Tea in 2010, My Inside Industry View

Growth in Segments

2010 was predicted successfully by yours truly to be one of continued growth, opportunity, and success. Glad to be right.

I see even more opportunity for growth and continued growth in 2011, especially in the coffee roaster and coffee business segments, as their b2b and direct consumers demand more quality, education, and diversity in tea selections - as well as a call offer something to the ever growing -non caffeine crowd.
I have heard that "non caffeinated crowd" or herbal tea growth to be anywhere between 30 and 40 % of the tea market. That is good size. I had always thought it to be ironic, when I owned my tea chain and wholesale line, that Rooibos and Herbal (non-caffeinated) teas were always outselling the camellia sinensis leaves in bulk and hot teas, just not in the iced -although the iced herbals were growing and catching up too.

I see the caffeinated herbal - Yerba Mate - to continue to grow in blend selections in 2011. While Green and White teas continue to be of solid interest as well as Organic in these and all segments as well. Black Tea continues to take the cake, especially in the RTD and iced tea sales of course in the U.S.

Tea Blends continue to grow and be a great opportunity for Coffee Companies to step up their game. Fruits, flowers, and value additions- the key anything that will help you spin your marketing chant is all good. Be it super fruit teas with flavor and function, energy or sleepy time. Chai's continue to be solid and strong - although uniquely signature to each company most times. Peach, tropical, and chocolate dominate - as does a bit of coconut as well. These fancy ingredients and enhancements are found in all of the teas - herbal, regular, and often even in Organic - and progressively so. These influences are usually kept up on by walking a Fancy Food show. Speaking of Organics - QTrade made a huge leap to go with mostly all natural flavors in 2010 - to keep with and push for as natural as possible.

I continue to see Coffee Roasters seek new blends and to further the growth of better tea's and specialty blends. In hot tea, fuso or pyramids, and/or iced as well.

My prediction in 2011 for growth in the tea realm? More and more tea powders and mixes. You name it, they will mix it and offer it in more and more stick packs, bulk, and cans. Iced teas will continue to get better, and healthier - fresh brews, more selection, higher quality at a higher price point, and diversity - AMEN.

More later this week...Iced Teas and options, Fuso and pyramid, consultants, classes, container sourcing of tea and key ingredients such as Goji Berries, reported increase in pricing in all teas and herbs.



Cheers!

Indian Tea Prices to go up...

Article from Financial Express
http://www.financialexpress.com/news/tea-prices-to-go-up-says-mcleod-russel/627588/2

World's largest tea producer McLeod Russel India Ltd sees average price realisation per kg to rise at least by Rs 12-15 in 2010-11. The average tea price was around Rs 137 per kg in 2009-10.

Mcleod Russel managing director Aditya Khaitan said contrary to expectations that average tea prices would drop during the year, prices are actually expected to go upwards. ''There are apprehensions in some quarters that average tea prices would drop in 2010-11 from last year's level but my reading is that we would see a higher price as crop shortage is only going to go up," he said.

According to him, industry is likely to face a shortage of 80 million kg during the year. Last year the shortage was around 60 mkgs. The company has suffered a net loss of Rs 120 crore during the quarter to March 31, 2010, against a loss of Rs 88.61...World's largest tea producer McLeod Russel India Ltd sees average price realisation per kg to rise at least by Rs 12-15 in 2010-11. The average tea price was around Rs 137 per kg in 2009-10.

Article continued....http://www.financialexpress.com/news/tea-prices-to-go-up-says-mcleod-russel/627588/2

Organic Buying up 41%

Consumer survey finds 41% of parents buying more organic foods than a year ago
U.S. families are buying a wider variety of organic products than ever
Contact: Barbara Haumann (802-275-3820; bhaumann@ota.com)
BRATTLEBORO, Vt. (Dec. 8, 2010)—In spite of the sluggish economic recovery, U.S. families continue to buy more organic products than ever before and from a wider variety of categories, according to findings from the latest consumer study jointly sponsored by the Organic Trade Association (OTA) and KIWI Magazine. In fact, 41 percent of parents report they are buying more organic foods today than a year ago, up significantly from 31 percent reporting organic purchases in 2009, according to the U.S. Families’ Organic Attitudes & Beliefs 2010 tracking study.

“Consumers are increasingly interested in where their food comes from and how it is produced. With organic, they have that transparency,” said Christine Bushway, OTA’s Executive Director and CEO. She added, “It is exciting to see parents recognize the importance of organic products to their families.”

The survey, conducted between Aug. 11 and 27, 2010, also found that parents buy organic because they see organic products are generally healthier, address their concern about the effects of pesticides, hormones and antibiotics on children, or provide a means to avoid highly processed foods and/or artificial ingredients.
Although perceived price disparity between conventional and organic products remains a barrier to purchase for some families, the study revealed significant opportunities for marketers of organic products to educate consumers on the value of these products, and of the significant differences between organic, conventional and unregulated “natural” products. Demographically, consumers’ education level appears to be more significant than income level in predicting organic purchase behaviors.
The study, the second of its kind sponsored by OTA and KIWI Magazine, shows that three-quarters of U.S. families purchase some organic products. Comprising a growing percentage (36 percent versus 32 percent in 2009), newly organic families who have begun purchasing organic products in the past two years represent more than three in ten U.S. households.
The 64-page study profiles organic buyers, tracks purchases and behavior motivation, explores consumer knowledge and trust in organic, looks specifically at perceptions about personal care and natural, and identifies emerging trends. The new report can be ordered for purchase by sending an e-mail to info@ota.com. The cost is $1,495 for non-OTA members, with a special discounted rate of $795 provided to OTA member companies. An executive summary may be requested by the media.
The Organic Trade Association (OTA) is the membership-based business association for organic agriculture and products in North America. Its members include growers, shippers, processors, certifiers, farmers' associations, distributors, importers, exporters, consultants, retailers and others. OTA’s Board of Directors is democratically elected by its members. OTA's mission is to promote and protect the growth of organic trade to benefit the environment, farmers, the public and the economy (www.ota.com)

Organic Trade Association applauds passage of child nutrition bill Includes provision for organic pilot program in schools

Contact: Barbara Haumann (413-376-1220; bhaumann@ota.com)

WASHINGTON, D.C. (Dec. 2, 2010)—The Organic Trade Association (OTA) today applauded Congress for passing the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010 that includes a $10 million Organic Pilot Program OTA championed to help provide organic food choices in school nutrition programs.
“OTA is pleased that this important legislation has passed and very excited that it includes OTA’s proposal for an organic pilot program giving children access to organic foods as part of healthy school feeding programs,” said Christine Bushway, OTA’s Executive Director and CEO. “The health status of our children is crucial to the well-being of our nation’s future, and the food that they are fed in schools is key to their health status.”

The bill, which passed the Senate before the August recess, moved through the House of Representatives today, with House passage in a 264-to-157 vote.

Under the Organic Pilot Program, competitive grants favoring socially disadvantaged schools will be offered for schools to increase organic offerings in their meal programs. Because the Organic Pilot Program is not mandatory, the Appropriations Committee will decide on funding for the program.

In the Senate, Sen. Sherrod Brown of Ohio sponsored the program in the Senate Agriculture Committee. Sen. Patrick Leahy of Vermont also gave his support, with the program included in the Health, Hunger-Free Kids Act passing the Senate in a unanimous vote before the August recess.

Meanwhile, OTA worked with Rep. Lynn Woolsey of California to sponsor the program in the House Education and Labor Committee. Rep. Dennis Kucinich, also of Ohio, co-sponsored the amendment for inclusion in the House's Improving Nutrition for America's Children Act. OTA met with more than 20 House offices to build support for the program.

In addition to the Organic Pilot Program, the bill includes a $40 million Farm-to-School Program that OTA also supported. This mandatory funding will provide a robust competitive grant and technical assistance program in the U.S. Department of Agriculture to increase the use of local foods from small- and medium-sized farms in schools. The final bill also provides the first increase in meal reimbursement rates, other than that based on inflation, since the 1970s, and streamlines enrollment in school meal programs

Compared to the Senate bill, the House Education and Labor bill was substantially more expensive. Therefore, the House voted to pass the Senate's Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010, which costs $4.5 billion and is offset by supplemental food stamp benefits from the stimulus bill.

The Organic Trade Association (OTA) is the membership-based business association for organic agriculture and products in North America. Its members include growers, shippers, processors, certifiers, farmers' associations, distributors, importers, exporters, consultants, retailers and others. OTA’s Board of Directors is democratically elected by its members. OTA's mission is to promote and protect the growth of organic trade to benefit the environment, farmers, the public and the economy (www.ota.com).

Ever Wonder How Jasmine Pearls are made?

natural flavors and essential oils in tea

11.08.10
natural flavors and essential oils in tea
Posted in T Ching - blog
by Zhena Muzyka


At Zhena’s Gypsy Tea, we get an enormous number of calls from tea drinkers asking what “natural” as in “natural flavors” means. Tea drinkers are increasingly aware that “natural” is a loose term that can mean almost anything - and they are right.

The FDA loopholes on flavorings are vast, rendering the term “natural” meaningless if there is no organic certification attached that ensures auditing of ingredients and labeling laws. Organic certification ensures auditing, a level of checks and balances that would not otherwise be implemented regarding tea production.

Standards committees at retailers have created lists of chemicals that are not allowed in the products they sell, but there is not a standards committee verifying that manufacturers’ ingredients are free of these chemicals. The only way to ensure you are not ingesting chemicals when sipping flavored teas is to buy flavored teas that are certified organic.

The history of flavored teas began in China with the Tang Dynasty (AD 618-906), during which teas were flavored with plum juice, cloves, ginger, peppermint, onions, and salts.

The Song Dynasty (AD 960-1279) began the use of essential oils in tea - lightly blending their leaves with essences of lotus, jasmine petals, and chrysanthemum. According to The Book of Tea, the higher classes preferred scented and flavored teas, showing themselves to be more adventurous in taking tea.

According to The Sage Report’s US Tea is Hot Report:

“For every ten pounds sold of the higher end specialty teas - those selling over thirty dollars per pound - one hundred pounds of specialty flavored tea reaches US consumers’ cups. The middle tea market…flavored, delicious, aromatic and nicely packaged, will outpace the growing but supply-restricted (annual output for the next 5-10 years) stocks of unflavored, long leaf, orthodox teas. Purists may cringe, but the mega-marketers are gearing up for a specialty tea future that is flavored, flowered and spiced.”

Flavor Terminology

To clarify flavor terminology for our tea drinkers, I use the following descriptions:

Artificial Flavor: A flavor derived from 100% synthetic materials (not found in nature), such as Ethyl Vanillin, which is listed on the ingredients statement of some milk chocolate bars.

Nature-Identical Flavor: A term used mostly in Europe. All ingredients are man-made, but are also found naturally occurring in nature. An example is vanillin, which occurs naturally as white crystals on a vanilla bean after curing. Vanillin also has a nature-identical version (artificial) derived through the processing of lignin, which is a by-product of paper manufacturing and is an economical source of man-made vanillin. Man-made vanillin has the same chemical structure as natural vanilla. However, due to the fact it does not come from a natural source, it is termed NATURE-IDENTICAL. Both categories - ARTIFICIAL and NATURE-IDENTICAL - are coded in the United States as ARTIFICIAL.

Natural & Artificial Flavor: A flavor derived from natural and artificial ingredients.

Natural Flavor: A flavor derived 100% from the title material. An example would be a Natural Cherry Flavor, which is derived entirely from cherries. (Many companies use this term for any and all types of flavors.)

Natural WONF Flavor: This flavor must contain at least one ingredient from the title source, such as cherry. All other ingredients must come from other natural sources.

Natural Flavor Blend Flavor: All ingredients in this flavor must be natural, but none are derived from the title material. A Cherry Type Flavor, NFB is derived from 100% natural chemicals, essential oils, oleoresins, floral absolutes, solid extracts, fluid extracts, distillates, juices, and essences, but none of these ingredients are derived from cherries.

How Flavors are Created

Natural flavors are usually distilled, while artificial flavors are a blend of chemical compounds, even plastics! An example of an artificial flavor carrying agent is Propylene Glycol, which is a colorless, viscous, hygroscopic liquid. It serves as a humectant - a substance that retains moisture content. It makes the skin feel moist and soft and keeps products from drying out.

Propylene Glycol is used in anti-freeze, brake and hydraulic fluid, de-icers, paints and coatings, floor wax, laundry detergents, and tobacco, as well as in cosmetics, toothpastes, shampoos, deodorants, lotions, processed food, dog food, and many more personal care products.

The Material Safety Data Sheet (MSDS) for Propylene Glycol states:

“Implicated in contact dermatitis, kidney damage and liver abnormalities; can inhibit skin cell growth in human tests and can damage cell membranes causing rashes, dry skin and surface damage.

Acute Effects: May be harmful by inhalation, ingestion or skin absorption. May cause eye irritation, skin irritation, gastro-intestinal disturbances, nausea, headache and vomiting, and central nervous system depression.”

Natural Carrying Agent - Alcohol

Alcohol has been made for thousands of years - it’s a compound of carbon, hydrogen, and oxygen, produced when glucose is fermented by yeast. During the making of alcoholic drinks, the alcohol content is controlled by the amount of yeast and the duration of fermentation.

Fruits are used to make wines and ciders, and cereals, such as barley and rye, form the basis of beers and spirits. These substances provide the flavor associated with each individual drink. Alcohol bases evaporate during the blending process, leaving the flavor behind to work its magic on our taste buds.

Shelf Life: Natural flavors last up to one year under favorable storage methods, while artificial flavors last two solid years. Essential oils like Earl Grey’s oil of Bergamot will only last 4-8 months, while natural raspberry is reported to last only 2 weeks.

Volatility: Natural flavors tend to be more volatile than artificial. This means that they evaporate more quickly and are changeable and inconsistent - in one word, fickle.

Scent Effects

Natural scents and flavors can enhance and change moods, like clinical aromatherapy, while artificial flavors do not have the same olfactory effects. Basically, natural flavors contain the sunshine, while artificial flavors made in a lab lack it. I call my blends, “Sunshine in a cup,” due to their pure flavors. Here are some great aromatherapy benefits when using real essential oils. You can view my aromatherapy chart for tea blending at gypsytea.com.

1. Bergamot oil reduces appetite.
2. Jasmine, Cardamom, Cinnamon, and Orange Blossom are all aphrodisiacs.
3. Bergamot, Lemon, and Rose are antiviral.
4. Bergamot, Grapefruit, Jasmine, Lavender, Orange, and Lemon Verbena are antidepressants.
5. Cardamom, Juniper, Lemongrass, and Rosemary alleviate boredom and stimulate mental clarity and attentiveness.
6. Fennel, Lime, and Lemon are great detoxifiers.
7. Anise, Bergamot, Cardamom, Fennel, and Rosemary aid digestion.
8. Rose, Jasmine, and Grapefruit induce euphoric emotions.
9. Emotional coldness can be warmed by using Black Pepper, Ginger, and Grapefruit.
10. Jasmine, Lavender, and Lemon relieve headaches.
11. Chamomile and Lavender are for sleep.
12. Menopausal hot flashes can be lessened with Fennel and Roman Chamomile.
13. Poor memory is helped with Cardamom, Peppermint, and Lemongrass.
14. Bad breath is lessened with Bergamot, Cardamom, and Peppermint.
15. Bergamot, Chamomile, Grapefruit, Jasmine, Lavender, Lemon and Lemongrass, Orange Rose, Pine, and Tangerine are all used to east tension and stress.
16. PMS is helped by Bergamot, Rose, and Tangerine!

Here’s to your health, dear tea drinker! I hope this helped you gain the knowledge to be empowered to make the best choices for you and your health when it comes to flavored and scented tea options.

Original Article and more from T Ching found here: http://www.tching.com/2010/11/natural-flavors-and-essential-oils-in-tea/

Caffeine and Tea Myth - Chado Article

This is a must read blog in Cha Dao - a Journal of Tea and Culture
Article by Nigel Melican http://chadao.blogspot.com/2008/02/caffeine-and-tea-myth-and-reality.html

WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 06, 2008

CAFFEINE AND TEA: Myth and Reality
by NIGEL MELICAN

EDITOR'S NOTE: When it comes to the topic of caffeine in tea, there is no end to the generating of myth and indeed of science fiction. Perhaps the most persistent canard is the one that alleges that tea can be 'mostly' decaffeinated (80% is, I think, the number most often quoted) by a quick preliminary infusion in hot water (30 seconds is the duration typically recommended). While one cannot hope to dispel so-called 'common wisdom' overnight, even by the demonstration of clear scientific fact, it is surely a step in the right direction to put the data into public circulation. That is why I have asked Nigel Melican, founder and Managing Director of Teacraft Ltd, to offer us a post on this and other aspects of caffeine in tea. Nigel is, quite simply, one of the world's leading authorities on tea; readers of CHA DAO will recall with pleasure the massive work of bibliography that he contributed to this blog in an earlier post; today's entry is, I think, destined to become a standard compendium of information on the topic.


I. DECAFFEINATING TEA

Tea contains two physiologically active compounds: caffeine and theanine. Moderate caffeine consumption is perceived by some in western countries to border on the dangerous, and many consumers, rather than abstaining entirely from drinking tea, maté, or coffee, demand a decaffeinated version. In the case of tea, this is provided commercially by a process that uses organic solvents to remove most of the offending caffeine (along with other compounds); the result, unfortunately, is at best an indifferent product. (Ironically, the very caffeine so removed is a valuable by-product eagerly sought by soft-drink manufacturers to enhance their sugary beverages.)

As well as reducing product quality, commercial decaffeination is an expensive process that takes hours of production time and doubles the raw material price of a pound of tea. How likely is it therefore that the accountants at Lipton and similar packers would have overlooked a simple and inexpensive process that removes 80% of caffeine in 30 seconds? Yet this myth exists and is propagated daily by retailers and tea gurus without any other basis than that they wish it were true, therefore it must be. So: what, then, are the facts?

In 1996, Monique Hicks, Peggy Hsieh and Leonard Bell published a peer-reviewed scientific paper recording precise time related extraction of caffeine from tea using a modern detection technique (HPLC). This paper, 'Tea preparation and its influence on methylxanthine concentration,' appeared in Food Research International Vol 29, Nos 3-4, pp. 325-330. (FRI is copyright of the Canadian Institute of Food Science and Technology). Methylxanthines caffeine, theobromine and theophyllin all occur in tea and have similar physiological action, but in tea caffeine is the prominent methylxanthine.

In summary: Hicks et al measured the caffeine (plus theobromine) content of six different teas (three bagged and three loose-leaf, including black, oolong and green types). They measured caffeine-extraction in boiling water when steeped for 5 minutes, 10 minutes and 15 minutes. They replicated all their extractions three times to eliminate experimental error. Extrapolation of their data gives the following caffeine-extraction percentages below 5 minutes (averaged over all tea types and formats); note that while loose tea extracted marginally more slowly than tea-bag tea, it made only a couple of percentage-points' difference:

30 seconds: 9% caffeine removal
1 minute: 18% caffeine removal
2 minutes: 34% caffeine removal
3 minutes: 48% caffeine removal
4 minutes: 60% caffeine removal
5 minutes: 69% caffeine removal
10 minutes: 92% caffeine removal
15 minutes: 100% caffeine removal

Clearly to achieve the 80% target we must wash our tea for more than five minutes! This is very much at odds with the mythical '30- or 45-second hot wash to remove 80% of the caffeine' advice, as a 30-second initial wash of the tea will actually leave in place 91% of the original caffeine!

Before the publication of this work by Hicks et al, Professor Michael Spiro and his group had already done some ground-breaking physical chemistry on tea. In their paper, 'Tea and the Rate of Its Infusion' (published in Chemistry in New Zealand 1981, pp 172-174), they disclosed caffeine concentration diffusing into water (4g loose leaf -- it will have been a CTC small fannings type -- in 200 ml water held at a constant 80 degrees C, and stirred with a magnetic stirrer). Their first data point is at 90 seconds, and shows 49% caffeine removed from leaf (i.e. into the wash water). Extrapolating from Spiro's plot gives:

30 seconds: 20% caffeine removal
1 minute: 33% caffeine removal
2 minutes: 64% caffeine removal
3 minutes: 76% caffeine removal
4 minutes: 85% caffeine removal
5 minutes: 88% caffeine removal
10 minutes: 99% caffeine removal
15 minutes: 100% caffeine removal

Again we would have to be washing our tea for a long period – three to four minutes to achieve 80% decaffeination. While a 30-second 'wash' under Spiro's rather extreme laboratory conditions (small leaf CTC tea, loose in the 'pot' rather than in a teabag, at constant temperature and stirred vigorously) leached 20% of caffeine rather than the 9% yielded by Hicks's more normal steeping, neither of these scientifically conducted findings comes anywhere near the 30-second/ 80%-decaffeination claims perpetuated as an Internet Myth.


II. CAFFEINE LEVELS IN VARIOUS TEAS

Another much-repeated claim is that black tea is high in caffeine, green tea is lower, and white tea (through the naturalness of its manufacture it is implied) has next to none. While suiting the sales pitch of some tea vendors this information is so wrong as to verge on the fraudulent.

Three scientifically verifiable facts are:

1. Caffeine level varies naturally in types of tea and levels in one type may overlap with another type
2. Black and green tea manufactured from leaf from the same bushes on the same day will have virtually the same caffeine levels (within +/- 0.3%)
3. For a given bush, the finer the plucking standard, the higher the caffeine level

Actual caffeine level in tea is highest:

• when the tea is derived from buds and young first leaf tips (thus white tea has a high caffeine level)
• when the bush is assamica type rather than sinensis (can be 33% higher caffeine, thus African black tea tends to be higher than China black tea)
• when the bush is clonal VP rather than seedling (can be 100% higher caffeine, thus new plantings in Africa are higher than old seedling plantings in Asia),
• when the plant is given a lot of nitrogen fertilizer (as in Japan), and
• during fast growing seasons.

Thus tea derived from older leaf, China type seedling bush, under-fertilized husbandry and in autumn season will naturally be lowest in caffeine. Georgian and Turkish tea falls into this category: expect only 1 to 1.5% caffeine in them, compared with the usual 3% in retail teas. Tea from well-fertilized fast-growing young tips of African clonal tea can often have 5-6% caffeine.

The above summary disregards the changes in caffeine level (albeit smaller than genetic, edaphic and climatic mediated changes) produced during tea processing. Those interested in the topic of caffeine levels in various types of tea may be interested in some experimental process-runs undertaken in the Teacraft ECM System for precision miniature tea manufacture -- 'the tea factory in a box.' This system allows any environmental variable to be controlled to a set value while the other variables are held rock-solid -- and gained the American Society of Agricultural Engineers' AE50 Award for 'outstanding technological innovation.' (Too expensive for home use, I fear.)

EXPERIMENT 1: Effect of wither conditions on caffeine level. The same leaf was put into all experimental conditions; all leaf was fine 'two leaves and a bud' standard; and was a named VP clone.

Fast wither (8 hours to 70% moisture content):
Wither at 15 degrees C: caffeine 3.20%
Wither at 25 degrees C: caffeine 3.45%
Wither at 35 degrees C: caffeine 3.30 %

Slow wither (18 hours to 70% moisture content):
Wither at 15 degrees C: caffeine 3.10%
Wither at 25 degrees C: caffeine 3.65%
Wither at 35 degrees C: caffeine 3.43 %

A quadratic response in each set, with the highest caffeine produced by slow wither at moderate temperature (also, by gut feel, the tea maker’s favorite conditions) and demonstrating that the field is not the only determinant of caffeine level in the cup.

EXPERIMENT 2: Effect of length of wither on caffeine level (hours to 70% moisture content). 2L&B hybrid seedling leaf was used; each run was replicated and the means are also shown.

10 hours: 3.20, 3.23% = 3.22%
14 hours: 3.38, 3.41% = 3.40%
18 hours: 3.38, 3.47% = 3.43%
22 hours: 3.50, 3.52% = 3.51%
30 hours: 3.53, 3.58% = 3.56%

Straight-line response, with long withering producing the highest caffeine by 0.34% over slow wither.

EXPERIMENT 3: Effect of fermentation (oxidation) duration (minutes) on caffeine level (average of four clones).

0 minutes: 3.20%
30 minutes: 3.02%
45 minutes: 2.98%
60 minutes: 2.88%
75 minutes: 2.80%
90 minutes: 2.72%

Again, a straight-line response with oxidation, unlike caffeine boosting withering, slightly reducing caffeine level in black tea. Note i) that green tea is neither withered nor oxidized, and ii) white tea is not oxidized but has a very long wither

FIELD DATA: Some hard data from published sources

Seasonal variation in the natural caffeine level of Kenya Tea clones averaged for the four quarters:








Here caffeine level is lowest in all the clones during the slow growth period of July. (Note Clone 4 variation of more than 100% from slow growth season to fast growth in December quarter.)

Again from Kenya, consider the absolute minimum/maximum caffeine measurements through the year:

Clone 1: 1.2 & 3.2%
Clone 2: 1.3 & 3.4%
Clone 3: 1.7 & 3.9%
Clone 4: 1.9 & 5.0%

These natural variations across time make it difficult the assess whether a particular tea or tea-type is a high-caffeine or low-caffeine type, particularly with a single 'snapshot' analysis, as is often listed even by enlightened vendors on the Internet. For example, should we consider Clone 4 a high- or low-caffeine type?

I have shown here a few of the factors (natural and man-made) that can change and determine caffeine level in a made tea. Other important factors that influence the level are the level of nutrition (which goes up with nitrogen in the soil) and the degree of leaf shading which increases caffeine (though it is applied, in Japan, to increase theanine).

All of this goes to show that quoting any particular caffeine percentage for a given tea type, as many people do, should be fringed with caveats, and the exact data provided as to how it was processed and when it was grown. At best (using HPLC analysis), a precise and accurate caffeine-content measure is but a snapshot in time. And in the main, none of this information is available to the tea producer, let alone to the seller.


III. SOLVENTS AND DECAFFEINATION

Any solvent used to remove caffeine will also remove other chemical compounds from tea. The completely-targeted solvent does not exist, though some are better than others. Antioxidant polyphenols (flavanols) -- present as catechins in green tea, and in black tea either as oxidised catechins (= theaflavins) or as condensed polymerised oxidised catechins (= thearubigins) -- are partially soluble in the decaffeinating solvents, though as you would expect these are chosen to maximize caffeine solubilty and minimize polyphenol solubility. Typical data is 82% removal of polyphenols by (less expensive) ethyl acetate decaffeination, and only 8% by (more expensive) supercritical CO2 decaffeination.

The methylene chloride solvent route is not allowed by the FDA for tea decaffeination (though bizarrely it is for coffee!). It is however permitted and used in Europe, and the polyphenol retention is midway between that of ethyl acetate and of supercritical CO2. Probably the best decaffeinated tea is made by applying the extraction process during tea manufacture, rather than after it. This is done in a few factories in Malawi and Zimbabwe, and produces a decaffeinated cup that is virtually indistinguishable from normal tea from the factory. Such decaffeinated tea does not appear in the USA for several reasons: it is a CTC process; the robust colour and taste demand milk; and it utilizes methylene chloride solvent.

Consumers demanding decaffeination for the sake of their health or their sleep have I suspect been subjected more to caffeine excess from coffee than from tea. Coffee-, maté- and cola-derived caffeine can deliver a jolt that tea, be it ever so strong, does not deliver, though when extracted the caffeine from all these sources is chemically the same. The natural complexing of caffeine in tea (it binds with tea polyphenols during steeping) gives a slower and more gentle uptake in the stomach and hence to the brain; and I suspect that the relaxing effect of tea's own mind-calming amino acid (theanine) also contributes to the body's reacting more gently to tea caffeine than to coffee caffeine.


IV. OTHER INFORMATION ON THE WEB

http://nobleharbor.com/tea/caffiene.html [sic]
This page supports the information given above – summarizes the Hicks et al paper, and in places borrows some of my own data, with a few (unimportant) errors. It debunks some of the popular caffeine myths and concludes 'all teas have roughly similar caffeine contents, and one cannot rely on the belief that green tea has less caffeine, as asserted by many popular claims.'

http://lpi.oregonstate.edu/infocenter/phytochemicals/tea/
The Linus Pauling Institute gives a fairly inconclusive comment on the level of caffeine in tea showing data (from just 20 snapshot analyses) that the green teas they analyzed varied from 40 to 211 mg/liter, while the black teas varied from 177 to 303 mg/liter -- a larger and more representative sample of the worlds teas could have would have increased these ranges and the overlap considerably. However, LPI do suggest that the popular belief of low caffeine level in White Tea is misplaced: 'Buds and young tea leaves have been found to contain higher levels of caffeine than older leaves, suggesting that the caffeine content of some white teas may be slightly higher than that of green teas.'
POSTED BY CORAX AT 7:44 PM