13 Mei 2022 TK7004 UAS 33021007 – Wildan Wibawa Perdana

Coffee Decaffeination Process on Organleptic Quality Value

Wildan Wibawa Perdana1

Department of Food Engineering – Faculty of Industrial Technology Institut Teknologi Bandung, Jalan
Ganesha 10 Bandung 40132
Email: wildan.w.perdana@gmail.com

The novelty of this research is to use an extraction process using air under subcritical conditions with operating
conditions parameters: temperature, time, and solid: liquid ratio. This shows that caffeine extraction carried out
with air at high temperature and pressure will give good results the same as the extraction process using ethanol
and methanol as solvents.

Abstract.
Coffee is not only a refreshing drink because it has a distinctive aroma and taste, but also a new trend (social life
style) in big cities in the world (Zarwinda & Sartika, 2018). the maximum limit of caffeine consumption is 120 mg
per day for children under 18 years old, while for adults over 18 years it is 400 mg per day and for pregnant and
nursing mothers, caffeine consumption is limited to with 200 mg per day. Various methods have been claimed to
reduce the caffeine content in coffee beans, with the aim of making coffee healthier than ordinary coffee on the
market, because of its lower caffeine content (Colombo & Papetti, 2020).
The decaffeination process also affects other coffee components such as coffee physicochemical properties and
coffee organoleptic properties such as coffee taste, aroma, and color. some modifications to the coffee
decaffeination method with characteristics that depend on several operating conditions such as temperature,
duration, solvent, solvent concentration, and decaffeination pressure, such as Hydrothermal extraction
decaffeination process is an extraction process using water under subcritical conditions. Thermodynamically, water
in the liquid phase which is below its critical point of 374 oC and 22 MPa is called subcritical water (SCW).

Keywords: Coffee, Decaffeination, Green beans, Organoleptic Propertis, Extration

1. Introduction
The craze for drinking coffee is a new trend (social life style) in major cities of the world, in addition to
being a refreshing drink the taste and distinctive aroma of coffee has its own charm. (Zarwinda & Sartika, 2018),
Excess caffeine consumption can lead to stomach upset, increased blood pressure, and decreased insulin sensitivity,
referring to SNI 01-7152-2006 maximum caffeine limits of 150 mg/day and 50 mg/serving.
The quality and quality of a coffee is largely determined by handling during harvest and post-harvest
(Ghosh & Venkatachalapathy, 2014), The selection of different coffee processing methods can lead to different
amounts of caffeine content (de Melo Pereira et al., 2019; Worku, de Meulenaer, Duchateau, & Boeckx, 2018).
Consumers and Trends The economic impact of decaffeinated coffee is generally underestimated. First, the caffeine
and its effects is intrinsic to coffee in the same way that alcohol is to beer or wheat is to bread, and thus the removal
of such a key component can be felt as an unnatural downgrading of the product. Second, decaf consumers often
have some sort of personal limitation, like sleeplessness or a genetic higher sensitivity to caffeine. Although these
are good reasons to

Figure 1.1. Trends in decaffeinationdfraction of decaffeinated coffee on a mass basis.Data references: Europe:
European Coffee Federation (2014); Germany: Deutscher Kaffeeverband e.V.(2014). Sales in US: NCA (2015)
etc.; Export data for green and roasted beans.
2. Kafein
Caffeine is an alkaloid compound in the form of white crystals. The chemical formula for caffeine is
C8H10N4O2 and the IUPAC name is 1,3,7-trimethylpurine-2,6-dione. Caffeine presents naturally in the leaves, fruit,
and seeds of many plant species, such as coffee, tea, and chocolate. This compound is odorless and has a bitter
taste. Caffeine presents in the cytoplasm is in a free state (Sivetz and Desroiser, 1979). The rest of the caffeine was
identified as an alkaloid compound that has an ionic bonds with potassium chlorogenate to form a complex salt
compound (Clifford, 1985). This bond causes caffeine can not move freely in the coffee bean tissue. The following
is the chemical structure of caffeine.

Figure 2.1 Chemical structure of caffeine

Caffeine compounds have a strong physiological effect when consumed in large quantities for a long time
(Bistara & Kartini, 2018). Based on FSANZ (Food Standards Australia and New Zealand) the maximum limit of
caffeine consumption is 120 mg per day for children under 18 years old, while for adults over 18 years it is 400 mg
per day and for pregnant and nursing mothers, caffeine consumption is limited to with 200 mg per day. Robusta
coffee has a higher caffeine content than Arabica coffee. Based on the experiments conducted by C. L. et al. (2001)
caffeine content in robusta green coffee beans is between the range of 1.51-3.33%.
Table 2.1 Composition of green beans and roasted and grounded beans
Composition Green bean (%) Roasted and ground coffee (%)
Total polysaccharides 50-55 24-39
Reducing sugars (glucose,fructose) 0.1-1.2 0.3
Sucrose 6.0-10.51 0-3.5
Caffeine 0.9 -1.3 1.1 – 1.3
Chlorogenic Acid 4.1-7.9 1.9-2.5
Citric Acid 0.3-1.57 -
Malic Acid 0.44-0.57 -
Protein 11.0-13.0 13-15
Amino acids 0.1-2.0 0
Lipids 12.0-18.0 14.5-20.0
Minerals 3.0-4.2 3.5-4.5
Source: Clarke dan Macrae (2003).
On the outer skin of coffee consists of a thin layer, and on the young fruit will be dark green then green
yellow, yellow, red to red to blackish red. The layer of fruit flesh is a slimy part and has a slightly sweet taste when it
is cooked. The skin layer of the horn is the inside has a hard structure. Coffee beans consist of institutions (embryos)
and ari skin, while the gap is an empty cavity in the form of a channel along the size of the bean Kustantini beans
(2014).
Consuming caffeine from coffee or other foods and beverages can cause some effects on the health of the
human body. Caffeine is digested about 45 minutes after consumption and ingested up to 99% (Gupta et al.,
2020). It is reported that caffeine can cause some good effects for the human body such as reducing the risk of
Parkinson's and Alzheimer's (Arendash & Cao, 2010), Caffeine can inhibit tumors so it can also lower the risk of
cancer (Bhoo-Pathy et al., 2013). Consuming coffee or caffeine was also found to reduce the risk of cirrhosis of the
liver due to components in coffee itself and some other lifestyles (Corrao et al., 2001). In addition to providing a
good effect on the human body, caffeine also provides several other negative effects on the human body. The main
impact of caffeine is hypertension or increased blood pressure (de Mejia & Ramirez-Mares, 2014; Adriana Farah,
De Paulis, Moreira, Trugo, & Martin, 2006; Nawrot et al., 2003; Princess, Nocianitri, & Son, 2017).
2.2. Dekafeinansi Method
 The process of removing caffeine components from coffee beans is called the decaffeination
process. Modern society today increasingly considers the consumption of coffee containing caffeine because of the
physiological impact that caffeine has on the body. Decaffeination in coffee beans is usually done before
the roasting process (Almada, 2009). Side effects resulting from caffeine consumption provide consequences that
people who like coffee cannot consume coffee freely. There are several possibilities of losing some components of
coffee flavor (A. Farah, 2009), and coffee produced from the decaffeination process is more bitter (Butt, Ahmed,
Sultan A. Imran, Yasin, & Imran, Imran, 2011).
Because the caffeine content in robusta coffee is higher than arabica, decaffeination is generally done in
robusta coffee. Some countries already set permissible decaffeination coffee standards. For some countries in
Europe, according to European law, the maximum caffeine content in decaffeinated coffee is 0.1% caffeine-based
anhydrous in both green coffee beans and roasted coffee beans, while the maximum caffeine content in coffee
extract is 0.3% dry matter base. (Pietsch, 2017). For some other countries in the United States and Canada, the
maximum caffeine content in decaffeinated roasted coffee beans is 0.1% (Pietsch, 2017). In addition, according to
Putri et al. (2017) and Widyotomo et al. (2009), coffee is categorized as decaffeinated coffee if it contains about 0.1
to 0.3% caffeine. The following are the deaffeinated coffee standards applied in several countries.
Table 2. 2 Standards of decaffeinated coffee in various countries
Country United Canada European Australia New Indonesian
States Union Zealand
Lost caffeine 97% 99,7% 99,9% 99,9% 99,9% 99,7%

(source: ElevenCoffees).
There have been many decaffeination methods developed to date. Some of them are modifications of
previous methods by using other caffeine solvents. Commonly used decaffeination methods are water
decaffeination, solvent decaffeination, supercritical decaffeination, and enzymatic decaffeination. The solvent
decaffeination method was first discovered then water decaffeination and supercritical decaffeination and is
preferred over other decaffeination methods (Ong, Ng, & Chung, 2015).
These processes have been in operation for decades now, and monographs on coffee science deal with the
technologies as well as their history (Sivetz and Foote, 1963; Sivetz and Desrosier, 1973; Katz, 1987; Heilmann,
2001; Vitzhum, 2005). Not much new information on decaffeination processes has been published in the last years
and process details are still often in-house knowhow and kept confidential.
In summary the process sequence in all industrial processes is bean prewetting with water, caffeine
extraction, and subsequent bean drying. Some of these publications on coffee decaffeination were published over
the years. As seen in Figure 3, the number of coffee decaffeination publications tends to increase year after year.

Figure 3. Number of coffee decaffeination publications over the years (Source: Scopus, 2022)
The ideal decaffeination process removes the caffeine from the bean cells without any other alteration to
the bean. Due to the nature of the caffeine molecule and its location inside of the coffee bean cells, it is apparent
that such an ideal removal faces severe obstacles. Unwanted side effects can include a loss of aroma or precursor
molecules, changes in bean structure and size, mass loss, solvent residues, and changes of the beans appearance. In
the beginning plenty of unsuccessful attempts were made to extract caffeine out of the beans with various organic
solvents directly. The breakthrough came when Ludwig Roselius, the founder of the company Kaffee HAG in
Germany, added an additional preprocess: wetting and swelling of the green beans with water and steam. In 1908,
Meier, Roselius, and Wimmer patented the first useful decaffeination process (US Patent 897,763). The bean
volume increases up to 100% allowing easier penetration of the solvents and mass transfer in the bean matrix. Later
research revealed that the elevated water content liberates the caffeine from a structure with chlorogenic
acids. After the extraction process, the initial water content of the beans has to be restored by drying, an
unfavorable and costly process step.
2.2.1. Water Decaffeination
Decaffeination with water or known as the water extraction process is one of the methods of decaffeination
that is considered quite simple, done by extracting caffeine components in green bean using water solvents. The
solubility of caffeine in water can increase significantly as the water temperature increases. This method of
decaffeination does not require harmful chemicals or solvents. Water decaffeination methods also do not require
pre-treatment and post-treatment such as pre-wetting or steaming.
The method of decaffeination with water can be done in 2 ways, the first type of water decaffeination of the
first type is done by extracting coffee beans using water. Coffee extract from the extraction is then removed
caffeine or extracted with activated carbon for caffeine to take. Activated carbon is used because of its high
selectivity to caffeine (Pietsch, 2017). After that, the coffee beans from the previous stage are dried and stored for 1
to 1.5 hours. Then decaffeinated coffee extract is returned to the coffee beans by the absorption process by the
coffee beans. While the second type of water decaffeination has slightly different steps in the preparation of
decaffeinated solvents and the decaffeination process. Decaffeinated solvent refers to coffee extracts that contain
small amounts of caffeine or that have been contaminated. Coffee extract is made by extracting coffee beans using
hot water. The coffee extract then passes through an activated carbon filter that will extract caffeine from the coffee
extract. This caffeine-free coffee extract is then used for the next decaffeination process as a solvent. Coffee extract
can be used as a decaffeinated solvent because it still contains coffee aroma and flavor compounds but has a low
amount of caffeine. The low level of caffeine in the coffee extract solvent will make only dissolved caffeine from
the coffee beans to be dissolved into decaffeinated solvents (Mendesil, Berecha, Weldemichael, Belachew, & Kufa,
2017). So in other words, the driving force of the second type of water decaffeination process is the difference in
caffeine concentration. This method of water decaffeination is often known as the Swiss Water Process.
2.2.2. Solvents Decaffeination
Decaffeination is done by extracting caffeine components using organic solvents that work specifically
against caffeine. Solvent selection is determined based on solubility to caffeine, price, ease of management, safety
regulations, and availability. Decaffeination using solvent methods is more common than other decaffeination
methods. 80% of the decaffeination process is solvent decaffeination (Butt et al., 2011). Generally, the solvent used
in coffee decaffeination is almost not mixed with water to prevent other water-soluble components such as aroma
compounds from being extracted. Some of the organic solvents commonly used in the extraction process are DCM
(methylene chloride) and ethyl acetate. However, chlorinated solvents such as trichloroethylene are prohibited from
use because they are carcinogenic compounds (Bermejo et al., 2013; US Franca, 2015).
The process of solvent decaffeination can be carried out in 2 ways, the first is direct solvent decaffeination
and the second is indirect solvent decaffeination. The difference between the types of decaffeinated solvents is the
target of decaffeination. For direct solvent decaffeination, there is direct contact between the solvent and the coffee
beans. As for indirect solvent decaffeination, there is contact between coffee extracts from the extraction stage of
coffee beans using water, indirectly with coffee beans. The overall process for solvent decaffeination consists of
pre-treatment, decaffeination or caffeine extraction, and post-treatment. The pre-treatment step is done by steaming
or soaking the coffee beans with water. This step will increase the water content of coffee beans from 10% to 22%
by steaming (US Franca, 2015).
Based on (Pietsch, 2017) the decaffeination process begins with pre-wetting green bean. This process can
be done by contacting green bean with water by soaking, boiling, or steaming to increase the water content of
green bean up to 10 to 25 wt%. Green bean is then extracted using organic solvents. Extraction can be done
with fixed beds systems, such as choosel percolation and extraction, and systems such as rotating drums. Then
proceed with drying with the aim of removing the solvent in the coffee beans.
The choice of an extraction solvent is subjected to various demands like solubility potential (see
Table 2.3), cost, manageability, legal bounds, and availability, among others. Solubility is solvent and
temperature dependent. Caffeine extraction from the water-swollen beans requires a solvent which is
virtually immiscible with water in order not to lose other water soluble components from the bean.
Naturally, the flavor precursor components should remain in the beans as extensively as possible. A
variety of organic solvents have been found to be suitable, but only two are commonly used: DCM
(methylene chloride; CH2Cl2) and ethyl acetate (ethyl ethanoate; CH3-COO-CH2-CH3).
TABLE 2.3. Solubility of Caffeine in Various Solvent
Solvent T Solubility Solvent T Solubility
(oC) (%wt/vol) (oC) (wt%
Ethanol 20 1.5 Holscher (2005) Water 20 1.65 Camenga
and
Bothe
(1982)
Dichloroethane 25 1.8 Rahmalakshmi 80 27.2 Camenga
and and
Raghavan (1999) Bothe
(1982)
Trichloromethane 20 15 Holscher (2005) Supercritical 80 0.3 Johannsen
CO2, 28 (1995)
MPa, dry
Trichloroethane 25 1.5 Rahmalakshmi As above, 80 1.38 Kurzhals
and wet CO2 (1986)
Raghavan (1999)
Acetone 20 2 Holscher (2005) As above, in 80 0.05 Pietsch
contact with (2000)
water
containing
1% caffeine
Ethylacetate 20 2 Holscher (2005) As above, 80 0.02 Pietsch
with coffee (2000)
solubles
DCM 20 8 Holscher (2005)
Coffee oil 20 0.4 Pietsch Liquid CO2, 21 0.04 Stahl et al.
(unpublished) maximum (1987)
Supercritical Fluid Decaffeination CO2
The supercritical fluid process that is often used in the decaffeination process is CO2. Used in conditions
above the temperature and pressure of criticism, namely at a temperature of 40oC - 80oC and a pressure of 120 -
180 atm with a length of time to convert the supercritical fluid CO2 with green bean for 5 to 30
hours. Decaffeination using CO2 is considered a green technique or green process in addition to using organic
solvents due to its sustainability and efficiency (Cravotto, 2020). The decaffeination process using supercritical
fluids generally has the following stages: pre-treatment, extraction or decaffeination of caffeine, and regeneration
of supercritical fluids. The process itself can be a batch, semi-continuous, or continuous process. The most
commonly used process in industry is semicontinential (Zabot, 2019).
This process begins with soaking green bean in water until the water increases by 50%. Green bean is then
contacted with a supercritical fluid by circulating. The supercritical fluid that has been circulated passes through the
green bean in adsorption with water to remove dissolved caffeine through the scrubber, then recirculated back
through the green bean until a certain time. Green bean that has been dissolved is then dried. Based on the United
States Patent No. 4348422 (1982) decaffeination with this method can reduce caffeine levels in coffee beans to
below 0.01%.
The advantages and disadvantages of this supercritical decaffeination method compared to other
methods. Fluid supercritical, commonly used as a solvent for the supercritical decaffeination process, has several
advantages including having high caffeine selectivity (Bermejo et al., 2013; Whizzing et al., 2017; Pietsch,
2017; Tejasari et al., 2010), CO2 also known as inert gas (AS Franca, 2015), high amount of contracted caffeine up
to 97-99% (Mendesil et al., 2017), does not dissolve flavor compounds and aromas from coffee (probability of loss
of flavor compounds and low aroma), But supercritical decaffeination requires high investment costs (set
equipment) and higher energy (Zabot, 2019).
3.4. Enzymatic Decaffeination
Decaffeination can be done biologically using enzymes. The type of enzyme used in enzymatic
decaffeination is proteolytic enzymes. Proteolytic enzymes or known as proteases are found in living things such as
plants, animals, and microorganisms. Proteases are protein catabolism, blood coagulants, support cell growth and
hormone release, hydrolyze rice-sized protein molecules into smaller molecules such as peptides or amino acids
(Chew, Anyway, & Ismail, 2018). One of the properties of proteolytic enzymes that support enzymatic
decaffeination processes is their ability to hydrolyze proteins. Some proteolytic enzymes that can hydrolyze
proteins are papain enzymes from papaya, bromelain enzymes from pineapple, renin enzymes from animals such as
cows and pigs, and renin from ficus sap (Putri et al., 2017).
Enzymatic decaffeination is performed by several researchers with several different raw materials. Putri et
al. (2017) Saloko, Handito, Murad, & Apriani (2020), and Daisa, Rossi, & Dini (2017) perform enzymatic
decaffeination using papaya sap as a source of papain enzymes, Oktadina, Argo, & Hermanto (2013) use pineapple
meat and Ratnaningsih (2015) using pineapple skin as a source of bromelin enzymes, and Sulistyaningtyas,
Prihastanti, & Hastuti (2018) using liquid and solid tofu waste as a source of protease. According to Oktadina et al.
(2013), the bromelain enzyme of pineapple has high caffeine selectivity and the reaction between enzymes and
caffeine does not produce byproducts (Oktadina et al., 2013).
In general, the process of decaffeination with enzymatics is divided into three stages, namely proteolytic
enzyme preparation, decaffeination, and the final stage. Proteolytic enzyme preparation is carried out by preparing
raw materials and isolating proteolytic enzymes contained in raw materials. For example, the papain enzyme from
papaya is obtained by tapping papaya sap, especially in young papayas. The sap is then used as a source of
proteolytic enzymes or further processed. Further processing such as the addition of sodium bisulfide to papaya sap
to produce an emulsion to be dried into crystals (Daisa et al., 2017).
3. Impact Of Decaffeinated Coffee
Various methods that have been claimed to reduce the caffeine content in coffee beans, with the aim of
making coffee healthier compared to ordinary coffee on the market, because of its lower caffeine content in
addition to the benefits of some non-caffeinine components such as polyphenols as anti-inflammatory and
antioxidant and coffee acid as antibacterial and antifungal (Colombo & Papetti, 2020). According to the
International Standards Organization, decaffeinated coffee is defined as coffee in which caffeine is already
extracted.
Ideally the decaffeination process is to remove kefein from coffee beans without changing but the effects of
the process can remove aromas or precursor molecules, loss of mass, appearance of coffee beans, changes in the
size and structure of coffee beans, and carried away solvent residues. Parameters other than caffeine as a
benchmark are water content, ash content and chlorogenic acid, so it can affect the organoleptic properties of
decaffeinated coffee when consumed, namely color, aroma and taste (Adriana Farah et al., 2006).
4. Decaffeinated Coffee to Sensory Properties
Differences in methods and conditions of decaffeination operation will produce caffeine content and sensory
quality attributes that are different, it can be seen in table 4.1.
Table 4.1. Caffeine Content of Various Decaffeination Methods
Decaffeination Operating Conditions Caffeine Content Reference
Method
Solvents -Solvent: ethyl acetate - -Solvent concentration↑, (Ananta Wijaya &
Decaffeination Solvent concentration : 5%, moisture content fluctuates Setyo Yuwono,
10%, 15% -Pre-treatment duration↑, 2015)
-Pre-treatment : 1, 2, 3 moisture content fluctuates
hour(s) -Range of moisture content:
-t: 1 hour 1.79-2.36%
-T: boiling point -Pre-treatment duration↑,
phenol content↓ -Solvent
concentration↑, phenol content↓
 -Range of phenol content:
115.84- 130.56%
-Solvent: ethyl acetate -T↑, CGA↓ -Coffee beans size↓, (Widyotomo &
-Solvent concentration: CGA↓ Mulato, 2007)
10% -Range of CGA content: 0.7-
-Coffee beans size 2.17% -T↑, decreasing rate of
(diameter) : ≤ 5.5 mm, 5.5- trigonelline↓
6.5 mm, 6.5-7.5 mm, >7.5 -Coffee beans size↓, decreasing
mm rate of trigonelline↓
-T: 50-60°C, 60- 70°C, 70-
80°C, 80- 90°C, 90-100°C
-t : 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12 hours -
Pre-wetting: water 100°C, 4
hours -Feed (beans :
solvent) = 1:5
-Decaffeination using a
single column reactor
-Solvent : ethyl acetate -Pre-treatment duration↑, CGA (Afriliana, 2016)
-Feed (beans : solvent) = content↓ -Pre-treatment
1:1 kg/L duration↑, trigonneline↓
-Pre-treatment : 4 hours -t :
0, 2, 4, 6 hours
-T : 100°C
-Solvent: ethyl lactate, -T↑, phenol content↑ Bermejo et al., 2013)
ethanol, ethyl acetate -T↑, lipid content↓
-Type of coffee feed: beans
and powder (500-1500 µm)
-T: 100, 150, 200°C
Water - Absorbent: shell activated -Solvent concentration↑, (Saloko, Sulastri, et
Decaffeination charcoal coconut, zeolite moisture content↓ al., 2020)
- Concentration absorbers: -Type of adsorbent does not
0, 5, 10, 15% affect
- Coffee extraction : Coffee moisture content and ash
beans: 100 grams Water: content -Solvent concentration↑,
280 ml T: 100 °C t: 3 hours ash content↓(zeolite), fluctuates
(activated charcoal)
Supercritical - Solvent: CO2, -P↑, CGA fluctuates (De Azevedo et al.,
Decaffeination CO2 modified with ethanol -P↑, coffee oil extracted↑ 2008)
5% b/b, CO2 modified with -Yield extraction of coffee oil:
isopropyl alcohol 5% b/b 70% (CO2), 93% (CO2
- T : 50, 60 °C modified with isopropyl
- P : 15.2; 24,8; 35.2 MPa - alcohol), 99% (CO2 modified
solvent mass flow rate : 1.8 with ethanol)
g/min
- Solvent:CO2 with water -T↑àcaffeine extracted↓ (Machmudah et al.,
(flow & batch mode and - P↑àcaffeine extracted↓ 2008)
flow mode both) - t↑àcaffeine extracted↓
- T : 40, 50, 60 °C - P : 15,
20, 25 MPa
- Flow rate : 3 ml / min - T :
40 °C
Enzymatic - Solvent: papaya sap - Solvent concentration↑, (Putri et al., 2017)
Decaffeination - Solvent concentration : 0, moisture content↑
1.5, 3, 4.5, 6% -Range of moisture content:
Pre-wetting: - T: 100 °C - t: 8.07- 11.34%
 30 minutes -Solvent concentration↑, ash
- Extraction: 2 hours content↓ -Range of ash content:
0.07-0.16%
-Solvent concentration↑,
protein content↓ -Range of
protein content: 9.72- 12.71%
- Solvent: papain enzyme -Solvent concentration↑, (Daisa et al., 2017)
from papaya moisture content↑
- Solvent concentration: 1, -Range of moisture content:
3, 5, 7% 5.47-6.34%
- t: 36 hours -Solvent concentration↑, ash
- solvent volume: 100 ml content↑ -Range of ash content:
4.79-5.37%
- Solvent: papaya leaf - Solvent concentration↑, (Saloko, Handito, et
extract - caffeine content↓ al., 2020)
- Solvent concentrations : 0, -range of caffeine content:
5, 10, 15, 20, 25% 0,66-3,11%
- t: 36 hours
- T: room temperature
From the results of the study that compared several solvents in the decaffeination process using ethyl
acetate, ethanol, and ethyl lactate under the same operating conditions. Decaffeination using ethyl acetate can
extract higher amounts of caffeine than other solvents (Bermejo et al., 2013). On the other hand, the extraction of
caffeine with methanol solvent results in higher extraction efficiency compared to water decaffeinated solvents,
ethanol, acetonitrile, dichloromethane, and n-hexane (Bi et al., 2011). Comparison of the types of adsorbents
between activated carbon and zeolite is also carried out on the method of water decaffeination. The final result of
caffeine levels in the decaffeination process using zeolite is lower compared to the decaffeination process using
activated carbon. This is because zeolites have a pore diameter that is smaller than activated carbon so the caffeine
adsorption area for zeolite is larger (Saloko, Sulastri, et al., 2020). Differences in solvent concentrations in the
decaffeination process also affect the final result of decaffeination products. The higher the concentration of
solvents used, the lower the caffeine content in the coffee beans obtained in the decaffeination process. The term
applies to the concentration of solvents in the process of direct decaffeination, the concentration of enzymes in
enzymatic decaffeination, and the concentration of adsorbents in water decaffeination. For example, decaffeination
using ethyl acetate solvent is carried out by Ananta Wijaya & Setyo Yuwono. (2015), with concentrations of 5, 10,
15% and produced the lowest caffeine content of 0.02% with a concentration of 15%. In direct solvent
decaffeination using polar solvents, there is a maximum concentration to increase the amount of caffeine
extracted. This can be due to the possibility of innocence of the aqueous polar solvent incompatible or caused by
the solubility of caffeine in the solvent (Bi et al., 2011). For enzymatic decaffeination, higher enzyme
concentrations will result in faster caffeine transfer due to the decomposition of coffee beans by proteolytic
enzymes will also be faster (Sulistyaningtyas et al., 2018). In water decaffeination, higher concentrations of
adsorbents used will result in higher amounts of extracted caffeine adsorbed in the decaffeination process (Saloko,
Sulastri, et al., 2020).
In addition to lowering caffeine cadan the decaffeination process also affects the organoleptic properties of
coffee. According to some research results on decaffeination mentions that the organoleptic properties of
decaffeinated coffee are lower than the standard of existing coffee products (Afriliana, 2016; Kuswardhani, Mukti,
& Sari, 2021). While the aroma of decaffeinated coffee does not have a significant difference with non-
decaffeinated coffee (Ananta Wijaya & Setyo Yuwono, 2015; Butt et al., 2011; Tejasari et al., 2010).
The taste of coffee is one of the organoleptic parameters of coffee that is prone to loss due to
decaffeination. The loss of coffee flavoring components can be caused by components dissolving during
decaffeination. Its components are chlorogenic acid and trigonelin. But according to Ananta Wijaya & Setyo
Yuwono (2015), there is no significant difference between the taste of decaffeinated coffee and non-
decaffeination. Different results obtained Butt et al. (2011), the lowest panelist test results obtained decaffeinated
coffee compared to coffee flavor compared to brewed coffee beans, coffee grounds, commercial decaffeinated
coffee grounds, and instant coffee and kuswardhani, Mukti, & Sari research (2021) stated that non-decaffeinated
coffee ginger coffee drinks have a higher taste and taste preference value than decaffeinated ones. Other results
were obtained by decaffeination using ethyl acetate where the taste of decaffeinated coffee is preferred over
decaffeinated coffee (Tejasari et al., 2010).
From one of the attributes of color organoleptic quality, it is obtained that there is no significant difference
between the color of decaffeinated coffee and non-decaffeination (Ananta Wijaya & Setyo Yuwono, 2015; Butt et
al., 2011). Other results were obtained by decaffeination using ethyl acetate by Tejasari et al (2010) and
decaffeination using water and produced as a ginger coffee drink by Kuswardhani, Mukti, & Sari (2021) where the
color of decaffeinated coffee is not preferred compared to decaffeinated coffee. . Enzymatic decaffeination using
pineapple produces organoleptic coffee preferred over decaffeinated coffee (Oktadina et al., 2013; Saloko, Handito,
et al., 2020). Enzymatic decaffeination using papaya sap also lowers the color value of coffee. Using a greater
concentration of papaya sap, the hue and brightness obtained are lower, but the difference is insignificant (Saloko,
Handito, et al., 2020).
5. Conclusion
The decaffeination process also affects other coffee components such as the physicochemical properties of coffee
and the organoleptic properties of coffee. Some components that are affected by the decaffeination process except
caffeine are chlorogenic acid, phenol, trigonelin, protein, air content, and ash content. These components will also
affect the organoleptic properties of coffee such as taste, aroma, and color of coffee. Common methods for
decaffeination are water decaffeination method, direct or indirect solvent decaffeination method, supercritical
decaffeination, and enzymatic decaffeination. Each decaffeination method has advantages and disadvantages. some
modifications to the coffee decaffeination method with characteristics that depend on several operating conditions
such as temperature, duration, solvent, solvent concentration, and decaffeination pressure, such as Hydrothermal
extraction decaffeination process is an extraction process using air under subcritical conditions.
Thermodynamically, water in the liquid phase which is below its critical point (Vandeponseele dkk., 2020).
Hydrothermal extraction is an extraction process using air solvent at temperatures and pressures above the normal
boiling point (T > 100 C, P > 1 atm), but below the critical point (T < 374 oC, P < 220 bar). The parameters that
affect the hydrothermal extraction process using HCW are operating conditions: temperature, time, and solid:liquid
ratio. the temperature will have a positive influence on the air diffusion coefficient, solubility of solutes (solute),
diffusion of solutes, water viscosity.
At high temperatures, the viscosity and surface tension of water will decrease so that the rate of mass
transfer and absorption in the matrix particles will increase so that the selectivity increases. This shows that
caffeine extraction carried out with water at high temperature and pressure will give results similar to the extraction
process using ethanol and methanol as solvents.

6. Refference
Afriliana, A. (2016). Pengaruh Penggunaan Mesin Dekafeinasi Terkendali Terhadap Karakteristik Mutu Kopi
Robusta. Fakultas Teknologi Pertanian, Universitas Jember , Jepang,17(1), 1–6.
https://doi.org/10.19026/ajfst.17.5983.
Ananta Wijaya, D., & Setyo Yuwono, S. (2015). PENGARUH LAMA PENGUKUSAN DAN KONSENTRASI
ETIL ASETAT TERHADAP KARAKTERISTIK KOPI PADA PROSES DEKAFEINASI KOPI
ROBUSTA Pengaruh Waktu Pengukusan dan Konsentrasi Etil Asetat Terhadap Karakteristik Kopi
Pada Proses Dekafeinasi Kopi Robusta. Dkk Jurnal Pangan Dan Agroindustri, 3(4), 1560–1566.
Diperoleh dari https://jpa.ub.ac.id/index.php/jpa/ article/view/280.
Bermejo, D. V., Luna, P., Manic, M. S., Najdanovic-Visak, V., Reglero, G., & Fornari, T.(2013).
Extraction of caffeine from natural matter using a bio-renewable agrochemical solvent. Food
and Bioproducts Processing, 91(4), 303–309. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fbp.2012.11.007
Bhoo-Pathy, N., Uiterwaal, C. S. P. M., Dik, V. K., Jeurnink, S. M., Bech, B. H., Overvad, K., … Bueno-De-
Mesquita, H. B. (2013). Intake of coffee, decaffeinated coffee, or tea does not affect risk for pancreatic
cancer: Results from the European prospective investigation into nutrition and cancer study. Clinical
Gastroenterology and Hepatology, 11(11), 1486–1492. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cgh.2013.05.029
Butt, M. S., Ahmed, A., Sultan A. Imran, M. T., Yasin, M., & Imran, M. (2011). Evaluating the effect of
decaffeination on nutritional and antioxidant status of different coffee brands. Internet Journal of Food
Safety, 13(January 2019), 150–156.
C. L., K., J., L., S., D., B., G., S., H., & M., N. (2001). Caffeine, trigonelline, chlorogenic acids and sucrose
 diversity in wild Coffea arabica L. and C. canephora P. accessions. Food Chemistry, 223-230.
Chew, L. Y., Toh, G. T., & Ismail, A. (2018). Application of proteases for the production of bioactive peptides.
Enzymes in Food Biotechnology: Production, Applications, and Future Prospects. Elsevier Inc.
https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-813280-7.00015-3
Clarke, R. J. (2003). COFFEE | Decaffeination. Encyclopedia of Food Sciences and Nutrition, (1997),
1506–1511. https://doi.org/10.1016/b0-12-227055-x/00272-8.
Corrao, G., Zambon, A., Bagnardi, V., D’Amicis, A., Klatsky, A., Morelli, D., … Salvagnini, M. (2001). Coffee,
caffeine, and the risk of liver cirrhosis. Annals of Epidemiology, 11(7), 458–465.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S1047-2797(01)00223-X
Cravotto, G. (2020). Highly-Efficient Caffeine Recovery from Green Coffee.
Cravotto, 2020, P., Manic, M. S., Najdanovic-Visak, V., Reglero, G., & Fornari, T. (2013). Extraction of caffeine
from natural matter using a bio-renewable agrochemical solvent. Food and Bioproducts Processing,
91(4), 303–309. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fbp.2012.11.007
Daisa, J., Rossi, E., & Dini, I. R. (2017). Pemanfaatan Ekstrak Kasar Enzim Papain pada Proses Dekafeinasi Kopi
Robusta. Jom Faperta, 1(2), 1–6.

De Azevedo, A. B. A., Mazzafera, P., Mohamed, R. S., Vieira De Melo, S. A. B., & Kieckbusch, T. G. (2008).
Extraction of caffeine, chlorogenic acids, and lipids from green coffee beans using supercritical carbon
dioxide and co-solvents. Brazilian Journal of Chemical Engineering, 25(3), 543–552.
https://doi.org/10.1590/s0104- 66322008000300012
de Mejia, E. G., & Ramirez-Mares, M. V. (2014). Impact of caffeine and coffee on our health. Trends in
Endocrinology and Metabolism, 25(10), 489–492. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tem.2014.07.003
de Melo Pereira, G. V., de Carvalho Neto, D. P., Magalhães Júnior, A. I., Vásquez, Z. S., Medeiros, A. B. P.,
Vandenberghe, L. P. S., & Soccol, C. R. (2019). Exploring the impacts of postharvest processing on
the aroma formation of coffee beans – A review. Food Chemistry, 272, 441–452.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2018.08.061
Emran, R. K., & Addyantina, S. (2012). Dekafeinasi Biji Kopi Robusta ( Coffea canephora L .) menggunakan
Pelarut Polar ( Etanol dan Metanol ) Uji Panelis Aroma dan Rasa Kopi Penentuan Residu Pelarut
Etanol dan. Acta Pharmaceutica Indonesia, XXXVII(3), 83– 89.
Farah, A. (2009). Coffee as a speciality and functional beverage. Functional and Speciality Beverage Technology.
Woodhead Publishing Limited. https://doi.org/10.1533/9781845695569.3.370
Farah, A., Monteiro, M. C., Calado, V., Franca, A. S., & Trugo, L. C. (2006). Correlation between cup quality and
chemical attributes of Brazilian coffee. Food Chemistry, 98(2), 373–380.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2005.07.032
Farah, Adriana, De Paulis, T., Moreira, D. P., Trugo, L. C., & Martin, P. R. (2006). Chlorogenic acids and lactones
in regular and water-decaffeinated arabica coffees. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 54(2),
374–381. https://doi.org/10.1021/jf0518305 Farah, Adriana, & Dos Santos, T. F. (2015). The Coffee
Plant and Beans: An Introduction. Coffee in Health and Disease Prevention. Elsevier Inc.
https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0- 12-409517-5.00001-2
Gupta, P. K., B., H., Sinha, A., Reddy, K. A., V., P., Hiremath, L., & Srivastava, A. K. (2020). Caffeine: Benefits,
Risks and Effects-A Review. Indian Journal of Public Health,
Heilmann, W., 2001. Technology II: decaffeination of coffee. In: Clarke, R.J., Vitzthum, O.G. (Eds.),
Coffee e Recent Developments. Blackwell Science, Oxford, pp. 90e107.
Katz, S.N., 1987. Decaffeinationo of coffee. In: Clarke, R.J., Macrae, R. (Eds.), Coffee Volume 2:
Technology. Elsevier Applied Science, London, pp. 59e71.
Kuswardhani, N., Mukti, N. P., & Sari, P. (2021). Antioxidant and sensory properties of ready to drink coffee-
ginger made from decaffeinated and non-decaffeinated robusta coffee beans. IOP Conference Series:
Earth and Environmental Science, 653(1). https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/653/1/012050
Machmudah, S., Kitada, K., Sasaki, M., Goto, M., Munemasa, J., & Yamagata, M. (2008). Caffeine and
chlorogenic acid separation from raw coffee beans using supercritical CO2 in water. AIChE
Annual Meeting, Conference Proceedings.
Mendesil, E., Berecha, G., Weldemichael, G., Belachew, K., & Kufa, T. (2017). Proceedings of Ethiopian Coffee
Science Society (ECSS) Inaugural Conference Held on 7-8 April 2017, Jimma, Ethiopia
Nawrot, P., Jordan, S., Eastwood, J., Rotstein, J., Hugenholtz, A., & Feeley, M. (2003). Effects of caffeine on
human health. Food Additives and Contaminants, 20(1), 1–30.
https://doi.org/10.1080/0265203021000007840
Ong, Y. K., Ng, H. T., & Chung, T. S. (2015). A Conceptual Demonstration of Decaffeination via Nanofiltration.
Industrial and Engineering Chemistry Research, 54(31), 7737–7742.
https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.iecr.5b01737
Pietsch, A. (2017). Decaffeination-Process and Quality. The Craft and Science of Coffee, 225–143.
https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-803520-7.00010-4
Putri, J. M. A., Nocianitri, K. A., & Putra, N. K. (2017). Pengaruh Penggunaan Getah Pepaya (Carica papaya L.)
pada Proses Dekafeinasi Terhadap Penurunan Kadar Kafein Kopi Robusta. Media Ilmiah Teknologi
Pangan, 4(2), 138–147.
Ratnaningsih, D. (2015). DEKAFEINASI KOPI ROBUSTA (Coffea canephora L.) DENGAN EKSTRAK KASAR
ENZIM BROMELIN DARI KULIT NANAS (Ananas comosus) (KAJIAN KONSENTRASI
EKSTRAK KASAR ENZIM DAN LAMA WAKTU INKUBASI.
Saloko, S., Handito, D., Murad, & Apriani, N. (2020). The Effect of Addition Papaya Leaf Extract (Carica papaya
L.) on Reducing Caffeine Levels in Robusta Coffee. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental
Science, 515(1). https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/515/1/012062
Saloko, S., Sulastri, Y., Murad, & Wahyuni, S. (2020). The application of activated carbon from coconut shell and
zeolite as adsorbents on coffee decaffeination using the Swiss Water Process (SWP). IOP Conference
Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 443(1). https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/443/1/012067
Seninde, D. R., & Iv, E. C. (2020). Coffee Flavor : A Review, 28–33.
Sivetz, M., Foote, H.E., 1963. Coffee Processing Technology. Avi Publishing Company, Westport.
Sivetz, M., Desrosier, N.W., 1973. Coffee Technology. Avi Publishing Company, Westport.
Sulistyaningtyas, A. R., Prihastanti, E., & Hastuti, E. D. (2018). Potential of liquid tofu waste for decaffeination of
robusta coffee (Coffea robusta Lindl.Ex De Will). Journal of Microbiology, Biotechnology and Food
Sciences, 8(1), 678–680. https://doi.org/10.15414/jmbfs.2018.8.1.678-680
Tejasari, Sulistyowati, Djumarti, & Sari, R. A. A. (2010). Mutu Gizi Dan Tingkat Kesukaan Minuman Kopi
Dekafosin Instan. Jurnal Agrotek, 4(1), 91–106.
Villanueva, D., Luna, P., Manic, M., Najdanovic–Visak, V., & Fornari, T. (2011). Extraction of caffeine from
green coffee beans using ethyl lactate. Food Processing, 1, 3.
Vitzthum, O.G., 2005. Decaffeination. In: Illy, A., Viani, R. (Eds.), Espresso Coffee e the Science of
Quality. Elsevier Academic Press, Amsterdam, pp. 142e148.
Widyotomo, S., & Mulato, S. (2007). Kafein : Senyawa Penting Pada Biji Kopi. Senyawa Penting Pada Biji Kopi,
23(1), 44–50.
Widyotomo, S., Mulato, S., Purwadaria, H. K., & Syarief, A. M. (2009). Karakteristik Proses Dekafeinasi Kopi
Robusta dalam Reaktor Kolom Tunggal dengan Pelarut Etil Asetat. Pelita Perkebunan, 25(2), 101–
125.
Widyotomo, S., Purwadaria, H. K., & Syarief, A. M. (2011). Pengembangan Model Matematik Laju Penurunan
Kafein dalam Biji Kopi dengan Metode Pelindian. Pelita Perkebunan.
Worku, M., de Meulenaer, B., Duchateau, L., & Boeckx, P. (2018). Effect of altitude on biochemical composition
and quality of green arabica coffee beans can be affected by shade and postharvest processing method.
Food Research International, 105, 278–285. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodres.2017.11.016
Zabot, G. L. (2019). Decaffeination using supercritical carbon dioxide. Green Sustainable Process for Chemical
and Environmental Engineering and Science: Supercritical Carbon Dioxide as Green Solvent. Elsevier
Inc. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12- 817388-6.00011-8