Newsday: Booze

[nacho]

The February issue of Maxim Magazine hit the shelves late last week and for once included an article worth reading which wasn’t about hot girls. It was however about beer. The four-page spread was a run down of what Maxim decided are the 25 Best New Beers in America. No real explanation of what “new” means, since some of the beers on the list are decidedly not all together that new but it was a surprisingly good list all the same — especially given the source — and only one of the twenty-five brews is from one of the “big three” breweries. There also doesn’t seem to be any specific order to the list that I can decipher, but here it is:

    * Porkslap Pale Ale – Butternuts Beer & Ale
    * Drifter Pale Ale – Widmer Bros.
    * Hoss (Rye Lager) – Great Divide
    * Hoptober Golden Ale – New Belgium
    * Haywire (Hefeweizen) – Pyramid
    * Helios Ale (Saison) – Victory
    * Noble Pils – Sam Adams
    * Ten Fidy (Imperial Stout) – Oskar Blues
    * Torpedo (Extra IPA) – Sierra Nevada
    * MarzHon (Marzen) – Clipper City
    * Bud Light Golden Wheat – Anheuser-Busch
    * Sexual Chocolate (Imperial Stout) – Foothills Brewing
    * Brew Free! Or Die (IPA) – 21st Amendment Brewing
    * Green Lakes Organic Ale (Amber) – Deschutes
    * Indian Brown – Dogfish Head
    * Upslope Pale Ale – Upslope Brewery
    * Old Stock – North Coast
    * Blue Ball (Porter) – Intercourse Brewing Co.
    * Calico (Amber) – Ballast Point
    * Union Jack (IPA) – Firestone Walker
    * Fat Squirrel (Brown Ale) – New Glarus
    * UFO White  – Harpoon (Boston)
    * Local 1 (Pale) – Brooklyn
    * Tumble Off (Pale Ale) – Barley Brown’s Brew Pub
    * Phoenix (Pale Ale) – Sly Fox

I think it’s interesting to note that five of the twenty-five beers on the list (or a full 20%) were canned beers; certainly speaks volumes to the nationwide trend. What do you think of the list? Anything you’d add or subtract if you were a Maxim intern compiling lists of microbrews while the paid folks were off shooting Amanda Bynes for the cover?

[RottingCorpse]

The goal is to try them all, right?

[nacho]

I've had the Torpedo (wonderful, and the Indian Brown (yawn).  But, yes, I want all the rest.

[RottingCorpse]

That UFO White seems familiar, but other than that I don't recognize the rest save for the Sam Adams and Budweiser ones.

[Cassander]

Bud American Golden wheat?  say what?

Brooklyn's Local 1 is pretty good.  I haven't heard of many of the other breweries, though.

[nacho]

Maxim Magazine:  Brought to you by Budweiser.  America's leading craft beer!

[RottingCorpse]

My alcoholism makes me INDESTRUCTIBLE!!!!

Beer May Be Good For Your Bones

If you downed one too many while watching the Super Bowl, here's at least one reason to hold your head high: Drinking beer can be good for your health.

But seriously, a new analysis of 100 commercial beers shows the hoppy beverage is a significant source of dietary silicon, a key ingredient for bone health.

Though past research has suggested beer is chockfull of silicon, little was known about how silicon levels varied with the type of beer and malting process used. So a pair of researchers took one for the team and ran chemical analyses on beer's raw ingredients. They also picked up 100 commercial beers from the grocery store and measured the silicon content.

The silicon content of the beers ranged from 6.4 mg/L to 56.5 mg/L, with an average of 30 mg/L. Two beers are the equivalent of just under a half liter, so a person could get 30 mg of the nutrient from two beers. And while there is no official recommendation for daily silicon uptake, the researchers say, in the United States, individuals consume between 20 and 50 mg of silicon each day.

However, other studies show that consuming more than one or two alcoholic beverages a day may be, overall, bad for health.

The take-home message for the casual drinker: "Choose the beer you enjoy. Drink it in moderation," lead researcher Charles Bamforth of the University of California, Davis, told LiveScience. "It is contributing silicon (and more) to your good health."

Bamforth and his colleague Troy Casey, both of the university's Department of Food Science and Technology, detail their findings in the February issue of the Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture.

The silicon levels of beer types, on average:
Indian Pale Ale (IPA): 41.2 mg/L
Ales: 32.8 mg/L
Pale Ale: 36.5 mg/L
Sorghum: 27.3 mg/L
Lagers: 23.7 mg/L
Wheat: 18.9 mg/L
Light lagers: 17.2 mg/L
Non Alcoholic: 16.3 mg/L

Their research showed the malting process didn't affect barley's silicon content, which is mostly in the grain's husk. However, pale-colored malts had more silicon than the darker products, such as the chocolate, roasted barley and black malt, which all have substantial roasting. The scientists aren't sure why these darker malts have less silicon than other malts.

Hops were the stars of the beer ingredients, showing as much as four times more silicon than was found in malt. The downside: Hops make up a much smaller portion of beer compared with grain. Some beers, such as IPAs are hoppier, while wheat beers tend to have fewer hops than other brews, the researchers say.

"Beers containing high levels of malted barley and hops are richest in silicon," Bamforth said. "Wheat contains less silicon than barley because it is the husk of the barley that is rich in this element. While most of the silicon remains in the husk during brewing, significant quantities of silicon nonetheless are extracted into wort and much of this survives into beer."

(Wort is the sweet liquid that comes from mashing the grains and eventually becomes beer.)

While the researchers are not recommending gulping beer to meet your silicon intake needs, their study does add to others on the potential health benefits of this cold beverage.

The type of silicon in beer, called orthosilicic acid, has a 50 percent bioavailability, meaning that much is available for use in the body. Some foods, like bananas are rich in silicon but only 5 percent is bioavailable. This soluble form of silica found in beer could be important for the growth and development of bone and connective tissue, according to the National Institutes of Health.

Past research has suggested that moderate beer consumption may help fight osteoporosis, a disease characterized by low bone mass and deterioration of bone tissue.

Another past study involving nearly 1,700 women reported last year in the journal Nutrition showed participants who were light to moderate beer drinkers had much better bone density than non-drinkers. The researchers suggested the beer's plant hormones, not the alcohol, could be responsible for the bone boost.

[Cassander]

Tomorrow: Red Bull and Vodka Help Fight Alzheimer's!

[nacho]

Exclusive - more details about the future of Tetley's
from Pete Brown's Blog by Pete Brown
I've blogged in the past about how Tetley's was my trainer beer, my local pint, and how even though its star has fallen, it retains a special place in my heart.

In 2008 Carlsberg UK announced that the brewery in Leeds would be closing. Today they've announced that from 2011, Marstons will brew Tetley's Cask in Wolverhampton, while Smoothflow will be brewed by Molson Coors in Tadcaster. Carlsberg say they are delighted that most of the volume brewed will be remaing in Yorkshire, and that with cask, they looked into every option for keeping it in Yorkshire but this proved not to be possible.

I've just had a chat with Darran Britton, Carlsberg UK's marketing director, and got a bit more background. I'll scribble down what he said first, and reserve some personal reflections till the end of this post.

The most contentious part of the whole deal is the move of cask out of Yorkshire. Was there really 'no other option?'

"It may not be as fashionable as it once was, but Tetley's is a still a very sizeable cask ale," replied Britton, "it needed somewhere with enough excess capacity. But it also needed someone who is experienced in brewing other people's beers, someone who is technically excellent."

Lots of names have been speculated - Black Sheep, Timothy Taylor's, Heineken (as in John Smith's in Tadcaster) but if you agree with those criteria - and it's hard not to - then it's difficult to disagree with the conclusion, however unpalatable it may be.

So why Marston's?

"They have a great reputation for their ales, and they're an experienced contract brewer. In Wolverhampton they have traditional square fermenters, which Tetley's has always been brewed in. We'll work with them to keep the same recipe, the same ingredients, and we'll continue using Tetley's unique two-strain yeast."

And what about Leeds? What are the plans for the brewery site?

"Production in Leeds will end mid-2011. We'll be transferring the brewing earlier in the year. We're in talks with Leeds council about their plans for the city, but there are no plans for the site yet."

Tetley's - like its counterparts Worthington's, John Smiths and Boddington's - has been in a phase of managed decline for several years now, ceding the cask ale market to regionals and local brewers. Now that cask ale is back in growth - tiny, tiny growth, but growth nonetheless - will this move coincide with renewed support behind the brand? To be clear, Carlsberg is retaining ownership of Tetley's for the foreseeable future, with Molson Coors and Marston's brewing on a contract basis. Despite this, I'm reminded of when Courage brands moved from S&N, who clearly didn't want them, to Well's & Young's, who did. In that case there was a change of ownership, but it saw the beers being revitalised to a dramatic extent. As I said, this move for Tetley's is different, but after reports of new investment and the return of the huntsman to the brand's identity, I wondered if this was a cue for somer kind of relaunch.

Britton refused to be drawn, saying more that this was "business as usual". Rather than there being any renewed energy behind the brand, he insisted that there wouldn't be any less support behind it, that investment will continue, and that there'll be a new sampling campaign later this year.

So there we go.

In my job, I get to see both sides of stories like this. Sometimes I'm with the marketers when difficult decisions have to be made, when the harsh realities of modern business and the demands of shareholders make unpalatable choices inevitable. Other times I get to be a beer fan, and to be able to say "Fuck the shareholders, this is beer we're talking about! A short term view not only betrays the core drinkers of the brand, it actually doesn't make sound business sense in the long view."

In this case, I'm torn. I am grief-stricken at what has happened to Tetley's, appalled that the link between the brand and the city of Leeds will be broken. ("Tetley's will always have a relationship with Leeds", insists Britton, but that relationship will only exist in an abstract, emotional sense). I'm frustrated that Carlsberg as a whole seems unable to make the huge power of provenance and place of origin for one of the biggest beer btrands in the country make commercial sense for them. Lots of people will say that Tetley's can never taste the same if it's brewed in Wolverhampton but I'm not one of them - it'll taste exactly the same. But it's not about that - it's about the story, the soul of the beer.

On the other hand, I feel we have to accept the commercial reality that it no longer makes business sense for big breweries to sit on lots of expensive land in city centres. We don't have to like it. We can rage against it. But that doesn't stop it from being true. It's difficult enough to make money in brewing.

I think that to fairly criticise Carlsberg for what they've announced today, you have to be able to suggest something they could have done instead.

Keeping the Leeds brewery open was not an option. Moving cask to another brewery in Yorkshire was - if we take Britton at his word - not an option.

The one thing I think may have been an option, and which I'm disappointed by, is not keeping a small part of the space in Leeds and continuing to brew cask there. Most of the land is a massive distribution centre, which would be way better somewhere else. It doesn't make much difference at all where Smoothflow is brewed and I'm not sure any0ne cares. But if you sold off all that lot, and kept hold of the old brewery bit or redeveloped a new purpose-built cask ale brewery for a few million quid, this could only have enhanced whatever plans Leeds will eventually have for the space (I'm guessing "luxury apartments" with the odd Starbuck's and panini shop.) It would add heritage, character and romance, something uniquely Leeds in what is sure to be a development that will look identical to any city in the UK. It would have sent the right signals to the ale community, given the city a stake, mollified hardcore Tetley's fans. Maybe they looked at this option and found reasons why it wasn't viable. Maybe not. But the fact that it is not happening is a crying shame.

I have no problem whatsoever with Marston's - they certainly know how to brew beer.

I think Britton is right - it will be business as usual. Nothing will change in the beer itself. And it has always been a decent cask pint, brewed with love and care, no matter what anyone thinks.

But I had hoped that this would be more than business as usual. It's emotional and sentimental because that's what beer is, but when Tetley's cask is no longer brewed in Leeds, I for one will have one less reason to drink the beer. I'd rather been hoping for new reasons to drink it instead. Sadly, I've heard nothing to suggest that there will be.

[monkey!]

[nacho]

Oh yes!  www.moderndrunkardmagazine.com updated.  At long last...

Highlights:

A madman's dream to create a "booze resort": http://moderndrunkardmagazine.com/issues/55/55-boozetown.html

A bit of wonky Roman stuff for the hardcore history geeks: http://moderndrunkardmagazine.com/issues/55/55-blood-and-wine.html

The rise and fall of Ripple (and Zima and Billy Beer): http://moderndrunkardmagazine.com/issues/55/55-dead-end-drinks.html

[nacho]

This only matters to me because I grew up in Kensington, and the "Old Town Market" used to be a 7-11 where I hung out every day reading Heavy Metal and drinking suicide Big Gulps.

http://www.gazette.net/stories/05262010/kensnew210141_32547.php

When Kensington residents vote in the June 7 town council election, they also will be polled about their views on expanding beer and wine sales in town, a referendum some say could bring new life to small business.

"Absolutely it would help us," said Susie Cooper, co-owner of Old Town Market on Kensington Parkway. "The neighborhood would be able to support us more, and we'd be able to serve the community in a way bigger stores can't."

Prior to 2007, alcohol sales of any kind were prohibited within town limits. That year, state lawmakers — at the behest of the Kensington Town Council — passed legislation allowing the Montgomery County Board of License Commissioners to issue alcoholic beverage licenses to restaurants in the business district.

In 2009, the area where alcohol sales are permitted was expanded to portions of Connecticut Avenue, Howard Avenue, University Boulevard, Dupont Avenue, and several other streets that featured eateries near Town Center.

The town council is considering legislation that would permit off-site alcohol sales in those areas; a measure that would provide for beer and wine stores in Kensington.

"I've heard some pretty strong feelings on both sides of the issue," Councilman Sean McMullen said. "I think most people would like to see it go through if we put some limitations in place."

McMullen said similar to current on-site alcohol sales, which are allowed in certain areas and in restaurants where at least half of their income is generated by food sales, the proposition will include several caveats prohibiting the hours of sales and if it can be refrigerated.

Cooper said she has been lobbying Town Hall for off-site beer and wine sales since she opened the Old Town Market three years ago. She says such sales would boost profits for stores.

"When you're off the beaten path like we are, you have to do have something that brings people in," she said. "That's why we have soft serve ice cream and deli sandwiches; it's a way to compete."

Resident Meredith Fulton said she does not support the move, as Kensington already is served by liquor stores.

"I don't consider this to be a priority right now," she said. "There are a lot of other things we could spend our time on when there's already a place to buy it around here."

Barnesville, Damascus, Laytonsville, Washington Grove and the City of Takoma Park also are noted in Maryland State Law, prohibiting or further limiting alcohol sales within their limits. All sales of alcoholic beverages require a license, issued by Montgomery County's Board of License Commissioners.

The referendum is expected to be attached to ballots during the June 7 election, scheduled for 6 to 9 p.m. at Town Hall, 3710 Mitchell St., Kensington. Following a tallying of referendum opinions, town officials said any legislation would have to pass public hearing before proposed to a state representative who can sponsor a bill. The bill would then need approval by the Maryland General Assembly before becoming law.

Referendum question: Should the Town support State legislation that would allow a prospective license holder, only in the geographic area shown below, to apply for a license to sell beer and wine for consumption off-site only, subject to certain conditions, for example; limiting the hours of sale and/or requiring that beer and wine not be refrigerated, with final conditions to be determined by the Council after a Public Hearing and vote before the State legislation is requested.

Voting is 6 to 9 p.m. June 7 at Town Hall, 3710 Mitchell St., Kensington.

[RottingCorpse]

drinking suicide Big Gulps.

Whoa. Flashback.

[nacho]

I love how most of us reading the forums are drunks and, yet, this is the deadest sub-forum. What, Sirharles and Reggie are the only sober people here, right?  And you can't trust Sirharles after the sun sets and his fiance shows him the Visa bill from the bridal store. 

Anyway...the big booze news here in MD is that the cruel grip of Montgomery County liquor control has been weakened.  There's talk that private companies will be able to sell liquor in 2011... And, gasp, they'll be able to do it at all hours.

I haven't really followed this, but will try to in the coming weeks.  Growing up in MoCo, I've gotten used to government run liquor.  Plus I steal everything from the weddings.  And, when a friend from out of town asks "Where the fuck can I get a beer at 8am in Montgomery County?" (as RC has done to me three times) I just giggle and say, "Blessed are we, the children of Christ."

[RottingCorpse]

You forget I lived in a group house in MoCo for a year in the late 90s. To get beer, we'd literally drive the extra two miles into DC most of the time because it was easier and more likely to be a successful.

Keep in mind that I very rarely saw the sun in that tenure so a beer run was likely to be "after hours" so to speak.

Also, I seem to remember some "late night" beer store in Bethesda that we'd always try to hit. It wasn't truly late night, just some smart business owner who realized there was money to be made from UofM frat boys and drunk coke heads.