You’ve probably heard the “drink local” slogan a thousand times. But have you ever thought about the impact it could have on the environment if more of us actually committed to it? The truth is that beer has a sizable carbon footprint, and not just in the way it’s made, but in the way it’s distributed and consumed. The impact of consumer behavior and purchasing decisions is surprisingly profound. The good news and the bad news is that our actions count for something. It’s not by accident that most beer bars these days have offerings from all over the world, or that the number of breweries now packaging their offerings in cans has exploded in recent years. Consumer preference is often the driver of such trends. So what can we do to lessen beer’s environmental impact? Three things: REDUCE, Reuse, recycle – and in that order*. Read on to learn how and why.
The single biggest thing you can do to be an environmentally conscious beer drinker is to go for hyperlocal brands whenever possible. Even better, frequent your neighborhood brewery and sip a few pints right from the taproom. Nothing beats drinking from the source. On-premise consumption from reusable glassware and refillable kegs limits your beer’s carbon footprint and yields the highest profit margin for the brewery. Why encourage all that use of fossil fuels for deliveries from far off breweries when you can choose from so many amazing options being brewed in (insert name of your state, province, or country here). In some communities, a whopping 30 percent or more of their greenhouse gas emissions come from transportation vehicles.
Please Take Our Craft Beer Drinker Survey
One article I recently read points out that as delivery chains extend farther, so does the pollution associated with them. The fewer miles delivery trucks drive with beer, or the less we drive in pursuit of it, the less particulate matter and carbon monoxide that pollutes the air we breathe. It might not be a slogan, but we all “breathe local.” So whenever possible, use public transportation, hop on a bike, or hoof it (walk) to a nearby brewery. An added benefit to drinking local is that the money boosts your local economy.
Things gets a bit trickier for the environmentally conscious beer drinker when it comes to takeaway beer. Much has been written on the demise of the once-mighty growler, but most eco-minded breweries still fill them. From an industry perspective, especially if you’re one of the big players, there’s no doubt that aluminum cans are a superior method for distribution and retail sales. Viewed through an environmental lens, however, eliminating refillable growlers in favor of cans and bottles is kind of a big deal. Even if 100% of the single-use containers sold and consumed were recycled, though most of the world is nowhere close to that mark**, it’s important to consider the vast amounts of energy associated with collecting, sorting, reprocessing, and delivering them back to the brewery. A refillable growler has just 5% the carbon footprint that a recycled can or bottle does, and it uses far less water and energy than cans or bottles do to prepare it for its next fill.
On occasions when you’re unable to go the on-premise route for draught or a refillable growler, you’re left with no other option than to try and properly recycle your non-refillable*** bottles, cans, and maybe (big maybe) those pesky plastic can carriers. Unfortunately, recycling rates for both glass and aluminum are far lower than they should be, especially considering both materials are infinitely recyclable, meaning they can be recycled over and over without loss of material quality. The same cannot be said for plastic, which worldwide is currently recycled (or more accurately downcycled****) at a woeful rate of just 18 percent. For some important tips on how to increase the odds of your empties being recycled, check out the related blog post below.
Related: How to Make Sure You Infinitely Recyclable Aluminum Beer Cans Actually Get Recycled
In closing, I invite you to take the ultimate eco-friendly beer drinker challenge for a month, week, or even just a day: (1st level) buy your beer directly from the source – i.e. a brewery, (2nd level) avoid single-use beer vessel waste – including cans, bottles, and disposable cups, (3rd level) use only public transportation, bike, or your feet when traveling to and from breweries. Cheers to more sustainable beers. 
*Note 1: Many well intended consumers believe that recycling alone is enough. The truth is that at current consumption rates, especially with a population of 7.8 billion (and growing), recycling single-use items like beer bottles/cans is not sustainable. Following the common advice of REDUCE – Reuse – recycle in its intended order cannot be over stated.
**Note 2: The global recycling rate for aluminum beverage cans is estimated at 73%. In the U.S. it’s considerably worse, just under 50%.
***Note 3: Germany, parts of Canada, and the state of Oregon all currently have successful refillable bottle programs.
****Note 4: Plastic is rarely recycled: the current global rate is just 18% according to the OECD. And most of that is actually downcycled, meaning it’s all thrown together to make products of lesser quality that aren’t themselves recyclable at the end of their life. Ultimately, all plastic ends up as waste which goes to landfill, gets incinerated, or often leaks into the environment as pollution. And there is mounting evidence of health implication associated with unintended human consumption of plastic.
I prefer bottles to cans, and I also thought that the environmental impact was lesser for bottles, however, you are treating them as one and the same. Could you elaborate a bit on this? We have a deposit system covering bottles, cans etc., if that makes a difference to this discussion
Hey Troels:
Admittedly, it’s a bit complicated. As far as the actual production of cans and bottles, there isn’t a drastic difference in the actual environmental impact. When it comes to distribution, however, there can be a big difference in the amount of energy and GHG emissions associated with distribution, especially if it’s a larger brewery that sends its beer beyond just its local area. Cans stack much better, so more can fit into a truck, for example, and they are lighter in weight, so for some larger breweries that do a lot of distribution it can make a difference in energy savings.
Additionally, in some parts of the world, glass bottles are difficult to recycle back into glass bottles. Here in the US., for example, many areas don’t recycle glass anymore. Aluminum, on the other hand, is highly recyclable everywhere, and is recycled at a higher rate than any beverage container in the world.
All that said, a refillable bottle or growler would be a vast improvement over a single-use aluminum can, so that’s the way to go if it’s an option.
And NOTHING beats actually drinking a draught beer from reusable glassware, preferably right from the source – the brewery’s taproom. Better for the environment, better for the brewery’s bottom line, better drinking experience for the consumer.
Happy to clarify further, or provide references if you’d like.
Cheers
Is it more likely that cans/bottles will actually be recycled if I return them for deposit rather than in my municipal recycling?
Excellent question Barbara. Aluminum cans will definitely get recycled either way because the materials is a valuable commodity. Just be sure not to crush your cans before pitching them into the recycling bin, it makes them harder to sort at the materials recovery facility (MRF). Here are a few other tips for recycling cans successfully:
As for glass, it’s actually more a matter of what region of the country you live in (assuming you’re in the U.S.) because there aren’t as many glass recyclers as there were a decade or two ago. In New England, for example, there isn’t a single glass recycling plant remaining so crushed glass is being used for things like road paving materials, but not actually recycled back into glass bottles – which is a shame because, like aluminum, it’s an infinitely recyclable material.
I have become a huge fan of growlers vs cans/bottles for this very reason!
However, I find it is usually much more expensive. $12-14 for 64 oz of cans vs $20ish for 64 oz of growler fill.
I think this is because the growlers are usually priced the same as beer to be consumed on-site at a bar/brew pub which ofc have higher costs associated with such service. However, it seems like it /should/ be less expensive bc you are only buying the beer, none of the packaging.
Which leaves me trying to brainstorm ways to make a growler fill cheaper. It seems like getting a growler filled at a beer or grocery store is feasible, but maybe there is little incentive to do it.
Hey Bobby: I think it depends on where you go, if you find a brewery that still does growler fills – sadly, many don’t anymore. Admittedly, it takes more time and can even result in more spillage during filling, and consumers currently value the convenience of cans. Some places I frequent do pre-filled growlers, which makes a lot of sense because it is more efficient. Cheers