The Bar Towel

Folks, the bottle agreement is disappearing at a rocket pace. I have seen numerous signs that the Industry Standard Bottle agreement is unworkable and the aluminum 'bottle' is merely just another crack. The new 'imported' star from Labatt Brazil, Brahma, is supposedly in a contoured bottle with hand holds and this is to be their world dominating brand. It makes no more sense to brew this in Brazil and import it here than it did for Molson to import its loser.

The issue lies in the package and not the beer. That message will soon overwhelm the marketing guru's struggling with the Canadian brand and then all the strings come undone. They have a choice between two options for Canadian: charge $24.00/case and stay in the ISB or try and develop it as a value-added product in a distinctive package. There are no other workable options!

If the government czars would let market demand rule then cans would eventually grab a 60-70% share and we (the micro's) could choose whatever package we think would be appropriate. Sleeman, Steamwhistle, Creemore and Millstreet prove that the "we can't afford any other package" arguement is complete bullsh*t.

Generic lagers have no recourse but to distract you with mental imagery - Corona and JImmy Buffett. Hell, even Heineken rode the green skunky beer image for over two decades!

I may be in the minortiy but I am actually a big fan of the ISB. It is a big factor in allowing the beer store system to maintain an exceptionally high level of reuse and recycling rates, and corresponding energy savings.

Conversely, I also like the unique bottles of Mill St. and Steamwhistle, which presumably also get reused and don't have paper-wasting labels on them.

JerCraigs wrote:I may be in the minortiy but I am actually a big fan of the ISB. It is a big factor in allowing the beer store system to maintain an exceptionally high level of reuse and recycling rates, and corresponding energy savings.

Conversely, I also like the unique bottles of Mill St. and Steamwhistle, which presumably also get reused and don't have paper-wasting labels on them.

Well, beyond the marketing argument which is a no-brainer, the energy evidence is far from conclusive to those who actually challenge the beer industry claims.

Each brewery of size in Ontario has a football field sized bottlewasher that is maintained at 85 degrees C 24/7. Added to that, they expel hot waste chemical solution at rates of 30-80 gallons per minute containing residual caustic and chlorine from the cleaning process which goes to waste for treatment. I have never seen any realistic estimates of these energy costs put forth. Beyond this, these machines are exceptionally inefficient from an energy point of view compared to kilning new glass on a bottle to bottle basis.

Beyond this, reusable glass weighs approx. 25% more than 1-way glass which is transported to the brewery as an empty bottle (extra energy 1), is transported into the distribution system as full beers (extra energy 2), is collected and redistributed as empty bottles again instead of cull to recycling (huge extra energy 3), enters breweries with mold, fruit flies and bacteria where it is stored, disassembled from extra heavy waste packaging required to carry 2-way glass, washed and refilled. A typical 1-way line in the US is rated at 3 1/2 workers per line per shift. A similarly rated 2-way line in Canada has 18 workers (so I guess its good for the unions).

Our twist-off ISB means that extra heavy-duty top sealed packaging is required (which is all single use) because of potential security/contamination concerns. So not only is our bottle a massive energy sink, the nature of the packaging required is much heavier and because of the high colour inks and fibreglass reinforcement tape required, the packaging is 100% unrecyclable (believe me, I was responsible to try and offload it and nobody would touch it).

Cans and lightweight bottles require significantly less packaging than 2-way glass and they are getting lighter every day. Transportation is one of the most signifigant cost drivers in beer because of the weight. Recycling rates need not change at all with an appropriate deposit system.

All of that being said, the main driving factor for breweries is very simple. 2-way bottles, by agreement, cost approx. $0.18. By bottlewashing, you can reduce your cost/unit significantly ($0.03?) depending on how many trips you get out of the bottle so I see the reason for it. If we could even get away from the twist off I believe we could provide a much more responsible package but as an efficiency aficionado (inc. energy), no amount of TBS rhetoric is going to make me believe we have an environmentally sensitive system. The problem is, as Canadians we are suckers for pseudo government propaganda.

Man I love reading Rob's posts. They are insightful, concise and informative. We are very fortunate to have someone with Rob's extensive background on Bartowel. He is our very own "insider".

Well stated, Rob. I've been a skeptic of the two-way bottle for years, although I'm also a committed environmentalist. I've never written about it because: a) TBS is a very efficient marketer of propoganda; and b) getting hard, comparative facts is as difficult as your post alludes.

That being said, and conscious of the fact that all of this should really be under a different thread, I think one of the absolute worst beer "innovations" of the past decade or two has been the twist off cap. It's inefficient as far as packaging goes (as Rob states), reduces the life of reusable bottles, shreds hands and frequently (at least to my experience) adds a micro-dose of glass shards to a glass of otherwise fine beer.

Well, beyond the marketing argument which is a no-brainer, the energy evidence is far from conclusive to those who actually challenge the beer industry claims.

I have the same doubts in the back of my mind right now when it comes to cloth v disposable diapers. It there a net savings considering how much water and energy is used to clean them?

One big difference I have noticed though: the ISBs are often full of crap when they are shipped, whereas the diapers are full of crap when they are returned

New Thread

http://www.bartowel.com/board/viewtopic.php?t=1715