Wednesday, 10 July 2013

World hop acreage in 1910 and 2010

I'm still not done with hops. I've unearthed too many numbers, plump and golden, like the first new potatoes of summer, to leave them to rot, uneaten.

The reason I assemble statisitcs from various sources is very simple. Most published statistics cover a limted number of years. You can't really see the big picture. By nailing together different sets of numbers, I can create tables with a much greater scope. Ones that span centuries.

Like the set today. Which span exactly 100 years. And no, I don't have figures for all the intervening years. I'm still on the trail of those. Please let me know if you're aware of a source for world hop production statistics from 1970 to the present. The Statistical Handbook of the BBPA doesn't include them, unlike the Brewers' Almanack.

The table shows us that pretty much everywhere in the world the area dedicated to hops has declined over the last 100 years. Even in the USA and Germany, where the hop industry has industry has been very successful in the last 30 years. In both od those countries, hop acreage only declined 30% or so, compared to a global decline of 44%. It's particularly impressive in Germany's case as it lost its second largest hop-grwong region, Alsace-Lorraine, after WW I. It had been responsible for about 20% of German hop acreage in 1910.


World hop acreage in 1910 and 2010
Country 1910 area (ha) 2010 area (ha) % difference
Germany 27,466 18,386 33.06%
Czech Republic 14,715 5,210 64.59%
Poland (Galicia) 2,293 1,867 18.58%
Slovenia  1,391
UK  13,319 1,070 91.97%
France  2,741 580 78.84%
Spain  508
Romania  245
Austria  522 234 55.17%
Slovakia  229
Belgium  1,940 186 90.41%
Bulgaria  160
Hungary  964 27 97.20%
Portugal  17
European Union  30,110
Ukraine  1,184
Turkey  352
Russia  9,068 420 95.37%
Serbia  39
Belarus  53
Switzerland 18
Croatia  16
Rest of Europe  2,082
EUROPE  75,593 32,192 57.41%
USA 18,428 12,662 31.29%
Argentina  235
Canada  9
AMERICA  12,906
China 5,502
Japan  192
India  45
ASIA  5,739
South-Africa  492
AFRICA  492
AUSTRALIA/OCEANIA  827
WORLD 94,761 52,156 44.96%
Sources:
Barth Hop Market Telegram June 2011
Barth Hop Report 1911-1912 

Poland appears to come out on top with just an 18% decline. But that's not really true. Only one of Poland's hop-growing regions, Galicia, is included in the 1910 numbers. Poznan, Lublin and Wolhynien are omitted. Had all the regions been included, the decline would have been considerably larger.

With the borders of Russia and Hungary having changed considerably in the intervening years, it's hard to make much of a useful comparison between the 1910 and 1920 figures. Which leaves two obvious big losers: the UK and Belgium. Both saw a fall of 90%. What you would call pretty catastrophic.

Why, when world beer production has increased, has the area dedicated to hops fallen so much? It's combination of improved agricultural techniques which mean the amount of hops produced per hectare has increased. Then there's the move to high-alpha acid hops. Fewer are required to achieve the same level of bitterness.

Britain's move away from strong, heavily-hopped beers after WW I must have also had an effect. At one time Britain was soaking up a large percentage of world hop production. in 1913, the UK consumed 580,000 zentners (1 zentner = 50 kg) of a total world consumption of 1,734,000 zentners*. I make that just about exactly a third.





* Barth Hop Report 1911-1912.

Tuesday, 9 July 2013

German brewing waters

I'd been meaning to write about this for a while, but was delayed, as usual, by my sloth. I wanted to make a comparison with British brewing waters and that required effort. First, to find the right analyses and second to translate the units of measurement. All the British ones are in the very non-SI grains per gallon format.

The quotes are, once again, taken from Ludwig Narziss's article on the Reinheitsgebot.

First the Reinheitsgebot rules about water treatment. Once again it has me scratching my head wondering why some treatments are allowed and others not.

"3.1.3. The brewing liquor, according to the Beer Law, includes every water to be found in nature. A pretreatment for the elimination of iron, of suspended particles or colloids by precipitation and filtration is allowed as is the addition of calcium sulphate and calcium chloride provided that the water does not have a different composition to natural waters. In particular, the neutral reaction must not be changed or varied. The salts mentioned must be added to the water, not to the mash or to the wort. The addition of any inorganic or organic acid is prohibited. Usually the liquor is decarbonated, i.e. the hydrogen carbonates of calcium and magnesium are removed by saturated lime water, but the added calcium-oxide is quantitatively removed. Weak acid ion-exchangers are used too, but the released CO2 must be removed by rinsing and neutralisation by lime water or marble stones. Strong acid exchangers set free the strong mineral acids derived from the corresponding salts. They are neutralised either by lime water — producing the calcium salts of these acids or by anion exchangers which demineralize the water totally. By blending with the original water, the desired water quality is built up. A similar water composition is attained by electro osmosis, reverse osmosis or electro dialysis. The material of the exchangers as well as that of the membranes and nodules must be of food standard.

Materials using this wide field of procedures it is feasible to produce any conceivable water composition. The addition of gypsum is, with or without boiling of the water, the oldest method to equalise the pH-increasing effect of the hydrogen-carbonate. It seems to be one of the benefits of the visit of the two brewers Anton Dreher and Gabriel Sedlmayer to Burton on Trent and the method was called 'Burtonizing' for almost a century.

The addition of acids is thus prohibited, as the balance calcium oxide-carbon dioxide would be varied. It is possible however, to correct the pH of mash or wort by the lactic acid bacteria of acid malt or by the multiplication of those bacteria in wort. This method is used for some of the most respectable beers in Germany, it is not too popular as the bacteria (long rods) which are killed by hops and wort boiling are still present in the beer and are difficult to distinguish from living organisms. A survey on some types of brewing liquors is shown in Table III."
Journal of the Institute of Brewing, Volume 90, Issue 6, November-December 1984, page 353.

TABLE III. Analytical data of various brewing liquors
Munich Dortmund Munich
Type Original Decarbonated Pilsen Original Decarbonated Decarbonated +20g/Hl CASO4
Total hardness °G 14.8 3.9 1.6 41.3 26.0 9.1
Carbonate hardness 14.2 3.3 1.3 16.8 1.5 1.5
Non carbon-hardness 0.6 0.6 0.3 24.5 24.5 7.6
Calcium-hardness °G 10.6 1.5 1.0 36.7 21.4 6.7
Magnesium-hardness 4.2 2.4 0.6 4.6 4.6 2.4
Residual alcalinity °G 10.6 2.5 0.9 5.7 -5.3 -0.8
SO4 2- mg/l 9.0 9.0 5.2 290 290 180
Cl- mg/l 1.6 1.6 5.0 107 107 1.6
NO3- mg/l Trace Trace Trace Trace Trace Trace

So you can add calcium sulphate and calcium chloride as long as the result is like some water somewhere in the world. I wonder if the Dead Sea and other salt lakes count? They have pretty extreme mineral contents. Not sure they'd be much use for brewing, mind.

I'm so glad Dreher and Sedlmayer get a mention. But I don't believe for a minute that they brought back burtonisation from their trip to Britain. They were there far too early - the 1830's - before the practice had been worked out. I don't think they started burtonising until the 1860's. In any case, Burton brewers had no need to burtonise. Their well water was that way naturally.

I'm struggling to understand why the Reinheitsgebot allows the addition of salts to brewing water but not acids. If I had a brewery, I wouldn't want to deliberately introduce lactic acid bacteria into it. Asking for trouble.

It's time now for the table of British brewing waters. As I don't understand the units being used to measure hardness in the German table, I haven't been able to find similar figures for British waters. In fact, only three entries do match: Cl, SO4 and NO3.


British brewing waters mg/l
Deep Well Waters
Burton
highest lowest Old London well water London Metropolitan Water Board supply.
Total solids (dried) 2280.6 1225.8 461.8 319.3
Sodium—Na 51.3 29.9 98.4 24.2
Calcium—Ca 513.1 270.8 49.9 89.8
Magnesium—Mg 81.2 61.3 18.5 4.3
Nitrate—NO3 42.8 31.4 — 2.9
Chloride—Cl 67.0 35.6 59.9 18.5
Sulphate—S04 1297.1 655.7 77.0 58.4
Carbonate—CO3 1396.9 139.7 155.4 122.6
Source:
"Brewing Theory and Practice" by E.J. Jeffery, 1956, page 101.

Unsurprisingly, the SO4 content is highest in the Burton waters. Though the level in Dortmund water is considerably higher than all the other waters. The Cl content of Dortmund water is also high, even higher than in Burton. NO3, which is only present as a trace in the German waters, is found in considerable quantities in the Burton waters.

But what really stands out is just how soft Pilsen water is. With bugger all of any mineral in it.

Monday, 8 July 2013

French brewing methods in the 1920's

I've been getting so distracted by hop statistics that I almost forgot about one of the best bits in the Journal of the Institute of Brewing article about the reconstruction of the French brewing industry after WW I. It's the bit where they describe French brewing methods. Probably the most relevant part for the theme of this blog.

In the part of Northern France most affected by the war, breweries only slowly started moving over to bottom fermentation after the end of hostilities. It really was a slow process, with many, even quite large concerns, not changing over brewing until after WW II.

Here are the three methods of fermentation used in France:

"The breweries in France work on three different systems:— Top fermentation, Mixed fermentation, Bottom fermentation.

Those in the devastated areas were practically all top-fermentation breweries and the majority were small concerns carried on in a primitive fashion. The beer is fermented in the actual trade casks or in puncheons at a high temperature and without any attempt at attemperation, it is fined with ray skins and sent out four or five days after mashing.

Bottom fermentation breweries are very exceptional in the north but are general in the east and at Paris where the largest French breweries are to be found.

"Fermentation mixte" combines some of the characteristics of both top and bottom fermentation. A top yeast is used and the fermentation method is more like that practised in England. There is, however, a short storage in casks similar to those in a Lager cellar but not chilled, and the beer is racked under counter-pressure through filters. The newer breweries are, however, fitted with open or closed fermenting vessels, the latter on the Landouzy system, very much like Yorkshire stone squares but made of wood. The cover is some little distance below the top of the round, and in the centre has a manhole through which the yeast works out, the beer running back into the vessel. They are said to give more body with light beers than open vessels, but the open vessels have many partisans particularly for stronger beers."
Journal of the Institute of Brewing, Volume 27, Issue 2, February 1921, pages 63 - 64.

Fermenting in trade casks was also typical of small-scale Belgian brewing. As was pointed out last time this type of fermentation came up, there were also British breweries who used this system. Bateman's, for example. Fermenting in casks without attemperation must have led to variable results. In a larger cask the temperature would rise more during fermentation than in a small one. Then, of course, there would be variations in air temperature at different times of year. Pretty much every barrel would taste different. There are still some Belgian styles, for example Saison, that are fermented at very high temperatures.

At this time only the largest French breweries bottom-fermented and few of those were in the north.

I'm not quite sure that I see how the third method described was "mixed fermentation". There wasn't even proper lagering at a cool temperature, as with Kölsch and Alt. Though I do recall in a report of a visit of British brewers to Cologne around 1900 there was a top-fermenting brewery described that lagered warm. Maybe this was more common in the past. It sounds like a way of emulating some characteristics of Lager without the need to install lots of expensive new cooling equipment.

That Landouzy system caught my attention. Was that somehow derived from Yorkshire squares or had they thought it up themselves? The aim seems the same: rousing the beer and removing suspended yeast.

"The old fashioned fermentation in puncheons with its crude and dirty methods is now being gradually abandoned, the new breweries are adopting one or other of the alternatives mentioned. Several of the larger concerns in the north are fitting up Lager plant either of the ordinary type or of the Nathan system of which one example already existed before war at Fere-en-Tardenoise, but which was destroyed during hostilities. But the great majority of firms are building top fermentation breweries with open or Landouzy vessels or adopting the "mixed" fermentation system. A few breweries have been fitted with mash filters and more are being adopted, while the Wooldridge system has been introduced, one large brewery to adopt it being in Armentieres, a name which brings to Englishmen many memories far apart from those of brewing, but among which the desire for beer may sometimes be recalled."
Journal of the Institute of Brewing, Volume 27, Issue 2, February 1921, page 64.

Mash filters seem to have been popular in France between the wars. I don't know, I find the idea very inelegant. I prefer the romance of the mash tun.

Here's proof of how common they were in France. This from a report of English brewers visiting the east of France:

"From the Ecole de Brasserie we proceeded to the Grandes Brasseries Reunies de Maxeville, where M. Dillon, the managing director, received us and piloted us through the various departments of this extensive brewery. Among the many interesting things shown us, three deserve special mention, namely, 1, the mechanical floor turner, which serves the six malting floors and displaces no less than ten trained maltsters. 2, The two large mash filters, capable of turning out 2,000 hectolitres (over 1,200 barrels) per day, and 3, the central control panel from which all the machinery can be started or stopped throughout the brewhouse, all valves opened and closed, and upon which are mounted the various pressure and vacuum gauges, registering thermometers, etc. This clever labour-saving contrivance was designed by M. Dillon."
Journal of the Institute of Brewing, Volume 30, Issue 8, August 1924, page 642.

These breweries were large and modern, unlike those in the North, and had already moved to bottom-fermentation. The brewery described here still exists:

" . . . the party proceeded to les Grandes Brasseries et Malteries de Champigneulles, there to see the largest and most wonderful brewery in France. Here the managing director, M. Krampitsch, conducted us round as much of the brewery as time would allow, and in this connection an apology is distinctly due to him that we should have had so little time to do justice to the many most interesting things which he had to show us. To an English brewer the brewhouse was simply a revelation, its many large coppers and other metal work being kept brightly polished, but the most imposing sight of all was the Buhler mash filter installation which was capable of dealing with 120 quarters four times a day. Altogether the spotless cleanliness reflected by the white enamel finishing of the whole room and the general air of light and brightness will linger in the memories of all those privileged to see it, for many a day."
Journal of the Institute of Brewing, Volume 30, Issue 8, August 1924, page 643.
Brewhouse at Champigneulles


You what we haven't had yet? A table. Time to put that right. Here's a comparison of French and UK beer production in the 1920's:


French and UK beer output (hl)
Year France UK French output as % of UK output
1913 12,844,000 56,960,947 22.55%
1918 6,375,000 31,233,818 20.41%
1919 10,785,000 38,073,804 28.33%
1920 11,548,000 57,358,068 20.13%
1921 12,254,000 56,468,799 21.70%
1922 16,802,000 49,389,304 34.02%
1923 20,235,000 39,193,404 51.63%
1924 20,396,000 41,609,566 49.02%
1925 19,688,000 43,753,145 45.00%
1926 19,121,000 43,803,527 43.65%
1927 19,237,000 41,078,410 46.83%
1928 16,312,000 41,626,141 39.19%
1929 21,145,000 40,272,468 52.50%
Sources:
European Statistics 1750-1970 by B. R. Mitchell, 1978, page 285.
Brewers' Almanack 1928, p. 110
Brewers' Almanack 1955, p. 50
British Beer & Pub Association Statistical Handbook 2005, p.7

The development is quite different. In the UK, beer production shot up after the end of the war, but when the brief post-was boom ended, fell back again. While in France output rose steadily in the first half of the 1920's then stabilised. The French industry more than bounced back and after the war was  in better shape than it had been in 1913. In 1929, beer production was almost 40% greater than in 1913. While in the UK beer output fell by 30% over that period. And that's using bulk barrels. In terms of standard barrels the fall was even greater, due to the fall in gravities.

Sunday, 7 July 2013

UK hop production by variety 1984-1986

The Journal of the Institute of Brewing is a gift that keeps giving. Especially now I've become temporarily obsessed with the hop industry.

One of the reasons I love its articles so much are all the tables. I'm a total sucker for tables, as you may have noticed. The more numbers the better, as far as I'm concerned.

I've collected all sorts of different numbers, but never any related to the quantities grown of each different type of hop.  I find it fascinating, probably because it's new to me.

Five types of hop together accounted for around 85% of production: Goldings, Fuggle, Northdown, Challenger and Target. It's a good demonstration of the perennial popularity of Goldings and Fuggle, which have both been around for well over 100 years.

I must see if I can dig out similar figures for a more recent period. I'm sure that Goldings and Fuggle would still be popular, but I suspect that there would have been a lot of changes amongst the other varieties. If only becasue this is just when the industry went into a tailspin, with output falling to unheard levels. The greatest quantity of hops produced in any year since 1984 was 104,000 cwt.

Because the original figures were given in pockets, ot's not possible to translate them precisely to a weight. A pocket holds between 1.5 and 2 cwt., depending on the type of hop and how it's been packed. So it's hard to check if the figures are for the complete hop crop. To cross check, here are the actual production figures:


UK hop production
Year Cwts.
1984 127,883
1985 99,814
1986 102,161
Source:
Statistical Handbook of the British Beer and Pub Association 2011, page 20.

It's clear that if the figures aren't for the whole crop, it's very close to being all of it.

UK hop production by variety 1984-1986
1986* 1985 1984
Variety cwt % cwt % cwt %
Goldings 12,425 15.66% 13,194 13.21% 13,259 11.14%
W.G.V. 2,511 3.17% 3,671 3.67% 3,926 3.30%
Fuggle 11,426 14.40% 12,446 12.46% 15,401 12.94%
Progress 1,191 1.50% 1,635 1.64% 1,461 1.23%
Bramling Cross 1,053 1.33% 1,661 1.66% 2,699 2.27%
Northern Brewer 240 0.30% 368 0.37% 1,293 1.09%
Wye Northdown 11,291 14.23% 14,634 14.65% 16,550 13.91%
Zenith 674 0.85% 1,044 1.05% 1,244 1.04%
Wye Challenger 11,637 14.67% 15,333 15.35% 18,006 15.13%
Wye Target 20,066 25.29% 26,966 26.99% 36,876 30.99%
Yeoman 6,273 7.91% 8,405 8.41% 6,501 5.46%
Omega 497 0.63% 152 0.15% - -
Others 50 0.06% 395 0.39% 1,790 1.50%
Total 79,331 99,900 119,003
Notes:
Weights calculated from pockets assuming 1.5 cwt per pocket
* Provisional figures
Source:
Journal of the Institute of Brewing, Volume 93, Issue 3, May-June 1987, page 209.

More, tables, I know. Don't worry, I'm sure it's just a phase I'm going through.

Saturday, 6 July 2013

The collapse of UK hop growing

Bit of a change of pace today. I'm extracting my head from the past's arse to look at the present. Or the near past.

You may have noticed that I've been collecting hop statistics. Mostly from the late 19th and early 20th centuries. But I thought it was time to have a gander at the last couple of decades. I must admit that I was shocked.

I'd heard about the decline in UK hop growing, but until I saw the firgures for the last 30 years, I hadn't realised just how catastrophic that decline had been.

Between 1955 and 1970, UK hop production averaged just under 250,000 cwt. per year. Which was a little more than required for British brewing - an average of just under 210,000 cwt. 1955 - 1969. Britain was more than self-sufficient in hops and was able to export the surplus. Though the amount exported declined from just under 50,000 cwt. to just under 10,000 cwt between 1955 and 1969.


Average UK hop production
years cwt
1955-1970 238,718
1971-1980 180,729
1981-1990 132,810
1991-2000 78,254
2000-2009 33,702
Sources:
Statistical Handbook of the British Beer and Pub Association 2011, page 20.
1971 Brewers'Almanack, page 54

There was a slight decline in production in the period 1971 to 1980, when it averaged 180,000 cwt. That's when things started going badly wrong. Between 1981 and 1990 the average was down to 132,000 cwt. 1991 to 2000 the average was just 78,000 cwt. And for 2001 to 2009 a meagre 33,000 cwt. That's way less than the amount needed by British brewers. The UK hads gone from being a net exporter to a big net importer in a couple of decades.


UK hop production, imports and exports 1955 - 1969
UK production Imports: Less Re-Exports Exports: British Hops Consumption Years ended 30th Sept. following
Year Cwts. Cwts. Cwts. Cwts.
1955 256,821 5,836 49,049 218,820
1956 184,170 6,416 40,746 215,114
1957 267,677 8,848 38,635 208,870
1958 302,640 5,441 42,352 226,371
1959 222,768 6,007 34,291 234,611
1960 248,195 8,172 12,220 234,611
1961 204,306 19,235 24,914 226,437
1962 266,812 16,489 16,070 234,611
1963 276,384 10,063 21,790 226,437
1964 252,398 12,624 24,181 226,565
1965 258,727 12,961 19,474 237,356
1966 228,923 10,767 18,673 236,424
1967 215,025 10,165 2,709 207,249
1968 199,205 12,040 2,286 198,029
1969 209,543 11,401 8,543 186,103
Source:
1971 Brewers'Almanack, page 54

Britain is no longer a serious hop producer, at least in world terms. How very sad. Now I just need to understand why so few hops are currently grown in Britain.

Here are the full figures:


UK hop production 1955 - 2009
Year Cwts. Year Cwts. Year Cwts.
1955 256,821 1975 156,954 1995 101,979
1956 184,170 1976 142,180 1996 88,108
1957 267,677 1977 184,414 1997 64,386
1958 302,640 1978 203,247 1998 59,194
1959 222,768 1979 191,909 1999 53,138
1960 248,195 1980 183,838 2000 50,377
1961 204,306 1981 291,109 2001 50,089
1962 266,812 1982 167,473 2002 37,858
1963 276,384 1983 155,497 2003 40,772
1964 252,398 1984 127,883 2004 31,147
1965 258,727 1985 99,814 2005 26,633
1966 228,923 1986 102,161 2006 28,995
1967 215,025 1987 96,755 2007 27,737
1968 199,025 1988 92,897 2008 28,431
1969 209,543 1989 90,182 2009 31,657
1970 226,076 1990 104,326
1971 175,404 1991 93,365
1972 205,649 1992 104,326
1973 200,841 1993 87,392
1974 162,853 1994 80,272
Sources:
"Statistical Handbook of the British Beer and Pub Association 2011", page 20.
1971 Brewers'Almanack, page 54
This is really turning into the Summer of Tables. Blame the bad weather. If it were sunnier, I'd be thinking more of Lager.