PROCESSING
The malt and hop crisis
Technologies to maximise processability and cost efficiency
By Declan L Goode and Eoin Lalor
Kerry Bio-Science
T he years 2006 and 2007 will best be
remembered by brewers across the globe
as the catastrophic years of variable malt
quality and hop supply problems –
unfortunately the outlook for 2008 and beyond
looks no better. The overall global cereal
supply is currently characterised as poor
yielding with low year-to-year stock-leads.
Basically, we are bordering on a situation of
higher demand than supply, consumption is
exceeding production. This has resulted in a
high demand for virtually every agricultural
crop across the globe.
As a result, barley and malt prices have
rocketed through the roof. Likewise, Mother
Nature has not been so kind, poor weather
conditions in 2007 have meant crops of a
difficult nature to process and malt. High
protein levels, high beta-glucan levels and
often malt of a quality that can at best be
described as variable have increased
difficulties in the brew-house. Brewers are
forced to change processes, and increase
adjunct proportions in recipe formulations.
This is not just a localised European problem,
but rather a global crisis!
Unfortunately, it is not limited to malt supply,
the outlook for hop supply is even bleaker. A
combination of factors has created this
problem. Mismanagement in previous years,
where hop prices were allowed to fall because
of oversupply in the market place, eventually
forced growers out of the market and therefore
reduced hop acreage considerably. In 2007,
climatic factors across the globe accentuated
the problem further. The level of supply has
dropped below the level of demand. What is
the result? - prices for alpha acids have
Figure 1.
Variable quality malt, elevated malt prices and
supply difficulties have forced some breweries to
make drastic changes to established recipes and
processes.
doubled, tripled and even quadrupled in some
cases and breweries are struggling to get
supplies.
Bottom-line – what does this mean for the
brewing industry? It means we are under even
more pressure to improve our process and
cost efficiencies in our downstream processes.
How can this be achieved? By recognising
the limitations of our processes! The brewing
specialists at Kerry Bio-Science have been
working closely with brewers globally to
address this problem. The following article
summarises technologies, process aids and
ingredients (Figure 1) that are designed to help
The BREWER & DISTILLER INTERNATIONAL • Volume 4 • Issue 3 • March 2008 • www.ibd.org.uk
brewers cope with the current demanding raw
material supply chain – and enhance cost
efficiencies in the process.
Improving brew-house efficiencies
Exogenous wort enzymes
Variable quality malt, elevated malt prices and
supply difficulties have forced some breweries
to make drastic changes to established
recipes and processes. A reduction in either
the proportion or quality of malt in a recipe
means a considerable decrease in necessary
endogenous enzymatic activities and an
increase in the difficult-to-degrade barley cell
wall structural components such as β-glucan,
pentosans, arabinoxylans, small starch
granules and protein. Likewise, increasing the
proportion of adjunct in the mash brings
additional challenges. The adjunct choice,
which can include barley, maize, rice, sorghum
and wheat, will again depend on price,
availability and brewery geographical location.
The reader is thus referred to a previous
publication by the author, in which details of
the process difficulties associated with each
adjunct, together with process solutions are
explained in more detail(1).
Commercial enzymes (Table 1 overleaf) can
alleviate problems associated with variable
quality malt and increased adjunct usage and
when applied correctly can increase brew-
house yields, thereby optimising the starch and
protein sources brought by the malt or adjunct.
Increased brew-house yield, increased mash
filterability, reduced fermentation times,
increased alcohol yields and improved colloidal
stability of the beer can be achieved. Correct
application of the enzymes will reduce
processing difficulties imparted by the poor
quality malt/adjunct and therefore increase
process predictability, in a very cost effective
manner.
37
PROCESSING

Wort Fining Agents
Likewise, the high nitrogen grains can result in
turbid worts, which could cause colloidal
problems downstream. Application of
Whirlfloc a wort-fining agent can in part
alleviate these problems. Whirlfloc is a purified
form of high molecular weight κ-carrageenan
extracted from red marine algae
(Rhodophycae) and manufactured exclusively
for use as a high performing wort-fining agent.
When applied 5-10 min before casting, it
accelerates the formation of dense and
compact trub, saves time, boosts whirlpool
wort recovery and results in considerably
brighter worts. How does this happen? – The
carrageenan polymers are large negatively
charged molecules. These form complexes
with positively charged wort proteins, lipids
and glucans. As explained from the principle of
Stokes law, the resulting tightly bound
electrically neutral aggregates sediment rapidly
and form more compact trub in the whirlpool.
This process is represented schematically in
Figure 2 opposite.
Improving Fermentation Efficiencies
Foam Control
The changes in the early vigorous stages of
primary fermentation can be visually
characterised as foam developing on top of
the fermenting wort. Traditionally brewers
have left 20-30% headspace on top of the
fermentation vessel to accommodate this
excess foam. The foam produced can have
the effect of reduced overall fermentation
capacity, increased fouling of vessels and CO2
recovery equipment and at worst overflow of
foam from the vessel resulting in product
losses. These problems can be alleviated by
the use of a foam control agent FermCap
which is a food-grade material consisting of a
unique emulsion of an extremely effective
surface-active agent, which prevents foam
formation by reducing surface tension –
thereby reducing vessel headspace to <10%.
It has been specifically designed for
application in the brewing process. It is
classified as a processing aid because it is
removed from the beer under normal brewing
process conditions. It is adsorbed onto the

Table 1. Brew-house enzymes for increased process-ability.

Problem Symptom Process Aid / Enzyme Description Key Benefits

Deactivation or Starch positive wort and Bioferm is a fungal endo-amylase. It can be used in Improves wort fermentability
insufficient concentration slow fermentation the mash (or in fermentation) to reduce starch to low Production of maltose in
of malt amylase molecular weight dextrins and maltose. high adjunct brewing
Eliminates starch hazes
Improves beer filtration

Deactivation or insufficient Slow or incomplete Amylo is a fungal amyloglucosidase. It sequentially Increases wort glucose levels
concentration of fermentation hydrolyses both exo α-1,4 and α-1,6 glycosidic Low carbohydrate beer
malt enzymes linkages and therefore is used to degradestarch production
polymers and maltose to glucose. The addition of Improved Alcohol yield
Amylo in the brew-house, to the cold wort or beer
(in the fermenter) converts dextrin to glucose and
results in high alcohol / ‘low carb.’ beer.

Poor starch hydrolysis/ High mash or cereal
cooker viscosities and
starch positive wort
Hitempase is an endo-acting liquefaction bacterial Improves starch liquefaction
α-amylase which randomly hydrolyses the α-1,4 and subsequent yields in
glycosidic linkages in amylose and amylopectin cereal cooker
resulting in the production of dextrins. It is Control of starch positive worts
characterised by its stability at extremely high in kettle
temperatures (~105°C).

Non-starch Poor mash or beer Bioglucanase is an endo-betaglucanase preparation Reduces mash and wort viscosity
polysaccharides filtration and β-glucan and has a pure lichenase activity and hydrolyses Eliminates β-glucan gums and
released during mashing haze 1,4 glycosidic linkages next to a 1,3 linkage, in mixed hazes
are insufficiently linked β-glucans. Improves filtration
hydrolysed. Biocellulase contains cellulase, hemicellulase and Increases extract yield
betaglucanase activities. The activities present in Compensates for malt quality and
Biocellulase are effective in the degradation of the season to season variations
complex carbohydrates found in plant cell walls. Improves beer shelf life

Presence of a significant Insufficient nitrogen Bioprotease is a proteolytic enzyme. Optimises FAAN (Free Alpha
percentage of unmalted available for yeast Amino Nitrogen) levels in high
barley or use of other growth and slow adjunct brewing
adjuncts fermentation Improves mash lautering/
filtration and extract yield
Improves filterability of the wort

Poor extract yield or Presence of starch and Promalt is an enzyme cocktail providing amylase, A single addition of amylase,
ineffective wort β-glucan residues in the glucanase, cellulase and protease activities. glucanase, cellulase and
filtration in high final product protease
adjunct brewing Improves extract yield and
fermentability
Gives consistent brewhouse
performance
Improves wort stability/clarity

The BREWER & DISTILLER INTERNATIONAL • Volume 4 • Issue 3 • March 2008 • www.ibd.org.uk
38

Figure 2. Figure 3.
surface of the yeast, vessel walls and filter Yeastex products address these problems by
media. supplying combinations of essential amino
While the primary reason for incorporating acids, peptides, vitamins and co-factors.
FermCap into the process may be to increase Specific formulations are available for optimal
fermentation capacity, there are also very end application in high adjunct brews and will
important additional benefits incurred as a be formulated depending on the final wort
result of controlling foam formation during composition.
fermentation as its use improves hop alpha
acid utilisation. In today’s brewing climate Diacetyl Control
where hop supplies are challenging and hop Diacetyl levels during fermentation can be
prices have gone through the roof, this controlled by the application of an
represents a very interesting benefit for the acetolactate decarboxylase (ALDC). Kerry’s
brewer. Hop utilisation increases between 4- Biomatex products act to convert the diacetyl
11% have been achieved. Likewise, a natural precursor acetolactate directly to acetoin
initial concern by brewers is that a foam (Figure 3). Acetoin has a much higher flavour
control agent could have a negative effect on threshold than diacetyl. The benefits of this for
final beer foam stability. In fact it is the the brewer are a reduction in the time
opposite. Foam control during fermentation dependent high temperature stand usually
increases the foam stability of the final beer. employed to reduce diacetyl in the normal
Why? – Because foam positive (hydrophobic) fashion. Again, it is an enzymatic method of
proteins that would otherwise have been increasing fermentation capacity, while also
denatured during fermentation remain in the giving the brewer an alternative way of
fermenting wort – and pass through to the final controlling final beer diacetyl levels.
beer. Likewise the hop acids are retained in
the beer in a similar manner and thus Accelerating Yeast Removal
contribute positively to both foam stability and Once fermentation has ceased it is important
increased hop utilisation. The summary of to remove as much yeast as possible prior to
benefits of applying a foam control agent filtration as this will significantly reduce the
during brewing are outlined in Table 2. solids loading on the filter and therefore
prolong filter run times. Yeast sedimentation
Yeast Nutrition and subsequent removal can be significantly
When brewing with high levels of adjuncts, the improved by addition of Biofine to the
supply of adequate levels of vitamins, fermenter. Biofine is a purified form of collagen
essential salts, amino acids and peptides for isolated from the swim bladder of tropical fish.
optimal fermentation efficiency can be limiting. This isinglass molecule is a triple helix of
This can result in slow or incomplete amino acids, with an overall net positive
fermentation and flavour deficiencies in the charge at beer pH. It forms large aggregates
final product. The Kerry Bio-Science range of with the negatively charged yeast cells thereby
Table 2. Major benefits of foam control during brewing operations
Benefit Details
Increased fermentation capacity Typically 7–15%
Increased utilisation of hop acids Range 4–11%
Improved foam stability 5-10% increase in Nibem (30mm) in pilot and production
trials
Increased CO2 recovery The desired CO2 purity is reached earlier in the
fermentations using FermCap
Reduced cleaning costs Due to absent or reduced yeast foam head ring in
fermenter.
The BREWER & DISTILLER INTERNATIONAL • Volume 4 • Issue 3 • March 2008 • www.ibd.org.uk
PRODUCTION
increasing their rate of sedimentation. The
action of the finings in the sedimentation of
yeast is shown schematically in Figure 4.
Some of the benefits that the brewer might
expect to see as a result of using such finings
are related to beer filtration, quality (haze etc)
and the associated cost benefits such as
increased filter run lengths and decreased
costs of filter aid materials.
Improving Final Beer Quality
Protein Stabilisation
Chill haze formation in beer as a result of
protein precipitation or a combination of
protein and polyphenols may be controlled by
the addition of Profix to the beer prior to
pasteurisation. Profix is a proteolytic enzyme
(papain) extracted from the fruit of the papaya
tree. Its application can be used to prevent
colloidal instability problems imparted by
protein and therefore extend the shelflife of
beer. It works by hydrolysing protein that
would otherwise have formed complexes with
polyphenolic materials resulting in chill haze
and eventually permanent haze.
Oxidative Stabilisation
Oxidation during packaging causes
deterioration of beer quality, haze and flavour
stability. Oxygen both dissolved in the beer
and also in the package headspace is
incorporated into compounds in the beer,
especially polyphenols, carbonyl compounds
and isohumulones during storage. Oxidative
staling of beer occurs by a free radical
process. During storage, even trace amounts
of metals such as iron or copper will catalyse
the conversion of molecular oxygen to what
are known as ‘reactive oxygen species’ (ROS).
One such ROS is the hydroxl free radical that
rapidly oxidizes components of the beer to
free radicals. Beer-derived free radicals react
further to perpetuate a chain reaction that
results in carbonyl end products such as
aldehydes and ketones. It is these carbonyl
compounds that give rise to the ‘cardboard-
like’ flavour of stale beer. Antioxidants such as
Biox in beer help them resist free radical
oxidation, by acting to scavenge oxygen
directly in the beer and also in the package
headspace. Although oxidation is inevitable
39
PROCESSING

What of the future?

Figure 4. Role of Biofine in yeast sedimentation.
over time, it can be minimised by optimising
brewery operations, storage conditions and
also by the incorporation of Biox to provide
maximum antioxidant content in the packaged
beer.
Foam Quality
The quality, amount and stability of foam on
beer when dispensed from either small pack
or large pack is a very important characteristic
of the product. In normal dispense
environments there are numerous external
factors as well as some internal factors (such
as malt and hop derived lipids), which may
adversely affect beer foam stability. Kerry Bio-
Science has a number of products which
tackle the issues of foam quality in beer.
Biofoam K is a form of propylene glycol
alginate (PGA) derived from brown marine
algae (Phaeophycaeae) developed and
manufactured exclusively for use as a beer
foam stabiliser. Due to its chemical structure
the PGA polymer consists a hydrophobic head
and hydrophilic tail. The hydrophobic head
resides in the exterior surfaces bubble wall
whereas the hydrophilic tail orients itself into
the aqueous phase. This surface-active
orientation of the molecule along with other
‘foam positive material, (protein, hops and
oligosaccharides) not only promotes foam
production but stabilises the foam against
collapse by foam negative materials.
Biofoam W is particularly suited to treat
beers of low protein such as high adjunct
brews where it utilises the synergistic effect of
foam positive proteins and foam stabilising
PGA to stabilise beer foam. A recent addition
to the range - Biofoam CL is a combination of
cereal protein and yeast derived proteins; this
has both a foam generation effect and a foam
stabilisation effect when applied to beer.
Uniquely it is a label friendly beer ingredient
since it is of cereal and yeast protein origin all
of which are native to beer.
It can be argued that the brewing process is a
natural biological one and its efficiency relies
mainly on the quality of its raw materials.
Ways of directly improving the raw material
issues can only be controlled outside of the
brewery environment and start literally at
grassroots, growing the cereal and hop crops.
Outside of this, within the brewery
environment the only way of controlling the
efficiency of the process and the quality of the
final product is by development of new
equipment technologies and the application of
processing aids and ingredients. In essence,
optimal application of processing aids can
give the brewer the freedom to retain and
improve their processes, irrespective of
starting raw material qualities. ■
● Reference:
1. Goode D L and Arendt E K (2006), Developments
in the supply of adjunct materials for brewing, in
Bamforth C W, Brewing – new technologies,
Woodhead Publishing Limited, Cambridge,
England, 30-67.
Authors Declan Goode (left) and Eoin
Lalor at Brau 2007.

INSTITUTE OF BREWING & DISTILLING NEWS www.ibd.org.uk

● David Barrie Priestley (1941–2008)

David Priestley joined Allied Breweries in 1965
from Bangor University as part of the graduate
training scheme, firstly at the Tetley plant in
Leeds and then at Tetley Walker in Warrington.
During his time at Warrington he was sent to
Heriot Watt to study for his Postgraduate
Diploma in Malting and Brewing.
After a spell at Burton in the Allied Head Office,
in 1973 he moved to Romford as Packaging
Manager, overseeing the redevelopment of the
bottling lines and the installation of a new can
line as well as maintaining and improving the
bottling output. He became Head Brewer at a
time when Allied were re- regionalising its cask
beers, so he had to produce Romford, Benskins,
Friary and Meux brands in a plant designed to
brew Ind Coope Bitter and lagers.
Once at a dinner in the Grosvenor Hotel, David
was enjoying a pre-dinner drink with a number of
other Head Brewers from around the country. He
suddenly realised that, although they had all
started with Allied Breweries, he was the only
one of the ten who was still employed by them.
The Allied training scheme certainly gave a
thorough grounding in brewing!
In 1984 he was appointed Director of the
Wrexham Brewery. Here David was able to put
into practice, his management beliefs which he
had developed over the years. He felt that, if you
looked after your team, they would look after
you. He increased the extent of training available
and involved them in social activities both after
work and in the community.
Further re-organisation meant a move back to
Burton, although he continued to live in
Wrexham. He became responsible for trying to
extend Allied’s influence in Eastern Europe and
Russia. He saw some interesting ways of
operating breweries. In one, the concrete
fermenters had pitted floors retaining infected
and mouldy beer. Here the problem was not the
potential source of infection, but that the plant
management did not see it as a potential
problem!
This interesting role came to an end when
Allied subsumed their brewing interests into

The BREWER & DISTILLER INTERNATIONAL • Volume 4 • Issue 3 • March 2008 • www.ibd.org.uk
40