I do have a question for you gentlemen.
I have a Blonde Belgian which was kegged, force carbonated and to sweet."
I went through various steps to recover and save the beer, although, I am amazed that there does seem to be sweetnes still in the brew since the hydrometer indicated 1.000 FG. When I plugged the numbers into Beer Smith it showed Total calories 326 Cal/pint, Calories from Alcohol 265 Cal/pint. I thought the calories would be absent or way lower, since the carbohydrates/sugars had been converted. I have used beano in the past when attempting to make a beer for a friend of mine who happens to be a diabetic. I was under the assumption that the carbohydrates would be converted into alcohol and therefore it would be an effective way to brew beer for a person who may have diabeties. When the FG was crunched down to 1.000, I thought that the calories would also be near the zero range. Do you think this is a software issue or am I confused?
Cheers
I have a Blonde Belgian which was kegged, force carbonated and to sweet."
I went through various steps to recover and save the beer, although, I am amazed that there does seem to be sweetnes still in the brew since the hydrometer indicated 1.000 FG. When I plugged the numbers into Beer Smith it showed Total calories 326 Cal/pint, Calories from Alcohol 265 Cal/pint. I thought the calories would be absent or way lower, since the carbohydrates/sugars had been converted. I have used beano in the past when attempting to make a beer for a friend of mine who happens to be a diabetic. I was under the assumption that the carbohydrates would be converted into alcohol and therefore it would be an effective way to brew beer for a person who may have diabeties. When the FG was crunched down to 1.000, I thought that the calories would also be near the zero range. Do you think this is a software issue or am I confused?
Cheers