Technological development to elaborate common white wine in misiones, with economic evaluation at industrial scale.
Mino Valdes, Juan Esteban
INTRODUCTION
In the province of Misiones Argentina since 2004 it is developing
the project Profruta to diversify production. According to Mino Valdes
and Herrera (2007), the increase in grape growing was one of
alternatives, using Vitis labrusca varieties that were better adapted to
the soil and climate of the province as Niagara Rosada (NR) and Isabella
Tinto (IT) among others. According to Bakos (2009) the production of
table grapes in Misiones supplied market demand in 2009 with 0.61
kilograms/year habitant ([hab.sup.-1] [year.sup.-1]), where about 300
rural producers engaged in growing grapes. Piekun (2011a) noted that the
grape harvest to Nov/2011 and Feb/2011 reached about 800 tons and of
this total, 85% was sold as fresh fruit; with the remaining grapes 50
farmers produced common wine by spontaneous fermentation without control
variables for family consumption. Given that the Argentine Food Code
(AFC) allows regional production of table wines and not vinifera grapes
and that the National Wine Institute of Argentina (NWI) authorized to
market only within the country, so this activity was recorded as a
diversification alternative to be evaluated. According to Piekun (2011b)
prices on the farm ranged between 8 and 10 dollar/kilogram ($
[kg.sup.-1]) at the beginning of the harvesting in Nov/2010 and then
dropped to $ 6 [kg.sup.-1] at the end of it.
The scientific problem raised was the lack of technological
information obtained with scientific methodology for the development of
common white wine, Vitis labrusca varieties: NR or IT cultivated in
Misiones, using inocula of yeasts.
To solve this problem it was necessary to obtain and record the
values of the parameters to follow the development laboratory and pilot
plant scale, in three phases of technological analysis:
* Prefermentative phase included: the heavy, stemming, crushing,
pressing, sulphite and clarified.
* The fermentative phase included: the addition of nutrients and
yeasts at different temperatures in IT and NR musts.
* Postfermentative phase included: sulphiting, clarified,
stabilized, stored, filtered and packaged.
As a hypothesis is established that it is viable from the economic
and scientific point of view, to develop an appropriate technology to
rural areas, to develop common white wine fit for human consumption,
from mustsfrom not vinifera table grapes.
For these reasons the general goal was: to develop an appropriate
and sustainable technological process for the preparation of common
white wine fit for human consumption, from not viniferous grape
cultivated in Misiones using indigenous yeasts or Saccharomyces
cerevisiae bayanus (S. bayanus).
The specific objectives of technological development require:
* Basing from the standpoint of scientific and technological
research strategy to achieve the overall objective proposed.
* Perform IT or NR grape vinification with native yeasts or S.
bayanus yeast as controls with different temperatures.
* Evaluate the performance of yeasts on S. bayanus.
* Determine physicochemical suitability of common white wines
produced.
* Establishing and promoting a technological process suitable for
the elaboration.
* Demonstrate the economic sustainability of the developed
technology and environmental impact mitigation technology for this
procedure.
To achieve the specific objectives the strategy was based on a
thorough analysis of the state of the art of winemaking with wine
grapes, and executes actions with inductive and deductive methodology in
the following scales:
At laboratory scale:
Step A. Developed common dry white wine.
Step B. Values were evaluated for tracking parameters.
Stage C. We obtained a mathematical modeling of the process.
Step D. It was verify wines fitness for human consumption.
At pilot plant scale:
Step E. A technological procedure was developed and wines were
elaborated.
Step F. We evaluated the performance of each operation.
At an industrial scale:
Step G. Equipment was sized for the procedure.
Step H. We evaluated economically the established technological
development.
DEVELOPMENT
Below it develops steps A, B, C and D at laboratory scale.
Stage A: developing common dry white wine with IT and NR.
Materials and Methods at laboratory scale
The grapes used were varieties of Vitis labrusca IT and NR from
Cerro Azul, Misiones, 2006/2007 harvest. The native seed yeast came from
the skin of grapes and S. bayanus (commercial yeast, from Spain,
Anfiquimica supplier).
Native inoculum yeast: 2 kg of IT grape were pressed with skin (no
stalk) and was added 1 gram/hectoliter (g [hL.sup.-1]) ammonium
phosphate (fermentation adjuvant). Spontaneously fermented for 2 days
(d), then was taken (without skin) 3% volume/volume (v/v) of Cuba foot
and inoculated to 2 Liter (L) of wort prepared IT. The amount of yeast
per milliliters (mL) at the beginning of wort fermentation was 12.
[10.sup.3].
Inoculum of S. bayanus: yeast were added to the wort at a dose of 1
g [hL.sup.-1] previously hydrated and reactivated with distilled water
at 37[degrees]C (Celsius) for 30 minutes (min). The initial
concentration in the wort was 6 [10.sup.3] S. bayanus [mL.sup.-1].
Samples: 5 kg of grapes were used per sample to vinify, pressed
separately without stalk to obtain 2.5 L of wort. 3 g [hL.sup.-1] of
sulfur dioxide (S[O.sub.2]) were added to the wort and 2 g [hL.sup.-1]
of pectolytic enzymes. Each container was plugged with water valve and
decanted for 24 hours (h) to clarify the wort. After this time, 0.5 L of
cleared were separated, obtaining samples of 2 L each. The fermentation
temperatures studied were: 18[degrees], 22[degrees], 26[degrees] and
30[degrees]C with IT and 24[degrees]C with NR.
The added additives were prepared with solutions of potassium
metabisultfite at 10% weight/weight (w/w); ammonium phosphate 5% w/w and
peptolitical enzymes (Lafazym supplier, Spain origin). The inoculate,
samples and additives were prepared with Pszczolkowski methodology,
(2002).
They were determined: Van Rooyen-Ellis-Du Plessi and
Cillis-Odifredi maturation indices, total soluble solids (TSS) measured
in Brix degrees ([degrees]Brix), hydrogen potential (pH), weight and
volume of the berries, the gravity of the wort, the wort yield berries,
reducing sugars, the degrees of alcohol obtained, the degree of
potential alcohol, acidity (total and volatile), the temperature, the
sulfur dioxide (free and total), the power fermentation (PF), the
fermentation activity (AF), performance fermentative (PF), the
population count and yeast generations.
The additives and determinations were performed according to the
method of Chang, (2002); Pszczolkowski, (2002), INV (2005); Boulton et
al. (2006) and Bordeau, (2006).
Fermentations: were inoculated in triplicate with native yeasts or
S. bayanus samples of 2 L prepared at fermentation temperatures. To each
wort was added 1 g [hL.sup.-1] ammonium phosphate. The containers were
filled with valve water to produce anaerobiosis. They were started
simultaneously in all isothermal chamber fermentations. When the density
remained constant 2 consecutive days of fermentation was terminated. To
each wine obtained 6 g [hL.sup.-1] of S[O.sub.2] was added The wines
were stored upright at 0[degrees]C in refrigeration for three weeks at 0
[degrees]C.
Then, the lee formed was separated when the wine was racked into
clean and sanitized bottles of 750 mL each. The free S[O.sub.2] was
fixed taking it to 35 mg [L.sup.-1] of wine for their protection.
Containers were filled with cylindrical corks during 3 months and lying
stored at 0[degrees]C to stabilize them, and then they were analyzed.
The methodology of alcoholic fermentation in oenological conditions was
performed according to Pszczolkowski (2002).
Statistical Stat graphic Plus[R] package were used for Windows
1993, version 5.1 Statistical Graphics Corporation. For data analysis,
the mean, standard deviation and range. The Fischer test (F) for the
analysis of unknown variances and to compare the mean test with equal
variances (t) of Student, both statisticians were applied with a
confidence level (CL) of 95% and two tails.
Results at laboratory scale
Figs 1, 2, 3 and 4 show the values of density, TSS, pH and yeast
population respectively vs. time for native yeast-fermented mash.
[FIGURE 1 OMITTED]
[FIGURE 2 OMITTED]
[FIGURE 3 OMITTED]
[FIGURE 4 OMITTED]
IT and S. bayanus are shown in Fig 5, 6, 7 and 8 with the values of
density, TSS, pH and yeast population respectively in function of the
fermentation time.
[FIGURE 5 OMITTED]
[FIGURE 6 OMITTED]
[FIGURE 7 OMITTED]
[FIGURE 8 OMITTED]
The results with NR grapes inoculated with native yeasts and S.
bayanus at 24[degrees]C are shown in Tab. 1
Stage B:
Evaluation of the results of the process of winemaking grape IT at
different temperatures with the t test for a confidence level (CL) of
95% were:
The average pH did not differ significantly: at 18, 22 and
26[degrees]C with inocula native yeast; at 18, 22 and 26[degrees]C with
inocula of S. bayanus; at 18, 22, 26 and 30[degrees]C with native
inocula respect to S.bayanus at each temperature.
The average pH showed significant differences: at 30[degrees]C
compared to 18, 22 and 26[degrees]C with native yeast inocula; at
30[degrees]C compared to 18, 22 and 26[degrees]C with inocula of S.
bayanus.
The average SST values were not significantly different: at 18, 22,
26 and 30[degrees]C with native yeast inocula; at 18, 22, 26 and
30[degrees]C with inocula of S. bayanus; at 18, 22, 26 and 30 [degrees]C
with respect to native S.bayanus at each temperature.
The PF in [([degrees]Alcohol obtained) [10.sup.2]
[([degrees]Alcohol expected).sup.-1]]: by comparing the PF at each
temperature; yeast of S. bayanus were higher than the native at
18[degrees]C by 9.1% (98.9 to 89.8); at 22[degrees]C by 4.1% (93.9 to
89.8); at 26[degrees]C 5% (95.9 to 90.9), respectively, but at
30[degrees]C natives were better with a difference in favor of 8% (90.8
to 82.8).
The AF in (g [day.sup.-1] sugar): IT musts of S. bayanus and native
was similar at the same temperature with the following values: 11.2 at
18[degrees]C, 14 at 22[degrees]C, 16.8 at 26[degrees]C, 18.6 at 30
[degrees]C, and 14.6 at 24[degrees]C in NR musts.
The PF in (g sugar/[degrees]Alcohol)
From this point of view the PF of S.bayanus had more performance
than natives: (17.14 and 18.87) at 18[degrees]C, (18.06 and 18.87) at
22[degrees]C, (17.68 and 18.66) at 26[degrees]C, respectively, but at
30[degrees]C the best PF obtained the native with 20.48 respect to
S.bayanus with 18.66).
The yeast population: Generation 1 was 12 [10.sup.3] [mL.sup.-1]
native and bayanus 6 [10.sup.3] [mL.sup.-1] respectively. The maximum
regarding the initial generation 1 in IT musts were:
At 18[degrees]C: for native 8-9 generations and S.bayanus 10-11
generations
At 22[degrees]C: for native 8-9 generations and S.bayanus 10-11
generations
At 26[degrees]C: for native 8-9 generations and S.bayanus 9-10
generations
At 30[degrees]C: for native 8-9 generations and S.bayanus 9-10
generations
The final populations regarding the initial IT musts were:
At 18[degrees]C: for native 6-7 generations and S.bayanus 8-9
generations.
At 22[degrees]C: for native 7-8 generations and S.bayanus 9-10
generations
At 26[degrees]C and 30[degrees]C: for native 7-8 generations and
S.bayanus 8-9 generations
The final population of 18-30[degrees]C with native IT S.bayanus
were (1.25 to 2.37) [10.sup.6] cells [mL.sup.-1] and 6-8 generations
(1.82 to 3.47) [0.10.sup.6-1] cells mL of 8-10 generations.
Stage C:
The model of alcoholic fermentation in oenological conditions is
presented in Fig. 9. The contribution to the formation of ethanol, the
population of S.bayanus and decreased substrate were for IT must
fermentation at 18[degrees]C.
[FIGURE 9 OMITTED]
It seemed appropriate to bring oenological science, numerical
equations to predict the change of scale, explain technological behavior
and predict the performance of yeast in pilot plant or at industrial
level. Solving the equations by the Newton method nonlinear regression
simulation has led to the fermentation process of fructose from known
biomass concentration and evolution of consumption of fructose, present
in amounts equivalent to glucose must.
It was designed with the following set of variables where their
units define the meaning of each: [[mu].sub.M] = 0.04 [h.sup.-1] m =
0.02 g fructose [(g biomass h).sup.-1]
[Y.sub.X/S] = 0.2 g biomass [(G fructose).sup.-1]; t = 14.56
[h.sup.-1]; [Y.sub.P/X] = 5.78 g ethanol [(g biomass).sup.-1]
The mathematical model obtained adequately represented the results
observed by Minho Valdes (2010).
Step D:
Regarding the lab wines fitness for consumption, the Tab.2 presents
the physical and chemical parameters measured by Minho Valdes and
Herrera (2007).
From the point of view of the measured variables wines were
suitable for consumption.
Partial conclusions at laboratory scale: stages A, B, C and D
1. In isothermal fermentations at 18, 22, 26 and 30[degrees]C with
IT and 24[degrees]C with NR using native yeasts from the same berries or
pure bayanus strains it was feasible to develop common dry white wine.
2. Density, TSS, pH and the yeast population: with IT musts
densities with native at 18, 22, 26 and 30[degrees]C showed no
significant difference. The same is for the densities of musts with
bayanus. The same for the densities of native musts and bayanus musts at
the same temperature. Idem for[degrees]Brix and yeast population of
musts with both strains. The pH of the musts at 18, 22 and 26[degrees]C
showed no significant difference with native, either pH in musts with S.
bayanus, nor the pH in musts with native and S. bayanus at the same
temperature.
3. The PF (in % v/v): Isabella in red musts with native yeasts was
better at 30[degrees]C and 26[degrees]C (90.8 and 90.9) than at 22 and
18[degrees]C (with 89.8 and 89, 8). With S. bayanus were better at
18[degrees]C (98.9) than at 22[degrees]C (93.9) at 26[degrees]C (95.9)
and 30[degrees]C (82.8). In NR musts at 24[degrees]C with S. bayanus
(99.1) were better than with native yeasts (96.3).
4. AF (ln g [day.sup.-1] sugar): Isabella in red musts with native
yeasts and S. bayanus values were the same: at 18.6 at 30[degrees]C,
16.8 at 26[degrees]C, 14-22[degrees]C, and 11.2 at 18[degrees]C. In NR
musts with native yeasts and S. bayanus values were from 16.6 at
24[degrees]C.
5. The PF (in g initial sugar [degrees][Alcohol.sup.-1]): IT musts
with native yeasts was best at 26-30 [degrees]C to 18-22[degrees]C
(18.66 and 18.87) respectively. With S.bayanus was better at
18[degrees]C (17.14) than at 22[degrees]C (18.06), 26[degrees]C (16.8)
and 30[degrees]C (20.48). The PF means (18, 22, 26 and 30)[degrees]C was
better for S.bayanus (18.34) than for native (18.76) respectively. Musts
NR were better with the S. bayanus (17.26) than with native yeasts
(17.76) at 24[degrees]C.
6. Duration of isothermal fermentation IT musts (at 18, 22, 24, 26
and 30)[degrees]C with inocula of 12 [10.sup.3] [mL.sup.-1] native,
delayed 15, 12, 11, 10 and 9 days, respectively; with inocula bayanus 6
[10.sup.3] [mL.sup.-1], delayed 15, 12, 11, 10 and 9 days respectively.
7. Generations of native yeasts and S. bayanus in IT grape must
were 6-8 and 8-9 with maximum of 8-9 and 9-11 respectively.
8. Mathematical modeling obtained properly accounted to the
observed pattern of evolution of fructose according to the logistic
model solved, the contribution justified 50% of the total ethanol
obtained, whereas glucose and fructose were in equivalent amounts in the
fermentation of musts IT at 18[degrees]C with S. bayanus.
Based on the previous partial conclusions, to advance to the E and
F stage pilot plant, were selected temperatures of 20, 22 and
24[degrees]C for producing wines in pilot plant with IT and NR grapes
and S. bayanus yeasts.
Following is a description of pilot plant scale technology for
steps E, F and stages for industrial scale G and H.
Step E:
To establish a pilot plant technological process we used the
criteria of similarities. According to Ibarz and Barboza (2005), for the
design and construction of equipment on a larger scale, there are two
models the mathematical and empirical. The mathematical similarity
criterion is m equal to k by m; where m and m' are measures of the
same magnitude in the model and in the industrial prototype
respectively, where k is the scaling factor. Similarities were applied:
mechanical, geometrical, thermal and concentration for all tests wine
made.
The Tab. 3 shows the transactions provided for making white wine
from no viniferous colored grapes with inoculum of S. bayanus.
The similar criteria applied between the model and the prototype
were four: a) the geometric (proportionality between the size of
equipment); b) mechanics (reception, weigh, stemming, crushing,
pressing, clarified, stored, filtering, bottling and fluid motion); c)
the thermal (fermented and cooled); d) concentration (yeasts and
additives in operations). In this step there was applied a scaling
factor k of 40, resulting in the sample of pilot plant 200 kg.
Step F:
To assess the technological process in the pilot plant set in Tab.
3, vinifications were developed using materials and laboratory methods,
for a sample size of 200 kg vineyard. Yields were obtained for each
operation and with these values the total income of each wine.
Partial Conclusions steps E and F
1. Pilot plant yields were: 52.3% (L white wine [kg.sup.-1]
vineyard NR) at 20[degrees]C, from 56.4% (L white wine [kg.sup.-1]
vineyard IT) at 20[degrees]C, from 53.5% (L white wine [kg.sup.-1]
vineyard NR) at 22[degrees]C and 54.7% (L white wine [kg.sup.-1]
vineyard NR) at 24[degrees]C.
2. The fermentation times in a pilot plant on the laboratory were
a) with k = 40 to 14 days at 20[degrees]C and seeding of 1 g levadura
[hL.sup.-1], b) with k > 40 (yeast and additives) for 10 days at
22[degrees]C and 8 days at 24[degrees]C, c) with k > 40 (with 20
glevadura [hL.sup.-1]) were 10 days at 22 [degrees]C and for 8 days at
24[degrees]C.
3. All wines produced were fit for human consumption according to
the protocol analysis INV National Wine Institute (2007).
Step G:
The procedure evaluated in pilot plant was testing at industrial
size; it was necessary to establish a production unit, calculate the
production of the vineyard and estimate a plant size to calculate and
select industrial equipment.
The production unit was established at 12 families, with an average
of 27 hectare each vneyard.
From the 3rd year of seed it could be harvested between 10 and 18
tons per [hectare.sup.-1] by INTA, (2008). In 27 hectares
[families.sup.-1] planted with 9 hec. of Venus to harvest in November, 9
hec of NR to harvest in December and 9 hec of IT to harvest in January
by MAyP, (2007).
Production of 12 families, three months per year was calculated at:
4,212 tons vineyard per [year.sup.-1].
The plant size required to satisfy the production unit for a
working day of 8 h/day at 30 days/month requires 46.8 tn vineyard per
[day.sup.1].
To operate 6 h/day with 2 hours of cleaning requires a size 8 tons
vineyard per [h.sup.-1].
We applied a scaling factor of k = 40, from 200 kg per sample
vineyard pilot plant to industrial scale was obtained 8.000 kg
[h.sup.-1] vineyard.
Projected industrial yields with k 40 for 8.000 kg [h.sup.-1]
vineyard wine expressed in L and in bottles of 750 mL each were:
For 20[degrees]C with NR could get 4,184 L of white wine (5,578
bottles).
For 20[degrees]C with IT could get 4,512 L of white wine (6,016
bottles).
For 22[degrees]C with NR could get 4,280 L of white wine (5,706
bottles).
For 24[degrees]C with NR could get 4,376 L of white wine (5,834
bottles).
Below are presented in Tab. 4 the results of the calculations and
equipment selection for the prototype considering industrial yields
expected.
The equipment selected regarding their size were:
1 Central refrigeration of 24 Hp; 54.000 frig [h.sup.-1]; water
entrance and exit 12 y 7[degrees]C.
1 Mobile pump (2 Hp, 2 veloc. 470 rpm, flow of 12 [m.sup.3]
[h.sup.-1] at 16 m hight.
1 Screw Pump for watering mills of 4 kW, (10 [m.sup.3] [h.sup.-1],
1,8 bar y 200 rpm).
1 Elevating conveyor for vineyard in stainless steelAISI 304 (380
V, 50 Hz, y 1,5 kW h).
1 Steel Manual Master AISI 304, (7-9). [10.sup.3] Kgvinedo
[h.sup.-1] y 1,87 kWh.
1 Scales for 250 kg to weigh to weigh different plastic boxes with
10-13 kgvines each one.
1 diatomeas filter para 4 [m.sup.3] [h.sup.-1]; capacity 85 L,
preassure 6 bar, power 1,75 KWh.
1 Frame Filter and y 40 plaques of 50, 80 y 100 L [plaques.sup.-1]
[h.sup.-1] for smothing the wine.
1 Piston steel pump AISI-304, (with 2 speeds from 4300 to 8500 L
[h.sup.-1] and 1,5 hp).
1 Wine cooler 6 m. with 4 concentric tubes of 80 mm and 114 mm.
1 Steel catwalk, with leg protector with railing, grile floor and
ladder.
13 sets of internal plumbing for internal cold water for
refrigerarator fermentors (going and coming)
2 Lung tanks for cold water and return with a capacity of 1,500 L
each one.
3 Circulation pumps: one primary and two 2 hp secondary ones.
13 Steel tanks for fermentation and clarification calculated at
31.9 [m.sup.3 each]
1 manual packing for bottles of 750 [cm.sup.3].
Step H:
Estimation of capital investment and production costs as from
Peters and Timmerhaus point of view, (1981).
You can use various methods to analyze capital investment. The
choice of method depends on the amount of detail available and the
accuracy that is desired. In this time, the method C of percentage of
equipment delivered was used. Then, the remaining items of direct cost
of the plant are estimated as a percentage of the cost of equipment
delivered. Additional components of capital investment are based on a %
average of total direct cost of the plant, in total direct and indirect
costs or in the total capital investment. The Tab. 5 presents the fixed
capital invested for the alternatives studied in pilot plant and
industrial scale projected with a proportionality factor of k=40.
Tab. 6 shows the production costs for options 1, 2 and 3 tested in
pilot plant and industrial scale applied.
Regarding the capacity of the plant to produce Tnvinedo [h.sup.-1];
it was established that the 1st year the work would be at 70%, 2nd at
85%, 3th at 90% and from the 4th at 95%. The sell price for the wine in
bottle ready the go was fixed at 1.5 U$D during the economic analysis
and the 6 hours labor day
To choose the best production alternative Tab. 7 shows the analysis
with the productions alternatives.
This type of estimation is commonly used for preliminary results
and study. However in the case of comparable plants of different
capacities, this method allows very accurate time estimations according
to Peters and Timmerhaus (1981).
According to the Tab. 7 the three alternatives are viable for
investment but the best is number one, because it is recovered in the
shortest period (three years) the present value of the investment.
CONCLUSION
From the economic and technical point of view it is feasible to
establish a production unit consisting of 12 families with 27 hec for
each vineyard
With the developed technology it is feasible to obtain common white
wines fit for human consumption from Vitis labrusca varieties: Niagara
Rosada and Isabella Tinto.
The native yeasts are suitable and additives added presented
continuous fermentation, non-stop, for endogenous or exogenous reasons
to yeast.
Musts color grapes are suitable to develop common white wine and do
not need to correct the initial acidity and sugar, to have normal
fermentations.
It is profitable from the economic point of view, the projected
industrial size with established technology, to develop common white
wine at 1.5 U$D per 750 mL, with Isabella grape grown Red or Pink in
Misiones.
The best investment was projected at 24[degrees]C for Niagara
Rosada grapes presented at NPV of 6,602,666 U$D, and IRR of 60% and a
3-year PRD.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Please refer to articles Spanish Bibliography.
Mino Valdes, Juan Esteban
Facultad de Ingenieria--Universidad Nacional de Misiones
Obera, Misiones, Argentina
minio@fio.unam.edu.ar
Reception date: 09/26/12--Approval date: 10/11/12
Table 1. Density, pH and TSS vs. Time NR musts fermentation at
24[degrees]C
Time Density PH SST ([degrees]Brix)
Days (g [L.sup.-1])
S.bayanus Native S. bayanus Native S.bayanus Native
0 1080,3 1080,3 3,20 3,20 19,0 19,0
1 1058,6 1058,8 3,29 3,32 15,5 15,89
2 1045,8 1046,7 3,28 3,26 13,4 13,85
3 1035,8 1035,8 3,26 3,26 11,6 12,09
4 1021,9 1023,7 3,25 3,19 10,3 10,75
5 1013,7 1015,7 3,23 3,18 8,75 8,25
6 1005,6 1006,7 3,21 3,20 7,21 7,75
7 1001,7 1001,4 3,24 3,21 6,84 6,60
8 997,7 997,7 3,23 3,25 6,24 6,24
9 995,7 995,6 3,24 3,23 5,74 5,71
10 993,7 993,6 3,25 3,23 5,74 5,71
11 993,6 993,6 3,27 3,24 5,71 5,61
Source: Own Elaboration
Table 2. Physical-chemical parameters of white wine
WINE Yeast PH S[O.sub.2] S[O.sub.2]
free total
Grape mg [L.sup.-1] mg [L.sup.-1]
Temperatura
IT S.bayanus 3,56 14 107,52
18[degrees]C Native 3,57 16,6 96
IT S.bayanus 3,66 7,60 108,8
22[degrees]C Native 3,63 12,8 119
NR S.bayanus 3,27 34,5 81,92
24[degrees]C Native 3,24 19,2 81,92
IT S.bayanus 3,57 14 96
26[degrees]C Native 3,61 14 1[O.sub.2],4
IT S.bayanus 3,55 25,6 98,56
30[degrees]C Native 3,6 8,9 115
Limits of dry with INV 4 180 [+ or -] 35
Adjusting for 25-30
conservation
WINE Yeast (1) Acidity (2) Acidity
total Volatile
Grape g [L.sup.-1] g [L.sup.-1]
Temperatura
IT S.bayanus 6,97 0,98
18[degrees]C Native 6,52 0,98
IT S.bayanus 7,42 1,05
22[degrees]C Native 6,07 0,78
NR S.bayanus 5,92 0,36
24[degrees]C Native 5,85 0,27
IT S.bayanus 5,92 1,06
26[degrees]C Native 6,07 1,04
IT S.bayanus 6,75 0,86
30[degrees]C Native 7,05 0,84
Limits of dry with INV 1 [+ or -] 0,2
Adjusting for 4 a 8
conservation
The free S[O.sub.2] was 35 mg [L.sup.-1] before storing wine.
(1) as tartaric acid; (2) such as acetic acid.
Source: Own Elaboration
Table 3. Operations to develop pilot plant white wine with
color grapes
Operations Vineyard Additives
1 RECEPTION
2 WEIGH
3 STEMMING
4 CRUSHING
5 PRESSING
6 CLARIFIED (3 g S[O.sub.2]+ 2 g peptoliticas enzymes)
h [L.sup.1]
7 FERMENTED (1g fosfato amonio + 1 g bayanus)
h [L.sup.1]
8 CLARIFIED 6 g S[O.sub.2] h [L.sup.1]
9 STORED
10 FILTERING
11 BOTTLING Take to 35 mg S[O.sub.2] free h [L.sup.1]
Source: Flanzy 2003
Table 4. Equipment and devices to calculated the process of 8
tons per vineyard [h.sup.-1]
Equipment Hopper Variables Screw Calculated Results
per boxs Diameter 0,32 m
Pneumatic Press Capacity and power 32 hL; 6,6 kW
Volume 31,9 [m.sup.3]
Hight 6,5 m
Diameter 2,5 m
Fermentator-- Fang Speed 0,15 m [h.sup.-1]
clarifier Clarifying Time 2 dias
Clarification 8
Barrel
Wine Tank Volume 270 [m.sup.3]
Length width hight 30 m, 3 m, 3 m
Stabiliztion Time 3 meses
Floor Inclineve 2[degrees]
Number of tanks 9
Fermenor molec. Weight 180 g [mol.sup.1]
[C.sub.6][H.sub.12]
[O.sub.6]
Heat generated by mol 24,5 kcal mol
[glucosa1.sup.-1]
Heat generated by L 24,9 kcal [L.sup.-1]
Fermentation time 8 days
Heat generated in .735 kcal
8 days [h.sup.-1barrel1]
Lining Water Cp water 1,002 kcal [kg.sup.-1]
[degrees][C.sup.-1]
Cooling water 219,3 kg [h.sup.-1]
[cuba.sup.-1]
Simultaneity factor 1,4
Performance 85%
Heat to disipate total 49.214 kcal [h.sup.-1]
process
Source: Own Elaboration
Tabla 5. Fixed Capital Invested updated based on fermentation
temperatures
CONCEPTS Cost U$D 2005 Cost U$D
(441) 2012 (620) 1
Production of at 20[degrees]C at 24[degrees]C
white wine
Alternative No. 20g lev.
[hL.sup.-1]
1. Direct Costs 533 341.0 702 000.1
1.1. Equipment *
A. Equipment 360 633.0 507 013.9
acquired
[] Instruments 2 200.0 3 092.98
and controls
[] Pipes and tubes 3 200.0 4 498.88
[] Electrical 2 800.0 3 936.52
B. Civil works 141 115.0 198 393.6
(including
services)
C. Utilities 1 100.0 1 546.49
(mounted)
D. Ground 500.0 702.95
II. Indirect Costs 100 332
A. Engineering and 7 330.0 37 491.25
supervision
B. Construct 20 000.0 37 491.25
expenses and
fees
C. Possible 18 031.6 25 350.6
III. Fixed capital 802 332.1
invested = I + II
CONCEPTS Cost U$D2012 Cost U$D
(620) 2 2012 (620) 3
Production of a 22[degrees]C a 20[degrees]C
white wine
Alternative No. 20g lev. 1g lev.
[hL.sup.-1] [hL.sup.-1]
1. Direct Costs 747 619.1 900 363.0
1.1. Equipment *
A. Equipment 535 646.25 645 083.40
acquired
[] Instruments 3 267.64 3 935.25
and controls
[] Pipes and tubes 4 752.94 5 724.01
[] Electrical 4 158.82 5 008.50
B. Civil works 209 597.3 252 419.9
(including
services)
C. Utilities 1 633.82 1 967.62
(mounted)
D. Ground 742.64 894.37
II. Indirect Costs 101 764 107 236
A. Engineering and 37 491.21 37 491.26
supervision
B. Construct 37 491.21 37 491.26
expenses and
fees
C. Possible 26 782.30 32 254.1
III. Fixed capital 849 383.1 1 007 599
invested = I + II
Source: Own Elaboration
Table 6. Production costs depending on fermentation temperatures
CONCEPTS and Cost U$D Cost U$D
estimation ways 2012 2012
1 2
Winemaking at 24[degrees]C at 22[degrees]C
I. Manufacturing costs
A. Direct production costs
1. Quote commodity deals 2 800 899 2 799 032
2. Labor costs 10% of 361 029,6 360 799.27
total product cost
3. Direct supervision. 1% 36 102,9 36 079.93
of total product cost
4. Utilities calculation 3 960 3 960
data
5. Maintenance and repair 16 594.6 16 594.6
2% of fixed capital
invested
6. Operational supplies 4 148.6 4 148.6
0.5 % del Capital Fijo Invertido
7. Lab expenses 1 % of 36 102,9 36 079.9
total costs of product
8. Patents y royalties 1 36 102,9 36 079.9
% of total product
costs
B. Fixed expenses
1. Depreciation 10 % of 82 973.4 82 973.4
Fixed Invested. Capital
2. Local taxesl % of 8 297.3 8 297.3
Fixed Invested. Capital
3. Insurance 0.4 % of 3 318.94 3 318.94
Fixed Invested. Capital
4. Rent (own property) 0 0
II. General Expenses
a. Administrative costs: 72 205.8 72 159.8
2 % of total product
cost
b. Distribution and sales 72 205.8 72 159.8
costs: 2% of total
product costs
c. Research and Development: 72 205.8 72 159.8
2% of total product costs
d. Financial Interest: 0.5 4 148.6 4 148.6
of Fixed Capital fijo
Invested
III.Total Product Costs 3 610 296.7 3 607 992.7
= I + II
CONCEPTS and Cost U$D
estimation ways 2012
3
Winemaking at 20[degrees]C
I. Manufacturing costs
A. Direct production costs
1. Quote commodity deals 2 792 173.50
2. Labor costs 10% of 360 746.48
total product cost
3. Direct supervision. 1% 36 074.65
of total product cost
4. Utilities calculation 3 960
data
5. Maintenance and repair 17 487.9
2% of fixed capital
invested
6. Operational supplies 4 371.9
0.5 % del Capital Fijo Invertido
7. Lab expenses 1 % of 36 074.6
total costs of product
8. Patents y royalties 1 36 074.6
% of total product
costs
B. Fixed expenses
1. Depreciation 10 % of 87 439.9
Fixed Invested. Capital
2. Local taxesl % of 8 743.9
Fixed Invested. Capital
3. Insurance 0.4 % of 3 497.59
Fixed Invested. Capital
4. Rent (own property) 0
II. General Expenses
a. Administrative costs: 72 149.3
2 % of total product
cost
b. Distribution and sales 72 149.3
costs: 2% of total
product costs
c. Research and Development: 72 149.3
2% of total product costs
d. Financial Interest: 0.5 4 371.9
of Fixed Capital fijo
Invested
III.Total Product Costs 3 607 464.8
= I + II
Source: Own Elaboration
Table 7. Dinamic analysis depending the fermentation temperatures
Elaborations 1 2
24[degrees]C 22[degrees]C
Winemaking 5 834 5 706
bottles.[day.sup.-1] bottles.[day.sup.-1]
(1) VAN (2012) 6.602.660 5.403.308
(2) Tir% 60 56
(3) PRD years 3 3,4
Elaborations 3
20[degrees]C
Winemaking 5 578
bottles.[day.sup.-1]
(1) VAN (2012) 5.647.471
(2) Tir% 53
(3) PRD years 3,6
(1) Net updated Value
(2) Internal Tax returns
(3) Investment recuperation Pedriod at up dated value
Source: Own Elaboration
