or by vapor temperature. The wash itself varies too much (say between brandy and whisky) in levels of fusels, esters methanol and other volatiles to make any simple volume rules across such a wide range.


For the various %'s at which to do the "cut", Donald advises to use a great hydrometer with 0.5% or greater calibrations for best results, and suggests ...

Mash First Distillation Second Distillation
Grains to 18% (98 °C) 85%-58% (80.5 °C - 92 °C)
Fruit to 25% (97.5 °C) 85%-60% (80.5 °C - 91.5 °C)

When about 2/3 - 3/4 of the way through the middle run, and approaching these cut points, start collecting the spirits in smaller collection containers, and smell each of them seperately. The flavour will change from that of the neutral spirit, to more and more of the flavour coming through. This will intensify, but then start to become bitter. You need to work out when to make your "cut" during this period, but do so before it gets to the bitter stage. After making the cut, keep collecting (seperately) the feints up to about 92 °C, and add these to future runs.

For a reasonable whisky without the long term maturation try this :

* Brew an all grain or malt extract wash using a good yeast like turbo, hyper or one of the wyeast family. Go for no hops and don't add sugar.
* When attenuated, load the wash into your POT still or DE-REFLUXED reflux still with the feints (see later).
* Run out about one third of what you loaded in, as "low wines". Different distilleries tend to get between 18-25% on these.

Repeat the whole exercise several times until you have enough of the low wines to fill your still. (Commercial distilleries get around this by using a smaller still for the low wines).

Load the still with the low wines and set it going.

* Throw away the first 200 mL. These are the "foreshots", containing methanol as well as other low boiling point compounds. You need to discard more than the usual 50 mL, as pot stills are less discriminating then reflux stills. Watch this run with more care than before - it will proceed quite a bit faster !
* The next 5 litres is the good bit that you're after (approx 75%, stop when getting below 60% ? - this is the trade secret of distilleries, as it determines the taste of the distillate). Update ! - see Donalds recommendation above of 58% for grains and 60% for fruit.
* The following 10 litres (the "feints") - save and put back into wash run next time.

It's this re-cycling of the feints each time that does the magic, as they contain the higher alcohols (fusel oils), and esters.

You can now take the 5 litres, flavour it a little bit, put it in a small keg or flavour it with some oak essence. If kegging cut with water to around 40% or the angel's share will get too much. Don't charcoal filter or polish this spirit, as all the tasty bits you've just worked so hard to obtain will go too.

In theory, lets say I was the distiller at Ardberg with one wash still and one spirit still, I would run all the spirit out of the washstill as low wines, load this into the spirit still and run foreshots, high wines, with a cut at betwixt 65/60% then the rest as feints down to X %. The feints could then go back to the wash still or spirit still for the next batch. If I were at Ardberg, I would probably run them back to the wash still.

In order to get congeners, as opposed to a neutral profile it is important not to have a definitive reflux device in the steam path - enough refluxing will occur within the headroom, the "roof" of the still body, the lyne arm or equivalent. Make sure the still is only filled to about the three quarter mark.

As the weather becomes hotter and hotter in the southern hemisphere pot distillers put less wash in the body of the vessel thereby allowing more head for particulates of the solid variety to not be entrained [carried over] into the distillate. If you have variable control throttle back a bit.

Jack adds regarding the tossing of heads...

Typically, you only throw away the first 50 to 100ml on the second distillation, not the first. Because of the higher alcohol concentration, the methanol will be more concentrated as well. This makes getting rid of all of it more likely on the second run.

Jack compares the cuts ...

The "middle cut" proportions that are listed in Ian Smiley's corn whiskey book mathmatically conform (almost exactly) to the yield data I sent you out of that Japanese Scotch book - About a 57% middle cut.

I also learned that these "middle cut" numbers are good for any volume, and any still- I have made a corn whiskey and have "made the cut" according to Ian Smiley's numbers- but I did this with an ice-water-wok still, and only 2-liters of freeze-concentrated mash (equal to 4 liters unfrozen). It comes out to:
Foreshots 23 ml (3.1%)
Heads 130 ml (17.4%)
Middle Run 428 ml (57.1%)
Tails 168 ml (22.4%)

all adding up to the 750ml bottle I normally get of pretty rough stuff out of this still. Just by applying the middle cut numbers, I get just over half as much- but it is a LOT better.

Jack adds ...

[for typical scotch] ... The beer still is loaded with 100 volumes of wash at 8%abv, this is distilled until you get 35 volumes of low wines at 20-23%abv. You will then mix 22 volumes of feints (from a previous distillation) at 28-30%abv, giving you 57 volumes at 23-25%abv, which you load into the spirit still. You then distill the low wines, collecting the fraction coming over at 75%abv (methanol is thrown out, anything from the initial starting % down to 76%abv is tossed into the feints tank), and you stop collecting at 55%abv, giving you 11 volumes of spirit at 68-70%abv. Anything that comes out of the still at below 55%abv is saved, and thrown into the feints tank. In the first distillation you should be left with 65 volumes of "pot ale" at the bottom of the still with less than 0.1%abv to be sold as high protien animal feed. In the second distillation, you should be left with 23.5-24.5 of spent lees at less than 0.1%abv, that is diverted to waste water treatment.

By the way, even the Scotch distilleries are now admitting that yeast strain makes a difference in the spirits' final flavor. They figured this out after a couple of research chemists at a distillery made a batch, then filtered ALL the yeast out, and distilled it. After comparing the resulting spirit with regular (unfiltered mash) spirit, they found (under liquid chromatography), that the yeast has a BIG influence on flavor due to the long chain fatty acid esters that are found in yeast do distill over into the spirit- this is, in fact, the cause of cloudiness in spirit thats been run through a potstill only once, not the heavy alcohols as was once thought.

Jack also adds about Glenmorangie...

They take only 1/5 of the second run as middle cut spirit- the numbers I posted are for the more common 1/3 middle cut- sorry, all of those wanting Glenmorangie should work just like [above], but only collect 6.6 volumes of spirit, after the heads are thrown out, and the >76% fraction has been sent to the feints tank, other than that, it's the same. This should average a final spirit strength of about 70%abv, and your Glenmorangie cutoff point should be when the spirit coming out of the still drops to below 65%abv.

Using a Water Distiller as a Pot Still
If you want, you can use the commercial water distillers as pot stills, though they're not really the best for it. But it can be done. Make sure that you turn it off before collecting the tails - dont just let it distill all the brew you put in there, or else you'll simply end up collecting it all again. (The Kenmore still is a water purification unit marketed by Sears. It is complete and self-contained, with its own carbon filter. The brief description can be found at http://www.sears.com)
Steve explains his technique :

He uses the Kenmore water distiller : http://www.kenmorewater.com/productlist/no-plumbing-drinking-water-systems/34480.html

I'm not sure how accurate this method is, but what I do is discard the first 50 mls of heads.. Then I collect enough total liquid such that I stop when my spirit hydrometer indicates it has reached about 48%. Probably could go down to 45% but I don't want much tails at all so I stop a bit early at around 48%. Basically I collected the first 500 ml, and then the next 50 ml thereafter and found that the tails and taste started to get bad at about 850 ml, so I stop at around 600 ml, which in this case came out to be around 48%. Not exactly precise, and possibly leaving some good stuff behind, and may differ depending on the alcohol percentage of what I'm distilling, but on the whole once you've got it figured out for the first time for a particular mash it is totally painless to use. Since the quantity of fluid I put in there is also very known, it is easy to get it down to a science and just use a timer.. Like 35 minutes to the point where the heads start coming out of the distiller, and then 47 minutes of collecting the spirit, which then yields a known quantity of liquid. After you figure this out the process becomes very easy and reproducable.

There are a few different models of having different sizes so these numbers won't be the same for every Sears/Kenmore water distiller.

Since the quantity of liquid is small, and you're not using an open flame, it's probably a bit safer too than operating some stills.

Still Spirits also has some instructions on how to use it.. Called distilling with the Sears Water Purifier. They just suggest to collect certain quantities of liquid based on using their known alcohol percentages of their yeast/nutrient/sugar combinations.http://www.stillspirits.com/instructions.htm

Tom writes ..

I discard the 1st 50 to 75 mL each time and then monitor the ABV closely. I seperate tails at about 48% and have begun collecting them for a seperate run when I get enough. After I've collected all my "hearts", I run them again together to a higher %, cutting this time at about 60%. If I'm doing a sugar wash, I'll then carbon filter.

The product seems fine. It may not be as excellent as the 90+% you get with a more extensive set up, but it works for me. I've produced a drinkable Brandy from wine, I've added essences to sugar washes with good result, and even done my own alchol extractions creating a nice Ouzo/Anisette. It does take many runs to do a 5Gallon batch, but it requires little monitoring once you get the timing down.

A couple of pointers for those interested:

Watch the amount of wash you try to run. My unit is supposed to take 3 quarts, but the most I can really do is closer to 2.5 because of boilovers. The amount of residual sugar in your wash has a great effect. I tried to run a failed beer, and it would boil over (boil up into the condeser) at any thing over 1quart! I ended up dumping 8 gallons of beer into the garden...)

I added a small amount of copper to the vapor path by attaching a copper pipe "elbow" stuffed with copper scrubber to the rubber/vinyl inlet hose on the lid of the unit. I don't know if it helps, but I figure it can't hurt.

Using a Reflux Still
The alcohol coming off a reflux still will be more distinctive / occur in steps. Rather than a gradual increase in temperature over the coarse of the run, it will get up to certain temperatures (near those listed above for pure fractions), then tend to sit there. The alcohol coming off will be of a fairly steady purity right through, only dropping off late towards the end. You'll probably finish a reflux run at a lower temperature (say 92-94 ° C) than a pot still (say 96 ° C.

For example, my StillSpirits 20L reflux still takes about 1 hour to heat up, then once it gets to about 40 ° C, it then heats up pretty quick to 65-70 ° C. It will then sit there for around 5 minutes, and the first liquid (distillate) starts condensing. After about 5 mL of distillate have collected, the temperature then starts climbing again, up to 80-90 ° C.(Note that these temperatures aren't exactly as in the table above. The water & ethanol form an mixture that boils at a higher temperature - as shown in the graph way back in the Theory section). It will then sit there for the next 2.5-3 hours, and I collect the distillate at the rate of approx 1L/hour. (with my improved reflux still, it now sits steady on 78.2-78.4C for most of this period - eg 95% purity) Slowly towards the end of this period, the temperature slowly starts increasing up towards 90-94 ° C. By this stage, my hydrometer shows me that the alcohol is only about 40%, and I've usually had enough, so I then turn it off. Total time 4 hours. (with the new reflux still, I finish collecting at around 82C, as past there it deteriorates fast towards the rubbish - still 4 hours though)

Likewise, finish distilling at 92-94 ° C, as you've basically got all the easy ethanol, and you're starting to collect the higher ends, heavy in fusel oils (the wet cardboard smell).

Rob has the following advice running a reflux still :

At the moment I'm trying to make wodka with a modified stillmaker still. I have just returned from the Czech Republic, where I have bought a bottle of Jelinek wodka which I am using as a reference w.r.t. taste and smell.

To make it easier to achieve maximum purity I strip the beer first and I remove the first 100 ml to be sure the methanol is out. I stop distilling when the temperature reaches 95 Celsius regardless of the %.

The low wines I have now are approx. 55% and I dilute this to 40% max. for the fractioning distillation. I slowly bring the low wines to the boil and keep the cooling water running at a high rate for maximum reflux at the top of the column. After a while I tune the cooling water until I get a steady drip from the condenser outlet; I keep the boiler at the lowest boiling rate possible.

Every 100 ml I check the % and I put a few ml in a noser (glass) and I add the same amount of water; as soon as I detect a distinct smell of wet cardboard, I know I have to stop collecting the middle cut; the alcohol that comes after this point (not much if the fractioning was going well) is collected, and after a series of distillations I fill the boiler with these faints to collect the remaining ethanol. When checking the alcohol for wet cardboard smell, it is important to dilute the alcohol first to 30-40%, because the undiluted alcohol will not release the smell, and you will notice it too late when you are preparing your wodka, liqueur etc...

You will notice, that the off smell will start to occur as soon as the temperature in the top of the column starts tending to rise above 78,5 celsius or the drip from the outlet starts to diminish and you need to increase the heat to keep the boiler going. Also the % goes down to less than say 92%. Don't waste your vodka now by trying to collect that little bit more !!! After a few runs, you'll get the hang of it; there is nothing better than experience.

Ian Smiley's book "Making pure corn whiskey" http://www.home-distilling.com/ has very detailed instructions for using a reflux still or fractionating column for making whisky, by closely following recommended cut points (similar to those above); they can likewise be used for rums.
Using a Fractionating Still
The difference here is the need to really equilibriate the column at the start of the run, so that the methanol gets to accumulate at the top of the column, and to get all the packing in the column up to its equilibrium temperature so that it will work its best. This can take from 1-4 hours.

To get a fractionating still to work at its best also requires quite a high reflux ratio - returning 8-12 times back to the column vs that which is kept. To do this means knowing what the total rate is, then trimming the offtake valve to only take a portion of it. Do this by opening the valve fully and measuring how fast it is coming out, then closing down to only take what you should. Once you know this setting (say 1 drip per second), it will be the same for future runs.
If you have an W heating element, and you are collecting the distillate at mL/min and at %
the distillate flowrate would be mL per minute if you were to reflux none of it, but you presently have a Reflux ratio of

Using the collection calculator back up the page, you know how much alcohol you have to collect, thus it is easy enough to work out how long its going to take. You may figure that its not worth waiting quite so long, just to gain a couple of 0.? % improvement in purity. Experiment to find a reflux ratio that still gives you a suitable purity, without having to wait forever.

I control my still only by adjusting the reflux ratio. It will happily sit between 78.2 C and 78.4 C for most of the run with a low reflux ratio, but towards the end, the reflux ratio will need increasing more and more to hold it there. As this happens, change the receiving container, and keep the tails seperate.

Randy writes ...

The most important aspect of observing temperature is to make sure that you do not save any foreshots as beverage. Anything collected before the still head reaches 172 F (77.8 C) should be discarded or used as charcoal lighter. From there on you would be better off using your nose to detect if the heads are finished or not. Then experience will tell you when the tails start coming over. Some people save more tails into their product than others. This is according to taste. Of course everything I just typed about flavor is assuming that you are using a grain mash. If you are using a sugar wash, then the nasties that make you use carbon treatment are in the cogners.

For me I let the still equalize in total reflux for 2 hours and then draw off the foreshots and then let it equalize for another 1/2 hour. Then I draw off the heads until I cant detect a foul smell. These I save and add to a container labled "faints". Then I distill the middle run and a portion of the tails. I run this phase until I reach 75 pct ABV. These are saved in my 'product' containers. Then everything else is distilled out until 65 pct and placed into the feints container. Then I distill everything else out of the wash that I can get. I stop when still head temps reach 205 F (96C) or so. Everything in this portion goes into a container labled 'redistill'. If you 'throw everything away' then you will be sending perfectly good ethanol down the drain. It might not be beverage quality right now, but it will be excellant stock to make a clear vodka from.

Ken describes his technique ..

I usually strip 50ltrs and end up with around 18 ltrs @36-40%,this is from 2 fermenters of sugar wash,I then set up and turn on around 11pm and go to bed.Next morning the tower is in a state of total reflux and I start taking the fore shots off around 6-30 am,by 8am everything is coming over @ top % and I keep an eye on it and change jars every 2 ltrs and know when it is about time to expect the tails to start coming over. If you have unexpected guests arrive during the day I usually just turn the temperature down by 10 degrees or so and wait for them to go then turn it back up again and you are soon back in production,the same thing also if you haven't finished at night and you do not want to leave it running while you are asleep,just turn the temperature down by 10-15 degrees.I know a lot of our members will say I am mad for leaving the unit unattended but I have put a lot of effort into my control systems and am very confident in this setup,the next thing to add is a pressure switch that will turn off the power to the kettle if I have a cooling water failure.

Rum from a Reflux Still
See the different recipes etc in the sugar based washes page.

Make the wash from diluted molasses. Arroyo recommends to split up the fractions out of a reflux still, and then recombine them. The fractions are collected as per ..

* First fraction - collect between 69-72 °C at 91% - approx. 5% total distillate, unpleasant aldehydes, organic acids and esters. Discard.
* Second fraction, 72-77 °C at 93-94% - 10% total distillate, contains ethanol with appreciable amounts of aldehydes and esters.
* Third fraction, at 78 °C, 95.5%, largest in volume at 55-60% ,mostly ethanol with very small amounts of congeners
* Fourth fraction at 78.5-85 °C , 90%, most of the higher alcohol's
* Fifth and final fraction at of 85-90 °C at 25-30% - highest boiling point esters and aldehydes

Mix the fractions together as ...

* Light rum = 25% of the second fraction, 50% of the third, 40% of the fourth & 15% of the fifth fraction
* Dark rum = whats left (except the first fraction - that was all thrown away)


I don't get that fancy with my rum. I first equilibriate the column, and remove approx 50 mL of foreshots, one drip per second. Then I open it up, so that I'm collecting quite fast, and at around 82-84C (rather than my neutral spirits temp of 78C). I'll collect it all together, until the temp rises to about 90C. Anything after that is relegated to tails. I'm after a big hearty flavoured rum, so if you prefer it lighter, don't take it quite as high in final temperature.

Just like whisky, you can keep the feints, and add them to following batches, to improve the flavour you get. Tom explains ...

As for returning feints in rum, I do it all the time. I pretty much follow the same process as is outlined in Ian Smiley's corn whiskey book. I have found it makes a lot of difference. I was fortunate enough to trade the use of the brewery's forklift for 120 x 50# bags of raw sugar (sugar with a high molasses content). I use this with a Wyeast 2112 yeast (our house yeast at the brewery) and ferment it out at about 13%. This is about the limit of the yeast and I use more sugar then will ferment so as to leave a sweet wash. If I don't use the feints I end up with a pedestrian rum, but with the feints I create a deep and complex rum. If aged in oak I find it to be much like a dark, dry Cuban rum, without it is a tasty white.

Jack disagrees ...

It doesn't seem to help the flavor any. It also makes the "middle cut" (if that's what you are trying for) a lot smaller. A no-feints added run gives 2 liters of 95% middle run spirit. With feints added- it becomes one liter of 95%. A better choice is to save the feints in a labeled container and run them on their own. The feints only run does tend have a slightly richer flavor (at least in malt whiskey and peach brandy). Best to save them to re-run on their own than mix them in to an otherwise normal (mash only) run.

Foreshots & Heads
When making the "flavoured" spirits such as whisky, rums, or schanpps, theres always the question of exactly how much of the heads to keep.

Mike raises some questions ...

... commercial whiskey distillers make no distinction between "foreshots" and "heads". To them, these are simply different names for the same thing. Similarly, they draw no distinction between "feints" and "tails". Now these guys must surely know what they are doing, as many of them have been distilling whiskey for generations, so I just wondered if we might not be introducing distinctions that really don't matter.

After almost a week of searching through the internet and browsing through the local library, I've also learned that although whiskey washes contain methanol, resulting from the use of grain, not one drop of foreshots/heads or feints/tails is ever thrown away, but is instead frugally stored in the 'low wines' vat for inclusion in the next batch. It was also interesting to learn that the decision on when the foreshot/heads 'ended' and the feints/tails 'began' was entirely up to the still master, and that many distilleries included a fair proportion these 'cuts' in the middle run as they contain a lot of flavour compounds that they want in the final product. What also surprised me was how little of the foreshots/heads were diverted to the low wines vat, some distilleries starting to collect the main body only 10 to 20 minutes into a run. Considering the size of their batches, that's very little indeed! Perhaps they rely on long periods of maturation to modify the compounds they include?

The way the still master judges when the foreshots/heads 'finish' and the feints/tails 'begin was also interesting, as it is all done without the benefit of measuring the temperature of the vapor or being able to smell the product. It's all done begind glass in the still safe, and the traditional methods depend on measuring the density of the product (correcting for temperature of the liquid) and what is termed a 'misting' test. Many distilleries now use more sophisticated methods, but these two tests are still widely used. The temperature corrected density seems fairly obvious, but the 'misting' test was new to me, so I had high hopes that perhaps here was a method we could use. Essentially, the 'misting' test involves mixing a sample of the product with distilled water. The presence of foreshots/heads or feints/tails is indicated by the mixture taking on a faint milky cloudiness. Sadly, when I tried it on some heads and tails that I had set aside, I could detect no 'misting' whatsoever, so I reckon that it must be characteristic of whiskey washes that may contain much higher proportions of oils than we encounter with sugar washes. Any thoughts anyone?

Now, I'm NOT suggesting for one moment that anyone drinks either heads or tails! However, we may have been throwing away a lot of good ethanol when pouring the heads down the sink. Whether those first heads contain methanol or not (depending on the ingredients of the wash), it is apparent that they contain a very high percentage of ethanol. If, instead, we set them aside and added both heads and tails to the next batch – all of them, as the whiskey distilleries do – then we would be in no danger of including them in the results of that next batch as we would again set aside the heads and tails of that. The obvious question can be asked ... would this not mean that the amount of 'nasties' builds up over time as they are repeatedly added to successive batches? Logically, the answer must be 'yes', but this doesn't seem to worry the whiskey distillers, and they are dealing with much bigger quantities than we are.

As for determining when to start or stop collecting the main body of a run, I believe that the methods we have been using are probably the best there are … measuring the temperature of the vapor and using our sense of smell. They may well be better than the traditional methods used in whiskey distilleries! There is certainly a discernible difference between what we have been calling 'foreshots' and 'heads' … the very first part of the heads is markedly more volatile, so the change to the main body of heads is easily detected by monitoring the vapor temperature. Equally, the slower change in temperature as the main run starts is fairly easily seen if you have a good thermometer in the right place in the column.

Jack likewise adds ...

In some reading I was doing, I found a spirit where the heads are not separated out at all; Pre-WW2 German Fruit Schnaps. Some may have made a brandy out of a fruit wine and noticed that the heads they were throwing out had a great fruity smell, and it was a shame to throw them out- old style German distillers didn't bother. This is why it has a reputation as a sharp tasting spirit. The trick is to ferment cool, and use no pectic enzyme, and ferment with added sugar no higher than 12%abv- all these things will dramatically increase methanol production. Then, make a note of how much distilled spirit was made out of how much wine, and only drink the amount of spirit that represents one wineglass of the original fruit wine/mash. For example: you have a gallon (4L) of cherry wine/mash, you get 750ml of spirit out of it at about 50% or so. At this rate of concentration, a 3ounce (90ml) serving of the wine equals a half ounce (16.875ml) of the distilled spirit. This (rather anemic) 17ml serving is to be considered one glass of wine. Limiting oneself to a "double" (roughly 30ml of spirit) of this "no heads separated" spirit, will give you a nice (but sharp) fruit schnaps, with little chance of a crippling hangover. Again, this requires a very temperate attitude toward drinking- in the above example, an American "shot" of this schnaps (2oz./60ml) would be equal to 4 glasses of the original wine- say hello to a nasty hangover. If this sounds a bit dangerous, then perhaps throwing out only the most minute bit of the heads could be done- say 5 to 10ml per gallon (4l) of wine- this should remove the bulk of the methanol.

Distilling Water
Do you just want to use your still to make some nice clean water ? Zoran advises ...

Put 10 g permanganate in 10 L of tap water. Reflux 30 minutes. Distill from glass or SS. Reject first 200 mL. Collect 8 L very clean water without chlorine or any organic contaminants. Dispose residue

Fermenting

Summary

Ferment the mash/wash at a constant 25oC, using 1.5g/L of good yeast suited to the wash.

Use an airlock to let CO2 out but not let air in.

Let the yeast settle out, and possibly even filter the wash before putting it into the still.


Introduction
Fermentation is the conversion of sugar to ethanol and carbon dioxide by yeasts (wort to wash). Whilst doing this, it can create a range of flavours beyond what the wort started with. During fermentation yeast converts sugar into alcohol and carbon dioxide by feeding on a series of increasingly complex sugars, essentially breaking the sugar down into other compounds which enable it to grow. First on the menu is glucose, before moving onto maltose, then maltotriose. Depending on the strain of yeast, these sugars may be tackled at different rates, and not always strictly in sequence. Although sugars account for the majority of flavours, yeast works on various other compounds, including amino acids and fatty acids, which also contribute flavours.


Theoretically 10 kg of sugar will produce 6.5 L (5.1 kg) of ethanol and 4.9 kg (4900L) of carbon dioxide. In doing so, some energy is released too (about 2.6 MJ/kg of ethanol).

Yeasts are single-cell fungi organisms. The most important ones used for making ethanol are members of the Saccharomyces genus, bred to give uniform, rapid fermentation and high ethanol yields, and be tollerant to wide ranges of temperature, pH levels, and high ethanol concentrations. Yeasts are facultative organisms - which means that they can live with or without oxygen. In a normal fermentation cycle they use oxygen at the start, then continue to thrive once it has all been used up. It is only during the anaerobic (without oxygen) period that they produce ethanol.

Gil explains ....

More correctly, in the absence of free dissolved oxygen the yeast will continue to breath by scavenging oxygen from the sugar molecules, and by doing so will continue to exhale carbon dioxide but leave the remnant sugar molecule behind in the form of ethyl alcohol.

The yeast does not consume sugar as food, but the other nutrients added to the wort. Mead making is an interesting experiment in this respect since unlike grape juice honey water will not in itself sustain yeast, and any half-decent distiller will do themselves a favour by mastering the technique of making such an environment more friendly.

Over the years I have learned to sustain the yeast in mead batches on a mixture of Vegemite and Epsom Salts, then aerate the wort thoroughly before activating the yeast and pitching. You can experiment with any number of nutrients and aerating systems to breed as much yeast as you want, but I have found the above mix avoids an off-taste in the finished mead and is easy to introduce to the colony.

The process implies two distinct fermentation phases. The primary fermentation takes place as the yeast breeds rapidly in the initially aerobic environment and the colony comes up to strength. Then the secondary fermentation takes place in the anaerobic environment thus generated, as the yeast strips oxygen from the sugar molecules in order to avoid suffocating.

Fermentation does not mean that alcoholic is being produced, only that the wort is in a ferment; that is, bubbling merrily.

Throughout both stages there is an abundance of carbon dioxide being exhaled which assists in maintain the anaerobic environment conductive to the production of ethyl alcohol. It does need to be kept in mind that it is not the yeast colony's intention to produce the alcohol, but ours.

All the yeast is trying to do is avoid suffocating in anaerobic conditions.

Beyond that it is fundamentally misleading to suppose that yeast is much interested in sugar, which can kill it the same as alcohol does, and here we must also recall that we are merely exploiting its ability to adapt to what are essentially hostile conditions.

My reference is A.J. Salle, "Fundamental Principles of Bacteriology", 3rd Edition, New York: McGraw-Hill, 1948.

Another book that must be read is Bill Mollison, "The Permaculture Book of Ferment and Human Nutrition", Tyalgum: Tagari Publications, 1993.


The influence of the yeast depends on the sugar concentration in the wort, the pitching temperature, and the rate of fermentation.

There are three phases to fermentation once the yeast has been added:

1. an initial lag phase, where little appears to be happening, but the yeast is adjusting to its new environment, and begining to grow in size
2. after about 30 minutes, the yeast begins to reproduce rapidly and the number of yeast cells increases exponentially (thus known as the exponential growth phase). Carbon dioxide is released in large quantities, bubbling up through the liquor. As the fermentation proceeds, the yeast cells tend to cluster together (flocculate).
3. The last phase is a stationary phase during which nutrients are becoming scarce, and the growth rates slow down. The evolution of carbon dioxide slows down, and the yeast settles to the bottom of the fermentor.

Under optimal conditions, a yeast cell is able to split its own mass of glucose (ie about 200 million million molecules) into alcohol and carbon dioxide every second.

For more information about fermentation, see Fermented Fruits and Vegetables - A Global Perspective, and Brewing Yeasts.

Yeast produces 33 times more alcohol while reproducing than when resting (so most of the gains are in the first couple of days, then you're just relying on the large numbers of yeast finally present to slowly work their way through the remaining sugars)

Once the nutrients have run out, and the fermentation has become "stuck" or sluggish, it is then too late to provide either nutrients or new yeash. If this happens really early during the fermentation, then you're in trouble.This is because when a yeast is deprived of a nutrient, it grows as best as it can with what is available, and then growth comes to a halt. Those cells are then put together with less than satisfactory levels of (lets say) protein due to deficient nitrogen. Their enzyme content is less than adequate, and they don't metabolize well at all. Growing cells are ~33 x faster at ethanol production than non-growing cells. Supplementation at that point does not reinitiate growth in the older cells. By that time the medium is higher in alcohol and still deficient in some nutrients. Some cells may even have died. Even supplying the combination of BOTH nutrients and new yeast won't get the activity restarted again. So the trick is to ensure you have enough nutrients available at the start of the fermentation.

You end up with having grown about 2g per litre of yeast (eg 40g in a 20L wash) This is why you don't get the full 51.1% conversion of sugar to ethanol, and gives some idea of the amount of nutrients - particularly nitrogen - that you need to supply.

Bakers yeast will produce a maximum of around 14% alcohol, whereas the "turbos" can generate up to 20% alcohol. Obviously you'd use different amounts of sugar for either case. Its not that the Turbo makes a higher % from less sugar, its advantage is that it can handle the higher concentrations (first of heaps of sugar, then later, the high alcohol %), and hence you need proportionally less water. Hence you end up with more alcohol in your 20L wash, because you are able to put more sugar in. Only use the Turbo's if you're after a "neutral" alcohol. If you're trying to make a flavoured spirit, (eg corn whisky, brandy, rum, etc) then use a yeast which will help give you the flavour profile that you desire.

While making the ethanol, the yeasts will also make very small amounts of other organic compounds - including other alcohols, aldehydes, esters, etc. These are known as the "cogeners" or the "fusel oils". It is the presence of these that give the alcohol its flavour. So when trying to make a neutral spirit, we'd try to minimise their presence, but if making a whisky, rum, brandy etc, then we need a very small proportion of them present.

Fusel oil concentration in the wash can be up to around 0.24 g per Litre from 20% sugar (eg about 3.2 mL from a 20L wash)

Fusels increase depending on ...
* yeast strain (eg Saccharomysce cerevisia makes more than S.carlsbergensis)
* temperature (higher temp = more fusels)
* increased aeration and agitation (news to me ! so don't over-stirr it !)
* wort composition (nitrogen sources and readily metabolised sugars)

The most common limiting factor for yeast growth is a lack of nitrogen. Nitrogen is approx 9% of the cell mass. Most common form to add it is as the ammonium ion, as the sulphate and phosphate salts (phosphorus is approx 1-2% of the cell mass, and sulfur 0.3-0.5% so these are needed too - this is a nice way of getting all three in there). Add the ammonium phosphate at a rate of 25-50 gramms for a 25L wash.

The second most common limiting factor is a lack of oxygen, but it only needs it until high cell numbers are present (eg during the first day) (so make sure that you've aerated the wash well just prior to adding the yeast, but don't do this too much later in the game) "Splash filling" is enough to do the job.

Bacteria can double in number every 20-30 minutes, but yeast takes 3 hours (so guess which one will win the race if an infection gets started and you don't deal to it). Another technique to help with this is to use a lot of yeast - when using Bakers yeast, use at least 150g for a 20L wash. Note that using more yeast wont make the yeast work through to a higher % alcohol, but just enable it to get where its going, faster.

Theres a fair bit of choice available as to which yeast to use. I'm personally inclined to use the "Turbo" yeasts, which are pre-packaged with all the nutrients etc necessary. Thats because I'm only ever doing sugar-water washes for pure neutral spirits, and I find it easy, convienient, and reliable. I don't try and reuse it a second time, as I only distill every couple of months, and can't be bothered storing it for that long. If however you are doing more of a grain or fruit based mash, and interested in flavours, then consider some of the other yeasts.

How do you know when fermentation has finished ? Alex tells ..

You determine the end of fermentation with these signs:
1. There is no more bubbles coming to the surface.
2. There is no more hissing noise inside the vessel.
3. Gravity of the mash sinks equal or below 1.00
4. The mash does not tast sweet anymore.
5. It has been sitting in the bathroom for three weeks.

Hector writes ...

Yeast, as simple a living organism as it is, has some complex nutritional needs, certainly more than just sucrose. However there’s a wide variety of yeast strains who’s needs differ widely. Alcohol producing strains fall always under the Saccharomyces family, and they, and their metabolic needs and environment adaptation pathways have been the subject of much study. There are “usual” metabolic mechanisms for the fermentation of grape juice, beer wort, et all, by specific members of the Saccharomyces family (e.g. bayanus or capensis in wine, cerevisae and carlsbergensis / uvarum in beer). All of those mechanisms require the presence of their specific sugar and nutrient carrying mediums (grape or apple juice, malt wort, etc.) because their specific yeasts are perfectly adapted to this environments. There’s no such thing as an alcohol producing yeast strain that can thrive in such a nutrient deprived medium as a sugar (sucrose) wash. Saccharomyces family strains are all adapted to nutrient rich environments as those cited before, but being that there’s no other organism in earth that adapts and mutates as readily and fast as yeast (that’s a fact, and it’s why yeast is the natural “guinea pig” in cellular death studies that are being advanced right now in the hope of learning to fight cancer), it always finds a way to survive as long as some type of nourishment can be found. This “ways” almost certainly imply a certain loss in the edible qualities of the fermented product because the chemical compounds generated by starving and abused yeasts usually form azeotropic bonds with the ethanol molecule, which is the product you concentrate when you distill an alcohol carrying substance. This compounds are mainly fusel alcohols, esters like amyl and ethyl acetate; diacetyl, acetaldehyde and sulfur compounds like ethyl mercaptin and dimethyl sulfide and disulfide, just to mention the beer (my specialty) pertinent, but universal in this scenario, by-products.

I understand that the much popular ... “turbo” yeast products are no more than specially packaged Saccharomyces strains that include the bare necessities (in nutritional terms) that yeast will need to barely ferment just one sucrose based batch. That’s why you guys find the notion of re-pitching your yeast so alien. I believe turbos are a very good thing for the yeast industry and truly they deserved a break. But I find they could try to strike a more consumer wise equilibrium on pricing (IMO they’re obscenely expensive). However there’s a notion that I believe would make this group improve exponentially their distilled products (and that I haven’t read about in any post so far) and it’s that whatever you can do to enhance your wash’s quality as a fermented product brings by itself a better spirit. I’m no fanatic on this. I don’t drink my molasses wines, for instance (though my whiskey’s beers are just as good as the product I sell commercially, sans the hops, of course). It’s just little things you need to do to avoid the basic problems, like always boiling and quickly cooling the wash, aerating the cooled wash prior to inoculation, keeping the fermentation temp below 23 deg. centigrade, and the original sugar concentration below 17-19º Brix (1.070-1.079 s.g.), and of course, work sanitarily. That’s all.

Which Yeast to Use
Ted recommends

I have a yeast that can ferment to 17% with greater than 80% attenuation in less than 4 days at 75 degrees F. It has a slight H2SO4 nose to it but it clears bright in 2 days and then you can't smell the H2SO4. Esters and phenols are slight to none. No breadiness, sour or vegemite aromas from the yeast that has been stored for 2 weeks and its viability is 94% after 34 generations. This yeast is a work horse! www.whitelabs.com - California Ale Yeast This isn't the only one out there that is fantastic either.

Jack recommends ...

Types of Yeast
The yeast selection pretty much depends on what you are making -
o For whiskey (corn or malt) the best bet is a dry ale yeast - Doric brnad ale is my favorite (ask your homebrew shop owner what his most attenuative, alcohol tolerant dry ale yeast is and use that).
o For wine and mead the best choice is Lalvin's K1V-1116 - it has a 16% alcohol tolerance and is very fast (it also has the ability to fight off bacterial contamination).
o For plain sugar mashes (to be made into vodka) the best bet is Lalvin's EC-1118 - it has an 18% alcohol tolerance and is faster than the K1V-1116 - but it tends to result in a stale, brackish flavor in the wine and the distillate - making it a bad choice for a wine yeast (by overpitching this yeast - 100grams in 20 liters and about 100 grams of yeast nutrient with 6-8 kilos of sugar you can make your own Turbo- style yeast) - carbon polishing will take care of the stale taste from this yeast- making it a good vodka yeast.
o For making rum out of molasses I like to use plain old bread yeast- it has a nice flavor when it's distilled, and while it's fermenting the house smells like cookies.
o NEVER use Montrachet yeast. I have had many recipes for wine taste horrible becuase this yeast was what the recipe said to use- it always ended up tasting (reeking) of sulfur- even when no sulfite was used to make the wine. The sulfur smell it makes is more than capable of carrying over into the distilled product (rotten egg schnaps was not what I was trying for). If you find a recipe that uses this yeast- use the K1V-1116 instead. I later found out that Montrachet was prone (genetically) to producing hydrogen sulfide gas, hence the sulfur taste/smell whenever I used this yeast. Avoid it at all costs.

Ken recommends ..."SAF-DISTIL.B-28" from D.C.L.Yeast

For more on EC-1118 see http://consumer.lallemand.com/.

See also http://www.hambletonbard.com.

A new White Labs strain WLP099 claims to do up to 25% EtOH : http://www.whitelabs.com/

Donald advises ...

Distillers' yeast is now sold in slurry form in the major homebrewer's yeast banks. Unless you are making neutral spirits, do not use a distiller's "fuel yeast". The Tennessee whisky yeast, Highland Scotish yeast, Fruit Brandy/Eau de Vie yeast, ect. all add extra oganoliptics that fuel yeast cannot.

Ryzopus derived Ryzozyme (Alltech Biotechnology) is a "cold mash" koji (not aspergillis as used in Sake) now for sale from Alltech, Inc. Ryzozyme step converts starch to sugar at room temp. I achieved a yield of 23.6% alcohol (yes that's right) in 40 hours with 100% corn mash this fall at the Alltech Alcohol School. (1 week for $950.00 US$). The entire Alltech Biotechnology line is sold through Crosby & Baker in the USA. Alltech, Inc. products are sold world wide, so check the web. if your local suppliers don't carry this yet. They also have great distillers yeast, yeast nutrient and other biotech fermentation supplies. The brave new worlds' bright side is here at last !

Patrick writes ..

For those of you not using turbos in the US. Check out this site, you can purchase 500g packets of wine yeast at HUGE discount! There is a Red Star yeast, same strain as Lalvin EC-1118 for $8.95 US for 500g! Thats just over a pound! Presque Isle Wine Supplies http://www.piwine.com.

M writes ...

I recently purchased a pound of "SuperStart" Distillers Yeast by Alltech from Crosby & Baker. (http://www.crosby-baker.com) According to the spec. sheet the optimal fermentation temperature is 90F +/-2F. So for those of you in hotter climates this may be just the ticket. Also, Seth from C&B reported that it is very possible to get a 21-22% yield from this yeast.Pricewise - 1lb. - $3.15 US (label states that 1/2lb will ferment 1000gal.

Baker writes about Red Star Ethanol Red (ER) :

From the product sheet ...Ethanol Red is a specially selected strain of saccharomyces Cerevisiae that has been developed for the Fuel Alcohol Industry. ER is a fast acting, temperature tolerant dry yeast that displays higher alcohol yields and maintains higher cell viability during fermentation as compared with standard distiller's yeast. Designed for producing alcohol at elevated temperatures, ER is capable of maximizing alcohol yields under a wide range of temperatures. Yields of 48g ethanol/ 100g sugar at 35C have been reported. Lower cooling costs, higher ethanol levels, and increased fermenter through put can be expected using ER. Industrial fermentation for the production of fuel alcohol from grain mashes is the primary application for this strain. this strain performs well for the production of ethanol from a variety of carbohydrate sources including molasses, citrus pulp and corn syrup. Pitching levels between 25 - 50 g per hectoliter will give an initial yeast density of approximately 5 - 10 million yeast cells per mL. Prior to inoculation, yeast should be rehydrated in 4 -5 times its weight in clean 40 C water.

[in comparison ..] Alltech SuperStart is a superstarter, but rapidly peters out. It performs better with a protease to provide FAN, but even with a protease does not perform as well as Red Star without. Red Star performs equally well with or without a protease except in a milo mash where adding the protease improves its performance.

Mike cautions though ...

Just an aside for "newbies", please don't get the idea that some yeasts produce more alcohol from a given amount of sugar than others. The "higher alcohol yield" bit refers to the tolerance of this yeast to alcohol during fermentation. For example, the strains of yeast used by bakers cannot tolerate concentrations of alcohol higher than around 8%, so any sugar left in the wash once this level is reached remains unfermented. Other strains are more tolerant to the alcohol they produce, and are therefore more efficient if the aim is to process as much sugar as you can in the shortest possible time ... which is what cost-effective production of fuel alcohol is all about. The downside for us, trying to produce potable alcohol, is that the hotter (and faster) the fermentation, and the higher the alcohol tolerance of the yeast, the more likely it is that other compounds will be produced with the ethanol, so we will have more heads and tails to deal with. For example, the new "24 hour" turbos perform as claimed (stand well back!), but the downside is that the concentration of ethyl acetate is very much higher than their slower cousins. In their defence, they are much "cleaner" than the Zippo yeasts favored by the Fuel Industry which, to be fair, is not concerned about how the product tastes so long as it burns well.


You can make your own Turbo yeasts. Jack wrote ..

Use large amounts of the wine yeasts called "prisse de mousse" (by the Red Star company), or EC-1118 (by the Lavlin company) - these are the yeasts used in the Turbo yeast packs- you just need to buy 100 grams (4 ounces) of it and pitch it all at once to get the turbo yeast performance (this also requires 100 grams of citric acid and about 100grams of yeast nutrient). Both these yeasts are common winemaking yeasts in the U.S

Mike adds ...

It is very easy to stretch a turbo (or any yeast, for that matter), but the process is a tradeoff - more work and time spent.

The procedure is similar to that spelled out as "the Cone Protocol" in The Compleat Distiller - you manage the stresses that the yeast sees during the ferment.

What are those stresses? Osmotic potential (sugar concentration), temperature and alcohol concentration. One of the reasons that turbo yeast packets contain so much yeast is that up to 80% of the yeast cells are killed or severely damaged when they are put into the wash - too high a sugar concentration and too low a temperature slow down the entry of water into the cells and allow a lot of damage to occur. Lowering the initial sugar concentration allows a lot more of these cells to survive, meaning that they can do more work.

Temperature - the active and rapid fermentation produces a lot of heat. Gert has published tables of yeast viability by temperature and alcohol concentration, and the higher the alcohol concentration, the lower the temperature that will kill them off. Lowering the initial sugar concentration will reduce the heat production and temperature rise in the wash. External temperature control is also very useful for extending a turbo.

Alcohol concentration - Alcohol is a yeast waste product. The more of it that is present, the harder is is for yeast to produce more, and the more stressed the yeast is, making them even more sensitive to osmotic and temperature effects. Sugar should be added in decreasing amounts throughout the fermentation as the alcohol concentration rises.

WARNING!! Active ferments are supersaturated with CO2!! If you just dump in some more sugar, you will see foam like you could not believe, and will lose several liters of wash to the surrounding environment. When you add sugar, begin stirring the wash, and trickle a spoonful of sugar into it. It will foam semi-violently, but will not overflow. Repeat a few times until it quits foaming when you add a little sugar. Now you can add it more rapidly.

Here is one way to stretch a turbo (based on the "20%" regular speed turbos out there). This method takes two weeks to complete. It is designed to completely use a standard (American) 25 pound sack of sugar. The Final volume is 8 US gallons instead of 25 liters. Pour 13 pounds of the sugar into the fermenter, and make up to just under seven gallons with warm water to end up at 30 deg C. Stir to make sure the sugar is all dissolved, then stir in the turbo and vigorously stir for a couple of minutes. You probably want the fermenter set into a tub of water to avoid a sharp temperature rise when fermentation takes off. (This is for two reasons - one to preserve the yeast, second, because a cooler fermentation is a cleaner one!) Control the temperature of the water jacket to about 18 deg C.

Float a hydrometer in the wash. Intial reading will be about 1.080. When it has dropped to about 1.010 - 1.020, add seven pounds of sugar. When it has dropped back to 1.10, add another three pounds. When it drops to 1.005, add the final two pounds. If done properly, the terminal gravity will be about 0.9.

Mixing Different Yeasts
It is sometimes useful to use two different stains of yeast at the same time; one strain for flavor and another for the alcohol content. Sometimes distilleries will mix brewers yeast with distillers yeast - thinking that the brewers yeast will add a heavier, fatter, mealier quality to new spirit. Others reckon it makes no difference.

Ray writes ..

It is quite a common practise to use a combination of yeast strains to acheive the desired result e.g. I have seen a good general purpose type yeast which is designed to go to around 13% mixed with a high alcohol yeast strain which is designed to go to 18% or higher, the idea being that the general purpose yeast does the majority of the work converting the sugar to alcohol then the high alcohol yeast kicks in and takes the percentage up to the next level. I haven't used that method for a long time but it seemed to work fine at the time.

Ted suggests ..

Use the low alcohol tolerent yeast to ferment first to get as much of that yeasts "flavor " as is possible. Then add more of the first strain to your ferment to push it along a bit further. The reason for this is that most yeast can withstand high levels of alcohol for a while before they go into stasis (they aren't really dieing off). then go for the tolerent yeast. Be aware that in high gravity ferments that the number of yeast cells must be increased a lot!!! (High gravity is anything over 1.060) Most yeast producers won't tell you this but, many strains are mixtures of yeasts that have different profiles and variing flocculation habits. On your recipe, you could try two seperate ferments one at a low gravity and one high then combine for distillation.

The Omnipresent Mecakyrios does similar ..

I like the "Two Fermentations" idea. I brew my batches (a hard Cider and Mead mix. Some call it a Melomel, but the taste is not like a Melomel at all) then use the following fermentation method: primary fermenter for about a month, rack into a secondary for about two months, rack into another secondary for about a month or two (depending on how the brew is doing), and if everything looks good I let it age for about a month and then distill it. After I distil it, I let it age for about three to six months.

If I were to do the "Two Fermentations" idea, I could use the "flavor yeast" in the primary, and the "strength yeast" in the first racking of the secondary. Then I could shorten the first racking time and lengthen the second to even things out.

How Much Yeast to Use
Jack advises ...

To use the best brewing guidelines- use 2 to 4 grams of dried yeast per gallon of mash.
o If the alcohol is in the 5% or less range - use 2 grams per gallon.
o in the 5 to 7%abv range; use 3 grams per gallon.
o In the 8 to 10%abv range use 4 grams per gallon.
You will know when you have pitched the right amount of yeast because the high kraeusen stage (the tall foamy cap) will have formed in four hours or less. If it takes longer than 4 hours- don't worry too much. If it takes longer than 24 hours to form- you aren't using enough yeast.

Higher than 4 grams per gallon will get you some sulfur flavors that can be hard to get rid of, so only use the 100 grams of dry yeast per 5 gallons (20 litres) rule for a pure sugar mash that is destined to be carbon polished and turned into vodka or a "base spirit" for liqueurs, etc.

If buying that much dry yeast is a problem, you can make a starter. Make a small "mini batch" of your mash - using the same ingredients at the same concentration (no less than 500ml no more than 2,000ml for a 5 gal/20liter batch) and put it into a sanitized glass flask, bottle, jug, etc. Do this one or two days before you plan to make the main (5 gal/20L) batch. Add the small (typically 5 gram) packet of yeast to the starter, and when it is at high kraeusen, add it to the main batch. Yeast "learns" to feed on sugars when it wakes up from that little packet- it takes yeast seven generations to learn how to digest a different kind of sugar- therefore you MUST make your starter out of the same stuff you are going to make the main mash out of (this is why waking up your yeast in orange juice is a bad idea). Also, yeast is sensitive to sugar concentrations- so the starter MUST be the same strength or weaker than the main batch in order to prevent osmotic pressure from causing the formation of mutant yeast cells (a big cause of off flavors).

The temperature the yeast is used at also can cause the flavor to degrade. Most whiskey mashes use an ale yeast- the ideal temperature range is 60 to 70 degrees F. Lower temps will slow down the yeast- if sanitation is good- this is not a problem. If a higher temp is reached - the yeast will undergo "stress" reactions that cause excessive ester and higher alcohol formation- this will result in a solvent- like flavor that can carry over into the finished spirit. Lager yeasts tend to form a lot of sulfur compounds at the begining of the ferment- during the lagering stage the yeast reabsorbs these sulfur compounds, leaving a crisp clean lager flavor in the beer- since you don't want to store a whiskey mash for 2 months in the fridge- it's best to use an ale yeast.

When you are fermenting wine (for brandy or drinking)- it is best to use 2 grams of dry yeast per gallon and no more (two of the five gram packets per 5gal/20L batch). It's true that you would think to use 4 grams per gallon since the alcohol is so high (typically 10% or more)- but, with wine, in order to preserve the delicate aroma of the fruit you are fermenting, you need to have a slow, cool (60-70F) ferment to prevent the CO2 from driving off all of the more delicate flavors. A fast ferment in a wine will find the CO2 "scrubbing" the delicate flavors out, leaving you with a bland acidic wine that tastes pretty rough.

Note though that you can over-pitch a wort with too much yeast. Jack warns ..

when used at a rate over 4 grams per gallon (with ale yeast and a potential alcohol of less than 9%), dry yeast will give off some excessive ester/ sulfur compounds that are almost impossible to get rid of through cold storage (lagering). If the stuff is to be distilled, and you "overpitch" your yeast- just make sure you have a LOT of copper to get rid of the extra sulfur compounds.

The very high cell concentrations typically cause a reduction in yeast growth. This makes the yeast that is pitched is the yeast that is responsible for the ferment- if the yeast viability is below 90%, stuck ferments may occur. Otherwise, the profile of the flavors that yeast makes is typically a mix of compounds made during both the aerobic and anaerobic phases- with the aerobic phase suddenly gone- some very odd smells occur (sulfur compounds), that, thanks to the stress of fermenting without any time to adapt (the lag phase), the yeast is damaged, and unable to reabsorb any of the esters and sulfur compounds when they go dormant (during the settling out and lagering phase-if any). The high cell count also makes fining and filtering more difficult.

Overall, underpitching is more of a concern than overpitching. Underpitching causes a long lag time that can allow bacterial infection to take hold, overpitching can cause off flavors to develop that can be removed with a long lagering/secondary ferment, and alot of copper exposure.

As a general rule, you use 400ml of yeast solids per hectoliter of wort (for a lager yeast), and half of that for ale yeast (granted, this is at 12degrees plato). For dry yeast, 2 to 4 grams per gallon of wort is best- 2 grams for standard beer, 4 rgams for doppelbocks, barleywines, etc. For an active yeast starter, the actively fermenting starter should comprise 10% of the volume of the mash/wort. It should also be of the same sugars/composition and at the same concentration (err on the side of a weaker starter, rather than a stronger one- yeast can go from "rags to riches", but not the reverse.)

Ted Palmer writes ...

Many if not most commercial distilleries use some form of brewers yeast. What should determine the type and AMOUNT of yeast is the make-up of your wash. A common problem isn't the type of yeast that you are using but rather how you are using it. A 1.060sg wash will be reduced just fine by any yeast so long as there are enough yeast cells per ml. and enough nitrogen to keep the cells healthy. In fact by repitching more activly fermenting yeast several times into a high gravity wash, a "beer yeast" can ferment up to 16 to 18 percent alc. If you use a packet of dry yeast then there are too few cells let alone heathy ones.

Here are a few guidelines for proper yeast use in any ferment:
o You will need 10 X 10^6 cells per ml for any wash up to 1.050sg and 1 X 10^6 cells more for each 1.004sg above 1.050.
o Always use a rigorously fermenting pitch of yeast, ie: never use yeast straight from a package, always grow up enough cells for the SG you are using (called a yeast starter). Say you are going to make 10 liters of wash at 1.050, open the package and grow the cells in 10 ml. of 1.050 wash. When fermentation passes the most rigorous point pitch the 10 ml. into 100 ml. of 1.050 wash, repeat this into 1 liter and then pitch into the 10 liters. with higher gravities use 2 or more seperate yeast starters.
o Yeast need proper nutrition, nitrogen must be present. If using only sugar put 2 ml. of ammonia per 1 liter of wash. If using fruit juice or grain mash 0.5 ml. per liter. Yeast also need more than just sucrose for food, add some fructose, dextrose, maltose or any other simple sugar. An acid isomerization of sucrose(invert sugar) will also work if other sugars aren't available.
o Reuse the yeast from the last batch you made! This is the easiest way to make sure there are enough cells for your wash, keep any eye out for infections though and only reuse yeast that fermented properly in the last batch.

Nutrients & Acidity
A slightly acidic environment is enjoyed by yeast, and also inhibits the development of bacterial contaminants. The pH of the brew should be adjusted to between 4.0 and 4.5 prior to fermentation, using citric or lactic acids. You can also use lemon juice rather than citric acid - it works great in distilling, but is bad in winemaking. Just use it on an equal volume basis- 1TBSP of acid blend = 1TBSP of lemon juice.
If using citric acid ....
To get a pH of you need to use grams per litre
ie grams in a L wash to use

This calculation seems on the low side practically - it must be that the citric acid sold in supermarkets / brewshops isn't 100% pure. Always double-check the pH using pH papers or some other test.

Nutrients also need to be present. Yeast cells require phosphorus, nitrogen and potassium, as well as amino acids and vitamins, for metabolic processes. The extent to how much is required depends on the feedstock being used. The nitrogen requirement may be supplied in the form of amino acids, ammonia, or ammonium salts. If the solids are separated from the sugar solution prior to fermentation (or say starting only with sugar) the bulk of the protein will be removed, and hence a potential nitrogen source lost. Ammonia or ammonium salts are the preferred source of of additional nitrogen if its needed, however avoid using excessive amounts because it can kill the yeast. Both nitrogen and phosphorus can be supplied by ammonium phosphate (commonly available as a fertilizer). Many fermentations will proceed satisfactorly without vitamin suppliments because the fermentation medium contains sufficient of these nutrients, however in most cases, cell growth is enhanced when B-vitamins are added.

Jack adds ...

DAP (Diammonium phosphate) is also known as "yeast nutrient" among wine/beer makers. Yeast energizer is typically a yeast hull extract- an all-natural version of yeast nutrient- it doesn't work as well, because there just isn't enough free-amino nitrogen in it. Most homebrew shops (who know what they are doing) sell the DAP salt- it should look just like any other chemical salt (like table salt, but with bigger crystals)- if it's off-white, brown, or any other color- it's likely a mix of yeast nutrient, yeast energizer, some B vitamins and other assorted junk (ie trace minerals, folic acid). If your local homebrew shop has it's head up it's arse, try checking online for a domestic home-brew shop that sells it online. Most homebrew magazines have dozens of adds for places like this- just find the closest one to save on shipping.


One recipe for nutrient ale salts is

* 58 g sodium chloride (common table salt)
* 170 g citric acid
* 7 g ammonium sulphate
* 6 g magnesium sulphate
* 2.5 g grape tannin

This mixture is hygroscopic (attracts water), so keep it in a cool dry place with a good lid.

The "Great New Zealand Home Wine Making Book" suggests to ... "buy some ammonium sulphate or ammonium phosphate, and some pottassium phosphate or potassium sulphate and add 2g (1/2 teaspoon) of each to every 4.5 L. Another valuable addition is vitamin B1. You can buy these as tiny 3 milligram tablets from your local chemist or pharmacy and add one of these each 4.5 L" ...
Darryl offers ...

Before turbo yeasts came along, I would use a champagne yeast and my own nutient mix to ferement a sugar wash. For a 20 litre wash I would use 5 kg sugar plus the following nutrient mix:
o 4 tsp winemakers' yeast nutrient salts
o 4 tsp citric acid
o 1/3 small jar molasses
o 1 tsp marmite


Concerning the use of Urea in nutrients, Des writes :

According to 'The Food Regulations 1984, Amendment No. 5' dated 2nd December 1991 regulation 235, General alcoholic drinks, subclause 3 says "General alcoholic drinks may contain any of the following:", paragraph (i) "Yeast nutrients, except urea"

Which is what has been quoted in past correspondence and always referred to when discussing the issue, however: 'The Food Regulations 1984, Amendment No. 9' dated 10th of October 1994 regulation 101, (3) states "Regulation 235 of the principal regulations is hereby further amended by revoking paragraph (i) of subclause (3)." ie the exception to urea above is now revoked.

On seeing this I contacted the New Zealand Health Department and requested, under the Official Information Act, all the paper work as to why the original banning and why the lifting of that ban. Of course, I got screeds of paper but the story is that the ban was instigated because of research done in England that pointed health risks of urea as an ingredient for fermentation. Thus it was banned.

It was later realised that although these chemicals were present in the fermented wash, they were not present once the wash had been distilled. It appears that they are not carried over in the distillation process, thus the ban for this type of alcoholic product was lifted.

Mike adds ...

Nothing wrong with urea in modest quantities... the human body excretes it daily, and in some quantity, so it is not a killer. However, only drawback with its use as a nutrient is that it encourages production of ammonia compounds, and that can taint a brew. This was a common complaint from people who had problems with early turbo mixes that used excessive urea. Current mixes appear to have overcome this problem, but addition of urea yourself should be governed by caution. A little goes a long way. DAP is a better nutrient to use as the ammonium radical is more tightly bound.

Also, don't use too much nutrient. It won't make the yeast work any faster, once you've supplied its needs ... but it can make your spirit turn blue. Mike explains ...

... alkaline washes that hold a lot of nitrogen-containing compounds that have been put in as nutrients will liberate ammonia and that, being a gas, will get to the top condenser and form an aqueous ammonia solution, which is alkaline. Normal oxidation of copper under heat forms cupric hydroxide in an alkaline solution. This turns black when boiled with water, and is commonly seen on copper components in stills. This, in turn, reacts with ammonia solution to form Schweitzer's solution, containing the tetrammino-cupric ion Cu[4NH3]++, which is deep blue. Don't worry ... it won't hurt you, and you might even think the colour attractive!

Answer is to ensure that your wash is not alkaline, but acidic. This is the normal condition after a fermentation, as yeasts tend to acidify the wash with their by-products. You say that you added yeast nutrients, and I suspect that you were a bit too enthusiastic, as this can tipp the balnace the other way. Addition of citric acid is usually enough to neutralise and then acidify a solution made too alkaline by overdosing with nutrients, but without acid buffers to control the pH. In an acidic solution, those nitrogen-containing compounds will react with the acid to form salts, and so will not ne carried up to the top condenser.

If this happens, make sure you strip down your tower, and clean it well. The blue alcohol can be cleaned up by adding some citric acid (50g per 5L) (which will react with the ammonia to produce ammonium citrate which will precipitate out along with the copper leaving hydrogen sulphyte and or sulphide), and then filtering it through some coffee filters to collect the flocculant; the alcohol will then be ok to redistil.

Matt suggests

The White Labs site (http://www.whitelabs.com/) mentions that they are now distributing Servomyces a nutrient which apparently even conforms with the Reinheitsgebot! It was developed in Europe, and seems aimed more at the beer brewing market, but it might still give interesting results for those doing a low-nutrient wash ferment.

Wyeast Labs of Oregon, USA also offers a yeast nutrient: http://www.wyeastlab.com/nutrient/nunutrie.htm


Brians recommendation re nutrients is lallemand fermaid k; use at a d/r of circa 60/100 g /20 litres ( http://www.lallemand.com)
Oxygen
During fermentation, yeast has a couple of choices. If it has oxygen available to it, it will be able to reproduce quite rapidly (doubling every 3 hours). If there is only limited oxygen available, it will turn its task to producing ethanol and other products (about 1300 in all), like higher alcohols (sometimes called fusel oils), esters, organic acids, and carbonyl compounds. To get good initial growth of the yeasts, you want to have a bit of oxygen available - but you can do this simply by stirring the wash vigorously when disolving the sugar. Once you have added the yeast, it is critical to seal the container such that air cant get in, but you can still let the CO2 out, by using an airlock. To minimise the amount of other volitiles produced, make sure that you are using a yeast designed for the job, and keeping it happy with nutrients & with a stable temperature.

Fizz writes ..

..for those of us who have heard about the need for oxygenating the water prior to pitching the yeast and (like me) cannot afford extra equipment to do this I would recommend (if you have one) a kitchen stick blender, like what you use to make soups or sauces etc. 2 minutes in that baby and the water had that much O2 in it, it turned milky !

If you're going to use an airstone to aerate the wash, Mecakyrios recommends ..

1.) I HIGHLY recommend for you to use an in-line HEPA air filter. This will allow for the air going through it to be essentially sterile when it comes out through the air stone. This aids in protecting your wash from becoming infected with unwanted nasties.

2.) I would recommend using a racking cane with a small piece of tubing connected to your air stone. Let me try to explain better: You have you air pump connected to the correct length of tubing to get to your wash. You connect that tubing to your racking cane. To the other end of the raking cane you add a small piece of tubing, and to that tubing you put on your air stone. Then you submerge the air stone by placing the raking cane into the wash. What this will do for you is allow you to position the air stone where ever you may need to, but more importantly it will keep the stone from floating to the top of the wash. By using the raking cane (or similar device) method you now have more control over the air stone while making sure that it remains submerged.

There are brew shops that sell both of these products. Some even sell special "air wands" that come with both the filter and a special "wand" that keeps the air stone submerged.

If you would like more information, or at least a look at some products for this topic, I would recommend going to http://www.williamsbrewing.com/. Go to the fermenting equipment section and then go to "Wort Aeration" section to look at some products that deal with this issue.

Ted Palmer writes ..

In order to properly "grow up" a series of yeast starters you must aerate the wash with sterile air or pressurized oxygen (O2). The reason for this is that yeast cells bud or reproduce only when there is enough oxygen present to grow. During fermentation yeast cells will still bud, but at a slower rate since it has to pull oxygen out of chemicals. The amount of O2 required is small, on the order of 20 microliters per ml. to support the budding phase.

So how do you put O2 in your wash?

Sterile air:
Pump air through a 0.02 micron filter and then a stone (fish tank bubblers work well) into the wash. If you can't get a filter use a jar setup like a thump barrel only put a stone on the inlet pipe, fill this with hydrogen peroxide halfway full. pump air through this jar and then a stone into the wash. Run this setup 20 - 30 seconds for each liter of wash.
Pressurized O2:
Use any tank of pure oxygen fitted to a stone on a length of tubing, run for 5 - 10 seconds for each liter of wash. Aerating a fermenting wash will result in one hell of a lot of yeast and very little alcohol. Aerating a fermenting wash for even a short time will oxidize flavor components including ethanol !!!

Cooling the Wort
Before you pitch the yeast, you need to cool the wort down below 26 ° C. You could leave it overnight to cool, but then you risk letting an infection get started. Its often better to force-cool the brew down. The rate and length of fermentation is adjusted by the pitching temperature, which in turn can influence the flavours.

Jack writes ...

If it's a pure sugar/molasses wash- your only concern is with the temperature. If you add the yeast when the temperature is still above 70F you are going to stress the yeast- and it's going to produce more higher alcohols (methanol, for example) than it normally would.

If you are making a mash using grain (corn, rye, malt, etc) you should try and cool the mash down to 70F in under one hour. Otherwise, you are allowing the production of a chemical called DMS (dimethyl sulfide)- this is a chemical compound that gives beer/mash a buttery/ butterscotch flavor- in some dark beers, it's okay- in light beers and whiskey mashes it's a problem. Over time DMS is reduced into various other sulfur compounds- some will form a rancid butter flavor/oder, others will be estery (solvent flavor). By cooling the beer/mash quickly, you inhibit the formation of this compound. And, yes, the nasty flavors DMS can make will transfer over into the finished spirit.

And, that's the prime time for an infection to take over. The rule is: cool to 70F as quickly as possible, and add your yeast as soon as you get to that temp.

Tim writes ...

I have a counterflow wort chiller for my beer brewing. It's a 20' piece of 1/2" ID copper tubing inserted inside a 19 1/2' piece of 3/4" ID rubber hose. This whole thing is wound into a coil around a beer keg (then the beer keg is removed...)

The inside of the chiller has to be spotless and sanitized to keep from contaminating the (then cooled) wort on its way to the fermenters.

I've been using and cleaning this thing for 10 years and have NEVER had a contaminated batch.

The vinegar/water mix makes it shine like a new penny!

This method was told to me by a PhD Brewing Chemist who'd been doing this for years. It really works!

Fermentation Tank Hydraulics
Jack writes ...

Traditionally, shallow, open, "wading pool" shaped fermenters were the most common found in old breweries/distilleries. Due to space concerns, "unitanks" (sealed on top, with a conical bottom and a valve to separate trub and yeast) have taken over, as they provide a more sheltered enviroment that, being tall rather than wide, allows companies to expand production at a fraction of usual expansion costs. After testing various fermenter shapes, it was found that the effective height (that which is actually filled) of the fermenter should be less than the fermenter's diameter. A few industrial studies show why this is so. In 1978 it was found that carbon dioxide gradients were present- the largest values being at the bottom of the fermenter. This caused s heterogeneous flow field that included isolated vortices. The maximum vortex formation was found at the top of the fermenter, which influenced temperature, sugar concentration, and Ph- effectively, tall fermenters have not one, but several fermentations taking place in parallel.

In order to counter this effect, the best method is to use a stirring device within the fermenter, or to recirculate a small amount of the mash (maybe 5 to 7% of the total volume).

Why was this done? Because short/wide fermenters work markedly better than tall ones. Check the numbers:

Tall fermenter Short/wide fermenter
Fermentation time: 10 days 8 days
Final gravity: 1.010 1.011
Diacetyl (mg/L) 0.350 0.060
Clearing poor excellent
pH at end point 4.6 4.4


The lower pH will provede a greater stability in the mash/beer during storage/secondary fermentation/ clarifying procedures. Blind tastings have also shown that the short fermenter in an "open fermenter" form (a large stainless steel stockpot with the lid on instead of an airlock) made for a cleaner, better tasting beer/mash. For large industrial concerns, closed unitank fermenters are a good business idea. For home brewers/distillers using a large (7 gallon) stainless steel stockpot with a lid gives you a great fermenter (even compared to carboys- just watch the sanitation in the surrounding area), that will give a faster ferment and a faster clearing time. That alone reccomends it for distiller-only hobbyists, but the flavor improvementsalso make it worthwhile. Remember, a still will not make a bad mash taste good- it will only make it taste stronger. As a result of this info, I now brew my beer (and bourbon) in an open fermenter. And I'm drinking/distilling it 2 days faster as a result.

Pitching Yeasts
When the temperature of the wash has dropped below 26 °C, add the yeast. Do not add the yeast too soon - if the temperature is above about 34 °C, it will kill the yeast.

You're aiming for around 10 million yeast cells per mL of wash. A 25L wash at 1.080 will therefore need about 3 cups of slurry. Get this amount by using the slurry left over from the previous run. See the comments below in the Reusing Yeast section.

If using dried yeast, it can be helped along by letting it soak in about 1C of warm (24 °C) water for about an hour beforehand. Use a high alcohol yeast such as for champagne, or the new proprietary alcohbase or "turbo" yeasts which can generate up to 21% alcohol (who needs distillation ?). If the pack you're using is one of those small ones, it will pay to grow it up to a suitable size before using it (see Teds comments below).

Close the fermentor, and use an airlock. Keep the temperature around 28 C, and the specific gravity should drop to approx 0.980 - 0.990 g/mL and have ceased bubbling within 5 days.

Jack H recommends ..

Try using cling wrap over the top of your fermenting vessel. Secure with a rubber band(I cut mine from an old tyre inner tube) Then prick about 6 holes in the wrap to allow the gas pressure to escape.You can see when the fermentation is over and I have found that I have never had a failure with this method as opposed to using a fermentation lock .

MeadMaker suggests a method of making a simple airlock ...

while most people go out and buy a one way valve, it is realy quite easy to make at home. all you need is: (1) the lid of the bottle you will be fermenting in, (2) 2 straws, (3) something to seal with, (e.g. bluetac, wax (just melt a candle), glue (might make it smell though) and/or sticky tape), and (4) a glass of water.

Now... make a hole in the lid using a hammer and nail, and then widen it using sissors to the diameter of the straw. Then insert the straw so that the end of it is just in the hoke in the lid. Wax/bluetac/glue so that it is sealed. Then make the straw so that it is on a right angle (I'm assuming ur using one of those "bendy ones". Insert the second straw into this, then sticky tape and wax/bluetac/glue so that it is sealed. Make THAT straw on a right angle, so that the end of it is inserted into a glass of water. Test by adding some baking soda and vinigar to the bottle. If the gas seems to ONLY be coming out through the glass of water, it works.


Also, this is better for SMALL bottles, if ur making a big brew, i recomend u use a rubber pipe or something instead of straws

Bill writes ...

Open (barrel) fermenters, Found the plastic used to cover windows, shrink wrap works well its nice and clear lets you check the temp. and specific g. without removing the cover and letting air into the fermenter. if its cut about two in. larger than the top it can be held in place with a bit of twine attached to an elastic band, then heated for a couple of seconds with a hair dryer, this makes it nice and tight and clear.

If the fermenter doesn't bubble, check that the lid is sealing well. If you squeeze the container when you put the lid & airlock on, the water should move up in the airlock, then drop again when you let go. If it doesn't, then the lid isn't on correctly.

Another way of knowing how far the fermentation has progressed is to measure the weight of your fermentor & contents. Half the sugar is expected to convert to CO2 gas and bubble away. Theoretically the yield is 48.9%, but practically this is 40% because some of the gas dissolves in the wort. So if you have added 5 kg of sugar, and the weight has only dropped by 1 kg, keep it going for a while longer (you expect 5 x 0.4 = 2kg weight loss).

For excellent discussions about yeast, and how to get the best out of it, see the Turbo yeast and AllTech web pages.
Temperature Control
Temperature control is very important during fermentation. Yeast is a living organism, and will die if too stressed. Both alcohol and temperature stress it. With no alcohol around, it won't die until about 40 °C. At 14% alcohol, it will die at 33 °C, and at 25 °C if in 20% alcohol. So keep it below 25 °C at ALL times. Lower temperatures will also result in less volitiles. When the temperature has been kept below 30 °C the production of fusel oils is minimal, and is extremely small if kept below a maximum of 25 °C. This is where you get into a bit of a trade-off; if you keep it too cool, it will take heaps longer, with greater time for the risk of infection etc to set in. At 25 °C, it will take 3 days to ferment 0.24 kg/L sugar, but at 15 °C it will take nearly 2 weeks.

Higher fermentation temperatures will result in more fusels being formed. Jack advises ..

This is for the Wyeast1056/s001 strain that is used for Sierra Nevada's pale ale:

Temperature Ethyl acetate(mg/l) Amyl acetate(mg/l)
60F (15.5C) 16 0.5
68F (20C) 26 2.0
75F (24C) 53 4.0

Technically, ethyl acetate and amyl acetate are considered esters, not fusels, but they act the same in the still. Fusel oils are formed by the ferment of amino acids- not sugars. There are two types of fusel oils; aliphatic and phenol. The aliphatic have a straight line structure and are volatile- they have a warming alcoholic/solvent note with fruity tones. They lead to definate harshness. Phenol types are involatile, aromatic alcohols with a madicinal flavor.

Lager yeasts fermented at the right temperature (cold) form less than half the fusel oils an ale yeast does at normal temp. (25mg/l against 70mg/l for an ale).

All yeast start to increase fusel oil production when sugar concentrations above 16% (sp.gr.1.065) are used.

Mutated and first generation (air-bubbled "lab-grown" yeast) tend to make more than recycled yeasts do- hence the Scotch distillers use of second hand yeast from the Dublin breweries).

Ian Smiley adds ..

However, when fermenting straight sugar-and-water with turbo yeast one is typically making grain neutral (i.e. vodka), and such congener production is not really relevant if using a high-separation still like a full-reflux fractionating still. Virtually all such congeners are stripped out during a double distillation anyway, so the distiller need not worry about off flavours and is typically better off with the faster turnaround of a hotter fermentation. Also, commercial distilleries have no problem separating comparatively high concentrations of congeners given the sophistication of their stills.

The temperatures that I refer to, BTW, for the fast turbo yeast fermentations are between 80 and 90F (27 and 33C). And, in Making Pure Corn Whiskey I recommend a fermentation temperature range between 70 and 90F (21 and 33C) for the production of whiskey.

Now, the production of beer, wine, and whiskey (or any other flavour-positive spirit, for that matter) is a different story, because the congener profile formed during fermentation will pervade through to the finished beverage. This is clearly true of beer or wine where no distillation is done, so whatever is formed is with the substrate for the duration of its life cycle. Flavour-positive spirits undergo distillation but since certain families of congeners are retained this makes such spirits sensitive to the congener make-up of the mash, unlike grain neutral where everything but the alcohol is stripped out.

I have done extensive experimentation with whiskey-mash fermentation, including numerous different temperature regimens. I've even lagered whiskey mashes with bottom-fermenting lager yeasts for as long as 13 weeks. It produced an unhopped corn/rye all-grain lager that I swear I could have bottled and conditioned and consumed as a very light (and cheap) lager, and I'm confident that it would have been delicious and refreshing. However, when I distilled it, it was completely insipid. It simply didn't have enough esters to give it a significant flavour. It was pleasant enough, but it just wasn't whiskey, although when I rectified it into grain neutral it was very clean.

All of this would have been due to the long lager fermentation where the yeast literally consumes esters, aldehydes, and fusel alcohols during the late-phase fermentation cycle.

I have found that the best whiskey and schnapps flavours are in fact formed during a hot, fast, brisk fermentation, and that long languishing fermentations (i.e. other than lagering) are the ones that produce the less desirable flavours. Of course, this point would be subject to personal preference.

In another experiment, I fermented a corn mash with a wine yeast and let it ferment for over four months. The mash actually formed a sherry flor on top and oxidized and darkened and took on a very unusual but pleasant smell. When I distilled it, it had a distinct fruity/sweet fragrance and flavour that could only be described as a delicious liqueur. I haven't had time to return to this line of experimentation, but when I do I'd like to explore this further.

Just to clear up my use of the term "secondary fermentation", what I mean by that is the fermentation phase that takes place immediately following the high krausen phase. Wine and beer makers will recognize the pattern whereby their fermentations start out with a lag phase followed by a vigorous bubbling phase, often with foaming, then it settles down to just spurious bubbling. This vigorous fermentation is the high krausen phase, or primary fermentation. After that, the mash or must settles down to a spurious bubbling, this is the "secondary fermentation" in my parlance, and it usually takes one or two weeks for beer and one or two months for wine. After this, the beer or wine is left to age or lager (German for, "store in the cold"). In my terminology, the fermentation that naturally carbonates a beverage is called the "conditioning fermentation".

Just to recap, a mash intended for distillation only needs to undergo the high krausen phase in my standard processes.

The familiar rotten-egg smell ... is due to the formation of hydrogen sulphide, mercaptans, and dimethyl sulphide. All of these compounds are usually consumed later in the fermentation in the case of beers and wines, but with distilled mashes, any amount of contact with copper in the construction of the still will instantly remove it.


An easy way to maintain the temperature in cooler climates is to wrap a water bed heating pad around the fermentor, and tape the thermostat to the side of it before wrapping it all in a blanket. Other people just keep their fermenter in the hot water cupboard. Another way is to keep it in a small cupboard or box with a light wattage lightbulb to supply a lttle heat (but shield the bulb so that the beer doesn't become light-struck). Some even use immersion heaters like those for tropical aquariums - but these can be tricky to sterilise, you need to get the wires through the lid in an airtight manner, and if you lift them out of the brew without turning the power off, they can quickly overheat and burn-out (an expensive exercise in forgetfullness). Others yet put their fermentor into a larger drum/container, fill the gap with warm water & then use an immersion heater to keep the outer water warm.

If using the Turbo yeasts, pay particular attention to the temperature. These babies can raise the temperature of the wash by 5-8 °C, so don't add them until the wash has cooled to about 18-20 °C.

If you are fermenting large volumes, you may need to actually cool the wash, either by dropping in frozen 2L softdrink bottles of water, or getting fancy like big brewers, and running cooling water pipes through the fermentor. The larger the amount you are trying to ferment, the harder it wil become to control, yet it is critical that you try to keep it all at 25 °C plus/minus only 1 °C. You may find washes larger than 200L difficult to control & keep cool.

Ian writes ..

I have made "double" batches of wash - 50 and 60 litres. If you are in a warm climate be careful of the temperature. A double batch will heat up quite a bit more than a 25 - 30 litre batch. During the summer I used ice packs (the chemical that is sealed in little plastic bags - that you freeze for use in your cooler.)

Jack writes ...

To heat up the batch- ferment in a glass carboy, set the carboy in a plastic bucket, fill the space between the two with water, and use a small immersible aquarium heater to keep it warm. To keep it cold, do the same as above, but, instead of the heater, toss a couple of those reusable ice packs in the water covering the fermentor, and switch them out with a couple more kept in the freezer when they finally melt. If you ferment in a bucket, freeze some water in a plastic jug, sanitize the outside of it and float it in the mash. To heat up a bucket, just sit it on a heating pad- start with the lowest temp- that usually is good enough. Putting an immersion pump in the mash also keeps the yeast from "retiring early" when it gets cold.

Settling
Settling is probabaly THE best kept secret for getting really neutral spirits such as those used for gin. If you can really let your wash settle well, maybe even decanting it into another fermentor to let it settle a second time, then the distillate will be so much cleaner when distilled.

Once fermentation has finished (eg final specific gravity of 0.990-0.980 reached), turn off the heat, and let the finished yeast settle over a couple of days to the bottom of the container. Siphon the clear wash into the still, and you're ready to go. Be careful to not disturb the yeast layer, because if it gets into the still it can result in bad smells and flavours. If in a hurry, you can use finings (eg gelatin - 2g in 100mL to settle 25L) to help settle/clear the yeast, or try placing the wash in the freezer, to chill it fast & knock the yeast down. Passing the wash through a simple filter, or even a couple of paper towels to clear out the remaining yeast will also help improve the quality you later get. The simplest (& often most effective) technique though is just time.

There is also a new product available, called "Turbo Clear" which is said to help : http://www.aquavitae.co.nz/spotlight.html.
Jack recommends not to use gelatin ..

Gelatin doesn't work as well in sugar mashes - it works by binding to tannin- which sugar doesn't have. The best bet is Polyclar AT. It can be done in as little as a few hours.


The settling/clearing behaviour of yeast depends on the type of yeast you've used. From Brewing Yeasts (rehashed a bit)...

Yeast normally reproduces by "budding". During budding a small bubble like protuberance from the mother cell is formed into which part of the cytoplasm as well as a daughter nucleus, formed by division, passes. In some yeast strains the mother and daughter cells separate from one another completely, in other strains the cells remain connected to one another and form chains. Bottom fermenting yeasts occur mainly as single cells or pairs of cells, whereas top fermenting yeasts form chains of budding cells. In the case of top fermenting yeasts the mother and daughter cells remain attached to one another for a longer time and as a result branched chains are formed. Top fermenting yeasts can be categorised as powdery and flocculent yeasts. In the case of powdery yeasts the cells remain very finely divided in the fermentation medium and sink slowly to the bottom only at the end of fermentation. The cells of flocculent yeast, clump together after a short timeto form large flocs and then settle rapidly. Bottom fermenting yeasts do not form flocs. Another difference is their ability to fermet the trisaccharide raffinose. Bottom fermenting yeasts can ferment raffinose completely, whereas top fermenting yeasts can ferment only a third of the trisacchride. So... flocculent yeasts produce a clear but less fully fermented beer, whereas powdery yeasts and bottom fermenting yeasts produce a turbid beer with a high degree of attenuation. They also differ in regard to fermentation temperatures .. bottom fermenting yeasts are performed between 4-12 °C, whereas top fermenting yeasts use 14-25 °C.


Jack writes ..

It's very easy to clarify in the primary fermentor - just fine it with some bentonite or some Sparkalloid. Dropping the temperature also helps- say, down into the 50-60F (10-15C) range. The larger yeast volume in the mash may also (if you're lucky) may cause the yeast to re-absorb some of the esters they produced during the ferment as they go dormant- just like in beer brewing with a long lagering phase.

AuntyEthyl describes his technique ...

The process i use for my turbos at the moment is that I ferment only in the primary fermentor. When the spec. gravity hits .990. I rack the wash from the sediment, into a clean fermentor. I then clean my first fermentor and over the period of the next 3 -4 hours. (depending on how lazy I feel) I continuously pour the wash from one fermentor to the other for 3 or 4 times then let it sit for 30mins, and repeat.

This degasses the wash and aids clearing. I then follow the directions for Turbo Clear and add the first of the two part clearing agent let stand for an hour then add second part leave 24hrs. Result, nice clear wash

If you have to split the wash (say you've made more than the still can hold), just pour the remaining wash into a container that will hold the remains and be full. That is, ensure that the air in the container is minimalised. By eliminating the air in your container you will lessen the oxygen thereby lessening the chance of oxidation. This way you will be able to do the remains in a second run any time. The wash should be quite safe for weeks. Keep it sealed.
Ian writes ...

Please don't "run" your wash while it is still cloudy - when I started this gratifying hobby I did just that. The result of distilling all that yeast is you get a lot of nasties that you could avoid by clearing the wash! Yes, the carbon polishing removed all the nasties over a period of time - but as we are striving for excellence - please clarify your wash! I have found a tremendous difference in the result since I started clarifying my wash. Filtering it is NOT the way to go - I use Sparkeloid - it clears the whole batch in 24 hours. Also, just placing the wash in a carboy in a cool place will do the same job over a longer period of time. When your wash is in a carboy - preferably glass - you can see the yeast settle to the bottom . After it has settled, siphon it off - you don't want to suck up the stuff at the bottom - so put the tip of your siphon hose an inch or two above the crud at the bottom. You will have a crystal clear wash. With the stuff remaining in the carboy - I pour or siphon all the loose crap above the almost firm layer of expired yeast into clear 2 litre soda pop bottles - let it settle, and use it in the next batch - the clear stuff of course - not the crud in the bottom.

You should be able to keep your wash happily for weeks or months after its settled, before distilling it. Mike writes ..

The question was recently raised about storing sugar washes. Almost any alcohol solution over about 5% ABV can be stored for long times if oxygen is kept away from them. This means store it in glass or stainless steel; plastic fermenters will allow oxygen to get in and your wash will turn into vinegar! The higher the alcohol content, the easier storage is because the solution will be self sanitizing from the alcohol.

For longer term storage, the yeast present in the wash may present a problem. After the sugar is used up in a wash, the yeast initially will start to process some of the higher molecular weight compounds that it made during the primary fermentation, and the brew will actually get cleaner! Both beers and wines often benefit from some period of "sur lees" (on the yeast)storage. If you are planning a pot distillation for a flavored beverage, this may be a good step to take. Experiment and find out!

As time goes on, the yeast do die and split open, changing the flavor strongly for the worse. For storage longer than a few weeks, the wash should be "racked" (siphoned)off of the yeast cake that will have settled out in the bottom and sealed in an air tight glass or stainless container.It can then be stored for months without problems.

Plastics are not 'impermeable to anything'. They may be considered so for liquids that don't attack them, but their structure makes them relatively porous to gases compared to the dense, amorphous structure of glass. Even steel is very porous to hydrogen! Plastics may therefore be used for long-term storage of chemicals that are not adversely affected by oxidation, but not for sugar washes, where even very small amounts of oxygen can have significant impact. Commercial PET in pop bottle thickness transmits 1.5 to 8 ml of oxygen per square meter per day at room temperature. 'Artificial' corks are made out of carefully selected plastics to have uniform oxygen transmission rates, and are being used because they are more uniform than 'natural' corks, not because they don't allow oxygen in. They have the further advantage of being moisture repellent, unlike 'natural' corks which can soak up wine and so provide a nutrient-rich path for fly or airborne bacteria.

The most common bacterium responsible for production of acetic acid from ethanol is not a member of the lactobacillus family, but is mycoderma aceti, commonly known as Mother of Vinegar. When present in wines, members of the lactobacillus family are responsible for malolactic fermentation, which produces many flavorsome by-products. Far from 'being held in check by the alcohol content', they are responsible for secondary fermentation of new wines that are naturally too high in malic acid, as in Germany, or when particular nuances of taste and flavor are desired, as in the red wines of Burgundy and Bordeaux in France. When present in milk, they produce yoghurt. In contrast, mycoderma aceti, which may be bought in any good brewing shop by those wanting to make their own vinegars, primarily produces acetic acid. In the presence of oxygen, this bacterium oxidises ethanol to acetaldehyde and then to acetic acid. This process can and does occur over long storage times in the best of wines should mycoderma aceti permeate 'natural' corks, in which they can find sustenance and so thrive, resulting in the common complaint that a particularly expensive wine has been 'corked'.

Alcohol Content of the Wash
You can easily calculate the strength of your wash, if you know your starting & final specific gravities (SG) - measure these with a hydrometer. The % alcohol is (Starting - Final) x 129. eg: if your sugar/water mix of SG=1.120 drops to 0.980, then you have a wash with (1.120-0.980)x129=18.1%.
If the SG started at and finished at
Your wash is % alcohol


Some winemakers use the Ebulliometer degree table for their wines - it estimates the difference between the boiling point of their wine & distilled water (eg if your distilled water boils at 100C, and the wine boils at 93C, then it has 8.8% alcohol). I've created the following calc based on data from Churchward (ACI Jnrl & Proc, Jan 1940), supplied by Duncan. Note that some correction may required if there is still residual sugar present. This calc is only good for % alcohol less than 25%.
If the alcohol content is %
Your wash should boil degrees Celcius below that of distilled water


Reusing Yeast
It is possible to reuse the yeast several time. Ted Palmer advises :

You can "re-pitch" yeast more than 10 times in most cases, the biggest factor in determining if the yeast is still healthy would be its viability. Viability is the percentage of live cells in a given sample. To test for this you will need a microscope, a hemocytometer and some methylene blue stain. Here is a good link written by a friend of mine that explains this method in detail http://www.brewingtechniques.com/library/backissues/issue2.4/allen.html.

Another important factor is the genetic strength of the yeast, some yeasts are very stable genetically others aren't. What this means is that genetic mutations change the profile of the cells to the point that they no longer resemble the parent strain. Some yeast strains mutate in less than 4 generations where others are stable for hundreds. Turbo yeast being a highly hybridized yeast falls into the former, I can't tell you how well it will perform or for how many generations, you will have to figure that one out on your own through experimentation. Many packaged yeasts are mixtures of 2, 3 even 4 different yeasts, so if one doesn't crop yeast at the right moment during a ferment one or more of the strains could wind up missing in action. Also be aware that the pitching rate or the number of cells added per ml is an important factor in any ferment . The right # is 10 X 10^6 cells per ml up to 12 degree Plato and you must add 1 x 10^6 per degree Plato above 12. That can be allot of yeast in a high gravity wort. The caveat in yeast pitching is more is better than less.

See also The Microbrewery Laboratory Manual:

* Part 1: Yeast Management
* Part II: Bacteria Detection, Enumeration, and Identification
* Part III: Wild Yeast Detection and Remediation

Jack comments ....

I've been doing some fermentation speed/alcohol-sugar tolerance experiments. The Canadian wine yeast called Lalvin EC-1118 (champagne-saccharomyces bayanus), when pitched at a massive rate (I made up a starter of 10 lbs of sugar, 5 teaspoons of yeast nutrient, in 5 gal of water, then when this was done fermenting, I repitched the thick yeast cake at the bottom of the carboy into only 2.5 gallons of 15% potential alcohol sugar water), with what seems like excessive yeast nutrients, it acted the same as the Turbo yeasts I hear you guys in NZ talk about, plus, with the competative factor (it's a "killer" yeast strain) no boiling or campden tablets had to be used. Anyone who can't get a turbo yeast can make one by "overpitching " this wine yeast! Fun experiment, but I tested every wine yeast in the store, and I went through over 120 lbs of sugar. EC-1118 was the clear winner by a long shot. Hope this can help someone. (by the way, fermentation took less than a week)

David Lamotte writes (to CraftBrewing@egroups.com (a brewing group for Australians/Kiwis at YahooGroups)) ...

Now repitching is a great way to get huge amounts of yeast working for you quickly, but you can also get the same amount of bugs doing nasty things. Bacteria grow much more quickly than yeast, but are usually killed off as the yeast get going making alcohol and lowering the pH (both are kryptonite to bacteria). But the few that survive from the first brew quickly grow to millions in the second and trillions in the third .... So it can often take a few batches before you have to dump one down the drain.

You can just save some of the slurry from the bottom of the fermenter, but it can only be repitched a few times as the 'gunk' builds up and coats the yeast. The information that you were looking for comes from Wyeast's home page (http://wyeastlab.com/hbrew/hbyewash.htm) and tells you how to wash and store your slurry. You can replace the plain water with an Acid wash which will kill any bacteria (but not wild yeast).

Donald advises ...

For yeast re-pitching & yeast washing applications the alcohol should not go above 6%. This is so the yeast will not become stressed and start to reproduce sexually (causing off flavors & mutations) rather than asexually.

Please note that at the end of primary fermentation there is enough yeast for four re-pitches. So, one can harvest 1/4 for re-pitch unstressed yeast before stepping up with the remaining 3/4. Also if you want to change your yeast strain by harvesting: Repitch of the bottom 1/3 will be more flocculent, repitch of the middle will be moderate 1/3 and re-pitch of the top 1/3 will be hardley flocculent. It is suggested to take 1/3 top, 1/3 middle & 1/3 bottom to assure yeast character. What you want the yeast to do now is up to you.

Turbo yeasts are not recommended to be reused. Mike explains "ul> You can easily re-use beer yeast for two reasons - beer generally is not fermented to high alcohol levels, so most of the yeast in the cake at the bottom is still alive, and beer wort is a nearly perfect growth medium to make more new yeast cells.

Turbos are designed with a LOT of live yeast cells and enough nutrients to grow more - but by the end of a fermentation, the nutrients (should be)nearly all gone, and most of the yeast in the cake is dead - from the combined effects of heat and high alcohol levels.

If you pitched a new sugar wash onto a turbo yeast cake, I would expect it to ferment - but MUCH more slowly than when the turbo was new, and would not expect it to reach the same alcohol levels. Jack divulges his method for preserving yeast cultures...

Most home brew shops sell syringes (about 10cc sizes) without needles- these can be used to collect yeast in a perfectly clean manner. Fill up a measuring cup full of hot water and microwave it until it's boiling, then stick the tip of the syringe into the water and fill the syringe totally with boiling water, wait one minute, then repeat twice more with boiling water. On the last draw-up of the boiling water, instead of squirting it out, leave it in the syringe, put the cap on and allow the syringe/water to cool in a draft free place. When you brew your next batch of whatever, pour off all of the beer/wine/mash until you just have the yeast layer covered with liquid (the yeast layer sould never have been exposed to open air). Un cap the syringe and wipe down the tip with alcohol, then stick it under the surface of the fermented liquid near what looks like a healthy yeast colony, squirt out the water into the general area to stir the yeast up a little bit (don't wash it away, just unpack it from it's settled state- squirt the rest of the water away from the yeast you are aiming for to prevent from scattering it to the wind-the amount of water needed to blast the yeast loose depends on what kind of settling properties it has)- then draw back the syringe plunger to collect the 10cc of yeast slurry. The inside of the syringe has not been exposed to the contaminating air, neither has the yeast (due to the protective blanket of beer/wine/mash that you did not pour off), using standard beer "yeast starter" techniques you can use the syringe to make ten "sub-cultures" (about 50 to 100ml), which can then be used to make a one litre starter for your next batch- This technique will not work well for the Turbo yeasts designed for nothing but sugar- but for expensive (liquid) yeast cultures for fancy styles of beer/ wine/ whiskey mash- this system works wonders - I store my syringes in the 'fridge- no acid washing no HEPA filter no extra food- they last at least a month this way. Just make sure that if your mom house-sits for you while your on holiday, that you show her what they are so she doesn't think your a junkie and pours your trappist ale culture down the toilet. By the way- special blends of various beer and bread yeasts work great for fermenting whiskey mashes.

Magnetic Stirrers

You can make a magnetic stirrir out of an old tape player- epoxy a bar magnet to the spindle that turns when you push play and fast forward, mount a piece of thin aluminum above it, buy the stir bars at a science shop, or make one by sealing another bar magnet in a length of tubing cut out of the stem inside a Windex spray bottle, then seal it with the hot edge of a knife- very handy for yeast propagation

Sloppin' Back
Re-use of yeast is an old moonshiners trick also known as "sloppin' back". This refers to adding the mash that was strained out of the wash just prior to distilling, or the sludge left in the bottom of the fermentor, to the next batch of mash.

As Sam explains ..

I did't strain mine so to speak. I pumped out beer from the barrel and left the grain. I used about half old and half new grain. NO YEAST. It is already there. I added water and the same amount of sugar as when I would start a fresh batch. Stir like crazy and you only have to wait for 3 days max for the cap to form and fall and you are ready for a good run. Like I mentioned, third time is the best as far as taste and quantity in my opinion.


This can be a good source of infection for the next batch, but if it goes well, it will help boost the yeast count heaps, act as a bit of a source of nutrients (though its still best to add more of the real stuff like ammonia), and should help buffer the pH a touch (dropping it a few 10 ths). The yeast that you're reusing by this technique are those that have already shown themselves to be quite happy in that type of mash, and are ready to go for the next lot.

It appears that the "Turbo" yeasts are only designed to be used once, and not reused. Ola Norrman writes ...

Turbo Yeast (a mixture of yeast and nutrients) - shall never be reused. There are 2 main reasons for this:

1. Yeast condition. During the manufacture of dried yeast, very high levels of phospholipids are accumulated within the plasma membrane because the yeast is grown aerobically (with oxygen). The yeast population which exists at the end of fermentation has depleted levels making yeast cells more sensitive during subsequent fermentations and fermentation more likely to stick.

So the yeast produce and accumulates lipids during its growth in the yeast factory. Then, during anaerobic fermentation (without oxygen) in the wash, each new generation of yeast contains less and less lipids. Lipids are needed for alcohol tolerance which make this important to 14% Turbos and far more important to 18% Turbos. If to many generations have passed (because of reuse of yeast or to little yeast to start with) the yeast have low "lipid protection" and alcohol tolerance decrease.

Dried yeast also contains typically 15% Trehalose which is a "protectant sugar". It gives the yeast cell internal strength and also is an excellent "start sugar" for the yeast to use at the start of fermentation. Cells at the end of fermentation will typically contain only 2 or 3% Trehalose. Trehalose protect against the shock when the yeast are mixed in the wash.

2. Nutrient depletion. Not relevant for beer, partly relevant for wine but totally relevant for Turbo. So for Turbo, because the sugar offers no nutritional value, re-using the yeast a second time will result in a stuck.

Turbos also contains pH-buffer to give the yeast perfect pH conditions. Nutrients not only work as nutrients, they also keep the production of volatiles down to a minimum. Nutrients are consumed by the yeast. Re-use of a Good Turbo yeast will also result in a lot more volatiles in the wash. pH-buffer will not work in the second batch. There are other ingredients making the CO2 leave faster, giving the yeast cells something to claim to and move around in the fermentation, assist clearing after fermentation etc. Those functions will also be spoiled as they are a part of the nutrients.

Nutrient composition are the manufacturers secrets. One can not simply add some DAP (diammoniumphosphate) or similar and expect it to work the same. The first Turbo in the world was made in Sweden. They are sold under the name Prestige and are extremely good. At http://www.turbo-yeast.com/intro.html there is a lot of info about quality Turbos including a "recipe" telling how "Bad Turbos" are made.

There is also info about yeast strains at: http://www.lallemand.com/ It is a bit surprising that they not have some never information here, only old basics.

One could talk about genetic drift and bacterial risks too, but it is not so important.

Freezing Yeast Cultures
Matt reports

Noonan's book does mention freezing as a viable way of culture storage. It seems that yeast cultures that have been refrigerated are allowed to warm up to around 50F/10C for about a week. This causes a sedimentation and the liquid above the yeast layer is decanted off and the bottom layer is harvested. This layer is squeezed of excess water and then tightly rolled into a ball, stored in plastic wrap and then moved to a freezer. It apparently can be stored for several months. To re-animate this yeast, it needs to be thrown into a starter culture of aerated wort before pitching.


High Gravity Ferments
If you want to use high concentrations of sugar, in order to realise final high alcohol, you need to take special steps.
From the Whitelabs site, the instructions for using their WLP099 Super High Gravity Yeast are as follows ....

o Aerate very heavily, 4 times as much as with a normal gravity beer. Less oxygen dissolves into solution at high gravity.
o Pitch 3-4 times as much yeast as normal.
o Consider aerating intermittently during the first 5 days of fermentation. This will help yeast cells during a very difficult fermentation. Aerate with oxygen for 30 seconds or air for 5-10 minutes.
o Higher nutrient levels can allow yeast to tolerate higher alcohol levels. Use 2 times the normal nutrient level. This is especially important when using WLP099 to make wine and mead, which have almost no nutrient level to begin with.
o Do not start with the entire wort sugar at once. Begin fermentation with a wort that would produce a 6-8% beer, and add wort (it can be concentrated) each day during the first 5 days. This can be done together with aeration. This is mandatory if the reported 25% ABV is to be achieved.

Dr Clayton Cone writes..

Here is a brief protocol for the production of high alcohol fermentations. You can down size to your needs. EC 1118 is a good choice up to 16 - 18 % alcohol. K1 and L2226 seem to work better at 18 - 20+% alcohol. The key to the success of fermenting to these high levels of alcohol is management of the yeast: lots of nutrients, pH control, small amount of aeration and occasional stirring to keep the yeast in suspension.

High Alcohol Fermentation 15-20 +% v/w
K-1or L 2226 Yeast Strain 6# / 1000 gallons
Vi-A-Dry Inactive Yeast 2133 2# / 1000 gallons
Fermaid K 2# / 1000 gallons
Di Ammonium Phosphate (DAP) 4# / 1000 gallons

Sprinkle the 6# K1 or L2226 yeast into 6 gallons of 105 F. water. While gently stirring ,to prevent lumping. Allow to set for a maximum of 30 minutes. Stir to disperse.

To minimize cold temperature shock, cool the warm rehydrated yeast slowly , in stages, by adding equal volumes of juice to the slurry. The attemperating stage is important to prevent the formation of unhealthy yeast cells (petite mutants) which form when the yeast is suddenly exposed to greater than 20 F drop.

Add the yeast inoculum to the bottom of the fermenter after a few gallons of the juice has been pumped in. This allows the yeast added time to get through its lag phase and exposes it to the necessary oxygen that it requires for healthy , alcohol resistant cells after the growth phase.

Divide the nutrients into several portions and add in increments throughout the first 72 - 96 hours.

Start the fermentation in juice that is below 24 brix, preferably 16-20 brix. The lower the initial brix the better the yeast will grow to achieve the necessary population required to complete the last stage of the high alcohol production.

* Aerate or circulate gently for the first 24-48 hours. Do not put air cap on for first 48 hours. Oxygen during the yeast growth phase is necessary to produce the cell wall protection that is required towards the end of the fermentation.

Monitor the pH carefully during the first 24 hours. Do not let it drop below 3.4. Adjust with potassium carbonate or other suitable alkaline material.

Monitor the fermentation closely. When the sugar drops to 4 brix, add fermentable sugars to bring it back to 6 brix. Repeat this 4-6 brix. cycle until you reach the desired alcohol level, allowing the last cycle to go to completion (dry).

Comments:
The temperature should be 80 - 85F. for the first 48 hours and 70 - 80F. for the remainder of the fermentation.

pH below 3.1 places an added stress on the yeast cell as the % alcohol increases. It is best to maintain a 3.4+ pH. Use carbonates such as potassium carbonate to keep the pH above 3.4. It is especially important to monitor the pH during the early hours of fermentation when you are using sugar, honey and some concentrates to increase the alcohol level. There is little or no buffering capacity in these sources of sugar.

High levels of nutrients are absolutely essential for the yeast to produce high levels alcohol.

100% fructose sugar is not recommended as a source of added fermentable sugars. Most wine yeast ferment fructose at a slower rate and often times have trouble fermenting to dryness.

You can expect 0.58 - 0.60 % alcohol by volume for each 1% sugar. Thus the total brix or % sugar should be 33 -35.

With experience you may be able to adjust the brix between 4 and 10 rather than 4 and 6 to minimize the number of sugar additions.

Every juice ferments differently You may have to increase the yeast and nutrient levels or you may even be able to decrease one or more of them. If you are using sugar, honey or concentrate to increase the alcohol level, there are little to no nutrients present in these so you will have to add all that the yeast need for a healthy fermentation. .

You should obtain a Clinitest Kit from your local drug store and use it to monitor the sugar level near the end of the fermentation. It cost about $0.10 per test. It is an ultra simple test normally used to test your urine for sugar. 3 drops fermenting wine + 10 drops water in a test tube + 1 tablet, wait about thirty seconds. Read color compared to a chart.

One step, high gravity , 25-40 brix, fermentation:
High nutrient and yeast inoculum levels are necessary..
3-5X the above recommended yeast and nutrients are required.

* Sugar is just as toxic to yeast as alcohol. Yeast growth decreases as the brix increases. Above 25 brix the growth drops dramatically and has to be compensated by increasing the inoculum. A general rule of thumb-1x10 6th yeast cells / ml./degree brix; 1/2 # K-1 / degree brix/1000 gallons juice; i.e., 1000 gallons of 30 brix juice would require 15# K-1 yeast.

There is usually very little suspended matter in the high gravity juice and as a result the yeast tends to settle rapidly. The yeast on the bottom of the fermenter participate very little in the sugar to alcohol process. Therefore, stirring and or circulating constantly or frequently throughout the fermentation is recommended.

Stuck Ferments

If your fermentation peters out early in the story, it could be due to a couple of reasons.

* Nutrients. This will be the biggie. These are necessary if just using sugar/water. If this is why its become "stuck", then there will be little chance of reviving it (sorry). See the discussion above for more details.
* I sometimes suspect that I haven't diligently rinsed all the bleach from my fermenter, and that this has killed the yeast. Repitching with more yeast gets it going again (and remember to rinse better next time).
* Sometimes you haven't added enough yeast (there almost is no such thing as "too much" yeast). Use a couple of packets if you are using those little 5-7g sachets.
* Temperature problems - too hot will kill the yeast, to cold will make it dormant. Keep the temperature between 26-34 °C, and keep it constant - varying the temperature will jepardise its run.

Do not add more sugar to a stuck ferment. It won't help.

You can still distill a wash which hasn't fully fermented out, but be prepared for some fun. It is likely to foam up heaps, and possibly block the column if you don't give it enough headspace, or use the "anti-foaming" silicon emulsions (wash conditioner) available in brewshops. Also, because not all the sugar has fermented, you're likely to get less alcohol out, and you may caramelise a bit of it on the element or the base of the pot (clean it well afterwards).


Heres a couple of emails between Steve & Dr Clayton Cone that are hugely informative ..

Below is the reply to my enquiry re turbo yeasts and stuck ferments. Dr. Clayton Cone is a microbiologist and consultant at Lallemand which is the manufacturer of the Lallevin EC1118 yeast which is good for up to 18% alc/vol. He provides a protocol for the production of high alc wines/washes below. You may wish to put the following links on your site, www.lallemand.com and www.redstaryeast.com The latter has an interesting text on the history of yeasts.

Regards, Steve


Steve,
I hope that you had a chance to read my articles in the Lalvin Home Wine Making section of the Lallemand.com. I try to cover the role of yeast rehydration, nutrients, oxygen, stirring, pH and other factors that are involved in a healthy fermentation that should assure you of a complete fermentation.

Most stuck fermentations today are caused by:
1. Mishandling at rehydration. Follow instructions very carefully.
2. Allow the temperature to rise too high.
3. No oxygen (aeration) during the first 36 - 48 hours.
4. No stirring or agitation during the first days of the fermentation and near the end. The yeast settle out and are not up in the must where all the sugar is.
5. Lack of yeast nutrients.
6. Too low pH
7. Toxic effect of Octanoic and decanoic fatty acids

I would first try to reactivate the yeast by adding Vi A Dry yeast residue and stirring, allowing a little air to get into the must. Stir several times for several days. If no activity is observed then you need to do one of the following:

1. There will be no yeast growth with all of the alcohol present so you must add a large number of live yeast to finish the job. Add 10lbs of properly rehydrated EC 1118, K1 or L2226 directly to the stuck wine and aerate and stir.
or
2. Calculate the right amount of EC 1118, K1 or L2226 required for the total volume of stuck wine at 5lbs/1000 gallons. Rehydrate the yeast in 10 time its weight in 105F tap water. Add the dry yeast slowly to the water while stirring to avoid lumping and allow to stand for a maximum of 30 minutes.

Add the rehydrated yeast to the following initial mixture which is 5% of the total stuck wine volume:
o 2.5% of volume of stuck wine (25 gallons/1000 gallons)
o 2.5 % of volume as water (25 gals./1000 gal.)
o 2.0 lbs. Fermaid K & 2 lbs DAP /1000 gals. Of wine/water mix
Adjust sugar level of this mixture to 5% with juice concentrate or sugar (40 lbs sugar/100 gals)

Maintain temperature at 70 - 75F

When the sugar level has dropped by