Applied Thermal Engineering 117 (2017) 511–521

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Applied Thermal Engineering

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

Research Paper

Exergy analysis of wine production: Red wine production process as a

case study
Mahmut Genc a, Seda Genc b,⇑, Yekta Goksungur a
a _
Ege University, Engineering Faculty, Department of Food Engineering, TR-35100 Bornova, Izmir, Turkey
b _
Yasar University, Vocational School, Department of Food Processing, TR-35100 Bornova, Izmir, Turkey

h i g h l i g h t s

Red wine production process was studied thermodynamically by exergy analysis method.

The first study on exergetic analysis of a red wine production process.

Energetic and exergetic efficiencies are calculated as 57.2 and 41.8%, respectively.

Cumulative exergy loss is computed as 2692.51 kW for 1 kg/s grape.

Specific exergy loss is found as 5080.20 kW/kg wine.

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: This paper performs exergy analysis of a red wine production line and defines the exergy destruction
Received 14 December 2016 rates to assess the system performance in terms of sustainability. A model study with necessary data
Revised 25 January 2017 is chosen for the calculations. The total exergy destruction rate of the overall system was determined
Accepted 4 February 2017
to be 344.08 kW while the greatest destruction rate of the exergy in the whole system occurred in the
Available online 17 February 2017
open fermenter (333.6 kW). The system thermal efficiency was obtained to be 57.2% while the exergy
efficiency was calculated as 41.8%. The total exergy destruction rate of the overall system increases with
Keywords:
the increase both in the grape flow rate and the reference temperature when the reference pressure is
Red wine
Thermodynamic analysis
assumed as 101.325 kPa. Furthermore, the chemical exergy of streams was found much higher than
Exergy the physical exergy for each stream. The exergy results were illustrated through the Grassmann diagram.
Sustainability Furthermore, cumulative exergy loss and specific exergy loss values were determined as
2692.51 kW/1 kg/s grape processed and 5080.20 kW/kg wine, respectively.
Ó 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction important factors leading to this acceleration is globalization of

Wine, which has economic and cultural impacts on the world
for thousands of years, is one of the foundations of Western civi-
lization and it is still the most popular alcoholic drink in the world
[1]. Grape, with about 8 million hectares of vineyards across the
world, adds a significant value to the economy especially in most
of the wine producing countries [2]. According to the international
reports and statistics, it is clear that the international wine trade
continues to grow. One of the indicators of the trade is ‘‘the share
of wine export volumes” which has been rising significantly and
reached over 101 million hectoliters in 2012. This amount repre-
sents 36% of global production compared with 2002 which repre-
sents 25% of the overall production [3]. One of the most
⇑ Corresponding author.
E-mail address: seda.genc@yasar.edu.tr (S. Genc).
consumption supported by the steady increase in the number of
producer countries.
The composition of wine is mainly water, ethanol, glycerol,
polysaccharides, different types of acids and phenolic compounds.
Although wine is not essential nutrients for human body, it is still
an important product of human ingenuity [4].
Vitis vinifera (Grapevine) is one of the most important agricul-
tural plant species in the modern world [5]. Similar to the other
agricultural processes viniculture is decidedly dependent upon
and inherently interconnected to climate and whether. The evi-
dence suggest that global warming will affect viticulture and vini-
culture process, not only in grapevine physiology and biochemistry
but also in the production methods used to make wine [6]. Addi-
tionally, vine and wine industry are entirely dependent on the nat-
ural sources such as clean water and healthy soils, meanwhile they
create significant demand on industrial resources, including water,

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2017.02.009
1359-4311/Ó 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
512 M. Genc et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 117 (2017) 511–521
Nomenclature
cp specific heat (kJ/kg K)
ex specific exergy (kJ/kg)
E_ energy rate (kW)
Ex_ exergy destruction rate (kW)
h specific enthalpy (kJ/kg)
x mass fraction (–)
m_ mass flow rate (kg/s)
Q_ heat transfer rate (kW)
P pressure (kPa)
s specific entropy (kJ/kg K)
T temperature (K or °C)
W _ rate of work or power (kW)
CEL cumulative exergy loss (kJ)
SEL specific exergy loss (kJ/final product)
Greek letters
g thermal (the first law) efficiency
e exergetic (the second law) efficiency
and fossil fuels. Resource derogation and climate change have
destructive effects on the vine and wine industry [7]. In compar-
ison with the many other industries, the wine industry alone might
be assessed relatively less impact on global climate change. How-
ever, it is not innocent from altering vineyard microclimates [8].
In order to secure long term competitiveness and prosperity,
wine manufacturing industry and viticulture sectors will have to
respond to those challenges by increasing sustainability of their
processes and products [9,10]. For this reason, the wine industry
in cooperation with all stakeholders have to find their proper and
effective role in the mitigation of and adaptation to climate change
globally. According to the guidelines of International Organization
for Vine and Wine (OIV) [11], the protection and preservation of
these natural assets through environmentally sustainable practices
are imperative for the long-term viability of vitivinicultural activi-
ties. Also, several researchers studied about the sustainability
within the life cycle of wine. They considered sustainability mainly
in two points of view. One group researchers studied the impacts
of climate change on the global vine agriculture and wine industry
whereas the others focused on the single or multiple impacts of
wine to environment. Some of these studies are dealing with anal-
ysis of the whole life cycle of a bottle of wine while others take
much narrow boundaries and only focused to a specific process
stage like distribution, viticulture, or material manufacturing such
as glass, cork for highlighting issues such as using of energy, pesti-
cide and fertilizers and waste. Among them, the most common
method is Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) method with a single
impact such as Carbon footprint and/or Water footprint [12,13].
However, resource degradation is also one of the very important
impact to environment. Improving of the thermodynamic efficien-
cies of a process would be resulted with decreasing resource con-
sumption as well as waste and emission and consequently this
becomes very important for creating a sustainable future. For that
reason, energy analysis is widely used as a common tool which is
conducted for the sustainable resource management based on
the first law of thermodynamics. However, conservation of energy
does not give any idea about energy quality. In 1978, Szargut [14]
showed that an exergy analysis can be useful tool for minimizing
the use of natural resources. According to Szargut et al. [15] the
maximum amount of work gained from a system can be defined
as exergy when it is reached to a state of thermodynamic
equilibrium with its surroundings. The exergy analysis evaluates
Subscript
D destruction
max maximum
in input
out output
0 reference environment
i numerator
k location
p product
f fuel
Superscript
ph physical
ch chemical
performance of the systems and indicates irreversibilities to
improve the system.
Exergy is widely accepted as a measure for quality of energy
and could be an effective tool for evaluating the quality and max-
imum limits of resources which is converted into the work. The
advantage of exergy indicators is mainly leading to a better under-
standing of the physical and chemical reasons of the inefficiencies.
This vision could be easily adopted in designing of more efficient
processes where all the inputs would be used in most feasible
way [16]. So far, this methodology has been applied successfully
in different industries, sectors and renewable energy sources
[17,18], it is also possible to assess the sustainability of a food man-
ufacturing process by using exergy analysis based on second law of
thermodynamics. Several researches used this method as a mea-
suring tool in different food processes such as potato crisp frying,
novel protein products, flavored yoghurts, vegetable oil produc-
tion, milk pasteurization and biofuel manufacturing [19–24].
However, only three publications have been found in the liter-
ature where the second law efficiency of the winemaking process
was studied, yet those are only in viticulture or very limited focus
in wine manufacturing. Zabalza et al. [25] determined the eco-
efficiency of wine production with simplified LCA analysis. Bas-
tianoni et al. [26] discussed the potentiality of exergy in comparing
two agricultural farms producing grapevine in Italy. Pizzigallo et al.
[27] studied comparative thermodynamic evaluation of two vine
producing farms through combined use of emergy and LCA meth-
ods. In these studies, no exergy calculation related to wine making
process was given or discussed by the researchers. Only Zabalza
et al. presented the exergies of main energy carriers and some fuels
such as diesel oil, natural gas, coal, wood, vine shoot, pomace and
stalk in their research but they did not mention calculation
methodology.
The exergy concept in the food industry has started to show a
growing trend among researchers and various studies have been
conducted in different sectors. Based on authors’ knowledge, an
exergy analysis of a red wine production process has never been
applied before. Hence, a model study with necessary data is chosen
for the calculations. The aim of this study is to apply an exergy
analysis of a red wine production line, including the cold room,
the crusher/destemmer, the chilled tank, the open fermenter, the
pneumatic press, the secondary fermenter, the racking, the heat
exchanger, the cold stabilization, the plate and frame filter, the
 M. Genc et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 117 (2017) 511–521
aging and the bottling. Exergy efficiency and exergy destruction
rate of each component and the overall system are calculated to
determine inefficiencies through assessing the system perfor-
mance in terms of sustainability for the first time.
2. Materials and methods
2.1. System description
2.1.1. General description of the red wine production process
The classic red winemaking process consists mainly four parts,
those are mechanical harvest treatments (crushing, destemming
and tank filling), vatting (primary alcoholic fermentation and mac-
eration), draining (separation of wine and pomace by de-juicing
and pressing) and final fermentations (malolactic fermentation)
[28]. For reaching a better level of quality some other steps are
applied to wine such as stabilization, clarification and maturation.
The simplified diagram of a red wine production process is shown
in Fig. 1.
Red wine is a macerated wine. Prior to the beginning of fermen-
tation, the temperature of the must can be adjusted to allow a per-
iod of cold maceration for leaching of the phenolic materials of the
grape-tannins, coloring agents (anthocyanins) and flavor com-
pounds from the grape skins, seeds and stems into the must. Also,
fermentation occurs while the juice is in contact with skins for an
extended maceration to further develop the wine character. Fer-
mentation is initially activated by yeast inoculation where yeast
primarily turns the sugar into carbon dioxide, heat and alcohol.
This reaction is an exothermic reaction and fermentation must be
carried out under controlled temperature where the optimal range
is 25–30 °C. After primary fermentation and maceration is com-
pleted, the wine is separated from marc through de-juicing or
pressing. Malolactic fermentation is carried out by lactic acid bac-
teria that turns the tart malic acid (of green apples) into the softer
lactic acid (of milk). After primer and secondary fermentation wine
left for a period for maturation. During this stage, the wine allows
to contact with small and controlled amounts of air through
periodic racking and wine transfers and the lees is separated from
wine. The tartaric stabilization is a process involving the
Fig. 1. Simplified flow diagram of a red wine production process.
513
refrigeration of wine from 20 °C to 0 °C for a period to allow the
precipitation of tartaric salts that would make the wine cloudy.
Prior to aging process, the wine pumped through plate filter for
clarifying. The wine production process ends up with the bottling
facility.
2.1.2. System boundaries and description
Fig. 2 illustrates a schematic diagram of the considered system
of a red wine production process. The system boundary starts with
the grape arrival and concludes with the membrane filtration. As
can be seen in Fig. 2, the system within this boundary consists of
mainly twelve parts, namely (i) the cold room, (ii) the crusher-
destemmer, (iii) the chilled tank, (iv) the open fermenter, (v) the
pneumatic press, (vi) the secondary fermentation, (vii) the racking,
(viii) the heat exchanger, (ix) the cold stabilization, (x) the plate
and frame filter, (xi) the aging in barrel, (xii) the membrane filter.
In this system just after harvesting, the red grapes (stream 1) go
to the cold room to prevent spoilage of the grapes. The second
stream (stream 2) is fed to the crusher–destemmer, where the
grapes are separated from the bushels and subsequently broken
to allow for the fermentation of the juice. The separated stalks
(stream 16) are the first waste of the process. After crushing, the
red must is transferred to the chilled holding tank and kept at
10 °C. After the completion of the maceration period in the chilled
tank, the must (stream 4) goes to the open, temperature controlled
tank where primary fermentation takes place. One of the waste of
the fermentation reaction is carbon dioxide and this amount was
emitted to the atmosphere (stream 17) during the fermentation.
Hereafter, the output stream of the open fermenter is divided into
2 streams, referred to as stream 5 and stream 6. The first stream
(stream 5) is free run and it goes directly to the secondary fer-
menter where ‘‘malolactic fermentation” is carried out. The second
stream (stream 6) coming from the open fermenter is fed to the
pneumatic press. The press fraction called press run (stream 7) is
pumped to the secondary fermenter. The pomace in the press is
the grape marc (stream 18) and it represents the main by product
generated by the wine industry. Following to malolactic fermenta-
tion process, the fermented juice (stream 8) goes to the racking for
first clarification of wine. The separated residue in the racking
called lees is represented as stream 19. Then, red wine (stream
514 M. Genc et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 117 (2017) 511–521

Fig. 2. Schematic of the system of a red wine production process.

9) is chilled to 0 °C through the heat exchanger and chilled wine _ ¼ mex

Ex _ ð6Þ
(stream 10) goes to the cold stabilization tank for the removal of
Exergy can be classified into physical and chemical exergy. In
crystalline tartarite deposit. The stabilized wine (stream 11) is
this study, both physical and chemical exergies have been consid-
reheated to 11 °C and the stream 12 flows through the plate and
ered in all steps of the process.
frame filter to remove any remaining residues (streams 20) before
The specific physical exergy of stream is calculated by using Eq.
aging. Aging is carried out in oak barrels for a period ranging from a
(7).
few months to 1–2 years depending on the desired wine quality.
The membrane filtration (stream 14) is applied to the aged red exph ¼ ðh  h0 Þ  T 0 ðs  s0 Þ ð7Þ
wine stream (stream 14) to completely remove the microorgan-
isms. Finally, the filtered wine (stream 15) reaches to the end of where the specific enthalpies of streams are computed by the
the system boundary and is pumped to the bottling section. formula
h  h0 ¼ cp ðT  T 0 Þ ð8Þ
2.2. Process modelling
and 0 refers the dead state or the reference environment of the sys-
The mass, energy, and exergy balance equations are applied to tem (T0 = 298.15 K, P0 = 101.325 kPa).
the system of interest to determine exergy destruction and effi- The specific entropies of the streams are calculated as [29];
ciencies in which the system is at steady-state and steady-flow s  s0 ¼ cp lnðT=T 0 Þ  R lnðP=P0 Þ ð9Þ
process.
In general, the mass balance equation is explained in the rate In this study, the specific heat capacities of streams are com-
form as puted based on a composition. In addition, Eq. (10) is used to cal-
X X culate unknown specific heat capacities of streams at each point of
_ in ¼
m _ out
m ð1Þ the process.
X
The general energy balance can be expressed as the total energy cp ¼ xi cp;i ð10Þ
input equals the total energy output i
X X
E_ in ¼ E_ out ð2Þ The composition of streams used in calculation of specific heat
is tabulated in Tables 1and 2 [30].
with all energy terms it becomes The specific chemical exergy of stream is calculated by using Eq.
X X (11).
Q_ þ m _ þ
_ in hin ¼ W _ out hout
m ð3Þ X
exch ¼ xi exch;0
i ð11Þ
The general exergy balance equation is defined in the rate form
as In Eq. (11), xi is the mass fraction of ingredient found in stream
X X X composition and exch;0 is specific chemical exergy. If two or more
_ in 
Ex _ out ¼
Ex _D
Ex ð4Þ i
streams are incorporated, exergy is destructed and defined as in
or Eq. (12).
X
X X X 
T0 _ X exmix ¼ Nt RT 0 ðxi lnðai ÞÞ ð12Þ
_ in exin 
m _ out exout þ
m 1 _ ¼
Qk  W _D
Ex ð5Þ
Tk
where Nt is total mole number of stream and R and T0 are universal
where gas constant and reference temperature, respectively and ak is the
 M. Genc et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 117 (2017) 511–521 515

Table 1
The compositions used in the calculation of specific heat and chemical exergy (90–93).

Juicea Wineb Stemc Skinc Seedc Leesd

Water 76% 87% 69% 76% 35% 55%
Total diet fiber – – 14% 9% 30% 11%
Condensed tannins – – – 6% 10% 0%
Protein – – 2% 3% 8% 8%
Fat – – 0% 2% 8% 3%
Ash 0% – 2% 2% 4% 5%
Soluble sugar 23% 1% 13% 1% 2% 2%
Soluble polyphenols – 0% – 1% 3% 0%
Tartaric acids 1% 1% – 0% 0% 13%
Alcohol – 11% – – – 3%
CO2 – – – – – 3%
Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
a
The composition of Juice is taken from Ref. [49].
b
The composition of wine is taken from Ref. [50].
c
The composition of stem, skin and seed are adopted from the Refs. [45,47,48,51,52].
d
The composition of lees is adopted from Refs. [53–56].

Table 2 The first law efficiency of the overall system is defined by the
The composition of grape cluster. formula as follows:
The grape cluster composition(w/w)a Eproduct E15
Stem 6% gov erall ¼ ¼ ð13Þ
Skin 10% Efuel E1
Seed 5%
Bery 94%
Additionally, the exergy efficiency of the overall system is
determined as the ratio of exergy of product over exergy of fuel
a
Adopted from Refs. [45–48]. Eq. (14). Furthermore, cumulative exergy loss (CEL) for kg grape
and specific exergy loss for kg wine are computed by using Eqs.
(15) and (16).
activity of ingredient k, which is proportional to the mole fraction of _ 15 e15
Exproduct m
this ingredient in the total mixture and the activity coefficient is ewhole ¼ ¼
_ 1 e1
ð14Þ
Exfuel m
assumed to be 1 as the streams are assumed as ideal solution
[15]. The specific chemical exergy ðexch;0 ), heat capacity (cp) and X X
i
CEL ¼ ExD þ ExD;waste ð15Þ
molecular weight (Mw) values of the ingredients used for calcula-
tions are tabulated in Table 3.
CEL
General mass, energy and exergy balance equations of the red SEL ¼ ð16Þ
wine production processes (in Fig. 2) based on the system compo- mwine produced
nents are tabulated in Table 4. The system of interest is analyzed by using Engineering Equa-
In the exergy analysis, both exergy losses depending on mass tion Solver (EES) software package [31] and the graphs were drawn
losses (waste streams) and exergy destruction associated with irre- in both EES and Microsoft Office Excel.
versibilities can be evaluated as irreversibilities in the process.
Therefore, the exergy destruction rate for each component is
2.3. Data used and assumptions made
calculated for two situations (considering with or without waste
streams). And the exergy efficiency of each component is deter-
The red wine production process explained in Section 2.1 is
mined as the ratio of exergy of product over exergy of fuel shown
assessed by using the first and second law analysis while the model
in Table 4.
explained in Section 2.2 is applied to this system. The main data
used in this study were taken from the literature and modelled
according to the assumptions below. By using these data, the
Table 3 enthalpy and entropy values were computed using EES by formulas
Specific chemical exergy ðexch;0
i ), heat capacity (cp) and molecular weight (Mw) of the explained in Eqs. (8) and (9) [32]. The input and output streams at
ingredients used for calculations.
each operation are tabulated in Table 5. The thermodynamic prop-
Specific exergy Heat capacity Molecular weight erties of all streams (grape, must, wine, waste, etc.) illustrated in
(kJ/kg) (kJ/kg K) (kg/mol) Fig. 2 are determined and all results are tabulated in Table 6 as a
Water 50 4.18a 0.018 sample case.
Diet fiber 13,800 1.55a 22,000 The grape cluster consists of berry, stem, skin and seed. Their
Tannins 33,534 1.351b 290c
percentages are adopted from Refs. [33–36] as shown in Table 1.
Protein 22,610 1.71a 80,000
Fat 43,090 1.93a 0.28 The compositions of must, wine, stems, skin and seeds are from
Ash 20 0.84a 0.035 the references of [33,35–44] as shown in Table 2.
Simple carbohydrate 16,700 1.55a 0.18
Phenol 33,243 1.351b 94
2.3.1. Assumptions
Tartaric acid 1373 1.255b 150
Alcohol 30,140 2.44a 0.046 The following assumptions are made for the exergy analysis of
Carbondioxide 240 0.92a 0.044 the system.
a
Value adapted from Zisopoulos et al. [56].
b
Value calculated according to Shieh and Fan [60].
(a) All processes are steady state and steady flow with negligi-
c
Epicatechin was taken for the calculation. ble potential and kinetic energy effects.
516 M. Genc et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 117 (2017) 511–521

Table 4
The mass. energy and exergy equations of the components of the red wine production process.

System Mass. energy and exergy equations System components Mass. energy and exergy equations
components

m_1¼m _2 m_8¼m _ 9 þm _ 19
m1 cp:1 T 1  Q_ I ¼ m_ 2 cp:2 T 2 m_ 8 cp:8 T 8 ¼ m _ 9 cp:9 T 9 þ m_ 19 cp19: T 19
_ D:ı ¼ m_ 1 ex1  m_ 2 ex2  Q_ ı ð1  T 0 =T 2 Þ _ D:VII ¼ m
Ex _ 8 ex8  m _ 9 ex9  m _ 19 e19
Ex
eı ¼ m_ 2 ex2 =m_ 1 ex1 eVII ¼ m_ 9 e9 =m_ 8 e8

m_2¼m _ 3 þm _ 16 m_9 þm _ 11 ¼ m _ 10 þ m _ 12
m_ 2 cp:2 ¼ m _ 3 cp:3 T 3 þ m _ 16 cp:16 T 16 m_ 9 cp:9 T 9 þ m _ 11 cp:11 T 11 ¼ m_ 10 cp:10 T 10 þ m_ 12 cp12 T 12
_ D:II ¼ m
Ex _ 2 ex2  ðm _ 3 ex3 þ m _ 16 ex16 Þ _ D:VIII _¼ m _ 9 ex9 þ m _ 11 ex11  ðm _ 10_ ex10 þ m_ 12 ex12 Þ
Ex
eII ¼ m_ 3 ex3 =m_ 2 ex2 eVIII ¼ ðm_ 10 ex10  m_ 9 ex9 Þ=ðm_ 11 ex11  m_ 12 ex12 Þ

m_3¼m _4 _ 10 ¼ m
m _ 11
m_ 3 cp:3 T 3  Q_ III ¼ m
_ 4 cp:4 T 4 m10 cp:10 T 10  Q_ IX ¼ m _ 11 cp:11 T 11
_ D:III ¼ m
Ex _ 3 ðex3  ex4 Þ  Q_ III ð1  T 0 =T 4 Þ _ D:IX ¼ m
Ex _ 10 ex10  m _ 11 ex11  Q_ IX ð1  T 0 =T 11 Þ
eIII ¼ m_ 4 ex4 =m_ 3 ex3 eIX ¼ m_ 11 ex11 =m_ 10 ex10

m_4¼m _ 5 þm _ 6 þm
_ 17 m_ 12 ¼ m _ 13 þ m _ 20
m_ 4 cp:4 T 4  Q_ IV ¼ m_ 5 cp:5 T 5 þ m _ 6 cp:6 T 6 þ m_ 17 cp:17 T 17 m_ 12 cp:12 T 12 þ Q_ X ¼ m_ 13 cp:13 T 13 þ m_ 20 cp:20 T 20
_ D:IV ¼ m
Ex _ 4 ex4  m
_ 5 ex5  m _ 6 ex6  m _ 17 ex17 Q_ IV ð1  T 0 =T 5 Þ _ D:X ¼ m
Ex _ 12 ex12 þ Q_ X ð1  T 0 =T 13 Þ  m_ 13 ex13  m_ 20 ex20
eIV ¼ ðm_ 5 ex5 þ m_ 6 ex6 Þ=m_ 4 ex4 eX ¼ m_ 13 ex13 =m_ 12 ex12

m_6¼m _7 +m _ 18 m_ 13 ¼ m_ 14 m_ 13 cp:13 T 13 ¼ m _ 14 cp:14 T 14

m_ 6 cp:6 T 6 ¼ m _ 7 cp:7 T 7 þ m_ 18 cp:18 T 18 _ D:XI ¼ m
Ex _ 13 ex13  m _ 14 ex14
_ D:V ¼ m
Ex _ 6 ex6  m _ 7 ex7  m _ 18 ex18 eXI ¼ m_ 14 ex14 =m_ 13 ex13
eV ¼ m_ 7 ex7 =m_ 6 ex6

m_ 5 þm _7¼m _8 m_ 14 ¼ m _ 15 m _ 14 cp:14 T 14 ¼ m_ 15 cp:15 T 15

m_ 5 cp:5 T 5 þ m _ 7 cp:7 T 7 ¼ m _ 8 cp:8 T 8 _ D:XII ¼ m
Ex _ 14 ex14  m _ 15 ex15
_ D:VI ¼ m
Ex _ 5 ex5 þ m _ 7 ex7  m _ 8 ex8 eXII ¼ m_ 15 e15 =m_ 14 e14
eVI ¼ m_ 8 ex8 =ðm_ 5 ex5 þ m_ 7 ex7 Þ

(b) The directions of heat transfer to the system and work trans- (c) The pressure and heat losses in the pipelines and the system
fer from the system are positive. components such as cold room, crusher-destemmer, sec-
ondary fermenter, racking, pneumatic press, heat exchanger,
Table 5
the filters and aging are ignored.
Definition of streams used in the system.
(d) The mass flow rate of red grape is assumed as 1 kg/s at the
Process Stream IN Streams OUT Waste process entrance.
Cold Room Ambient Grapes Chilled grapes (e) The fermentation yield is considered as 100%.
Destemmer/ Chilled Grapes Destemmed and Stem (f) The temperature of the grape entering the cold room is
Crasher crushed grapes Waste
35 °C.
Cold Tank Destemmed and Cooled destemmed
crushed grapes and Crushed grapes (g) The cold storage temperature of the grape is taken as 25 °C.
Free run Cooled destemmed Free Run (h) The temperature of the open fermenter is 25 °C.
separation and crushed grapes (i) The cold stabilization temperature is assumed to be 0 °C.
Pressing Destemmed must Press run Pomace (j) The reference state temperature and pressure values are
Blending of free Free run + press run Fermented wine
298.15 K and 101.325 kPa, respectively.
run and press
run (k) Any chemical exergy changes during secondary fermenta-
Cooling Tank Wine blend Cooled wine blend tion are not considered.
Filter operation Cooled wine blend Filtered wine blend (l) The streams are assumed as ideal solution.
Secondary Filtered wine blend Wine blend draft
(m) The mass losses (waste streams) of crusher-destemmer,
fermentation
Racking Wine blend draft Wine Lees
open fermenter, pneumatic press, secondary fermenter,
Cold stabilization Wine blend Stabilized wine racking and plate and frame filter are 6%, 7%, 90%, 1.3% and
Filtering Stabilized wine Filtered wine Tartarate 0.7%, respectively [45–48].
blend (n) In the open fermenter, a net heat transfer rate is defined to
Aging in barrel Filtered wine blend Aged wine
be involved as warming up stream 4 at 10–25 °C and heat
Membrane filter Aged wine Wine Microbes
Bottling Wine Bottled wine release during fermentation.
 M. Genc et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 117 (2017) 511–521 517

Table 6
Thermodynamic properties of the system at operating conditions (Tref = 298.15 K, Pref = 101.325 kPa).

Point Stream Temperature Pressure Specific heat Mass Physical Chemical Total specific Energy Exergy rate
(K) (kPa) capacity (kJ/ flowrate specific exergy specific exergy exergy (kJ/kg) rate E = mex
kg K) (kg/s) (kJ/kg) (kJ/kg) (kW) (kW)
1 Grape Cluster 35 101.325 3.48 1.00 0.57 4652.76 4653.33 1072.00 4653
2 Grape Cluster 25 101.325 3.48 1.00 0.00 4653.00 4653.00 1038.00 4653.00
3 Crushed 25 101.325 3.49 0.94 0.00 4649.00 4649.00 978.10 4370.00
destemmed
grape
4 Crushed 10 101.325 3.49 0.94 1.36 4649.00 4650.36 928.90 4371.00
destemmed
grape
5 Free Run Juice 25 101.325 3.92 0.06 0.00 3767.82 3767.82 582.30 1877.00
6 Crushed 25 101.325 3.92 0.38 0.00 5705.00 5705.00 408.10 2145.00
destemmed
must
7 Press run 25 101.325 3.92 0.04 0.00 3768.00 3768.00 43.94 141.70
wine
8 Wine 25 101.325 3.92 0.54 0.00 3768.00 3768.00 626.20 2019.00
9 Lees 25 101.325 0.93 0.53 0.00 3737.00 3737.00 619.80 1976.00
10 Wine 15 101.325 3.92 0.53 0.67 3737.00 3737.67 597.30 1977.00
11 Wine 0 101.325 3.92 0.53 4.35 3732.00 3736.35 566.20 1976.00
12 Wine 11 101.325 3.92 0.53 1.36 3732.00 3733.36 588.70 1974.00
13 Wine 25 101.325 3.92 0.53 0.00 3712.00 3712.00 613.70 1949.00
14 Wine 25 101.325 3.92 0.53 0.00 3712.00 3712.00 613.70 1949.00
15 Wine 25 101.325 3.92 0.53 0.00 3712.00 3712.00 613.70 1949.00
16 Stem 25 101.325 3.34 0.06 0.00 4710.00 4710.00 59.75 282.60
17 CO2 25 101.325 0.92 0.07 0.00 240.00 240.00 18.05 15.79
18 Pomace 25 101.325 3.61 0.34 0.00 5919.71 5919.71 364.20 2003.00
19 Wine 25 101.325 3.09 0.01 0.00 5887.61 5887.61 6.42 41.01
20 Lees 11 101.325 3.09 0.00 1.36 5887.61 5888.97 3.41 21.8

(o) The ratios of stem, skin and seeds are assumed as 6%, 10% ciencies of the overall system are calculated as 57.2% and 41.8%,
and 5%, respectively as shown in the Table 2. respectively. Also, CEL and SEL values are determined to be
(p) The stems are separated in destemmer, skins and seeds are 2692.51 kW for 1 kg/s grape processed and 5080.20 kW/kg wine
removed after fermentation in pneumatic press. produced, respectively.
(q) The free run fraction is 53% and the press fraction is 10.6% of Table 8 presents exergy destruction of different components of
the crushed must [45,49]. the whole system. As seen in Table 8, total exergy destruction of
(r) The remaining skin content in free run and press run wine is the overall system is found to be 344.08 kW without waste streams
assumed to be 1–2% [45]. while the greatest irreversibility (exergy destruction) occurs in the
open fermenter covering 96.95% (333.6 kW), followed by the cold
stabilization (3.86 kW), the plate and frame filter (1.81 kW), the
3. Results and discussion
racking (1.33 kW), the chilled tank (1.32 kW), the cold room
(0.57 kW), the crusher-destemmer (0.29 kW) and the pneumatic
3.1. Results
press (0.01 kW) while the secondary fermenter, the aging in barrel
and the membrane filter processes have no exergy destructions as
For an illustrative case, the stream name, temperature, pressure,
seen in Table 8 and Fig. 3.
specific heat capacity, mass flow rate, specific physical and chem-
On the other hand, if the exergy destructions are calculated
ical exergy rates and total exergy rate for streams, energy and
depending on both mass losses (waste streams) and exergy
exergy rates together with the corresponding stream numbers
destructions (without waste streams), total exergy destruction of
specified in Fig. 2 are shown in Table 6.
the overall system (CEL) is computed as 2692.51 kW. In this sce-
Table 7 presents heat transfer and work power rate of the com-
nario, the pneumatic press has the highest exergy destruction
ponents and efficiency values of the overall system based on the
(2003 kW) because of its huge amount of waste stream, followed
reference environment (T0 = 298.15 K, P0 = 101.325 kPa). When
by the open fermenter (333.6 kW) and the crusher/detemmer
the system is run under this condition, the thermal and exergy effi-
(282.9 kW) as presented in Table 8 and Fig. 3.
Total exergy destruction and exergy efficiency of the overall
Table 7 system versus the mass flow rate of grape is plotted in Fig. 4. The
Main results of the system at operating conditions (Tref = 298.15 K, results show that total exergy destruction is proportional with
Pref = 101.325 kPa).
the mass flow rate of grape for the overall system. The exergy
Component # Component Value (kW) destruction rate of the overall system is calculated as 344.08 kW
I Cold room heat capacity 34.8 at 1 kg/s and 3441 kW at 10 kg/s. In other respects, the exergy
II Crusher/destemmer power 0.29 destruction rates are calculated as 2692.51 kW and 26,925 kW
III Chilled tank heat capacity 49.21 for grape mass flow rate of 1 and 10 kg/s, respectively. Addition-
IV Open fermenter heat capacity 22,98
ally, the change in mass flow rate of grape do not affect overall
V Pneumatic press power 0.11
IX Cold stabilization 31.1
exergy efficiency.
X Plate and frame filter 28.46 The exergy efficiency of each component in the whole system
Overall (I-XII) Thermal efficiency 57.2% are analyzed using the equations given in Table 4 and the results
Overall (I-XII) Exergy efficiency 41.8% are shown in Fig. 5. The efficiency values are in the range of
518 M. Genc et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 117 (2017) 511–521

Table 8
Exergy loss of different components of the whole system (Tref = 298.15 K, Pref = 101.325 kPa).

Component Component Exergy destruction rate without Exergy destruction fraction Exergy destruction rate with Exergy destruction fraction
# waste (kW) without waste (%) waste (kW) with waste (%)
I Cold room 0.57 0.17 0.57 0.02
II Crusher/ 0.29 0.08 282.9 10.51
destemmer
III Chilled tank 1.32 0.38 1.32 0.05
IV Open 333.6 96.95 333.6 12.39
fermenter
V Pneumatic 0.01 0.00 2003 74.39
press
VI Secondary 0 0.00 0 0.00
fermenter
VII Racking 1.33 0.39 42.35 1.57
VIII Heat 1.29 0.37 1.29 0.05
exchanger
IX Cold 3.86 1.12 3.86 0.14
stabilization
X Plate and 1.81 0.53 23.62 0.88
frame filter
XI Ageing in 0 0.00 0 0.00
barrel
XII Membrane 0 0.00 0 0.00
filter
Whole System 344.08 100.00 2692.51 100.00

(a) (b)
_
Fig. 3. Percentage exergy loss of the system components (a) without (b) with waste streams (Tref = 298.15 K, Pref = 101.325 kPa, m grape = 1 kg/s).

Fig. 4. Effect of the mass flow rate of grape on total exergy destruction of the whole system (Tref = 298.15 K, Pref = 101.325 kPa).

18–99% and the cold room, the chilled tank, the racking, the cold brane filter have the highest exergy efficiencies with values of
stabilization, the plate and frame filter, the aging and the mem- 99.98–99.95%. Exergy efficiency of the open fermenter is calculated
 M. Genc et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 117 (2017) 511–521
Fig. 5. Exergetic efficiency of the system components (Tref = 298.15 K,
_ grape = 1 kg/s).
Pref = 101.325 kPa, m
as 92.01%. However, the pneumatic press and the heat exchanger
have lower exergy efficiencies with the value of 6.60% and
18.09%, respectively. The overall system exergy efficiency is com-
puted as 41.89%.
Fig. 6 presents the effect of the mass flow rate of grape and the
reference temperature on total exergy destruction of the whole
system for the reference pressure 101.325 kPa. As seen in Fig. 6,
the minimum total exergy destruction of the system (343.8 kW)
is obtained at 293.15 K reference temperature and 1 kg/s mass flow
rate of grape. The rise both in grape mass flow rate and reference
temperature increases total exergy destruction of the overall
system.
The exergy destruction rate with waste streams for the overall
system are computed based on the data shown in Table 6 and illus-
trated on the Grassmann diagram (Fig. 7). In the considered sys-
tem, the total exergy output rate of the overall system is
determined as 1949 kW while the total exergy input rate is calcu-
lated as 4653 kW. The exergy destruction rate during the red wine
production process are calculated as 2704 kW. The difference
between exergy destruction rates between 2704 kW and
2692.51 kW (seen in Table 6) is because of exergy of carbon diox-
ide which was not considered as waste stream in the calculation. In
the overall system, the main exergy destruction rates occurred in
the pneumatic press (2003 kW), the open fermenter (333.6 kW)
and the crusher-destemmer (282.9 kW). The exergy waste of the
production line comes from the waste of the crusher-destemmer,
the pneumatic press, the racking and the plate and frame filter.
Fig. 6. The effect of mass flow rate of grape (m_ 1 , kg/s) and reference temperature
(Tref, K) the exergy destruction rate (kW) of the whole system.
519
3.2. Discussion
The exergy analysis is used to assess the performance of the sys-
tems by indicating inefficiencies of system components. The
results of the present study are compared with the exergy studies
of similar fermentation processes in the literature since this
research is the first study on exergy analysis of the red wine pro-
duction process. Palacios-Breche et al. [50] studied ethanol produc-
tion from sugarcane and compared exergetic efficiencies of the
conventional and enzymatic hydrolysis integrated process. They
reported exergetic efficiencies of the examined processes were
28% and 35–37% for conventional and new processes, respectively.
The exergetic efficiency of the system in our study was found 41.8%
which is a little higher from the study of Palacios-Breche et al. [50].
Ojeda et al. [51] carried out an exergetic analysis of ethanol pro-
duction from lignocellulosic biomass through different three cases
and the highest exergetic efficiency of fermentation was found 65%
[52]. Bayrak et al. [53] presented the energy and exergy analyses of
sugar production stages of a sugar plant including sherbet produc-
tion, distillation, thickening and crystallization. They deduced that
the exergy loses took place mostly during the sherbet production
process (49.3%) because of the irreversibility in the sub-operation
stages, which are vapour production, circulation sherbet mixing
and bagasse compression. They suggested to keep the temperature
differences at lowest possible for improving the system. However,
the highest exergetic efficiency (91.9%)was found in the third
stages and they connected this result with low irreversibilities
within this stage. Velazques-Arredondo et al. [54] studied exergy
analysis of ethanol and biodiesel using the fruit and flower stalk
of banana tree, palm oil, and glucose syrups as raw materials. Max-
imum exergetic efficiency of fermentation was found 77.8% when
syrup of banana hydrolysis used. In our study, the fermentation
exergetic efficiency (92%) is higher than banana hydrolysis fermen-
tation since grape sugar is much more usable by yeast. Zabalza
et al. [25] stated that exergetic analysis result would match with
energetic analysis since the energy use is not the main drive of
the main final product and the heat is not demanded for the pro-
cesses within the wineries. According to energetic analysis results,
Symth [55] stated that most of the energy for wine making process
is consumed at fermentation refrigeration, cold stabilization and
cold storage stages. In our study, the fermentation process has
the most exergy destruction rate without waste but this amount
is almost equal to the whole exergy destruction rate (96.95%). It
is because of chemical exergy involvement in our system. The
chemical exergy in the changing of must to wine is much greater
than physical exergy. Similar statements were given by Zisopoolos
et al. [56] and Böschel et al. [57]. Also, the wastes and by products
are responsible from highest exergy destructions. As shown in
Table 8, four of the five highest exergy destructions occurred in
the processes where waste exists (see Table 5 for the detailed
streams). In our system, the lowest exergetic efficiency is found
in pneumatic press (%7). This is not only because of the irreversibil-
ities, it is also resulted by the exergy loss due to waste stream as it
was shown in third and fifth column in Table 8. The third column
represented the irreversibilities and theoretically if we take the
waste as a product output we could improve the efficiency. First
improvement could be increasing of the mass of press run. How-
ever, viticulture is a specific process and mainly depending on
the species of grapes and the associated type of wine. For that rea-
son, in some high-quality wines it will not be an option to increase
press fractions. In order to improve the exergy loss, we are also
suggesting to valorisation of waste streams. Encouraging the wine
manufacturer for this purpose will be concluded with improving of
the exergetic efficiency. Berghout et al. [58] pointed the impor-
tance of the valorisation. They compared the exergetic perfor-
mance of the conventional aqueous fractionation of oilseeds with
520 M. Genc et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 117 (2017) 511–521
Fig. 7. Grassmann diagram of the red wine production process.
dry fractionation and they concluded that process sustainability
could be further increased by valorising the side streams.
Jankowiak et al. [59] emphasized that keeping chemical exergy
of all material streams within the production line has crucial
importance and they recommended that the loss of materials with
high specific chemical exergy should be averted. In our study, the
exergy destruction rates calculated for two cases (without or with
waste streams) are found different (344.08 and 2692.51 kW). Since
waste streams have high chemical exergy values. It adds up to min-
imize the waste output for decreasing exergy destruction rate.
These outputs must be taken as by-products of further valorization
steps. Similar conclusions obtained by Zousopoulus et al. [56]
where they stated that optimizing the use of physical exergy
makes sense only after the waste production has been minimized.
4. Conclusions
The study is limited to an analysis of the red wine manufactur-
ing processes and its main components. For evaluating the perfor-
mance of various systems thermal (the first law) analysis is mostly
used one. However, recent studies have showed that exergy anal-
ysis methods are becoming more useful on determining the system
inefficiencies. Therefore, in this study, energy and exergy analyses
of the red wine production process have been conducted by using
the operational data taken from the literature.
The concluding remarks of this study can be summarized as
follows:
(a) The total exergy destruction of the overall system without
waste stream was found to be 344.08 kW. The greatest
exergy destruction rate of the overall system was the open
fermenter (333.6 kW) followed by the cold stabilization
(3.86 kW) and the plate and frame filter (1.81 kW).
(b) The total exergy destruction of the overall system with
waste stream was calculated as 2692.51 kW. The greatest
exergy destruction rate of the overall system was the pneu-
matic press (2003 kW) followed by the open fermenter
(333.6 kW), the crusher and destemmer (282.9 kW), the
racking (42.35 kW) and the plate and frame filter
(23.62 kW).
(c) The thermal efficiency of the overall system was determined
as 57.2% while the exergy efficiency was calculated as 41.8%.
(d) When the reference pressure was assumed as 101.325 kPa,
the rise in grape flow rate and reference temperature
resulted in an increase in the total exergy destruction of
the overall system.
(e) CEL and SEL values were computed as 2692.51 kW for 1 kg/s
grape processed and 5080.20 kW/kg wine, respectively.
(f) Further studies are required on
– the separate study of the exergy analysis of the bottling
process of wine,
– the thermodynamic optimization of the best operating
conditions and assessment of the exergetic life cycle,
– the evaluation of the thermodynamic efficiency of the
upstream and downstream processes and the by-
product/waste streams.
When the whole red wine production process is considered, it
was found that the chemical exergies of the streams were more
effective than physical exergies. The analysis demonstrated that
using all materials efficiently were very important in obtaining
high exergetic efficiencies. However, due to specific requirements
of the high-quality wine manufacturing techniques, it was not
always possible to decrease waste streams. Therefore, it is neces-
sary to focus on the valorization of the side streams before opti-
mizing the physical exergies.
The exergy concept in the food industry is now at the very
beginning stage and there is still need to improve the level of sen-
sitivity and decrease the uncertainty, by doing more validation and
verification studies. The result of this study contributes to design
new research models for introducing more efficient and sustain-
able approaches to wine industry which is very important for the
societies where the grapevine and wine is one of the economically
value creating product.
Acknowledgements
This research did not receive any grant from public, commer-
cial, or non profit agencies/organizations. We thank Prof. Dr. Arif
Hepbasli, Dr. Nurdan Yildirim for their precious comments and
Mrs. Huriye Göksungur for editing the manuscript. Additionally,
the authors are also thankful to the reviewers for their valuable
comments that contributed to the content of the work.
 M. Genc et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 117 (2017) 511–521 521

References [30] R.E. Sonntag, C. Borgnakke, G.J. Van Wylen, S. Van Wyk, Fundamentals of
Thermodynamics, vol. 6, Willey, New York, NY, 1998.
[31] F-Chart Software, Engineering Equation Solver [Internet], 2014, Available
[1] S.K. Estreicher, Wine from Neolithic Times to the 21st Century, Algora
from: F-Chart Software.
Publishing, New York, NY, 2006, 199p.
[32] S. Syahrul, F. Hamdullahpur, I. Dinçer, Exergy analysis of fluidized bed drying
[2] FAO Food and agriculture organization of the united nations statistics division,
of moist particles, Exergy Int. J. 2 (2) (2002) 87–98.
FAOSTAT Domains [Internet], 2014 [cited 2016 Apr 11], Available from:
[33] L. Bravo, F. Saura-Calixto, Characterization of dietary fiber and the in vitro
<http://faostat3.fao.org/browse/Q/QC/E>.
indigestible fraction of grape pomace, Am. J. Enol. Vitic. 49 (2) (1998) 135–141.
[3] OIV (International Organization for Vine and Wine), OIV report on the world
[34] J. Moreno, R. Peinado, Enological Chemistry, Academic Press, 2012, p. 429.
vitivinicultural situation [Internet], 2015 [cited 2016 May 30], Available from:
[35] M. Basalan, T. Gungor, F.N. Owens, I. Yalcinkaya, Nutrient content and in vitro
<http://www.oiv.int/en/oiv-life/2015-oiv-report-world-vitivinicultural-
digestibility of Turkish grape pomaces, Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 169 (3–4)
situationnbsp>.
(2011) 194–198, Elsevier B.V..
[4] M.R. Mozell, L. Thach, The impact of climate change on the global wine
[36] M. Bordiga, Valorization of Wine Making by-Products, CRC Press, Boca Raton,
industry: challenges and solutions, Wine Econ. Policy 3 (2) (2014) 81–89.
USA, 2016, 376p.
[5] A. Pulvirenti, R. Giugno, R. Distefano, G. Pigola, M. Mongiovi, G. Giudice, et al., A
[37] R.B. Boulton, V.L. Singleton, L. Vernon, L.F. Bisson, R.E. Kunkee, E. Ralph,
knowledge base for Vitis vinifera functional analysis, BMC Syst. Biol. 9 (Suppl.
Principles and Practices of Winemaking, Springer, US, 1999, p. 604.
3) (2015) S5.
[38] R.S. Jackson, Chemical Constituents of Grapes and Wine, Wine Science, 2014,
[6] H.R. Schultz, Climate change and viticulture: research needs for facing the
pp. 347–426.
future, J. Wine Res. 21 (2–3) (2010) 113–116.
[39] M.R. González-Centeno, C. Rosselló, S. Simal, M.C. Garau, F. López, A. Femenia,
[7] B. Hardy, Sustaining Success, The Australian Wine Industry Environment
Physico-chemical properties of cell wall materials obtained from ten grape
Strategy [Internet]; 2002 [cited 2016 Apr 11], Available from: <http://www.
varieties and their byproducts: grape pomaces and stems, LWT – Food Sci.
wfa.org.au/assets/envirmonment-biosecurity/Sustaining-Success.pdf>.
Technol. 43 (10) (2010) 1580–1586, Elsevier Ltd.
[8] T. Colman, P. Päster, Red, white, and ‘‘green”: the cost of greenhouse gas
[40] J. Yu, M. Ahmedna, Functional components of grape pomace: their
emissions in the global wine trade, J. Wine Res. 20 (1) (2009) 15–26.
composition, biological properties and potential applications, Int. J. Food Sci.
[9] P.M. Wognum, H. Bremmers, J.H. Trienekens, J.G.A.J. Van Der Vorst, J.M.
Technol. 48 (2) (2013) 221–237.
Bloemhof, Systems for sustainability and transparency of food supply chains –
[41] M.E. Gómez, J.M. Igartuburu, E. Pando, F.R. Luis, G. Mourente, Lipid
current status and challenges, Adv. Eng. Inform. 25 (1) (2011) 65–76, Elsevier
composition of lees from sherry wine, J. Agric. Food Chem. 52 (2004) 4791–
Ltd.
4794, American Chemical Society.
[10] I.S. Saguy, R.P. Singh, T. Johnson, P.J. Fryer, S.K. Sastry, Challenges facing food
[42] A.B. Moldes, M. Vázquez, J.M. Domínguez, F. Díaz-Fierros, M.T. Barral, Negative
engineering, J. Food Eng. 119 (2) (2013) 332–342, Elsevier Ltd.
effect of discharging vinification lees on soils, Bioresour. Technol. 99 (13)
[11] OIV (International Organization for Vine and Wine), OIV guidelines for
(2008) 5991–5996.
sustainable vitiviniculture: production, processing and packaging of products
[43] K.N. Kontogiannopoulos, S.I. Patsios, A.J. Karabelas, Tartaric acid recovery from
[Internet], 2008 [cited 2016 Apr 11], Available from: <http://www.oiv.int/
winery lees using cation exchange resin: optimization by response surface
public/medias/2089/cst-1-2008-en.pdf>.
methodology, Sep. Purif. Technol. 165 (November) (2016) 32–41.
[12] B. Rugani, I. Vázquez-Rowe, G. Benedetto, E. Benetto, A comprehensive review
[44] S. Nordestgaard, T. Abbott, Winery lees: minimising volumes and recovering
of carbon footprint analysis as an extended environmental indicator in the
better quality juice and wine, Aust. New Zeal. Grapegrow. Winemak. 626
wine sector, J. Clean. Prod. 54 (2013) 61–77.
(2016) 62–64.
[13] L. Petti, I. Arzoumanidis, G. Benedetto, S. Bosco, M. Cellura, C. De Camillis, et al.,
[45] B.C. Rankine, Making Good Wine, Sun Books, South Melbourne, 1989, p. 374.
Life cycle assessment in the wine sector, in: Life Cycle Assessment in the Agri-
[46] S.J. Nordestgaard, Phenolic Extraction and Juice Expression during White Wine
Food Sector, Springer International Publishing, Cham, 2015, pp. 123–184.
Production, The University of Adelaide School, 2011.
[14] J. Szargut, Minimization of consumption of natural-resources, Bull. L Acad. Pol.
[47] J. Lachman, K. Rutkowski, P. Trávníček, T. Vítěz, P. Burg, J. Turan, et al.,
Des. Sci. Des. Sci. Tech. 26 (6) (1978) 41–45.
Determination of rheological behaviour of wine lees, Int. Agrophys. 29 (3)
[15] J. Szargut, D.R. Morris, F.R. Steward, Exergy Analysis of Thermal, Chemical, and
(2015) 307–311.
Metallurgical Processes, Hemisphere Publishing, New York, NY, New York, NY,
[48] Y. Margalit, Concepts in Wine Technology: Small Winery Operations, 3rd ed.,
1988, 332p.
The Wine Appreciation Guild, Ltd, South San Francisco CA, 2012, 275p.
[16] G. Wall, Exergetics, Mölndal, Sweden, 2009.
[49] K. Yokotsuka, Effect of press design and pressing pressures on grape juice
[17] G. Boroumandjazi, B. Rismanchi, R. Saidur, A review on exergy analysis of
components, J. Ferment. Bioeng. 70 (1) (1990) 15–21.
industrial sector, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 27 (2013) 198–203.
[50] R. Palacios-Bereche, K.J. Mosqueira-Salazar, M. Modesto, A.V. Ensinas, S.A.
[18] C. Koroneos, T. Spachos, N. Moussiopoulos, Exergy analysis of renewable
Nebra, L.M. Serra, et al., Exergetic analysis of the integrated first- and second-
energy sources, Renew. Energy 28 (2) (2003) 295–310.
generation ethanol production from sugarcane, Energy 62 (2013) 46–61.
[19] S. Genc, A. Hepbasli, Performance assessment of a potato crisp frying process,
[51] K. Ojeda, O. Ávila, J. Suárez, V. Kafarov, Evaluation of technological alternatives
Dry Technol. 33 (7) (2015) 865–875.
for process integration of sugarcane bagasse for sustainable biofuels
[20] K.R. Apaiah, Designing Food Supply Chains – a Structured Methodology: A Case
production-Part 1, Chem. Eng. Res. Des. 89 (2011) 270–279.
on Novel Protein Foods, Wageningen University, Wageningen, The
[52] K. Ojeda, E. Sanchez, V. Kafarov, Sustainable ethanol production from
Netherlands, 2006.
lignocellulosic biomass - application of exergy analysis, Energy 36 (4) (2011)
[21] C. Ofori-Boateng, T.L. Keat, L. Jitkang, Feasibility study of microalgal and
2119–2128, Elsevier Ltd.
jatropha biodiesel production plants: exergy analysis approach, Appl. Therm.
[53] M. Bayrak, A. Midilli, K. Nurveren, Energy and exergy analyses of sugar
Eng. 36 (1) (2012) 141–151.
production stages, Int. J. Energy Res. 27 (11) (2003) 989–1001.
[22] E. Sorgüven, M. Özilgen, Energy utilization, carbon dioxide emission, and
[54] H.I. Velásquez-Arredondo, S. De Oliveira Junior, P. Benjumea, Exergy efficiency
exergy loss in flavored yogurt production process, Energy 40 (1) (2012) 214–
analysis of chemical and biochemical stages involved in liquid biofuels
225, Elsevier Ltd.
production processes, Energy 41 (1) (2012) 138–145.
[23] M. Özilgen, E. Sorgüven, Energy and exergy utilization, and carbon dioxide
[55] M. Smyth, J. Russell, T. Milanowski, Solar Energy in the Winemaking Industry,
emission in vegetable oil production, Energy 36 (10) (2011) 5954–5967,
Springer International Publishing, London, 2011, 466p.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2011.08.020 [Internet] Elsevier Ltd.
[56] F.K. Zisopoulos, S.N. Moejes, F.J. Rossier-Miranda, A.J. Van Der Goot, R.M. Boom,
[24] N. Yildirim, S. Genc, Thermodynamic analysis of a milk pasteurization process
Exergetic comparison of food waste valorization in industrial bread
assisted by geothermal energy, 2015.
production, Energy 82 (2015) 640–649.
[25] I. Zabalza, A. Aranda, S. Scarpellini, Analysis and improvement of energy and
[57] P. Bösch, A. Modarresi, A. Friedl, Comparison of combined ethanol and biogas
environmental costs for small and medium enterprise in the wine sector, in:
polygeneration facilities using exergy analysis, Appl. Therm. Eng. 37 (2012)
16th International Conference on Efficiency, Costs, Optimization, Simulation
19–29.
and Environmental Impact of Energy Systems (ECOS 2003), 2003, pp. 1–8.
[58] J.A.M. Berghout, P.J.M. Pelgrom, M.A.I. Schutyser, R.M. Boom, A.J. van der Goot,
[26] S. Bastianoni, S.N. Nielsen, N. Marchettini, S.E. Jorgensen, Use of
Sustainability assessment of oilseed fractionation processes: a case study on
thermodynamic functions for expressing some relevant aspects of
lupin seeds, J. Food Eng. 150 (2015) 117–124.
sustainability, Int. J. Energy Res. 29 (1) (2005) 53–64.
[59] L. Jankowiak, J. Jonkman, F.J. Rossier-Miranda, A.J. van der Goot, R.M. Boom,
[27] A.C.I. Pizzigallo, C. Granai, S. Borsa, The joint use of LCA and emergy evaluation
Exergy driven process synthesis for isoflavone recovery from okara, Energy 74
for the analysis of two Italian wine farms, J. Environ. Manage. 86 (2) (2008)
(C) (2014) 471–483.
396–406.
[60] H.J. Shieh, T.L. Fan, Energy and Exergy Estimation Using the Group
[28] P. Ribéreau-Gayon, D. Dubourdieu, B. Donèche, Handbook of Enology, John
Contribution Method, in: Efficiency and Costing, 1983, pp. 351–371.
Wiley, 2006.
[29] S. Syahrul, I. Dinçer, F. Hamdullahpur, Thermodynamic modeling of fluidized
bed drying of moist particles, Int. J. Therm. Sci. 42 (7) (2003) 691–701.