Journal of the American Society of Brewing Chemists

The Science of Beer

ISSN: 0361-0470 (Print) 1943-7854 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ujbc20

The Relative Importance of Temperature and Time

in the Cold Conditioning of Beer

Michaela Miedl & Charles W. Bamforth

To cite this article: Michaela Miedl & Charles W. Bamforth (2004) The Relative Importance
of Temperature and Time in the Cold Conditioning of Beer, Journal of the American Society of
Brewing Chemists, 62:2, 75-78, DOI: 10.1094/ASBCJ-62-0075

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1094/ASBCJ-62-0075

Published online: 01 Feb 2018.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 3

Citing articles: 1 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=ujbc20
The Relative Importance of Temperature and Time
in the Cold Conditioning of Beer
Michaela Miedl and Charles W. Bamforth,1 Department of Food Science and Technology, University of California,
Davis 95616-8598
ABSTRACT
J. Am. Soc. Brew. Chem. 62(2):75-78, 2004
The impact on the development of turbidity from chilling lager-style
beer at constant low temperatures and alternating to low temperatures has
been investigated. Irrespective of whether a beer is held isothermally or
has received a change in temperature of storage, the magnitude of the
haze that develops is determined by the extent of chilling that the beer
encounters. Equally, the length of storing a beer at a prior, higher
temperature does not influence the extent of haze development when the
beer is subsequently brought to a lower temperature. These observations
support the contention that in the formation of insoluble material during
cold conditioning of beer, a short period at a very low temperature (e.g.,
–2.5°C) is more efficacious than a prolonged period at a warmer
temperature (e.g., 0°C).
Keywords: Haze, Stabilization
RESUMEN
La Importancia Relativa de Temperatura y Tiempo
en el Acondicionamiento Frío de Cerveza
El impacto en el desarrollo de turbiedad causado por el enfriamiento de
cerveza estilo lager a temperaturas bajas constantes y alternación a
temperaturas bajas se investigo. Independiente de si una cerveza está
sostenida isotérmicamente o ha recibido un cambio en temperatura de
almacenaje, la magnitud de calina que se desarrolla es determinada por el
grado de enfriamiento que la cerveza llevó. Igualmente, la longitud de
almacenar una cerveza a una temperatura anterior más alta no influye el
grado de desarrollo de calina cuando la cerveza se lleva posteriormente a
una temperatura más baja. Estas observaciones apoyan la contención que
en la formación de material insoluble durante el acondicionamiento frío
de cerveza, un período corto a una temperatura muy baja (e.g., –2.5°C) es
más eficaz que un período prolongado a una temperatura de mas calor
(e.g., 0°C).
Palabras claves: Calina, Estabilización
Traditionally, beer is stored for prolonged periods so that it
becomes “matured” in terms of flavor and stability. However,
these inherited practices stem from the days before the brewer
acquired an understanding of chemical and biochemical processes
that occur during storage and the control systems (e.g., regulation
of temperature) to optimize operations. It is now feasible to
shorten storage periods considerably, yet the time-honored pro-
tocols may be retained on a rationale of marketing advantage.
Considering specifically colloidal stability, cold storage allows
the precipitation and sedimentation of material that has not been
eliminated upstream in the process. Although a range of
downstream process aids or additives is available for removing
colloidally sensitive proteins and polyphenols, it nonetheless is
necessary to take a holistic approach to stabilizing beer, such that
haze-potentiating material is lowered throughout the malting and
1 Corresponding author. Phone: (530) 752-1467; Fax: (530) 752-4759;
E-mail: cwbamforth@ucdavis.edu
Publication no. J-2004-0223-02R.
© 2004 American Society of Brewing Chemists, Inc.
75
brewing processes (1). Thus, the cold-storage stage is generally
considered to be very important. Essentially it is an exercise in
removing chill haze components.
There is no unanimously accepted view on the preferred
conditions within cold storage that will have the most benefit in
terms of eliminating colloids. Thus, commercial storage periods
seem to range from a period of weeks at 0 to 1°C to three to five
days at –1°C (4). Based on empirical and unpublished ob-
servation, it is preferable to have short periods at very low
temperatures rather than a longer holding period at warmer
temperatures (2). The opinion is that –1°C for one day would be
better than 1°C for one week or even longer. However, there
appear to be very few published studies to support or refute these
statements.
One concern often expressed is the risk of freezing the beer.
The freezing point of a beer is given as Freezing point
(°C) = –0.42 × A + 0.04 × E + 0.2 in which A is the percent of
alcohol content by weight and E is the original gravity of the wort
(3). On this basis, each 1% increase in alcohol content lowers the
freezing point by 0.42°C and each increase in gravity of 1°Plato
(P) raises it by 0.04°C. Thus, no beer will freeze at –1°C, and
products at higher alcohol concentrations (including high-gravity
brews prior to dilution) will withstand even lower temperatures.
In this paper, we present the results of experiments in which we
have studied the impact of temperatures as low as –2.5°C on the
tendency of “rough” beer to produce haze during storage. Our
premise is that the haze represents material that can be removed
from the solution during cold storage and subsequently removed
by filtration (although further work would be needed to confirm
this).
EXPERIMENTAL
Measurement of Haze
Turbidity measurements were performed in 24-mm-diameter
cuvettes with model 2100AN Turbidimeter (Hach Co., Loveland,
CO) in the ratio mode with a tungsten light source and U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency method 180.1 filter. Results
were expressed in nephelos turbidity units (NTU). An air purge
system provided in the turbidimeter was used to flush the optical
compartment with dry nitrogen gas (99.9997%) to prevent
condensation on the outside of the sample cell while measuring
cold samples. The turbidimeter was calibrated according to the
supplier’s instructions with Formazin Primary Standards (20, 200,
1,000, 4,000, and 7,500 NTU). Instrument calibration was
verified with precalibrated Gelex Secondary Standards. If the
reading was not within 5% of the assigned value for the standard,
the turbidimeter was recalibrated.
Test System
A lager-type beer (15°P, 6.8% v/v ethanol) was taken from a
single, commercial, maturation tank at 8°C (i.e., before entering a
cold-conditioning process). It was poured into 0.33-L bottles and
manually capped. No special precautions were taken with regard
to oxygen levels, except that sampling was such as to minimize
76 / Miedl, M., and Bamforth, C. W.

oxygen ingress and bottles were firmly capped. Precautions were RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
not taken to remove yeast, and no adsorbents or finings were
used. The beer was stored at 8°C until used in the experiments. Figure 1 illustrates that there was proportionately more haze
The preparation of the beer samples for the first experiment with formation (precipitation) as the holding temperature decreased.
a temperature combination of 2.5 and 0°C started approximately The bulk of the insolubilization occurred within the first hour,
15 hr after removing the beer from the maturation tank. The with turbidity maximal after 6 hr at the lowest temperatures.
investigations with a temperature combination of –2.5/0°C and However, at 2.5 and 1°C there was a progressive increase in the
the experiments at 1/–1°C were started four and eight days, level of haze throughout the two-day period, though not to the
respectively, after the first experiment. Samples were degassed extent that the level was as high as what developed even within
through the application of a vacuum and simultaneous stirring 1 hr at temperatures below 0°C. The samples held at –2.5°C did
with a magnet “flea” in a 4-L beaker. Beer (30 mL) was dosed not freeze, nor did we expect them to freeze (5).
into 50-mL disposable, plastic centrifuge tubes with screw caps. Figure 2 illustrates this impact of temperature (at 1, 3, and 6 hr),
These preparation steps were performed in a cooled chamber at showing an excellent linear correlation between haze de-
8°C to avoid temperature fluctuations. velopment and decrease in temperature. Comparing the data for
Isothermal Treatments. The samples were held at –2.5, –1, 0, 1,
or 2.5°C for 48 hr. Haze was measured at 0, 1, 3, 6, 15, 30, and
48 hr. To minimize temperature increase during haze
measurement, the sample cell was precooled to the same
temperature as the sample. To avoid formation of a compact
deposition pellet on the bottom of the centrifuge tube, all samples
were inverted three times at every measurement point. The beer
sample was transferred from the centrifuge tube to the sample
cell, and haze measurement was carried out within 5 sec using
signal averaging.
Experiments with a Temperature Step. In these experiments,
beer samples were held for 1, 3, 6, 15, or 30 hr at an initial tem-
perature before being subjected to a second temperature for the
rest of the 48-hr incubation. Temperature combinations were
–2.5/0°C, 0/2.5°C and –1/1°C.
Fig. 3. The impact on the level of haze when changing the temperature
from 2.5 to 0°C (Q) or 0 to 2.5°C (G) after 1 hr of incubation.

Fig. 1. The development of haze in beer held at constant temperatures. Fig. 4. The impact on the level of haze when changing the temperature
Q = –2.5°C, U = –1°C, O = 1°C, and V = 2.5°C. from 2.5 to 0°C (Q) or 0 to 2.5°C (G) after 3 hr of incubation.

Fig. 2. The difference in the level of haze observed after different time
periods at a range of temperatures. Values are ∆haze (as illustrated in Fig. 5. The impact on the level of haze when changing the temperature
Fig. 1). O = 1 hr, G = 3 hr, and V = 6 hr. from 2.5 to 0°C (Q) or 0 to 2.5°C (G) after 30 hr of incubation.

2.5 and –2.5°C storage, it can be seen that at the higher
temperature a haze differential (∆haze) (Fig. 1) of approximately
40 NTU occurred as compared with one exceeding 90 NTU at the
lower temperature. This can be contrasted with the impact of
increasing storage time at any of the temperatures, which had a
much less sizeable impact on ∆haze.
Figure 3 illustrates the impact of changing the storage
temperature after 1 hr from high to low or from low to high.
Clearly, the rate of development of haze was greater at the lower
temperature. If the beer was subsequently warmed, then some of
the haze returns to the solution, but the haze seemed to rise
slowly on progressive storage. If the beer was held at 2.5°C for
the first hour, then there was a sizeable increase in turbidity to an
extent of approximately two-thirds of that at the lower temperature.
Subsequent changing to 0°C, however, allowed the development
of turbidity to continue to increase. By 5 hr, it was at a maximum.
Fig. 6. Changes in haze levels when changing the temperature of the beer
from 2.5 to 0°C after 1 hr (Q), 3 hr (G), 6 hr (V), 15 hr (U), or 30 hr (O).
Fig. 7. Changes in haze levels when changing the temperature of the beer
from 0 to 2.5°C after 1 hr (Q), 3 hr (G), 6 hr (V), 15 hr (U), or 30 hr (O).
Fig. 8. Changes in haze levels when changing the temperature of the beer
from –2.5 to 0°C after 1 hr (Q), 3 hr (G), 6 hr (V), 15 hr (U), or 30 hr (O).
Cold Stabilization of Beer / 77
These phenomena are even more apparent in Figure 4, in which
the temperature change was made after 3 hr. It will be seen that at
the warmer temperature, haze development was maximum after
1 hr, but when the temperature change is made, it increased again.
The bulk of the haze was developed after 1 hr at 0°C, but it con-
tinued to rise until the temperature transition point, and then came
down again to that of the sample that had been held at 2.5°C.
Slowly it picked up again, but even after 48 hr it had not reached
the value of the sample which had started off warm, but sub-
sequently was changed to cold. This illustrates the importance of
getting the sample cold and not allowing the temperature to rise
again.
Figure 5 illustrates the situation when the transition was not
done until 30 hr. Again, the importance of the low temperature to
achieve the higher haze level is apparent. Exactly analogous
observations were made when the transition temperatures were 1
and –1°C and –2.5 and 0°C (data not shown).
Figure 6 depicts the key changes in haze levels consequent to
the transition from 2.5 to 0°C after various time periods. It
appears that irrespective of the time of transition there was an
extremely rapid increase in haze levels to essentially the same
value, with the possible indication of some ensuing downturn in
turbidity in some samples. Equally, it will be noted that over the
30-hr period in samples held at 2.5°C, there was a progressive
and slow increase in turbidity (cf. first data point in each plot).
This follows the more rapid but limited increase in turbidity that
occurred when the beer was initially cooled to 2.5°C (cf. Figs.
1–5). Clearly, it is the decrease in temperature that had the
biggest impact on haze formation and level.
Figure 7 presents a summation of the opposite transition. There
was a rapid downturn in haze values when the temperature of the
Fig. 9. Changes in haze levels when changing the temperature of the beer
from 0 to –2.5°C after 1 hr (Q), 3 hr (G), 6 hr (V), 15 hr (U), or 30 hr (O).
Fig. 10. Summary of haze level changes occurring with constant
incubation at 0°C (▬) or –2.5°C (ƒƒ) and transition from 0 to –2.5°C
after 1 hr (F), 3 hr (V), 6 hr (O), 15 hr (U), or 30 hr (Q).
78 / Miedl, M., and Bamforth, C. W.
beer was changed from 0 to 2.5°C, the haze level matching
samples that had been held for approximately 1 hr at 2.5°C (cf.
Fig. 1). It appears that the rate of the haze level downturn was
slower, and the final level of haze was higher for the sample that
had been held at 0°C for the longest period. Again, there is
evidence for a slow increase in haze level in the beers after they
had been equilibrated at 2.5°C.
Figures 8 and 9 summarize the equivalent experiments, but this
time the two temperatures were 0 and –2.5°C. As seen in Figure
8, maximum haze development at –2.5°C was not realized until
after 6 hr (comparison of the first data points in the first three
lines going from the left [also Fig. 1]). In all instances, changing
the sample to the warmer temperature led to a decrease in haze
level, but in each case the value started to increase again. Figure 9
shows that there was a rapid increase in haze value commensurate
on lowering the temperature from 0 to –2.5°C, irrespective of the
stage at which this was effected. Again, comparison of the initial
data point on each line illustrates the progressive increase in the
level of haze which occurred on storage at 0°C, but the magnitude
of this was far less than the scale of increase pursuant to lowering
the temperature to –2.5°C. With the exception of the beer when
the transition point was 30 hr, it appears that in the biphasic
patterns observed haze rose to the highest level for the shortest
transition time of 1 hr.
Finally, in Figure 10, we compare the pattern of haze
development in beers held constantly at 0 and –2.5°C and also for
the beers that were changed from 0 to –2.5°C after various time
periods. The overriding factor was the temperature; a higher and
similar level of haze was developed at –2.5°C in all samples,
irrespective of the time at which this temperature was reached,
with this haze value being higher than that observed in samples
held at 0°C. Similar plots have been constructed for all the other
temperature transition studies (data not shown). The upper and
lower “tramlines” for all of these plots are similar to the lines
observed in the isothermal incubations depicted in Figure 1.
For logistical reasons, we did not extend the time periods
beyond two days in this study. We noted the very slow increase in
haze level that occurred at higher temperatures (Figs. 1 and 6). If
we extrapolate this data, then we might estimate that the
residence times necessary to achieve the same turbidity value
achieved at –2.5°C would be approximately 10 and 12 days for 1
and 2.5°C, respectively. However, there is no certainty that the
linearity would continue. Further studies are needed to examine
this point. Equally, there is a need to seek out the impact of still
lower temperatures for short periods. Particle phenomena in cold-
based systems are classically differentiated into nucleation and
particle growth phenomena (6). Low temperatures promote
nucleation, with higher temperatures promoting growth of those
nucleated particles. The slow and progressive increase in turbidity
occurring at the higher temperatures in this study may reflect this
growth phenomenon. Our data, however, illustrates the greater
significance of nucleation in the cold stabilization of beer,
together with the reversibility of the effect.
CONCLUSIONS
From the data presented in this paper, we would speculate that
the storage of beer at the lowest practical temperature (short of
freezing) for very short time periods before filtering would offer
as much colloidal stability as would substantially longer periods
at somewhat warmer temperatures. It would be impractical to
achieve uniformity in this very low temperature in large holding
tanks, but rather in a flow through mode with perhaps a 1-hr
residence period in-line. Our data suggests that the buffer stock
feeding the “flow through chiller” need not be held at an
especially low temperature, for it appears that it is the lowness of
the absolute temperature reached rather than the temperature
prehistory of the beer before final chilling that has the major
impact. It must be stressed that in this paper we have only
addressed physical stability issues and that any refinement of
flavor dependent on yeast action will need to be achieved before
this cold stabilization treatment. It must also be emphasized that
we are presenting data on a single beer brand. While there is no
indication that it has any properties that would render our
observations unusual in any way, it is nonetheless necessary to
consider beers on a case-by-case basis.
It is also apparent from our data that any opportunity for beer
to warm between the cold-conditioning stage and filtration
introduces tremendous risk from a colloidal stability perspective.
It must be stressed that cold conditioning is only one among
several stages that impact the colloidal stability of beer. We do not
suggest that the “lowest practical temperature” protocols
advocated in this paper would of themselves allow the necessary
shelf life in beer in the absence of best practices upstream or the
use of stabilization treatments downstream.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
David Reid and Moshe Rosenberg are thanked for valuable discussions.
LITERATURE CITED
1. Bamforth, C. W. Beer haze. J. Am. Soc. Brew. Chem. 57:81-90, 1999.
2. Bamforth, C. W. Great brewing debates: Part 4 Does beer get better
with ageing? Brew. Guard. 131(10):26-28, 2002.
3. Kolbach, P. The freezing point of beers. Wochenschr. Brau. 57:41-43,
49, 1940.
4. MacDonald, J., Reeve, P. T. V., Ruddlesden, J. D., and White, F. H.
Current approaches to brewery fermentations. In: Progress in
Industrial Microbiology, M. E. Bushell, Ed. Elsevier, Amsterdam. Vol.
19, pp. 47-198, 1984.
5. Tanaka, M., and Sakuma, S. Prediction of the formation of frozen beer
precipitates. J. Am. Soc. Brew. Chem. 57:104-108, 1999.
6. Van Hook, A. Crystallization: Theory and Practice. Reinhold, New
York, 1961.
[Received September 18, 2003. Accepted December 9, 2003.]