Cheap drinks
Or, how perception interferes with technology.
A post on Consumerist about a recall of Sam Adams beer that comes complete with bonus glass shards makes me ask: why is beer still sold in bottles, anyway?
I once went on a tour of the Clipper City brewery in Lansdowne --- $5 for a souvenir beer glass, with six complimentary samples --- and learned that a tiny amount of beer oxidizes in bottles due to the exposure to air that's sealed inside.
Canned beer doesn't have this problem. It's also lighter than bottled beer and thus costs less to ship and transport.
Not to mention that you don't need special tools to open a can, nor are you likely to hurt yourself if one breaks.
But you don't see a lot of craft beers in cans just yet --- probably because of stereotypes that don't need to be repeated here.
Makers of wine in screw-cap bottles still experience similar derision (see the first comment here) even though many people realize that wine corks can dry out and expose the fine liquid inside to oxidation and mold. Mmm, tasty.
Hugh Sisson, general partner of Clipper City Brewing Company and co-host of WYPR's weekly program Cellar Notes, is in favor of both both canned beer and screw-cap wine.
"Because the public's perception is that corks and bottles are better doesn’t mean they’re right," he said.
"I frankly think the glass blottle is becoming something of a dinosaur," he said, noting the tremendous energy required to make a glass bottle, which is heavy and fragile.
I know that most of the beer consumed in this country comes in pop-top form --- Sisson said 60 percent of all beer comes in cans. I'm just asking why haven't more smaller producers, such as Oskar Blues in Colorado, haven't made the investment in packing technology. Sisson said he could improve his nautically themed business if he made the switch.
"The boating community doesn't want bottles on a boat," he said.
The same thing applies to the wine-drinking public, which has grown in recent years. As more and more people invest in higher quality wines, Sisson predicts that they -- and the retailers that sell it to them -- will be less tolerant of wine that's corked.
After all, "them that writes the checks wields the club," he said.
UPDATE: Beer blogger Rob Kasper has a post about good beers sold by the can.
(photo: Jed Kirschbaum/Baltimore Sun)


Comments
There is actually a contract packaging unit that is being used by several craft breweries to can their beer now. This is a good way to get around the startup cost of all the equipment that would be required.
Posted by: Mike | April 8, 2008 11:02 AM
I'm not sure if you have ever tasted a beer out of a can, but it isn't the same as a beer out of the bottle. When you drink a beer out of a can, the beer's flavor is tainted by the metallic taste of a can. Glass, however, is neutral in taste so the integrity of the beer's flavor is preserved.
Also, glass bottles provide better insulation for the beer. That means beer in bottles is less sensitive to the changes in temperature it experiences on the long journey from the brewery to your lips. Bottled beer also stays cold longer once you open it because of that, and that is crucially important as backyard barbecue is imminent. Of course, a coozie can keep your beer cold too. However, most people are not willing to sink to that undignified level solely to keep their brew chilled.
Finally, and most importantly, a bottle is more respectable than a can. Canned beer is like paper cups. You use them for convenience only (or when the people doing the consuming are on the younger side). Expectations and presentation do influence your experiences. If you are willing to spend the money for quality microbrews, the producer owes it to you to present the beer in an appealing manner. While change for the sake of change is a popular battle cry today, the bottle works just fine.
Posted by: Jim | April 8, 2008 11:11 AM
Right on, Jim.
Posted by: bryanintimonium | April 8, 2008 11:16 AM
Jim, you raise a good point --- that beer packaging is used for both for transport and for serving, and that presentation is important.
Sisson did recommend during his tour that beers be decanted into glasses, but that's not always feasible.
And the low-brow reputation of canned beer can't be denied --- in fact, it has fueled the popularity of brews like Pabst Blue Ribbon and Milwaukee's Best.
I admit, I'm not a beer expert. But I'm wondering if the taste disparity you describe has more to do with the temperature difference than the flavor imparted by the packaging. So, let's reclaim the can as well as the coozie/cozie/cozy (however it's spelled).
Posted by: Liz Kay | April 8, 2008 11:58 AM
But bottles make such a nice sound when you clink them together.
Posted by: Tiny Bubbles | April 8, 2008 12:01 PM
Better than putting wine under screw cap -- put it in a bag and box it up. Better educated minds than mine note several advantages to "boxed" wine (wine-in-a-bag-in-a-box to be precise).
1. the wine keeps longer once opened -- up to a month without losing original taste (can't back that with experience because the wine's always gone in a week or two). Why? Very little air finds it's way into the bag.
2. You can put the equivalent of 4 bottles of wine in one bag, which a. saves packaging cost; b. saves bottler (bagger?) and consumer money; c. takes up less storage space.
3. Great fun to fill wine glass from spigot.
4. Box/bags harder to break.
5. Etc.
More wine packagers will use the bag/box as consumers come round to the idea or a law is passed. The snob appeal here is I think exceptionally strong.
As for beer in bottles vs. cans:
Cans are handier than bottles, no question. Experience forces me to disagree that cans impart undesirable taste to beer, with the possible exception of Miller Lite. But 1. no sensitive person considers "light beers" worthy of serious taste consideration; they aren't brewed for taste. 2. Don't all tapped beers at bars come from cans, albeit rather large ones?
Full disclosure: Though I've had many beers in cans, I don't think I've ever had a craft beer in a can. Not surprising if the makers don't put their product in them. I do have some experience with Guinness in bottles and cans. I get it in cans if that option is available.
I yield; bags of wine in boxes are more portable, storable and easier to stack than wine in bottles, whether topped by cap or cork. --- lfk.
Posted by: jl | April 8, 2008 1:18 PM
Liz,
I'm with Jim. Beer out of a can has a tinny taste -- even when you pour it into a glass. It's the same with soda. Whenever I see one of the old school glass bottles of Coke, I get it.
Posted by: Sam Sessa | April 8, 2008 1:35 PM
While I am not a beer drinker, I have to disagree about taste from a second hand perspective. My friends own a craft brewery in MN and they only sell their beer in kegs and cans.
This links to their reasoning.
Too bad you can only get Surly in MN and Chicago?
Posted by: Michelle | April 8, 2008 2:03 PM
Canned beer MIGHT taste metallic if you drink it out of the can. However, all true beer aficionados know that one always pours beer – canned or bottled – into a glass to allow it to open up and remove any off tastes from the packaging. No one thinks of drinking wine from a bottle – why drink beer from a can.
Posted by: Hugh Sisson | April 8, 2008 2:35 PM
Granted Cask.com sells canning systems to craft brewers, but if you read the following PDF they have pretty good rationale for canning beer:
http://www.cask.com/files/pdf/Cask-CanVantages-10-07.pdf
Posted by: Benjamin Linus | April 8, 2008 2:46 PM
Here's a related story from today's Milwaukee Journal Sentinel about the "return" of Schlitz, the way it was brewed in the 60s.
http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=736523
The story mentions bottles versus cans.
Posted by: Piano Rob | April 8, 2008 3:13 PM
No one drinks wine from a bottle? Speak for yourself, Hugh.
hiccup.
Posted by: Sam Sessa | April 9, 2008 1:00 PM
All cans used, at least by the brewery I work in, have an interior coating that keeps the metal from touching the beer. If you get a can of beer that tastes metallic, chances are you just happened to get the rare can that was defective.
The chances of bad beer in a bottle are far higher than of bad beer in a can. All bottles, regardless of color, are translucent, so some light gets to the beer. The bottles don't seal as tightly. Bottles can chip or could have microscopic cracks in the top that make a nice place for nasty things to grow. These can happen long after the beer leaves the brewery.
If you assume that fresh beer, straight from the brewery, tastes the best, then do the following:
1. Go online and find out your favorite brewer's packaging codes. These will almost always include the packaging dates and the location where it was made. Get the freshest beer from the closest brewery possible. Note that companies code things differently, so one may put a "born on" date for the day the beer was made, while another may put an expiration date on it, so pay attention.
2. Keep your beer in a dark place. If you get bottles, leave them in the box as long as possible. Never take them out of the box and stick them in the fridge, since the light in the fridge goes on every time someone opens the door.
3. Similarly, avoid bottled beer at a bar that has a well lit, refrigerated display. Bar owners LOVE showing off their bottles behind the bar, but it's bad for the beer. I've even seen some bars with black lights on the beer, and the UV is exactly what skunks the beer in the first place!
4. Temperature can matter, so keep it cool, but light is a bigger problem.
If you don't want to mess with all that or if you have no choice (like at a bar), get CANS! They are guaranteed to have no light exposure and less likely to be defective from the manufacturer. If you don't want to look like a dork, have the bartender pour it into a glass or get draft beer.
Posted by: Chris | May 30, 2008 11:26 AM