>>8473704

96% ethanol is NOT required for hand sanitizer. 70% is the ideal proof, but anything from 40-96% works perfectly fine.

This is marketing gobblygoop.

The approved formula uses Ethanol, h2o2, and glycerol.

Every distillery in the nation received guidance from the TTB yesterday.

These distilleries must pay excise tax as they're not denatured manufacturers who usually supply the ethanol for such a product,

because the spirit is potable/food grade this sanitizer will have a vastly higher cost of goods due to state and federal excise tax.

Most distilleries are also beholden to label printers and raw material suppliers (farmers, glass manufacturers, closures/caps, etc.)

2 weeks is wildly optimistic considering the strain on suppliers.

Distilleries that can self print labels and coopt existing packaging will be able to be first to market.

But once the denatured producers catch up distilleries cannot compete due to excise taxes.

>>8474213 LB

>>8474213

After looking into it, it does appear who guidance is to use 96%.

They suggest using a lot of h2o2 and glycerol bringing the batch abv down to around 70-80%.

I stand corrected.

>>8474273

Most of the ethanol for gin, vodka, liqueurs, is made by a handful of producers with such scale that their loss is the typical annual production of a small distillery like ops.

The good thing is that local production is possible from these smaller producers, especially if logistics breaks down.

but the excise tax requirement is going to kill them in the long run.

It's kind of like a distributed network of producers who can produce sanitizer.

I can see the value to the country for such a network.

The excise taxes are anti competitive for food grade ethanol producers making sanitizer though.

The class change to non-potable should have an implicit waiving of the tax.

The POTUS enacting Defense Production Act could actually be in effort to force distilleries to make these products?

>>8474392

Most of the 96% ethanol that is.

Many small producers can produce 96% but not efficient enough to compete.

>>8474447

That's an excellent point.

It also puts in perspective Cuomo's push for farm distilleries in NY.

He has been the first and foremost at liberalizing laws in NY for this type of small producer.

I wonder why.

Especially considering his chummy relationship with POTUS as of late.

Not to give herr cuomo any unneeded praise but he has seemed to changed his approach lately.

I think listing the major GNS producers in the country both denatured and food grade

and then digging their ownership and execs may give you some light on that.

Are they owned by China?

How big is this market for hand sanitizer going to be going forward?

It could be vast.

Anons,

Why is POTUS turning to small ethanol producers for hand sanitizer?

There are giant monster companies that produce so much 96% food-grade ethanol/denatured ethanol that their waste annually dwarfs these producer's annual production.

Who supplies purrell? They're ethanol based, unlike most other sanitizers using isopropyl.

Pfizer produces purrell as of 2004, but recently sold to Johnson & Johnson.

Where is purrell produced? China? Does this become a national security issue?

What is the efficacy of ethanol vs isopropyl against this virus?

Ethanol is much easier to produce through small distilleries around the country,

isopropyl not so much.

Where is the best source for glycerol and h2o2 for the WHO based recipe?

Distilleries have to pay for all the raw materials? (Yeast, enzymes, packaging, grain, etc.)

Distilleries absolutely shouldn't charge for it…if they do the public would look at them as assholes and ruin their business/brands.

Maybe sell it at cost?

There's a lot going on here that we may not understand.

With China threatening face mask hording, is it out of the question taht they're threatening hand sanitizer/ethanol some how?