Johnson unveils Tube alcohol ban
 

On Mon, 12 May 2008 03:24:01 +0100, Charles Ellson wrote

Is it written down anywhere how much alcohol needs to be in something
before it's "an alcoholic beverage"?

ISTR it used to be 2%.

You are confusing percentage (of alcohol by volume) with degrees
proof. 100deg proof = ~57 % abv ('Merkan measure is different).

Am I? I just remember cans of Shandy Bass in the late 60s with the warning
"contains no more than 2% alcohol"

Johnson unveils Tube alcohol ban
 

On Mon, 12 May 2008 20:02:48 +0100, Stimpy
wrote:

On Mon, 12 May 2008 03:24:01 +0100, Charles Ellson wrote

Is it written down anywhere how much alcohol needs to be in something
before it's "an alcoholic beverage"?

ISTR it used to be 2%.

You are confusing percentage (of alcohol by volume) with degrees
proof. 100deg proof = ~57 % abv ('Merkan measure is different).

Am I? I just remember cans of Shandy Bass in the late 60s with the warning
"contains no more than 2% alcohol"

I remember cans of shandy and some ginger beer as showing "not more
than 2° proof".

Johnson unveils Tube alcohol ban
 

On Mon, 12 May 2008 19:12:12 +0100, Tom Anderson
wrote:

On Mon, 12 May 2008, Charles Ellson wrote:

On Sun, 11 May 2008 21:11:31 +0100, Stimpy
wrote:

On Sun, 11 May 2008 20:42:22 +0100, Mark Morton wrote

Is it written down anywhere how much alcohol needs to be in something
before it's "an alcoholic beverage"?

ISTR it used to be 2%.

You are confusing percentage (of alcohol by volume) with degrees proof.
100deg proof = ~57 % abv ('Merkan measure is different).

Yes, which i've never got. My understanding is that British proof was
defined as the percentage of alcohol at which a mixture of the spirit with
gunpowder would explode when lit. Why the septics switched to the
gratuitously different, chemically meaningless and practically
no-better-than-ABV system of 1 degree = 0.5 % ABV, i really don't know.
The usual sheer wrongheadedness, i suppose.

Both systems seem to be somewhat arbitrary and at the mercy of the
actual composition and moisture content of the gunpowder (and/or the
surrounding atmosphere?). There is some description of the evolving
methods of determining proof in :-
http://www.dcs.ed.ac.uk/home/jhb/whisky/swa/chap6.html

WRT Stimpy's shandy mentioned in another post, the Sikes system
(designating in degrees proof) would seem to have not been replaced by
the current system (designation by percentage of alcohol) until 1980.

Johnson unveils Tube alcohol ban
 

On Mon, 12 May 2008 23:11:44 +0100, Charles Ellson
wrote:

Am I? I just remember cans of Shandy Bass in the late 60s with the warning
"contains no more than 2% alcohol"

I remember cans of shandy and some ginger beer as showing "not more
than 2° proof".

My memory goes with the percentage labelling too.

To quote from the fount of all knowledge, aka Wikipedia:

In the United States, beverages containing up to 0.5% alcohol by
volume (ABV) can be legally called non-alcoholic according to the
Volstead Act. Due to the extremely low alcohol content present in
various brands of "NA" (non-alcoholic) beer, the sale to minors and
adults under age 21 is legal in most states.

In the UK the following descriptions apply by law (correct at May
2007):
No alcohol/alcohol free: not more than 0.05% ABV
Dealcoholised: over 0.05% but not more than 0.5% ABV
Low alcohol: not more than 1.2% ABV

Johnson unveils Tube alcohol ban
 

On Mon, 12 May 2008, Charles Ellson wrote:

On Mon, 12 May 2008 19:12:12 +0100, Tom Anderson
wrote:

On Mon, 12 May 2008, Charles Ellson wrote:

On Sun, 11 May 2008 21:11:31 +0100, Stimpy
wrote:

On Sun, 11 May 2008 20:42:22 +0100, Mark Morton wrote

Is it written down anywhere how much alcohol needs to be in something
before it's "an alcoholic beverage"?

ISTR it used to be 2%.

You are confusing percentage (of alcohol by volume) with degrees proof.
100deg proof = ~57 % abv ('Merkan measure is different).

Yes, which i've never got. My understanding is that British proof was
defined as the percentage of alcohol at which a mixture of the spirit with
gunpowder would explode when lit. Why the septics switched to the
gratuitously different, chemically meaningless and practically
no-better-than-ABV system of 1 degree = 0.5 % ABV, i really don't know.
The usual sheer wrongheadedness, i suppose.

Both systems seem to be somewhat arbitrary and at the mercy of the
actual composition and moisture content of the gunpowder (and/or the
surrounding atmosphere?).

And the quantity of spirit added to the gunpowder, i'd guess. I assume
there was some kind of British Standard governing the test!

tom

--
When you mentioned INSERT-MIND-INPUT ... did they look at you like this?

Johnson unveils Tube alcohol ban
 

On Tue, 13 May 2008 11:22:27 +0100, Tom Anderson
wrote:

On Mon, 12 May 2008, Charles Ellson wrote:

On Mon, 12 May 2008 19:12:12 +0100, Tom Anderson
wrote:

On Mon, 12 May 2008, Charles Ellson wrote:

On Sun, 11 May 2008 21:11:31 +0100, Stimpy
wrote:

On Sun, 11 May 2008 20:42:22 +0100, Mark Morton wrote

Is it written down anywhere how much alcohol needs to be in something
before it's "an alcoholic beverage"?

ISTR it used to be 2%.

You are confusing percentage (of alcohol by volume) with degrees proof.
100deg proof = ~57 % abv ('Merkan measure is different).

Yes, which i've never got. My understanding is that British proof was
defined as the percentage of alcohol at which a mixture of the spirit with
gunpowder would explode when lit. Why the septics switched to the
gratuitously different, chemically meaningless and practically
no-better-than-ABV system of 1 degree = 0.5 % ABV, i really don't know.
The usual sheer wrongheadedness, i suppose.

Both systems seem to be somewhat arbitrary and at the mercy of the
actual composition and moisture content of the gunpowder (and/or the
surrounding atmosphere?).

And the quantity of spirit added to the gunpowder, i'd guess. I assume
there was some kind of British Standard governing the test!

According to the ed.ac.uk site I mentioned elsewhere the measurement
method had changed from setting fire to things to measuring specific
gravity in the 1740s. As different drinks have different ingredients
there was presumably still a practically insignificant element of
error.