This page contains a single entry from the blog posted on July 15, 2008 11:11 AM. The previous post in this blog was Bye it now. The next post in this blog is Anonymous commenters, take note. Many more can be found on the main index page or by looking through the archives.

E-mail, Feeds, 'n' Stuff

Tuesday, July 15, 2008

What's the carbon footprint on that Bud Light?

I'm not drinking beer that much these days, and when I do, it's never American macrobrew. So the news that Budweiser is being taken over by some Belgian outfit doesn't faze me much.

It's pretty much just bad karma for Bud. Once they stole Rolling Rock from Latrobe, Pennsylvania and moved it to the Bud plant in Newark, New Jersey (where my late Uncle Billy used to work), the Anheuser Busch folks had it coming.

Thinking about these deals, I've been marveling that in these times of fuel- and carbon-emission-consciousness, they're actually trucking faux Rolling Rock from Newark to points across the country. A second-hand report we got the other day was from a trucker who was hauling 45,000 pounds of Rolling Rock from Newark to L.A.

I think I'll do the eco-correct thing and stick with the local brew.

Comments (23)

Cheers to that.

Where is Henry's made these days anyway? California? Sacrilege.

by product of the brewing process is carbon dioxide (yeast waste). beer is bad, no matter where is is from.

Where is Henry's made these days anyway? California? Sacrilege.

Actually, Henry's is currently be brewed in Hood River, Ore.

For years, Löwenbräu was made by Miller in the U.S. and tasted like Stroh's. Save the carbon, lose the taste.

In 2002, "Original" Löwenbräu began being imported to the U.S. More carbon, more taste.

In 2004, the makers of the original Löwenbräu were sold to ... drumroll ... InBev!

And you thought the GOP had a big tent.

Rolling Rock was a pretty good beer back when I was in college in upstate NY many years ago. Of course, I also thought Genesee Cream Ale was pretty good too. Rolling Rock was so much better than Coors, with which it was frequently compared. (Back then, you couldn't get Coors in the eastern states, so you couldn't tell how bad it was. And, of course, we didn't know that Adolph Coors was the right-wing monster we now know and love...)

Outstanding analysis in this post, Jack.

I too, am shedding no tears over the hostile takeover of Anheuser Busch for the reasons you stated, among others such as I've never liked the taste of any of the Budwiser products to begin with, as well as any beer made mainly out of rice shouldn't even be considered beer, to be perfectly honest.

But that's another issue for another day...


Just a quick note:

Has anyone actually proven that CO2 can cause dangerous global warming?

I ask because, as I looked deeper into global warming, I found a few mentions of this and HAVE NOT found any papers even claiming to prove that CO2 can cause dangerous warming.

I did, however, find several that claim to prove that CO2 increase is a response to, not cause of, temperature increase.

(by papers I mean published in quality scientific journals - peer reviewed as Al would say)


It's actually kind of funny that the company that sold Rolling Rock to Budweiser now once again owns Rolling Rock. I went to college in Latrobe and I have many fuzzy/fond memories of Rolling Rock. Many were consumed. It's not a great beer, but it doesn't completely suck, either. It was cost efficient for a college student as a case of the ponies ran about $4.50. Also, I don't care what anyone else say, but there is definitely a noticeable taste difference between the old Latrobe-made RR and the existing Newark-made beer, and not for the better.

In college, price was the number one quality I looked for in a beer, the cheaper - the better. Rainier pounders, Stroh's (because backwards, Stroh's spells shorts.)

I love our microbrews, I could drink them all day long. However, it makes me tired and I get headaches much more easily than I did back in the day.

I have even enjoyed PBR at a happy hour on tap.

Isn't Henry's owned by an Australian company?

Probably, my least favorite beer is the Beast - Blitz.

And if beer consumption does cause global warming??? Goodbye glaciers.

Was it Abraham Lincoln who said something like -- don't trust men without a vice.

So, I have two, a love of deep-fried food (highly curtailed) and a love of microbrews - not the dark ones, but the ambers, the Hefeweisens, Scottish ale, a light cloudy one (this however has been seriously curtailed)

In these h'yar parts, I was weaned on Oly stubbies...we'd peel off the label looking for 4 dots...4 dots meant we'd "get lucky". Drank alot of Blitz, too. $4/case at Bob's Superette on 13th in Eugene.

When Coors was still not distributed in Oregon, my college roommate came back from spring break in California with 12 cases...we were going to sell it and make a few extra bucks. Funny thing happened as we swung into spring term...we didn't sell a can....just ended up with empties.

Gotta agree....today's craft/microbrews beat anything else.

In the case of "It's the water" Oly, a truer line was never crafted...though actually I suspect it was their famed artesians peeing in the water that lent it its ... um ..."special" characteristics.

Weinhard beer is today brewed by Full Sail Brewing of Hood River, though for some reason I find their namesake products generally more agreeable than what comes out under the Henry's label.

I have moments ago returned from Rogue's tasting room, and highly recommend their dry hop red.

Back in school, we considered Henry's the "good beer." I guess because it came in a bottle, and everything else we bought was in cans.

Nice to know at least some of it is brewed in Hood River. (I do believe I've read that some production is elsewhere. But what do I know?)

Anyway, I still enjoy a good macrobrew every once in a while. Especially this time of year. I don't need to drink a nut brown ale in 95 degree weather. On the deck with a hot dog, High Life works just fine.

Coors Light is the best beer.

Eco-correct shmeeco-correct.

Well, now, where would anyone be going for all that other beer?

And but, where everyone would be going for all those beer ads.

Henry Weinhard TV ads, that is.

1) Here:

2) Click on 'Heritage' (of Weinhard marketing)

3) 'Close' window of instructions, Click-drag the slider on the Timeline to '1979 The Family Sells' inscription.

4) (Above 'Sells'), Click on TV-icon where 'Vern and Earl - 1980' title pops-up.

5) Set 'Settings' to 'Loop', lean back, relax, be transported ... to another state.

I too, am shedding no tears over the hostile takeover of Anheuser Busch...

Likewise. When I visited the Czech Republic, I discovered the real Budweiser - and as far as I'm concerned, there's only one brewer fit to call their product by this name.

That brings up an interesting question: How would this acquisition affect the ongoing dispute over the use of the "Budweiser" trademark in the EC? Is that perhaps their angle here?

You might be interested to know that the former Rolling Rock brewery in Latrobe is now a facility for Sam Adams beer a.k.a. the "Boston Brewing Co." who keeps marketing themselves as a New England quaff, but originally had their beer made in Pittsburgh, but now has its largest facility in Cincinnati. When Widmer is brewed in Tallahassee or Deschutes is done in Des Moine, I'll give up all beers.

Remember that Anheuser-Busch's dominace was based on four things. The building of the interstate highway systm, refrigerated trucks, cheap fuel and relentles marketing.

Now that fuel prices have gone up and will continue to rise the party is over and it's time for AB to sell out.

The local brews were always just as good or better. Time to go back.

Karlock: RealClimate.org

Henries is brewed at various locations around the Country. Their IPA is the one brewed in Hood River. Its contract brewed by Full Sail.

The supposed "Americans" who are maliciously glad that A-B is being bought by foreigners remind me of the fools in Ireland who invited the British in to help win a war against their local rivals. The British decided to stay, and abused Ireland for 800 years. There's always a good excuse for treason. Rarely, however, is it wise.

The beer in question was being hauled in a non refrigerated trailer. The Shipper A-B kept us waiting for five hours to get the load! Other people had been there over a day and many trucks were loaded incorrectly. Those that were loaded incorrectly had to take the load back to the docks and get them repacked. We were lucky and were able to adjust it and get out of there.

George Seldes Karlock: RealClimate.org
JK: If you are saying that some sort of proof is there, please cite link and quote.

However I did find this:
At least three careful ice core studies have shown that CO2 starts to rise about 800 years (600-1000 years) after Antarctic temperature during glacial terminations. (realclimate.org/index.php?p=13) (they then go on to explain how CO2 could cause further warming after, something unknown started the warming. Of course the original, unknown, something could merely continue!)

And this: Water vapor is responsible for 60-90% of the greenhouse effect. I quote : the maximum supportable number for the importance of water vapour alone is about 60-70% and for water plus clouds 80-90% of the present day greenhouse effect. (realclimate.org/index.php?p=142)

And this: CO2 causes, at most, 20-30% of the climate warming effect. I quote: the maximum supportable number for CO2 is 20-30% (realclimate.org/index.php?p=142)

JK: Here are some other sites that may interest you:

icecap.us/ climateaudit.org/ co2science.org/ scienceandpublicpolicy.org/ co2sceptics.com/ climate-skeptic.com/ worldclimatereport.com/ climatechangefacts.info/ iceagenow.com/ climatecooling.org/index.htm (Use web sites as leads to the original sources, not as sources - except those few sites that actually are primary sources.)

JK: I’ll end with a warning against interpreting climate models as predictions of the future - they aren’t, they are just scenarios:
One should not mix up a scenario with a forecast - I cannot easily compare a scenario for the effects of greenhouse gases alone with observed data, because I cannot easily isolate the effect of the greenhouse gases in these data, given that other forcings are also at play in the real world (realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2008/04/model-data-comparison-lesson-2)

Let me know if you disagree with any of the above.

It's not simply that I disagree with any of that.

It is that I agree with much more than that.

Like, f'r instance, I agree the polar icecaps are melting, and the glacier-hosting mountain snowcaps are melting, and the planet-wide fresh water supply is depleting. I agree, and believe so, because there is photographic evidence. Now, I don't know if that's a 'model' or a 'forecast' or a 'trend' or a 'hunch' or what. I just know it i s go ing . g o i n g . . g . o . n . . e . . .

P.S. The equatorial rainforest is missing, too. Not saying who took it. Just, there are photos. The rainforest is gone.
There used to be rainforest where, today, drifts the sand dunes that we call the Sahara Desert.

Clicky Web Analytics