Quality, safety and feasibility study of high-pressure processing on cow milk

There is an increasing demand for innovative processing technologies due to the growing concern on food safety and quality. High-pressure processing (HPP) has emerged as a promising method for preserving the nutritional value and safety of perishable foods. However, its application to cow milk and feasibility within milk processing facilities remain underexplored. Current approaches to milk preservation often involve heat treatment which might not the best preservation method as it can compromise the sensory and nutritional attribute of final product. This study investigated HPP as a viable method for preserving cow milk, given its potential to maintain nutritional value and safety. HPP treatment at 600 MPa for 10 mins was compared to ultra-pasteurisation (ESL) treatment at 125°C for 4s in terms of microbiological, physicochemical, nutritional and organoleptic properties of cow milk. The cost and environmental impact assessment were conducted to evaluate its sustainability. HPP milk exhibits a confidently extended shelf life beyond 60 days, meeting microbial safety standards, while ESL milk faced contamination during filling. HPP milk demonstrated higher physicochemical stability, maintaining consistent pH and undetectable acidity, and better retention of vitamins A and B5 (75% and 65% respectively) as compared to ESL milk after 60 days storage. Both HPP and ESL have comparable results for mineral stability. Sensory evaluation revealed 89.5% of panellists were able to differentiate HPP milk from ESL milk with majority (61%) preferring HPP milk for its superior colour, milkiness, mouthfeel and aftertaste attributes, except for creaminess which required improvement. A feasibility study assessed the economic and environmental impacts of HPP technology in milk processing. The capital cost for industrial-scale HPP was estimated at RM 6,470,000, three times higher than ESL treatment, primarily due to high HPP equipment costs. Both systems have comparable operational cost with HPP inducing higher electricity, labour and facility-dependent cost, while the ESL has higher utilities cost such as steam, cooling water and chilled water. Economic feasibility study showed both treatments are regarded acceptable investment with NPV > 0 and IRR > 10% although HPP has higher break-even quantity (1.9 million bottles) than ESL heat treatment (0.6 million bottles). Total electricity consumption was higher by 77.4% for the HPP (874,500 kWh/yr) than the ESL (500,500 kWh/yr) The working principle of HPP that uses electricity contributed to lower carbon emission (0.018 kg CO2/L) as compared to ESL treatment (205.488 kg CO2/L) that uses steam as source of energy. In conclusion, the aforementioned results suggested HPP treatment at 600MPa for 10 min could be used as an alternative to replace heat treatment for milk processing with lower risk on post contamination, longer shelf life, higher stability on physicochemical, nutritional and organoleptic properties with potentially lower carbon emission except that of a 3-fold higher capital cost. Future research should focus on studying the effect of HPP on vitamin and mineral contents due to limited literatures found to support the finding. Additionally, further investigation on customer acceptance and market viability is recommended to facilitate the widespread application of HPP in dairy industry.

Text FK 2024 31 - Declaration Form.pdf Restricted to Repository staff only Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial No Derivatives. Download (669kB) Text FK 2024 31 - Full Text.pdf Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial No Derivatives. Download (3MB) Text FK 2024 31.pdf Restricted to Repository staff only Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial No Derivatives. Download (3MB) Official URL or Download Paper: http://ethesis.upm.edu.my/id/eprint/18996

Actions (login required)

View Item