This past Thursday,
The Washington Post online responded to a reader’s question:
Q I'm hosting a dinner party next week, and I'll be serving both beer and wine alongside the meal. Which has the lower carbon footprint?I was initially surprised to find this article in
The Washington Post but soon realized that drinking does not begin-and-end in college and if there is a trend to cater diets to low-carbon alternatives, why not change drinking styles too?
The article outlines a number of suggestions for a sustainable and earth-friendly party (using research largely from U.K.-based Food Climate Research Network). Some highlights are:
• There is no significance difference in the
GHG emissions from beer, wine and spirits
•
Bottles vs. Cans: choose glass for beer brewed locally and aluminum for beer drafted further away• Organic barley draft significantly produces less
GHG’s in its production and assembly
• Strong beers and standard ales do not require as much, if any, refrigeration, which contributes to 1/3 of the beer industries
GHG emissions
• When choosing a wine, the bigger the bottle the better. Choose larger bottles or “
lighweight” bottles that require less glass… boxes are even more
eco-friendly—this means
Franzia is good for the environment as long as you recycle the box when you are done slapping the bag!
• Wine bottles are heavy and more carbon intensive to distribute, so drink local wine over local beer
As consumers, it seems we have certain choices when purchasing beer and wine to limit our carbon footprint. On a local level, the
Arbor Brewing Company brews
13 beers and sells their products at a number of locations in Ann Arbor. To get locally produced 6-packs, cases, growlers and kegs you can call 734-480-BREW.
In addition to consumer choices that reduce
GHG emissions, being a college-student at the University of Michigan offers a unique opportunity to save money and clean up the environment. Under the
Michigan Beverage Container Act implemented in 1978, Michigan has the highest bottle return rate at 10 cents a bottle. In effect, Michigan has the highest recycling rate.
So not only are we in Michigan, we are furthermore college students in Michigan. College students consume roughly
four billion cans of beer a year… scary? If it is being put in a landfill, then it certainly is. If it can return $400,000,000 to college students annually, it just makes sense to capitalize on this waste and start returning your cans and bottles to pay for your next party. When you get wasted, don’t waste the waste!
The discussion of drinking and its carbon-footprint speaks to a growing social awareness of our daily lives and how we impact the environment through little decisions such as Busch Light versus Natural Ice (Natural Ice w. higher alcohol content would hopefully use less cans and save money). The very fact that
The Washington Post reader asked about sustainable drinking shows people are not only listening to but also actively seeking information on how to be a more mindful consumer. Similarly, when I went to check out
The Omnivore’s Dilemma at the Undergraduate Library, 5 of the 6 copies were checked out. Later that day, I saw a nurse at
UHS reading one of the copies and discussing it with another nurse.
I wonder if the reader who inquired about the drinks to serve at her party took other factors into consideration, such as serving meat. An article on
PlanetGreen.com showed that a full vegetarian diet could reduce your carbon emissions 1 ton annually, reducing your carbon footprint from 2.5 to 1.5 tons a year. This means no meat, poultry, or fish but you can eat eggs and dairy products (a.k.a. a
lacto-
ovo vegetarian diet). However, this reduction makes the choice between wine and beer seem a little trivial.
However, the article went on to explain that .7 tons of
GHG emission (how much you save being a weekday vegetarian) is equal to about one flight from Boston, Massachusetts to Wichita, Kansas… So, a year of being a vegetarian saves a little bit more
GHG emissions than a flight in the same time zone?
My intention in breaking down these numbers is, of course, not to discredit being a vegetarian or to keep people confined to Boston, but rather to illustrate the different kinds of action that can be taken to prevent global change. And it is not always the largest contributors to global change that are the most important to tackle. The road to environmental change lies in a complicated web of how people consume, what they consume, how much people consume, and if they are willing and able to change their lifestyle choices. When viewed this way, it seems that knowledge and spread of information is the key to affecting how we treat our earth.