Brewing - water

In-place cleaning

If CIP is not fitted follow link Filtration

• Reliable and less expensive cleaning
• Long contact times
• High temperatures safely
• Strong detergents safely
• Water consumption reduced
• Document cleaning schedules and monitor hygiene and cleanliness
• Consider level controllers on make-up tanks to prevent overflows and monitor usage
• Consider re-using final rinses for first rinses
• allow for plant hold-up volume when recycling
• used detergent may also be employed as first rinse
• but avoid possibility of hypochlorite contacting caustic detergents (they react)
• Review cycle times by vessel size and process unit position
• Hold-up volume may vary with e.g. piping lengths
• More programmes maybe required
• volume per rinse may controlled by measurement of flowrate and time Review whether a full clean is required every time usually acid clean is only required intermittently

Case study: Red Stripe Acid CIP and optimisation

Using Acid-only CIP for maturation vessels and bright beer tanks has saved water, chemicals and time while also reducing COD of wastewater. Packaging CIPs are specific to brand change. Fermentation vessel CIP is also specific to brand; brands that produce less brunhefe get less cleaning.

Case study: Coors - Optimisation of Yeast Handling CIP Systems

Coors brewers reassessed their automated cleaning system to use less water and chemicals in a project with a pay back time of just nine weeks. At the same time Coors wanted to ensure that their cleaning cycles were sufficient for their purpose. An In-Site Management Information System was implemented which produced reports based on all actions carried out during cleaning, including the cost of utilities involved in the process, verification of quality standards and the environmental impact of each clean. Water consumption decreased by 37% with additional benfits in energy costs and chemical requirements.

The British Brewing Industry: Thirty years of Environmental Improvement 1976-2006.