LC - What's gone RIGHT so far.

Bobsy · Post by **Bobsy** » Fri Jan 18, 2008 10:52 pm

A little followup to the mentions of single serving cans today. I went to Summerhill today and bought a few for myself. Tried the 10w30...not a bad beer, and certainly nothing I would see as an effect of the can...this is reassuring. I also noticed Amsterdam Nut Brown in single 500ml servings, so I picked one up. Is this a new listing?

Belgian · Post by **Belgian** » Fri Jan 18, 2008 11:05 pm

grub wrote: kegs are stainless steel, so no need for coating afaik.

All of them are? That's great. I never knew they were used for aging - but of course winemakers can age red wine in stainless, and beer is way less acidic.

I was reading about the origin of pop beverage can liners - a Pepsi would corrode its way through a can were it not lined with plastic. Of course the cans used to be regular steel, not aluminum. They were a bit smaller and very hard to crush!

Tapsucker · Post by **Tapsucker** » Fri Jan 18, 2008 11:10 pm

I'm going to venture into this can debate with a bit of semi-science - so forgive me if I overstep my capacity here.

Bottles have the advantage of a non-reactive surface, except for the cap/cork/whatever. You can also presumably see what has gone wrong inside before buying.

Besides the cap/cork/whatever, bottles have the weakness of two materials that will expand/contract/leak at different rates.

Cans do have the potential to spoil their contents in chemical reactions, if poorly coated. I assume most good brewers tackle this. They at least have the same material for a lid as the rest of the container, but the big question is the edge/lip between the can and the seal. If the coating is week, it may contaminate. However, the beer should spend a limited amount of time in contact with this.

I think there are few realities we should really consider:
1. Bottles are kind of a romantic attachment. Not to be underestimated, we have a romantic attachment to the contents. But - corks are finally being outgrown in the wine industry for many non-romantic but quality and science reasons, so maybe we can learn.
2. Despite alluminum being a resource pig to make, it has advantages in shipping/recycling potential. After all we should enjoy our pleasure without being stupid.
3. UV is the most common enemy of beer. Cans are clearly better than bottles (pun intended).

I think cans have had a bad reputation mainly because they so often contain bad beer and because North Americans lack the social skills to use a glass. Once decanted, there can be no reason to say a beer taste worse coming from a can. Of course, a can is lighter to carry to the ball park and it holds a straw well

Rob Creighton · Post by **Rob Creighton** » Sat Jan 19, 2008 8:48 am

Tapsucker wrote:Cans do have the potential to spoil their contents in chemical reactions, if poorly coated. I assume most good brewers tackle this. They at least have the same material for a lid as the rest of the container, but the big question is the edge/lip between the can and the seal. If the coating is week, it may contaminate.

Despite aluminum being a resource pig to make, it has advantages in shipping/recycling potential.

An interesting note on the PPG (the company) polymer lining that is used in aluminum cans and lids. If there is a breach in the liner, even a micro spot, the acidity of beer reacts with the metal and will eat through the can within 2 to 3 hours creating a leaker case while still in the brewery. In essence, it is very unlikely anyone has ever encountered beer with a mettalic taste from the can.

In contrast, it is very likely that you have encountered metallic flavours from poorly brewed or packaged beers. A classic example is the dreaded "smooth flow, cream flow nitro crap that Irish/English brewers have inflicted us with and some American brewers tried to emulate. Nitrogen, in beers with a slightly lower flavour profile than Guiness Stout, tastes very metallic. It is not a natural flavour in beer and the introduction by Guinness in the '60's as a marketing gimmick has turned out to be a curse to good beer.

Some hop/malt/oxygen reactions create metallic off-tastes and of course the greatest wild card is that tasting instrument between your teeth. It cannot be calibrated and therefore, 'metallic' is subjective. High alpha hops are renowned for their 'metallic' flavours.

The double seam seal on a can is vastly superior to a liner/glass surface seal but the greatest package advantage for a can is its weight/shipping advantages. Think about it. We are supposedly 'environmently' sensitive by rewashing our bottles. A rewashable glass bottle weighs 280 grams and needs massively strong unreusable/unrecyclable packaging to get it to market and the empty bottle has to trucked back to the plant to be reused. You get 13 layers of 24's of cans on a skid versus 7 glass so the truck capacity/efficiency is almost double. You do the math.

The reality though is that I am sure that someone will prove that the polymer liner on cans gives you a horrible, incurable disease, the package has very few negatives and a lot of positives.

I'll stop now...I could go on a lot longer

lagerale · Post by **lagerale** » Sat Jan 19, 2008 11:19 am

gardhouse wrote:This christmas, thanks to the LCBO's quality winter release and gift packs - and my good friends at Mill Street, I put together some amazing beer themed gifts packages for some of the beer loving folks in my life.

The response was amazing - most people did not know such interesting items where available at the old, bland LCBO......

What did you put in the gift packs? I'm always looking for good beer ideas/gifts for my friends that aren't beer geeks.

gardhouse · Post by **gardhouse** » Sat Jan 19, 2008 12:19 pm

lagerale wrote:
gardhouse wrote:This christmas, thanks to the LCBO's quality winter release and gift packs - and my good friends at Mill Street, I put together some amazing beer themed gifts packages for some of the beer loving folks in my life.

The response was amazing - most people did not know such interesting items where available at the old, bland LCBO......
What did you put in the gift packs? I'm always looking for good beer ideas/gifts for my friends that aren't beer geeks.

I did up a bunch of 'baskets', 'cept the baskets where galvanized buckets. Each one had a selection of new - but agreeable beers (lighter lagers/pilsners) and then some "crazy" beers from the winter release. Each basket came with a couple pieces of beer specific glassware.

Next year, I'll be doing the same thing, but I'll probably try to add in a light book of some sort, on the topic of beer, something suitable for washroom reading.

midlife crisis · Post by **midlife crisis** » Sat Jan 19, 2008 7:19 pm

Rob:

Thanks for your informative posts on the pros and cons of aluminum cans. As I think I said in another thread, I'm a big fan of this development. I really hope we might see some Grand River products in this format sometime soon!

Belgian · Post by **Belgian** » Sat Jan 19, 2008 8:12 pm

I concur for most practical purposes the use of cans for beer is nothing to worry about.

Notwithstanding the long-term effects of bottle glass use (zero) are centuries-proven, whereas the effects of schmancy modern copolymer can linings (what is that stuff, exactly?) is still a great unknown. It's the known-versus-unknown debate, that is to say "I'd rather be slightly reactionary than abandon all caution."

I would not age several cans of Imperial Stout for ten years to see if I get moobs from synthetic esters leaching in over that great length of time. Who can say though - we probably get way more estrogen from the Toronto city water supply (the hormones from women's birth control pills enter the water cycle and do not break down but concentrate over time.)

It sounds like paranoia over health but there is real evidence our hormone balance is being messed with over the past few generations. In this vein I really enjoyed Bill Bryson's book, with its many cautionary tales of 'progress':

KwaiLo · Post by **KwaiLo** » Sat Jan 19, 2008 8:38 pm

midlife crisis wrote:Rob:

Thanks for your informative posts on the pros and cons of aluminum cans. As I think I said in another thread, I'm a big fan of this development. I really hope we might see some Grand River products in this format sometime soon!

I just want the 500mL bottles to come. Perhaps the info that is on the news page will help with that......

Bobsy · Post by **Bobsy** » Sat Jan 19, 2008 9:07 pm

KwaiLo wrote:
midlife crisis wrote:Rob:

Thanks for your informative posts on the pros and cons of aluminum cans. As I think I said in another thread, I'm a big fan of this development. I really hope we might see some Grand River products in this format sometime soon!
I just want the 500mL bottles to come. Perhaps the info that is on the news page will help with that......

I would second that. For me, Grand River has definitely been the news story of the past year, and kudos to everyone involved. If they begin bottling and supplying LCBOs in my area, then I will be a very happy man!

Belgian · Post by **Belgian** » Sat Jan 19, 2008 9:56 pm

KwaiLo wrote:
I just want the 500mL bottles to come. Perhaps the info that is on the news page will help with that......

It's a romantic notion, but part of my attachment to glass is the 500ml bottle I see when I visit my aunt and uncle in Bavaria. They have only those standard half-liter beer bottles in sturdy reusable crates - no cardboard is used - and everyone buys their 750ml spring water and 500ml beer in glass and dutifully returns the empties.

The beer and the water are both sourced locally, and the Weissenburg beer drinkers are very loyal to the local brewers' cooperative. Somehow it all works, and it would be great were life here so uncomplicated!

Rob Creighton · Post by **Rob Creighton** » Sun Jan 20, 2008 10:26 am

Thought I should clarify my position on bottles versus cans. I hope, in the long term, that Grand River Brewing ends up in 500ml bottles and 1.9L growlers (our bottlewasher/filler is designed for both). The LCBO and the Ontario public are reacting to the long term discrimination against the aluminum can and the micro's are lining up to meet their demand.

In the US, I believe the can market is 64% of the total beer market. BC and Alberta are slightly higher and given a free, open market in Ontario, I think our ratio's will be similar. I look at the single serve bottle with a pry cap as the best long-term package for a 'premium' beer. I also hope that we can institute a plastic crate similar to those in Europe but that is as much a big brewery issue as anything.

I do like the 8-pack the LCBO offers and we will offer something similar at GRB once the bottle is available. It will be interesting to see what package the LCBO accepts from the US micro's given their directives to the Ontario micro's that they are no longer interested in new 341ml-6 packs.

Al of Kingston · Post by **Al of Kingston** » Sun Jan 20, 2008 11:02 am

One wish of mine were that the LCBO allowed growler fills like US beer shops and the sort of bottle your own bulk deals you see in Liquor stores out east. Then I am handling the reuse of the container myself.

Belgian · Post by **Belgian** » Sun Jan 20, 2008 12:16 pm

Rob Creighton wrote:It will be interesting to see what package the LCBO accepts from the US micro's given their directives to the Ontario micro's that they are no longer interested in new 341ml-6 packs.

It's laughable how much busy-work Ontario makes over "formats." What a red herring.

JerCraigs · Post by **JerCraigs** » Mon Jan 21, 2008 9:06 am

Rob Creighton wrote:Thought I should clarify my position on bottles versus cans. I hope, in the long term, that Grand River Brewing ends up in 500ml bottles and 1.9L growlers (our bottlewasher/filler is designed for both). The LCBO and the Ontario public are reacting to the long term discrimination against the aluminum can and the micro's are lining up to meet their demand.

.... I look at the single serve bottle with a pry cap as the best long-term package for a 'premium' beer. I also hope that we can institute a plastic crate similar to those in Europe but that is as much a big brewery issue as anything.

Given your relatively small current distribution system, that is actually more environmentally friendly than the aluminum cans. I'd have to look it up again but the point at which refillable stops being the best choice is when they are traveling more than a certain distance round trip.