The Cons of Cans...

[Eric Brewer]

The 6-head canning line is on the way.

I'm excited about it.


But I'm expecting some resistance from the market. (We're still going to package in 12 and 22-oz bottles -- restaurants don't seem to want to hear about the superiority of cans.)

What I'd like to know, in what ways are bottles better than cans? Most cans have a lining that contains BPA. We're spending extra for cans that are BPA-free. So they can't use that excuse.

Anything else I'm not thinking of?

[BrandonH]

I wouldn't necessarily say bottles are better than cans. It all comes down to marketing perception. Bottles were always marketed as elegant and classy. It's the same reason that the stubby bottle was abandoned originally for the longneck. Their argument was that the longneck was a more elegantly looking bottle. It's years of marketing that has pushed the perception of bottles being better than cans on the general masses.

With that said, I still prefer bottles.

[jwalts]

I think the superiority of one vessel over the other boils down to how well a particular bottling/canning line keeps oxygen out. Small canning lines scare me because several filled cans at once can be open to the atmosphere while they wait to be sealed one-by-one, but the three-head Little Prince I used to bottle with wasn't worth a damn at preventing oxidation either.

Joe

[gitchegumee]

Our Cask manual single head seamer will close a can faster than the two fillers will fill empty cans. When full, we place a lid on top of foam immediately and move to the seaming stage. Our cans aren't open for more than one second tops. Oxygen pickup is fairly low for a low-tech manual system. I love cans. I hope to never operate a bottle line again.

[Eric Brewer]

We're getting a Cask system as well, Phillip.

Can't wait.

[Mike Elliott]

Cans are great.

We are filling around a million cans per year on our Cask five-head system, and we are very happy with its performance. After lots of work and little adjustments, we have reached package air levels of around 0.5 mL in a 16 oz can.

The beauty of cans for us:

--Usability: Missoula loves to recreate outside, and glass is prohibited on the rivers, at parks, on golf courses, etc. Cans can go everywhere, including into the many Wilderness areas around town.

--Recycling: Missoula does not have an effective recylcling program for glass, but cans can be put into curbside bins for pickup. Huge waste savings.

--Light exposure and air pickup during shelf life is ZERO. That's pretty great.

--Differentiation: Our cans look great on shelves and stand out to consumers. It's hard to put a price on that.

--Easy production work: Empty cans are safe and easy to work with. No breakage, light weight, etc.

Our customers love our cans. Every now and then we get folks from outside Montana into the tap room who express skepticism about perceived quality in a can, but they come around once we educate them with the above points and let them taste a gold-medal winning beer straight from a can. Doesn't take long.

That said, BPA is a concern for some people. The FDA cannot detect any BPA in our beer after canning, so we feel ok about that.

We are always working on re-engineering certain parts of the canner to minimize atmospheric exposure during packaging. That includes CO2 drips, lid tampers, timing, etc. It gets better all the time, and we notice improvements in our beer every time we make a positive change. We feel very secure in having cans on the shelf for 150 days with no problems.

I'm not a schill for Cask, but I do love cans. I believe cans will only continue to grow in popularity among brewers and acceptance among consumers.

Cheers.

Mike Elliott
Kettlehouse Brewing Co, LLC
Missoula, MT

[Eric Brewer]

Hey Mike,

Would you jot down a list of the main things you have modified to decrease O2?

Stuff like "changed stock gizmo with ABC company gizmo, used such-and-such regulator with XX PSI, etc."

We're going to have the Cask guys down next month setting up the system, and I'd like to talk with them about it while they're here.

I'd ask you to PM it, but I have a feeling a lot of people will want this info.

[Woolsocks]

The 6-head canning line is on the way.
We're spending extra for cans that are BPA-free. So they can't use that excuse.

I love cans, but cons come to mind:

• BPA (can you share your source of BPA-free cans? Last I checked there was no such thing)
• More storage requirements for small brewers (one load of cans / beer canned) than bottles
• More difficult for small brewers to can one-off beers due to volume of cans you need to buy vs. just making a new bottle label
• As Dave M. said, you can't vacuum out the atmosphere like you can with a bottle
• Cans can't be washed and reused like bottles (more of a concern outside the US)

Once a can is sealed, oxygen stays out, but if your canning machine adds a lot of air to start, what's the point of that great seal?

I do feel that the advantages of cans far outweigh their disadvantages in most cases.

[gitchegumee]

Woolsocks, I have cans being packaged with labels. Couldn't be happier with them. Loads easier than glue and a label on a cold, wet bottle. Putting 3 different shrink labels on a plain, blank, silver can. Now your argument against cans gets lighter. And one of the studies Cask did showed that counterpressure was actually part of the problem of oxygen pickup. At least that was in their dog-and-pony show we got. Might be true. Anyway, I'm all for cans.

[Dailybeer]

plastic wraps for cans

Hi Phil:

Who is your supplier for the sleeves? What machine do you use to apply the sleeves? How many CPM?

I would like to visit with them about using the same application(s).

Cheers!

Jeff

[Woolsocks]

I was actually thinking that labeling cans might be an option for us as well but unsure the logistics of it.

Go cans!

[uptown brothers]

What does the shrink-wrapping do to the recyclability of the cans? This is a good selling point to our customers and guests who have been programmed to believe glass bottles are somehow "classier." Wouldn't want to lose this because the shrink wrap lessens the recyclability of the can.

I understand Crown will do smaller lots than Ball, perhaps I got this wrong? But if they will maybe the need to buy a truckload of monochrome cans and apply 3 or 4 different plastic shrink wrap labels, well, maybe that need, um, shrinks...

[yap]

specialty cans

check out the sun king brewery in indianapolis. they recently got permission to use a universal "specialty can" that has a blank space on it. they then can print a small label to apply to the cans. this way they have one specialty can to buy but can put many different beers into it.

http://www.craftcans.com/indys-sun-king-brewingexpands-and-innovates

[Larry Doyle]

[QUOTE=uptown brothers]What does the shrink-wrapping do to the recyclability of the cans?

It might have a lot to do with it. Perhaps, it may wreak havoc with the recycling process. Why don't you ask Ball? If its a problem, anyone who puts foreign material on cans is messing up a good system.

[liammckenna]

I have to agree with Larry.

I can smell the burning plastic now. Kind of scary.

Sorry folks. Call me a reactionary, call me a luddite, call me whatever you wish but don't call me someone who likes beer in plastic lined aluminum vessels.

Interested in the previous mention of BPA free can liners. Love to hear about that. Would be interested in the alternative 'plasticizer' they're using instead. I would bet dollars to doughnuts that it's hormonally active as well. Also at the ppb or even ppt level.

As I've mentioned before in other posts, beer, to me, comes in stainless or glass (and someone added wood as well to my previous commentary to which I have to agree). If you don't offer me one of those options, I will consume someone else's beer instead.

My opinion.

Bauxite mining is pretty freaking awful as well. Especially in the third world where much of it comes from. Toxic strip mining.

Pax.

Liam