OnTap Magazine

I have been around beer for over 40 years and seen a lot of things, at home and abroad. Since 2012 I have written three editions of The World Atlas of Beer, which is published in the UK and US and sometimes finds its way to RSA. I have watched as better-tasting beer moved from near obliteration by 1975 to a sizeable global presence by 2020. No country’s craft brewers are more resourceful and resilient than South Africa’s, but for the first time this century, I see beer facing a challenge that might be too big. It’s not COVID, or the insidious rise of anti-alcohol lobbyists dressed up as health campaigners, it’s the impact of climate change, or more accurately the measures to mitigate it. THE NATURE OF CLIMATE CHANGE Around 2012, while on holiday in Latin America, I spent an evening in conversation with an American environmentalist called Lester Brown, who happened to be staying at my hotel. I remember his impressive eye- brows. Concern about global warming was becoming a thing and he told me that so far, he had put the case for its existence and the threats it brings to five US presidents – so I tried to listen well. In particular I remember his answer to a lazy question, “Is there an easy way to avoid catastrophic climate change?”. “Yes,” he said, “be over 50.” That was ten years ago. The proposition is simple. The production of greenhouse gases, mostly carbon dioxide, traps heat in the atmosphere. This warms the planet’s surface, which alters the climate. The effect is now so great that if we do not reverse – not simply reduce – emissions within X years, the grandchildren of today’s young adults will need to find homes on another planet, or die trying. It might be that X years means 30, though it could mean just 10. This is no longer in doubt, and around 98% of climate change scientists now back this view. THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT OF BEER MAKING Making and distributing beer mostly impacts the environment in two ways. It produces a lot of carbon dioxide (CO2) and it consumes much fresh water. Please pardon me if I duck the politics of water in South Africa and concentrate on the more approachable issue of the carbon (dioxide) footprint. I write of course from a European perspective and respect the fact that African numbers will vary a little from ours, though the principle is the same. Over here the extent to which different aspects of the beer trade create carbon dioxide is roughly summarised thus: Growing, preparing and delivering ingredients ±25% ------------------------------------------------------------------ Brewing fermenting and conditioning the beer ±10% ------------------------------------------------------------------ Delivering beer from the brewery to the glass 20-25% ------------------------------------------------------------------ Making and recycling beer containers (packaging) 30-35% ------------------------------------------------------------------ Disposal of waste products 5-10% For balance, in 2020* South Africa’s main brewer, AB-InBev (ABI) quoted global numbers of: Growing, preparing and delivering ingredients ±18% ------------------------------------------------------------------ Brewing fermenting and conditioning the beer ±15% ------------------------------------------------------------------ Delivering beer from the brewery to the glass ±29% ------------------------------------------------------------------ Making and recycling beer containers (packaging) ±36% ------------------------------------------------------------------ Disposal of waste products ±2% (* A b-inbev.com/sustainability/climate-action ) Behind these simple percentages lies some complicated analysis. For example, the ingredients figure includes the cost of transporting them, sometimes half way across the globe. More pertinent perhaps is that at least 50% of the delivery figure relates to keeping the beer cold on route, and then serving it even colder. The ABI data reckons two-thirds. HOW ARE BREWERS INTENDING TO ADAPT? In the UK and Europe around 85% of the beer trade is controlled by just five companies – ABI, Heineken, Carlsberg, Molson-Coors and Asahi. Of these, Heineken, Carlsberg and Asahi have already made huge public commitments to make major changes to their operations. In Asahi’s case these can be read in fine detail on the group’s global website, including an encyclopaedic list of specific and measurable targets that is worth a peek. The main pledges from ABI are quieter but include sourcing all the energy used in production from renewable sources by 2025, by which time they will reduce their other greenhouse gas (mostly CO2) emissions by 25%. Their most striking pledge is not to use offset schemes as a way of reaching “Net Zero”, presumably as these rely on planting trees that must not be chopped down for 50 years, a target based on hope not expectation. The important point about these commitments being made in such a public way is that it should increase the chance of them happening. Where it begins to get interesting, but not C A R B O N N E U T R A L ontapmag.co.za | Spring 2022 | 25