> For example, I think a lot of us don’t want to sit in front of a still for 30 minutes waiting for it to come up to temperature at the beginning of a distilling day.
Idk, I find driving a still to be pleasurable. To each their own.
Hot ethanol seems to have the refractive index to make it sparkle like a diamond. I recommend trying distilling if you like to brew things. It's a fun hobby.
Loughla 12 hours ago [-]
I have always wanted to set up an old timey whisky still in my woods on the creek. I have no idea how to make a still.
Any way you could point me toward a reliable source for how to build and operate one? I don't trust the results from blind googling anymore.
hidingfearful 8 hours ago [-]
looking for the snarky link between "blind googling" and blindness caused by drinking improperly distilled alcohol.
margalabargala 5 hours ago [-]
> blindness caused by drinking improperly distilled alcohol.
This isn't actually a thing. You will die of normal ethanol poisoning well before consuming enough methanol to cause blindness when drinking alcohol you made from distilling something you fermented.
The blindness thing is some nicely placed Prohibition-era propaganda combined with the addition of methanol to alcohol-containing products that managed to make its way into the public psyche.
ghushn3 19 hours ago [-]
Definitely be careful before embarking on home distilling. In many parts of the world (and many parts of the US) it's pretty strictly illegal.
landl0rd 19 hours ago [-]
A lot of my family has lived in a West Virginia valley since before the Revolutionary War. For most of that time, we have held a generalized contempt for the law and those who would tell others how to live their lives.
I think for other people, it's similar, and we either don't care or appreciate the fact that it's a way to rebel.
Disclaimer: I don't hold any licenses or permits related to alcohol, but as a holder of a half dozen other ones, I believe it would be surmountable to do this legally if you really want to.
drob518 10 hours ago [-]
You can do it legally, but I think the point is that many people think that home distillation is like home brewing of beer (legal and fairly easy as long as you don’t sell it). It isn’t. The Feds control distillation much more strictly, and as the site you referenced pointed out, even possessing an unlicensed still in some states is illegal.
schwartzworld 13 hours ago [-]
I think you’d struggle to find much evidence of home distillers getting busted. If you’re not selling the stuff, you’re probably not the TTBs concern.
diggan 11 hours ago [-]
> find much evidence of home distillers getting busted
Again, depends heavily on the country. Some countries don't care about the theoretical/actual impact of committing a crime, and will chase and charge you regardless if it's for private use or not (which, kind of also makes sense). In my personal experience, Sweden is one of those countries, I'm sure there are more out there.
drob518 10 hours ago [-]
This falls into the “how would they know about it?” category, but that doesn’t mean it’s not illegal or that you wouldn’t get prosecuted if they happened to find it. Sort of like growing your own personal stash of marijuana.
schwartzworld 4 hours ago [-]
More than that, what are they actually trying to enforce? In the USA it’s excise tax. The TTB cannot possibly go after home distillers making quantities that you’d make with a stovetop still. It’s like $2.70 per gallon for small producers. Obviously in countries that have stricter alcohol laws, the math might be different.
Carrok 9 hours ago [-]
We know it’s illegal. We don’t care.
fc417fc802 19 hours ago [-]
Any such law displays a gross disrespect for basic freedoms. The more people that ignore it the better. You'd do as well to outlaw sewing your own clothes.
ocimbote 18 hours ago [-]
Distillation, when done improperly, can result in very toxic substances. It requires care and craft and since alcohol is not only a drug but a transformed product (like LSD or meth), it is perfectly fine that some state-level supervision apply: anything ranging from plain interdiction to controlled production. Note that the level of control usually depends on potential health issues and culture, it is not usually strictly bound to the product itself, since we can observe variations from region to region.
fc417fc802 16 hours ago [-]
By that logic it would be acceptable for the state to regulate all sorts of common culinary techniques. Note that those are regulated in a commercial setting. I'd have no objection to similar regulations pertaining to restaurants that wanted to serve alcohol that was distilled, brewed, or otherwise prepared on site. In that context it's equivalent to the regulations pertaining to the handling of raw meat.
Similarly, perhaps the state ought to regulate the use of refrigerators in a residential setting since various failure modes there can easily land you in the hospital.
Enough people have contracted botulism poisoning by storing chopped garlic under oil in their fridge that the FDA has a warning about it on their website. So I suppose that would also be acceptable to regulate? Or perhaps just cooking oil in general? After all, it's quite flammable and people commonly start house fires when frying things.
While we're at it, perhaps canning things at home ought to require a permit?
The standard that "thing could pose a hazard therefore regulation is acceptable" is far too broad a criteria as it applies to approximately everything that exists and entirely disregards individual freedoms.
> It requires care and craft
A fine whiskey? Sure. The equivalent of vodka? Don't be ridiculous.
> alcohol is not only a drug but a transformed product
It most certainly is not. Distillation concentrates something that is already there.
Alternatively, fried eggs are a transformed product but at that point the term as used is so absurdly broad as to be rendered entirely useless.
kopadudl 16 hours ago [-]
The pure process of Distillation does the concentration of something that is already there. But is it always pure when amateurs do it? Can you guarrantee that nothing goes wrong, that the product is tested for contaminations every time?
fc417fc802 16 hours ago [-]
Do you swab your pan fried chicken and culture to test for salmonella after cooking it? Or do you just follow the recipe and basic food safety guidelines? Perhaps you judge doneness by a combination of fillet thickness and cook time? Or perhaps you go to the trouble of using a digital thermometer just to be safe?
btreecat 13 hours ago [-]
> But is it always pure when amateurs do it?
Yes. Arguably, because amateurs are not cost bound, they tend to make a less "containinated" product due to the way the collection and blending works.
You discard the foul flavors and harse volatiles that commercial folks keep for cost.
>Can you guarrantee that nothing goes wrong, that the product is tested for contaminations every time?
Life isn't about that kind of guarantee. You don't practice the same level of food safety at home as you're required to maintain in a professional environment.
Life, is about risk acceptance.
denkmoon 16 hours ago [-]
Why does that matter if it is not for commercial distribution?
lo_zamoyski 8 hours ago [-]
> A fine whiskey? Sure. The equivalent of vodka? Don't be ridiculous.
Given the variability of quality and flavor among vodkas, this is not quite true. Water mineralization, number of distillations, type of filtration, terroir and remaining "impurities" from the specific mash used. All of these affect the character of the vodka just as they do any spirit. That's why no one takes vodka distilled a million times seriously, if you can even call it vodka.
(And that excludes things like barrel-aged vodkas, like the venerable starka, or a well-made bimber which cannot be accused of lacking character.)
btreecat 13 hours ago [-]
> Distillation, when done improperly, can result in very toxic substances.
You're talking methanol right? That's a byproduct of fermentation of fruit.
>It requires care and craft
It really doesn't, it's a very basic process.
>and since alcohol is not only a drug but a transformed product (like LSD or meth),
Not sure what that means, could you clarify?
>it is perfectly fine that some state-level supervision apply: anything ranging from plain interdiction to controlled production.
It's really no different than brewing beer or wine, then discarding the water. For personal consumption it shouldn't be an issue.
drob518 10 hours ago [-]
Let’s be honest, what the government really cares about are the excise taxes on whiskey.
jajko 16 hours ago [-]
People frequently get blind or just die from home made booze when distilling and not checking for methyl alcohol. Quite common on poor parts of the world but also ie eastern Europe and russia.
margalabargala 5 hours ago [-]
This gets repeated a lot but doesn't actually stand up to any scrutiny.
If you go and look, you will find that cases of blindness are caused not by "improper" distillation, but rather by the adulteration of the finished product- that is, extra methanol being added after the fact.
If you can find a verifiable case of a person going blind from home distillation, I would be interested to see it.
fc417fc802 16 hours ago [-]
Misinformation. Unless you happen to own a GCMS you don't check for methanol. Rather you discard the heads and the tails from a fractioning still because that's where stuff that isn't ethanol comes out. In the modern era you'd use a digital thermometer for this task.
Someone suffering methanol poisoning from DIY distillation is equivalent to someone landing in the hospital after failing to cook his chicken all the way through. It's simple incompetence, likely due either to blatant disregard for safety or else to attempting to wing something based on only the most topical of knowledge.
genewitch 14 hours ago [-]
Isn't the remedy for methanol ingestion... Ethanol? Just keep drinking?
I have two distillers and I've never distilled alcohol. I do distill water in my eletric one. I turn it on and leave the condenser part off until bubbles form, I blow the steam off to ensure it steams again, place the top on, set the timer for 3 hours and shut it off then. The pre-boil ostensibly let's the petroleum and the like escape, and the stopping before dry prevents anything with a higher phase temp than water from distilling.
I use it for coffee machine, kettle, and ice machine, just to cut down on maintenance.
Ten years ago I bought 3 copper five gallon distillers, and gave two to my in-laws and kept one for myself. I tried to distill water in it but it was not coming out clean, so I packed it away till I had time to use it outside on a propane burner after purging it with alcohol or some non-copper eating acid.
btreecat 13 hours ago [-]
> Rather you discard the heads and the tails from a fractioning still because that's where stuff that isn't ethanol comes out.
This is also incorrect. It comes out throughout the distillation process, with a higher % concentration in the tails, but an over all reduced volume due to lower % distillate.
> Someone suffering methanol poisoning from DIY distillation is equivalent to someone landing in the hospital after failing to cook his chicken all the way through.
It's more like taking raw packs of chicken and rubbing your eyes. That has to be intentional.
dpacmittal 18 hours ago [-]
I mean it's illegal to grow marijuana or synthesize LSD at your home in most of the world.
fc417fc802 18 hours ago [-]
Note that I don't take issue with the UAE banning home distillation.
If marijuana is fully legalized in a given jurisdiction yet it remains illegal to grow small quantities of it I would feel similarly. Still, I don't think it's quite as culturally ubiquitous throughout history as alcohol is, at least in the west.
LSD is an entirely different ballpark. I don't personally think US drug law makes much sense but I will acknowledge that something like LSD lacks the broad historical acceptance that alcohol enjoys in the west. Mushrooms would be a much better example if you want to take the discussion in that direction.
dylan604 9 hours ago [-]
I'm really at a loss as to the why distilling needs anything requiring OSS. It's worse than my washer/dryer/dishwasher wanting/requiring WiFi access. You put your mash in a vat to ferment. You bring that mash to boil in the still. You collect the output.
dmos62 6 hours ago [-]
iSpindel is cheaper than a manual hydrometer and it's automatic (and thus safer for the cultures). If you don't want to track/collect data about the fermentation or whatever, then don't, but many find it practical and pleasurable.
Are you sure it's cheaper than a glass hydrometer, you can get one for around £3
Dusksky 18 hours ago [-]
[dead]
nicman23 17 hours ago [-]
[flagged]
Ringz 17 hours ago [-]
You aren’t the only one. I wonder how distillation of LLMs is done, didn’t research it and hoped this might be a solution. Well, it might be a solution but one that come with more hallucinations.
qeternity 13 hours ago [-]
It's the same process as regular training, but instead of a single token for your cost function, it's top-k logits.
Idk, I find driving a still to be pleasurable. To each their own.
Hot ethanol seems to have the refractive index to make it sparkle like a diamond. I recommend trying distilling if you like to brew things. It's a fun hobby.
Any way you could point me toward a reliable source for how to build and operate one? I don't trust the results from blind googling anymore.
This isn't actually a thing. You will die of normal ethanol poisoning well before consuming enough methanol to cause blindness when drinking alcohol you made from distilling something you fermented.
The blindness thing is some nicely placed Prohibition-era propaganda combined with the addition of methanol to alcohol-containing products that managed to make its way into the public psyche.
I think for other people, it's similar, and we either don't care or appreciate the fact that it's a way to rebel.
1 - it depends on what you're distilling.
https://www.distillate.org/laws/list
2 - while federally illegal to just get a still and start churning out spirits, ... https://www.ttb.gov/regulated-commodities/beverage-alcohol/d... a free permit and some paperwork (okay a lot of paperwork) lets you.
Disclaimer: I don't hold any licenses or permits related to alcohol, but as a holder of a half dozen other ones, I believe it would be surmountable to do this legally if you really want to.
Again, depends heavily on the country. Some countries don't care about the theoretical/actual impact of committing a crime, and will chase and charge you regardless if it's for private use or not (which, kind of also makes sense). In my personal experience, Sweden is one of those countries, I'm sure there are more out there.
Similarly, perhaps the state ought to regulate the use of refrigerators in a residential setting since various failure modes there can easily land you in the hospital.
Enough people have contracted botulism poisoning by storing chopped garlic under oil in their fridge that the FDA has a warning about it on their website. So I suppose that would also be acceptable to regulate? Or perhaps just cooking oil in general? After all, it's quite flammable and people commonly start house fires when frying things.
While we're at it, perhaps canning things at home ought to require a permit?
The standard that "thing could pose a hazard therefore regulation is acceptable" is far too broad a criteria as it applies to approximately everything that exists and entirely disregards individual freedoms.
> It requires care and craft
A fine whiskey? Sure. The equivalent of vodka? Don't be ridiculous.
> alcohol is not only a drug but a transformed product
It most certainly is not. Distillation concentrates something that is already there.
Alternatively, fried eggs are a transformed product but at that point the term as used is so absurdly broad as to be rendered entirely useless.
Yes. Arguably, because amateurs are not cost bound, they tend to make a less "containinated" product due to the way the collection and blending works.
You discard the foul flavors and harse volatiles that commercial folks keep for cost.
>Can you guarrantee that nothing goes wrong, that the product is tested for contaminations every time?
Life isn't about that kind of guarantee. You don't practice the same level of food safety at home as you're required to maintain in a professional environment.
Life, is about risk acceptance.
Given the variability of quality and flavor among vodkas, this is not quite true. Water mineralization, number of distillations, type of filtration, terroir and remaining "impurities" from the specific mash used. All of these affect the character of the vodka just as they do any spirit. That's why no one takes vodka distilled a million times seriously, if you can even call it vodka.
(And that excludes things like barrel-aged vodkas, like the venerable starka, or a well-made bimber which cannot be accused of lacking character.)
You're talking methanol right? That's a byproduct of fermentation of fruit.
>It requires care and craft
It really doesn't, it's a very basic process.
>and since alcohol is not only a drug but a transformed product (like LSD or meth),
Not sure what that means, could you clarify?
>it is perfectly fine that some state-level supervision apply: anything ranging from plain interdiction to controlled production.
It's really no different than brewing beer or wine, then discarding the water. For personal consumption it shouldn't be an issue.
If you go and look, you will find that cases of blindness are caused not by "improper" distillation, but rather by the adulteration of the finished product- that is, extra methanol being added after the fact.
If you can find a verifiable case of a person going blind from home distillation, I would be interested to see it.
Someone suffering methanol poisoning from DIY distillation is equivalent to someone landing in the hospital after failing to cook his chicken all the way through. It's simple incompetence, likely due either to blatant disregard for safety or else to attempting to wing something based on only the most topical of knowledge.
I have two distillers and I've never distilled alcohol. I do distill water in my eletric one. I turn it on and leave the condenser part off until bubbles form, I blow the steam off to ensure it steams again, place the top on, set the timer for 3 hours and shut it off then. The pre-boil ostensibly let's the petroleum and the like escape, and the stopping before dry prevents anything with a higher phase temp than water from distilling.
I use it for coffee machine, kettle, and ice machine, just to cut down on maintenance.
Ten years ago I bought 3 copper five gallon distillers, and gave two to my in-laws and kept one for myself. I tried to distill water in it but it was not coming out clean, so I packed it away till I had time to use it outside on a propane burner after purging it with alcohol or some non-copper eating acid.
This is also incorrect. It comes out throughout the distillation process, with a higher % concentration in the tails, but an over all reduced volume due to lower % distillate.
> Someone suffering methanol poisoning from DIY distillation is equivalent to someone landing in the hospital after failing to cook his chicken all the way through.
It's more like taking raw packs of chicken and rubbing your eyes. That has to be intentional.
If marijuana is fully legalized in a given jurisdiction yet it remains illegal to grow small quantities of it I would feel similarly. Still, I don't think it's quite as culturally ubiquitous throughout history as alcohol is, at least in the west.
LSD is an entirely different ballpark. I don't personally think US drug law makes much sense but I will acknowledge that something like LSD lacks the broad historical acceptance that alcohol enjoys in the west. Mushrooms would be a much better example if you want to take the discussion in that direction.
https://opensourcedistilling.com/ispindel/