Craft beer and intoxication: What doesn’t add up
Here’s a question that I posed to myself after talking to a few friends this weekend.
Craft beer, on a whole, is a bit more expensive than macro beer, but also tends to have, on average, a higher Alcohol by Volume (ABV) per bottle or can as well. So, if you do the math, is it economically better to buy macro beer at volume to achieve the same amount of intoxication, or to drink fewer, higher ABV beers?
This may seem like a ridiculous question to ask – most craft beer drinkers that I know don’t drink only to get intoxicated, and most are not drinking craft beer for any kind of drunken economic advantage. But i realized that I’ve never actually checked it out for myself… so I decided to follow through a little experiment to see what I’d actually come up with – just in case I ever had to make the argument someday.
So let’s take an “average” of 5 macro light lagers:
- Keystone Light – 4.2 % ABV
- Coors Light – 5% ABV
- Bud Light – 4.2 % ABV
- MGD 64 – 3% ABV
- Natural Ice – 5.9% ABV
These average out to be 4.5% ABV
I’m also going to take five similar craft beers – let’s say a few popular IPAs.
- Dogfish Head 60 Minute IPA – 6% ABV
- Sierra Nevada Torpedo IPA – 7.2% ABV
- Green Flash West Coast IPA – 7.3% ABV
- Stone IPA – 6.9% ABV
- 21st Amendment Brew Free or Die IPA – 7%
These average out to be 6.9% ABV
And as a third group – a set of five “imperial” or high ABV beers:
- Russian River – Pliny the Younger – 11% ABV
- Stone – Russian Imperial Stout – 10.5% ABV
- Dogfish Head – 120 Minute IPA – 18% ABV
- Brew Dog – Tokyo – 12% ABV
- Sierra Nevada – Bigfoot – 9.6% ABV
These average out to 12.2% ABV
So in review, we have:
- Macro average: 4.46%
- Craft IPA average: 6.9%
- “Imperial” craft beer average: 12.2%
Now, I know that “imperial” beers can vary wildly between 8-10% and anywhere to 55% ABV, but I tried to pick a few well-known representative samples, and I feel I can say with some certainty that once something is in the 12% range it would be considered by me to be a higher-alcohol beer.
For the sake of argument, I am also going to even out a few things. First, I know that not all of these beers are available by six packs, for example, but I am going to make a few assumptions. *Price information is provided by BevMo.
For the “macro” beers, I am going to use a 12 pack of 12 oz cans as a starting point. which costs $10.99 and contains a total of 144 oz of beer.
So 144oz times 4.5% = 6.48 oz of “alcohol” in the 12-pack
$10.99 = 6.48 oz so that’s about $1.70 per ounce of alcohol.
For the “craft IPA” beers I am going to use a 6 pack of 12 oz bottles as a starting point, which costs $11.49 (average of the five costs above)
So 72 oz times 6.9% = 4.97 oz of “alcohol” in the 6-pack
$11.45 = 4.97 oz so that’s about $1.77 per ounce of alcohol Corrected: $2.30
(Thanks for noticing this!)
For the “imperial” beers I am going to start with a 22oz bottle, which costs about $10.00 (conservative estimate – imperials vary WILDLY on price)
So that’s 22 oz times 12.22% = 2.68 oz of “alcohol” in the bottle
$10.00 = 2.68 oz that’s about $3.70 per ounce of alcohol
So firstly, the idea that drinking extremely high ABV beers are somehow a cheaper way toget drunk is false. It doesn’t matter what size bottles you buy, the cost per oz of alcohol is clearly in the favor of the cheaper macro brews – who have gotten that price point based on volume. In the first example above, there isn’t a huge price differential in craft and micro (7 cents?) so I also decided to look further. Though there’s a difference (especially with my math corrected) I did decide to turn around and still think about the realities of volume as well.
So let’s take the same three scenarios and play with the numbers some more and let’s talk about volumes.
How much of each beer type would it take to get to the same amt of alcohol?
If I had to pick a target “drunk level” for this problem it would probably be about 5 oz of alcohol (this is totally arbitrary, but stick with me here…)
In the “macro” category, I’d have to drink 9 and a quater “macro” beers to get the 5 oz of alcohol. That’s a total of 111 oz of fluid. And, if you divide it out, 9.25 beers is a little bit less than the total purchase price of $10.99 – it turns out I have to drink $8.47 worth of my investment to get to this level.
In the “craft” category, I’d have to drink about a 6 pack to get 5 oz of alcohol. That’s a little better for my bladder at only 72 oz of fluid, though, after drinking the 6 pack I’ve now used up my $11.45 purchase.
In the “imperial” category, I’d have to drink a little shy of 2 full bomber bottles – a total of 44 oz of fluid. I would have to spend $20.00 to do this. Less trips to the bathroom, but more expensive by far.
Now, looking back for a moment, clearly a pattern emerges. The most “eifficient” way to get intoxicated seems to be by sticking to cheap macro beers with low ABVs. Why is this ironic, you ask?
In the state of Mississippi, there is a law in place that states that no beer above 5% ABV can be sold. Proponents of this ban argue that bringing in higher ABV beers could lead to binge-drinking or more problems with intoxication. I’d say that anyone looking for that “quick drunk” fix is probably more likely to pick more-water-than-beer and cheap-as-possible swill (which is the only beer available to them currently) than a high-test beer due to its added expense and more complex flavors. Even in a “free” market scenario (allowing all types of beer to be sold) if someone’s intentions are to get smashed on beer, then the choice (economically speaking) is obvious. Truly, this law’s only effect is to prevent craft beer enthusiasts from doing what we’re all proud to do with beer – to enjoy it responsibly.
Want to learn more about this law and what’s being done about it? Check out “Raise Your Pints,” a grassroots organization attempting to fight the archaic craft beer law that’s stifling the tastes of those who appreciate what craft beer is meant for – and know that high-gravity beers are meant to be savored, not slammed. Their mission is “to promote and enhance craft beer culture in Mississippi by working to lift the ban on high-gravity beer; clarify the status of homebrewing as a legal, fun, and wholesome hobby; promote Mississippi’s beer, brewpub, and brewing industries and small businesses; and work to broaden the appreciation of craft beer for all Mississippians.”
13 Comments to “Craft beer and intoxication: What doesn’t add up”
Leave a Reply
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by beerbabe and beerbabe. beerbabe said: Fresh off the Hop Press: Craft beer and intoxication: What doesn’t add up http://hops.me/vc [...]
Very interesting findings. I really enjoyed reading this. Raise Your Pints is doing a lot of good. Hopefully, we can get that law changed soon.
I spent some time thinking about this a few years ago too.
Your analysis is good. Basically, the business of mega breweries is producing alcohol at the cheapest basis per unit volume possible. So it should be no surprise that they achieved it. That’s what they’ve spent years of research and millions of dollars on.
It is nice though that craft beer isn’t really that much more expensive. The benefit of not having to make as many trips to the bathroom is valid.
I think the teetotalers’ reason for perceiving higher ABV beers as more dangerous is that it is easier to drink a high ABV beer quickly (smaller volume, fewer trips to bathroom, etc) and let the buzz sneak up on you. But if wine and liquor are permitted, it doesn’t make any sense to restrict beer.
Nice one, been wondering about the subject myself… Although the price of alcohol in Norway (where I live) is further manipulated through a system of ABV taxation, I still think your calculations ring truth.
I think it all depends on what you’re examples are. The math can definitely be done in such a way that craft beer is a better choice fiscally. Also, I feel that its important to use the same measures across the groups you’re comparing whenever possible or at least try and compensate whenever this isn’t possible. 12 packs of macro vs. 6 packs of micro isn’t very fair given the discounts given to bulking across the board. I understand that macro offers an option there that a lot of craft companies can’t, but for an analysis it should be kept as equivalent as possible for a comparison of variables. (Plus the 14.99 12 packs of 6.8% Celebation we have here weighs out to about 1.53 per oz/alc). Also, it’d be a good idea to stick to the same beers in your example groups when determining the value of all of your variables. Basically making sure that you’re deriving your average alc content and average cost per unit alc from the same beers. Overall I’d have to say that you’re probably right unless you make very select choices in order to get the most bang for your buck from craft brews.
Beer Babe, your math is wrong. $11.45 / 4.97 = $2.30 per oz for micro 6-pack. Macro is considerably cheaper.
Patrick – Saying that it’s easier to drink a high ABV beer quickly is false. Craft beer has much more flavour, and the higher the ABV, the stronger the malt, hop, or alcohol flavour. The imperial brews are so strong, I can only sip them. Light macro beer, on the other hand, can be chugged like water (assuming you can get past the taste). You can’t do a funnel or keg stand with an imperial beer, you’d be overwhelmed by the taste. It would be akin to chugging whiskey or vodka.
emacge – Comparing case vs case of micro to macro, we get $17.60 for a case of macro, and $43 for a case of micro (for the beers used above). That’s now $0.58 per can of macro vs $1.43 per bottle of micro, compared to the 12 / 6-pack price of $0.91 per can of macro vs $1.91 per bottle of micro. It’s a fair comparison, since both are available in cases, but clearly the macro beer features a much greater discount for bulk than micro. As such, the price disparity for buying in bulk is much greater, and getting trashed off macro is much cheaper ($1.35 per oz of alcohol for macro and $2.16 for micro).
It is a well structured argument. I do not agree. The human factor(human element), psyche is far more powerful. Your mood has way too much to do with how alcohol will effect you. Also part of tolerence is pace and delivery. A person who drinks Budweiser for 10 years with out change in routine will be effected by the increase of abv. in a craft 6 pack much sooner than an equivalent amount via his bud source. Hence the idea more bang for the buck. Stats are empty numbers. Yes statistics may give you general direction but can not represent true data. Sample set is way too small as well. Sorry. Try 50 packages in each category.
Timobkg – Thank you for the math correction and your comments. I’ve made a note and amendment to the article above!
Hi John-
Hi John – While between different people there are vast differences in tolerance, metabolic rate, etc., I will have to respectfully disagree that the differences in quantity of alcohol consumed by one person (i.e., by switching from macro to craft brews with a higher ABV rate) is based on psyche. Physiologically, it doesn’t matter what type of alcohol is consumed -or drinking history- when alcohol is taking effect. In an individual, the same quantity of alcohol in a glass of wine and glass of beer and shot of liquor (were they measured equally) will have the same effects on the body. There is some evidence that one’s mental state does amplify the *appearance* of intoxication (there is a lot of research on reflecting the behavior of others around us without conscious effort – so a rowdy group at a party may be acting equally as intoxicated though they may vary in their actual BACs). However, I’d like to say that though some statistics are empty, the quantity of ethanol consumed by one person is a linear formula to get to Blood Alcohol Content – it is the behavior of the person consuming the alcohol that varies.
Secondly, I would have loved to compare 50 different types of craft beer to the probably 10 or 20 different varieties of macro brews, but the reality of finding consistent pricing information made my choices limited. I hoped to merely take a sample of popular and well known craft, macro and “imperial” beers to broadly define the category. It is true that as you go up the ABV scale, the range (and thus, standard error) of cost varies and becomes less correlated with ABV. So that category was probably the weakest in coherence. But I do think that the IPAs and macro beers that I picked were generalizable to their categories as a whole – because there wasn’t wide variety in cost or ABV content between them. But I welcome your comments and would love to see a wider exploration of the math if you can find a source of ABVs and price that is consistent.
Thanks for your comments – Cheers.
Some other states are worse. From Wikipedia:
For example, in Colorado, Kansas, Minnesota, Oklahoma, and Utah, beer that is sold in supermarkets and convenience stores must have no more than 3.2% alcohol by weight (4% ABV). This low-alcohol beer is called “low-point beer” or “three-two beer”.
Minnesota has a full-service alcohol license that is available to retailers. It permits the sale of regular beer, but the 3.2% licenses are easier to obtain.
About the intoxication: the take-up of alcohol in your body is an osmotic-proces. This means that the speed in that alcohol is taken up by the body increases by the difference between body and beer ABV. A 10% beer will give it’s alcohol to the body much faster then a let’s say 5% beer. So if alcoholamounts are the same the stronger beer will get you faster&more intoxicated but this means the alcohol will be out of your blood faster too!
It is ridiculous that certain states outlaw high gravity beers yet still allow the selling of liquors and wines. Thanks for spreading the word that high gravity doesn’t equal low morals
thebrewgirl.com
@dtschirmer
“Some other states are worse…”
boohoo, so they can’t get them at super markets. WE CAN’T GET IT ANYWHERE!! At least they can go to a beer store and get a bottle of Sierra Nevada’s 30th Anniversary Ale (9.5%). We have to go out of state. To say that because they can’t get high abv beers at a gas station is worse than Mississippi having basically zero tolerance for good beer is an insult. Stop reading Wikipedia and check your sources before you go adding insult to injury. As far as beer laws go we have it worse than anyone else in the country. We are denied over 90% of the beers 49 other states are not. I don’t see how Colorado has it worse. They have Left Hand, Great Divide, and New Belgium plus tons more for christ’s sakes. We have ONE brewery.
Prick