Each week Americans toss roughly a billion aluminum cans into the
landfill and roughly another billion into the recycling bin.
Our country should be leading the way toward a more livable
future, but with our profligate energy and resource use, we are leading in the
opposite direction.
Americans use more energy per capita than residents of any
country except Canada and several small, Middle East oil producers. Based on 2011 numbers each American uses
almost 50 percent more energy than the average Russian, almost twice as much as
the French, Germans and Japanese, over twice as much as the British and
Italians and three times as much as the Chinese. We use 11 times what the average Indian uses
and 34 times a Bangladeshi's daily energy use!
Yet, we all have roughly the same basic needs and live on the
same planet.
And the news about the health of the earth keeps getting worse.
The vast majority of scientists believe that it is because of the way we humans
are living. If you haven't seen enough
bad news yet, see note 1 for some recent recommended sources. Worrisome changes are happening in more
places and faster than most anyone imagined.
The idea for this essay started with beer cans. A recent college graduate told me about his
just-for-now job putting labels on beer cans.
The empty beer cans are delivered by truck from somewhere in New York to
a Connecticut business that applies labels. The empty cans are all repacked for
trucking to a New Hampshire can-filling facility where these well-traveled cans
are sanitized and finally filled with beer for sale anywhere and
everywhere. The beer that fills the cans
is brewed in Vermont.
This story provides a great opportunity to learn the important
differences between matter and energy: in what they are, in how they move and
transform and in the results of those movements and transformations. It also helps us understand the concept of
"embodied energy."
Knowing these physical realities should help us design a more livable
future which requires fewer resources, consumes less energy and produces less
waste.
Matter
Matter can neither be created nor destroyed. Earth is made of matter. Very little matter is added or removed from
Earth. In nature's plan, most matter is continually reused and recycled. The
same atoms of matter are used over and over again.
Beer itself is matter, mostly water, containing alcohol created
by yeast as it consumes a malted grain, flavored by hops. For at least 5,000
years and maybe twice that long, humans have made and consumed beer created
with a wide variety of plant products.
The matter in beer comes from fields and water systems. After it is used as intended, the matter
(except for that which becomes part of the drinker's body) flows through a
sewer or septic system before rejoining the earth's water system.
Matter can always be recycled.
Once in a container, the beer also comes to us with more matter.
Glass, steel and aluminum are all used to deliver beer to drinkers and all are
made of matter that can be recycled.
Energy
Energy can't be created or destroyed either, but unlike matter,
it can NOT be recycled or reused. Energy moves in one direction -
downhill. That is, from a more useful
form to a less useful one, leaving entropy or disorder behind.
The beer itself contains energy.
There are between 100 and 170 calories of food energy in the beer in a
12 ounce can. That energy all came from the sun, was captured by plants and
processed by yeast. One beer provides enough energy to power a human for
roughly two hours. (That is the energy equivalent of about 0.005 of a gallon of
gas. One gallon of gas contains the
quantity of energy needed to power a human for about 15 days. No wonder we like
it.) Note 2.
The energy that was in the beer ends up as waste heat slightly
warming the drinker's environment.
Although that energy started out at the sun and could power plant
growth, you can't run photosynthesis on a body's waste heat. That's energy's
usefulness really going downhill!
Once we put the beer in a container, a more complicated energy
picture emerges. None of these containers provides any energy to the drinker,
although each took a lot of energy to produce.
Embodied Energy
Here is where the idea of embodied energy comes in handy. That is the name for all the energy that was
consumed to make something. The embodied energy concept may have been less
important when energy seemed plentiful and its use was without consequence. Now
we know more about the consequences.
Black Hog Brewing Co. offer reusable "Squealer" |
In our current, historically brief, period of rampant energy use,
we have included lots of fossil and electrical
energy in all these processes: planting, fertilizing, spraying, harvesting, drying and more. Therefore, contemporary beer contains more embodied energy, and much more fossil and electric energy than the beer Shakespeare might have drunk. None of that energy provides any food calories or nutrients.
energy in all these processes: planting, fertilizing, spraying, harvesting, drying and more. Therefore, contemporary beer contains more embodied energy, and much more fossil and electric energy than the beer Shakespeare might have drunk. None of that energy provides any food calories or nutrients.
Filling up our growler at Two Roads |
There is a promising development - the trend in Connecticut and
many other places toward smaller local craft breweries. Many of these serve beer at the brewery,
completely eliminating packaging. Many
sell beer in large refillable glass jugs called growlers. Many have their beer
available on tap at local restaurants and drinking establishments. In our state
we have many good examples of this.
Aluminum Can
Now back to the fact that
if we put beverages in a single-use container, a can or bottle, we bring
more embodied energy into the picture.
For example, take an aluminum can, a very common container for
beer, soda and other beverages. That can
comes embodied with all the energy it took to make the can: the energy it took
to mine and process bauxite ore in Australia or Jamaica and to ship the
resulting alumina to Washington state for smelting. (Smelting aluminum is one of the processes
most damaging to the global climate, and to salmon. It takes enormous amounts
of subsidized electricity.) The can also
contains the energy it took to turn the ingot of aluminum into a can, as it
moved from a mill to a factory before being painted, baked, coated and baked
again. That's about where we were in the
story above. Note 3.
When was the last time you made an aluminum can at home? Each step consumes fossil and electrical
energy in multiple ways and creates many small and large scale environmental
problems. All in order to hold 12 ounces of mostly water for a few weeks or
months. However, many people are finding out how easy and wonderful it is to
make beer at home. And local craft breweries are increasingly making their
products available in more environmentally sound ways.
A virgin aluminum can (with no recycled content) has as much
embodied energy as the gas it takes to fill it one quarter of the way; that is
three ounces. That energy is equivalent
to 738 food calories, or enough to power a human for at least eight hours. That means that the can contains over four
times as much energy as the beer provides. (Imagine the ratios for various low
and no calorie beverages. They approach infinity.)
So it makes sense that the can itself costs more than the
beverage inside. (Perhaps the can also
produces more profit).
Once the can is filled the whole thing gains more embodied energy
as it moves from filler to wholesaler, retailer and consumption point using
even more energy and trucks.
Entropy
The entropy from those energy transformations as ore becomes a
discarded can shows up all over the globe - at ruined mining sites, with toxic
substances at each step, with dammed and dredged rivers, cans on the side of
the road and with climate change everywhere.
If the aluminum can is recycled that will greatly reduce the
energy use for the next can. A can with
33 percent recycled content has a third less embodied energy in the
aluminum. That can still contains about
enough energy to keep a human going almost six hours. But recycling involves more travel,
processing, heat, a new label and coating and two more bakings, filling and
delivery, and more trucks carrying empty cans on the highways.
A can that is not recycled will be in the environment for longer
than a human lifetime. Seems like a big
price to quench a thirst.
Older solutions
Until sometime in the last century, beer was essentially local.
Most of the time, refillable kegs and bottles moved beer a relatively short
distance from brewery to drinkers. As recently as the middle of the last
century many Connecticut towns had one or more breweries. It just made sense.
Reusable kegs, made of wood or steel and refillable glass bottles
contain embodied energy, but that energy can be divided by a large number of
refillings.
The big push in the 1950s and beyond toward no-deposit, no-return
containers for beer (and soda and milk) allowed a bigger separation between
brewer and drinker and eventually the current enormous concentration of
beverage companies' ownership. But that
is another whole story.
Current Situation
Growth in local craft breweries aside, for beer and soda, just a few giant global
corporations now dominate the market.
They are all trying to get us to drink more and more of whatever they
are selling. Flavor and size options
proliferate in the drive to sell increased numbers of beverages in a can. The
planet and communities everywhere are damaged by the making and delivery of the
cans and, in many cases, by their contents.
(Remember that the two big soda, tea, water, coffee, juice and
energy drink companies are also major funders of the effort to BLOCK our right
to know if our food contains GMOs.)
In the face of climate and other resource constraints it
is unlikely that we will be able to sustain the kind of growth in aluminum can
use we have seen in the past few decades.
Energy is too valuable to be wasted in such a profligate way- to hold in
our hand for just a few minutes before disposal.
Other ways
I am likely tilting at windmills to think that letting folks know
how destructive and silly it is to buy and discard a new aluminum container
with each 12 ounces of beverage will make a difference. (Perhaps a few more
folks will decide to join those of us who avoid aluminum cans and other single
serve containers as much a possible).
However I was encouraged by Mark Bittman's recent column
in the NY Times about New York City's ban on foam food containers. He cites the exciting progress made in a
number of other municipal, state and national jurisdictions in banning or
taxing energy and environmentally expensive packaging. He writes: "municipalities and sometimes
even states are asserting themselves against the “right” of industry to
sell whatever it wants, and more of the public is willing to have government
alter its behavior when the reasons are sound.
The home brewing movement, the increasing value people put on
drinking water, and the trend toward smaller local craft breweries are all
promising steps in the right direction.
I heard the story about the traveling beer cans the same day that
Connecticut Governor Dannel Malloy said the following in his 2015 state of the
state speech:
We need to change the ways we commute, the
ways our businesses move their products, and the ways we get around our cities
and towns. It’s time for Connecticut to establish a
collective vision for the next thirty years. A vision for a best-in-class
transportation system.
We can have an open and honest
discussion of what needs to happen to transform our infrastructure to meet the
challenges and demands of the 21st Century.
Do we make the roads wider and better so more trucks can haul
more empty beer cans through the state or should we perhaps change the way we
drink beer and soda?
It's up to us to design a sustainable and livable future. The more we know about what's going on, the
easier that will hopefully be.
NOTES:
1. Recently the NY Times has had alarming stories about
the failing health of the oceans and cod;
about climate disaster
and the doomsday clock.
Website mashable.com and NYTimes blogs detailed
the warmest year ever.
I also just read Elizabeth Kolbert's very engaging (and
frightening) The Sixth Extinction: An unatural history, Naomi Oreskes's
and Erik M. Conway's The Collapse of Western Civilization: A view from the
future and am in the middle of Michael T. Klare's The Race for What's
Left: The global scramble for the world's last resources. All of these
books predict a dire future if we don't significantly change our resource
consumption and our way of living. It is important to remember that the
planet's ability to absorb waste gases without causing severe problems is a
valuable resource that is currently very much over used.
2. There is the equivalent of 31,500 food Calories of energy in
one gallon of gasoline. I've used 2,000 as a round number for the number of
calories a human needs each day. We and
our cars consume carbon-containing substances to provide the energy we need,
taking in oxygen and giving off carbon dioxide.
3. Stuff: The Secret Lives of Everyday Things, by John C.
Ryan and Alan Thein Durning, provides a lot of information about the making of
aluminum cans. The quantity of electricity
used in the process is enormous and easier to quantify than many of the other
energy uses, so most energy studies focus on that aspect. Of course there are so many other uses of
energy that likely no one knows how much is consumed in making and delivering a
beverage in an aluminum can. Until now,
we have relied on the market to make these design decisions. However, since the market hasn't included
environmental factors such as mine spoils and climate change and hasn't really
accounted for all the subsidies "embodied" in each can of beverage,
those decisions don't any longer make sense. (Subsidies include those taxpayers
and ratepayers provide for electricity, fossil fuels, water and waste disposal,
as well as the costs of environmental and human health effects)
No comments:
Post a Comment