Trends in Food Science & Technology 71 (2018) 36–45

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Trends in Food Science & Technology

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/tifs

Review

Beverage dealcoholization processes: Past, present, and future T

a b b,∗
Dave Mangindaan , K. Khoiruddin , I.G. Wenten
a
Food Technology Department, Faculty of Engineering, Bina Nusantara University, Jakarta 11480, Indonesia
b
Department of Chemical Engineering, Institut Teknologi Bandung, Jl. Ganesha 10, Bandung 40132, Indonesia

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Background: It is clearly observed that there is a highly significant increase on the demand of non-alcoholic
Beer beverages (such as beer and wine) for the last few years. However, there is a huge issue faced by the market,
Dealcoholization where most of the available non-alcoholic beverages are not organoleptically accepted, as they exhibit lack of
Membrane flavor and aroma, and also different taste compared to the regular brews. Therefore, it is imperative to have
Non-alcoholic beverage
appropriate processes or methods to selectively remove ethanol while retaining the volatile components that are
Wine
related with flavor and aroma of original brew.
Scope and approach: To present a clear background about the dealcoholization and its importance, this paper
will bring a brief discussion on the nutrient and health aspects related to the beer and wine. Furthermore, some
conventional approaches for dealcoholization in the past will be discussed, mainly on the thermal-based pro-
cesses. Moreover, the state of the art and the present status of the beverage dealcoholization processes will be
discussed in detail, focusing on the approaches utilizing membranes along with some miscellaneous deal-
coholization methods. In addition, the dealcoholization employing the membrane processes is the spotlight for
the future perspective and development.
Key findings and conclusions: The membrane processes demonstrate promising results for beverage deal-
coholizations while preserving the sensorial properties. However, there is still a lot effort to be placed on the
research for the development of the prospective separation process that may produce brews that are both healthy
(dealcoholized) and delicious.

1. Introduction
Beer and wine are beverages produced via fermentation process.
With the assistance of yeast, the mixture of malt and hops are converted
into beer, while those of grape juices are transformed into wine, both
having alcoholic content up to around 5 and 15%, respectively.
Recently, there is an increasing global demand for the alcohol-free beer
(ranging from 0.05 to 1.2% ABV (alcohol by volume) or dealcoholized
wine (less than 7% ABV) (Fig. 1), due to improved paradigm aiming for
healthy lifestyle, consciousness of moderate consumption of beer or
wine, and also due to religious reasons. This is such a positive attitude
where consuming beer or wine, especially when the disadvantageous
alcohol content is sharply reduced, will let one to enjoy beneficial
bioactive compounds, namely vitamins, minerals, antioxidants to an-
ticancer agents.
Despite the increasing worldwide demand, producing such low-al-
cohol beverages are quite challenging. The manufacturer could just use
grape with lower sugar content, perform arrested fermentation with
special yeast that produces low alcohol concentration, or without any
fermentation at all continued with blending with artificial aroma, but
the products are quite disappointing, as they are organoleptically dif-
ferent with those of standard beer or wine. Physical separation pro-
cesses are also employed in the post-fermentation stage to remove al-
cohol from the beverages (Fig. 1), although facing the same obstacle in
the quality of the end product. In this paper, a brief detail on the nu-
tritive substances of the brews will be introduced, continued with
overview on the production of low alcoholic beverages, and then fo-
cused on the membrane-based processes and the challenges countered
for the removal of alcohol while maintaining the quality of taste and
flavor, and taking as low energy as possible. By observing Fig. 1, we
could also notice that the membrane-based dealcoholization processes
are the common ones nowadays (almost 50%). Furthermore, our main
focus in this review is only on categorizing some advancements in the
dealcoholization processes for the last 30 years, without promoting
much on the feasibility study of those processes.

∗
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: igw@che.itb.ac.id (I.G. Wenten).

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tifs.2017.10.018
Received 16 June 2017; Received in revised form 21 September 2017; Accepted 29 October 2017
Available online 31 October 2017
0924-2244/ © 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
D. Mangindaan et al.
2. Nutritive substances in beer and wine
It is true that beer or wine have alcohol content that might deliver
adverse effect to human, if it is consumed excessively. Some possible
health disadvantages due to overconsumption of beer or wine (mainly
due to ethanol content and some allergens) are allergy induction, in-
creasing uric acid (gout), cancer induction, dementia, obesity, cirrhosis,
and other liver problems (Sohrabvandi, Mortazavian, & Rezaei, 2012).
However, less is consciously known about the nutritive substances in-
side the brews that are beneficial to the health, but need to be ac-
companied with moderate amount of consumption. It is therefore a
great advantage to consume dealcoholized brews to get nutrition from
beer or wine, without the drawback effects of alcohol.
In the literature, it is found that beer has significant quantities of B
vitamins (thiamine, riboflavin, niacin, B6, folate, and B12) that would
be important to reduce the risk of having beriberi and nerve-degen-
erating diseases. Beer also possesses minerals such as Ca, P, Mg, Fe, Zn,
high K over low Na (4:1 ratio), and Se, as the active components for the
active site in the intercellular antioxidant enzymes (Bamforth, 2002;
Sohrabvandi et al., 2012). As a fermentation product, beer is enriched
with significant phenolic compounds that is beneficial as antioxidant
and free-radical scavengers, namely phenols, benzoic acid, cinnamic
acid derivatives, coumarins, catechins, di-, tri-, and oligomeric proan-
thocyanidins, and flavonoids that is believed to be able to prevent
cancer, tumor, diabetes, aging, and neurological diseases (Sohrabvandi,
Mousavi, Razavi, Mortazavian, & Rezaei, 2010).
On the other hand, although wine has higher ethanol content
compared to beer, but it is also enriched with antioxidants such as
hydroxycinnamic acids, tyrosol and hydroxytyrosol (Lugasi & Hóvári,
2003) and several health-improving bioactive phenolic substances,
namely caffeic acid, catechin (Li, Cao, & Zhu, 2006; Norata et al., 2007),
resveratrol, hydroxytyrosol, and melatonin (Fernández-Mar, Mateos,
García-Parrilla, Puertas, & Cantos-Villar, 2012). Those three compounds
are both simultaneously capable as impressive antioxidants, anticancer
substances, and neuroprotective biochemicals. Resveratrol is a stilbene
phenolic compound commonly found in red wines. It is also found
applications as cardioprotective, anti-diabetic, and anti-aging agent.
Hydroxytyrosol is a phenyl ethyl alcohol, having similar power to that
of resveratrol (although not an anti-aging substance), with additional
antimicrobial activity. Melatonin is an indolamine that acts as a neu-
rohormone, with further ability for improving immune system
(Fernández-Mar et al., 2012). In conclusion, both beer and wine are not
totally health-degenerative, in account of their nutritive and bioactive
compounds, accompanied with moderate amount of consumption, and
even greater positive impact for the health if the alcohol components
37
Trends in Food Science & Technology 71 (2018) 36–45
Fig. 1. Number of annual publications related to the search
terms “non-alcoholic beverage” and “dealcoholization” over
the past 30 years. Indexed by Scopus (TITLE-ABS-KEY
(terms); June 2017).
could be extracted to a safe level (while expectedly with maintained
taste and aroma/flavor).
3. Methods in producing low or free alcoholic beverages
There are several methods possible to produce low alcohol or free
alcohol beverages, which are the pre-production and post-production
techniques (Andrés-Iglesias, Blanco, García-Serna, Pando, & Montero,
2016; Brányik, Silva, Baszczyňski, Lehnert, & Almeida e Silva, 2012;
Erten & Campbell, 2001; Lehnert, Brânvik, Vicente,
Dostálek, & Teixeira, 2006; Lehnert, Kuřec, Brányik, & Teixeira, 2008;
Lehnert et al., 2009; Montanari, Marconi, Mayer, & Fantozzi, 2008;
Navrátil, Dömény, Šturdík, Šmogrovičová, & Gemeiner, 2002;
Pickering, 2000; Schmidtke, Blackman, & Agboola, 2012; Strejc,
Siříšťová, Karabín, Almeida e Silva, & Brányik, 2013; van Iersel,
Meersman, Swinkels, Abee, & Rombouts, 1995). In the first method, the
fermentation process is modified in some aspects such as using raw
materials of grape juice with low sugar content; by utilizing special or
immobilized yeasts that produces low ethanol content; or by blending
malt juice (with no fermentation process at all) with several aroma
compounds in order to create a product resembles to its alcoholic
counterpart. However, these processes definitely have an obvious
drawback where the aroma and taste of the products are not acceptable,
where the color might change (Gambuti, Rinaldi, Lisanti,
Pessina, & Moio, 2011), some worty off-flavor might be involved, and
lack of fruity aroma (Liguori, Russo, Albanese, & Di Matteo, 2013b).
Therefore, these days a lot of effort is placed on the post-production
method (Schmidtke et al., 2012) where it is still involving the pro-
duction of brews having high-alcoholic composition, where the alcohol
content is to be separated later and some aroma compounds might be
added up again (Belisario-Sánchez, Taboada-Rodríguez, Marín-Iniesta,
Iguaz-Gainza, & López-Gómez, 2012; del Olmo, Blanco, Palacio,
Prádanos, & Hernández, 2012).
The traditional post-production alcohol separation processes from
brews are heat treatment processes, such as evaporation and distillation
(Andrés-Iglesias, García-Serna, Montero, & Blanco, 2015; Eckert,
Baumann, & Gierschner, 1990; Gómez-Plaza, López-Nicolás, López-
Roca, & Martínez-Cutillas, 1999; Pickering, 2000). As ethanol is more
volatile compared to water, it is logical to remove ethanol from the
brews by heating. However, the product is significantly differ with the
regular beer in terms of taste and flavor as some volatile components
are thermally degraded during the dealcoholization process, and not to
mention that these processes are consuming extensive amount of energy
(Blanco, Andrés-Iglesias, & Montero, 2016; Pickering, 2000). An im-
provement to the distillation process is the spinning-cone column (SCC)
D. Mangindaan et al. Trends in Food Science & Technology 71 (2018) 36–45

method. SCC is a column having a stack of specially-designed cones

connected to a shaft that enables them to be rotated. These movable

(Catarino, Mendes, Madeira, & Ferreira, 2006)

cones are intercalated with the cones fixed onto the column's wall. This
meticulous design of SCC clearly combines high contact area and also
mass transfer rate, thus low pressure drop in the column (Schmidtke

Bekassy, & Bekassy-Molnar, 2016)

(Banvolgyi, Savaş Bahçeci, Vatai,
et al., 2012). The beer or wine is flowed from the top of the SCC, while
water vapor is introduced from the bottom of the column as the strip-

(Catarino & Mendes, 2011a)

(Catarino & Mendes, 2011a)

(Pilipovik & Riverol, 2005)

ping agent in order to create a contact that allow water vapor to extract

(Banvolgyi et al., 2006)

(Alcantara et al., 2016)
(Catarino et al., 2007)

(Labanda et al., 2009)

the alcohol content from the brews. Nevertheless, as ethanol is rapidly

(Takács et al., 2010)

(López et al., 2002)
removed, the volatile aroma compounds are also extracted out, ren-

(Gil et al., 2013)

dering the final product flavor to be reduced extensively. Furthermore,
the SCC process is also an energy extensive process, as water as the
stripping agent needs to be heated and vaporized. The SCC applications
Ref.

can be found in several literature (Belisario-Sánchez et al., 2012;

Bellsario-Sánchez, Taboada-Rodríguez, Marín-Iniesta, & López-Gómez,
Dealcoholization cost: 0.15 €/L for removing 1% of ethanol. No

Alcohol concentration in product: 0%; Sample dilution gives a

Alcohol concentration in permeate: 9.72%; Alcohol rejection:

2009).
Alcohol concentration in final product: 8.4%; in permeate:

Another option is by partial removal of alcohol during the fermen-

Alcohol concentration in product: 4–6% (reconstitution);

Alcohol concentration in product: 9.8%; Cost: 4.8 €/m3 tation process (Aguera, Bes, Roy, Camarasa, & Sablayrolles, 2010). This
option was reported could improve the fermentation rate. However,
Alcohol concentration in product: 9.11% (120 h);
Alcohol concentration in final product: ∼0.5%

simultaneous removal of alcohol during the fermentation was stressful

Alcohol removal: 75% (in diafiltration mode)
Alcohol concentration in final product: 0.5%

for the yeast. It can affect the final concentration of the compounds in
Alcohol concentration in permeate: 3.84%

significant change in wine characteristics

the final product including the lowered volatile compounds content.

As the aforementioned processes are lack of sensorial satisfaction
due to high loss of volatile aroma compounds accompanying the re-
moved alcohol, membrane-based separation process is emerged in this
field as a type of ethanol-selective separation process which is expected
Alcohol rejection: 36%

to produce low alcoholic beer or wine with acceptable aroma and taste
better performance.

(Schmidtke et al., 2012). The following discussion is devoted to de-

scribe some of the membrane-based technologies to produce low-al-
cohol beer or wine.
17.06%;
Results

11.6%;

4. Membrane technologies in dealcoholization

C0:5.45%; P: 40 bar; T:

C0:5.26%; P: 40 bar; T:

C0:12.8%; P: 20 bar; T:

C0:13.1%; P: 20 bar; T:
C0:6.6%; P: 4.9 bar; T:
C0:5.5%; P: 35 bar; T:

C0:12%; P: 29 bar; T:

C0:12%; P: 16 bar; T:

C0:12%; P: 16 bar; T:

C0:12%; P: 20 bar; T:

Membrane technology has been widely used in various industrial

Operating conditions

C0:8%; P: 45 bar; T:

sectors and started to replace conventional processes due to interesting

features such as low energy consumption, high separation efficiency,
selective and molecular separation, relatively low cost, easy to scale-up,
and smaller footprint (Ariono, Khoiruddin, Subagjo, & Wenten, 2017;
10 °C;

15 °C;

30 °C;

20 °C;

15 °C;

30 °C;

30 °C;

20 °C;

25 °C;
0 °C;

5 °C;

Aryanti, Yustiana, Purnama, & Wenten, 2015; Belyaev et al., 2003;

–

Bernardo & Drioli, 2010; Himma, Anisah, Prasetya, & Wenten, 2016;
Himma, Wardani, & Wenten, 2017a, 2017b; Khoiruddin,
Red Wines (AOC Penede's & AOC

Red Wine (from The Bojt Laszlo

Red Wine (from The Bojt Laszlo

Home-made alcoholic beverage

Hakim, & Wenten, 2014; Khoiruddin, Ariono, Subagjo, & Wenten, 2017;
Wenten, Dharmawijaya, Aryanti, Mukti, & Khoiruddin, 2017;
Wenten & Khoiruddin, 2016a). In addition, it is also possible to combine
TokajiHárslevelű wine

membrane technology with other processes into a hybrid process thus

Typical example of beverage dealcoholization using RO and NF membranes.

the separation steps could be reduced (intensified process) (Ariono,

Purwasasmita, & Wenten, 2016; Drioli, Criscuoli, & Curcio, 2002;
Model Wine

wine cellar)

wine cellar)
Apple cider
Stout beer
Red Wine

Red Wine

Drioli & Curcio, 2007; Khoiruddin, Widiasa & Wenten, 2014;

Beverage

Priorat)

Purwasasmita, Nabu, Khoiruddin, & Wenten, 2015; Wardani, Hakim,

Beer

Beer

Khoiruddin, & Wenten, 2017; Wenten, Julian, & Panjaitan, 2012;

Wenten, Khoiruddin, Arfianto, & Zudiharto, 2013; Wenten & Widiasa,
Cellulose acetate, DSS-CA995P, Alfa Laval

Cellulose acetate, DSS-CA995P, Alfa Laval

2002). Furthermore, since membrane-based separation can be operated

at the mild condition, it is beneficial for maintaining the nutritive
available information of the material
Renew spiral wound membrane, no

compounds in food and beverage processing (Cuperus & Nijhuis, 1993;

Polyamide, NF99 HF, Alfa Laval

Mohammad, Ng, Lim, & Ng, 2012; Snape & Nakajima, 1996). In this
Cellulose acetate, CA995PE

section, we will discuss exclusively on the membrane-based technolo-

Polyamide, XN45 (Trisep)

Polyamide, XN45 (Trisep)

gies, such as reverse osmosis, nanofiltration, dialysis, membrane con-

NF200, DOW Filmtec

tactor, osmotic distillation, and pervaporation.

Polyamide, AF99
Polyester-sulfone
Osmonics - SE

4.1. Reverse osmosis (RO)

Membrane

RO can be promising alternative for dealcoholization process re-

–

placing the thermal-based processes because it can remove alcohol

under mild temperature (Wenten & Khoiruddin, 2016b). The low mo-
Process
Table 1

lecules, namely ethanol and water, are permeated across the membrane
RO

NF

while the taste and nutritive components of beverages are retained in

38
D. Mangindaan et al.
Fig. 2. Schematic of membrane-based processes for beverage dealcoholization. (a) Reverse osmosis and nanofiltration, (b) dialysis, osmotic distillation, and membrane contactor, and (c)
pervaporation.
the product. Since RO is operated under low operating temperature, it
offers advantages over traditional distillation which include reduction
of energy consumption, high quality of beverage, low damage to tem-
perature sensitive compounds, and alcohol removal without phase
change (Catarino, Mendes, Madeira, & Ferreira, 2007). Reported studies
of RO applications in beverage dealcoholization are shown in Table 1.
RO has been used in several works to remove ethanol from fer-
mented beverage such as beer, wine, and cider (Catarino & Mendes,
2011a; Gil et al., 2013; Leeper & Tsao, 1987; Lisanti, Gambuti,
Genovese, Piombino, & Moio, 2013; López, Alvarez, Riera, & Alvarez,
2002; Pilipovik & Riverol, 2005). In dealcoholization, RO process can
be operated as batch, continuous, or diafiltration mode (Fig. 2 a). Ac-
cording to those studies, beverage dealcoholization using RO process
can be summarized as follow:
- RO can be used in beverage dealcoholization with insignificant
change of flavor and quality.
- Producing dealcoholized beverage with alcoholic content < 0.45%
is not feasible.
- Feed dilution is recommended to keep the levels of carbohydrate
content, extract percentage, and salts in acceptable range.
- Considerable flux declining is found for beverage with higher pH.
- Cellulose acetate membrane exhibits the highest flux and the lowest
ethanol rejection. The highest rejection of polyamide membrane is
considered as the effect of its hydrophobicity.
- A higher ethanol removal and rejection of desirable aroma com-
pounds can be obtained via diafiltration mode rather than batch
operating mode.
39
Trends in Food Science & Technology 71 (2018) 36–45
- It requires a relatively high operating pressure to exceeds osmotic
pressure of the beverage solution.
4.2. Nanofiltration (NF)
NF is a pressure driven membrane process that uses semipermeable
membrane which has characteristics between RO and ultrafiltration
(UF) membranes. A more loose pores of NF membrane compared to RO
allows to provide higher fluxes than RO (Fig. 3) while exhibits better
rejection for small molecules than UF membrane. Several studies on NF
application in wine processing have been reported (Table 1). Banvolgyi
and co-workers (Szilvia Banvolgyi, Kiss, Bekassy-Molnar, & Vatai, 2006)
have investigated the performance of NF (XN45 from Trisep) for con-
centrating red wine. During the concentration of valuable components,
water and ethanol permeated through the membrane resulting in
permeate with similar alcoholic content of the original wine. The al-
coholic content of permeate was 10.75% ABV (at 20 bar and 30 °C)
which was slightly lower than the original wine (12.81% ABV) while
the rejection was 9.7%. Furthermore, the valuable components such as
sugar, total acid, total extract and sugarless extract were increased to
about two times larger from the initial concentrations with low aroma
loss.
Comparison of NF and RO membranes for dealcoholization of wine
containing 12% ABV were conducted under 16 bar and 30 °C of feed
pressure and operating temperature, respectively (Catarino & Mendes,
2011a). The results showed that NF membranes exhibited higher flux
than RO membrane and acceptable ethanol rejection (7–10%). NF
membrane showed the effectiveness in dealcoholization of wine due to
D. Mangindaan et al.
their high ethanol permeability, high rejection of aroma compounds,
and promising organoleptic properties of the product. Similar results
was found in another study (Labanda, Vichi, Llorens, & López-
Tamames, 2009). In addition, another approach in producing low al-
cohol-contents could be applied by reducing sugar content of musts
with NF membrane (García-Martín et al., 2010; García-Martín et al.,
2011; Massot, Mietton-Peuchot, Peuchot, & Milisic, 2008; Salgado et al.,
2017). The advantage of the method is easier to preserve the organo-
leptic properties resulting from fermentation. Despite of the effective
performance on dealcoholizing wine, NF applications on the beer
dealcoholization are not very commonly reported in the literature. With
higher flux and high rejection of aroma compounds, NF could be pro-
mising alternative to RO on beverage dealcoholization.
4.3. Dialysis
An early study on the beer dealcoholization by using dialysis pro-
cesses have been conducted by Moonen and Niefind using a pilot unit
with capacity of 1500 l/h (Moonen & Niefind, 1982). In the deal-
coholization via dialysis, ethanol is removed using the principle of se-
lective diffusion through semipermeable membrane. Alcohol diffuses
through the membrane from beer into water as a result of concentration
gradient between both solutions (see Fig. 2 b). It was suggested that the
dialysis should be operated at pressure above the CO2 saturation pres-
sure, virtually zero difference to the transmembrane pressure, and the
water stream is enriched with CO2 to prevent CO2 release. By using
hollow fiber membrane (Cuprophan® from cotton cellulose) with 90 m2
area, with dialysis temperature of 5 °C, alcohol content was reduced
from 6.29 to 3 %v/v under continuous operation.
Leskošek and Mitrović studied an optimization of beer deal-
coholization using Cuprophane membranes (I. J. Leskošek & Mitrović,
1994), where the clearance and the permeability of ethanol as the re-
levant penetrant were optimized. The optimal selectivity could be ob-
tained by tuning an appropriate average velocity of beer to achieve an
adequate residence time at specific hydrodynamic regime (related to a
specific Reynold number). Furthermore, membrane thickness and
transmembrane pressure also influence alcohol and beer separation
using dialysis process (I. Leskošek, Mitrović, & Nedović, 1995). An 8 μm
thick Cuprophane hollow fiber membrane showed higher ultrafiltration
coefficient, permeability, and higher selectivity for ethanol than that of
11 μm thick membrane. By applying transmembrane pressure higher
than 40 kPa, removal of essential volatile flavor components might be
minimized thus improved the quality of the dealcoholized beer.
Moreover, the ethanol concentration could be reduced from 3.8 to
Fig. 3. Permeate flux and ethanol rejection of several NF and RO membranes in wine
dealcoholization (Data labels: membrane; pressure [bar]; temperature [°C]; Data from
refs (Banvolgyi et al., 2006; Catarino & Mendes, 2011a; Labanda et al., 2009; Takács,
Korány, & Vatai, 2010)).
40
Trends in Food Science & Technology 71 (2018) 36–45
0.35%w/w (when operated at 2 bar and 5 °C).
Experimental studies of beer dialysis with transmembrane pressure
were performed to investigate mass transfer of the process (Leskoŝek,
Nedović, & Petkovska, 1997; Petkovska, Leskošek, & Nedović, 1997;
Petkovska, Leskošek-Čukalović, Vukosavljević, & Krstić, 1996). Two
different membrane materials i.e. Cuprophane (regenerated cellulose)
and polysulfone were used. By applying transmembrane pressure, two
simultaneous mass transfer processes took place, namely diffusion and
convection. Contribution of convection induced by transmembrane
pressure was found to be depend on membrane type, beer flow rate, and
molecular size of solute. Elimination of ethanol depended on diffusion
mechanism while convection contributed to large molecule transfer and
extract loss which diminished the efficiency of selective alcohol/extract
separation in beer dialysis.
4.4. Osmotic distillation (OD)
In the process of dealcoholization of beverages using OD, micro-
porous hydrophobic membrane is utilized. An ethanolic feed is con-
tacted onto the surface of the membrane at atmospheric pressure and
room temperature, while the opposite side of the membrane is con-
tacted to a stripping solution flowed in counter-current mode (see Fig. 2
b). As ethanol is permeating through the membrane, the stripping so-
lution is tasked to capture the ethanol. There are different names for
this process, such as membrane contactor, isothermal membrane dis-
tillation, or evaporative pertraction, but they are actually bear the si-
milar principles with OD. With the OD process, both beer and wine can
be dealcoholized to some extent of control of the product concentration
(Diban, Athes, Bes, & Souchon, 2008; Liguori, De Francesco, Russo,
Perretti, et al., 2015; Liguori, Russo, Albanese, & Di Matteo, 2013a;
Liguori et al., 2013b). A successful pilot plant test of OD for beer
dealcoholization has also been reported (De Francesco, Sileoni,
Marconi, & Perretti, 2015).
A handful numbers of OD or membrane contactor for the applica-
tion of dealcoholization of beer or wines are shown in Table 2. It can be
observed that the dealcoholization process by using OD is dominated by
the utilization of polypropylene-based microporous hollow fiber
membrane, operated at about ambient temperature, using water as an
inexpensive and biologically safe stripping agent. Moreover, OD is able
to perform partial dealcoholization of wine (final concentration of
ethanol of 8%–11% ABV), total dealcoholization of wine (< 2% ABV),
and dealcoholization to < 1% ABV, either from real brews or synthetic
ethanol-water mixtures. There are some variations of the temperature
and types of stripping agent, but commonly the optimum conditions are
room temperature with water as stripping agent.
From several researches in Table 2, there are some studies regarding
the quality of the volatile aroma compounds in the dealcoholized beer,
conducted using organoleptic testing or spectrometric study. Generally,
for the partially dealcoholized wine (reduction from 2% to 5% ABV),
the aroma and flavor are not significantly different to that of original
wine. However, for the total dealcoholized wine and beer (reduction
more than 10%, and 5%, respectively), left a hole for the taste and need
additional aroma components, such as ethyl acetate, isoamyl acetate,
and so on (Liguori, De Francesco, Russo, Perretti, et al., 2015; Liguori
et al., 2013b).
4.5. Pervaporation (PV)
PV is a concentration-driven membrane-based process, which works
with the principle of permeation and evaporation over a membrane
(Wenten, Dharmawijaya, Aryanti, Mukti, & Khoiruddin, 2017). At first
the liquid feed is contacted onto the membrane, without any additional
pressure, at mild temperature (around 50 °C). The component that is
intended to be separated will then interacts with the membrane mate-
rial due to the activity coefficient and themodynamical affinity, and
later permeates through the membrane, evaporates and leaves the
D. Mangindaan et al. Trends in Food Science & Technology 71 (2018) 36–45

Table 2
Performance of OD during dealcoholization.

Membranes Type of beverage Operating conditions Results Ref.

Time C0 T Qf Qs Cf

Liqui-cel 1 × 5.5, PP hollow Red wine, Aglianico 255 13 20 0.07 0.14 0.19 (Liguori et al., 2013b)
fiber
Liqui-cel 0.5 × 1, PP hollow Red wine, Aglianico 170 12.5 20 1.2 2.4 10.65 (Liguori et al., 2013a)
fiber Ethanol-water mixture 170 12.5 20 1.2 2.4 10.6
170 10 20 1.2 2.4 7.8
340 10 20 1.2 2.4 5
510 10 20 1.2 2.4 4
680 10 20 1.2 2.4 3
850 10 20 1.2 2.4 2
Liqui-cel Extra-flow, PP hollow Red wine, Merlot 60 13.35 20 5.8 8.1 11 (Diban et al., 2008)
fiber Ethanol-water mixture 20 13.02 20 5.5 8.7 10
20 10.78 20 5.4 8.8 8
60 13.32 20 5.6 9.6 11
60 12.88 20 5.4 7.6 10
60 13.39 20 1.7 5 8
Liqui-cel Extra-flow, PP hollow Red wine, Aglianico 2007 60 15.46 20 0.583 0.183 13.46 (Gambuti et al., 2011)
fiber 120 20 0.583 0.183 12.46
180 20 0.583 0.183 10.46
Red wine, Aglianico 2008 60 13.81 20 0.583 0.183 11.81
120 20 0.583 0.183 10.81
180 20 0.583 0.183 8.81
Red wine, Merlot 60 13.88 20 0.583 0.183 11.88
120 20 0.583 0.183 10.88
180 20 0.583 0.183 8.88
Red wine, Piedirosso 60 13.67 20 0.583 0.183 11.67
120 20 0.583 0.183 10.67
180 20 0.583 0.183 8.67
Liqui-cel Extra-flow, PP hollow Red wine, Aglianico 2007 88 15.46 20 0.583 0.183 13.54 (Lisanti et al., 2013)
fiber 140 20 0.583 0.183 12.04
246 20 0.583 0.183 10.84
Liqui-cel Extra-flow Red wine, Aglianico 2008 86 13.81 20 0.583 0.183 11.65 (Lisanti et al., 2013)
Polypropylene hollow fiber 147 20 0.583 0.183 10.52
283 20 0.583 0.183 8.83
Liqui-cel Extra-flow Aglianico wine 180 12.8 – – – 0.42 (Liguori, Attanasio, Albanese, & Di Matteo,
2010)
Polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF) Red wine (Siam Winery) 360 13.2 30 0.066 0.053 8.1 (Varavuth, Jiraratananon, & Atchariyawut,
Memcor Ethanol-water mixturea 60 13 30 0.053 0.093 11.92 2009)
Ethanol-water mixtureb 60 13 30 0.053 0.093 11.89
Ethanol-water mixturec 60 13 30 0.053 0.093 11.77
Polypropylene hollow fibers Langhe Rosè (C0:13.2% v/v), VerdunoPelaverga 360 13–15 10 1.6 0.8 5 (Motta et al., 2017)
(JU.CLA.S. LTD, Verona, red wine (C0:15.2% v/v) and Barbera red wine
Italy) (C0: 14.6% v/v)
Liqui-cel ExtraFlow Xarelo wine 20 11.5 10 10 10.1 (Diban et al., 2013)
Garnacha wine 60 13.9 5 5 9.3
Tempranillo wine 60 13.3 5.8 5.8 9.0
Liqui-cel mini module 1.7 × 5.5 Lager beer A 60 4.53 10 0.5 0.5 1.5 (De Francesco, Freeman, Lee,
Membrana GmbH 120 10 0.5 0.5 1.06 Marconi, & Perretti, 2014)
Lager beer B 60 5 10 0.5 0.5 1.2
120 10 0.5 0.5 0.79
Lager beer C 60 4.81 10 0.5 0.5 1.1
120 10 0.5 0.5 0.51
Liqui-cel 1 × 5.5 Polypropylene Italian lager beer, Vs/Vf = 1 200 5 10 0.07 0.14 0.89 (Russo, Liguori, Albanese, Crescitelli, & Di
Matteo, 2013)
Italian lager beer, Vs/Vf = 2 200 5 10 0.07 0.14 0.47 (Liguori, De Francesco, Russo, Albanese,
et al., 2015)
Liqui-cel polypropylene hollow Craft beer 270 4.3 – 0.7 0.14 0.7 (Liguori, De Francesco, Russo, Perretti, et al.,
fiber 2015)
Liqui-cel polypropylene hollow Weiss beer 285 5.7 1.0 (Liguori et al., 2016)
fiber
Liqui-cel polypropylene hollow Bitter beer 285 3.6 10 0.07 0.14 0.7
fiber
Liqui-cel ExtraFlow Beer 150 5.2 24 30 30 0.9 (De Francesco et al., 2015)

Note: C0 – initial concentration of alcohol; Cf – alcohol concentration in the final product; Qf – feed flow rate; Qs – flow rate of stripping agent (most of the times, water); T – temperature;
PP – polypropylene.
Units: Concentration - (%v/v); Pressure – bar; Rejection - %; T - °C; Flowrate – l/min; Time – minutes.
a
Water as stripping solution.
b
Glycerol 50% w/w as stripping solution.
c
CaCl2 40% w/w as stripping solution.

41
D. Mangindaan et al.
membrane (see Fig. 2 c). The permeate stream may then be collected
with the assistance of liquid nitrogen cold trap (Feng & Huang, 1997).
PV is actually a common membrane-based process for alcohol dehy-
dration (removal of water from ethanol mixture, to produce alcohol
with purity > 98%, and usually combined with distillation column) due
to its superiority in breaking the azeotropic point between water-
ethanol. For the pervaporation dehydration, usually the membranes of
interest are the hydrophilic ones, capable of drawing water and get the
ethanol dehydrated. However, for the dealcoholization of beer the hy-
drophobic membranes play a vital role (Feng & Huang, 1997; Jiang,
Wang, Chung, Qiao, & Lai, 2009).
Takács et al (Takács, Vatai, & Korány, 2007) reported deal-
coholization of semi-sweet TokajiHa'rslevelu (Linden leaves) of vintage
1997 quality wines (provenance Tolcsva having 13.11% ABV) using
PERVAP.Sulzer 1060 type pervaporation (organophilic flat composite
membrane). Results of the study showed that temperature plays the
important role in pervaporation performance i.e. flux and separation
ability. Meanwhile, economic analysis implies that the high cost of
investment was due to the relatively high price of non-porous perva-
poration membrane. Tan et al (Tan et al., 2003) used a pervaporation
with flat composite PDMS membrane for wine dealcoholization. The
dealcoholization process was conducted at 40 °C and 1.3 kPa of
permeate pressure. The process could produce wine with 3–7% of
ethanol while the average flux was 1.5 kg m−2.h.
Catarino and Mendes (Catarino & Mendes, 2011b) reported the ap-
plication of PVfor dealcoholization using hydrophobic POMS/PEI
membrane (polyoctylmethylsiloxane/supported onto polyetherimide)
only for extracting aroma and volatile components from Pilsner beer
(5.5% ABV), namely ethanol, propanol, isobutanol, amyl alcohol, ethyl
acetate, isoamyl acetate, and acetaldehyde. The main step for deal-
coholization was conducted by using SCC process, where the ethanol
from the Pilsner beer could be reduced to 0.45% ABV. After following
the SCC distillation, the pervaporated aroma is then re-blended into the
dealcoholized beer in order to obtain beer with acceptable taste. Similar
strategy on recovering amyl alcohol, ethyl acetate, isoamyl acetate from
Special (5.5% ABV) and Reserve beer (6.5% ABV) was carried out by
pervaporation using hydrophobic PDMS/PET (polydimethylsiloxane/
supported onto polyethylene terephtalate, from Pervatech BV), con-
tinued with blending the pervaporated aroma onto the non-alcoholic
beer, resulting in organoleptically satisfactory beer (del Olmo et al.,
2012).
A membrane distillation using non-porous membrane which is si-
milar to pervaporation process has been used by Indonesian scientists
for the dealcoholization of Anker beer, a local Indonesian beer
(Purwasasmita, Kurnia, Mandias, Khoiruddin, & Wenten, 2015). The
dealcoholization process was carried out by using non-porous spiral
wound membrane from DOW Filmtec, composed of polyamide thin film
composite membrane, at room temperature and 2–3 bar gauge, and
permeate of alcohol was drawn by vacuum ranged from 0.49 to
0.66 bar. This process was successfully reduced ethanol from 5% ABV
to 2.45% ABV in 6 h, without meaningful loss of several nutritious
components (maltose and glycerol).
5. Miscellaneous technologies
Besides the conventional thermal-based and membrane-based pro-
cess, there are some several new emerging technologies that are note-
worthy in the application of the dealcoholization process. A relatively
new technology that is quite exciting for its product quality in aroma
recovery, and cleanliness/food safety, is the supercritical fluid extrac-
tion, with CO2 as the most common solvent (Fornari, Hernández, Ruiz-
Rodriguez, Javier Señorans, & Reglero, 2009; Medina & Martínez, 1997;
Rizvi, Yu, Bhaskar, & Chidambarra Raj, 1994; Ruiz-Rodriguez, Fornari,
Hernández, Señorans, & Reglero, 2010; Schmidtke et al., 2012). This
process acts with the thermodynamic principles, where at above its
critical pressure and temperature, a matter could be a phase where both
42
Trends in Food Science & Technology 71 (2018) 36–45
densities of liquid and gas are the same and no interphase between
them. In other words, supercritical fluid acts both as liquid and gas.
Therefore, supercritical CO2 may extract organic components due to its
affinity from the carbon chain (as liquid), and then it will immediately
evaporate (as gas) and leave the extracted substances, without any re-
sidue. CO2 has critical temperature of 31 °C and critical pressure of
73 atm (Atkins & De Paula, 2006). Although the advantages of clean, no
toxic residue, nonflammable, cheap and recyclable CO2 are interesting,
however the supercritical CO2 extraction are still limited for the deal-
coholization of beverages due to economical infeasibility for preparing
an industrial scale supercritical fluid reactor/container, that must be
built form materials that is able to withstand > 75 atm, while the ex-
tracted component is quite small, only 5% ethanol ABV for beer.
Another carbon dioxide based technology which has been used for
dealcoholization of beverage is extraction with solid carbon dioxide. A
pilot scale of wine dealcoholization (capacity of 10 L/h) using this
extraction process has been reported by Antonelli et al (Antonelli,
Carnacini, Marignetti, & Natali, 1996). The system was applied to re-
move the alcohol from six samples of red and white wines. In this
process, wines were sprayed over the solid carbon dioxide and extrac-
tion process was conducted at 5 °C and 5 min retention time. The al-
cohol content of white wines was successfully reduced to 1.1–1.4%
from initial 9.4–10.7% of concentrations. Meanwhile, for the red wines,
the alcohol content was reduced to 4–6%. However, similar to dis-
tillation, a loss of major volatile compounds was observed in this
technique. In addition, the energy consumption of the process is also
relative high (12 kW/kg wine).
Recently, a microbial fuel cell (MFC) is proposed by Szollosi et al
(Szollosi et al., 2016) to produce a non-alcoholic beer. Generally, MFC
is used to simultaneously produce energy and to treat wastewater in a
single process by using an active microorganism (Khoiruddin, Aryanti,
Hakim, & Wenten, 2017). MFC consists of one or two chambers sepa-
rated by proton exchange membrane and equipped with a pair of
electrode. In their study, two-chamber MFC was used wherein about
107 CFU/mL yeast cell was employed to inoculate the anode chamber.
In addition, Riboflavin was used as a non-toxic extracellular mediator.
They found that a low-alcoholic beer (alcohol content < 2%) could be
produced by fermentation in an MFC as well as an electricity. Fur-
thermore, they proposed that non-alcoholic beer could be produced in
MFC by increasing anode surface and/or controlling the amount of
electron shuttles.
6. Challenges
As the world paradigm over beer or wine is shifted from excessive
drinking to moderate drinking, and followed by healthy drinking (to
avoid ethanol, and looking for nutrition and bioactive components such
as anticancer and antioxidants), the production of low alcohol or even
alcohol free beverages (beer or wine) is increased. However, the pro-
duction of such beer or wine has its own challenges, especially in
preserving volatile aroma compounds that are important to give deli-
cious and fruity like taste/aroma. Unfortunately, those volatile organic
components are soluble in ethanol, an organic solvent, where simulta-
neous removal of ethanol and aroma will definitely occur (Bartolomé,
Peña-Neira, & Gómez-Cordovés, 2000; Liguori, De Francesco, Russo,
Perretti, et al., 2015; Liguori et al., 2013b) (see Fig. 4). Therefore, it is
imperative for the research and development in the field of membrane
science and technology, especially, to explore new exciting possibilities
for the selective removal of ethanol while retaining the aroma com-
ponents. Membrane-based separations have the advantage in energy-
saving process (mild temperature), a type of process with relatively
high selectivity and productivity, but it is still limited with the ther-
modynamics of the solubility. Hopefully in the near future this barrier,
along with the energy consumption, and productivity will be gradually
tackled.
D. Mangindaan et al.
Fig. 4. Loss of volatile compounds in dealcoholized beer produced from different
methods (Catarino et al., 2006; De Francesco et al., 2015; Liguori et al., 2016).
7. Conclusions
With increasing demand of alcohol-free beer or wines (less than 1.2
and 7% ABV, respectively), it opens up opportunity for both scientists
and engineers in the field of fermentation or separation processes to
make such products available, with comparable taste and flavor to that
of standard brews, and sustaining the beneficial bioactive components
(listed previously) inside both beverages. This review has discussed the
state of the art for production of alcohol-free beverages. It is initially
developed from several past pre-fermentation technologies. Currently,
post-fermentation dealcoholization technologies has also been re-
viewed, with deep focus on the emerging membrane-based deal-
coholization processes. It is believed that the membrane-based pro-
cesses will also be the preferred methods in the future for the removal
of alcohol (besides supercritical fluid extraction, albeit its high pressure
requirement) due to their promising properties of high selectivity to
ethanol, mild operation temperature thus saving vast amount of energy,
and combined with high productivity. However, there is still a lot effort
to be placed on the research for development of the finding the pro-
spective separation process that may produce brews that are both
healthy (dealcoholized) and delicious (acceptable sensory and organo-
leptic aspects).
References
Aguera, E., Bes, M., Roy, A., Camarasa, C., & Sablayrolles, J.-M. (2010). Partial removal of
ethanol during fermentation to obtain reduced-alcohol wines. American Journal of
Enology and Viticulture, 61(1), 53–60. Retrieved from https://www.scopus.com/
inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-77949305464&partnerID=40&md5=
9247d57a7954d9ada17d953f5532a597.
Alcantara, B. M., Marques, D. R., Chinellato, M. M., Marchi, L. B., da Costa, S. C., &
Monteiro, A. R. G. (2016). Assessment of quality and production process of a non-
alcoholic stout beer using reverse osmosis. Journal of the Institute of Brewing, 122(4),
714–718. https://doi.org/10.1002/jib.368.
Andrés-Iglesias, C., Blanco, C. A., García-Serna, J., Pando, V., & Montero, O. (2016).
Volatile compound profiling in commercial lager regular beers and derived alcohol-
free beers after dealcoholization by vacuum distillation. Food Analytical Methods,
9(11), 3230–3241. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12161-016-0513-7.
Andrés-Iglesias, C., García-Serna, J., Montero, O., & Blanco, C. A. (2015). Simulation and
flavor compound analysis of dealcoholized beer via one-step vacuum distillation.
Food Research International, 76, 751–760. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodres.2015.07.
017.
Antonelli, A., Carnacini, A., Marignetti, N., & Natali, N. (1996). Pilot scale deal-
coholization of wine by extraction with solid carbon dioxide. Journal of Food Science,
61(5), 970–972. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2621.1996.tb10913.x.
Ariono, D., Khoiruddin, Subagjo, & Wenten, I. G. (2017). Heterogeneous structure and its
effect on properties and electrochemical behavior of ion-exchange membrane.
Materials Research Express, 4(2), 24006. https://doi.org/10.1088/2053-1591/aa5cd4.
Ariono, D., Purwasasmita, M., & Wenten, I. G. (2016). Brine Effluents: Characteristics,
environmental impacts, and their handling. Journal of Engineering and Technological
Sciences, 48(4), 367–387. https://doi.org/10.5614/j.eng.technol.sci.2016.48.4.1.
Aryanti, P. T. P., Yustiana, R., Purnama, R. E. D., & Wenten, I. G. (2015). Performance and
characterization of PEG400 modified PVC ultrafiltration membrane. Membrane Water
Treatment, 6(5), 379–392. https://doi.org/10.12989/mwt.2015.6.5.379.
43
Trends in Food Science & Technology 71 (2018) 36–45
Atkins, P., & De Paula, J. (2006). Physical chemistry (8th ed.). New York: W.H. Freeman
and Co.
Bamforth, C. W. (2002). Nutritional aspects of beer—a review. Nutrition Research,
22(1–2), 227–237. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/S0271-5317(01)
00360-8.
Banvolgyi, S., Kiss, I., Bekassy-Molnar, E., & Vatai, G. (2006). Concentration of red wine
by nanofiltration. Desalination, 198(1), 8–15. https://doi.org/. https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.desal.2006.09.003.
Banvolgyi, S., Savaş Bahçeci, K., Vatai, G., Bekassy, S., & Bekassy-Molnar, E. (2016).
Partial dealcoholization of red wine by nanofiltration and its effect on anthocyanin
and resveratrol levels. Food Science and Technology International, 22(8), 677–687.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1082013216642331.
Bartolomé, B., Peña-Neira, A., & Gómez-Cordovés, C. (2000). Phenolics and related
substances in alcohol-free beers. European Food Research and Technology, 210(6),
419–423. https://doi.org/10.1007/s002170050574.
Belisario-Sánchez, Y. Y., Taboada-Rodríguez, A., Marín-Iniesta, F., Iguaz-Gainza, A., &
López-Gómez, A. (2012). Aroma recovery in wine dealcoholization by SCC distilla-
tion. Food and Bioprocess Technology, 5(6), 2529–2539. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s11947-011-0574-y.
Bellsario-Sánchez, Y. Y., Taboada-Rodríguez, A., Marín-Iniesta, F., & López-Gómez, A.
(2009). Dealcoholized wines by spinning cone column distillation: Phenolic com-
pounds and antioxidant activity measured by the 1,1-Diphenyl-2-picrylhydrazyl
method. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 57(15), 6770–6778. https://doi.
org/10.1021/jf900387g.
Belyaev, A. A., Yampolskii, Y., Starannikova, L. E., Polyakov, A. M., Clarizia, G., Drioli, E.,
... Barbieri, G. (2003). Membrane air separation for intensification of coal gasification
process. Fuel Processing Technology, 80(2), 119–141. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-
3820(02)00241-2.
Bernardo, P., & Drioli, E. (2010). Membrane gas separation progresses for process in-
tensification strategy in the petrochemical industry. Petroleum Chemistry, 50(4),
271–282. https://doi.org/10.1134/S0965544110040043.
Blanco, C. A., Andrés-Iglesias, C., & Montero, O. (2016). Low-alcohol Beers: Flavor
compounds, defects, and improvement strategies. Critical Reviews in Food Science and
Nutrition, 56(8), 1379–1388. https://doi.org/10.1080/10408398.2012.733979.
Brányik, T., Silva, D. P., Baszczyňski, M., Lehnert, R., & Almeida e Silva, J. B. (2012). A
review of methods of low alcohol and alcohol-free beer production. Journal of Food
Engineering, 108(4), 493–506. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfoodeng.2011.09.020.
Catarino, M., & Mendes, A. (2011a). Dealcoholizing wine by membrane separation pro-
cesses. Innovative Food Science and Emerging Technologies, 12(3), 330–337. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.ifset.2011.03.006.
Catarino, M., & Mendes, A. (2011b). Non-alcoholic beer - a new industrial process.
Separation and Purification Technology, 79(3), 342–351. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
seppur.2011.03.020.
Catarino, M., Mendes, A., Madeira, L., & Ferreira, A. (2006). Beer dealcoholization by
reverse osmosis. Desalination, 200(1–3), 397–399. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.
2006.03.346.
Catarino, M., Mendes, A., Madeira, L. M., & Ferreira, A. (2007). Alcohol removal from
beer by reverse osmosis. Separation Science and Technology, 42(13), 3011–3027.
https://doi.org/10.1080/01496390701560223.
Cuperus, F. P., & Nijhuis, H. H. (1993). Applications of membrane technology to food
processing. Trends in Food Science & Technology, 4(9), 277–282. https://doi.org/10.
1016/0924-2244(93)90070-Q.
De Francesco, G., Freeman, G., Lee, E., Marconi, O., & Perretti, G. (2014). Effects of
operating conditions during low-alcohol beer production by osmotic distillation.
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 62(14), 3279–3286. https://doi.org/10.
1021/jf405490x.
De Francesco, G., Sileoni, V., Marconi, O., & Perretti, G. (2015). Pilot plant production of
low-alcohol beer by osmotic distillation. Journal of the American Society of Brewing
Chemists, 73(1), 41–48. https://doi.org/10.1094/ASBCJ-2015-0112-01.
Diban, N., Arruti, A., Barceló, A., Puxeu, M., Urtiaga, A., & Ortiz, I. (2013). Membrane
dealcoholization of different wine varieties reducing aroma losses. Modeling and
experimental validation. Innovative Food Science and Emerging Technologies, 20,
259–268. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ifset.2013.05.011.
Diban, N., Athes, V., Bes, M., & Souchon, I. (2008). Ethanol and aroma compounds
transfer study for partial dealcoholization of wine using membrane contactor. Journal
of Membrane Science, 311(1–2), 136–146. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.memsci.2007.
12.004.
Drioli, E., Criscuoli, A., & Curcio, E. (2002). Integrated membrane operations for seawater
desalination. Desalination, 147(1), 77–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0011-9164(02)
00579-9.
Drioli, E., & Curcio, E. (2007). Membrane engineering for process intensification: A
perspective. Journal of Chemical Technology and Biotechnology, 82(3), 223–227.
https://doi.org/10.1002/jctb.1650.
Eckert, M., Baumann, G., & Gierschner, K. (1990). Dealcoholization of beer by evapora-
tion. Food Biotechnology, 4(1), 278. Retrieved from https://www.scopus.com/
inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-0025209094&partnerID=40&md5=
baac1d44ad24b33757f6ce89bfaaf5f2.
Erten, H., & Campbell, I. (2001). The production of low-alcohol wines by aerobic yeasts.
Journal of the Institute of Brewing, 107(4), 207–215. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2050-
0416.2001.tb00092.x.
Feng, X., & Huang, R. Y. M. (1997). Liquid separation by membrane Pervaporation: a
review. Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research, 36(4), 1048–1066. https://doi.
org/10.1021/ie960189g.
Fernández-Mar, M. I., Mateos, R., García-Parrilla, M. C., Puertas, B., & Cantos-Villar, E.
(2012). Bioactive compounds in wine: Resveratrol, hydroxytyrosol and melatonin: A
review. Food Chemistry, 130(4), 797–813. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2011.
D. Mangindaan et al.
08.023.
Fornari, T., Hernández, E. J., Ruiz-Rodriguez, A., Javier Señorans, F., & Reglero, G.
(2009). Phase equilibria for the removal of ethanol from alcoholic beverages using
supercritical carbon dioxide. Journal of Supercritical Fluids, 50(2), 91–96. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.supflu.2009.05.012.
Gambuti, A., Rinaldi, A., Lisanti, M. T., Pessina, R., & Moio, L. (2011). Partial deal-
coholisation of red wines by membrane contactor technique: Influence on colour,
phenolic compounds and saliva precipitation index. European Food Research and
Technology, 233(4), 647. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00217-011-1553-2.
García-Martín, N., Perez-Magariño, S., Ortega-Heras, M., González-Huerta, C., Mihnea,
M., González-Sanjosé, M. L., ... Hernández, A. (2010). Sugar reduction in musts with
nanofiltration membranes to obtain low alcohol-content wines. Separation and
Purification Technology, 76(2), 158–170. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seppur.2010.10.
002.
García-Martín, N., Perez-Magariño, S., Ortega-Heras, M., González-Huerta, C., Mihnea,
M., González-Sanjosé, M. L., ... Hernández, A. (2011). Sugar reduction in white and
red musts with nanofiltration membranes. Desalination and Water Treatment, 27(1–3),
167–174. https://doi.org/10.5004/dwt.2011.2039.
Gil, M., Estévez, S., Kontoudakis, N., Fort, F., Canals, J. M., & Zamora, F. (2013).
Influence of partial dealcoholization by reverse osmosis on red wine composition and
sensory characteristics. European Food Research and Technology, 237(4), 481–488.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00217-013-2018-6.
Gómez-Plaza, E., López-Nicolás, J. M., López-Roca, J. M., & Martínez-Cutillas, A. (1999).
Dealcoholization of wine. Behaviour of the aroma components during the process.
LWT - Food Science and Technology, 32(6), 384–386. https://doi.org/10.1006/fstl.
1999.0565.
Himma, N. F., Anisah, S., Prasetya, N., & Wenten, I. G. (2016). Advances in preparation,
modification, and application of polypropylene membrane. Journal of Polymer
Engineering, 36(4), 329–362. https://doi.org/10.1515/polyeng-2015-0112.
Himma, N. F., Wardani, A. K., & Wenten, I. G. (2017a). Preparation of superhydrophobic
polypropylene membrane using dip-coating Method: The effects of solution and
process parameters. Polymer - Plastics Technology and Engineering, 56(2), 184–194.
https://doi.org/10.1080/03602559.2016.1185666.
Himma, N. F., Wardani, A. K., & Wenten, I. G. (2017b). The effects of non-solvent on
surface morphology and hydrophobicity of dip-coated polypropylene membrane.
Materials Research Express, 4, 54001. https://doi.org/10.1088/2053-1591/aa6ee0.
van Iersel, M. F. M., Meersman, E., Swinkels, W., Abee, T., & Rombouts, F. M. (1995).
Continuous production of non-alcohol beer by immobilized yeast at low temperature.
Journal of Industrial Microbiology, 14(6), 495–501. https://doi.org/10.1007/
BF01573964.
Jiang, L. Y., Wang, Y., Chung, T.-S., Qiao, X. Y., & Lai, J.-Y. (2009). Polyimides mem-
branes for pervaporation and biofuels separation. Progress in Polymer Science, 34(11),
1135–1160. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.progpolymsci.2009.06.001.
Khoiruddin, Ariono, D., Subagjo, & Wenten, I. G. (2017a). Surface modification of ion-
exchange membranes: Methods, characteristics, and performance. Journal of Applied
Polymer Science, 134(48)https://doi.org/10.1002/app.45540 45540.
Khoiruddin, Aryanti, P. T. P., Hakim, A. N., & Wenten, I. G. (2017b). The role of ion-
exchange membrane in energy conversion. AIP Conference Proceedings, 1840(1),
90006. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4982314.
Khoiruddin, K., Hakim, A. N., & Wenten, I. G. (2014a). Advances in electrodeionization
technology for ionic separation - a review. Membrane Water Treatment, 5(2), 87–108.
https://doi.org/10.12989/mwt.2014.5.2.087.
Khoiruddin, Widiasa, I. N., & Wenten, I. G. (2014b). Removal of inorganic contaminants
in sugar refining process using electrodeionization. Journal of Food Engineering, 133,
40–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfoodeng.2014.02.015.
Labanda, J., Vichi, S., Llorens, J., & López-Tamames, E. (2009). Membrane separation
technology for the reduction of alcoholic degree of a white model wine. LWT - Food
Science and Technology, 42(8), 1390–1395. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lwt.2009.03.
008.
Leeper, S. A., & Tsao, G. T. (1987). Membrane separations in ethanol recovery: An ana-
lysis of two applications of hyperfiltration. Journal of Membrane Science, 30(3),
289–312. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0376-7388(00)80124-6.
Lehnert, R., Brânvik, T., Vicente, A. A., Dostálek, P., & Teixeira, J. A. (2006). Preliminary
optimization study of alcohol-free beer production in a continuous immobilized cell
reactor system. CHISA 2006-17th international congress of chemical and process en-
gineering. Retrieved from https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-
34748897779&partnerID=40&md5=0f9305637e3b6d0301fa5209efa7652d.
Lehnert, R., Kuřec, M., Brányik, T., & Teixeira, J. A. (2008). Effect of oxygen supply on
flavor formation during continuous alcohol-free beer production: A model study.
Journal of the American Society of Brewing Chemists, 66(4), 233–238. https://doi.org/
10.1094/ASBCJ-2008-0910-01.
Lehnert, R., Novák, P., Macieira, F., Kuřec, M., Teixeira, J. A., & Brányik, T. (2009).
Optimisation of lab-scale continuous alcohol-free beer production. Czech Journal of
Food Sciences, 27(4), 267–275. Retrieved from https://www.scopus.com/inward/
record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-70350144130&partnerID=40&md5=
e05badee412b2488cb71567040e73c1b.
Leskošek, I. J., & Mitrović, M. (1994). Optimization of beer dialysis with cuprophane
membranes. Journal of the Institute of Brewing, 100(4), 287–292. https://doi.org/10.
1002/j.2050-0416.1994.tb00826.x.
Leskošek, I., Mitrović, M., & Nedović, V. (1995). Factors influencing alcohol and extract
separation in beer dialysis. World Journal of Microbiology and Biotechnology, 11(5),
512–514. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00286364.
Leskoŝek, I., Nedović, V., & Petkovska, M. (1997). Effect of convective mass transfer on
beer diafiltration. Journal of the Institute of Brewing, 103(5), 279–282. https://doi.org/
10.1002/j.2050-0416.1997.tb00956.x.
Li, Y., Cao, Z., & Zhu, H. (2006). Upregulation of endogenous antioxidants and phase 2
44
Trends in Food Science & Technology 71 (2018) 36–45
enzymes by the red wine polyphenol, resveratrol in cultured aortic smooth muscle
cells leads to cytoprotection against oxidative and electrophilic stress.
Pharmacological Research, 53(1), 6–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.phrs.2005.08.002.
Liguori, L., Attanasio, G., Albanese, D., & Di Matteo, M. (2010). Aglianico wine deal-
coholization tests. Computer Aided Chemical Engineering, 28, 325–330. https://doi.
org/10.1016/S1570-7946(10)28055-0.
Liguori, L., De Francesco, G., Russo, P., Albanese, D., Perretti, G., & Di Matteo, M.
(2015a). Quality improvement of low alcohol craft beer produced by evaporative
pertraction. Chemical Engineering Transactions, 43, 13–18. https://doi.org/10.3303/
CET1543003.
Liguori, L., De Francesco, G., Russo, P., Perretti, G., Albanese, D., & Di Matteo, M.
(2015b). Production and characterization of alcohol-free beer by membrane process.
Food and Bioproducts Processing, 94, 158–168. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fbp.2015.
03.003.
Liguori, L., De Francesco, G., Russo, P., Perretti, G., Albanese, D., & Di Matteo, M. (2016).
Quality attributes of low-alcohol top-fermented beers produced by membrane con-
tactor. Food and Bioprocess Technology, 9(1), 191–200. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s11947-015-1612-y.
Liguori, L., Russo, P., Albanese, D., & Di Matteo, M. (2013a). Effect of process parameters
on partial dealcoholization of wine by osmotic distillation. Food and Bioprocess
Technology, 6(9), 2514–2524. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11947-012-0856-z.
Liguori, L., Russo, P., Albanese, D., & Di Matteo, M. (2013b). Evolution of quality para-
meters during red wine dealcoholization by osmotic distillation. Food Chemistry,
140(1–2), 68–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2013.02.059.
Lisanti, M. T., Gambuti, A., Genovese, A., Piombino, P., & Moio, L. (2013). Partial deal-
coholization of red wines by membrane contactor Technique: Effect on sensory
characteristics and volatile composition. Food and Bioprocess Technology, 6(9),
2289–2305. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11947-012-0942-2.
López, M., Alvarez, S., Riera, F. A., & Alvarez, R. (2002). Production of low alcohol
content apple cider by reverse osmosis. Industrial and Engineering Chemistry Research,
41(25), 6600–6606. Retrieved from https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?
eid=2-s2.0-0037065265&partnerID=40&md5=
c4d6a33f1c4a3eee991ab9000cad3326.
Lugasi, A., & Hóvári, J. (2003). Antioxidant properties of commercial alcoholic and
nonalcoholic beverages. Food/Nahrung, 47(2), 79–86. https://doi.org/10.1002/food.
200390031.
Massot, A., Mietton-Peuchot, M., Peuchot, C., & Milisic, V. (2008). Nanofiltration and
reverse osmosis in winemaking. Desalination, 231(1), 283–289. https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.desal.2007.10.032.
Medina, I., & Martínez, J. L. (1997). Dealcoholisation of cider by supercritical extraction
with carbon dioxide. Journal of Chemical Technology and Biotechnology, 68(1), 14–18.
1 < 14::AID-JCTB589 > 3.0.CO;2-E https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-
4660(199701)68.
Mohammad, A. W., Ng, C. Y., Lim, Y. P., & Ng, G. H. (2012). Ultrafiltration in food
processing Industry: Review on application, membrane fouling, and fouling control.
Food and Bioprocess Technology, 5(4), 1143–1156. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11947-
012-0806-9.
Montanari, L., Marconi, O., Mayer, H., & Fantozzi, P. (2008). Production of alcohol-free
beer. Beer in health and disease prevention (pp. 61–75). . Retrieved from https://www.
scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-84906292859&partnerID=40&md5=
372243476d60803c9a345fea51284a80.
Moonen, H., & Niefind, H. J. (1982). Alcohol reduction in beer by means of dialysis.
Desalination, 41(3), 327–335. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0011-9164(00)88733-0.
Motta, S., Guaita, M., Petrozziello, M., Ciambotti, A., Panero, L., Solomita, M., et al.
(2017). Comparison of the physicochemical and volatile composition of wine frac-
tions obtained by two different dealcoholization techniques. Food Chemistry, 221,
1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2016.10.046.
Navrátil, M., Dömény, Z., Šturdík, E., Šmogrovičová, D., & Gemeiner, P. (2002).
Production of non-alcoholic beer using free and immobilized cells of Saccharomyces
cerevisiae deficient in the tricarboxylic acid cycle. Biotechnology and Applied
Biochemistry, 35(2), 133–140. https://doi.org/10.1042/BA20010057.
Norata, G. D., Marchesi, P., Passamonti, S., Pirillo, A., Violi, F., & Catapano, A. L. (2007).
Anti-inflammatory and anti-atherogenic effects of cathechin, caffeic acid and trans-
resveratrol in apolipoprotein E deficient mice. Atherosclerosis, 191(2), 265–271.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atherosclerosis.2006.05.047.
del Olmo, A., Blanco, C. A., Palacio, L., Prádanos, P., & Hernández, A. (2012). Setting up
of a method of pervaporation for Improving alcohol-Free beer. Procedia Engineering,
44, 1005–1006. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2012.08.654.
Petkovska, M., Leskošek-Čukalović, I., Vukosavljević, P., & Krstić, D. (1996). Analysis of
mass transfer in beer dialysis and diafiltration with two different membranes. Journal
of the Serbian Chemical Society, 61(4), 331–342.
Petkovska, M., Leskošek, I., & Nedović, V. (1997). Analysis of mass transfer in beer dia-
filtration with cellulose-based and polysulfone membranes. Food and Bioproducts
Processing, 75(4), 247–252. https://doi.org/10.1205/096030897531658.
Pickering, G. J. (2000). Low- and reduced-alcohol wine: A review. Journal of Wine
Research, 11(2), 129–144. https://doi.org/10.1080/09571260020001575.
Pilipovik, M. V., & Riverol, C. (2005). Assessing dealcoholization systems based on re-
verse osmosis. Journal of Food Engineering, 69(4), 437–441. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.jfoodeng.2004.08.035.
Purwasasmita, M., Kurnia, D., Mandias, F. C., Khoiruddin, & Wenten, I. G. (2015a). Beer
dealcoholization using non-porous membrane distillation. Food and Bioproducts
Processing, 94, 180–186. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fbp.2015.03.001.
Purwasasmita, M., Nabu, E. B. P., Khoiruddin, & Wenten, I. G. (2015b). Non dispersive
chemical deacidification of crude palm oil in hollow fiber membrane contactor.
Journal of Engineering and Technological Sciences, 47(4), 426–446. https://doi.org/10.
5614/j.eng.technol.sci.2015.47.4.6.
D. Mangindaan et al.
Rizvi, S., Yu, Z., Bhaskar, A., & Chidambarra Raj, C. (1994). Fundamentals of processing
with supercritical fluids. In S. Rizvi (Ed.). Supercritical fluid processing of food and
biomaterials (pp. 1–26). London: Blackie Academic & Professional.
Ruiz-Rodriguez, A., Fornari, T., Hernández, E. J., Señorans, F. J., & Reglero, G. (2010).
Thermodynamic modeling of dealcoholization of beverages using supercritical CO2:
Application to wine samples. Journal of Supercritical Fluids, 52(2), 183–188. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.supflu.2009.12.011.
Russo, P., Liguori, L., Albanese, D., Crescitelli, A., & Di Matteo, M. (2013). Investigation of
osmotic distillation technique for beer dealcoholization. Chemical Engineering
Transactions, 32, 1735–1740. https://doi.org/10.3303/CET1332290.
Salgado, C. M., Fernández-Fernández, E., Palacio, L., Carmona, F. J., Hernández, A., &
Prádanos, P. (2017). Application of pervaporation and nanofiltration membrane
processes for the elaboration of full flavored low alcohol white wines. Food and
Bioproducts Processing, 101, 11–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fbp.2016.10.001.
Schmidtke, L. M., Blackman, J. W., & Agboola, S. O. (2012). Production technologies for
reduced alcoholic wines. Journal of Food Science, 77(1), R25–R41. https://doi.org/10.
1111/j.1750-3841.2011.02448.x.
Snape, J. B., & Nakajima, M. (1996). Processing of agricultural fats and oils using
membrane technology. Journal of Food Engineering, 30(1), 1–41. https://doi.org/10.
1016/S0260-8774(96)00053-2.
Sohrabvandi, S., Mortazavian, A. M., & Rezaei, K. (2012). Health-related aspects of beer:
A review. International Journal of Food Properties, 15(2), 350–373. https://doi.org/10.
1080/10942912.2010.487627.
Sohrabvandi, S., Mousavi, S. M., Razavi, S. H., Mortazavian, A. M., & Rezaei, K. (2010).
Alcohol-free beer: Methods of production, sensorial defects, and healthful effects.
Food Reviews International, 26(4), 335–352. https://doi.org/10.1080/87559129.
2010.496022.
Strejc, J., Siříšťová, L., Karabín, M., Almeida e Silva, J. B., & Brányik, T. (2013).
Production of alcohol-free beer with elevated amounts of flavouring compounds
using lager yeast mutants. Journal of the Institute of Brewing, 119(3), 149–155. https://
doi.org/10.1002/jib.72.
Szollosi, A., Nguyen, Q. D., Kovacs, A. G., Fogarasi, A.-L., Kun, S., & Hegyesne-Vecseri, B.
(2016). Production of low or non-alcoholic beer in microbial fuel cell. Food and
Bioproducts Processing, 98, 196–200. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fbp.2016.01.012.
45
Trends in Food Science & Technology 71 (2018) 36–45
Takács, L., Korány, K., & Vatai, G. (2010). Process modelling in the production of low
alcohol content wines by direct concentration and diafiltration using nanofiltration
membranes. Acta Alimentaria, 39(4), 397–412. https://doi.org/10.1556/AAlim.2010.
0001.
Takács, L., Vatai, G., & Korány, K. (2007). Production of alcohol free wine by perva-
poration. Journal of Food Engineering, 78(1), 118–125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jfoodeng.2005.09.005.
Tan, S.-J., Xiao, Z.-Y., Li, L., Wu, F.-W., Xu, Z.-H., & Zhang, Z.-B. (2003). Experimental
research on dealcoholization of wine by pervaporation. Jingxi Huagong/Fine
Chemicals, 20(2), 69.
Varavuth, S., Jiraratananon, R., & Atchariyawut, S. (2009). Experimental study on
dealcoholization of wine by osmotic distillation process. Separation and Purification
Technology, 66(2), 313–321. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seppur.2008.12.011.
Wardani, A. K., Hakim, A. N., Khoiruddin, & Wenten, I. G. (2017). Combined ultra-
filtration-electrodeionization technique for production of high purity water. Water
Science and Technology, 75(12), 2891–2899. https://doi.org/10.2166/wst.2017.173.
Wenten, I. G., Dharmawijaya, P. T., Aryanti, P. T. P., Mukti, R. R., & Khoiruddin (2017).
LTA zeolite membranes: current progress and challenges in pervaporation. RSC
Advances, 7(47), 29520–29539. https://doi.org/10.1039/C7RA03341A.
Wenten, I. G., Julian, H., & Panjaitan, N. T. (2012). Ozonation through ceramic mem-
brane contactor for iodide oxidation during iodine recovery from brine water.
Desalination, 306, 29–34.
Wenten, I. G., & Khoiruddin (2016a). Recent developments in heterogeneous ion-ex-
change membrane: Preparation, modification, characterization and performance
evaluation. Journal of Engineering Science and Technology, 11(7), 916–934.
Wenten, I. G., & Khoiruddin (2016b). Reverse osmosis applications: Prospect and chal-
lenges. Desalination, 391, 112–125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2015.12.011.
Wenten, I. G., Khoiruddin, Arfianto, F., & Zudiharto (2013). Bench scale electro-
deionization for high pressure boiler feed water. Desalination, 314, 109–114. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2013.01.008.
Wenten, I. G., & Widiasa, I. N. (2002). Enzymatic hollow fiber membrane bioreactor for
penicilin hydrolysis. Desalination, 149(1), 279–285. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
S0011-9164(02)00789-0.