A Good Beer Blog

-------

Have you read The Unbearable Nonsense of Craft Beer - A Rant in Nine Acts by Alan and Max yet? It's out on Kindle as well as Lulu.

Maureen Ogle said this about the book: "... immensely readable, sometimes slightly surreal rumination on beer in general and craft beer in particular. Funny, witty, but most important: Smart. The beer geeks will likely get all cranky about it, but Alan and Max are the masters of cranky..."

Ron Pattinson said: "I'm in a rather odd situation. Because I appear in the book. A fictional version of me. It's a weird feeling."


Comments

Comments are locked. No additional comments may be posted.

The Beer Nut -

I wouldn't count this as local because the profits, to some extent, are going to investors on the New York Stock Exchange who could be anywhere. The main thing I love about drinking local is the principle that my beer money goes back into the local economy. Here, some gets creamed off for someone some place else.

And macrobreweries are almost always going to be greener than micros -- wastage of water and energy costs Wall Street money and is therefore not acceptable for beer factories. If the environmental impact of your beer is important to you, grow and brew your own or STFU.

Pok -

The notion of local food (which includes beer and other potables) is a good one. Choosing an authentic local product does contribute to sustaining your own community's economy and it probably, in the majority of cases, lessens the environmental impacts of your choice.

Beer Nut: I think your objection may be too harsh. Yes some (or all) profits may flow to non-local investors but one can argue that a trickle of wealth will flow to local employees, suppliers, contractors, tax collectors, shopkeepers, etc. that would not if the less than local option were chosen.

All that being said, I would no more buy a local beer that tasted like piss than a domestic car that has a tendency to sit in the driveway in need of repair while it prematurely rusts away.

The Beer Nut -

Pok, the raw economics and environmental impact means always buy from the local macro: it employs more people and takes better care of its resources. Which is why I said above it's the principle that matters to me, not the raw cash.

Quality being equal, that is, which it rarely is.

Pok -

It would be interesting to have a local macro where I live. Consider the workforce required to grow, malt, culture, brew, deliver and reuse bottles of local beer if my City were to become loyal patrons of a local product. Hundreds - maybe even one thousand people engaged in the business of keeping the local citizenry in beer with the prospect of export to towns nearby down the 401. What an opportunity!

Knut -

I'd say this is another beer made up by the marketing men rather than the brewers at Coors. Being a ticker, I'd try it once, but I would not go out of my way. At least not to Colorado. Across the street, perhaps.

Bill (It's Pub Night) -

Obviously this beer isn't going to impress snobs like us. But it's good that the big boys are thinking along these lines. Is a local Coors as good for Colorado as New Belgium? No. Is it better for Colorado than non-local Coors? Yes.

The Beer Nut -

Pok, if that local macro made mostly crappy beer, was owned by a multinational company headquartered abroad and had spent years shutting down small locally-owned competitors to achieve unassailable full-spectrum dominance, would you still loyally fly the flag for them?

jerc -

"And macrobreweries are almost always going to be greener than micros -- wastage of water and energy costs Wall Street money and is therefore not acceptable for beer factories. If the environmental impact of your beer is important to you, grow and brew your own or STFU."

So Coors who have been repeatedly fined by the EPA for spills and contaminating the local groundwater are more environmentally friendly than New Belgium who are generating power from their wastewater and cleaning it up before it even hits the Colorado water system?

Your argument about investors may in fact work in reverse - investors may not allow macros to make the environmentally conscious decision if it costs more...

New Belgium or say Sierra Nevada are much better examples of "local" in my opinion, mind you both are now medium to large regional craft brewers as opposed to "micros" now as well.

Buying "local" is a means to an end, not an end unto itself. What does buying local accomplish? Is it more environmentally friendly? Does it stimulate the local economy? Does it taste better?