Sugar and Other Sweeteners

Gillian Eggleston, Benjamin Legendre,

and Mary An Godshall

Abstract
Sugar and starch are among the most abundant plant products available,
and large industries exist worldwide to extract and process them from
agricultural sources. The world production of sugar (sucrose from sugar-
cane and sugar beet) in 2015/2016 was approximately 176 million metric
tons, raw value, with 19.6% being beet sugar and 80.4% cane sugar
(Supplement to A first look at the 2016-17 sugar balance, 38, 2016).
The total production of world sugar has risen dramatically since 1971/
1972, when it was 71.7 million tons (FO Licht GmbH, World beet and
cane sugar production, 14–15, 2004). The proportion of beet sugar to cane
sugar has fallen steadily since about 1971, when it constituted 42.8% of
total sugar production (FO Licht GmbH, World production, consumption
and stocks of centrifugal sugar 1952–2000, 12–13, 2001). In 2015/2016,
37% (66.0 million metric tons) of world sugar production was exported,
with Brazil being the largest exporter (Supplement to A first look at the
2016-17 sugar balance, 38, 2016). China was the largest importer in 2015/
2016 followed closely by Indonesia, the European Union, then the USA
(Supplement to A first look at the 2016-17 sugar balance, 38, 2016).
Although, in some developed countries, there is currently an unhealthy
perception of sugar with associated campaigns to reduce sugar calories in
foods, world sugar consumption continues to climb. World sugar con-
sumption was 182 million metric tons, raw value in 2015/2016, due
mostly to Asia, Africa, and North and Central America (Supplement to

G. Eggleston (*)
USDA-ARS-Southern Regional Research Center,
New Orleans, LA 70124, USA
e-mail: gillian.eggleston@ars.usda.gov
B. Legendre
Audubon Sugar Institute, Louisiana State University,
St. Gabriel, LA 70776, USA
M.A. Godshall
Metairie, LA, USA

# Springer International Publishing AG 2017 933

J.A. Kent et al. (eds.), Handbook of Industrial Chemistry and Biotechnology,
DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-52287-6_15
934 G. Eggleston et al.

A first look at the 2016-17 sugar balance, 38, 2016). Per capita consump-
tion of sugar in 2015/2016 was greatest in South America (51.3 kg, raw
value) and lowest in Africa (17.8 kg, raw value).

Keywords
Sugar Manufacturing • Juice clarification • Evaporation • Sugar Refining
and Purification • Decolorizing and Packaging • Sugar Recovery from
Molasses • Sucrochemistry • Other Natural Sweeteners • Regulation and
Trade • Genetic Engineering

Introduction beets into white sugar, (b) considerably less reduc-

Sugar (sucrose) and starch (glucopolysaccharide)
are among the most abundant plant products avail-
able, and large industries exist worldwide to
extract and process them from agricultural
feedstocks. The world production of sugar
(sucrose from sugarcane and sugar beet) in 2015/
2016 was 172 million metric tons, raw value, with
19.6% being beet sugar and 80.4% cane sugar
[1]. The total production of world sugar has risen
dramatically since 1971/1972, when it was 71.7
million tons [2]. The proportion of beet sugar to
cane sugar has fallen steadily since about 1971,
when it constituted 42.8% of total sugar produc-
tion [3]. In 2015/2016, 37% (66.0 million metric
tons) of world sugar production was exported, with
Brazil being the largest exporter [1]. China was the
largest importer in 2015/2016 followed closely by
Indonesia, the European Union, then the USA
[1]. Although there is currently, in some developed
countries, an unhealthy perception of sugar with
campaigns to reduce sugar calories in foods, world
sugar consumption continues to climb. World
sugar consumption was 182 million metric tons,
raw value in 2015/2016, due mostly to Africa,
North and Central America, and particularly Asia
[1]. Per capita consumption of sugar in 2015/2016
was greatest in South America (51.3 kg, raw value)
and lowest in Africa (17.8 kg, raw value).
Although sugarcane is a grass and sugar beet a
tuberous root, the industrial processes for
extracting and producing sugar are similar. Three
major differences still exist: (a) the types of color
produced during beet processing compared to cane
processing, which allows the direct processing of
ing sugars in sugar beet than sugarcane, which
allows the processing pHs to be mostly alkaline
in beet factories, and (c) cane factories are essen-
tially self-sufficient in fuel because they can burn
bagasse (the cane plant fibrous by-product),
whereas the beet factory does not produce a con-
sumable by-product fuel.
Sugar is primarily used in the household and
industry for its nutritional value, sweetness, and
bulking ability. When used for such purposes in
industrialized nations, most of it is highly refined
or purified (commercial sugar has a very high
purity of >99.9%, making it one of the purest
organic substances manufactured on an industrial
scale), but considerable quantities are consumed
in less industrialized areas of the world as less
refined sugars. In India, crude sugar products
such as gur (also known as jaggery), khandsari,
and cane juice (beverage) are popular and repre-
sent as much as 29% of consumption [4]. Sugar is
used to a very limited extent in the production of
other chemicals, such as sucrose esters, and in the
form of by-product molasses, as a substrate for
fermentation processes and to produce alcohol,
both for consumption and power, usually mixed
with gasoline.
Starch is widely used in the textile and paper
industries, as well as for food. A major use of
starch is its hydrolytic conversion to glucose and
enzymatic conversion to fructose for use as a
sweetener in the food and beverage industries.
Technological developments and governmental
price support programs for the domestic (United
States) cane and beet sugar industries, began in
the mid-1970s, greatly magnified the importance
Sugar and Other Sweeteners
of starch as a source of nutritive sweeteners [5]. -
Starch-derived sweeteners have competed
directly and successfully with sugar in the United
States, but in recent years their consumption,
particularly high fructose corn syrup (HFCS),
has declined. The latter is mainly due to multiple
consumer issues, including high fructose content,
GMO, and links with obesity and medical
diseases such as diabetes [6].
The sugar industry is a mature industry and
thus typically characterized by steady, small
incremental improvements in technology and
production over the years, with subsequent
improvements across the process, from field
practices to new products [7, 8].
Sugar Manufacture
History [9]
The ancestry of sugarcane and its use as a food
have been traced to the island of New Guinea.
Around 8000 BC, the plant started on its migra-
tion from New Guinea to many areas of south-
eastern Asia, Indonesia, the Philippines, Malay,
Indochina, and eastern India, with humans most
likely acting as its main dispersal agent [10]. Sug-
arcane was first cultivated in Bengalese India as a
field crop and the juice manufactured into vari-
ous solid forms. A general knowledge of sugar
was prevalent throughout India by 500 BC
[11]. By the tenth century AD, sugar cultivation
and manufacturing had become important
industries in Persia and Egypt. The early Islamic
movement spread knowledge of the sugar indus-
try throughout the Mediterranean area. On the
second voyage of Columbus to America, in
1493, sugarcane was introduced in Santo
Domingo. It spread rapidly through the West
Indies and Central America. Cortez brought
cane to Mexico, and Pizarro introduced it in
Peru. By 1600, the sugar industry was the largest
industry in tropical America [12].
The modern sugar industry dates from the end
of the eighteenth century, when steam replaced
animal energy and made possible the develop-
ment of larger and more efficient production
935
units. The vacuum pan appeared in 1813, bag
filters in 1824, multiple-effect evaporators in
1846, filter presses in 1850, centrifugals in
1867, dryers in 1878, and packaging machines
in 1891 [13]. Cultivation of the sugar beet plant
and the manufacture of sugar from the beet
developed in the industrial nations of Europe
during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries.
In 1747, the German chemist, Marggraf,
established that sugar from beets was the same
as sugar from cane. His pupil, Achard, in 1799,
demonstrated that sugar can be commercially
prepared from beets. During the Napoleonic
wars, a short-lived beet sugar industry was
established in France [14]. Today, beet is the
major source of sugar in Europe.
Raw Sugar Production from Sugarcane
Traditionally, raw sugar is produced at the sugar-
cane factory and white, refined sugar is produced
at a refinery, often far removed from the source of
the raw sugar, and close to areas of consumption.
Figure 1 is a generalized flow scheme for the
manufacture of raw sugar. In summary, juice is
extracted from the harvested cane stalks, and the
juice is clarified, concentrated by vacuum evapo-
ration, crystallized, and centrifuged. The several
steps are described in the sections that follow.
Agriculture. The sugarcane is a large perennial
tropical grass belonging to the genus Saccharum.
Three basic species, S. officinarum, S. robustum,
and S. spontaneum, make up the sugarcane com-
plex, with a large number of varieties. Sugarcane
is propagated commercially by cuttings, each
cutting consisting of portions of the cane plant
having two or more buds, or “eyes.” The buds
sprout into shoots from which several other
shoots arise below the soil level to form a
clump of stalks known as a “stool.” From 12 to
20 months are required for the crop to mature
from new plantings and about 12 months for
ratoon crops (i.e., cane stalks arising from stools
that have been previously harvested). However,
in subtropical areas, i.e.,Louisiana, USA, sugar-
cane is harvested at 7–10 months because of
936 G. Eggleston et al.

imbibition water

Tandem Mill Juice Syrup

10-15ºBrix Multi-Stage ~65ºBrix Vacuum
Cane or Clarification Evaporation Crystallization
(whole-stalk Diffuser
or
billeted)

Raw
Bagasse Sugar

Centrifugation

Molasses

Fig. 1 Basic flow scheme of the manufacture of raw sugar in a sugarcane factory (from [15])

Fig. 2 Hand planting

freezing conditions during the harvest season.
Most of the field operations have been
mechanized, but planting is still done by hand
in some cane-producing areas (Fig. 2). Fields are
replanted after ~2 to 5 or more ratoons (cuttings
made from the original planting), depending on
the country.
As cane grows, its foliage is largely limited to
the upper one-third of the plant, as the lower
leaves senesce from shading as the stalk grows
taller. The cane stalk is round and jointed, and
grows to more than 3.05 m when mature (Fig. 3).
It is covered with a hard rind that varies in color
from light brown, green, yellowish green, purple,
or striped, depending on the variety. There is
usually a fine film of waxy material on the sur-
face of the rind, heavier in some varieties than
others. The stalk is divided into a series of
internodes, from 7.6 to 25.4 cm in length,
separated by nodes. The internodes contain the
Sugar and Other Sweeteners
Fig. 3 Sugarcane in the field
pithy material from which most of the
sucrose-containing cane juice is obtained. The
nodes, somewhat woody in nature, contain one
bud or “eye” on alternating sides, which sprout
when planted.
Breeding programs throughout the world
develop cane varieties that are suited to their
particular climatic conditions, to give the highest
yield, balanced with disease resistance and other
desirable agronomic traits. In Louisiana, for
example, cane varieties are bred for cold toler-
ance, among other traits, because of the short
growing season and the possibility of freezing
weather during the harvest. Varieties retain
vigor for 10–15 years and then need to be
replaced by new varieties. There is ongoing
research in genetic manipulation of sugarcane
for herbicide and disease resistance, but no com-
mercial varieties exist to date.
Harvesting. Sugarcane is cut by hand with
machete-type knives in a few producing areas.
In hand-cutting, the tops and leaves are removed,
and the cane is cut at ground level. In more
industrialized areas, cane is harvested by
machines. Two types of machine harvesting are
in widespread use: whole-stalk harvesters, also
known as soldier harvesters, and chopper
harvesters, also known as combine harvesters,
in which the cane is cut into smaller pieces,
known as billets, about 15.2–30.5 cm in length.
937
Combine harvesters exist as single-row (Fig. 4)
and two-row models (Fig. 5). The whole-stalk
cane may be transported immediately to the
factory where it is fed directly into the mill,
dumped in large cane yards for future processing,
or left in the field for future pickup. Billeted cane
should always be processed as soon as possible
because of the faster deterioration rate of the
juice quality caused by the shorter pieces. In
many areas, cane is burnt before harvesting to
help remove leaves and trash; however, burning
can enhance deterioration. The practice of burn-
ing has become less environmentally and socially
acceptable in recent years, and, in spite of many
efforts by the industry to control adverse effects,
the practice is in decline. The practice of
harvesting unburned cane is called green cane
harvesting, and it introduces a host of challenges
to the processor because of the heavier load of
impurities, such as color-producing molecules
and polysaccharides, that are expressed into the
juice [16, 17]. Cane may be transported to the
mill by railcars, trucks, trailers, carts, or even on
the back of animals.
A new development in harvest control for
better quality of cane and beet has been the use
of global positioning systems (GPS) based on
satellite navigation facilities [18].
Preparation of cane for milling. In many
countries, because of the presence of adhering
soil, rocks, and field trash, mechanically
harvested cane is washed before milling. In
some carefully controlled situations, when the
weather has been dry, washing can be eliminated.
Furthermore, due to the multitude of cut, exposed
ends in billeted cane, washing can cause losses of
sugar in excess of 4.5 kg per ton of cane and has,
therefore, been eliminated in many countries but
not all. Washing systems range from a simple
spraying with warm water on the carrier or cane
table, to an elaborate system consisting of
conveyors with water jets, stripping rolls, and
baths for the removal of stones and soil. In most
mills, a biocide is added to prevent bacterial
growth in the extracted juice of the sugarcane.
Mill sanitation is important to control bacterial
activity, which can result in direct sucrose loss as
938
Fig. 4 John Deere single-
row harvester
Fig. 5 Cameco two-row
harvester
bacteria consume the sugar, and in the produc-
tion of undesirable by-products, such as dextran,
mannitol, and lactic acid, which are discussed in
a later section.
The cane is prepared for milling by mechani-
cally knifing or shredding or a combination of the
two to chop the cane into smaller pieces. It is
important for the mill to pay attention to good
cane preparation, in as much as this is one of the
most important parameters affecting extraction
of the juice [19]. The Unigator, developed in
the late 1970s, combines the action of the
G. Eggleston et al.
chopper and the shredder into a single unit
[20]. The advantages gained are a greater
increase in juice extraction by the mills, an
increase in the grinding rate, and, in some
cases, a decrease in power consumption by the
milling operation. The preparation index (PI) is a
measure of how well the cane has been prepared
for juice extraction, and represents the percent-
age of cane plant cells that are ruptured by the
cane preparation equipment. It is measured as
Brix (percent soluble solids) in the ruptured
cells as a proportion of the total Brix in the cane.
Sugar and Other Sweeteners
Fig. 6 Tilby separator process (Courtesy Ander-Cane,
Inc., Naples, FL)
A novel approach to the preparation of sugar-
cane for the extraction of sugar was
demonstrated in a machine called a Tilby separa-
tor. Cane stalks, cut into 20.3–30.5-cm segments,
are fed into the separator, split in half, and
depithed by a depithing wheel, resulting in a
clean, sucrose-containing pith and rejected rind
segments (Fig. 6). This approach has not been
adopted on any large scale, but is used in some
tropical countries to produce edible cane juice
and also has some uses for research purposes.
Juice extraction. The prepared cane (knifed or
shredded) passes through a series of three or four
horizontal rollers (mills) arranged in a triangular
pattern, assuming three rollers with the top roll
rotating counterclockwise and the bottom two
939
rollers clockwise. The fourth roller, if installed,
is called a feed roll to assist in the efficient
extraction of juice by the three rollers. A series
of three- or four-roller mills, typically numbering
3–6, is called a tandem. The pressure on the top
roll is regulated by hydraulic rams and averages
about 50–80 tons/ft. of roll length. Below each
mill is a juice pan into which expressed juice
flows. The crusher and first mill extract 60–70%
of the cane juice, and the remaining mills remove
22–25%. The fibrous cane residue remaining
after juice is extracted is named bagasse. When
the fiber content of the bagasse reaches ~50%,
extraction by conventional milling approaches
zero. Because the juice remaining with the fiber
contains the same proportion of sucrose as the
original cane juice, the yield of sugar would be
substantially lowered if extraction were
terminated at this point. Consequently, a process
called “compound imbibition or maceration” is
used to reduce the sucrose in the bagasse by
repeated dilution and milling. In a five-mill tan-
dem, water is added ahead of the fifth mill, and
the expressed juice from that mill is brought back
ahead of the fourth mill. The expressed juice
from the fourth mill is recirculated to the third
mill and the third mill juice to the second mill. In
this way, the juice in the bagasse is always
diluted ahead of each mill.
The amount of imbibition applied at each mill
is approximately equal to the amount of water
applied to the last mill. The expressed juice that
goes to process is obtained from the first two
mills and is screened through perforated metal
screens to remove small bagasse particles that are
returned to the mill. Additional screening may be
provided by stationary, vibrating or rotating
metal screens.
The capacity of cane factories can vary from
as little as 1000 tons of cane per day (tcd) up to
60,000 tcd. Factories operate only during the
harvest, which may last for only 3 months or all
year long, depending on the location.
Diffusion. Diffusion represents an alternative
way to obtain juice from the cane, and is widely
practiced in South Africa. In diffusion, the cane
is carefully shredded to disrupt the cells for
940
maximum expression of juice. Diffusers have
capacities ranging from 200 to 500 t of cane per
hour (newer ones have capacities up to 875 t/h)
and may be used alone or in conjunction with
part of a milling tandem, the crusher, and the first
mill. Preparation of the cane for diffusion is
essential for good extraction. In the diffuser, the
shredded cane is countercurrently washed with
imbibition water at an average temperature of
~80  C. The high temperature helps to prevent
microbial growth in the cane juice, but also
increases the color of the juice. The last stage
of a diffuser, the bagasse exit, receives water that
gradually increases in sugar content as it pro-
ceeds to the final stage. Most of the sugar is
extracted in the first four or five stages by simple
displacement of sucrose from the ruptured cane
cells. In later stages, diffusion occurs in
unruptured cane cells. At the end of the diffusion
process, there are one or two mills to express
water from the discharged bagasse
[21]. Chainless diffusers were introduced by
Bosch Projects in 2006. The chainless diffuser
eliminates the need for chains to move the cane,
consisting instead of modules that move indepen-
dently, actuated by hydraulic cylinders [22].
Diffusers, compared to tandem milling, give
greater sucrose extraction (up to 98%
vs. 92–96% across a tandem mill), but with
greater impurities extracted [23]. Diffusion
provides a clearer juice (due to the filtering effect
of the bagasse mat) with lower starch and gums
but with ~25% higher color. Operation and main-
tenance of diffusers is typically simpler than for
tandem mills, but the initial capital cost is higher.
Also, diffusers have low power requirements
since low-pressure steam can be used for heating
in the diffuser and because of their typical
enclosed and insulated system which offers
good heat economy. During diffusion, less filter
cake is produced than for tandem mills because
its mat of shredded cane acts as a primary filter
[23, 24]. Cane diffusers have been installed in
sugarcane factories throughout the world and are
manufactured by a number of companies. Many
large sugarcane factories have diffusers, the
major exception being in the United States,
where only one factory has a diffuser.
G. Eggleston et al.
Biocides. Biocides, briefly mentioned above, are
chemical substances used to control microbial
contamination during industrial processing, and
are important in both sugar beet and sugarcane
processing. Biocides are usually a type of pesti-
cide (fungicide, algicide, insecticide, etc.), or an
antimicrobial (antibacterial, antibiotic, etc.), or
both. During sugarcane and sugar beet processing,
favorable conditions in temperature, juice pH,
water activity, sugar and nutrient content promote
microbial growth, resulting in sugar loss
[25]. Biocides reduce sugar loss by slowing
microbial growth (bacteriostatic) or killing the
microorganism (bactericidal). Examples of bacte-
ricidal compounds are sodium hypochlorite,
hydrogen peroxide, ozone, glutaraldehyde, and
quaternary ammonium compounds, i.e., ammo-
nium bisulfate and benzyl ammonium chloride
[26]. However, hydrogen peroxide and ozone
can cause high acidity and acid degradation of
sugars. Thus, they are usually added with lime.
Other compounds like dithiocarbamates, hops
acids, and rosin acids are classified as bacterio-
static, which limit growth. In the United States,
sugarcane and sugar beet factories are regulated
by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and
are allowed to use dicarbamates at < 4.1 ppm,
dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride at <
0.68 ppm, and glutaraldehyde < 250 ppm. Due
to regulations and availability, the biocides most
commonly use around the world are dithio-
carbamates, glutaraldehyde, and ammonium
bisulfite. Combinations of these biocides may act
synergistically [27]. The use of natural products as
antimicrobials has received attention in recent
years, and most natural products are unregulated.
Hop acids, rosin acids, and palm kernel fatty
acids, especially myristic acid, have shown prom-
ise [28, 29]. The recommended use of both
synthetics and natural biocides is mixtures and
rotations to prevent adaptation by
microorganisms. Natural biocides have the advan-
tage of being biodegradable, less toxic and can be
used in human food. Additionally, myristic acid is
precipitated by lime during clarification [29].
Dextran and mannitol. The major
microbiological losses in sugar processing are
Sugar and Other Sweeteners 941

Fig. 7 Production of
metabolites (degradation
products) after a sugar juice
was infected with
Leuconostoc mesenteroides
bacteria. From [30]

mostly caused by the common soil lactic acid

bacterium Leuconostoc mesenteroides, which
uses sucrose as a food source. L. mesenteroides
produces a long-chain polysaccharide, known as
dextran, and a sugar alcohol, mannitol, as the
major two degradation products [30] (Fig. 7).
Dextran is composed of linear α-1,4-glucose
with branches of α-1,6-glucose. In high enough
concentration, dextran causes viscous solutions
and associated difficulties in processing, along
with expensive sucrose losses. It also interferes
with the polarimetric analysis of sucrose
because, having a positive rotation, it is Fig. 8 Sugarcane starch in first expressed (crusher) juice.
interpreted as sucrose, resulting in false high Starch granules were stained with filtered iodine solution.
estimates of the sugar content in the cane or Starch granule sizes are 1–5 μm
beet juice. Various methods exist for dextran
measurement, all with some limitations. For Sugarcane starch occurs in the sugarcane crop as
example, the Haze dextran method is fast, sim- insoluble granules of irregular spherical shapes
ple, and inexpensive but is not specific to dextran that consist of amylose (linear) and amylopectin
and can give false-positive results [30, 31]; the (branched) glucopolysaccharides. Starch
antibody dextran test is fast and simple but granules (average size 2.8 μm) are extracted
expensive. For this reason, a factory enzymatic into factory juices by tandem milling or diffusion
mannitol method was developed by Eggleston (Fig. 8). In recent years, there has been a world-
[32] at the factory. Alternatively, mannitol can wide increase in sugarcane starch concentrations
be measured by sophisticated high performance mostly because of one or a combination of the
liquid chromatography (HPLC) if available at the following: (a) increased mechanical processing
factory [33], and even NIR [34]. Mannitol does of green sugarcane; (b) varying environmental
not degrade during sugar processing and can conditions; and (c) newer sugarcane varieties
negatively affect evaporation and with higher starch content [36]. Many refineries
crystallization [35]. around the world have now implemented a
942
penalty for high starch concentrations in raw
sugars. Insoluble starch that is not totally
solubilized during the factory clarification pro-
cess persists into syrups, massecuites, molasses,
raw sugars, and even refined sugars [36–
38]. Insoluble starch can interfere with viscosity
[36], filtration [39], and applications of
α-amylases to control starch. Most methods to
measure starch in the sugar industry only mea-
sure total starch. Only the USDA research
method [37] is able to measure total, soluble,
and insoluble starch.
Juice clarification. The sugarcane mixed juice
obtained from milling or diffusion is acidic
(pH around 5.4–5.7), turbid, and dark brown in
color. It contains 12–18% by weight sucrose
(depending on the maturity of the cane), in addi-
tion to soluble and insoluble impurities, such as
soil, protein, waxes, polysaccharides, insoluble
starch, fine bagasse (bagacillo), organic and phe-
nolic acids, soluble salts, and water insoluble
pigments. Sugarcane juice also contains from
0.5 to 3% reducing sugars (glucose and fructose
in approximately equal quantities). Juice
clarification or defecation is designed to remove
the maximum amount of turbid particles, and
usually employs heat, lime, and flocculants. The
degree of clarification has a great impact on
boiling house operations, sugar yield, and refin-
ing quality of raw sugar [40–42]. It can also
affect the juice filterability, evaporator scale
composition and amount, and sucrose
crystallization [40].
There are various lime clarification systems,
with hot and intermediate temperature liming the
most common. For all systems, hydrated lime in
the form of a slurry (milk of lime MOL) or lime
saccharate solution [43] is added to the juice to
raise the pH to ~7.3 for (a) neutralization of acids
to minimize sucrose losses from acid degradation
of sucrose, and (b) to react with inorganic phos-
phate present in the cane juice to form a calcium
phosphate flocs, and (c) to introduce positively
charged particles to the solution (Fig. 8). The
main sugarcane juice clarification systems are:
Cold lime clarification. Lime usually in the form
of milk of lime is added to the cold juice
G. Eggleston et al.
(35–40  C) in tanks with retention times up to
12 min [42]. The limed juice is then pumped
through heaters, then flash heated at ~102  C to
remove unwanted bubbles. Many modifications
to this process exist, especially with respect to
the heating of the juice. Fractional liming with
double heating involves liming the cold juice to
pH 6.4, heating, liming to ~pH 7.3, and then flash
heating and flocculant addition before sending
the juice to the clarifiers. Flocculants, typically
high molecular weight polyanionic acrylamide
flocculants, are added to agglomerate particles
and add weight to the calcium phosphate flocs.
Because there is no pre-heating of juice during
color lime clarification, the flocs are small and
settling is relatively slow and inefficient. Further-
more, dextran forms in the lime tanks, erratic pH,
color, and turbidity control occurs, and consider-
able sucrose losses can occur [41, 42] (Table 1).
Intermediate temperature lime clarification. This
is similar to cold lime clarification except that the
juice (only 30% needs to be heated to gain
benefits [41]) is pre-heated to 82–93  C before
liming in a lime tank (retention time up to
12 min), then flash heating, flocculant addition,
and settling in the clarification tank. Pre-heating
of the juice creates natural flocs through coagu-
lation of colloids. Heating is also an
excellent disinfectant and can remove up to
99.9% of microorganisms in juice [25]. The addi-
tion of lime then creates larger flocs with calcium
phosphate bridging. These larger flocs settle
faster and removed more turbid particles. How-
ever, as lime is added to the juice when it is warm
rather than hot and, because of relatively high
liming retention times, excess lime is still added
during intermediate lime clarification [41, 42]
(Table 1).
Hot lime clarification. This is the most com-
monly utilized clarification process in the USA
and worldwide. Like for intermediate tempera-
ture lime clarification, the juice is pre-heated, but
during hot liming the juice heating temperature is
 93  C, and all the juice is pre-heated. Lime is
added to the hot juice for only 0.5–1.0 min,
which reduces the amount of lime required. It
also has the added advantage of efficiently
Sugar and Other Sweeteners 943

Table 1 Comparison of the three main clarification processes used to purify sugarcane juice in a factory
Intermediate temperature lime
Cold lime clarification clarification Hot lime clarification
Advantages Disadvantages Advantages Disadvantages Advantages Disadvantages
Simple Color formation (~10%) Color removal good Extra juice Least sugar Extra juice
on liming heating losses heating
needed needed
Traditional High sucrose losses High turbidity Excessive Fast settling Requires high
removal (only 30% lime use temperature
of juice needs to be pH electrodes
pre-heated [41])
Least Excessive lime use Starch and dextran High turbidity
expensive removal on removal
operation pre-heating juices
(no heating)
Most erratic pH, color, Fast settling Some dextran
and turbidity control removal
Small flocs Largest flocs Very little or no
measurable
color formation
Least turbidity removal Clarified juice:
low color and
turbidity, with
good control
Clarified juice: high Less heater
color and turbidity scaling and
better heat
transfer
Dextran formation in
lime tanks
Mostly from [42]

controlling pH and sucrose losses. Lime can be
added before or after flash heating. The mecha-
nism for hot lime clarification of sugarcane juice
is illustrated in Fig. 9. The summarized
advantages and disadvantages of the three main
juice clarification processes are listed in Table 1.
Settling of flocs occurs in continuous closed-
tray clarification tanks. The settled mud after
juice clarification consists mostly of insoluble
lime salts, coagulated protein, and entrapped col-
loidal and suspended matter (approximately 5%
solid matter). The clarified juice leaving the
clarification tank is a clear yellow/brown liquid.
Entrained sugar is recovered from the mud by
means of rotary vacuum filters equipped with a
perforated metallic screen cloth. The turbid fil-
trate juice is returned to the clarification system,
and the press cake or filter mud is usually sent to
the fields as fertilizer. Since efficient juice
clarification depends on the formation of a stable
flocculent precipitate which settles rapidly, juices
low in natural phosphates (less than 300 ppm
P2O5 on juice solids) tend to be difficult to clarify.
Thus, phosphate may need to be added. Very fine
silty soil carried in from the field may also inter-
fere with clarification. The main changes in
clarifiers over the last 20 years have been the
development of the trayless SRI-type clarifier,
which can handle much higher throughputs than
the older-type clarifiers [44], as well as clarifiers
with turbulence reduction devices [45].
Syrup clarification. In some factories, a process
known as syrup clarification is used to produce a
higher-quality raw sugar, in particular lower
suspended solids and color, as well as better
yield. It is often used in the production of raw
sugars for direct consumption. Evaporator syrup
944 G. Eggleston et al.

Fig. 9 Schematic - -
cane juice - adsorbed colloidal
- - -- - - -
mechanism for hot lime particle -
- - - - - - particles, i.e.,
clarification of sugarcane - - proteins, polysaccharides
-
juice. Only 30% of the
Heat
juice needs to be heated to
gain enough flocs for coagulated -
-
- - -
- -- -- -
clarification [41]. A lime colloids
saccharate solution - - Heated Floc
-
provides a higher -
proportion of free calcium Lime + phosphate in juice
ions for the formation of calcium Ca2+
PO4
3- Ca2+ Ca2+
calcium phosphate flocs phosphate forms -
- - -
- - --
than a milk of lime
Ca2+ Ca2+ - - Calcium
suspension. From [43] -
Ca2+ Ca 2+ Ca2+ 3-
Ca2+ Phosphate
PO4
- Bridging
- - 2+ - - -
- -
- -- - -
Ca 2+ Ca Ca2+
- -- -
- - -
- Ca2+ - Ca 2+
- -
flocculant larger flocs
added

Precipitation in clarifier tank

is treated with phosphoric acid, lime, and a poly-
mer flocculent with a strong basic cationic center
(15–30 ppm). The floc contains air bubbles and
solid particles which are held together by the
flocculant [46]. Insoluble impurities floated to
the surface of the syrup and are removed by
skimming. Color removal (up to 10%) is not as
good as turbidity removal [46], but bagacillo
particle removal is efficient. The clarified syrup
goes to the vacuum pan for crystallization. Syrup
clarification reduces the color and turbidity of the
sugar produced, and can also be used in conjunc-
tion with sulfitation to produce an off-white,
edible sugar [47].
Sulfitation. Sulfitation (alternate spelling,
sulphitation) is the practice of adding sulfur diox-
ide (SO2), a bleaching gas, to cane juice and/or
syrup for the purpose of color control. In many
parts of the world, particularly developing
countries, sulfur dioxide is used to process cane
juice into a semi-refined white sugar, known as
plantation sugar or mill white sugar, used for
domestic consumption (see the section “Direct
Consumption Sugars”). Sulfitation is not used in
US sugarcane factories because high sulfite in
raw sugar is considered carcinogenic. Moreover,
sulfitation is not generally used in the manufac-
ture of raw sugar which is produced for export to
refineries. Sulfur dioxide gas is mostly produced
by burning (363  C) elemental sulfur in a fur-
nace. Alternatively, liquid anhydrous SO2 can be
used and eliminates the need for a furnace. Fur-
thermore, the use of liquid SO2 has been shown
to have advantages over the gas, especially in a
significant reduction in gas consumption (up to
69%) and a better quality of product [48]. Typi-
cally, lime (about 0.2% on juice) is added to
reduce acid degradation reactions, with the sul-
fite ion being stable between pH 7.8 and 8.7
[49, 50]. Many of the complex and little under-
stood reactions that produce color in cane juice
are inhibited by the presence of SO2 gas. For
example, enzymes responsible for the enzymatic
browning reaction are inhibited, and reducing
sugars (glucose and fructose) are blocked by
sulfur addition at the aldehyde group and cannot
react with amino acids to form browning
polymers in the Maillard reaction. The sulfitation
effect is temporary, and is better at suppressing
color formation than reducing it [51].
Double sulfitation is practiced in many mills
in India and China. In this process, a second
dosage of sulfite and lime is added to the
Sugar and Other Sweeteners
evaporator syrup at a solids content of 55–65%
[48]. Double sulfitation provides a better quality
white sugar.
There are many variations for the addition of
SO2 to juice, based on temperature, order of addi-
tion, and pH levels. These include liming first,
sulfiting first, simultaneous addition of lime and
sulfite, and fractional procedures, as well as
sulfiting cold or hot or stepwise heating of juice.
The advantage of using SO2 is a much lower color
in the produced sugar. Disadvantages include
increased scaling problems in the evaporators,
high sulfite content in the final product, higher
sugar loss due to lower pH, and secondary color
formation (color return) on storage. Overall, there
has been a trend to decrease the use of SO2 in the
cane sugar industry in favor of alternative color
control methods, such as reducing the amount of
trash (leaves and tops processed), polyaluminum
coagulants, hydrogen peroxide, and powdered
activated carbon.
Evaporation. The clarified juice (about 85%
water) is pumped to evaporators where it is
concentrated to a syrup containing about 65%
soluble solids. Evaporation is undertaken in
multiple-effect evaporators to achieve maximum
steam economy. Each effect is arranged in series
and operated so that each succeeding one operates
under a higher vacuum (lower pressure). This
arrangement allows the juice to be drawn from
one vessel to the next and permits it to boil at
progressively lower temperatures. The
concentrated juice (final evaporator syrup) is
removed from the last effect by a pump. Triple-,
quadruple-, and quintuple-effect evaporators are
used, occurring in some factories in parallel, with
the quadruple-effect type plus one to two
pre-evaporators being a common configuration.
In a four-effect (quadruple) evaporator, 1 lb. of
steam evaporates 4 lb. of water.
Several types of evaporators exist [52]. The
older, more traditional, evaporators are the
Roberts and the Kestner, both rising film, tubular
evaporators. The Roberts, first introduced in the
1800s, is known as a short tube, natural circula-
tion, vertical tube evaporator. The tubes, inside
which the evaporation takes place, are in the
945
range of 1.5–3 m in length. The Kestner evapo-
rator consists of numerous long vertical tubes,
6–7.5 m long, inside a cylindrical shell. In both,
the juice to be concentrated is fed to the bottom
of the tubes and heated, causing the juice to boil
and rise through the tubes. At the top,
concentrated juice and vapor are separated in
separators. The Kestner evaporator has a short
residence time and a high heat transfer coeffi-
cient, but is more subject to scale deposits.
The Roberts evaporator does not have a juice/
vapor separator.
Newer types of evaporators are the falling film
tubular evaporator and the plate evaporator, either
rising film or falling film configuration. The falling
film tubular evaporators have long tubes, like the
Kestner, but the juice is fed at the top and flows
down the tube wall as a thin film, resulting in higher
heat transfer coefficients and reduced contact
times. However, the tubes require feeding equal
quantities of juice and must be kept wet at all times,
as even a short time without adequate wetting can
lead to severe fouling. Advances and innovations
in evaporation are driven by the need for energy
efficiency and to improve heat transfer
coefficients. The goal in evaporation is to move
the liquid through as quickly as possible at the
highest temperature without causing degradation
of the sucrose. The newest of the evaporators is the
falling film plate evaporator (e.g., Balcke–Dür,
Niro, Inc., GEA Ecoflex GmbH), the first one
being installed in 1992. Recently, technology has
become available that allows the retrofitting of
existing Robert evaporators with falling film plate
packs and some peripheral equipment, allowing
the total steam demand of a cane sugar factory to
be decreased by almost 30% on cane [53]. Plate
evaporators are more common in the beet industry.
Evaporator scaling. A severe problem in cane
sugar processing is the deposition of scale on
the evaporator tubes or plates. Scale deposits
consist of calcium and silicate salts, enmeshed
in a matrix of organic material that can accumu-
late very rapidly, causing a severe drop-off in
heat transfer and efficiency of evaporation
[54, 55]. Cane factories are forced to clean their
evaporators on the order of every 10–15 days,
946
using mixtures of acid and alkali and mechanical
cleaning. Various anti-scalants are available,
with some, though not a great deal, of efficacy.
Evaporator scaling is a problem in cane sugar
refining and beet sugar production as well, but
not to the extent that it is in raw sugar production.
Good control of clarification will help to mini-
mize evaporator scale.
Crystallization. The final evaporator syrup is
pumped to a vacuum pan, in which it is
evaporated to supersaturation to cause sugar
crystallization. The vacuum pan is a single-effect
evaporator designed to handle viscous materials.
It is a vertical cylinder with its bottom designed
to allow easy removal of the crystallized mass.
The heating elements used in vacuum pans either
are short, large-diameter vertical tubes (calandria
pans) or coil around the inner surface of the
truncated cone of the pan (coil pans). A typical
vacuum pan, with a “catchall” or entrainment
separator for separating syrup from vapors,
measures approximately 7.6 m in height and
4.6 m in diameter. The working capacity is
about 28.3 m3 of massecuite (mixture of crystals
and syrup or mother liquor). The shape of the pan
and the positioning of the heating elements
within the pan are important design factors in
maintaining good circulation of the massecuite.
For example, floating calandrias (calandria not
attached to the shell of the pan), horizontal pans,
and pans having mechanical circulators are used.
The process of crystallization is called boiling or
pan boiling in the industry.
The move toward continuous processing has
resulted in the development of continuous vac-
uum pans, low-grade continuous pan boiling is
well established [56], and raw sugar boiling with
continuous pans is increasing as well. The
benefits of continuous pan boiling include con-
trol simplicity, improved product quality, low
product losses, steam savings, steadier demand,
and energy savings [57]. Most continuous pans
are a variation of the original 1931 Werkspoor
patent, of a horizontal cylindrical pan divided by
8–18 stationary partitions or compartments, each
heated by steam. Continuous vacuum pans are
used in both the cane and beet sugar industries.
G. Eggleston et al.
It should be noted that batch pans are still
required for the production of high-quality
refined sugar. One version of the continuous vac-
uum pan is a horizontal cylinder with
compartments in its lower part. The pan is
provided with an additional evaporator called
the concentrator, where the density of the syrup
is raised to 78–80 Brix (% dissolved refractomet-
ric or soluble solids).
Seed is added in the first compartment, and
the resulting massecuite moves progressively
through the compartments of the pan. Additional
syrup is added to each compartment to control
the fluidity of the massecuite. Approximately
20% of the syrup is introduced at the concentra-
tor, and 80% of the syrup is fed to the various
compartments through special feed headers.
The crystallization of sucrose in vacuum pans
is called “sugar boiling” and each boiling is
termed a “strike.” Because a single crystalliza-
tion does not recover all the sucrose from the
syrup, mother liquor from a strike is recycled
for recovery of additional sugar. Various crystal-
lization schemes exist to suit the purity of the
incoming syrup and quality of the raw sugar
produced. The four major crystallization
schemes are: (a) Two-boiling scheme,
(b) Three-boiling scheme, (c) Double magma
scheme, and (d) VHP (very high pol) scheme.
The choice of boiling scheme affects both the
total massecuite flows and energy required for
crystallization. A three-boiling system is still the
most popular. Practically, rigid adherence to a
crystallization scheme all season is rarely possi-
ble, and some flexibility is needed to cope with
variations in syrup quality and purity. In general,
overheating and recirculation of impurities cause
color formation and enhance color transfer to the
crystals. The strikes are designated by letters.
Thus, the first, highest purity, strike is the A
boiling, and the products of the A massecuite
after centrifugation are A sugar and A molasses.
The second is B followed by C. The boiling
schemes are based on “purity,” the amount of
sucrose remaining in solution, and usually are
expressed as the ratio of the polarization value
to the total solids as measured by a Brix refrac-
tometer. The differences among the four major
Sugar and Other Sweeteners 947

Table 2 Differences among the major sugar crystallization boiling schemes

Three-boiling
Two-boiling scheme scheme Double Magma CBA scheme VHP scheme
Raw sugar Relatively low purity A 98–99  Z 99.3  Z 99.3–99.5  Z
purity sugar A & B sugars A Sugar A sugar
ICUMSA >1800 >700–1100 ~1100–1800
color at pH 7
Major Simple Least amount One grade sugar of high quality Highest quality of
advantage of plant space sugar; lowest
purity C-molasses
Major High color raw sugars Careful control Largest volume of massecuite Requires most
disadvantage of purities steam
needed
General Better suited to low Higher color than VHP scheme, Requires most
considerations purity <82% syrups, i.e., because of the presence of equipment
after a sugarcane freeze C-sugar nucleus in the A sugar
From [46]

crystallization boiling schemes are summarized
in Table 2.
The A and B massecuites, after being
discharged from a vacuum pan, are sent to
centrifugals for separation. The A and B sugars
are combined to become commercial raw sugar,
the principal product of a cane sugar factory. The
C massecuite is a low-purity, highly viscous
material that is not immediately sent to the
centrifugals because of the large amount of
recoverable sucrose remaining in solution.
Instead, it is placed in crystallizers, U-shaped
horizontal containers equipped with coils
attached to a hollow rotating shaft through
which water circulates. The massecuite remains
in the crystallizer from 1 to 4 days to allow
additional crystallization to take place. Centrifu-
gation of the C massecuite yields a final molasses
(blackstrap molasses) and a C sugar that is used
for seeding the A and B boilings.
Centrifugation. Massecuite from the vacuum
pans is sent to centrifugal machines in which
the crystals are separated from the mother liquor.
A centrifugal consists of a cylindrical, perforated
basket lined with a screen of perforated sheet
metal. The basket, enclosed in a metal casing, is
mounted on a vertical shaft that rotates the bas-
ket, imparting centrifugal force to the
massecuite. In a batch centrifugal, hot
massecuite is fed into the basket through a short
chute from the holding vessel. As the basket
rotates, the massecuite forms a vertical layer on
the screen lining. When the machine reaches
operating speed (1000–1800 rpm), the syrup
flows through the perforations lining the basket
and is removed through an outlet at the bottom of
the casing. The sugar on the lining is washed with
a spray of water to decrease the amount of molas-
ses adhering to the crystals. The basket continues
to rotate until the sugar is fairly dry, at which
time the machine is switched off and brakes
applied. The sugar is discharged by an
automatic plow.
In continuous centrifugals, the machines do
not stop, but continue in motion while receiving
fresh supplies of massecuites. The rate of feed
must be carefully regulated to obtain the opti-
mum separation of molasses from crystals, while
at the same time not abrading or breaking too
many crystals.
Raw sugar. The final product of the mill is raw
sugar, about 98.0–99.5% purity, a bulk commod-
ity shipped around the world to be refined by
importing countries. All raw sugar produced in
the United States is refined within the United
States; none is shipped offshore. The quality of
raw sugar is determined by its polarization (i.e.,
purity), color, moisture, ash, dextran, starch,
948
invert (i.e., glucose and fructose content), crystal
uniformity, and proportion of color on the crystal
surface. These parameters determine the com-
mercial price of raw sugar.
Control. Factory control is based on temperature,
pH, and purity (polarization). Cane is tested by
various means as it comes to the factory to deter-
mine its characteristics and to determine the
amount to pay the grower. Control of microbial
infection, discussed above, is important. If there
is a problem with dextran, dextranase enzyme
can be added to mitigate its negative effects
[58]. The optimal application of dextranase is to
add concentrated dextranase to juice at ~49  C,
where >84% hydrolysis of dextran can be
achieved [58]. Although adding dextranase to
syrup can break down some dextran, it is consid-
erably more expensive than adding to juice. It is
also important that factories measure the activity
of the dextranase to be added as this can vary
widely, and a factory method is available
[58]. The starch content of juice from immature
sugarcane, as well as certain varieties of sugar-
cane, can be significant (e.g., in Louisiana and
South Africa). α-amylase enzyme can be added
to control both insoluble and soluble starch
forms. If not controlled, starch, especially insol-
uble starch, can cause severe viscosity problems.
If intermediate temperature (IT) stable amylase
(sourced from Bacillus subtilis) is added, then the
best combination is adding it simultaneously to
the clarification tank, next-to-the-last evaporator,
and last evaporator [59]. If high temperature
(HT) stable amylase (sourced from Bacillus
licheniformis) is added, then it may cause
unwanted carryover (residual) amylase in the
raw sugar. To overcome this, HT amylase should
only be added in the clarification tank and subse-
quently treated with powdered activated carbon,
at the factory or refinery, to remove the residual
amylase [60]. Recently, a new HT amylase was
developed for the sugar industry [61] that
completely denatures in the clarification tank
after starch is hydrolyzed, and would not require
the PAC treatment.
G. Eggleston et al.
Molasses exhaustion. Molasses contains a signif-
icant amount of sucrose and its maximum
exhaustibility (removal of sucrose) has always
been a priority for the sugar industry since the
largest loss of sugar occurs in molasses. Well-
exhausted cane molasses contains about 33–35%
sucrose. Exhaustion depends on the amount of
sucrose in solution, which in turn is largely
affected by the amount of water. Many factors
contribute to poorly exhausted molasses, besides
inefficiency of process, low water amount, and
viscosity, and these include the impurities pres-
ent in the cane juice. Many of these impurities,
such as polysaccharides, ash components, and
organic acids, are melassigenic (i.e., they
increase the solubility of sucrose and loss of
sugar in molasses), making sucrose more difficult
to crystallize and, therefore, going preferentially
into the molasses [62]. The non-sucrose/water
ratio (qns/w) is useful in gauging molasses
exhaustion since it is highly correlated with vis-
cosity [46]. Target purity is typically the lowest
molasses purity achievable in a laboratory or the
target realistically achievable in a factory. The
target purity difference (TPD) is the difference
between actual molasses purity and the target
purity, with a low TPD indicating good molasses
exhaustion. All target purity equations take
reducing sugars and ash effects into account in
the ratio of reducing sugars/ash.
Crystal Quality
Sucrose forms anhydrous monoclinic crystals of
the sphenoidic class [63]. In appearance, the
ideal sugar crystal is a slightly asymmetrical
square with 8–14 faces or planes (Fig. 10).
Certain impurities in the mother liquor can affect
the growth of the sugar crystal and change its
morphology. Figure 11 shows the elongating
effect (along the C-axis) that dextran and
associated oligosaccharides have on the crystal
shape. Sucrose also can form twinned crystals.
Figure 12 shows refined sugar crystals.
Sugar and Other Sweeteners
Fig. 10 Plantation sugar
crystals, showing the ideal
shape of sugar crystals
Fig. 11 Raw sugar crystals elongated along the C-axis in
the presence of dextran and/or oligosaccharides
Bagasse
Bagasse is the fibrous fraction of the sugarcane
stalk that remains after juice extraction. When
discharged from the milling tandem, bagasse
contains approximately 50% by weight of water.
The average fuel value of ash-free dry bagasse is
8300 BTU/lb. (gross calorific value 19,400 kJ/kg
dry, ash free). It is a valuable by-product because
it is used to cogenerate steam and electricity for
running the factory [64], making cane factories
essentially energy-sufficient. Some countries’
sugar industries, e.g., Brazil, Mauritius, India,
Australia, Columbia, and Guatemala, operate
large-scale cogeneration of electricity and sell
the surplus electricity to the local or national
grid [65]. In recent years, there have been major
949
Fig. 12 Refined sugar crystals
technological improvements leading to higher
efficiency cogeneration of electricity from
bagasse, in particular the use of new high-
pressure boilers, i.e., up to 100 bar (producing
superheated steam at 525  C) [66]. In Brazil,
during the 2009/2010 harvesting season, the
total electricity produced from sugarcane bagasse
was 20,031 GWh and that value may rise up to
68,730 GWh in the next 9 years, as long as all
factories install 99 bar boilers and 1.04 billion
tons of sugarcane is produced [66]. Excess
bagasse can be used to produce paperboard and
wallboard and as a chemical feedstock for con-
version to furfural, lignocellulosic ethanol and
other biofuels and syngas from Fischer–Tropsch
950
(FT) processes [65]. Another option for excess
bagasse and sugarcane trash (leaves and tops
removed in the field or at the factory) is thermo-
chemical conversion to biochars. Biochars can be
applied to soils as a soil amendment and improve
soil fertility. Other applications of biochar are as a
fuel, adsorbent, and for carbon sequestration [65].
Direct Consumption Sugar
at a Sugarcane Factory
Many sugarcane factories in tropical countries pro-
duce white sugar by using combinations of
sulfitation, syrup clarification, or carbonation.
These edible sugars are known as mill white sugar
or plantation white sugar. When compared to
refined sugar, mill sugars are higher in color, ash,
moisture, and reducing sugars. Because sulfur is
used in production, the finished product may have
sulfite in it. In the USA, sulfur is not used due to
carcinogenic concerns of sulfur/sulfite in raw sugar.
Talodura. The Talodura process, used in syrup
clarification, consists of using a combination of
sulfite clarification followed by subsequent
clarification of the evaporated liquor with lime
and phosphoric acid to which a flocculant is
added. It has led to improvements in the color
of the mill white sugar, boiling house recovery,
and chemical costs per ton of sugar [67].
Blanco Directo. Blanco Directo is a trademark of
Tate & Lyle Process Technology. The process
and similar processes (as described above) are
used at sugarcane factories to produce a high-
grade white sugar suitable for use in food and
beverages. This product is economically compet-
itive with imported refined sugars. Although the
term “Blanco Directo” is the trade name for one
particular process, it appears to be used some-
what generically for similar processes.
Carbonation. In this process, the mixed juice
from the tandem mill is heated, clarified with
lime, and evaporated to about 35 Brix. The
syrup is relimed and treated with carbon dioxide,
filtered, recarbonated, reheated, and refiltered.
After carbonation, the syrup is given a double
G. Eggleston et al.
sulfur treatment and filtered. The resulting
syrup is subjected to a three- or four-boiling
system with the A and B sugars used as the
white sugar product.
Edible Products from the Sugarcane
Factory
Raw sugar is not considered food-grade in the
United States, whereas in many other countries it
is. There has been a growing trend to produce
food-grade sugar at the cane factory (see discus-
sion about plantation white sugar above). The
growing societal interest in “unrefined” or “natu-
ral” products has led to a huge growth industry
for products from sugar factories [68]. These
include such products as Demerara, Barbados,
Muscovado, and Turbinado sugar, which are var-
ious grades of brown/raw sugar. Turbinado sugar
is raw sugar that has been washed (centrifuged in
the presence of steam) to remove some of the
colored molasses coating on the surface of the
crystal, resulting in a light golden sugar with
large crystals and a mild cane taste. In India
and Southeast Asia, Jaggery is produced by sim-
ply boiling down sugarcane juice to the point
where it will harden [11]. A similar product is
made in Latin America named Panela.
Organic sugar. The largest area of growth for
edible mill products is organic sugar. This sector
is growing at 25–30% per year [69]. There are
many regulations and restrictions in place for a
factory to be certified to produce organic sugar;
these deal with land preparation and the use of
herbicides, fertilizers, and chemicals. The yields
from organic production are decreased 30–60%
from conventional sugar production, resulting in
a product which is about four times more expen-
sive than refined sugar. Brazil is the largest pro-
ducer of organic sugar.
New Technology
In recent years, a number of new technologies
have been explored for the production of raw
sugar, refined sugar, and beet sugar, including
Sugar and Other Sweeteners
ultra- and membrane filtration, ion exchange,
powdered activated carbon, juice softening (the
use of weakly cationic resin to remove calcium
[70]), and chromatographic methods, which are,
in the words of one author, “beginning to blur the
demarcation of steps like clarification”
[71]. These techniques are not limited to raw
sugar production but are also being explored in
the beet industry, although less so in cane refin-
ing. The goals in the use of these technologies are
to reduce or eliminate the use of lime and/or
sulfur, to produce a better quality sugar, or to
produce refined sugar directly from cane juice
at the factory.
Membrane filtration technology has not yet
proven economically feasible in the industry,
but continued research may eventually lead to
viable commercial products [72, 73]. Carousel
chromatographic systems, such as the continuous
ion-exchange separation (ISEP) and continuous
chromatographic separation (CSEP) systems,
offer some promise in the sugar industry. They
have been used successfully in other industries,
and may be tailored to obtain a number of differ-
ent fractions or products [74, 75].
water
Mingler
Raw Melter
and
Sugar Affination
washed
raw
sugar
White, Refined
Sugar
Molasses
Fig. 13 General flow diagram of sugar refining (from [15])
951
Cane Sugar Refining
The raw sugar produced at the factory is light
brown in color and contains ~98.0–99.3%
sucrose. As described above, in most instances
this product is not considered an edible food, but
rather is a bulk commodity. The process of
purifying raw sugar to make a white sugar is
called refining, and the sugar produced is called
refined sugar. Refining traditionally involves
several unit stages, as shown in Fig. 13. Unlike
the factory, the refinery streams have a high Brix
content of ~65. Because of the increased quality
of the raw sugar produced in some areas, not all
the stages are used, and various combinations of
processes are used at different refineries.
Affination and Melting
The first step in refining raw sugar is affination
(or washing), and consists of removing the film
of molasses around the crystal, which contains a
large portion of the impurities in the sugar. The
Clarification
Decolorization
filtration
Vacuum
Centrifugation Crystallization
952
raw sugar is mixed with saturated sugar syrup
(72–75 Brix) at ~50  C in a U-shaped trough
called a mingler. Saturated syrup is used to
avoid dissolving the raw sugar. The mingler has
a rotating agitator to maintain maximum contact
between the sugar and the syrup. The mixture is
centrifuged to separate the crystals from the
syrup, and the crystals are then washed with a
small spray of hot water or steam. The “washed”
or “affined” sugar is “melted” or dissolved in
water to a density of 55–65 Brix. Potable water,
steam condensate, and “sweet waters” are used
for dissolution. The liquor from the melter is
screened to remove insoluble matter, such as
sand, stones, wood, cane fibers, and lint. Screen-
ing is done by vibrating screens, cyclonic
separators, or centrifugal screens.
Today, most refiners have eliminated the
affination stage by buying very high purity
(VHP), very very high purity (VVHP), or very
low color (VLC) raw sugar, in effect, requiring
the raw sugar factory manufacture high purity
raw sugars.
Purification
The melted liquor is subsequently purified by any
of several combinations that include clarification
and decolorization. During clarification, the
liquor is treated chemically to remove suspended
matter, colloids, and other turbid particles.
Clarified liquor is optically clear, but still highly
colored, thus it has to be subsequently
decolorized. Decolorization procedures include
treating the clarified liquor with various filtration
media, such as bone char, granular activated car-
bon (GAC), powdered activated carbon (PAC),
or ion-exchange resin, either alone or in some
combination. It is necessary to clarify the liquor
before the decolorization process because the
particulate impurities will quickly “blind” or
foul the filtration material and render it useless.
Clarification. All clarification treatments include
the addition of lime. Lime increases the pH,
stabilizing the sucrose against acid hydrolysis at
high temperatures, and the calcium forms
G. Eggleston et al.
insoluble calcium phosphate precipitates with
many of the impurities in the raw liquor. Simple
liming is rarely used in refining. The important
clarification processes are phosphatation and
carbonatation, which include combinations of
lime with either phosphoric acid or carbon
dioxide.
Phosphatation. In phosphatation, the screened
liquor is heated to 60–70  C and mixed with
phosphoric acid (0.005–0.025% P2O5 on solids).
The mixture is immediately limed to pH ~8.0,
aerated with compressed air, and sent to a clari-
fier, a tank equipped with heating coils. The
liquor enters the clarifier at one end and is heated
to ~88  C while flowing to the outlet at the
opposite end. A flocculent precipitate of calcium
phosphate forms, reacting with or entrapping
colloids, organic acids, some coloring matter,
and suspended particles. Air flotation is used to
separate the precipitate from the liquor, causing
it to rise to the top of the clarifier as a blanket of
scum, which is skimmed off by moving paddles.
(This process is sometimes known as
phosflotation.) Approximately 25–30% of the
color is removed in this process. In general,
phosphatation is not sensitive to starch, but
recently there have been concerns about insolu-
ble starch creating unwanted channels in
ion-exchange resins and interfering with other
refinery decolorization processes [Jack
Thompson, LSR Refinery, personal
communication].
Talofloc process (color precipitation). The addi-
tion of flocculants and surfactants has greatly
improved the simple phosphatation process. The
Talofloc process (developed by Tate & Lyle)
consists of adding a cationic surfactant (Talofloc)
to the raw melt liquor in concentrations ranging
from 0.02 to 0.07% on solids. This is followed by
the addition of lime and phosphoric acid and the
incorporation of air. Just before the liquor enters
the clarifying chamber, a polyacrylamide floccu-
lant (Taloflote) is added that induces aggregation
of the calcium phosphate precipitate, causing a
faster and more complete separation of the
impurities. As much as 60% of the color can be
Sugar and Other Sweeteners
removed by this process. Other similar additives
are commercially available.
Carbonatation. In carbonatation (sometimes also
known as carbonation), the melter liquor is
heated to ~60–80  C, limed to ~pH 10–11
(0.4–0.8% CaO on solids), gassed with carbon
dioxide, heated to ~85  C, and regassed until the
pH drops to ~8.5. Because of the two-stage gas-
sing, carbonatation requires two clarifiers, a pri-
mary and a secondary. Washed flue gases are the
source of carbon dioxide. The carbonated liquor
resides in tanks called saturators for about 3 h
to allow growth of the calcium carbonate.
The calcium carbonate precipitate that forms
entraps some colored matter, colloids, organic
acids, and inorganic compounds. The precipitate,
known as mud, is removed by filtration, such as
Sweetland presses. Carbonatation alone achieves
about 50% decolorization and, with the
addition of polycationic additives, can achieve
as much as 70% [76]. Carbonatation, however,
is very sensitive to soluble and insoluble starch
contents.
There are continuing discussions about the
merits of one type of clarification over the
other, i.e., phosphatation vs. carbonatation. In
summary, the consensus appears to be that
carbonatation reliably removes more color and
colloidal material and is more flexible in
handling different types of raw sugar, but is
more expensive to operate, generates more
waste, is very sensitive to starch, and may have
slightly higher levels of sucrose loss to molasses
than phosphatation. Environmental restrictions
on disposal of phosphate-containing waste are a
consideration for phosphatation refineries.
Filtration. The liquor from phosphatation and
carbonatation contains small amounts of finely
dispersed particulate matter that require filtration
for removal. The filtration process is similar for
both types of clarified liquor. A precoat of filter
aid (diatomaceous earth or perlite) is first depos-
ited on the filter surfaces of the press. Additional
filter aid is added to phosphate-clarified liquors
to improve press runs. Liquor at 70–85  C is fed
to the press at a pressure of about 60 psi until the
953
flow rate drops below a predetermined level,
ending the filtration cycle. The calcium carbon-
ate particles in carbonated liquor act as a fairly
good filter aid medium, as long as the particles
are developed to optimum size during
carbonatation. Large quantities of
polysaccharides (starch, dextran, and others) in
the melt liquor can restrict the growth of calcium
carbonate, requiring the use of diatomaceous
earth. A filter cycle may last from 2 to 12 h
depending upon the quality of the feed liquor.
New developments. At least one refinery has, in
recent years, been able to omit all chemical
clarification by using only very high-purity,
low-color raw sugar. Clarification is accom-
plished by a two-stage coarse filtration, followed
by a finer filter-aid filtration. Again, this devel-
opment is possible only because of the high
quality of the incoming raw sugar.
Scums and muds. Both phosphatation and
carbonatation produce scums or muds that have
a moderate level of entrained sucrose, which
must be recovered or desweetened. Various
schemes exist for removing the sugar, such as
secondary clarification of phosphatation scums
and sluicing of carbonation muds with
dewatering on rotary vacuum filters.
Desweetening streams are, however, susceptible
to acid degradation of sucrose [77].
Decolorization
Filtered clarified liquor is a clear orange/brown
liquid having solids content between 55 and
65 Brix, pH of 6.7–7.2, and temperature between
65 and 85  C. The next stage of refining involves
removing this color to produce a clear, nearly
colorless solution from which white sugar can
be crystallized. There are basically two major
decolorizing processes at the refinery:
(a) chemical and (b) physical.
Chemical decolorization.
Chemical decolorization at the factory mainly
involves the use of oxidative decolorizers, espe-
cially sulfur dioxide, ozone, and hydrogen
954 G. Eggleston et al.

Table 3 Overall techno-economic comparison of four physical decolorization processes used in sugarcane refineries
[46, 89]
Parameters Bone Char GAC PAC Ion Exchange
Decolorization Low to Medium High Very High Medium
efficiency Also removes ash Does not remove all
colorants
Capital cost Very High High Low Medium to High
Operational cost Very High High Medium Medium
Operational Low Medium High Medium
flexibility pH drop—have to add
magnesite
Environmental Very High Very High Medium High
impact Kilns use energy and Kilns use energy and Solid waste Have to dispose brine
emit CO2; high sweet emit CO2; high sweet with BODb
water water
Other Affected by gums, etc. Affected by gums, etc. Removes odor, No pH drop. High ash
considerations Ash removed but Not affected by ash. insoluble starch, inhibits decolorization.
inhibits decolorization Difficult to automate and amylase Fouling possible
proteina
a
From [60]
b
BOD biological oxygen demand

peroxide. There has been an increasing trend in
the sugar industry to use such decolorizers but
with limited benefits. Oxidative decolorizers
have three main effects: (a) direct destruction of
colorants (bleaching effect), particularly low
molecular weight flavonoids and phenolic
compounds, (b) destruction of color precursors
to limit later color formation, and (c) increasing
the ionic character of colorants to improve color
removal by ion exchange. As long as the pH is
held at neutral or below during oxidation, there
should be no danger of destroying sugars
[78]. Sulfur dioxide (SO2) is most commonly
used in the factory, but is sometimes used in the
refinery in certain countries. Ozone (O3) is a
stronger oxidant than hydrogen peroxide (H2O2)
with a greater range of oxidation reactions. Davis
et al. [78] showed that ozone at 250 ppm can
decrease syrup color by 33%. However, ozone is
expensive to produce and Moodley et al. [79]
stated it was not cost-effective for syrup
decolorization.
Physical decolorization.
Bone char consists of sintered long bones of
cattle, and is composed of calcium hydroxyapa-
tite (80–85%) in a carbon matrix. Due to its
relatively low surface area (~100 m2/g) [80],
bone char only moderately remove colorants,
but a considerable amount of the ash components
are removed (Table 3). Some refineries in
Columbia use bone char for ash removal only.
Bone char (granular beads of 1–1.5 mm) is gen-
erally packed into cylindrical columns 6.1–7.6 m
high and about 3.1 m in diameter. Liquor flow
through bone char is about 1500 gal/h over
30–60 h. After washing, the spent carbonaceous
adsorbent is transferred to regenerating equip-
ment consisting of dryers, kilns, and coolers.
Bone char is regenerated at 540–600  C in a
controlled amount of air. After regeneration, the
adsorbent is returned to the system for a new
decolorizing cycle. The final consumption of
bone char is ~0.1–0.3% on melt [81].
Granular Activated Carbon (GAC) by itself
only removes color; it is usually treated with mag-
nesium oxide (magnesite) to buffer the sugar liquor
and may remove a small amount of ash. Compared
to bone char it has a much higher surface area
(800–2000 m2/g) and thus removes considerably
more color mostly via physical absorption onto it
by Van der Waal forces [81]. GAC (beads of
1–2 mm) is packed into either pulsed bet or fixed
bed columns. Liquor flow through GAC columns is
~3000 gal/h for 20–30 days. Like bone char, GAC
Sugar and Other Sweeteners
has to be reactivated in kilns outside of the column;
GAC is typically revivified at 950–980  C in a
limited oxygen and steam atmosphere (Table 2).
The final consumption of GAC is ~0.035–0.05%
on melt, and less is lost in the kiln compared to bone
char [81].
Powdered Activated Carbon (PAC) has an
extremely high surface area (up to 2000 mg2/g)
and is becoming more commonly used in
refineries. It is utilized by mixing it with clear
liquor in a tank for up to 20 min. PAC is added at
a dose of 400–1800 ppm often with body feed
(filter aid) of the same concentration [81]. The
hot, mixed slurry is then filtered through a pres-
sure filter or a plant and frame filter press; the
PAC and filter aid are removed from the filter
after completing the duty cycle (typically
5–10 h). The filter is desweetened by back-
flushing with hot water and, depending on the
type of filter employed, the cake can be disposed
of wet or dry [81]. PAC is highly efficient in
removing colorants (Table 3), particularly phe-
nolic and flavonoids, but has also been shown to
remove insoluble starch and residual amylase
protein [60] as well as odors.
Ion-Exchange Resins (IEX) absorb color and
change the composition of the ash. Since most
sugar colorants are anionic, strong base anionic
resins are utilized. Adsorption of sugar colorants
by IEX is governed by colorant molecular weight
and charge density, type of charge, pH and ionic
strength of the medium [81]. Typically, IEX
resins are utilized in a vessel, with another vessel
for regeneration. Ion-exchange resins are packed
into vessels 2.4–3.1 m high and 1.8–3.1 m in
diameter, holding between 2.8 and 8.5 m3 of
resin. Flow rates of hot (~85  C), filtered melt
are rapid (3000–4500 gal/h), and the cycle is
short (8–20 h). Regeneration is accomplished in
a vessel with a 10–15% salt solution at 45–60  C;
before regeneration occurs, the IEX is
desweetened by back-flushing with hot water to
remove any suspended matter. The chloride form
of a strong anionic resin decolorizes the liquor.
IEX resins can be either acrylic or styrenic in
composition. Acrylic resins have a higher capac-
ity for color removal, especially for high molec-
ular weight color bodies, and good resistance to
955
organic fouling. Styrenic resins, although having
less capacity, can remove the remaining small
molecular weight colorants. Because styrenic
resins will foul more easily, acrylic resins are
usually placed ahead of them to protect from
fouling, and they are used mainly for “polishing”
the fine liquor to remove the final traces of color.
Both types of resins have ion exchange as the
primary mechanism for color removal; styrene
resins also exhibit an adsorption mechanism for
color removal [82]. In recent years, ion-exchange
systems have made use of fractal technology to
improve flow and prevent excess pressure drop.
Compared to activated carbon, IEX resins are not
as good at removing phenolic/flavonoid
colorants [83].
An overall comparison of four physical decol-
orization procesess is listed in Table 3.
Crystallization
Decolorized liquor is a pale yellow liquid (Inter-
national Commission for Uniform Methods of
Sugar Analysis [ICUMSA] color 200–300) with
solids content of 55–65% (see section “Process
Control and Instrumentation” for further infor-
mation on ICUMSA). This liquor goes to
multiple-effect evaporators to be concentrated
to a solids content of ~72 Brix, and then pumped
to the “white pans” for crystallization. There are
four stages in the crystallization process:
(a) seeding or graining; (b) establishing the
seed; (c) growth of crystals; and
(d) concentration. Crystallization is governed
by the degree of supersaturation, which is the
state in which more solids are in a solution than
can be dissolved by water at a given temperature.
(The supersaturation coefficient is defined as the
mass fraction of sucrose in water divided by the
mass fraction of sucrose in water in a saturated
solution at a given temperature.) There are three
phases of supersaturation: [84]
1. The metastable phase—existing crystals grow
in size, but no new ones form.
2. The intermediate phase—existing crystals
continue to grow and new ones form.
956
3. The labile phase—crystals form spontane-
ously without the presence of others.
Sugar boiling for crystallization is undertaken
in the metastable and intermediate phase; below
the metastable zone, crystals dissolve and
inefficiencies result; above the intermediate
phase, uncontrolled “false grain” or extra, small,
and agglomerated crystals form, resulting in
poor-quality crystals. When the syrup is in the
metastable phase, it is “seeded”; that is, a
predetermined amount of very small crystals is
added, which act as nuclei for crystal growth. A
sufficient quantity of evaporated liquor is drawn
into the pan to cover the heating elements, and
water is evaporated from the syrup until its super-
saturation coefficient approaches 1.25. At this
point, the steam pressure is lowered, and seed
crystals are added. The seed consists of finely
pulverized sugar dispersed in isopropyl alcohol
or sugar liquor. This method is called shock
seeding because addition of the seed induces an
immediate formation of crystal nuclei throughout
the supersaturated syrup. The nuclei are grown to
a predetermined size or grain. Once the grain is
established, the crystals are grown to size by
maintaining supersaturation between 1.25 and
1.40 through control of the steam pressure, vac-
uum, and the feed rate of the evaporated liquor.
Adequate circulation during crystal growth is
important.
When the volume of the massecuite reaches
the maximum working capacity of the pan, the
syrup feed is shut off, and evaporation is allowed
to proceed until a thick massecuite is formed.
When the massecuite concentration is considered
“tight,” the steam and the vacuum are shut off,
and the massecuite is dropped into a holding tank
equipped with agitators, where it is kept in
motion until discharged into the centrifuges.
The boiling system in a refinery is straightfor-
ward. The first strike is boiled from evaporator
liquor; the second strike is boiled from the runoff
syrup of the first strike, continuing on to three or
four strikes. These strikes are blended to form the
final white sugar product. The runoff of the last
strike, which is quite high in color and ash, can be
used in a variety of ways: as syrup for affination, as
G. Eggleston et al.
syrup for remelt, or as syrup for producing brown
sugar, also called “soft” sugar in the industry.
Centrifuging. Refined sugar crystals are recov-
ered from the mother liquor by centrifuging the
massecuite in equipment similar to that used for
affining raw sugar. However, at this point, the
crystals are washed with a greater quantity of hot
water. The washed crystals are discharged into a
holding bin supplying a dryer.
Drying and conditioning. Sugar from the
centrifugals contains 1–2% moisture and is too
wet to be placed in storage or packaged. The wet
sugar is fed to drying equipment called
granulators, which are large rotating drums,
4.6–10.7 m long and 1.8–2.1 m in diameter,
inclined slightly for gravity discharge. Screw
conveyors, scrolls, vibratory “grasshoppers,” or
linear belts are used to transport wet sugar from
the centrifuge to the drier, where heated air is
blown through the dryer, concurrent with the
flow of the sugar. Sugar exiting the granulators
has a moisture content of about 0.03%.
Remelt Sugar
The sugar contained in affination syrup must be
recovered for economy, which is accomplished
by crystallizing the sugar in a vacuum pan. The
area of the refinery where various “low-grade
boilings” take place is called the remelt house.
The resulting sugar is “raw” in composition and
is returned to the refinery at the affination station,
hence it is “remelted.” The residual syrup from
the remelt station is known as refiners’
blackstrap, from which no further sugar can be
recovered. Various grades or streams of remelt
are produced, depending on the refinery.
Packaging and Storing Refined
Granulated Sugar
Sugar leaves the dryer at around 52–55  C and is
allowed to cool to about 45  C. Sugar leaving the
Sugar and Other Sweeteners
dryer still contains enough moisture to cause
problems with caking on storage, and the proper
bulk storage and conditioning of sugars in silos is
a widely discussed topic [85, 86]. One of the
most important considerations for refined sugar
is its ability to store well, without caking or
darkening in color.
Granulated sugar remains free flowing for a
longer period of time if it is “conditioned,” as
conditioning further reduces the moisture level,
which is necessary to prevent caking. Condition-
ing takes place in large vertical silos, with up to
three million pounds capacity. Conditioned
dehumidified air is percolated into the sugar
from the bottom of each silo. Residence times
in silos vary, from about 24 to 72 h. Proper
control of air flow, humidity of the air, and tem-
perature are essential for good conditioning.
Sugar leaves the silos with a moisture content
of 0.025% or less. Following conditioning, the
sugar is screened to meet the particle size
requirements of customers. Screened sugar is
then sent for packaging or for transport in bulk.
Sugar that is not immediately used is placed in
storage silos for periods that can be as long as
2 months. Sugar storage is another area where
problems with caking and solidification can
occur due to moisture migration, and newer
systems are beginning to appear where sugar in
storage is treated with a slow stream of
conditioned air.
Granulated sugar is packaged in 1, 5, 10, 25,
50, and 100 lb. bags, 2000 lb. sacks, as well as
cartons and heat seal packets. Other packaging
configurations are possible.
Specialty Sugars
The refined sugar is passed through sieves with a
specific holes size that determines the largest
grain in any given batch. Some sugars are also
sieved to remove smaller crystals [11]. Refineries
produce a number of specialty sugars and syrups
designed to meet the needs of customers. These
include sugars with various crystal sizes, pow-
dered sugars, brown sugars, and liquid
sugars [87].
957
Liquid sugars. Liquid sugars (sugar dissolved in
water) are economically important because food
manufacturers often prefer to use sugar in the
form of syrup because of the ease of handling a
liquid product. Liquid sugars are prepared by one
of two methods: dissolving refined sugar in water;
or further purification of in-process liquors by
ion-exchange treatment to remove minerals, and
further decolorization using bone char and
pulverized or granular carbon. Liquid sugar may
consist of (a) only sucrose, (b) as a mixture of
sucrose and invert sugar, or (c) as a blend with
various glucose syrups from starch hydrolysis.
Sucrose liquid sugars are usually distributed at a
67% sugar concentration, whereas invert sugar
and mixtures of invert and sucrose are distributed
at concentrations of 72–77% sugar. Partially
inverted sugar syrups are commercially prefera-
ble because of the higher solids content and
greater microbiological stability.
Partially inverted sugar syrups are made by
one of three hydrolytic methods: acid hydrolysis
with mineral acids (sulfuric or hydrochloric),
hydrolysis by cation ion-exchange resin, or
inversion by enzymes. Acid hydrolysis by min-
eral acids has the disadvantage that the resulting
syrups have a high ash content because the solu-
tion is neutralized with sodium or potassium
hydroxide. Enzymatic conversion has the disad-
vantage of being expensive and not very efficient
at the high temperature and densities of the
solutions being hydrolyzed. Cationic resin treat-
ment offers the best alternative, resulting in
nearly ash-free invert syrup. The most popular
invert syrup is a 50% mixture of sucrose and
invert [88].
Liquid brown syrups are also available,
known as refiners syrups, and can be adjusted in
color, flavor, ash level, and sucrose content
according to the specifications of the customer.
Brown or soft sugars. Brown sugars range in
color from light to dark brown. They have very
small crystals and high moisture content, ranging
from 0.5 to 3%. The combination of very small
crystals and high moisture gives the sugars the
“soft” appearance and texture. Brown/soft sugars
also contain higher ash, invert sugar, and an array
958
of compounds that contribute to the characteris-
tic flavors [89]. They are made in two ways. The
traditional method is to boil them from a
low-purity process liquor to obtain the desired
color, flavor, and composition. The more com-
mon method is to “paint” or coat a lesser quality
(third or fourth strike) refined sugar with a small
amount of refiner’s syrup or molasses to produce
a product with similar appearance and
characteristics. A typical brown sugar composi-
tion is 85–90% sucrose, 2–5% invert, 2–4%
moisture, and 1–3% ash.
Screened sugars. These are sugars that have been
separated on various sieves to give a narrow
defined range of particle size [11]. Regular
granulated sugar or fine granulated sugar is
<1200 μm, extra-fine sugar (aka fruit sugar) is
200–600 μm, and Baker’s special (known as cas-
tor sugar in England) occurs between the regular
and extra-fine sugar. These finer sugars are desir-
able because they mix, blend, and dissolve evenly.
Pulverized sugars (<250 μm). A range of
products are manufactured by milling granulated
sugar to a desired size. Examples include pow-
dered, confectioner’s, and icing sugar, with par-
ticle sizes 45–75 μm, and characterized by the
proportion of the sugar passing through certain
sieve sizes. In the United States, these sugars
usually are mixed with 3% corn starch to prevent
caking. Elsewhere, tricalcium phosphate may be
added for the same purpose.
Non-melting powdered sugar. Pulverized sugar
is coated with a fat to prevent it from melting
when sprinkled on top of cakes or fruit [11].
Fondant sugar. Fondant sugar is a special form
of pulverized sugar, which exists as a blend of
sugar (in the 90–95% range) and another ingre-
dient, such as maltodextrin, invert, glucose, or
starch. It may be dry and free-flowing or a paste.
It is also called icing sugar or glazing sugar. Dry
fondants usually are agglomerated forms.
Agglomerated sugars. The agglomeration of
sugar crystals helps to prevent caking, so
products, such as soft sugars that are subject to
G. Eggleston et al.
Fig. 14 Example of a co-crystallized sugar product. The
ball represents many microsized sugar crystals
agglomerated into a porous granule, which allows inclu-
sion of a second ingredient throughout the structure
caking, can be converted into a free-flowing dry
product. Several companies manufacture “dry
fondant” by agglomerating mixtures of invert
sugar and very fine (less than 40 μm) sucrose
particles. Particles below 40 μm cannot be distin-
guished by the tongue, so the product is per-
ceived as a smooth paste.
Compound products. Compound products are
made by manipulating the crystal size and
shape and incorporating another ingredient in a
process called co-crystallization. A very hot
(120  C), supersaturated sucrose solution is
allowed to cool with agitation in the presence of
a second ingredient, resulting in a dry, free-
flowing, agglomerated, porous granule, shown
in Fig. 14 [90]. Typical products include
granulated brown sugar, powdered brown sugar,
molasses granules, honey granules, and some
fondants. Flavors, such as apple or peanut butter,
may be co-crystallized with sugar. The process is
said to protect the flavors from loss of volatiles
and from oxidation.
Vanilla sugar. This is made by flavoring
granulated sugar with vanilla. In Europe, it is
widely used instead of vanilla extract [11].
Sugar and Other Sweeteners
Beet Sugar
Like sugarcane processing, the main stages in the
extraction and production of sugar from sugar
beets have remained basically unchanged for
the last 100 years, with cumulative incremental
improvements in sucrose yield and processing
taking place over the years. Unlike cane sugar
manufacture, however, white sugar is made
directly from the sugar beet. The process
includes harvesting beets, storage of beets until
needed, washing, slicing, and extraction of juice
by diffusion. The juice is clarified using lime and
carbon dioxide, sometimes also sulfur dioxide,
filtered, concentrated, and crystallized. The goal
is to produce a good quality white sugar in the
highest possible yield. Europe and the United
States are the major beet sugar producing areas
of the world. Sugar beets are grown in ten states,
with Minnesota, North Dakota, Idaho, and
Michigan the major producers [91].
Agriculture
The sugar beet, Beta vulgaris, is a temperate-
zone root crop grown largely in the Northern
hemisphere (Fig. 15). It is adapted to a wide
Fig. 15 A sugar beet (Courtesy of American Sugarbeet
Growers Association)
959
range of climatic conditions, growing, for exam-
ple, in the short cold summers of Finland and the
hot dry climates of the Imperial Valley of
California and southern Spain. Sugar beet agri-
culture began in earnest in Europe around 1830
and in the United States around 1880. Better-
yielding beet varieties, mechanization of the har-
vest, and increasing efficiency in processing have
helped the beet sugar industry grow to the extent
that it competes in parts of the world with cane
sugar.
The original sugar beet seed is of the multi-
germ type, which results in several plants
germinating in one spot, necessitating laborious
hand thinning. In 1950–1952, two Russian
scientists, V.F. and Helen Savitsky, working in
the United States, developed two lines of mono-
germ seeds. These seeds develop only one plant
per seed, which reduced or eliminated the need to
thin the young beet plants. Today all sugar beet
cultivation uses monogerm hybrids.
Harvesting and Beet Handling
After the plants have reached maturity in late
fall, they are harvested by machines that remove
the top growth of leaves, lift the roots from the
ground, and deliver them to a holding bin or a
truck.
Storage. Because the harvesting season is shorter
than the processing season, beets are stored in
piles or “clamps” at the factory or at outlying
points near transportation. Proper storage of
sugar beets is very important to prevent deterio-
ration of the beets. Frequently, storage piles are
ventilated to lower the temperature of the beets,
thus reducing sugar loss due to respiration during
storage. Sucrose losses inevitably occur if the
temperature fluctuates widely and if there are
freeze–thaw cycles.
In the Red River Valley area of Minnesota and
North Dakota, storage sheds for sugar beets were
constructed in the mid-1980s that measure 64 m
wide by 158 m long and hold 50,000 t of beets.
The temperature in these storage facilities is
960
controlled at not much above freezing to mini-
mize degradation of the sucrose content.
Washing. Beets are transferred from storage to
the factory in water flumes. These flumes lead
directly into a rock catcher, which allows rocks
to settle out, and then on into a trash catcher and a
rotary washer. A large amount of soil usually is
entrained with the beet roots, and processes for
recovering and returning the soil to the field are
in use.
Slicing. The washed beets are sliced into thin
V-shaped cossettes by means of specially shaped
knives set in frames mounted around the periph-
ery of a rotating drum. Good removal of rocks
and trash is essential for a reasonable life for the
knives.
Extraction of the Juice
Diffusion. The process of extracting the juice
from the beet is diffusion. The cossettes are
weighed and transferred continuously into a dif-
fuser where water passes countercurrent to the
movement of the cossettes and where, by diffu-
sion, sugar and some of the nonsugars of the beet
are extracted. For optimum extraction of juice,
the sucrose-containing plant cells need to be fully
disrupted to allow the escape of the juice. This is
done mechanically (5–15% of cells are disrupted
by the slicers) and with heat. A balance between
temperature and the time of heating is necessary:
it should be high enough to maximally extract the
juice, but not so high as to cause extraction of
undesirable nonsugars, such as pectins, or to
cause color formation and sugar degradation.
The temperature of the juices during diffusion
is around 70  C. Retention time is ~1 h. Antifoam
agents are used to control foam in continuous
diffusers, and bactericides are added for
microbiological control. Continuous diffusers
have largely replaced batch diffusers. Continu-
ous diffusers come in a variety of forms and
shapes, but all employ the same principle,
G. Eggleston et al.
namely the movement of juice countercurrent to
the movement of the cossettes.
The RT-type diffuser is a large revolving
drum with an internal helix that separates the
drum into moving compartments. As the drum
revolves, the cossettes travel by the action of the
moving helix from one end of the drum to the
other end, while the juice moves in the opposite
direction. The BMA diffuser is a cylindrical
tower with a conveyor mechanism attached to a
central rotating shaft. Guide plates on the shaft
direct the cossettes upward, while the juice exits
through screens at the bottom.
Beet pulp. Beet pulp is the solid residual portion
remaining after diffusion, and is a valuable
by-product. Wet pulp, containing 85–90% mois-
ture, is dewatered in horizontal double-screw
presses, reducing the moisture content to about
75%. Pulp is further dried to about 8–10% mois-
ture in pulp dryers, direct-fired horizontal rotat-
ing drums. Newer pulp-drying technology,
utilizing a pressurized fluid bed, results in 40%
more capacity and better energy efficiency
[92]. Beet pulp is mainly used as a pelletized
animal feed, either alone or mixed with molasses.
In the 1980s, several beet companies devel-
oped edible fiber from beet pulp to take advantage
of interest in the health benefits of dietary fiber
[93]. The fiber has a high water-holding capacity
and other interesting properties, but the market
has remained small and specialized, with uses as a
fiber additive in both human and pet food.
Juice Purification
The diffusion juice (also called raw juice) is a
turbid liquid ranging in color from lavender to
nearly black, containing 15–18% sucrose and
1–3% nonsugars, including proteins, nitrogenous
bases, amino acids, amides, inorganic material,
and pectinaceous matter. It also contains 0.25%
sodium and potassium. These impurities are
removed by a series of purification processes
using lime and carbon dioxide (carbonation),
Sugar and Other Sweeteners
and sulfur dioxide (sulfitation). In recent years,
there has been some use of ion-exchange resins
to produce high-quality refined granulated sugar.
Knowledge of the chemistry of the raw beet
juice is important in controlling the phases of
juice purification. The addition of increasing
amounts of lime and carbon dioxide should pre-
cipitate pectinaceous materials and insoluble
anions such as phosphate, sulfate, oxalate, and
others, as calcium salts cause alkaline degrada-
tion of invert sugar into lactic and other acids,
and flocculation of colorants. Lime is also essen-
tial for promoting good filtration.
Classic juice purification consists of
preliming, main liming, first carbonation, first
sludge separation (clarification), second carbon-
ation, second sludge separation, sulfitation, and
filtration. Control of pH is very important
throughout the process and depends on the qual-
ity of the beet juice, which is determined in the
lab.
Preliming. A small amount of lime (0.12–0.3%)
CaO is added to the juice, increasing the juice pH
from about 6.2 to 10.8–11.4. The lime reacts with
nonsugar impurities in the juice to make insolu-
ble precipitates and soluble products. Calcium
carbonate in the form of recycled first carbon-
ation sludge is added to provide colloid adsorp-
tion and stabilization. Temperature may be cool
(50  C) or hot (80  C) depending on the factory
design. Insoluble precipitates are formed
quickly. Retention time is 15–30 min.
Main liming. The addition of more lime (main
liming) to an alkalinity of 0.8–1.5% CaO on juice
results in a second set of reactions that produce
soluble products. During these reactions, the
small amount of invert sugar present in the raw
juice is destroyed and amides are saponified.
These reactions help to stabilize the juice and
reduce color formation. A great deal of color is
formed during this stage, but this type of
alkaline-derived colorant is fairly easy to remove
in crystallization.
First and second carbonation. In this process,
heated, limed juice is sent to a carbonator for
961
gassing with carbon dioxide. The carbon dioxide
reacts with the lime to form calcium carbonate,
which helps to absorb the insoluble impurities,
and some of the soluble impurities as well. The
resulting mixture, containing insoluble lime
salts, is pumped to subsiders (thickeners,
clarifiers) to remove the insolubles by settling
(sludge separation), and clarified juice is
decanted. From the subsider, the partially
clarified filtrate is recarbonated (second carbon-
ation) to lower the pH further, and the residual
lime is precipitated. The juice is then treated with
about 150 ppm sulfur dioxide gas (sulfitation),
which helps to inhibit further color-forming
reactions in the juice, removes any remaining
traces of calcium, and provides the final pH
adjustment, to a pH of around 8–8.5. This treat-
ment is followed by press filtration. The sludge
from the subsiders is filtered on rotary-drum
filters, and the sugar-containing filtrate is
returned to the first carbonation step. The carbon-
ation process can be either continuous or batch.
In some factories, the clarified juice is also sent
to softeners (cation resins) to remove any
remaining calcium.
Beet processing uses a large amount of lime
(2–2.5% on beet) and efforts are being made to
reduce the usage by effective control of tempera-
ture, pH, and other parameters [94], which can
bring down usage to about 1.0–1.2% and inclu-
sion of innovative processes, such as membrane
filtration [95], which can further reduce lime
usage to around 0.8% on beets. Beet juice
clarification is also considerably more suscepti-
ble to lower concentrations of dextran than
sugarcane juice clarification [96]. Dextranase
application to the beet juice, however, has been
optimized to improve clarification [96]. The
recovery of lime by reburning is also being stud-
ied. The clarified juice is called “thin juice” and
contains about 15% solids.
Evaporation and Standard Liquor
The thin juice discharged from the filter presses
after clarification is evaporated to “thick juice”
or evaporator syrup (50–65% solids) in multiple-
962
effect evaporators, containing five, six, or even
seven effects. If decolorizing absorbents are
used, they are usually added to the thick juice.
Granular and powdered activated carbons have
been used for this purpose. Thick juice that has
been treated with powdered activated carbon
usually must be double filtered to remove all
the carbon.
Low raw sugars (sugars with purities below
that of refined sugar) and white centrifugal wash
water are added to the thick juice in the melters to
make “standard liquor” from which white sugar
is crystallized. Standard liquor is usually filtered
with diatomaceous earth before going to the vac-
uum pan.
Extending the Processing Cycle
Thick Juice Storage
Depending on location, sugar beet harvesting
begins as early as August or as late as October.
At least one American company has extended the
season by allowing beets to freeze naturally so that
they can be processed over the winter. Many other
companies in the United States and Europe store
excess thick juice over the winter, which can
extend production time an additional 40–80 days.
Proper storage conditions are critical to
maintaining the integrity of the thick juice to pre-
vent sugar loss or microbial contamination, includ-
ing pH of 9.2, a high solids content of 67–69%,
cooling to below 30  C, and addition of soda lye or
hop β acid in the upper layer, and even adding a
surface sealant such as a vegetable oil [97].
Crystallization, Centrifuging,
and Drying
Crystallization practices in the US sugar beet
factories are similar to those in a sugarcane refin-
ery, and result in a white granulated sugar com-
parable in quality to refined cane sugar. White
sugar centrifuge stations as well as drying
operations are comparable with those operations
described earlier for cane sugar factories.
G. Eggleston et al.
A major difference between cane and beet
sugar refining is that beet refining occurs in one
stage, with refined sugar produced directly from
the sugar beets, whereas refined cane sugar is
produced first as a raw sugar and then refined. It
is possible for beet sugar to be produced directly
because the nature of the coloring material in
beet sugar is fundamentally different from that
of cane. A beet evaporator syrup with color >
3000 ICUMSA color units produces a white
sugar with an ICUMSA color of 25–40. How-
ever, for a cane white sugar of the same color to
be produced, the color of the evaporator syrup
must be only 200–300 color units. The nature of
these differences appears to be associated with
lower molecular weight colorants in beet, lower
polysaccharide content in beet, and colorant
mainly composed of alkaline degradation
products of invert sugar [98].
Molasses Desugarization
Sugar Recovery from Beet Molasses
Molasses is the viscous, dark-colored material
that remains when no more sugar can be econom-
ically extracted by crystallization. Beet molasses
is generally high in sucrose, 60% dry basis, and
represents considerable value. Sugar is routinely
recovered from beet molasses by various ion
exclusion chromatographic systems.
Historically, recovery of sucrose from molas-
ses was accomplished by the Steffen process, in
which sucrose is precipitated from dilute molas-
ses at low temperature (9–14  C) as the
tricalcium saccharate by adding finely ground
burnt lime. The process uses an excess of lime
(100–130% on molasses sugar) and does not
work if there is more than 0.4% invert sugar,
and other impurities, such as raffinose, which
inhibit crystallization [99]. Molasses
desugarization today is accomplished by various
forms of ion exclusion. Chromatography is no
longer done in batch form, which is inefficient,
and commercial operations utilize any one of
several procedures involving moving beds,
simulated moving beds (SMBs), or coupled
loops. These are discussed in detail in the
Sugar and Other Sweeteners
literature [100, 101]. Up to 90% of the sucrose in
the molasses can be recovered and other valuable
products, such as betaine, can also be recovered.
Most beet factories today desugarize molasses.
Desugarization is accomplished using cross-
linked strong cationic resin in the potassium
form. Sucrose is preferentially absorbed by the
ion-exchange resin and separates by lagging
behind the majority of the nonsucrose
components. Continuous processes are based on
countercurrent technology. The SMB process
avoids mechanical movement of resin, keeping
the whole resin bed stationary while changing
product inlets and outlets with an internal circu-
lar flow. Typically, molasses SMB systems have
8–20 resin compartments (or cells) in series. The
countercurrent resin movement is simulated by
changing the inlet and outlet ports forward in the
direction of the liquid flow. In coupled loop
technology, developed by Amalgamated Sugar
in the 1990s, a cascade of several loops is
provided instead of connecting several individual
cells. This allows recovery of additional
nonsucrose components, such as betaine, and
provides a purer sucrose fraction. For proper
operation of a molasses desugarization plant,
the molasses must be low in calcium and magne-
sium ions (this is usually achieved by thin juice
softening), free of suspended solids, and free of
oxygen, which irreversibly damages the resin
[102]. The sucrose fraction, called “extract,”
goes to pan crystallization, is mixed with thick
juice, and crystallized, or is further purified with
activated carbon or ion-exchange resin and sold
as liquid sugar. The waste fraction, called the
“raffinate,” is concentrated and sold as fodder
molasses.
Desugarization of Cane Molasses
Desugarization of cane molasses is more difficult
and less economical for several reasons: it has a
lower content of sucrose (about 35%) and a
higher content of invert sugar (about 10%); it is
more viscous because of higher concentrations of
polysaccharides; it has a lot more suspended
material, and it has a higher salt and calcium
963
concentration which has to be “softened” before
it can be put on a resin. Therefore, cane molasses
must be clarified to remove suspended matter and
gums, and prior softening is necessary to extend
the life of the resin. The resulting product frac-
tion from cane molasses contains a mixture of
sucrose and reducing sugars. There has been little
adoption of this process in the cane sugar
industry [103].
Process Control and Instrumentation
The sugar industry has always been in the fore-
front of chemical control. The most important
areas of control include measurement of sugar
(sucrose) content (done by polarization), pH con-
trol (because sugar is unstable at low pH, and
more so when high temperatures prevail), color
measurement, and control of vacuum pans (for
efficient crystallization).
At the end of the nineteenth century,
ICUMSA (International Commission for
Uniform Methods in Sugar Analysis) was
formed. This organization, which continues
today, is dedicated to all aspects of sugar analy-
sis, validation of methods, and promulgating offi-
cial methods that are scientifically valid and can
be used for trade. A good early history of
ICUMSA, covering the first session in 1897 up
to 1936, can be found in Bates [104].
Raw sugar quality characteristics that are
measured include polarization, color, grain size,
moisture, invert, dextran, starch, and surface
color (color that could be removed in affination).
New techniques, such as gas chromatography,
enzymes, high-pressure liquid chromatography
(HPLC), and near infrared (NIR) analysis, are
in use for determining various parameters, par-
ticularly sucrose, glucose, and fructose. NIR is
particularly promising because it is nondestruc-
tive and can theoretically measure a wide range
of parameters, such as moisture in bagasse and
polarization of juice. These methods are coming
to the forefront because the older method of
determining sugar content, polarization, has sev-
eral drawbacks. Originally, lead acetate was used
to clarify solutions for polarization
964 G. Eggleston et al.

Table 4 Major sugar-producing countries, 2015/2016 (world centrifugal sugar production in units of one million
metric tons) [1, 107]
Total sugar production Million Metric Tons, Raw Value Source
Brazil 39 Cane
India 26 Cane
European Union 16 Mostly beet
Thailand 10.4 Cane
China 10 90% from cane, 10% beet
United States 9 56.8% beet; 43.2% cane
Mexico 6.4 Cane
Pakistan 5.4 Mostly cane
Australia 5 Cane
Russia 4.7 Beet

Table 5 Per capita consumption of different world regions since 2011/2012 [1]
World Sugar Consumption in million metric tons, raw value
World Region 2011/2012 2012/2013 2013/2014 2014/2015 2015/2016
European Union 19.02 19.09 19.22 19.45 19.33
Europea 31.05 31.14 31.28 31.39 31.20
Africa 18.47 19.17 19.63 20.28 20.91
North and Central America 19.59 20.45 20.76 20.89 21.08
South America 21.06 21.06 21.09 21.29 21.23
Asia 76.55 78.88 81.35 83.56 85.53
Oceania 1.70 1.70 1.71 1.71 1.71
Total: 168.42 172.39 175.81 179.12 181.66
a
Includes the European Union plus other countries in the European continent including Turkey

measurement; with lead use restricted in most
countries, aluminum and zinc salts have replaced
it, but these are not as effective as clarifiers.
Polarization is also not a direct measurement of
sucrose, so it can be inaccurate in low-purity
materials, such as molasses.
Instrumentation is used extensively in sugar
boiling to control the process of crystallization.
Some of the principles used to provide control of
vacuum pans for boiling a strike of sugar are
listed below [84].
1. Boiling point rise (BPR): thermometers are
used to measure the temperature of the
massecuite and its vapors (the difference
between these two temperatures is the
observed BPR).
2. Electrical conductivity of the massecuite,
based on the principle that conductivity is
inversely proportional to the viscosity of the
solution, which in turn has a similar relation-
ship to the water content and thus the degree
of supersaturation.
3. Fluidity of the massecuite: An ammeter is
used to measure the current used by the
motor of a mechanical circulator; changes in
current indicate changes in the fluidity of the
massecuite.
4. Soluble solids measured by a refractometer.
5. Radiofrequency.
6. Microwave density probe [105].
Cane and Beet Sugar Production
Sugar (cane and beet) is produced in approxi-
mately 120 countries. Cane sugar is produced in
Sugar and Other Sweeteners 965

Table 6 US sugar deliveries to industrial and nonindustrial users, selected years (1000 short tons, raw value) [108]
Use 1990 1993 1995 2000 2005 2009
Bakery and cereal products 1608 1785 1905 2264 2297 2286
Confectionery products 1279 1292 1372 1328 1131 1082
Ice cream and dairy products 462 424 452 499 587 577
Beverages 228 158 169 168 237 351
Canned, bottled, and frozen foods 332 336 279 330 336 427
All other food uses 642 725 864 817 606 572
Nonfood use 102 85 64 85 92 83
Total industrial use 4660 4805 5103 5491 5286 5377
Hotels, restaurants, and institutions 108 108 103 71 115 127
Wholesale grocers, jobbers, sugar dealers 2130 2075 2173 2241 2401 2352
Retail grocers, chain stores 1077 1235 1236 1242 1262 1241
All other deliveries 76 171 189 339 248 179
Total nonindustrial use 3391 3589 3701 3893 4020 3899
Total United States 8051 8394 8804 9383 9312 9276

tropical and subtropical areas, and beet sugar is
produced in temperate zones. The United States
is sixth among the world’s sugar-producing
areas, and is the only country with significant
sugarcane and sugar beet acreage. Cane sugar
production is approximately 80.4% of the world
sugar production and beet sugar is 19.6%. The
major producers of sugarcane and beet sugar are
shown in Table 4. The biggest change to occur in
world sugar production is the ascension of Brazil
as the major producer and exporter [106]. Brazil,
India, and the European Union alone account for
46% of world sugar production.
Sugar Consumption and Usage
Per capita consumption of sugar varies widely
from country to country, and is often a measure
of the affluence and level of industrial develop-
ment of a country, except in Asia, where dietary
customs do not typically include high
sugar intake. However, as shown in Table 5,
consumption has been increasing in Asia, Africa,
and North and Central America. The increase in
the Americas is at least partially because of
the current backlash against high fructose corn
syrup (HFCS). The demand for high fructose
corn syrup (HFCS) has decreased in recent
years due to multiple consumer issues,
including high fructose content, GMO, and
links with obesity and medical diseases such as
diabetes [6].
How sugars are utilized for industrial and
nonindustrial uses is summarized in Table 6.
Nonfood uses of sucrose constitute only a small
portion of total use [108].
Derivatives of Sucrose:
Sucrochemistry
Because of its high purity and wide availability,
sucrose has been viewed as an attractive feedstock
for organic chemical synthesis. Sucrochemistry
has been pursued for many years, and many
products have been produced [109–111]. How-
ever, the economics of production have not been
good and the reactivity of sucrose is difficult to
control. Among the derivatives of sucrose are
ethers, fatty and other esters, acetals, and reduc-
tion products. Successful products from sucrose
include surfactants, surface coatings, food and
feed additives, polymers, textile chemicals,
pharmaceuticals, and pesticides. A promising
development is the conversion of sugar-based
feedstocks into conventional liquid fuels and
chemicals using a patented catalytic aqueous
phase reforming process [112]. Other sucrose-
based products in successful commercial distribu-
tion include olestra, a liquid sucrose polyester fat
substitute, sucrose acetate isobutyrate, and
966
sucrose-based detergents [113]. Sucralose, a
sucrose derivative containing three chlorine
molecules, was developed in 1976 by Tate &
Lyle, and received approval for food use in the
United States in 1998. It is 600 times sweeter than
sucrose, is non-caloric, and stable to high temper-
ature and low pH.
Sweeteners Derived from Starch
Starch is hydrolyzed to produce a range of
sweeteners, including syrups and crystalline
products. The bulk of starch-derived sweeteners
are from corn (maize) starch. Other starchy
products are used to produce starch-derived
sweeteners, and small specialty markets exist for
syrups from rice, barley, wheat, and cassava.
The United States is the largest producer of
corn sweeteners and the largest market for high
fructose corn syrup (HFCS). HFCS was first
marketed in the 1970s and is less expensive
than granulated sugar. The major use of HFCS
is in beverages and soft drinks, which, at its peak,
accounted for 75–80% of usage. However, the
use of HFCS peaked in 1999 due to consumer
concern rather than price. In particular,
consumers are concerned about a possible link
between HFCS and metabolic diseases like obe-
sity and diabetes. There has been strong scientific
consensus that the over consumption of added
sugar, including HFCS, is a major health prob-
lem. In the past 7 years, many large beverage
manufacturers have replaced HFCS with “natu-
ral” sweeteners such as cane and beet sugars.
HFCS is accused of being at once unhealthy,
unnatural, and unappetizing [6]. It must also be
noted that there is, in some countries, a growing
backlash also against sugar because of its also
perceived association with obesity, diabetes, and
tooth decay [114]. This sugar backlash, however,
has so far failed to cause meaningful changes to
consumption patterns [114]. Important
milestones in the development and growth of
HFCS are shown below [107, 115].
• Late 1950s—Discovery that glucose isomer-
ase enzyme converts glucose into fructose
• 1967—First commercial US production
G. Eggleston et al.
• 1972—Immobilization of glucose isomerase
for continuous production of HFCS-42
• 1977—Commercial production of HFCS-55
• 1980—HFCS approved as 50% of the sweet-
ener in Coca-Cola
• 1983—HFCS approved as 50% of the sweet-
ener in Pepsi-Cola
• 1984—100% level of HFCS approved in
Coca-Cola and Pepsi-Cola
• 1999—Highest per capita consumption of
HFCS attained in the USA
• 2014—30% reduction in the consumption of
HFCS in the USA since 1999
In Europe, where other starch sources are
utilized, such as wheat and potato, these are
referred to as high fructose syrups (HFS),
isoglucose, or high fructose starch-based syrups
(HFSS). These syrups are subject to a production
quota. In 2005, this quota was set at 303,000
tons [116].
The corn industry makes widespread use of
enzymes for carbohydrate conversion. The
advent of enzyme technology in the corn industry
in the 1960s dramatically changed the starch
industry and allowed the development of new
products. Today, enzyme hydrolysis of starch
has largely replaced acid hydrolysis, which is
used as an adjunct in starch conversion. Enzymes
used to make corn syrups and HFCS include the
following.
• Alpha amylase—Converts starch into dextrin;
used in the manufacture of glucose syrup.
• Glucoamylase—Converts dextrin into glu-
cose; specific for amylose.
• Pullulanase—Converts the amylopectin frac-
tion of starch into linear segments.
• Beta amylase—Releases maltose units from
the nonreducing end of a polysaccharide.
• Glucose isomerase—Converts glucose into
fructose; used to make HFCS.
Starch Conversion
Starch conversion refers to the process of
converting starch into other products. It involves
Sugar and Other Sweeteners 967

gelatinization, liquefaction, and saccharification.
Liquefaction refers to the acid- or enzyme-
catalyzed conversion of starch into maltodextrin.
Starch, usually from wet milling of corn, is
pumped as a slurry to the conversion plant,
where it undergoes one or more hydrolytic pro-
cesses to yield mixtures of various carbohydrates
in the form of syrups. The type and amount of the
various carbohydrates obtained depend upon the
type of hydrolysis system used (acid, acid–
enzyme, or enzyme–enzyme), the extent to
which the hydrolytic reaction is allowed to pro-
ceed, and the type of enzyme(s) used. The fact
that most starches consist of two different kinds
of polymers (amylose and amylopectin) also
influences the nature of the products obtained.
The extent to which starch is converted into
simpler carbohydrates is indicated by the dex-
trose equivalent (DE), a measure of the reducing
sugar content calculated as dextrose and
expressed as a percentage of the dry substances.
Hydrolyzates having dextrose equivalents rang-
ing from 5 to 100 are produced. Those having a
low dextrose equivalent frequently are referred to
as dextrins and are not sweet. They are produced
by minimal acid hydrolysis or roasting. Starch
hydrolyzate syrups commonly are produced as
“low,” “intermediate,” “high,” or “very-high”
conversion products, as more or less standard
Table 7 Conversion groups for starch hydrolyzates
Conversion DE
Low (Type I) 20–38
Intermediate (Type II) 38–58
High (Type III) 58–73
Very high (Type IV) 73 and above
products, as shown in Table 7. HFCSs are classi-
fied according to the fructose content, as a per-
cent of solids (i.e., 42%, 55%, 90%), rather than
by DE. Table 8 shows the composition of various
corn syrups. In addition to carbohydrates, the
syrups contain some sodium chloride and traces
of nitrogenous substances. Maltodextrin is a
dried corn syrup having a DE below 20, whereas
the dry dextrins with a DE above 20 are called
corn syrup solids.
Acid Hydrolysis of Starch
As mentioned above, this process now serves
mainly as an adjunct to enzymatic conversion
of starch and is rarely used alone. A starch slurry
containing 35–45% solids is acidified with
hydrochloric acid to about pH 1.8–1.9. The sus-
pension is pumped into an autoclave (converter)
where live steam is gradually admitted to a pres-
sure of 30–45 psi. The conversion time largely
determines the DE of the hydrolyzate; for exam-
ple, 8 min may produce 42 DE syrup, and 10 min
may produce 55 DE [118]. Converted liquors are
neutralized with sodium carbonate to a pH of
5–7, with coagulation of insoluble protein, fats,
and colloidal matter. The scum is removed by
centrifugation.
The dark-colored clarified liquor is pressure-
filtered and concentrated to 60% solids in
multiple-effect evaporators. The concentrated
liquor is decolorized with granular carbon in
columns 3.7 m in diameter and 9.1 m high in a
countercurrent manner; that is, liquor flows
upward in the columns, while a portion of the
carbon is removed from the bottom periodically.
Carbon is used at a rate of 2.5% of dry solid

Table 8 Carbohydrate composition of glucose syrups (saccharides as a percent of total carbohydrates) [117]
DE Glucose Maltose Tri-a Tetra-a Penta-a Hexa-a Hepta-a Higher
15 3.7 4.4 4.4 4.5 4.3 3.3 3.0 72.4
35 13.4 11.3 10.0 9.1 7.8 6.5 5.5 36.4
45 21.0 14.9 12.2 10.1 8.4 6.5 5.6 21.3
55 30.8 18.1 13.2 9.5 7.2 5.1 4.2 11.9
65 42.5 20.9 12.7 7.5 5.1 3.6 2.2 5.5
a
Refers to the number of glucose units in the oligosaccharide: tri maltotriose; tetra maltotetraose; penta maltopentaose,
etc.
968
processed, and approximately 5% of carbon is
lost during revivification [119]. In some cases,
granular carbon has been replaced by synthetic
polymeric adsorbents to decolorize the syrup.
“Low ash” syrups usually are deionized with
ion-exchange resins. The processed liquor is
evaporated to a final solids content of 75–85%
in a single-effect evaporator.
Acid–Enzyme Hydrolysis
Starch is first liquefied and hydrolyzed to specific
dextrose equivalents with hydrochloric acid.
After evaporation to 60% solids, a saccharifying
enzyme (fungal α-amylase) is added to continue
hydrolysis to the desired level. By choosing two
or more types of enzymes (such as α-amylase,
β-amylase, glucoamylase, pullulanase) and
adjusting the initial acid hydrolysis, syrups with
different ratios of dextrose, maltose, and higher
saccharides can be obtained [120].
Enzyme–Enzyme Hydrolysis
Enzyme–enzyme conversion employs heat and
an enzyme for starch liquefaction in place of
acid. This is the most common form of corn
processing today. Subsequent hydrolysis is by
enzymes, as above. The choice of hydrolytic
system depends upon economics and the kind
of end product desired. Enzymes are usually
inactivated by heating the syrup to 75–80  C,
with the exception of the heat-stable α-amylases
that have come on the market in the last 25 years.
A starch slurry of 30–40% dry matter is
gelatinized and liquefied in a single dose
jet-cooking process. Heat-stable α-amylase
enzyme is metered into the starch slurry after
pH adjustment to 6.0–6.5, and the slurry pumped
through a jet cooker. Steam is injected to raise the
temperature to 105  C and held for about 5 min,
which is sufficient to gelatinize the starch (break
up the starch granules). The partially liquefied
starch is then cooled to 95–100  C and the
enzyme is reacted at this temperature for 1–2 h,
until the required DE is obtained [120]. Following
liquefaction, the starch undergoes
G. Eggleston et al.
saccharification (conversion to sugars) using
glucoamylase and pullulanase enzyme, resulting
in maltose syrups, glucose syrups, and mixed
syrups, as described above. Two enzymes are
required at this point because starch is made up
of two types of glucose polymers—amylose,
which is a linear polymer, and amylopectin, a
branched polymer—and each requires a different
enzyme to break it up. Glucoamylase hydrolyzes
the linear chains of amylose, and pullulanase
specifically attacks the amylopectin at the
branching points. The proper combination and
time of hydrolysis will result in the desired
range of products, all the way to syrups with as
much as 97% glucose content. The glucose syrup
may also undergo isomerization with
immobilized glucose isomerase to make fructose
syrups.
Crystalline Dextrose
Highly purified, high-dextrose syrup is
crystallized to produce crystalline dextrose. The
high-purity liquor is pumped to insulated
crystallizers fitted with slowly moving agitators
for crystallization of dextrose monohydrate. A
heavy seed base (about 25%) from a previous
batch is mingled with the syrup and cooled to
about 38  C. The seeded liquor is held at this
temperature for several days until about 60%
has crystallized. The mixture then is centrifuged
to separate the crystals from the mother liquor.
The wet sugar is dried in rotary dryers or
recrystallized into anhydrous dextrose. The
monohydrate also may be converted to anhydrous
dextrose by drying in hot air. A second crop of
crystals is taken from the mother liquor, and the
runoff syrup from this step is final molasses.
Crystalline Fructose
The newest sweetener from the corn industry is
crystalline fructose, which came on the market
around 1987, and is now available in retail
outlets as a sweetener as well as used in commer-
cial products.
Sugar and Other Sweeteners
Table 9 Composition of molasses from various sourcesa
Constituent Cane final molasses (%)
Sucrose 31–40
Reducing sugars 20–30
Higher saccharidesb 1.5–4.0
Ash 10–14
Nitrogen 0.4
a
Values are on a dry basis
b
Includes polysaccharides
High Fructose Corn Syrup
HFCS is produced from very pure glucose syrup
using glucose isomerase. Commercial glucose
isomerase is produced from a variety of
microorganisms: Bacillus coagulans, Actino-
planes missouriensis, and several Streptomyces
species. Glucose isomerase is always used in
immobilized form because it is an intracellular
enzyme. The isomerization reaction is carried out
at 60  C at pH 7–8. Reaction time is limited to
prevent degradation of the fructose, which is
more labile than glucose. All isomerization
reactions today are undertaken in continuous
mode, rather than batch mode. The operating
lifetime of a column of immobilized enzyme
can be as long as 200–360 days, depending on
the robustness of the enzyme used [120].
The basic feature of the isomerization process
is a series of reactors containing the immobilized
enzyme fixed in a packed bed. The feed material
is of the highest practical purity possible because
enzymatic activity is closely related to the purity
of the glucose syrup. Glucose syrup of about
94 DE is filtered, treated with activated carbon
to remove residual color, and deionized with
ion-exchange resin to lower the ash content, par-
ticularly the calcium ion, which interferes with
the magnesium enzyme activator. The dissolved
oxygen is reduced by flash evaporation, which
also concentrates the feedstock to 40–45%
glucose and raises the temperature to 60–65  C.
At this point, prior to entering the reactors, mag-
nesium ions are added as enzyme activators. The
pH is adjusted to ~8. Isomerized liquor is
removed from the process when the equivalent
of 42% fructose on a dryo basis is reached. After
isomerization, the pH of the syrup is lowered to
969
Refinery blackstrap (%) Beet molasses (%)
50–60 60–63
5–10 0.5–1.5
0.5–1.0 1.0–2.0
5–10 8–10
0.1–0.3 2.0
4–5, and it is purified by ion-exchange resin and
activated carbon. This results in a 42% HFCS.
For use in soft drinks, it is converted to 55%
HFCS by passing through large chromatographic
columns of zeolites or the calcium salts of cation-
exchange resins, which absorb and separate the
fructose from the other components. This
produces a stream of about 90% fructose, which
is then blended with 42% fructose syrup to pro-
duce the desired 55% fructose syrup product.
HFCS technology and products have spread to
many countries including Canada, Japan, and
several western European nations.
Molasses
Molasses, defined as the residual mother liquor
from which little or no additional sugar can be
recovered economically, is a by-product of the
sugarcane, beet, and dextrose industries. Each
type of manufacturer has designated this liquid
by-product with its own name. The molasses
from both raw sugar manufacture and cane
sugar refining is commonly named blackstrap
molasses. In the cane factory, it is also known
as final molasses, and in the refinery it is some-
times named refinery molasses. Molasses
from beets is simply named beet molasses.
The composition of molasses varies depending
on location, varieties harvested, and the type and
efficiency of the process operation. The amount
of refinery molasses is usually small, because as
much as possible is recycled, and a lot is utilized
in the manufacture of brown sugar. Some cane
refineries have no molasses output at all. The
general composition of each type of molasses is
shown in Table 9.
970 G. Eggleston et al.

Blackstrap molasses from the sugarcane fac- Table 10 Relative sweetness (RS) of carbohydrate-
tory contains significant quantities of sucrose and based sweeteners
reducing sugars (glucose and fructose); reducing Sweetener RS
sugars are from the cane itself and some are Crystalline fructose 180
formed during the processing of the cane juice Fructose in solution (5–15%) 115–125
by enzymatic and acid hydrolysis of sucrose. High fructose corn syrup 100–130
Refinery blackstrap molasses has fewer Invert syrup 105
Sucrose 100
impurities because the raw sugar starting mate-
Tagatose 92
rial has fewer impurities and more sucrose than
Xylitol (10% solution) 85
the sugarcane juice. Beet molasses contains pri- Xylitol (10% solution) 100
marily sucrose and little or no reducing sugar Xylitol (10% in solution) 120
because of the lower content of reducing sugars Glucose (2% solution) 50
in beet juice and because the highly alkaline Glucose (8–10% solution) 60–70
processing conditions destroy most of the reduc- Glucose (50% solution) 90–100
ing sugars. Furthermore, the sucrose in beet Erythritol 70
molasses is recovered by chromatographic pro- Sorbitol (hydrogenated glucose) 70
cesses described earlier. Maltitol (hydrogenated maltose) 68
The main uses of molasses are for cattle feed, Maltose 50
production of some fermentation products, such Trehalose 45–50
Mannitol 40
as yeast, citric acid, potable and fuel ethanol.
Lactitol (hydrogenated lactose) 30–40
Brazil has been at the forefront of producing fuel
Lactose (milk sugar) 15–30
ethanol from sugarcane, specifically from the
juice and/or molasses. Brazil unveiled the world’s
first alcohol-powered car after the 1970s oil crisis, labeling purposes, so foods containing them as
using its abundant supplies of sugarcane. In spite sweeteners can be called “sugar free.” The
of some difficulties in the 1990s, this innovative polyols are usually 15–30% sweeter than their
program has been considered successful. corresponding sugar (see Table 7). Some of the
polyols give a cooling sensation on the tongue.
Several of the new carbohydrate sweeteners are
Other Sweeteners described below.
Erythritol, 70% as sweet as sucrose, is a
Several carbohydrate-based sweeteners exist on polyol currently used as a bulk sweetener in
the market today. Although sucrose is the “gold reduced-calorie foods. It has only 0.2 cal/g
standard” for sweeteners, other sweeteners have (sucrose has 4 cal/g) and was Generally
gained commercial viability because they are Recognized As Safe (GRAS) by the Food and
less expensive (such as corn-based sweeteners), Drug Administration (FDA) in 1997, allowing it
have fewer calories, or are better suited for dia- to be used in foods in the United States
betic diets. Unlike the synthetic sweeteners, most [123]. Erythritol is produced by fermentation
of the carbohydrate-based sweeteners are less with the fungus Moniliella pollinis [124].
sweet than sucrose, with the notable exception Tagatose, a monosaccharide similar to fruc-
of sucralose, which is 600 times sweeter than tose, received GRAS status from the FDA in
sucrose and is nonnutritive. Fructose and xylitol April 2001. This sugar, 92% as sweet as sucrose,
are reported to be sweeter than sucrose. Table 10 with 1.5 cal/g, is produced from galactose
shows the relative sweetness of the carbohydrate- obtained from whey, using immobilized enzymes
based sweeteners [121, 122]. [125]. It has similar bulking properties to sucrose.
An important group of carbohydrate-based Trehalose, a disaccharide sweetener, 45–50%
sweeteners are the polyols, also known as sugar as sweet as sucrose, was given GRAS status in
alcohols. These are not considered sugars for 2000. It is naturally found in mushrooms, honey,
Sugar and Other Sweeteners
lobster, shrimp, and foods made with yeast. It has
been used in Japan for decades, and is commer-
cially produced from starch by bacterial enzymes
[126]. Besides its mild sweetening power, it
maintains cell structure during freezing and
dehydration of foods. It is a nonreducing sugar,
so it does not participate in the Maillard
browning reaction and helps to protect the color
of processed foods [127].
Other Natural Sweeteners
In addition to the aforementioned concerns about
high fructose corn syrups, there have also been
consumer concerns about artificial sweeteners
such as aspartame and saccharin, causing top
diet soft drinks to be in decline in the USA
[128]. Beverage manufacturers have been turn-
ing to other natural sweeteners as well as cane
and beet sugars as replacements. These include
agave, stevia, monk fruit, and erythritol
(described above). Agave syrup (nectar) is a
sweetener extracted from succulent agave plants
native to the Americas, with most species in
Mexico. Agave syrup is high in fructose. Stevia
(a glycoside) is a natural sweetener extracted
from Stevia rebaudiana (mainly rebaudioside
A), a member of the sunflower family that
originated in Paraguay [11, 128]. Stevia is twenty
times sweeter than sucrose with no calories.
Purified stevia extracts have GRAS status
[128]. Difficulties have been reported with
stevia’s bitter aftertaste, especially at the levels
needed to produce carbonated soft drinks. There-
fore, it has to be formulated with other
sweeteners in beverages [128]. Nevertheless,
stevia has continued to enjoy a high profile as a
sweetener in the past year [114]. Monk fruit
sweetener is from a small round fruit (lo han
guo) grown in Southeast Asia. Monk fruit juice
concentrate is a natural fruit juice that is 15–20
times sweeter than sucrose with low calories,
which has a clean flavor profile and no lingering
bitterness, and it can also be supplied as a pow-
dered extract. Monk fruit extract contains mainly
fructose and glucose, and the sweetness is
971
increased by mogrosides, a group of triterpene
glycosides.
Other natural sweeteners for other foodstuffs
include honey, palm sugars, maple syrup, and
sweet sorghum syrup [11]. Honey was the first
sweetener for humans and remained so in the
Western world until the plantation system of
sugar production was developed. Honey is essen-
tially nectar concentrated by honeybees to ~18%
moisture, and is composed mainly of fructose
and glucose and some novel oligosaccharides.
Honey has been produced and exported for
centuries. Today, there is a great emphasis on
the organoleptic qualities of particular honeys
produced from specific nectar sources
[11]. High-quality honey is regarded as a gour-
met food, whereas a lower-grade honey (baking
honey) is used in the food industry. Palm sugar is
one of the world’s oldest sweeteners, and is pro-
duced and consumed across large parts of Asia
[11]. Palm sugar is produced by boiling sap col-
lected from the cut inflorescence of many palm
varieties, including the date palm. No matter
which palm it is made from, palm sugar is less
sweet than cane sugar [11]. Maple syrup is also a
sweetener made from intensive evaporation of
the sap from maple trees (Acer saccharum),
which are grown almost exclusively in the north-
east regions of Canada and the USA. Maple
syrup is primarily sucrose although the darker
syrups contain fructose and glucose. It is a fla-
vorful natural product that is in high demand
[11]. Sweet sorghum syrup is a natural sweetener
made from the juice of sweet sorghum, a grass
cane similar to sugarcane. It was introduced to
the USA around 1850 and its potential as a liquid
food sweetener was quickly recognized [11]. By
1890, over 25 million gallons of sweet sorghum
syrup was produced across forty-four states in the
USA. It became the predominant table sweetener
of early America, ultimately being displaced by
refined white sugar around 1900. Since that time,
sweet sorghum has been grown as a boutique
crop, to produce small-scale quantities of syrup
for local sale, mostly at roadside stands and
farmers markets. However, with consumers
demanding more healthy, non-GMO, and mini-
mally processed sweeteners, in recent years there
972
have been developments in the large-scale man-
ufacture of sweet sorghum syrup, for its reintro-
duction as a commercial liquid sweetener
[129]. This endeavor is being backed by the
United Sorghum Checkoff Program of the USA.
Sorghum syrup has a mild caramel taste that has
been described as earthy and fruity.
Regulation and Trade in Sugar
Raw cane sugar, refined sugar, sugar syrups,
specialty sugars, and sugar-containing products
enter the United States under a variety of tariff-
rate quotas (TRQs). Low within-quota tariff rates
facilitate access to the US market. The minimum
sizes of the TRQs and the corresponding duties
reflect obligations made by the United States.
When Congress ratified the NAFTA and WTO
(Uruguay Round) treaties, these TRQs became
part of the US Harmonized Tariff Schedule.
Most of the sugar produced in the world
(about 70%) is used for local or domestic con-
sumption. The remaining 30% is in excess of
local demand and makes up the global trade in
sugar. In recent years, the trend has been toward
the export of more white sugar instead of raw
sugar. In 2014/2015, the European Union
exported ~ 1.5 million tons of white sugar. Brazil
is currently the largest exporter of sugar at 24.0
million tons followed by Thailand at 8.5 million
tons and Australia at 3.5 million tons. China
imports 3.8 million tons sugar while the
European Union imports 3.5 million tons and
the USA 3.1 million tons. Overall, there are
51.8 million tons of sugar imported while there
are 53.7 million tons exported throughout the
world [130, 131].
Trade in sugar throughout much of the world
is controlled by agreements and special trading
arrangements. The United States regulated sugar
production, distribution, and importation by
means of the Sugar Act of 1948 as amended
(US Congress, Public Law 339), but the act was
allowed to expire in 1974. From 1981 to the
present, the United States has had a price support
program, connected to farm legislation. In 1982,
an import quota system went into effect to
G. Eggleston et al.
supplement the price support program. In 1988,
Australia filed a complaint against the United
States, charging that the import restriction on
sugar violated the General Agreement on Tariffs
and Trade (GATT) rules. When the United States
was found to be in violation on some of these
rules, it implemented a change from an absolute
quota to a tariff-rate quota. The United States
also has a program called the General System
of Preferences (GSP) that exempts countries
(mostly in the Caribbean area) from any duty.
The EU countries import raw sugar within a
special agreement with ACP (Africa, Caribbean,
and Pacific) countries.
Domestic raw cane sugar prices are quoted via
the Sugar No. 16 (ICE—Intercontinental
Exchange) contract which serves the hedging
needs of US sugar producers, end users, and
merchants. The contract prices physical delivery
of US-grown (or foreign origin with duty paid by
deliverer) raw cane sugar at one of five US refin-
ery ports as selected by the receiver (Simon,
personal communications). There is no futures
market for US refined sugar. The world refined
sugar price is based on the Number 5 Contract on
the London International Financial Futures and
Options Exchange (LIFFE), which is based on the
London daily spot market price for refined sugar
in free-on-board ships in European ports [132].
Copies of the Number 11 (world sugar) and Num-
ber 14 contracts (domestic) for raw sugar can be
found in issues of F.O. Lichts World Sugar and
Sweetener Yearbook prior to 2002.
The USDA’s Sugar-Containing Products
Re-Export Program is designed to put US
manufacturers of sugar-containing products on a
level playing field in the world market. The
Refined Sugar Re-Export Program is designed to
facilitate the use of domestic refining capacity to
export refined sugar into the world market. The
program establishes a license against which a
refiner can export domestically produced refined
sugar and later import world raw sugar, import
world raw sugar for refining and distribution into
the domestic market, and later export refined
sugar, or import raw sugar, refine it and export it
into the world market. The program was
implemented to mitigate the imposition of
Sugar and Other Sweeteners
restrictive quotas, which reduced the quantity of
raw sugar allowed to enter the US domestic
market.
Environmental Concerns
and Sustainability
The sugar industry, like all other sectors of the
food and chemical processing industries, is fac-
ing important sustainability issues and
opportunities, and this includes protecting the
environment. The relatively low and fluctuating
profit for sugar, surpluses of sugar, worldwide
trend to produce alternative, renewable
bio-based fuels and chemicals to those derived
from petroleum and reduce greenhouse gases,
water- and energy-intensive factories and
refineries, and increased consumer demands for
sustainably manufactured products are putting
pressure on the sugar industry to diversify for
sustainability [65]. This has meant that close
attention must be paid to all gaseous and liquid
effluents, with the aim of minimizing their pro-
duction and ensuring that they meet all minimum
standards before being discharged into the envi-
ronment. The overall goal of the sugar industry is
to be environmentally sustainable, economically
viable and efficient, and socially responsible
[133]. The latter includes community concerns,
such as the question of whether to continue the
preharvest burning of sugarcane in various areas.
Another factor of community concern is the odor
produced by beet factories, and odor abatement
programs are in place. It is certain that present
standards will not be relaxed and that they can be
expected to become more restrictive as time goes
on [134]. Lead usage in polarization analysis was
discussed earlier; most sugar producers now use
alternatives (aluminum salts) or newer methods
of analysis such as high wavelength polarimetry,
NIR, or HPLC. Assessment tools, standards, and
enhanced metrics to measure sustainability are
being developed for the sugar industry [65]. The
sustainability of the worldwide sugar industry
should be viewed as a continuous improvement
journey, and behavior change and education will
973
also be linchpins in effective sustainability
programs.
Issues of Genetic Engineering
In the United States, herbicide-tolerant geneti-
cally engineered (transgenic) sugar beet was
approved in 1998, and has been available to the
market since 1999. Today, nearly 100 percent of
the sugar beet area is planted with herbicide-
resistant transgenic varieties. Growers, however,
have been wary about planting it because soft
drink, food, and other industrial users are
concerned about the growing consumer fears and
the inability to export such foods to the European
Union. In 2013, the world’s first transgenic sugar-
cane variety was approved for planting in
Indonesia, albeit for drought tolerance and not
herbicide resistance as is the case for most modern
sugar beet varieties. The Indonesian experience is
likely to be monitored closely by Raı́zen (a joint
venture between Shell and Cosan, a Brazilian
sugar miller) and Monsanto, which have stakes
in the Centro de Tecnologia Canavieira (CTC)
and CanaVialis, respectively. Both based in
Brazil, these are the two biggest private-sector
breeding stations in the world. According to the
watchdog GMO Compass, field trials for trans-
genic sugarcane have been held in Brazil, as well
as other countries including Australia, Cuba,
India, and the USA [135]. Genetically modified
sugarcane has been approved in Indonesia.
https://ethicalsugar.org/2014/02/14genetically-
modified-sugarcane-approved-in-Indonesia).
Brazil actually developed the first transgenic sug-
arcane varieties in 1994 and continues an intense
breeding program, with at least three varieties
developed for herbicide tolerance, cold tolerance,
and flowering control. The introduction of trans-
genic sugarcane varieties is not foreseen for sev-
eral more years in Brazil due to social factors and
strong regulations [136]. Successful introduction
of transgenic sugarcane or sugar beet varieties will
depend on public opinion rather than scientific
factors. Transgenic corn has been grown in the
United States for many years, and several of the
enzymes used are from modified organisms.
974
Because these have been in place for some years,
there is more acceptance of the products.
References
1. FO Lichts (2016) Supplement to A first look at the
2016-17 sugar balance. International Sugar & Sweet-
ener Report 148:38
2. FO Lichts World Sugar Statistics (2001) F.O. Licht
GmbH, World production, consumption and stocks
of centrifugal sugar 1952–2000, pp 12–13
3. FO Lichts World Sugar Statistics (2004) FO Licht
GmbH, World beet and cane sugar production, pp
14–15
4. Sawhney DH (2002) The Indian sugar industry.
Zuckerind 127:186–194
5. Tegge G (1978) Development and prospects of
sweeteners obtained by glucose isomerization. In:
Ahlfeld H (ed) International sweetener report
no. 1. Licht, GmbH, Ratezeburg, pp 3–8
6. Engber D (2009) Dark Sugar. The decline and fall of
high-fructose corn syrup. http://www.slate.com/
articles/health_and_science/2009/04/dark_sugar.
html.
7. (2000) Recent developments in the sugar industry,
by the Editor. Internat Sugar J 102:43–60
8. Blackwell J (2003) Recent developments in sugar
processing. FO Lichts World Sugar and Sweetener
Yearbook, E5–E25
9. Moroz RD, Broeg CD (1992) Sugar and other
sweeteners. In: Kent JA (ed) Riegel’s handbook of
industrial chemistry, 9th edn. Kluwer Academic,
New York, Chapter 9, pp 315–316
10. Hugill JAC (1979) History of the sugar industry. In:
Birch GG, Parker KJ (eds) Sugar: science and tech-
nology. Applied Science. London, pp 15–37
11. Goldstein D (2015) In: Goldstein D (ed) The Oxford
Companion to Sugars and Sweets. Oxford University
Press, New York, pp 1–888
12. Deere N (1949) The history of sugar, vol 1. Chapman
& Hall, London
13. Hugot E, Jenkins GH (1960) Handbook of cane
sugar engineering. American Elsevier, New York
14. McGinnis RA (1951) Beet sugar technology. Van
Nostrand Reinhold, New York
15. Eggleston G (2008) Sucrose and related oligosac-
charides. In: Fraser-Reid, Tatsuta K, Thiem J (eds)
Glycoscience. Springer, Berlin, Chapter 5, pp
1163–1182
16. Eggleston G, Legendre BJ, Richard C (2002) Effect
of harvest method and storage time on sugarcane
deterioration. Proceedings of the sugar processing
research conference, Porto, Portugal, pp 205–221
17. Godshall MA, Legendre BL, Richard C, Triche R
(2002) Effect of harvest system on cane juice qual-
ity. Proceedings of the sugar processing research
conference, Porto, Portugal, pp 222–236
G. Eggleston et al.
18. K€ordel P (1998/1999) New equipment and processes
in the sugar industry. FO Lichts Guide to Equipment,
Products and Services for the Sugar and Allied
Industries, Directory of Suppliers, pp E3–E25
19. Rein P (2002) Cane preparation. Sugar Bull 8:9–11
20. Ducasse V (1978) Heavy duty chopper fiberiser.
Proc Internat Soc Sugar Cane Technol
16:1568–1601
21. Anon (1970) BMA cane diffusion. Sugar y Azucar,
p 22
22. Schroder KE, Voigt I, Moor B (2007) The conver-
sion of a BMA diffuser to a Bosch Projects chainless
diffuser—the first season’s experience. Proc Internat
Soc Sugar Cane Technol 24, Durban, South Africa
23. Rein PW (1995) A comparison of cane diffusion and
milling. Proc South Afr Sugar Technol Assoc
69:196–200
24. ISSCT Engineering and Energy Workshop on Fac-
tory Design, Pakistan (1997) http://www.
sugaronline.com/issct/energyengineering/engw.htm
25. Boone S, Eggleston G, Klasson KT, St. Cyr E,
Powell R, Dalley C (2016) Using biocides to reduce
sugar loss in sweet sorghum and sugarcane.
Proceedings of the advances in sugar crops
processing and conversion, vol 1. New Orleans, L
26. Boone S, Eggleston G, Klasson, KT, St. Cyr E.,
Montes B, Pontiff, K, Legendre D, Wright M
(2016) Limiting sugar losses in Louisiana mills:
Are biocides necessary? Proceedings of the advances
in sugar crops processing and conversion, vol 1. New
Orleans, LA
27. Fowers M, Lloyd LE (1999) Biocide synergy: reduc-
ing costs and losses through physical and chemical
interactions. Proceedings of the American Society of
Sugar Beet Technologists, Orlando, FL, 1999
28. Pollach G, Hein W, Beddie D (2002) Application of
hop beta acids and rosin acids in the sugar industry.
Proceedings of the sugar processing research confer-
ence, Porto, Portugal, pp 51–76
29. Pollach G, Hein W, Beddie D (2004) The concept of
different natural antibacterials for the sugar industry.
Proceedings of the sugar processing research confer-
ence, Porto, Portugal, pp 237–259
30. Eggleston G, Huet JM (2012) The measurement of
mannitol in sugar beet factories to monitor deterio-
ration and processing problems. Zuckerind
137:33–39
31. Legendre B, Eggleston G, Birkett H, Mrini M,
Zehuaf M, Chabaa S, Assarrar M, Mounir H (2014)
How to manage cane in the field and factory follow-
ing damaging frosts. Internat Sugar J
CXVIII:526–531
32. Eggleston G (2009) Analysis of mannitol, as tracer
of bacterial infections in cane and beet sugar
factories. Proceedings of the XVI International
Andrew Van Hook Symposium, 24–34
33. Eggleston G, Stewart D, Montes B, Wartelle L,
Verret C (2016) The first use of a HPLC system at
a Louisiana sugarcane factory: What it can do for
Sugar and Other Sweeteners
you. Proceedings of the Advances in sugar crops
processing and conversion, vol 1. New Orleans, LA
34. Antczak-Chrobot A, Gruska R, Wojtczak M (2016)
The application of Fourier transform near-infrared
spectrometry for monitoring microbiological con-
tamination of sugar beet juice. Internat Sugar J
118:106–111
35. Eggleston G, Gober J, Alexander Clay (2010) Anal-
ysis of mannitol as a Leuconstoc mesenteroides dete-
rioration marker in sugarcane and sugar beet
factories. In: Eggleston G (ed) Sustainability of the
Sugar and Sugar-Ethanol Industries. ACS Sympo-
sium Series 1058, Oxford Univ. Press, Chapter 13,
207–227
36. Eggleston G, Cole C, Gilbert A, Rose I,
Andrzejewski B, St. Cyr E, Stewart D (2013) A
new look at starch in the sugarcane factory and
refinery: The presence of soluble and insoluble
starch. Proc Sugar Ind Technol China LXXII
(1066):326–339
37. Cole M, Eggleston G, Gilbert A, Chung YJ (2014)
Development of a research method to measure insol-
uble and soluble starch in sugarcane factory and
refinery products. Proc Sugar Ind Technol Canada
LXXIII:212–229
38. Cole M, Rose I, Chung YJ, Eggleston G (2015) A
structured approach to target suitable starch solubili-
zation and hydrolysis for the sugarcane and sweet
sorghum industries. Food Chem 166:165–172
39. Cole M, Eggleston G, Thompson J, Rathke T,
Naiki J, Triplett A, Zatlokovicz J (2015) Battle of
the starches: Insoluble versus soluble at the refinery.
Proc Sugar Ind Technol Japan LXXIV:184–208
40. Doherty WOS, Greenwood J, Pilaski D, Wright PG
(2002) The effect of liming conditions in juice
clarification. Proc Australian Soc Sugar Cane
Technol 24:443–451
41. Eggleston G, Monge A, Pepperman A (2002)
Preheating and incubation of cane juice prior to
liming: a comparison of intermediate and cold lime
clarification. J Agric Food Chem 50:484–490
42. Eggleston G, Monge A, Ogier B (2002) Further
insights on the factory performance of cold, interme-
diate and hot lime clarification systems. Proceedings
of the sugar processing research conference, vol
348–365. New Orleans, LA
43. Eggleston G, Legendre D, Pontif K, Gober J (2014)
Improved control of sucrose losses and clarified juice
turbidity with lime saccharate in hot lime
clarification of sugarcane juice and other
comparisons with milk of lime. J. Food Proc Preserv
38:311–325
44. Steindl RJ (1999) The clarification of cane juice.
Internat Sugar J 101:213–215
45. Kochergin V, Gaudet C (2011) A juice clarifier with
turbulence reduction devices – results of first indus-
trial trials. Internat Sugar J 113:348–355
46. Rein P (2007) In Sugar technology. Beet and cane
sugar manufacture. Bartens, Germany, p 1118
975
47. (1993) Raw syrup clarification processes. In: Chen
JCP, Chou CC (eds) Cane sugar handbook, 12th edn
(Section 5.77). Wiley, New York, pp 156–162
48. Moodley M, Bekker DJ, Pienaar PJ, Pillay R (1997)
Replacement of sulphur burner with liquid sulphur
dioxide system at the malelane refinery. Proc South
Afr Sugar Technol Assoc 71:142–145
49. Chen JCP, Chou CC (1993) Cane sugar handbook
(Chapter 5), 12th edn. Wiley, New York, pp
146–150
50. Sugar Technology, Beet and Cane Sugar Manufac-
ture (1998) In: van der Poel PW, Schiweck H,
Schwartz T (eds) Verlag Dr. Albert Bartens KG,
Berlin, Chapter 9.2.4, pp 513–514
51. Kulkarni 2010 ISSCT
52. Rein PW, Kampen H (2002) Evaporators in cane
sugar mills. Sugar J 65:18–21
53. Grant G, Anders M, Morgenroth B, Niepoth K,
Ehrenreich S (2001) Application of the new falling-
film plate technology in the cane sugar industry.
Internat Sugar J 103:70–73
54. Walthew DC (1996) Aspects of evaporator scale
formation and control in the South African sugar
industry. Proceedings of the sugar processing
research conference, vol 22–43
55. Godshall MA, Whartelle L (2002) Composition of
evaporator scale in Louisiana mills. Proceedings of
the sugar processing research conference, New
Orleans, LA, pp 379–385
56. Rein PN (1986) A review of experience with contin-
uous pans in Tongatt–Hulett sugar. Proceedings of
the South African sugar technologists association,
Durban, South Africa
57. Moor B (2001) Continuous pans: part 1—history,
theory and experience applied in a new design.
Internat Sugar J 103:542–546
58. Eggleston G, Monge A, Montes B, Stewart D (2007)
Overcoming practical problems of enzyme
applications in industrial processes: Dextranases in
the sugar industry. In: Eggleston G, Vercellotti JR
(eds) Industrial application of enzymes on carbohy-
drate based materials. ACS Symposium Series
972, Oxford University Press, Chapter 6, 73–87
59. Eggleston G, Toyamasu T, Marsha Cole,
Sugawara A, Montes B, Stewart D, Alexa Triplett
A (2016) Conquering the control of insoluble and
soluble starch with novel applications of amylase.
Internat Sugar J
60. Eggleston G, Vawda A, Zatlokovicz J, Lima I,
St. Cyr E (2014) Use of activated carbons to remove
undesirable residual amylase from factory and refin-
ery streams. Proc Sugar Industry Technol Canada
LXXIII:330–342
61. Oliveira J, Oliveira D, Oliveira D, Borges R (2016).
A new enzymatic solution to remove starch from
sugarcane with no residual enzyme in final sugar.
Proceedings of the advances in sugar processing and
conv. conf, vol 1. New Orleans, LA
976
62. (1998) Influence of individual nonsugars on molas-
ses formation. In: van der Poel PW et al. (eds) Sugar
technology, beet and cane sugar manufacture. Verlag
Dr. Albert Bartens, Berlin, pp 685–686
63. Vavrinecz G (1965) Atlas of sugar crystals. Verlag
Dr, Berlin
64. Dixon TF, Bullock GE (2004) Zuckerind
129:233–236
65. Eggleston G, Lima I (2015) Sustainability issues and
opportunities in the sugar and sugar-bioproduct
industries. Sustainability 7:12209–12235
66. Goldemberg J, Coelho ST, Nastari PM, Guardabasi P
(2014) Production and supply logistics of sugarcane
as an energy feedstock. In: Wang L (ed) Sustainable
bioenergy production. CRC press: Boca Raton,
Chapter 9, pp 213–222
67. Bennett MC, Elvin JR, Heineman HWB, Pottage PR,
Rundell JT (1978) Syrup clarification for improving
sugar quality and yield. Proc Internat Soc Sugar
Cane Technol 16:2797–2809
68. Bosworth M (2000) Billington’s—the unrefined
sugar specialists. Internat Sugar J 102:654–655
69. Buzzanell PJ (2000) Organic sugar: short term fad or
long term growth opportunity? Paper presented at
international sugar organization, 9th international
seminar, Hot issues for sugar, London. http://www.
organic-research.co.uk/research/Papers/sugar.htm
70. Kochergin V, Tzchartzsch O (2005) Ion exchange
thin juice softening using fractal technology. Internat
Sugar J 207:342–353
71. Blackwell J (2002) Recent developments in sugar
processing. Internat Sugar J 104:28–42
72. Kochergin V (2001) Practical applications of mem-
brane filtration in the sugar industry. Internat Sugar J
103:529–532
73. Steindl RJ (2001) Membrane filtration technology in
the cane sugar industry. Proc Internat Soc Sugar
Cane Technol 24:3–10
74. Rossiter GJ (1999) Chromatography in sugar
processing. Symposium on advanced technology
for raw sugar and cane and beet refined sugar pro-
duction, vol 181–193. New Orleans, LA
75. Rossiter G, Jensen C, Fechter W (2002) White sugar
from cane at the factory: the impact of WSM.
Proceedings of the sugar processing research confer-
ence, vol 162–177. Atlanta, GA
76. (1993) Cane sugar handbook, 12th edn
(Section 12.15). In: Chen JCP, Chou CC (eds) Mod-
ification of phosphatation and/or carbonation. Wiley,
New York, p 458
77. Eggleston G, Pepperman A, Clarke M (1997)
Decomposition of sucrose across the Talo™--
clarification process. Internat Sugar J 99:178–186
78. Davis SB (2001) The chemistry of colour removal: a
processing perspective. Proc South Afr Sugar
Technol Assoc 75:328–331
79. Moodley M, Davis SB, Adendorff M (1999) Full
scale decolourisation trials with ozone. Internat.
Sugar J 101:165–171
G. Eggleston et al.
80. Field P (1997) Color removal—carbon/char. Proc
1997 Sugar Industry Technol Canada LVI:232–244
81. Vawda A, Sarir EM, Donaldo CA (2014) Compari-
son of different decolorization technologies. Proc
Sugar Industry Technol Canada LXXIII
(1088):189–200
82. MacDonald SEM (1996) Continuous ion exchange
adsorption for the decolourization of sugar. In:
Proceedings of workshop on separation processes
in the sugar industry, Sugar Processing Research
Institute, New Orleans, pp 29–54
83. Bardwell DJ, Croker JR, Paton NH (1985) Recent
applications of colour fractionation in CSR
refineries. Proc Sugar Industry Technol XLIV
(521):32–52
84. (1993) Cane sugar handbook, 12th edn (Section 7).
In: Chen JCP, Chou CC (eds) Pan control and use of
instruments. Wiley, New York, pp 236–248
85. Mikuz O, Budizeck L (1986) Sugar storage in silos.
Sugar Technol Rev 13:53–129
86. Burke RT (1996) Conditioning of white sugar in
silos. Proc Sugar Ind Technol 55:181–195
87. Godshall MA (2002) The specialty sucrose market—
an important niche. Proc Sugar Ind Technol
61:251–265
88. van der Poel PW, Schiweck H, Schwartz T (eds)
(1998) Liquid sugars: manufacture and properties.
In: Sugar technology, beet and cane sugar manufac-
ture. Verlag Dr. Albert Bartens KG, Berlin, pp
951–956
89. Godshall MA, Vinnet CH, Chew V (1986) Sensory
analysis of brown sugars and its correlation with
chemical measurements. Proceedings of the 1984
conference sugar process research. New Orleans,
LA, pp 22–52
90. Awad A, Chen AC (1993) A new generation of
sucrose products made by cocrystallization. Food
Technol 47:146–148
91. Sugar Producer Magazine, Member Associations
(2010) pp 20–22
92. Jensen AS (2003) Steam drying of beet pulp and
bagasse. Internat Sugar J 105:83–88
93. Tjebbes J (1988) Utilization of fiber and other non-
sugar products from sugarbeet. In: Clarke MA,
Godshall MA (eds) Chemistry and processing of
sugarbeet and sugarcane. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp
139–145
94. Sargent D, Philip EJ, Cubero MTG (1998) Lime
reduction in juice purification. Proceedings of the
sugar processing research conference, Savannah,
GA, pp 21–39
95. Tebble I (2002) Use of membrane filtration to reduce
lime usage in purification. Proceedings of the sugar
processing research conference, New Orleans, LA,
pp 103–111
96. Eggleston G, Dilks A, Blowers M, Winters K (2012)
Successful application of dextranase in sugar beet
factories. Proc 36th Gen Mtg ASSBT, Alberquerque,
Sugar and Other Sweeteners
Chemistry and Instrumentation Section, http://assbt-
proceedings.org/index.htm, pp 1–16
97. Schrevel G (2009) Beet thick juice degradation dur-
ing storage. Zuckerind 134:9–13
98. Godshall MA, Vercellotti JR, Triche R (2002) Com-
parison of cane and beet sugar macromolecules in
processing. Int Sugar J 104:228–233
99. (1998) Molasses desugaring. In: van der Poel P et al.
(eds) Sugar technology, beet and cane sugar manu-
facture. Verlag Dr. Albert Bartens KG, Berlin,
Chapter 17, p 939
100. Kearney M (1990) Simulated moving-bed technol-
ogy applied to chromatographic recovery of sucrose
from sucrose syrups. Proceedings of sugar
processing research conference, San Francisco, CA,
USA, pp 291–304
101. Paananen HA (1996) Trends in the chromatographic
separation of molasses. In: Clarke MA
(ed) Separation processes in the sugar industry.
Proceedings of a workshop. Sugar Processing
Research Institute, New Orleans, LA, pp 100–119
102. Anon (1998) BMA Information, 36/1998. BMA AG,
Braunschweig, pp 8–11
103. Kearney M, Kochergin V (2001) Chromatographic
applications in the cane sugar industry. Proc Int Soc
Sugar Cane Technol 24:11–15
104. Bates F (1942) Polarimetry, saccharimetry and the
sugars. Circular C440 of the National Bureau of
Standards, pp 767–779
105. Theisen K-H, Senkowski K, Diringer T (2001) Con-
centration measurement for continuous sugar crys-
tallization processes. Paper presented at 31st
American Society of Sugar Beet Technologists,
Vancouver
106. Anon (2010) Sugar and sweetener: data tables,
Table 1—world production, supply and distribution,
centrifugal sugar. Economic Research Service,
USDA, update 1 June 2010. http://www.ers.usda.
gov/briefing/Sugar/Data/data/.htm
107. Anon (2015) Sugar: World Markets and Trade.
USDA-FAS Office of Global Analysis, November
2015
108. Haley S, Bolling C (2005) Brazil: the emerging giant
of the global sugar industry. Sugar and Sweetener
Outlook, SSS-242. Economic Research Service,
USDA, 28 Jan 2005, pp 21–30
109. F O Lichts World Sugar Statistics (2005) Sugar per
caput use, F.O. Licht GmbH, pp 56–57
110. Sugar and Sweetener Yearbook, Table 20a, US sugar
deliveries for human consumption, Economic Research
Service, USDA, updated 10 Feb 2010. http://www.ers.
usda.gov/Briefing/Sugar/Data/data.htm
111. Hickson JL (1979) The potential for industrial uses
of sucrose. In: Birch GG, Parker KJ (eds) Sugar:
science and technology. Applied Science, London,
pp 151–180
112. Kollonitsch V (1970) Sucrose chemicals. The Inter-
national Sugar Research Foundation, Washington,
pp 17–105, 173–221
977
113. Lichtenthaler FW (ed) (1990) Carbohydrates as
organic raw materials. VCH, Germany
114. Jolly L (2016) Intense sweeteners: diversity prevails.
Int Sugar J World Sugar Yearbook 2016:86–90
115. Buzzanell PJ (1998) U.S. corn sweeteners: recent
trends and future prospects. F.O. Lichts World
Sugar and Sweeter Yearbook, F O Lichts GmbH,
1997/98, pp D20–D34
116. Atama Aksoy M, Beghin JC (eds) (2005) In Sugar
policies: an opportunity for change. Global Agricul-
tural Trade and Developing Countries. World Bank
Publications, p. 329
117. Sugar and sweetener situation and outlook report,
SSS-232. Economic Research Service,
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Sept 2001
118. Kooreman JA (1955) Physical and chemical
characteristics of enzyme converted syrup. Manufac
Confect June:35–90
119. MacAllister RV (1979) Advances in carbohydrate
chemistry and biochemistry. In: Tipson RS, Horton
D (eds), vol 36. Academic, New York
120. Olsen HS (2002) Enzymes in starch modification. In:
Whitehurst RJ, Law BA (eds) Enzymes in food tech-
nology. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, pp 200–228
121. Godshall MA (1988) The role of carbohydrates
in flavor development. Food Technol 42:71–72,
74, 76, 78
122. Godshall MA (1990) Use of sucrose as a sweetener
in foods. Cereal Food World 35:384–389
123. Calorie Control Council. http://www.caloriecontrol.
org/erythritol.html
124. Embuscado ME (2000) Erythritol, a unique
low-calorie alternative sweetener. 2000 IFT annual
meeting, Abstract No. 1 72–2
125. Roh HJ, Kim P, Park YC, Choi JH (2000) Biocon-
version of D-galactose into D-tagatose by expression
of L-arabinose isomerase. Biotechnol Appl Biochem
31:1–4
126. Chaen H (1997) Production of trehalose by a novel
enzymatic method and its applications. J Appl
Glycosci 44:115–120
127. Ennen S (2001) Trehalose gets GRAS. Food Process
August 44
128. Philips D (2014) Hitting the beverage sweet spot.
Natural non-nutritive sweeteners offer opportunities
in beverages when the formulation rings clear and
clean. Food Processing, May edn, pp 45–51
129. Eggleston G, Heckemeyer M, St. Cyr E, Wartelle L
(2015) Case study: commercialization of sweet sor-
ghum juice clarification for large-scale syrup manu-
facture. Sugar Tech. doi:10.1007/s12355-015-0387-9
130. McConnell MJ (2016) USDA ERS, World Produc-
tion, Supply, and Distribution
131. McConnell MJ (2016) USDA FAS PSD, Sugar and
Sweetener Outlook No (SSSM-329), pp 14
132. Anon (2001) Sugar and sweetener: background. Eco-
nomic Research Service, USDA, 10 May 2001.
http://www.ers.usda.gov/briefing/sugar/background.
htm
978
133. Sustainable sugarcane and sugar production technol-
ogy. In: Yang-Rui L, Solomon S (eds) Proceedings
of 2004 meeting. China Agriculture Press, Beijing,
Nanning, China, Nov. 29–Dec 2, 2004, 764 pp
134. Suhr M, Schulze BC (2003) Technology in use in the
modern beet sugar factory. Int Sugar J 105
(52–58):69–70
G. Eggleston et al.
135. Richardson B (2014)
136. Burnquist WL (2005) Cane genome: what is the
direction of research?” (Genoma da cana: Qual o
Rumo das pesquisas?). In: Portuguese, paper
presented at 26th annual meeting of encontros
Fermentec, Sao Pedro, Brazil, 14–18 March 2005;
Proc. on CD