Brookston Beer Bulletin

Jay R. Brooks on Beer

Socialize

Calories In Beer: Can We Please Stop?

By

diet-beer
This is one of those things that just drives me crazy: diet beer, low-calorie beer, low carbohydrate beer. That these things are so popular defies logic and common sense and is one of the best examples of just how effective advertising and marketing can be. In today’s Daily Beast there’s yet another list of the unhealthiest beers called the 50 Most Fattening Beers.

Here was their rationale. “The Daily Beast decided to determine which beers may not be the best for the buzz. Specifically, the beers were ranked based on which packed the most calories and carbohydrates for the least amount of alcoholic punch.” More particularly:

To ensure a wide range of beers were considered, we looked at the offerings of the largest 15 domestic breweries and the largest five international breweries based on import volume to the U.S. Our final list was whittled further so that no more than three variations of brews from a single brand of beer was included in the top 50. We used data from the manufacturers when available, using reliable third party databases if necessary.

So they went through this complicated process and applied some weird calculation that took into account calories, carbohydrates and alcohol content to tell you what beers you shouldn’t drink. Why? The calculations, as far as I can tell, seems to actually discourage drinking low-alcohol beers just because their caloric content is the same or more than other higher alcoholic beers. It seems incredibly wrong-headed to me to take into account high alcohol as a positive attribute just because it gives the beer more “punch.”

So using their calculation the worst beer in the world is Leinenkugel Berry Weiss just because it doesn’t have enough alcohol to balance the calories and carbs. In the real world that should be applauded; a full-flavored beer that’s low in alcohol is a great beer. That’s a session beer. It’s what you’ll find in the average British pub.

Looking at the list, it’s pretty hard to see any real patterns. I took the list from the slideshow the Beast has online. As far as I can tell, they’re meant to be in that particular order though it’s hard to see how they arrived at that order. It’s certainly not the reason that I won’t drink some of the beers on this list, which has to do with a far more important factor than this pointless numbers game: flavor. I touched on this before in Read This, Not That

If it’s just calories that are bad, there are plenty of beers that are over 300 and same deal with carbs, too. But so what? None of that really matters because those beers are meant to be sipped and, more importantly, shared. And for most of the beers below 300 calories, the majority are actually pretty close in range. Look over Bob Skilnik’s Does My Butt Look Big in This Beer? — which lists the nutritional values of 2,000 beers — and you’ll see that almost all of them are between 100 and 200 calories. Even in the Beast’s list, the lowest is 120 calories and the highest is 330, but the majority are below 200. In fact, only five are 200 or above. 90% are below 200. And actually three of the high five are just at the edge — 200, 205 and 207 — meaning it’s really more like 96% are in the same narrow range.

So the reality is that there’s not that much difference between most beers in terms of calories, and carbs too for that matter. Since drinking in moderation is the goal, 2-4 beers per day, then you should never choose a beer the beer with the least flavor. And that’s pretty easy to do since most are within a fairly narrow range by the numbers. It’s never enough to sacrifice what the beer tastes like for some meaningless number, be it carbohydrates or calories. And perhaps most importantly, you should never take advice from someone telling you what not to drink, not even me. Decide for yourself what to drink — not what not to drink — and let flavor be your guide.

The Beast’s Worst 50 Beers

KEY: Brewery Beer: calories per 12 oz. / carbohydrates / a.b.v.

  1. Leinenkugel Berry Weiss: 207 / 28 / 4.8%
  2. Grolsch Blonde Lager: 120 / 15.8 / 2.8% (though on the can it clearly states 4% a.b.v.)
  3. New Belgium 1554: 205 / 25 / 5.6%
  4. Sierra Nevada Stout: 225 / 22.3 / 5.8%
  5. Budweiser Budweiser & Clamato Chelada: 186 / 20.3 / 5%
  6. Leinenkugel 1888 Bock: 194 / 18 / 5.1%
  7. Michelob Honey Wheat: 175 / 17.9 / 4.9%
  8. Pilsner Urquell: 156 / 16 / 4.4%
  9. Sam Adams Boston Lager: 160 / 18 / 4.75%
  10. Sam Adams Boston Ale: 160 / 19.9 / 4.94%
  11. MillerCoors Frederick Miller Classic Chocolate Lager: 195 / 18.4 / 5.5%
  12. Leinenkugel Creamy Dark: 170 / 16.8 / 4.9%
  13. Boulevard Brewing Unfiltered Wheat Beer : 155 / 15 / 4.4%
  14. Budweiser American Ale: 182 / 18.1 / 5.3%
  15. Sierra Nevada Kellerweis: 168 / 15.6 / 4.8%
  16. Michelob Irish Red: 196 / 19.2 / 5.7%
  17. Sierra Nevada Bigfoot Ale: 330 / 32.1 / 9.6%
  18. Red Stripe: 153 / 17 / 4.7%
  19. Michelob Pale Ale: 200 / 19.3 / 5.9%
  20. Smithwick’s Ale: 150 / 15 / 4.5%
  21. Yuengling Porter: 150 / 14 / 4.5%
  22. Yuengling Black & Tan: 150 / 14 / 4.5%
  23. Henry Weinhard Classic Dark Lager: 164 / 16 / 5%
  24. Coors Winterfest: 185 / 17.4 / 5.6%
  25. New Belgium Mothership Wit: 155 / 15 / 4.8%
  26. Genesee Brewing Premium Beer: 148 / 13.5 / 4.8%
  27. Anchor Steam Beer: 153 / 16 / 4.9%
  28. Grupo Modelo Corona Extra: 148 / 14 / 4.6%
  29. George Killian’s Irish Red: 162 / 14.8 / 5%
  30. Shiner Bock: 142 / 12.9 / 4.4%
  31. Blue Moon Full Moon Winter Ale: 180 / 15.3 / 5.5%
  32. Redhook Nut Brown Ale: 181 / 16 / 5.6%
  33. Genesee Cream Ale: 162 / 15 / 5.1%
  34. Harp Lager: 153 / 13 / 4.7%
  35. Henry Weinhard Blue Boar: 147 / 13 / 4.6%
  36. Henry Weinhard Summer Ale: 155 / 14.5 / 4.95%
  37. Shiner Blonde: 140 / 12.4 / 4.4%
  38. Shiner Hefeweizen: 174 / 14.3 / 5.4%
  39. Rolling Rock Extra Pale: 142 / 13.2 / 4.6%
  40. New Belgium Fat Tire: 160 / 15 / 5.2%
  41. Aguila: 122 / 10.4 / 3.88%
  42. Genesee Red: 148 / 14 / 4.9%
  43. MillerCoors Miller Genuine Draft: 143 / 13.1 / 4.7%
  44. MillerCoors Miller High Life: 143 / 13.1 / 4.7%
  45. Grupo Modelo Negra Modelo: 165 / 14 / 5.3%
  46. Yuengling Lager: 135 / 12 / 4.4%
  47. Schlitz Beer: 146 / 12.1 / 4.7%
  48. Schaefer Beer: 142 / 12 / 4.6%
  49. Guinness Draught: 125 / 10 / 4%
  50. Blue Moon Harvest Moon Pumpkin Ale: 180 / 14.7 / 5.8%

SABMiller Proposes Floating Brewery

By

ship-cargo
SABMiller put out a press release today with their prediction for the future of breweries, “given a range of different scenarios determined by the cost and availability of water and energy.” Below is the text fro the release.

Working with innovation consultancy, Innovia Technology, SABMiller envisioned four plausible business environments, based on the different uncertainties facing the brewing industry over the next 30 years. These scenarios informed thinking around how the ‘Brewery of the Future’ might look under different circumstances, with some surprising results.

The most extreme scenario, ‘Marginal Survival’ envisaged a market with limited access to water and high energy costs. This scenario – where people would migrate from areas of water shortage or turbulent weather -provoked the most unorthodox response. One of the proposed solutions was a smaller, mobile brewery which would move from place to place on the back of a ship.

floating-brewery

Rob Wilkinson, Director of Innovia, said: “The descriptions are intended as food for thought rather than as blueprints for building new facilities. However, the example of the brewery on a ship is entirely feasible. It would allow for rapid entry to new markets, especially where no infrastructure is in place, it would provide flexibility in positioning and length of stay and allow SABMiller to move with water sources, with people, with crops, or even away from severe weather, natural disasters or political instability.”

Maurice Egan, SABMiller’s group head of manufacturing said: “Whilst this research has produced some imaginative solutions, the business case behind the thinking is very serious. We need to ensure that, given the rapid pace of technological developments, the impacts of climate change and growing wealth in developing economies, SABMiller has the capability to define, design and deploy our future breweries and supply chains.”

In another scenario ‘Energy Deprived’, where energy prices and the cost of transport are high but water plentiful and cheap, the brewery is closely integrated with the community, sharing facilities and resources. For example, local farmers might use the brewery mills for processing crops, while the brewery would use their agricultural waste to create bio-fuel as an energy source; the kilns used for malting barley might also be shared with local businesses as a facility for drying paper pulp. The resulting brewery would be a sustainable building looking not unlike the Eden Project in Cornwall where hot processes are timetabled for the day and cold processes during the cooler night in order to optimize resource use.

The other two scenarios envisaged were:

‘Water Scarce’, where energy costs are low due to large scale investment in alternatives to fossil fuels, but water is in short supply exacerbated by population increases coupled with climate change. In this case, the brewery would be highly optimised for low water use, using less than 2 litre of water to produce 1 litre of beer compared to SABMiller’s current average of 4.5 litres; this would be achieved in part by implementing a continuous brewing system and in part by advanced water treatment technologies.

‘Plentiful Supply’ describes a world self-sufficient in both water and energy, which benefits from low transport costs, abundant rainfall and robust water infrastructure. In this cornucopia sustainability and environmental stewardship remain key drivers. For example, the brewery would use natural processes to upgrade waste or extract valuable chemicals from it so as to reduce environmental impact. Power would be derived from renewable sources such as solar panels, rainwater would be collected and as much water as possible recycled.

Save the Ales, Or At Least the Word

By

yeast-buddy
My friend, colleague and kindred curmudgeon, Martyn Cornell, is fed up. And rightly so. In a new post today at his blog Zythophile entitled Look, will you all stop misusing the word ‘ale.’ Thank you, he charts the transformation of the word from its earliest usage through the present. It’s a fascinating journey and an even more compelling story. Listen to him, he knows what he’s talking about.

The Texas Craft Beer Boom

By

texas
The Houston Chronicle has a great article on the growing craft beer scene in Texas, Swimming in Beer, The state is seeing a boom in craft brews as more players jump into an unquenched market. Like the country as a whole, a lot of new breweries are being planned and are opening, despite a poor economy in many other sectors.

Beer In Art #97: Nashville Political Campaign Diorama

By

art-beer
Today’s art is by an anonymous artist from 1840. It’s a diorama depicting political life in Nashville, Tennessee and specifically a scene in which as a part of a political campaign, one side is giving beer to a potential voter. It doesn’t have a title per se, but is referred to as Diorama of Political Campaign in Nashville. Giving beer to a potential voter. It’s folk art made of carved wood and is painted. It’s housed at the Tennessee State Museum.

Unk-political-diorama-1840

Guinness Ad #38: In The Crocodile’s Mouth

By

guinness-toucan
Our 38th Guinness poster by John Gilroy features a pint of Guinness perched inside of a crocodile’s mouth and our intrepid zookeeper reaching in to get it, having obviously done the risk/reward calculation of “My Goodness, My Guinness.” Also, notice the crocodile tear. He must know he’s losing his Guinness.

Guinness-croc

And here’s a slightly different version of the same ad.

guinness-alligator

Beer In Ads #212: Pick A Pack Of Bud Suits

By

ad-billboard
Friday’s ad is another for Budweiser, from 1972. The tagline is “Pick a Pair of Six-Packs” and the ad features a pair of blonds holding a six-packs above their heads. But it’s their outfits that really make the ad; bell bottoms with Bud labels, bare midriffs and white shirts with another Bud label over each breast pocket. Oh, and a red sash tied around their waist. Behind them is a five-piece band in a male version of the same getup. Classic.

Bud-1972