• radix@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    98
    ·
    7 months ago

    Not sure why NA is being singled out here. Bottles are largely the same shape (with a few functional differences, see below) no matter where they come from.

    The round shape is mostly a historical artifact from early designs that were hand-blown. A hexagonal (bestagons!) shape would pack better in an infinitely large container, but since most shipping crates are rectangular, there will be wasted space either way, and round is far easier and cheaper to mass-produce. Also, as a carbonated beverage, sharper corners could create stress points and exploding bottles.

    Toppling over could potentially be reduced with a wider base, but fitting in the hand is a hugely important factor for any drinking container. There are larger-based bottles, but they also need more specialized packaging and storage space. By using bottles that are similar size to aluminum cans, lots of infrastructure can be dual-purpose (I’m thinking of things like can/bottle storage in your refrigerator, for example).

    Double the volume of what? Glass bottles have to be thicker than other materials, so to get the same volume as a can with the same size base, it has to be taller.

    If you want to do a lot more reading, here’s a few sources I borrowed from:

    https://sha.org/bottle/beer.htm

    Regarding the functional design features referenced above:

    https://www.hillebrandgori.com/media/publication/beer-bottle-sizes-and-their-surprising-history

    Those ‘shoulders’ we keep mentioning remain in modern beer bottle design mainly for aesthetic reasons. Their original function was to provide a handy place for the yeast residue and dregs to collect, so that these didn’t pour out into the glass with the beer. Nowadays, most beer is filtered, so this design feature is no longer needed. Unless you’re bottling a yeast beer like a Belgian beer, of course.

    • snooggums@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      7 months ago

      By using bottles that are similar size to aluminum cans, lots of infrastructure can be dual-purpose (I’m thinking of things like can/bottle storage in your refrigerator, for example).

      A great benefit of both containers being designed to fit in a hand!

    • Rhynoplaz@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      7 months ago

      North America wasn’t even on my radar! I suspect anyone who’s worked in the industry thought non-alcoholic by default.

      • ShepherdPie@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        7 months ago

        I haven’t tried a NA beer in some time, but when I did years ago it was in the same tall bottle that every other commercial beer uses. I honestly thought you meant north America and that other countries have differently shaped bottles (like how Sessions uses small 12oz bottles).

        • Rhynoplaz@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          7 months ago

          OP DID mean North America. I’m just a passerby that associated NA with Non Alcoholic. I also associate NR as meaning glass bottles, but I don’t know if that’s industry wide, or a local abbreviation.

          Non alcoholic beers use the same bottles as regular (for the most part, there may be exceptions).

  • Martin@feddit.nu
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    From a European, what does a standard NA beer bottle look like? I thought your bottles were similar to ours, which means bottom heavy and a slim neck.

    • BombOmOm@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      You sometimes see some very minor variations, such as a mild taper on the thick part or a slightly different angle on the neck. But they all look basically like below. Pictured is a beer from the oldest brewing company in the US; established 1829.

  • TheAlbatross@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    ·
    7 months ago

    I’ve never really seen an issue with the standard glass beer bottle in North America, is there a superior bottle shape that I’ve been missing all my life?

  • SanguinePar@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    21
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 months ago

    Have they? Can you give an example? Any NA beer I’ve bought (which is quite a bit) has been in standard beer bottles. Assuming you mean non-alcoholic, right?

    • OsaErisXero@kbin.run
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      23
      ·
      7 months ago

      I was under the impression that the glass was actually better, since the cans require a plastic lining to not ruin the beer and the bottles can either be recycled and reused as-is after a wash or ground up and remelted with little/no loss in quality.

      • bluGill@kbin.run
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        7 months ago

        The plastic lining is for soda - beer tends to be less acidic and so doesn’t need it. (at least in general)

      • ebc@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        7 months ago

        The lining in question is very thin (akin to a layer of paint) and just burns up when the cans are re-melted.

        Recycling beer bottles is indeed pretty easy once you get them to the processing center intact, but it’s getting there that’s the hard part. They’re fragile, pretty heavy and don’t stack well unless you put them in some form of packaging.

        Once they’re broken, they’re basically useless; glass isn’t recycled much except as grit material for sandpaper; re-melting it is resource-intensive and sensitive to impurities.

    • silly goose meekah@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      7 months ago

      Glass is almost always the most environmentally friendly packaging for drinks. Aluminium needs a lot of energy to be recycled and can only be used once. I’m not sure how it works in the states but here in Germany we reuse our glass bottles up to 50 times.

      • pixeltree@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        7 months ago

        Yeah here in the US no containers get reused as is, due to corporate lobbying from pre 1990. Aluminum also is less energy intensive to transport since containers weigh less! Both are infinitely preferable to plastic containers.

        • silly goose meekah@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          7 months ago

          Ahhh corporate lobbying is a beautiful thing. Halting progress to make sure the rich get richer! But thanks dor that explanation. Also a good point about Aluminium being lighter.

          • pixeltree@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            7 months ago

            Aluminum also takes way less energy and is much cheaper to recycle than to produce new! I think roughly around 2/3rds of all aluminum ever produced is still in use because of that. Don’t remember the exact figure, just remember it from my material science electives from college. Aluminum beverage containers usually have BPA liners, which is far from ideal, but as a material in general, it’s pretty nice

            • silly goose meekah@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              7 months ago

              yeah, absolutely! I’m not trying to say that aluminium is a bad material. Just that it’s not the right choice as a drink container, at least once you convince the population to return bottles to the store (the deposit system here in germany works pretty well. when people don’t want to return the bottles, they put them next to the closest trash can, so homeless people can collect them and return them to the store for a small reward)

              • pixeltree@lemmy.blahaj.zone
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                7 months ago

                There’s a bottle and can deposit system in some states! You pay an extra 5c per beverage and get 5c back by returning the empty container. Only in like 5 states, but it works well. They don’t get reused, just recycled, but I think that’s pretty much the only way plastic bottles get recycled here, as most recycling is extremely contaminated.

                Sorry not disagreeing with you about beverage container material choices! I just like chiming in with more info because I really enjoyed those packaging science classes I took. If I could live my life over again I’d do that instead of software tbh. Glass containers being reused instead of recycled is the dream, imo, but in the current US if you replaced all plastic beverage containers with aluminum ones that would still be a massive win. Transportation energy costs should only improve, so as time goes on that will matter less and less in the equation, but you can also achieve denser packing easier with aluminum packaging than glass. Glass containers don’t take non-cylindrical shapes as easily, or rather, cylindrical containers are far easier, more reliable to produce, and in general a lot more durable. If you swapped from plastic bottles to hexagonal aluminum ones, where you can achieve near perfect packing efficiency, that would be amazing. Far more containers per load, a roughly equivalent weight per container, made from a material that’s ACTUALLY recyclable, and (this I don’t actually know but I believe to be true) more easily automatically sorted out from contaminated recycling, that also has a financial incentive built into it to be recycled? That would be really really really good. Ultimately glass is better, the reusability is REALLY nice and glass also recycles incredibly well, and isn’t harmful as a pollutant, and also doesn’t require a questionably toxic (I believe BPA is an endocrine disruptor, but this isn’t something I know for sure) plastic lining? Oooooo yeah. That’s where it is.

                Also just a fun fact, blue glass is like incredibly contaminating color wise, it only takes a tiny bit of blue glass to color a load of clear glass it’s being added to blue! Not a problem with the material, just cool.

                Another fun fact, ever wondered why bottles have the bumps running around the edge on the bottom? It’s because the containers warp subtly as they cool, and with a purely circular base, this would give you an ever so slight saddle shape and it wouldn’t sit stably. With the bumps, there’s always at least 3 points of contact, so it’s stable!

                • silly goose meekah@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  7 months ago

                  Ohh thanks for chiming in! A lot of cool info in your comment, especially that last part about the bumps at the bottom of glass bottles.

                  I can only agree that aluminum is better than plastic, but I’m not sure about hexagonal cans. The cans we know nowadays are insanely well engineered and only use a minute amount of material, taking advantage of the pressure of carbonized drinks. I don’t think there’s any way to increase packing efficiency of Aluminium cans without increasing material thickness to an unreasonable degree. But regardless, if all drink containers were regulated to be Aluminium (or glass), it would certainly be a big improvement.

      • ℕ𝕖𝕞𝕠@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        7 months ago

        You’re supposed to decant it into a glass for optimal experience, but I hear you. I can drink straight from a bottle in a way I won’t from a can.

  • Paragone@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 months ago

    The “stubby” bottles were replaced with tall “classier” bottles in a surge of … fashion-moment, or something.

    I remember somebody did a news vid, or documentary on it, & the industry lost usable-storage-effectiveness when they went with the taller bottles, and there’s more glass in them, too…

    They said if they’d known what the actual results would be ( it didn’t alter the market to increase the percentage of the population which is always buying beer, for some reason… ), they wouldn’t have done it.

    Well, Duh…

    “never believe your own hype” IS a rule, because when you’re believing your own marketing-bumf, then you’re not competent at calculating any sort of project balance-sheet, right?