1. Michael Eumann EUWA Water Treatment Plants 32 nd Convention Melbourne, Australia 2012 25 th – 30 th March Institute of Brewing & Distilling Asia Pacific Section PUSHING THE LIMITS: DEVELOPMENT OF A NEW WATER TREATMENT PROCESS

2. Agenda Different Water – Different Beer Development of Water Treatment in Breweries Sustainability Conventional Lime Precipitation Modern Separation Technique: Ultrafiltration Combining Old and New Test Results Outlook

3. Different Water – Different Beer Different raw water influenced the evolution of typical beer types in different regions: Pilzen in Czech Republic  PILS Burton-on-Trent in UK  PALE ALE Munich in Germany  DARK BEERS Vienna in Austria  NO BEER, JUST WINE

4. Brew Water Treatment  Changes in ionic composition of brew water, primarily removal of bicarbonates, was the aim already in the early days of industrial brewing.  Today mainly three different major methods are used in breweries for changing the ionic composition of the brew water: From the oldest to the newest:  Lime precipitation (LP),  Ion exchange (IX) and  Reverse osmosis (RO).

5. Brew Water Treatment in the Historical Context Market Share Year 2000 1900 1950 19751925 2025 ? Lime precipitation Ion exchange Reverse osmosis

6. Sustainability WATERENERGYCHEMICALS Lime precipitationlow low - medium (Ca(OH) 2 ) Ion exchangemediumlowhigh (typically HCl) Reverse osmosishigh low (antiscalant, acid)

7. Lime: Ca(OH) 2 Lime (Ca(OH) 2 )  is a natural product,  is non-toxic.  CaCO 3 from lime precipitation can be easily used in other industries or even be recycled. Limestone quarray near Orosei, Sardinia (picture by Michael J. Zirbes; taken from www.de.wikipedia.org) Pamukkale, Turkey (picture by Mila Zinkova; taken from www.de.wikipedia.org)

8. Conventional Lime Precipitation Addition of lime (Ca(OH) 2 ): Main reaction: Ca 2+ + 2 HCO 3 - + Ca 2+ + 2 OH -  2 CaCO 3 + 2 H 2 O Mg(HCO 3 ) 2 can only be removed as Mg(OH) 2, which requires higher pH-values  two-stage lime precipitation (system Morgenstern).

9. Since 1965 ONE-STAGE LIME PRECIPITATION Raw water Lime milk Reactor 1 Lime water Sand filter Brew water

10. Since 1965 Mg(HCO 3 ) 2 + 2Ca(OH) 2 => 2CaCO 3 + Mg(OH) 2 + 2H 2 O TWO-STAGE LIME PRECIPITATION

11. Conventional Lime Precipitation Large footprint due to: Lime saturators Reactor(s).

12. Large Footprint Lime saturators: Solution of lime: short time. Separation of undissolved from dissolved matter by sedimentation:  long time  large footprint. Lime precipitation reactors: Reaction of lime with bicarbonates: short time (within minutes). Separation of undissolved from dissolved matter by sedimentation:  long time  large footprint.

13. Modern Separation Technique: Ultrafiltration  Ensures filtrate is free of particles, turbidity even under fluctuating flow conditions.  Takes out bacteria and viruses.  Ideal for surface water (e.g. river, lake) or as pretreatment for RO.

14. Combining Old and New: Lime Water Preparation Water source Lime milk Saturated Lime Water Membrane filtration system Lime Water Storage

15. Combining Old and New: Lime Water Preparation  Replaces lime saturators.  Small footprint.  Provides clear and saturated lime water of constant quality.

16. Combining Old and New: Lime Precipitation

17.  Replaces reactor(s).  Small footprint.  Provides clear, dealkalized brew water of constant quality.

18. Test Results: Water Quality (exemplarily for six months trial period) WATER Raw waterExisting Conventional Lime precipitation x1 New membrane based lime precipitation Total hardness (ppm CaCO 3 ) 163 - 1798889 m-Alkalinity (ppm CaCO 3 ) 125 – 1354535 – 40 p-Alkalinity (ppm CaCO 3 ) - 5+/- 015 pH ( )7.89 – 8.168.779.5 Conductivity (µS/cm)337 - 339190200 X1: Two-stage lime precipitation plant; effluent values fluctuating.

19. Test Results: Backwashing Focus was put on hydraulics and backwash regime, resulting in Cross-flow operation, Optimization of the lime precipitation reaction, Regular backwashing using air and water Backwash water recovery by simple reinjection, resulting in < 1 % of water losses.

20. Comparing Footprint and Cost Capacity 5m 3 /h ConventionalMembrane Footprint (LxWxH)8m x 2.5m x 5m4m x 2m x 2m Cost80,000€30,000€

21. Application Revival of a well-known, sustainable technology by restoring its competetiveness. Combination with reverse osmosis: As pretreatment for maximising the yield (up to 95 %). For concentrate recovery.

22. www.euwa.com THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION