ArticlePDF Available

Current Challenges of Cold Brew Coffee—Roasting, Extraction, Flavor Profile, Contamination, and Food Safety

Authors:
  • Coffee Consulate

Abstract and Figures

Cold brew coffee has emerged as a new trend over the last decade. However, "cold brew" is an extraction style of ground roasted coffee with water at lower than body temperature (typically 8 • C or room temperature), rather than a beverage per se. Cold brew extraction poses several challenges, including the need for specific optimization depending on the multiple influences of coffee variety and processing, roast degree, grinding, dosage, water composition, turbulence, brew system (drip, immersion etc.), time and temperature, and their interactions. While cold brew is typically characterized by a floral sweetness, over-extraction may lead to abundant acidity and bitterness. To avoid this, an extraction degree of 70% was suggested using shorter time frames (i.e., 2 h at 15 • C with 80 g/L coffee for optimized medium roast profiles). Due to the lack of sterilizing temperatures during preparation, cold brew is significant in the coffee sector because hygiene and food safety requirements pose specific challenges. To avoid microbiological contamination and deterioration in quality, cold brew should be as freshly prepared as possible and shelf-life should be minimized.
Content may be subject to copyright.
challenges
Viewpoint
Current Challenges of Cold Brew Coee—Roasting,
Extraction, Flavor Profile, Contamination,
and Food Safety
Raven Kwok 1, Kenny Lee Wee Ting 1, Steen Schwarz 2, Linda Claassen 3,4
and Dirk W. Lachenmeier 3,*
1
Earthlings Coee Workshop, Soho East, Sublot 16 Ground Floor, Lot 188, Jalan Wan Alwi Lorong 5, Kuching,
Sarawak 93350, Malaysia; raven@earthlings-coee.com (R.K.); kenny@earthlings-coee.com (K.L.W.T.)
2Coee Consulate, Hans-Thoma-Strasse 20, 68163 Mannheim, Germany; schwarz@coee-consulate.com
3Chemisches und Veterinäruntersuchungsamt (CVUA) Karlsruhe, Weissenburger Strasse 3,
76187 Karlsruhe, Germany; lindaclaassen@gmx.de
4Department Life Sciences, University of Applied Sciences Albstadt-Sigmaringen,
72488 Sigmaringen, Germany
*Correspondence: Lachenmeier@web.de; Tel.: +49-721-926-5434
Received: 5 July 2020; Accepted: 10 October 2020; Published: 13 October 2020


Abstract:
Cold brew coee has emerged as a new trend over the last decade. However, “cold brew”
is an extraction style of ground roasted coee with water at lower than body temperature (typically
8
C or room temperature), rather than a beverage per se. Cold brew extraction poses several
challenges, including the need for specific optimization depending on the multiple influences of coee
variety and processing, roast degree, grinding, dosage, water composition, turbulence, brew system
(drip, immersion etc.), time and temperature, and their interactions. While cold brew is typically
characterized by a floral sweetness, over-extraction may lead to abundant acidity and bitterness.
To avoid this, an extraction degree of 70% was suggested using shorter time frames (i.e., 2 h at 15
C
with 80 g/L coee for optimized medium roast profiles). Due to the lack of sterilizing temperatures
during preparation, cold brew is significant in the coee sector because hygiene and food safety
requirements pose specific challenges. To avoid microbiological contamination and deterioration in
quality, cold brew should be as freshly prepared as possible and shelf-life should be minimized.
Keywords:
coee; cold brew; nitro cold brew; roasting; extraction; hygiene; risk assessment;
product quality
1. Introduction
The history of cold brew coee can be traced as far back as the 1600s, with a major invention
being the Toddy cold-brew coee system in the 1960s [
1
]. However, only recently has cold-brew
become a growing trend across the entire coee industry [
2
]. For example, cold brew sales grew by a
remarkable 580% in the US in the period between 2011 and 2016 [
3
]. Due to its relative novelty, there is
an absence of in-depth research into this coee extraction method [
4
]. There is also currently a lack of
internationally accepted standards or definitions about what cold brew is and under what conditions it
is made [
5
]. The demand for high-quality, cold brew coee may have been driven by the fact that the
segment of iced coee has been adversely aected in the past “by using old, bitter-tasting, brewed
coee as the base” or “even worse, many have used coee extracts” [6].
Several cold brew methods such as drip filtration, full immersion, or cold press are available.
In general, the term “cold brew” describes a method of preparing a beverage in the form of a certain
style of extraction. Cold brew is not necessarily a cold beverage since, unlike iced coee, cold brew
Challenges 2020,11, 26; doi:10.3390/challe11020026 www.mdpi.com/journal/challenges
Challenges 2020,11, 26 2 of 13
may be served cold or hot. It is important to dierentiate between cold brew and iced coee, which is a
beverage extracted with hot water. Sometimes, mostly in industrial settings, hot brewed beverages are
cooled (the so-called “hot bloom” method [
5
]) and sold as some form of fake cold brew (“called brew”).
This article provides an overview about the current knowledge of cold brew coee preparation,
along with practical aspects and potential pitfalls specifically related to hygiene and food safety.
Furthermore, open research questions are included, and research challenges are highlighted.
2. Materials and Methods
For the first part of the article (Section 3), electronic searches of literature were conducted
including the databases PubMed, Google Scholar, and Food Science and Technology Abstracts (FSTA).
Search terms used were: (“cold brew” OR “nitro”) AND “coee”. The abstracts were screened for
relevance regarding aspects of roasting, extraction, flavor profile, contamination, and food safety.
Relevant articles were obtained in full text. The searches were complemented by the literature collection
of the authors. The major results were discussed using several online training sessions with coee
experts hosted by the professional training centers of Earthlings Coee Workshop (Malaysia) and
Coee Consulate (Germany), and research plans were derived from this (Section 4). The feedback of
the experts is also included in a section about open problems and challenges (Section 5).
3. Cold Brew Extraction—What Do We Know?
3.1. Roasting for Cold Brew Coee
Roasting plays a big part in determining what flavors go into the cold brew as it is possible to retain
or eliminate various aromas by manipulating dierent roast levels. Consumer research has shown
that the predominant factors influencing cold brew flavor are the roast level [
7
] and the resting time
after roasting [
8
,
9
]. In general, the authors suggest avoiding excessive dark roasting, so the resultant
coee avoids unpleasant aromas. Research also found that darker roasts may result in decreased
concentrations of compounds [
10
]. Typical roast profiles for cold brew, filter coee, and espresso are
compared in Figure 1. The biggest variant is with the espresso roast, while cold brew and filter coee
are similar. The cold brew is the fastest roast of the three with a more rapid arrival at phase III. The first
phase is more or less the same for all three types. The second, drying phase preserves the acids in
the bean. The cold brew roast is slowed down at the very end of its processing to avoid excessive
formation of Maillard reaction-based aromas.
3.2. Multi-Variate Influences on Cold Brew Extraction
The extraction of cold brew is typically conducted below body temperature, but there is no
universally accepted extraction temperature setting. The concept of “cold” is often culturally relative to
prevailing natural or artificial environments such as countries with cold winters vs. tropical countries,
air conditioning, and refrigeration. The authors, however, believe that temperature settings near or
above body temperature move away from the concept of cold brew, and should be critically assessed
to avoid misleading food information [11].
Cold brew can be extracted by all the three methods used for hot coee (see comparison of coee
extraction methods by Angeloni et al. [
12
]). It can be extracted as (i) cold drip (typically with iced
water) in a filtration method, (ii) lixiviation or immersion (grounds in a pot sitting in the water, with or
without turbulence), or (iii) cold press (under or overpressure) [11,13,14].
What exactly does the “cold” mean in cold brew? It may be close to 0
C (i.e., melting ice using
the drip method), at fridge temperature (4–8
C), or at any other temperature below body temperature.
There is a much broader range of temperatures than those used for hot coee extraction. The cold brew
extraction time is much longer than for hot brews, and largely depends on the selected temperature.
The minimum would be 2 h at 20
C. It is important to adjust the time/temperature equilibrium to not
over or under extract the cold brew.
Challenges 2020,11, 26 3 of 13
Challenges 2020, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 3 of 13
Figure 1. Exemplary roasting profiles of cold brew (gray line) compared with filter coffee (dark blue
line) and espresso (light blue line) (FZ-94 sample roaster, Coffee-Tech Engineering, Moshav Mazliach,
Israel).
3.2. Multi-Variate Influences on Cold Brew Extraction
The extraction of cold brew is typically conducted below body temperature, but there is no
universally accepted extraction temperature setting. The concept of “cold” is often culturally relative
to prevailing natural or artificial environments such as countries with cold winters vs. tropical
countries, air conditioning, and refrigeration. The authors, however, believe that temperature settings
near or above body temperature move away from the concept of cold brew, and should be critically
assessed to avoid misleading food information [11].
Cold brew can be extracted by all the three methods used for hot coffee (see comparison of coffee
extraction methods by Angeloni et al. [12]). It can be extracted as (i) cold drip (typically with iced
water) in a filtration method, (ii) lixiviation or immersion (grounds in a pot sitting in the water, with
or without turbulence), or (iii) cold press (under or overpressure) [11,13,14].
What exactly does the “cold” mean in cold brew? It may be close to 0 °C (i.e., melting ice using
the drip method), at fridge temperature (4–8 °C), or at any other temperature below body
temperature. There is a much broader range of temperatures than those used for hot coffee extraction.
The cold brew extraction time is much longer than for hot brews, and largely depends on the selected
temperature. The minimum would be 2 h at 20 °C. It is important to adjust the time/temperature
equilibrium to not over or under extract the cold brew.
The extraction of cold brew coffee depends on several factors including the coffee, roasting,
dosage (brew ratio), water temperature, and water composition such as hardness, turbulence
(increasing the water contact with the coffee grounds by stirring, agitating, or applying ultrasonic
waves), grinding level (particle size and surface, dust), and time (Figure 2). From these parameters,
the roasting profile is particularly significant as it influences the acidity that is extracted out of the
beans. The grinding surface is also vital because the extraction is influenced if the surface is irregular
or rounded.
Figure 1.
Exemplary roasting profiles of cold brew (gray line) compared with filter coee (dark blue line)
and espresso (light blue line) (FZ-94 sample roaster, Coee-Tech Engineering, Moshav Mazliach, Israel).
The extraction of cold brew coee depends on several factors including the coee, roasting,
dosage (brew ratio), water temperature, and water composition such as hardness, turbulence (increasing
the water contact with the coee grounds by stirring, agitating, or applying ultrasonic waves),
grinding level (particle size and surface, dust), and time (Figure 2). From these parameters, the roasting
profile is particularly significant as it influences the acidity that is extracted out of the beans. The grinding
surface is also vital because the extraction is influenced if the surface is irregular or rounded.
Challenges 2020, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 4 of 13
Figure 2. Ishikawa diagram of causal influences regarding cold brew coffee extraction.
3.3. Hazards During Cold Brew Extraction
Microbiological contamination along with typical chemical contaminants such as pesticides,
mycotoxins, acrylamide, and furan must be considered (Figure 3). Cold brew is one the few coffee
beverages that includes some microbiological food safety hazards. Risk is usually minimized by the
roasting process and fresh, hot brewing. The long brewing time of cold brew can facilitate
microbiological activity. Lopez [15] summarized microbiological challenge studies based on personal
communications with the industry showing that various species such as Salmonella, Listeria
monocytogenes, and Escherichia coli may be viable in cold brew for 7–28 days. Specifically, the potential
for Listeria monocytogenes to survive in cold brew coffee was judged as being of concern due to its low
infective dose [15].
Figure 3. Ishikawa diagram of causal influences of extraction on cold brew coffee contamination.
Cold brew producers should be vigilant for any visual or taste changes, which could be an
indication of microbial contamination. The risk of microbial growth is strongly related to the
extraction temperature and is dramatically reduced at very cold temperatures.
The most common organisms that could spoil cold brew are yeasts (leading to alcoholic
fermentation) and lactic or acetic acid bacteria (producing organic acids). For most small-scale
producers (e.g., in their coffee shops), it is impossible to work in a fully sterile environment, so the
product should have limited storage time. Pathogenic microorganisms such as Salmonella or Listeria
must be avoided.
Figure 2. Ishikawa diagram of causal influences regarding cold brew coee extraction.
Challenges 2020,11, 26 4 of 13
3.3. Hazards during Cold Brew Extraction
Microbiological contamination along with typical chemical contaminants such as pesticides,
mycotoxins, acrylamide, and furan must be considered (Figure 3). Cold brew is one the few coee
beverages that includes some microbiological food safety hazards. Risk is usually minimized
by the roasting process and fresh, hot brewing. The long brewing time of cold brew can
facilitate microbiological activity. Lopez [
15
] summarized microbiological challenge studies based
on personal communications with the industry showing that various species such as Salmonella,
Listeria monocytogenes, and Escherichia coli may be viable in cold brew for 7–28 days. Specifically,
the potential for Listeria monocytogenes to survive in cold brew coee was judged as being of concern
due to its low infective dose [15].
Challenges 2020, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 4 of 13
Figure 2. Ishikawa diagram of causal influences regarding cold brew coffee extraction.
3.3. Hazards During Cold Brew Extraction
Microbiological contamination along with typical chemical contaminants such as pesticides,
mycotoxins, acrylamide, and furan must be considered (Figure 3). Cold brew is one the few coffee
beverages that includes some microbiological food safety hazards. Risk is usually minimized by the
roasting process and fresh, hot brewing. The long brewing time of cold brew can facilitate
microbiological activity. Lopez [15] summarized microbiological challenge studies based on personal
communications with the industry showing that various species such as Salmonella, Listeria
monocytogenes, and Escherichia coli may be viable in cold brew for 7–28 days. Specifically, the potential
for Listeria monocytogenes to survive in cold brew coffee was judged as being of concern due to its low
infective dose [15].
Figure 3. Ishikawa diagram of causal influences of extraction on cold brew coffee contamination.
Cold brew producers should be vigilant for any visual or taste changes, which could be an
indication of microbial contamination. The risk of microbial growth is strongly related to the
extraction temperature and is dramatically reduced at very cold temperatures.
The most common organisms that could spoil cold brew are yeasts (leading to alcoholic
fermentation) and lactic or acetic acid bacteria (producing organic acids). For most small-scale
producers (e.g., in their coffee shops), it is impossible to work in a fully sterile environment, so the
product should have limited storage time. Pathogenic microorganisms such as Salmonella or Listeria
must be avoided.
Figure 3. Ishikawa diagram of causal influences of extraction on cold brew coee contamination.
Cold brew producers should be vigilant for any visual or taste changes, which could be an
indication of microbial contamination. The risk of microbial growth is strongly related to the extraction
temperature and is dramatically reduced at very cold temperatures.
The most common organisms that could spoil cold brew are yeasts (leading to alcoholic
fermentation) and lactic or acetic acid bacteria (producing organic acids). For most small-scale
producers (e.g., in their coee shops), it is impossible to work in a fully sterile environment, so the
product should have limited storage time. Pathogenic microorganisms such as Salmonella or Listeria
must be avoided.
When filling cans, bottles, or kegs, the use of additives such as ascorbic acid or preservatives may
increase microbiological stability and shelf life, as well as heat sterilization or pasteurization (see [5]).
However, all these methods are expected to negatively impact the flavor.
Heat-induced coee contaminants formed during roasting, such as furan or acrylamide [
16
],
were found at similar levels in cold brew when compared with hot brew [
17
]. While acrylamide
may increase with prolonged extraction times, furan may decrease due to volatility [
18
]. Similarly,
other chemical contaminants of coee such as pesticides or mycotoxins are expected to occur in cold
brew when the raw beans are contaminated, but this is not a problem specific to cold brew. Therefore,
we believe that microbiological contamination is the exception to the rule that needs specific mitigation
measures during the cold brew manufacture.
3.4. Extraction Degree
Considering consumer preference in Malaysia and Germany [
11
,
19
], 70% extraction (i.e., 70% in
relation to the total extractable/soluble amount) may be an optimal starting point for a cold brew coee
recipe to achieve a balanced product (Figure 4). This number does not yet have a scientific basis but
Challenges 2020,11, 26 5 of 13
stems from experience considering all aspects of the product, including the risk of microbiological
contamination and the flavor. In other words, the optimum extraction results in the best flavor while
avoiding contamination. Increased agitation will result in a faster process; cooler temperatures will
take longer. Not all the soluble constituents should be extracted, but just enough to get a good taste
while minimizing the risk of microbiological contamination. This can also happen in hot extractions
such as espresso, where over-extraction will lead to an unpleasant taste [20].
Challenges 2020, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 5 of 13
When filling cans, bottles, or kegs, the use of additives such as ascorbic acid or preservatives
may increase microbiological stability and shelf life, as well as heat sterilization or pasteurization (see
[5]). However, all these methods are expected to negatively impact the flavor.
Heat-induced coffee contaminants formed during roasting, such as furan or acrylamide [16],
were found at similar levels in cold brew when compared with hot brew [17]. While acrylamide may
increase with prolonged extraction times, furan may decrease due to volatility [18]. Similarly, other
chemical contaminants of coffee such as pesticides or mycotoxins are expected to occur in cold brew
when the raw beans are contaminated, but this is not a problem specific to cold brew. Therefore, we
believe that microbiological contamination is the exception to the rule that needs specific mitigation
measures during the cold brew manufacture.
3.4. Extraction Degree
Considering consumer preference in Malaysia and Germany [11,19], 70% extraction (i.e., 70% in
relation to the total extractable/soluble amount) may be an optimal starting point for a cold brew
coffee recipe to achieve a balanced product (Figure 4). This number does not yet have a scientific basis
but stems from experience considering all aspects of the product, including the risk of microbiological
contamination and the flavor. In other words, the optimum extraction results in the best flavor while
avoiding contamination. Increased agitation will result in a faster process; cooler temperatures will
take longer. Not all the soluble constituents should be extracted, but just enough to get a good taste
while minimizing the risk of microbiological contamination. This can also happen in hot extractions
such as espresso, where over-extraction will lead to an unpleasant taste [20].
Figure 4. Model considerations about cold brew extraction.
Figure 4. Model considerations about cold brew extraction.
Some empirical research confirms the authors’ suggestion of 70% extraction. Cordoba et al. [
21
]
reported higher scores in their sensorial evaluation when cold brews were prepared using the shortest
time (at 75–86% total dissolved solids compared with a longer extraction time). More research is
clearly necessary.
The highest possible extraction, namely 100%, is not desirable in the specialty coee field. It is
better to waste a little bit of coee, especially the part with the bad flavors. There might be an optimum
point, certainly less than 100%, where all the “good” flavors are in and the “bad” flavors are excluded.
The equipment and factors mentioned above must all be taken into account to ensure a consistently
high-quality product.
3.5. Flavor and Taste Profile of Cold Brew Coee
There are considerable aromatic dierences between hot and cold brew coee [
22
]. For example,
the Coee Consulate Aroma Wheel [
23
] shows some grayed out areas for cold brew (Figure 5). Those are
the oil-bound aroma groups (i.e., herbs, spices, and nuts), which are suppressed by extraction with
cold water. Fruit, floral, and vegetal aromas are more common; also, light roast, and some mineral
Challenges 2020,11, 26 6 of 13
and chemical aromas in cases of very dark roasts. Especially in the drip method, with melting water
just above 0
C, the product is characterized by fine, very fruity, and floral aromas. As a variation,
some people may extract cold brew with cold milk instead of cold water, which may increase the
lipophilic and more polar compounds and flavors. Compounds such as caeine, which are very water
soluble, are typically found in similar levels in cold and hot brew [24].
Challenges 2020, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 6 of 13
Some empirical research confirms the authors’ suggestion of 70% extraction. Cordoba et al. [21]
reported higher scores in their sensorial evaluation when cold brews were prepared using the
shortest time (at 75–86% total dissolved solids compared with a longer extraction time). More
research is clearly necessary.
The highest possible extraction, namely 100%, is not desirable in the specialty coffee field. It is
better to waste a little bit of coffee, especially the part with the bad flavors. There might be an
optimum point, certainly less than 100%, where all the “good” flavors are in and the “bad” flavors
are excluded. The equipment and factors mentioned above must all be taken into account to ensure
a consistently high-quality product.
3.5. Flavor and Taste Profile of Cold Brew Coffee
There are considerable aromatic differences between hot and cold brew coffee [22]. For example,
the Coffee Consulate Aroma Wheel [23] shows some grayed out areas for cold brew (Figure 5). Those
are the oil-bound aroma groups (i.e., herbs, spices, and nuts), which are suppressed by extraction
with cold water. Fruit, floral, and vegetal aromas are more common; also, light roast, and some
mineral and chemical aromas in cases of very dark roasts. Especially in the drip method, with melting
water just above 0 °C, the product is characterized by fine, very fruity, and floral aromas. As a
variation, some people may extract cold brew with cold milk instead of cold water, which may
increase the lipophilic and more polar compounds and flavors. Compounds such as caffeine, which
are very water soluble, are typically found in similar levels in cold and hot brew [24].
Figure 5. Coffee Consulate aroma wheel. Aroma groups that are reduced due to cold brewing are
grayed out.
The difference in flavor profile becomes obvious when a cold brew and a standard hot filter
coffee extraction of exactly the same coffee variety (oeiras) are compared using the Coffee Consulate
flavor profile by a calibrated taste panel (n = 3) (Figure 6) [10]. The cold brew profile is more intensive
in orange/lemon/cucumber flavors, while filter coffee is more intensive in peach, spice, and
microbiological characteristics. Cold brew has slightly less body and is more refreshing.
Figure 5.
Coee Consulate aroma wheel. Aroma groups that are reduced due to cold brewing are
grayed out.
The dierence in flavor profile becomes obvious when a cold brew and a standard hot filter coee
extraction of exactly the same coee variety (oeiras) are compared using the Coee Consulate flavor
profile by a calibrated taste panel (n=3) (Figure 6) [
10
]. The cold brew profile is more intensive in
orange/lemon/cucumber flavors, while filter coee is more intensive in peach, spice, and microbiological
characteristics. Cold brew has slightly less body and is more refreshing.
Challenges 2020,11, 26 7 of 13
Challenges 2020, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 7 of 13
(a)
(b)
Figure 6. Flavor profiles of a cold brew (a) compared with a filter coffee (b) of the same coffee.
Figure 6. Flavor profiles of a cold brew (a) compared with a filter coee (b) of the same coee.
Challenges 2020,11, 26 8 of 13
4. Cold Brew—Research Plans
Some initial organoleptic experiments with cold brew were initiated during the Intergastra 2020
trade fair (15–19 February 2020, Stuttgart, Germany), which included the Stuttgart Coee Summit,
one of the largest professional coee trade exhibitions worldwide. The visitors at the Coee Consulate
booth were asked to participate in several ranking order and triangle tests according to ISO 8587 and
ISO 4120 methodologies (n=60 for ranking order tests and n=25 for triangle tests). The statistical
evaluation of the results is ongoing and will be published later, but some initial trends were that cold
brew made with Coea arabica beans was preferred over the one with Coea canephora. There was also a
tendency of pulped natural processed Arabica being preferred over fully washed Arabica, potentially
due to the higher sweetness of the resulting brew. Another trial showed that consumers significantly
preferred cold brew over cooled down hot brew, when the same type of coee beans were prepared in
both instances.
There is not much literature about how cold brew is actually prepared in common practice.
Therefore, a questionnaire has been developed [
11
]. Besides some demographic data and experience
with cold brew, the questionnaire investigates the major parameters such as dosage, water composition,
brewing temperature, brewing time, grinding degree, coee variety, roasting degree, and serving
styles. The questionnaire was launched during online training in April 2020 and sent to all participants,
but also distributed on the Facebook pages of the aliated institutions and other social network
channels. The results are currently under evaluation. However, some initial interesting findings of the
first 49 participants as of 22 April 2020, which mostly encompass the participants of several online
training sessions, are shortly summarized below.
There was an almost equal distribution between the dierent cold brew systems (i.e., drip method,
commercial systems, French press, mixing in various containers, etc.) with a slight preference (34%) of
immersion in containers and filtration afterwards. The applied brew ratios were similarly diverse,
with a majority of participants preferring 80–100 g/L. For water quality, soft or medium hard water
is preferred. The most preferred extraction temperature is 8
C followed by 20
C (see Figure 7).
The average brewing time was 16 h (standard deviation 10 h, maximum 49 h). Medium roast with
coarse grinding degree was preferred. Following the brewing of the cold brew, the average storage
time was one day (median 0.6 days, standard deviation 1.4 days, maximum seven days).
Challenges 2020, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 8 of 13
4. Cold Brew—Research Plans
Some initial organoleptic experiments with cold brew were initiated during the Intergastra 2020
trade fair (15–19 February 2020, Stuttgart, Germany), which included the Stuttgart Coffee Summit,
one of the largest professional coffee trade exhibitions worldwide. The visitors at the Coffee
Consulate booth were asked to participate in several ranking order and triangle tests according to
ISO 8587 and ISO 4120 methodologies (n = 60 for ranking order tests and n = 25 for triangle tests). The
statistical evaluation of the results is ongoing and will be published later, but some initial trends were
that cold brew made with Coffea arabica beans was preferred over the one with Coffea canephora. There
was also a tendency of pulped natural processed Arabica being preferred over fully washed Arabica,
potentially due to the higher sweetness of the resulting brew. Another trial showed that consumers
significantly preferred cold brew over cooled down hot brew, when the same type of coffee beans
were prepared in both instances.
There is not much literature about how cold brew is actually prepared in common practice.
Therefore, a questionnaire has been developed [11]. Besides some demographic data and experience
with cold brew, the questionnaire investigates the major parameters such as dosage, water
composition, brewing temperature, brewing time, grinding degree, coffee variety, roasting degree,
and serving styles. The questionnaire was launched during online training in April 2020 and sent to
all participants, but also distributed on the Facebook pages of the affiliated institutions and other
social network channels. The results are currently under evaluation. However, some initial
interesting findings of the first 49 participants as of 22 April 2020, which mostly encompass the
participants of several online training sessions, are shortly summarized below.
There was an almost equal distribution between the different cold brew systems (i.e., drip
method, commercial systems, French press, mixing in various containers, etc.) with a slight
preference (34%) of immersion in containers and filtration afterwards. The applied brew ratios were
similarly diverse, with a majority of participants preferring 80–100 g/L. For water quality, soft or
medium hard water is preferred. The most preferred extraction temperature is 8 °C followed by 20 °C
(see Figure 7). The average brewing time was 16 h (standard deviation 10 h, maximum 49 h). Medium
roast with coarse grinding degree was preferred. Following the brewing of the cold brew, the average
storage time was one day (median 0.6 days, standard deviation 1.4 days, maximum seven days).
Figure 7. Initial survey result of cold brew extraction temperatures.
Figure 7. Initial survey result of cold brew extraction temperatures.
Challenges 2020,11, 26 9 of 13
5. Open Problems and Challenges about Cold Brew Coee
5.1. Should Cold Brew Be Served with Ice?
The ice will lower the temperature and may also dilute the aromas. Cold temperatures will also
suppress the optimal taste perception. Therefore, a good cold brew does not need ice. However,
obviously, if consumers like ice, such as in whisky-like cocktails, there is no reason not to oer it.
5.2. Is Cold Brew Extracted at Room Temperature Still a “Cold Brew”?
There is no available definition or regulatory standard on cold brew coee. According to the
authors’ own judgement, every brew made at temperatures below body temperature may be considered
as “cold” brew. Cold does not necessarily imply “ice cold”. We, however, no longer consider hot
brewed (>65
C) coees that are just cooled down, as cold brew. If cold brews are brewed at room
temperature (which could reach levels above 30
C in some regions of the world), it must obviously
be considered that the extraction will be much faster. This could even be advantageous regarding
microbiological contamination problems (e.g., comparing 18 h at 8
C vs. 2 h at 20
C). However,
systematic research into this issue is lacking so far. Shelf life should be longer at fridge temperature
than at room temperature.
5.3. What Would Your Suggestion Be for Cold Brew Extraction Conditions?
Based on the experience at Coee Consulate, an amount of 80 g/L coee is suggested for 2 h at
initially 15
C (tap water temperature in Europe) then stored in a fridge [
19
]. We use a 5 L food-grade
plastic container with the aliquot of medium fine coee (Catuai, pulped natural, or natural) and water
(4.8
dH German hardness), then we stir once after 1 h of lixiviation. Finally, the product is filtered
using a standard paper filter. We believe that this method is simple and stable, making a consistent
product as proven by various coee shops that use this recipe.
From a sensorial standpoint, nothing may be gained by prolonging the extraction time to 4 h
or even longer [
19
]. Increasing the extraction time may only increase the bitterness of the beverage.
Some empirical evidence confirms this opinion: Caeine and 3-chlorogenic acid reached equilibrium
(i.e., 100% extraction, compare Figure 4) between 6 and 7 h, instead of 10 to 24 h outlined in some
typical cold brew methods [
25
]. Cold drips were recognized as more bitter and temperature was found
to increase the concentration of several compounds [
13
]. We are currently in the process of adjusting
our coee analytical methods [
26
28
] to cold brews aimed at studying and optimizing the multivariate
influences and their interactions on cold extraction.
5.4. Is It Possible to Make Cold Brew with Beans from the Asia-Pacific Region?
These beans are often underrated. The advantage of the Indonesian and South-East Asian
(e.g., Myanmar, Thailand, Philippines, and Malaysia) beans is the uniqueness in very floral and spicy
coees. To make a cold brew out of these beans really needs consideration of roast profile and extraction
method. Cold brew prepared with beans from Indonesia (Arabica Bali Kintamani coee) showed a
fruity flavor with intense sweetness [
29
]. Otherwise, no reports on the sensorial data of South East
Asian (SEA) coees in cold brew are currently available.
5.5. What Would Be the Optimum Shelf Life of a Cold Brew Coee?
Optimally, the cold brew would sell on the same day of preparation. The authors are of the
strong belief that cold brew should be made fresh everyday (this actually appears to be in divergence
with current practices, see survey result above). When stored for longer, some changes in product
quality can be expected, such as raised acidity and greater ethanol content, also decreases in sugar
content/sweetness due to yeast or bacteria activity. For example, So et al. [
30
] have shown that pH
Challenges 2020,11, 26 10 of 13
declines and total acidity increases during cold brew storage for eight weeks, with greater eects for
storage at 20 C than at 4 C.
In addition to microbiological changes, the product will also go rancid and stale due to an oxidative
process. This oxidative process will not be as fast as for hot brewed coee, which has a much higher
lipid content. Anecdotally, if cold brew is stored under nitrogen pressure (e.g., in kegs), oxidation can
be avoided and shelf-life extended [
31
,
32
]. Some studies claim that the shelf-life of cold brew is limited
not by microbial stability, but rather by deterioration in sensory attributes [33].
Currently, for artisanal producers, we would suggest a maximum storage time of two days.
Taste is currently the only guidance available on site to determine how long a cold brew may be stored.
Otherwise, microbiological laboratory testing for shelf life analyses might be conducted.
To give an analogy with filter coee, this product would turn stale and be thrown away after
one to two hours. We do not believe that there is a reason to demand week-long storage times
for cold brew, which basically has the same underlying costs (similar brewing ratio) as filter coee.
We know from experience that this also greatly increases customer satisfaction. It is a shame that the
segment of cold brew, at least in Central Europe, appears currently dominated at an industrial level by
“called brews” (i.e., hot extracted fakes) and on the artisanal level by over-extracted and over-stored
products, which are sometimes extremely acidic and bitter, which is adverse to the goal of achieving a
loyal, returning customer.
5.6. Is It Possible to Prepare Cold Brew as Concentrate and Dilute before Serving?
If a high-quality coee is used to prepare a concentrate, there should be no reason that it should
taste bad. This would be the equivalent of high gravity mashing on beer brewing. Increasing the
ground coee to water ratio may simplify the extraction and storage of the brew, that can be diluted
just before consumption. Most commercially available concentrates, however, appear to be based on
lower grade coees and bad roasts as well as on hot extraction, using advanced equipment such as
evaporation systems. Currently, we would not advise making concentrates in smaller coee shops.
There is also no research available on how concentration influences flavor.
5.7. What Are Typical Customer’s Complaints Against Cold Brew?
It is too bitter, because bitterness is the sign that something is turning toxic. The next complaint
would be too sour or too acidic (meaning that it tastes rotten). The acidity may arise from over-extraction
and microbiological spoilage (lactic characteristics). These defects can be avoided when over-extraction
and over-storage is avoided.
5.8. What Are the Risks of Handling Cold Brew Coee?
Cold brew has a pH value greater than 4.6 (typically 4.9–6.0 [
25
,
34
,
35
]), which is a low acidity and
does not eectively suppress microbial growth [
5
]. Therefore, foodborne pathogens (i.e., human illness
causing microorganisms) or spoilage organisms, which mainly aect flavor, may develop in cold
brew [5], see also Section 3.3. above.
Some initial experiments showed that the growth of pathogens may be inhibited by compounds in
the coffee, but this must be confirmed for each individual preparation [
5
]. Conversely, spoilage organisms
such as molds and yeasts appear not to be inhibited and may increase quickly during storage leading
to fermentation [
5
]. Most sensitive products are ready-to-drink beverages, especially those under
anaerobic conditions (for example when filled under pressure with nitrogen [
34
]). These products
must be closely controlled to mitigate the risk of Clostridium botulinum (botulism), by either pH control
or thermal processing [
36
]. In fact, the product “Death Wish” nitro cold brew was recalled from the
market in September 2017, because it was determined that its production process could lead to the
growth and production of botulinum toxin in this low-acid food commercialized in reduced oxygen
packaging [37,38].
Challenges 2020,11, 26 11 of 13
We would currently compare the risk of cold brew coee to other alcohol-free beverages,
for which considerably more experience exists. As cold-brew has a small amount of sugars
(e.g., some initial findings found cold brew higher in reducing sugars than hot brewed coee [
39
]),
and unlike beer, does not contain alcohol which inhibits bacterial growth, the risk would be similar to,
e.g., other alcohol-free beverages with pH >5. Hence, special care and diligence need to be applied
regarding handling and cleaning of dispensing equipment and coee lines (e.g., for nitro cold brew
“on tap”). For example, the German norm DIN 6650-6 suggests a cleaning and disinfecting interval of
at least once a day for alcohol-free beverages [40].
Special care is also required when cold brew is filled in kegs needing careful study of the shelf
life [
6
]. Most commercial cold brews in the market also require refrigeration for both storage and
dispensing [
41
]. We recommend to specifically consider cold brew in the Hazard Analysis Critical
Control Points (HACCP) system, which is mandatorily implemented in many countries including the
European Union. To avoid contamination with pathogenic microorganisms, maximum storage times
based on microbiological shelf-life testing should be implemented (including labelling of maximum
duration and compliance controls that the product is removed before this date). Visual controls for
clouding and organoleptic testing at least once a day before service starts should be conducted.
Some further guidelines are specified in the “Cold brew coee toolkit for industry” published by
the National Coee Association of U.S.A. [
36
]. The toolkit includes information on challenge studies to
avoid risk from spore-forming bacteria such as Clostridium and guidance on shelf-life testing, storage,
and handling [
36
]. The British Columbia Centre for Disease Control suggests a maximum refrigerated
storage of less than 10 days for products stored at 4
C and below, if no other controls are present [
34
].
The Centre also suggests the following options to control the hazards of spore-forming bacteria for
products intended for longer term storage: (i) Heating and pasteurization, (ii) reducing the pH to 4.6 or
below, (iii) ensuring aseptic processing, (iv) addition of preservatives, and (v) a combination of these
controls [34].
5.9. What Are the Advantages of the Cold Drip Method?
Based on the experience at Earthlings Coee Workshop, customers like the concentrated, punchy
flavor from ice drip coee. It is usually served straight or with ice cubes, dependent on the customers’
preference. The ratio is usually 1:5. 300 g of blend and about 1450 g of ice cubes plus 50 g of filtered
water. The time is about 8–12 h. The use of ice cubes is extremely important for the flavor.
6. Conclusions
We are at the very beginning of scientifically understanding what cold brew coee is. It is important
not to have a pre-mindset into any direction and be really open to experience the entire spectrum
of possibilities with this extraction technology. The cold brew extraction is a highly multivariate
process [
13
], and additional chemical, microbiological, and sensory studies are needed to increase
our understanding. Additionally, the taste profile of cold brew can be influenced by the serving,
e.g., nitrogen infused or so-called nitro cold brew, milk addition, sugar addition, use of ice, or other
ingredients such as alcoholic beverages. The nitro method is specifically interesting because it
considerably changes the look and taste of the beverage. The nitrogen gas percolates through the glass
like a Guinness beer, leaving a creamy head on the top [
6
]. The flavors are dispersed across the tongue
because the bubbles dramatically increase the surface giving a smooth and creamy taste [
6
]. In our
experience, the nitro method also intensifies the sweetness and takes the bitterness out of the product.
Finally, the food safety hazards of cold brew need increased consideration. As suggested by
Lopez [
15
], both regulatory agencies as well as industry should address the issue aiming for standards
and good manufacturing practices reducing the risks of cold brew coee.
Author Contributions:
Conceptualization, S.S. and D.W.L.; formal analysis, D.W.L.; investigation, S.S. and L.C.;
methodology, S.S., L.C., and D.W.L.; project administration, D.W.L.; supervision, S.S. and D.W.L.; visualization,
Challenges 2020,11, 26 12 of 13
Steen Schwarz; writing—original draft, D.W.L.; writing—review and editing, R.K., K.L.W.T., S.S., and L.C.
All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research received no external funding.
Acknowledgments:
This article is based on training sessions by professional coee training centers in Malaysia
and Germany. The training sessions were initiated by presentations of invited speakers followed by Q&A sessions.
All participants in the online training sessions are thanked for their attendance, questions and suggestions.
Photogem25/Fiverr is thanked for proofreading the revised manuscript version.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.
References
1.
Le Compte, C. Cold Brew Wasn’t Invented Yesterday, So Here’s Some Historical Perspective.
Available online: https://dailycoeenews.com/2015/07/15/cold-brewing-wasnt-invented-yesterday-so-heres-
some-historical-perspective/(accessed on 24 April 2020).
2. Patel, D. Cold coee revolution in Southeast Asia. Asia Pac. Food Ind. 2017,4–5, 72–73.
3.
Anon. Niche and ultra-niche segments set to expand rapidly in diversifying US market. Coee Cocoa Int.
2019,46, 20–23.
4.
Cordoba, N.; Fernandez-Alduenda, M.; Moreno, F.L.; Ruiz, Y. Coee extraction: A review of parameters and
their influence on the physicochemical characteristics and flavour of coee brews. Trends Food Sci. Technol.
2020,96, 45–60. [CrossRef]
5.
Puro, E. Cold brew with caution. Food safety and quality concerns for the growing market. Roast
2016
,
7–8, 36–49.
6. Mendez, D.W. What’s so hot, about cold brew coee? Total Food Serv. 2016,26, 106.
7.
Hamilton, L.M.; Lahne, J. Assessment of instructions on panelist cognitive framework and free sorting task
results: A case study of cold brew coee. Food Qual. Prefer. 2020,83, 103889. [CrossRef]
8.
Salmaa Dwiranti, N.; Ardiansyah, A.; Asiah, N. Sensory Attributes of Cold Brew Coee Products at Various
Resting Time After Roasting Process. Pelita Perkeb. 2019,35, 42–50. [CrossRef]
9.
Asiah, N.; Aqil, M.; Dwiranti, N.S.; David, W.; Ardiansyah, A. Sensory and chemical changes of cold and hot
brew Arabica coffee at various resting time. Asia Pac. J. Sust. Agric. Food Energy
2019
,7, 2017–2020. [CrossRef]
10.
Rao, N.Z.; Fuller, M.; Grim, M.D. Physiochemical characteristics of hot and cold brew coee chemistry:
The eects of roast level and brewing temperature on compound extraction. Foods 2020,9, 902. [CrossRef]
11.
Schwarz, S.; Lachenmeier, D.W.; Claassen, L. Defining cold brew coee through extraction. Tea Coee Trade J.
2020,192, 31–32. [CrossRef]
12.
Angeloni, G.; Guerrini, L.; Masella, P.; Bellumori, M.; Daluiso, S.; Parenti, A.; Innocenti, M. What kind of
coee do you drink? An investigation on eects of eight dierent extraction methods. Food Res. Int.
2019
,
116, 1327–1335. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
13.
Angeloni, G.; Guerrini, L.; Masella, P.; Innocenti, M.; Bellumori, M.; Parenti, A. Characterization and
comparison of cold brew and cold drip coee extraction methods. J. Sci. Food Agric.
2019
,99, 391–399.
[CrossRef] [PubMed]
14.
Ahmed, M.; Jiang, G.H.; Park, J.S.; Lee, K.C.; Seok, Y.Y.; Eun, J.B. Eects of ultrasonication, agitation and
stirring extraction techniques on the physicochemical properties, health-promoting phytochemicals and
structure of cold-brewed coee. J. Sci. Food Agric. 2019,99, 290–301. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
15.
Lopez, J. Cold brew coee regulations and policies. Assoc. Food Drug O. J.
2021
,81, in press. Available online:
https://www.ifpti.org/s/Lopez_AFDO-Journal-Article_FINAL_June2020.pdf (accessed on 12 October 2020).
16.
Lachenmeier, D.W.; Schwarz, S.; Teipel, J.; Hegmanns, M.; Kuballa, T.; Walch, S.G.; Breitling-Utzmann, C.M.
Potential antagonistic eects of acrylamide mitigation during coee roasting on furfuryl alcohol, furan and
5-hydroxymethylfurfural. Toxics 2018,7, 1. [CrossRef]
17.
Kang, D.E.; Lee, H.U.; Davaatseren, M.; Chung, M.S. Comparison of acrylamide and furan concentrations,
antioxidant activities, and volatile profiles in cold or hot brew coees. Food Sci. Biotechnol.
2020
,29, 141–148.
[CrossRef]
18.
Han, J.W.; Boo, H.; Chung, M.S. Eects of extraction conditions on acrylamide/furan content, antioxidant
activity, and sensory properties of cold brew coee. Food Sci. Biotechnol.
2020
,29, 1071–1080. [CrossRef]
[PubMed]
Challenges 2020,11, 26 13 of 13
19. Schwarz, S. Cold brew: 2 hours are sucient. Food Serv. 2020,6, 12.
20.
Klotz, J.A.; Winkler, G.; Lachenmeier, D.W. Influence of the brewing temperature on the taste of espresso.
Foods 2020,9, 36. [CrossRef]
21.
Cordoba, N.; Pataquiva, L.; Osorio, C.; Moreno, F.L.M.; Ruiz, R.Y. Eect of grinding, extraction time and
type of coee on the physicochemical and flavour characteristics of cold brew coee. Sci. Rep.
2019
,9, 8440.
[CrossRef]
22. Seninde, D.R.; Chambers, E. Coee flavor: A review. Beverages 2020,6, 44. [CrossRef]
23.
Coee Consulate. CoeeBasics AromaWheel; Coee Consulate: Mannheim, Germany, 2020. Available online:
https://coee-consulate.com/en/produkt/coeebasicsaromarad/(accessed on 24 April 2020).
24.
Lane, S.; Palmer, J.; Christie, B.; Ehlting, J.; Le, C. Can cold brew coee be convenient? A pilot study for
caeine content in cold brew coee concentrate using high performance liquid chromatography. Arbutus Rev.
2017,8, 15–23. [CrossRef]
25.
Fuller, M.; Rao, N.Z. The eect of time, roasting temperature, and grind size on caeine and chlorogenic acid
concentrations in cold brew coee. Sci. Rep. 2017,7, 17979. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
26.
Lachenmeier, D.W.; Teipel, J.; Scharinger, A.; Kuballa, T.; Walch, S.G.; Grosch, F.; Bunzel, M.; Okaru, A.O.;
Schwarz, S. Fully automated identification of coee species and simultaneous quantification of furfuryl
alcohol using NMR spectroscopy. J. AOAC Int. 2020,103, 306–314. [CrossRef]
27.
Okaru, A.O.; Scharinger, A.; de Rajcic, R.T.; Teipel, J.; Kuballa, T.; Walch, S.G.; Lachenmeier, D.W. Validation of
a quantitative proton nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopic screening method for coee quality and
authenticity (NMR Coee Screener). Foods 2020,9, 47. [CrossRef]
28.
Monakhova, Y.B.; Ruge, W.; Kuballa, T.; Ilse, M.; Winkelmann, O.; Diehl, B.; Thomas, F.; Lachenmeier, D.W.
Rapid approach to identify the presence of Arabica and Robusta species in coee using
1
H NMR spectroscopy.
Food Chem. 2015,182, 178–184. [CrossRef]
29.
Fibrianto, K.; Umam, K.; Shinta Wulandari, E. Eect of roasting profiles and brewing methods on the
characteristics of Bali Kintamani coee. Adv. Eng. Res. 2018,172, 194–197.
30.
So, Y.J.; Lee, M.W.; Yoo, K.M.; Kang, H.J.; Hwang, I.K. Physicochemical characteristics and antioxidant
activity of Dutch coee depending on dierent extraction conditions and storage. Korean J. Food Sci. Technol.
2014,46, 671–676. [CrossRef]
31.
Jarvis, L.M.; Morrison, J. What’s nitro cold brew, and why is it so damn delicious? Chem. Eng. News
2015
,
93, 37.
32. Northrop, R. Manufacturing food safe cold brew. Tea Coee Trade J. 2018,190, 46–47.
33. Northrop, R. Cold brew and nitro coee on tap for growth. Tea Coee Trade J. 2019,191, 16–19.
34.
British Columbia Centre for Disease Control. Nitro Cold Brew Coee Food Safety Risks; BC Centre for Disease
Control: Vancouver, BC, Canada, 2017.
35.
Rao, N.Z.; Fuller, M. Acidity and antioxidant activity of cold brew coee. Sci. Rep.
2018
,8, 16030. [CrossRef]
[PubMed]
36.
NCA. Cold Brew Coffee Toolkit for Industry; National Coffee Association of USA, Inc.: New York, NY, USA, 2019.
37.
U.S. FDA. Death Wish Coee Co. Announces Recall of Nitro Cold Brew Cans From Retailers, Online Sales.
Available online: https://www.fda.gov/safety/recalls/ucm576809.htm (accessed on 24 April 2020).
38.
Rossman, S. ‘Death Wish’ Coee Recalled Because It Can Literally Kill You. Available online:
https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/nation-now/2017/09/22/death-wish-coee-recalled-because-can-
literally-kill-you/692417001/(accessed on 24 April 2020).
39.
Contador, M.; Schmidt, F.; Braga, A. Otimizaç
ã
o do processo de extraç
ã
o de caf
é
a frio (cold brew coee),
caracterização físico-química e sensorial. Rev. Trab. Iniciação Científica UNICAM 2019,27, 1. [CrossRef]
40.
DIN. DIN 6650-6:2014-12 Dispense Systems for Draught Beverages—Part 6: Requirements for Cleaning and
Disinfection; Deutsches Institut für Normung: Berlin, Germany, 2014. [CrossRef]
41. Anon. Cold brew coee—On tap! The future of coee and how to serve it. Total Food Serv. 2018,28, 110.
©
2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
... Using the SurveyMonkey tool (Survey Monkey Europe UC, Dublin, Ireland), a survey was created (see Kwok et al. [8] for details on development of the questionnaire and the data availability statement for access to a copy of the full questionnaire). This questionnaire contains questions which aim to find out how cold brew is produced at home, commercially and in the industry. ...
... This questionnaire contains questions which aim to find out how cold brew is produced at home, commercially and in the industry. This questionnaire was distributed on social networks with the collaboration of Coffee Consulate (Mannheim, Germany) and Earthlings Coffee Workshop (Kuching, Malaysia) and advertised during an international seminar on cold brew coffee (see Kwok et al. [8]) as well as on Facebook and Instagram, including non-public specialized interest groups on cold brew coffee. The participation of 125 people was achieved (see data availability statement for access to full raw results). ...
... The microbiological testing results (see Section 4.4) corroborate that there is more than a hypothetical hazard but rather a clear risk during cold brew coffee processing. As long as it has not been empirically determined up to which time and under which conditions the cold brew is considered safe, however, it is recommended not to keep it longer than one day and to discard it immediately if changes in the smell or taste become noticeable [8]. There appears to be a consensus, however, on the choice of bean type. ...
Article
Full-text available
Cold brew coffee is a new trend in the coffee industry. This paper presents pilot studies on several aspects of this beverage. Using an online survey, the current practices of cold brew coffee preparation were investigated, identifying a rather large variability with a preference for extraction of medium roasted Arabica coffee using 50–100 g/L at 8 °C for about 1 day. Sensory testing using ranking and triangle tests showed that cold brew may be preferred over iced coffee (cooled down hot extracted coffee). Extraction experiments under different conditions combined with nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) analysis showed that the usual extraction time may be longer than necessary as most compounds are extracted within only a few hours, while increasing turbulence (e.g., using ultrasonication) and temperature may additionally increase the speed of extraction. NMR analysis also revealed a possible chemical differentiation between cold brew and hot brew using multivariate data analysis. Decreased extraction time and reduced storage times could be beneficial for cold brew product quality as microbiological analysis of commercial samples detected samples with spoilage organisms and contamination with Bacillus cereus.
... Using the SurveyMonkey tool (Survey Monkey Europe UC, Dublin, Ireland), a survey was created (see Kwok et al. [8] for details on development of the questionnaire and the supplementary material for a copy of the full questionnaire). This questionnaire contains questions which aim to find out how cold crew is produced at home, commercially and in the industry. ...
... This questionnaire contains questions which aim to find out how cold crew is produced at home, commercially and in the industry. This questionnaire was distributed on social networks with the collaboration of Coffee Consulate (Mannheim, Germany) and Earthlings Coffee Workshop (Kuching, Malaysia) and advertised during an international seminar on cold brew coffee (see Kwok et al. [8]) as well as on Facebook and Instagram, including non-public specialized interest groups on cold brew coffee. A participation of 125 people could be achieved. ...
... corroborate that there is more than a hypothetical hazard but a clear risk during cold brew coffee processing. As long as it has not been empirically determined up to which time under which conditions the cold brew is considered safe, however, it is recommended not to keep it longer than one day and to discard it immediately if changes in the smell or taste become noticeable [8]. ...
Preprint
Full-text available
Cold brew coffee is a new trend in coffee industry. This paper presents pilot studies into several aspect of this beverage. Using an online survey, the current practices of cold brew coffee preparation were investigated identifying a rather large variability with a preference for extraction of medium roasted Arabica coffee using 50-100 g/l at 8°C for about 1 day. Sensory testing using ranking and triangle tests showed that cold brew may be preferred over iced coffee (cooled down hot extracted coffee). Extraction experiments at different conditions combined with nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) analysis showed that the usual extraction time may be longer than necessary as most compounds are extracted within only a few hours, while increasing turbulence (e.g. using ultrasonication) and temperature may additional increase the speed of extraction. NMR analysis also revealed a possible chemical differentiation between cold brew and hot brew using multivariate data analysis. Decreased extraction time and reduced storage times could be beneficial for cold brew product quality as microbiological analysis of commercial samples detected samples with spoilage organisms and contamination with Bacillus cereus.
... In den vergangenen Jahren konnte ein starker Anstieg beim Konsum von kalt gebrühtem Kaffee, insbesondere von sogenanntem Cold-Brew-Kaffee, verzeichnet werden [1]. Nach Expertenmeinung ist unter Cold-Brew-Kaffee eine Zubereitungsart von kalt gebrühtem Kaffee mit einer langen Extraktionszeit bei niedrigen Temperaturen, und nicht etwa ein spezifisches Getränk zu verstehen [2]. Üblicherweise wird für Cold-Brew der gemahlene Röstkaffee mit kaltem Leitungswasser (ca. ...
Article
Full-text available
Zusammenfassung Cold-Brew-Kaffee hat sich in den vergangenen Jahren zu einem Trendgetränk entwickelt. Lebensmittelrechtliche Anforderungen hierzu wurden noch nicht festgelegt. Mit Hilfe einer Online-Umfrage wurde daher die Erwartung konsumierender Personen untersucht und daraus eine mögliche Verkehrsauffassung abgeleitet. Rund 70 % der befragten Verbraucherinnen und Verbraucher erwarten demnach, dass gemahlener Röstkaffee mit kaltem Wasser übergossen, der Aufguss einige Stunden unter gelegentlichem Rühren gekühlt und anschließend abfiltriert wird. Die erwartete Extraktionszeit sollte zwischen 2 und 8 Stunden liegen. Davon abweichende Praktiken, wie die Verwendung von heiß-extrahiertem Kaffee oder die Verwendung von heiß-extrahiertem Kaffeeextrakt, wird von den teilnehmenden Personen mehrheitlich abgelehnt, und könnten somit täuschungsrelevant sein. Nach den Ergebnissen der Umfrage würde sich die Mehrheit der Verbraucherinnen und Verbraucher Cold-Brew-Kaffee bestellen, wenn dieser neben anderen Heiß-und Kaltgetränken angeboten wird. Cold-Brew-Kaffee bietet sich aufgrund seiner Zubereitungsart mit einem erfrischenden und wenig bitteren Geschmack als alternatives Sommergetränk an. Abstract Cold-brew coffee has become a trendy drink in recent years. Food law requirements have not yet been established. With the help of an online survey, the expectations of consumers were therefore investigated , and possible trade conceptions were derived from this. According to the survey, around 70 % of the survey participants expect ground roasted coffee to be poured over with cold water, the infusion to be cooled for a few hours under occasional stirring and then filtered off. The expected extraction time should be between 2 and 8 hours. Deviating practices such as the use of hot-extracted coffee or the use of hot-extracted coffee extract are rejected by most respondents and can therefore be deceptive. According to the results of the survey, the majority of consumers would order cold brew coffee if it was offered alongside other hot and cold beverages. Cold brew coffee offers itself as an alternative summer drink due to its preparation method with a refreshing and less bitter taste.
... In fact, coffee is the second largest commodity after oil and the second most popular beverage after water, and most coffee product manufacturers face high prices for imported raw materials and energy, which is a major factor [56]. Production processes such as extraction and drying are both energy intensity and environmental issues from many studies that have been identified to improve the quality of the flavor and other attribute within the coffee [57], [58]. ...
Article
The Indonesian coffee industry has become a trend that has a strategic role and potential for the livelihoods of the business people in it, as well as Indonesia's economic growth. One of the trends that stole attention is the concept of smart industry, the concept of a digital-based industry that is highly relevant to technological developments in this era. When companies want to implement a smart industry, companies need a strategy to implement IT (Information Technology) so that the investment spent is right to build the company's targets. This study aims to design a systematic IS/IT strategy to realize the concept of smart industries that are effective. The analysis and design method used is the Ward & Peppard framework which consists of two phases, namely the input and output phases. The input phase consists of internal business analysis, external business, IT internal and external. The output stage includes the design of IT management strategies, business information systems and IT strategies. The results of this study are in the form of a portfolio of IT designs at the Margamulya Coffee Producers Cooperative consisting of business strategy designs and IT management.
... Although in this research no tests were conducted concerning the safety of cold brew beverages, this issue is of paramount importance. Kwok et al. 31 reported that cold brew coffee includes some microbiological food safety hazards, because of the long brewing time, which can facilitate microbiological activity. Microbial growth is also favored by the low acidity of these beverages and consequently pathogens or spoilage organisms may be developed in them. ...
Article
Full-text available
BACKGROUND Cold brew coffee, based on cold extraction, is rapidly attracting consumers' preference worldwide. Low total solids yield and long extraction times (up to 24 h) are the main drawbacks of this process. Five different treatments were investigated: the traditional cold extraction method, freezing, lyophilization of coffee beans, use of chaotropic salt and reduced pressure extraction. The latter was optimized by applying a Box–Behnken design. Pressure, vacuum cycles, duration of each cycle and mass of ground coffee to water ratio were the optimization parameters. Yield, caffeine and phenol concentration were the response variables. RESULTS Caffeine concentration and yield were significantly affected by vacuum cycles and by the combination of vacuum cycles and duration of each cycle. Validation of the derived quadratic models for each response variable was performed. Optimum values for highest extraction yield (22%) and phenol concentration as well as mass transfer coefficients of phenol and caffeine were also determined. CONCLUSIONS Extraction under reduced pressure might be the best treatment for the acceleration of cold brew coffee extraction
Article
Abstrac Simple innovations in temperature control during cocoa roasting can help improve the quality of chocolate made by small entrepreneurs in the Andean-Amazonian valleys of Peru. The objective of this research was to evaluate the effect of oven temperature on the temperature of cocoa beans (Theobroma cacao) during roasting, using six mathematical models. Cocoa beans in the amounts of 100 and 200 g were placed in a tray in a conventional electric oven set at 250 °C. A K-type thermocouple with its respective reader was introduced in the geometric center of a cocoa bean and another 5 cm from the surface. The readings were recorded every 5 min and exported via Bluetooth to a computer. The temperature data were fitted to the mathematical models of the Concentrated System, Fourier's Law, Peleg, Page, Weibull and Midilli. The convective heat transfer coefficient (h), the thermal diffusivity (α), and the constants of the empirical models were determined. The h was 7.04 and 7.74 W/m2 °C for the toast of 100 and 200 g, respectively. The α was 3.09 x 10-8 and 3.28 x 10-8 m2/s for the 100 and 200 g toast, respectively. The rate constants of the empirical models showed a difference in the roasting of 100 and 200 g. All models represented the experimental data very well, since the values of R2, MRSE and MA%E were close to 1, close to 0 and less than 10%, respectively. The best mathematical model was that of Peleg.
Article
Background: Pot-pollen is a fermented product stored by stingless bees in cerumen pots and traditionally used as food or medicine by natives in tropical regions. The knowledge of pot-pollen composition from the Amazon region is important to strengthen the breeding of native bees and consequently contribute to sustainable development in this region. The aim of the present study was to determine the chemical composition of Melipona seminigra pot-pollen from Amazonas, Brazil. Results: We report the identification of 21 phenolic compounds using UPLC-ESI-QToF-MS. Overall, the predominant constituents of pot-pollen were protein (333.8-470.7 g kg-1 ) and dietary fibers (247.6-353.3 g kg-1 ). The predominant fatty acids were polyunsaturated (44.95-59.57% of total fatty acid content) and the samples contained all essential amino acids. Total carotenoids content (TCC) ranged from 3.2-48.0 μg g-1 , total flavonoids content (TFC) from 1.9-4.5 mg CAE g-1 , total reducing capacity (TRC) from 7.0-15.0 mg GAE g-1 , ferric-reducing antioxidant power (FRAP) from 2.8-8.9 μmol TE g-1 and oxygen radical absorbance capacity (ORAC) from 224.9-1117.0 μmol TE g-1 . Conclusions: This study reports for the first time a comprehensive chemical characterization of M. seminigra pot-pollen. The samples presented antioxidant activity, high values of nutrients and bioactive compounds such as polyphenols, carotenoids, insoluble dietary fibers, polyunsaturated fatty acids, and essential amino acids, comparable to other health foods. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
Article
Full-text available
The term “cold brew” describes a method for preparing a coffee beverage in the form of a certain extraction style. Several cold brew methods such as drip filtration, full immersion, or cold press are available but the key element is the water, which may be cold or room temperature, but never hot.
Article
Full-text available
The role of roasting in cold brew coffee chemistry is poorly understood. The brewing temperature influences extraction processes and may have varying effects across the roast spectrum. To understand the relationship between brew temperature and roast temperature, hot and cold brew coffees were prepared from Arabica Columbian coffee beans roasted to light, medium, and dark levels. Chemical and physical parameters were measured to investigate the relationships among degree of roast, water temperature, and key characteristics of resulting coffees. Cold brew coffees showed differential extraction marked by decreased acidity, lower concentration of browned compounds, and fewer TDS indicating that cold water brewing extracts some compounds less effectively than hot water brewing. Compounds in coffee did exhibit sensitivity to degree of roast, with darker roasts resulting in decreased concentrations for both hot and cold brew coffees. Total antioxidant capacity (TAC) was only sensitive to degree of roast in cold brew coffees, while hot brew coffees had a constant TAC for all three roast levels. This indicates that the solid bean matrix and its chemical constituents interact with cold water differently than with hot water. Surface wetting, pore dynamics, and solubility all contribute to the extraction potential during brewing and are all functions of water temperature.
Article
Full-text available
Flavor continues to be a driving force for coffee’s continued growth in the beverage market today. Studies have identified the sensory aspects and volatile and non-volatile compounds that characterize the flavor of different coffees. This review discusses aspects that influence coffee drinking and aspects such as environment, processing, and preparation that influence flavor. This summary of research studies employed sensory analysis (either descriptive and discrimination testing and or consumer testing) and chemical analysis to determine the impact aspects on coffee flavor.
Article
Full-text available
Monitoring coffee quality as a means of detecting and preventing economically motivated fraud is an important aspect of international commerce today. Therefore, there is a compelling need for rapid high throughput validated analytical techniques such as quantitative proton nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) spectroscopy for screening and authenticity testing. For this reason, we sought to validate an 1H NMR spectroscopic method for the routine screening of coffee for quality and authenticity. A factorial experimental design was used to investigate the influence of the NMR device, extraction time, and nature of coffee on the content of caffeine, 16-O-methylcafestol (OMC), kahweol, furfuryl alcohol, and 5-hydroxymethylfurfural (HMF) in coffee. The method was successfully validated for specificity, selectivity, sensitivity, and linearity of detector response. The proposed method produced satisfactory precision for all analytes in roasted coffee, except for kahweol in canephora (robusta) coffee. The proposed validated method may be used for routine screening of roasted coffee for quality and authenticity control (i.e., arabica/robusta discrimination), as its applicability was demonstrated during the recent OPSON VIII Europol-Interpol operation on coffee fraud control.
Article
Full-text available
Very hot (>65 °C) beverages such as espresso have been evaluated by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) as probably carcinogenic to humans. For this reason, research into lowering beverage temperature without compromising its quality or taste is important. For espresso, one obvious possibility consists in lowering the brewing temperature. In two sensory trials using the ISO 4120:2004 triangle test methodology, brewing temperatures of 80 °C vs. 128 °C and 80 °C vs. 93 °C were compared. Most tasters were unable to distinguish between 80 °C and 93 °C. The results of these pilot experiments prove the possibility of decreasing the health hazards of very hot beverages by lower brewing temperatures.
Article
The effects of extraction conditions on the acrylamide/furan content, antioxidant activity, and sensory properties of cold brew coffee were probed for samples prepared by steeping and dripping at various temperatures and for different times. Sensory properties were evaluated using a nine-point hedonic scale and an overall preference ranking test. Samples prepared by 3-h extraction featured the lowest acrylamide levels, while the lowest furan contents were observed for samples prepared by 24-h steeping and 12-h dripping. Among steeping-prepared samples, that extracted for 24 h showed the highest total phenol content, although no significant differences were observed for extraction times above 12 h, with a similar trend observed for ABTS free radical anion scavenging activity. Thus, the contents of bioactive and hazardous chemicals as well as sensory properties were found to be influenced by various extraction conditions.
Article
Background The physicochemical characteristics and flavour of coffee are related to the volatile and non-volatile compounds produced during roasting, which reach the coffee cup upon brewing. Scope and approach This review focuses on interpreting the contribution that various parameters have during the coffee extraction process (coffee brewing). Coffee brewing methods and their extraction parameters were analysed in terms of phenomenological explanations and their effect on the physicochemical and flavour characteristics of brewed coffee. Key findings and conclusions Many brewing methods have been developed to achieve a myriad of coffee flavour characteristics. Although several well-known brewing techniques have been adopted in the coffee industry, little associated relevant scientific data is available. Overall, these methods vary by extraction pressure, coffee/water ratio, water quality, contact time, particle size distribution, and temperature. An overview shows that all these factors modify the extraction of bioactive and volatile compounds that affect the flavour profile of the beverage. However, more in-depth explanation of the mass and energy transport phenomena would be useful to improve the understanding of the relationship between extraction variables and coffee flavour. Thus, phenomenological explanations are included to impart a better understanding of physicochemical and flavour changes in coffee beverages. Additionally, several gaps in knowledge relating to the extraction process are identified; and new trends in coffee extraction, including the cold brew method, are also discussed.
Article
As the free sorting task becomes more common in sensory science, methodological research is needed to determine best practices for the test. Previous studies have shown that asking attribute-specific, “analytical” questions can bias the answers participants give to later “holistic” questions in a survey. For the free sorting task, this has led researchers to recommend only asking subjects to label or describe groups of products after they have finished sorting, but this approach is not based on empirical research. The present study investigated whether the separation of sorting and labeling steps is necessary by having 80 panelists sort 12 cold brew coffee samples in 3 conditions: labeling and describing the groups afterwards, at the same time, or not at all. Results were analyzed with DISTATIS, Hierarchical DISTATIS, and permutation tests. This work is novel in investigating the effect of labeling instructions on sorting results and provides some interesting insight into sensory impact of coffee bean parameters on cold brew coffees. No configurational differences were found based on the timing of labeling instructions and 38% of panelists labeled their groups without being told, suggesting future researchers may request that subjects label when convenient. While the most distinctive samples were the dark roast coffees, a large subgroup (n = 36) sorted the coffee samples partially based on country of origin. Given the lack of effect from different sorting instructions and the tendency for spontaneous, simultaneous labeling, simultaneous labeling is suggested as best practice for future sorting tasks.