-
extracted text (extracttext:extracted_text)
-
The Olympia Brewing Company 1896-1916:
A Case Study in Environmental History and
Life Cycle Assessment
by
Nathan John Nadenicek
A Thesis
Submitted in partial fulfillment
of the requirements for the degree
Master of Environmental Studies
The Evergreen State College
June 2015
©2015 by Nathan John Nadenicek. All rights reserved.
This Thesis for the Master of Environmental Studies Degree
by
Nathan John Nadenicek
has been approved for
The Evergreen State College
by
________________________
Kevin Francis, Ph.D.
Member of the Faculty
________________________
Date
ABSTRACT
The Olympia Brewing Company 1896-1916:
A Case Study in Environmental History and
Life Cycle Assessment
Nathan John Nadenicek
The Olympia Brewing Company—located in Tumwater, Washington—grew
substantially from its founding in 1896 until the time that prohibition was enacted in
Washington in 1916. During this time the brewery grew to become a large regional
industry with supply and distribution chains that extended nationally and even globally.
For this thesis, I examined the environmental impact of the Olympia Brewing Company
during these formative years, using the tools of life cycle analysis and environmental
history. From the archives of the Olympia Brewing Company, along with other historical
resources, I collected a large amount of qualitative and quantitative information. The
indicator for this study was acres of land used to grow the barley and hops. This land use
was compared in the month of October in the years 1900 and 1910. Land use was
compared at the barrel level for selected batches of lager and bock beers along the
timeline of this study. I found that while the amount of land use grew significantly as the
company expanded, the amount of land use per barrel changed only slightly between
these years. Changing agricultural practices was identified as a possible cause of the
variations in per barrel land use throughout the years. This study contributes to local
environmental history of this area and begins a conversation about how these two
methods of understanding environmental impact can be integrated.
Table of Contents
List of Figures……………………………………………………………………….….vii
List of Tables……………………………………………………………………………vii
Acknowledgments………………………………………………………………...……..ix
The Olympia Brewing Company Brewhouse Built 1906…………………………...…x
Chapter 1: Introduction. ……………………………………………………………..…1
Chapter 2: Literature Review………………………………………….………....……..5
Environmental History…………………………………………………….…..…..5
Nature and Culture…………………………………………………...……8
Historical and Scientific Method…………………..……………….…..…9
Scale in Time and Space……………….…………………………...........12
Environmental History and Historic Breweries………………………………….15
Life-cycle Assessment……………………………………….………….……….16
Life Cycle Assessments about beer and brewing………………………...……...17
Life Cycle Assessment and Environmental History………………………..……19
Barley………………………………………………………………...…..20
Hops…………………………………………………………………...…22
iv
Chapter 3: Brief History of the Olympia Brewing Company……………...….…..…24
Chapter 4: Methods……………………………………………………………….……26
Historical Research Methods……………………………………………….……26
The Olympia Brewing Company Archives…………………………………..….27
Life Cycle Assessment and Historic Data……………….…………………....…28
Procedural Guidance………………………………………………..……………29
Goal Definition and Scoping ……………………………………………………31
Functional Unit……………………………………….………………………….32
Raw Materials………………………………….………….……………………..32
Transportation……………………………………………………………………34
Waste Products and Recyclables………………………………………………...35
Chapter 5: Results………………………………………………………………………37
Case study for barley October 1900 compared to October 1910………………...38
Location of Malt Manufacture…………………………………………...40
Malt to Barley Conversion……………………………………………….40
Land Use Per Acre……………………………………………………….42
Distance Barley Traveled………………………………………………...43
v
Case Study for Hops October 1903 compared to October 1910…………………44
Location of Hops Growing Regions……………………………………..45
Amount of Hops Used…………………………………………………...46
Hops Land Use Per Acre…………………………………………………47
Distance Hops Traveled…………………………………….……………59
Land Use Per Barrel……………………………………………………………...40
Chapter 6: Discussion…………………………………………………………………..58
Barley and the Olympia Brewing Company……………………………………..58
Density of Barley Farming……………………………………………………….59
Hops and the Olympia Brewing Company………………………………………63
Completing The Cycle…………………………………………………………...64
Chapter 7: Conclusion………………………………………………………………….65
Bibliography…………………………………………………………………………….67
vi
List of Figures
Figure 1. This photo of the Olympia Brewing Company Brewhouse, Located in Tumwater Washington was
taken around 1910. Photo: Courtesy of the Olympia Tumwater Foundation.
............................................................
x
Figure 2. Olympia Brewing Company Brewhouse 2007. Photo: Nathan Nadenicek
..............................................
x
Figure 3. Spatial temporal overlap areas of history and science
..................................................................................
13
Figure 4. Two Row and Six Row Barley
..................................................................................................................................
21
Figure 5. Phases of LCA
................................................................................................................................................................
30
Figure 6. Sample list of raw materials for beer
....................................................................................................................
34
Figure 7. Examples of Accounts Showing Distribution
.....................................................................................................
35
Figure 8. Letterhead from Bauer Schweitzer Hop & Malt Company
.........................................................................
39
Figure 9. Letterhead from The Ladish-Stoppenbach Co
...................................................................................................
39
Figure 10. From The Index of The American Brewer's Review
....................................................................................
40
Figure 11. Letterhead from Kola Neis, a Hops Broker in Salem, Oregon
.................................................................
45
Figure 12. Letterhead from Epstein Mendl and Grube Purveyors of Choice Bohemian Hops
..........................
46
Figure 13. Barrel Breakdown of Raw Materials Used in 1902
......................................................................................
51
vii
List of Tables
Table 1 Total amount of malt used in 1900 compared to 1910.
.....................................................................................
38
Table 2 Increase from malt to barley in 1900
........................................................................................................................
41
Table 3 Increase from malt to barley in 1910.
......................................................................................................................
41
Table 4 Acres used to grow barley for beer brewed in October 1900 compared to October 1910.
................
42
Table 5 linear distances from source of malt to Tumwater Washington.
....................................................................
44
Table 6 Hops used by location in October 1903.
.................................................................................................................
47
Table 7 Hops used by location in October 1910.
.................................................................................................................
47
Table 9 Acres used to grow hops in October 1910.
.............................................................................................................
49
Table 10 Distance from source to Tumwater, WA.
..............................................................................................................
50
Table 11 Lager Brewed on 1900.
...............................................................................................................................................
52
Table 12 Bock Brewed in 1903
....................................................................................................................................................
53
Table 13 Lager Brewed in 1903.
.................................................................................................................................................
54
Table 14 Bock Brewed in 1907
....................................................................................................................................................
55
Table 15. Lager Brewed in 1907
.................................................................................................................................................
55
Table 16 Bock Brewed in 1910.
...................................................................................................................................................
56
Table 17 Lager Brewed in 1910.
.................................................................................................................................................
57
viii
Acknowledgements
It is a great privilege and honor to have been able to be a student of Evergreen’s
Graduate Program on the Environment. It has been a long and difficult journey that I
most assuredly did not make alone. The completion of this thesis and the Master of
Environmental Studies degree would not have been possible without the support,
encouragement, nurturing and motivation that I have received from others along the way.
I owe a great debt of gratitude to the students, faculty and staff at The Evergreen
State College. My reader Kevin Francis, Ph.D. helped me at each phase of this project
from the first phases until the finished product. The faculty of the MES program has
helped me each step of the way through many difficulties. The fellow students that I
have had the pleasure of learning with were always available for support and
camaraderie. I would also like to thank the first person I met at Evergreen, Gail Wooten,
who was always there to answer the questions I had even if I didn’t know whom to ask.
My thesis research would not have been possible without the cooperation and
support of the wonderful people at the Olympia Tumwater Foundation. Thanks to John
Freedman who could have turned me away but instead treated me like on of the gang.
Karen Johnson and Don Trosper were always available to help me with my research in
the Schmidt House archives. Bob Crim and Jose Guzman were never too busy to unlock
the door for me.
One of the greatest assets on my side through this part of my life was my family.
My wife Jennifer always encouraged me when times got difficult and tolerated all the late
nights and grumpy mornings. Mom and dad were always supportive and believed in me.
In addition to helping me through this program and this thesis with motivation and
knowledgeable advice my dad showed me that most challenges are surmountable. My
daughter gives the best encouragement of all when her little voice says “good job daddy”.
ix
The Olympia Brewing Company Brewhouse Built in 1906.
Figure 1. This photo of the Olympia Brewing Company Brewhouse, Located in Tumwater Washington was
taken around 1910. Photo: Courtesy of the Olympia Tumwater Foundation.
Figure 2. Olympia Brewing Company Brewhouse 2007. Photo: Nathan Nadenicek
x
Chapter 1:Introduction
“Every age has a keyhole to which its eye is pasted.”
-- Mary McCarthy, On the Contrary
Because today’s challenging, even ominous, environmental problems seem so
ever present, the backward glance we call history would seem to have little value in
providing solutions. What insights could possibly be found in crumbling buildings, dusty
books, and sequestered archival collections? While nostalgia may cause a person to
venerate assumed nobility in a gaze from an old photo or place blame for our current
problems on perceived carelessness or ignorance in the past, it is difficult to imagine any
contemporary application for such anachronisms. In truth history’s contemporary use is
grounded in the fact that it always presents the past through the lenses of current ideas
and values as the quotation from Mary McCarthy so clearly expresses. In that way
history is not really about the past, but rather a road map replete with markers from the
past drawn to guide contemporary travelers. The environmental history lens, then, can be
particularly useful in providing ideas and direction to today’s environmental dilemmas.
As John Opie has written “The environmental historian participates in the gulf between
the ecological ideal and historical reality, between the two cultures of science and the
humanities”.1
1
Opie
John.
“Environmental
History:
Pitfalls
and
Opportunities,”
Environmental
Review
7
(1983):
8-‐16,
quotation
on
page
15
1
To date there have been no environmental histories written about breweries,
which is difficult to explain given the expansive land use and transportation reach of the
industry. The intent of this thesis is to present an environmental history and land use
impact study of the early years of the Olympia Brewing Company of Tumwater,
Washington. It is a common misconception that American breweries distributed their
products locally prior to 1920 and that the development of large national beer companies
emerged only after the repeal of prohibition in 1933.2 In fact, many companies began to
dramatically expand their distribution networks prior to prohibition. The period of this
research, therefore, will commence with the company’s founding in 1896 and finish when
prohibition legislation went into effect in Washington State in 1916 (four years before the
federal prohibition laws were in place). In conducting this research I employ the methods
used by environmental historians in an effort to understand the complex relationship that
the Olympia Brewing Company (OBC) had with the local, regional, national and even
international landscapes.
In an effort to link the cultures of science and the humanities as John Opie
suggests, this environmental history of the OBC will also apply the methods associated
with the study of the life cycles of products and industrial practices. To my knowledge
this thesis is the first attempt within environmental history to apply life cycle assessment
as a major component of the study. The use of life cycle analysis is an effort to study
environmental history in a new way, trying to understand the quantities associated with
the relationships between the brewery and the landscape.
2
Satran,
Joe
“Craft
Beer
Growth
Pushes
Number
of
Breweries
in
U.S.
Higher
that
Ever
Before”
The
Huffington
Post
12/13/2012.
This
article
discusses
the
number
of
breweries
falling
due
to
larger
ones
taking
over
as
a
post
prohibition
occurrence.
2
Environmental history is a way of assessing and communicating the complex
reciprocal relationship between the natural environment and human society in the past.3
The environmental history of the OBC, like that of all American breweries, is far from
well understood. While there is a good deal of information about the brewing industry in
general and the Olympia Brewing Company in particular for the years I am studying, the
material is mostly in the form of biographies, secondary studies, and documentation of
business practices rather than environmental impact. Therefore, the purpose of this
environmental history is to understand the role that OBC played in the changing
landscape, as well as assessing the geographic extent of that change, using the technique
of Life Cycle Assessment.
Life Cycle Assessment is a proven method used to study energy inputs and
outputs and connected environmental impacts linked to a product throughout its entire
life cycle. In other words, Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) is a systems-based approach to
quantifying the human health and environmental impacts associated with a product's life
from “cradle to grave.”4 LCA will provide additional tools beyond an environmental
history narrative in order to assess the company’s environmental reach and land use
influence.
While there are many possible starting places for this study, such as the geological
processes that created the soil or the history of the farming communities that provide the
crops, I have chosen to begin by discussing the raw materials that are the ingredients in
3
Oosthoek,
Jan,
Environmental
History
Resources,
www.eh-‐resources.org.
Accessed:
November
5,
2014.
United
States
Environmental
Protection
Agency
(“Life-‐Cycle
Assessment
|
Sustainability
Analytics
|
Research
|
US
EPA”)
This
guide
from
the
EPA
provides
very
detailed
guidelines
for
conducting
LCA
studies
that
I
used
for
guidance
as
I
set
up
my
study.
4
3
the beer that was brewed by the OBC. I have chosen this place to start because it is
within the scope of the LCA and pertinent information is directly available in an archival
collection. While there are a large variety of recipes for beer around the world and
throughout time, there are four basic ingredients to most beers. Water, grain, hops and
yeast can be combined in almost infinite ways to create the desired taste, color and
aroma.5 As the amount of raw materials used and their origin changed so did the land use
of the OBC.
Throughout this document the study of the land use history of the OBC will be
conducted. Chapter 2 is a literature review, which examines the relationship between
environmental history and Life Cycle Assessment, discussing the gaps in scholarship and
opportunities for interdisciplinary research. Chapter 3 provides a brief history of the
Olympia Brewing Company. Chapter 4 explains the research methods throughout,
discussing types of evidence and guidance. Chapter 5 presents the results of the study of
the land use of the OBC. Chapters 6 and 7 provide discussion of the results and
concluding statements.
5
Hoverson,
Doug.
Land
of
Amber
Waters
the
History
of
Brewing
in
Minnesota.
Minneapolis:
U
of
Minnesota,
2007.Pg
1
4
Chapter 2: Literature Review
While there are numerous ways to consider the importance of framing context in
environmental research, this study establishes it through a historical analysis.
Environmental history spans large timeframes and cultural contexts and yet can be of
great value in addressing the problems and issues that culture faces in today’s natural
environment. Understanding the different dimensions of environmental history provides
contemporary lessons about the same relationships of nature and culture, historic and
scientific methods, and relationships of scale found in all types of environmental
research. These dimensions help to create a more encompassing historical study by
ensuring that as much of the context involved is considered. Life Cycle Assessment aims
to encompass as much of the environmental influence of the system being studied by
striving to measure the impact of each part of the process. When considering breweries
and in particular the OBC in a historical timeframe, I am also considering to what extent
environmental history and LCA can be brought together to expand the conversation about
these two areas of research and their application to a specific area of local history.
Environmental History
Placing human society within the natural environment, and not in indifference to
it, forces the telling of history in a way that emphasizes both human achievements and the
natural conditions that provided cultural affordances. While many histories illustrate an
indifference to the natural environment (or in some cases in opposition to it) by
emphasizing human society as the major actor, environmental histories focus on a
5
symbiotic relationship. In order to understand why industry and cities are built and
prosper in some places and not others historians looked to the relationship with the
natural environment. Also in an effort to understand the origins of contemporary
environmental problems historians cast an eye to the relationship that was historically
nurtured between the people and the places in which they lived and worked.
Environmental history draws attention to the fact that human society and nature are
intricately intertwined.6
One of the best examples of a thought-provoking presentation of the
interconnectedness of humans and nature is Nature’s Metropolis: Chicago and The
Great West in which William Cronon tells the story of Chicago in the nineteenth
century7. The story of the city in no way stops at the city limits but instead reaches far
into the hinterland. One particular quality of the book is that it constantly reminds the
reader that what seemed to be the vast wilderness of the west was quickly captured into
the systems of commodification (a playing field of human and nature interactions) that
fueled Chicago’s rapid growth. Because of Chicago’s location, it became the center for a
processing and manufacture system that reached into the nation’s vast Midwestern and
Western landscapes through new rail systems. In less than a generation the city and its
vast network altered the look and lay of the land forever. Innovations such as the
refrigerated railroad car allowed the shipping of meat products from the vast stockyards
across much of the nation. According to Cronon, Nature’s Metropolis is the appropriate
term for those vast hinterlands because that is where human dynamics became bound to
6
Taylor,
Bron.
"“It's
Not
All
About
Us”:
Reflections
On
The
State
Of
American
Environmental
History."
Journal
Of
American
History
100.1
(2013):
140-‐144.
P144
7
Cronon,
William.
Nature's
Metropolis:
Chicago
and
the
Great
West.
New
York:
W.W.
Norton,1991.
Print.
6
economic dynamics and those markets extended the reach of the city into vastness of the
new nation. William Cronon’s book is a good example of an environmental history that
shows how industry may reach well beyond its physical location and directly influence
landscape changes on a large scale. Also evident in works like Nature’s Metropolis is the
need for environmental history to build a bridge between the two worlds of ecology and
history.
The Organic Machine by Richard White is another book that explores the
relationship between natural history and human civilization.8 White’s history of the
Columbia River relates the relationship the people of the Pacific Northwest had with the
natural environment. White explores how different groups of people connected with the
river as well as the influence the river had with the people who depended on it for
survival or economic gain. Like Nature’s Metropolis, The Organic Machine explores the
complexity of the human / nature interrelationship. White brings a dynamic approach to
his research as he moves from Native Americans to the early settler and on to
contemporary society—each successive group shaping and being shaped by the river in
unique ways.
In a 2008 article titled “Three Dimensions of Environmental History” in
Environment and History, J. Donald Hughes describes three factors that should be present
when writing an environmental history.9 These three dimensions are nature and culture,
historic and scientific method, and scale in time and space. Each of the dimensions
represents a challenge for the researcher and a need for balanced scholarship. Because
8
White,
Richard.
The
Organic
Machine.
New
York:
Hill
and
Wang,
1996.
Print.
Hughes,
J.
Donald.
"Three
Dimensions
Of
Environmental
History."
Environment
&
History
(09673407)
14.3
(2008):
319-‐330.
Environment
Complete.
Web.
19
Jan.
2015.
9
7
environmental history is research that analyzes the interaction between humans and the
natural environment and vice versa, it is important to carefully consider each of the three
dimensions.
Nature and Culture
The first dimension described by Hughes is the dimension that is composed of the
often-perceived dichotomy of nature and culture.10 This aspect of environmental history
is crucial because it must represent how both human societies as well as the natural
environment change over time. The reason that I use the phrase “perceived dichotomy”
is because it is impossible to untangle the two actors in the relationship, even though they
are often studied as separate phenomena. In order to be considered an environmental
history, a study must take into account both as part of a complex and reciprocal
relationship.
Environmental history, then, has in most cases transcended this dichotomy of
culture and nature.11 Often the melding of these two concepts is reflected in the titles
selected for those environmental histories. Nature’s Metropolis and The Organic
Machine are great examples of the books written by environmental historians intent on
bridging a conceptual divide, because the very structuring of the titles suggests the need
to create a realm where nature and culture are linked. The ability to connect various
disciplines and viewpoints is also a valued aspect of environmental history.
10
Hughes
(2008)
321-‐324
Sutter, Paul S. "The World With Us: The State Of American Environmental History." Journal Of
American History 100.1 (2013): 94-119.
11
8
The dichotomy of nature and culture is of specific interest when researching the
past environmental history of the OBC. It would be very difficult to write any history of
brewing in the region without considering the specific qualities of the natural
environment that led to the success of such an enterprise. From the artesian wells, the
abundance of hydropower and natural resources to the very presence of the Puget Sound
water transportation, it is no surprise that a major brewing operation took root in
Tumwater. It would also be of equal disservice to an environmental history to not
consider the particular aspects of human society of the time that fostered the growth of
this industry. The immigrants who came from Germany with the knowledge and skills to
create an industry from the ground up, the farmers and craftsmen who had skill sets to
foster steady growth, as well as the vast amount of technological and scientific
information flourishing at the time, all contributed to the history of brewing in the Pacific
Northwest.
Historical and Scientific Method
Using the methods of both historical and scientific research is an example of how
environmental history often spans disciplines. Environmental history, while using the
historical method, must also take into account how the scientific methods, may
supplement the research.12 Ecology in particular is of use to environmental historians
because ecology places humans inside the web of life dependent on other species and
equally subject to the forces of nature. Environmental historians do not need to be
12
Hughes
(2008)
324-‐326
9
experts in an area of scientific study, but they should be aware of the forces of change
that led to the way the people in a particular time and place interacted with the natural
environment and how that environment altered the human condition.
Considering both historical and scientific methods in an environmental history
changes the viewpoint of the researcher, getting away from the notion that human society
is the subject and the natural environment is the object. Bringing environment into the
study of history should be considered similar to the way other historians have broadened
the understanding of history by analyzing the roles that such topics as race, gender, and
class played in shaping the world. 13 While race, gender, and class are topics that are
understood in the context of social science, environmental topics are often best
understood through the methods of ecology, biology, and other natural sciences.
Epidemiology is a good example of a field of studies where scientific methods can be
used to understand diseases that decimated populations in the past. Another example of
scientific methods being used to study historical developments is through hydrology,
where the access to clean water has lead to the rise and fall of civilizations. When a
balance of historical and scientific methods is perused the conversation changes because
there is a new lens to view the topic. Instead of applying an agricultural history
approach, for example, which might consider how various farming techniques are “good
or bad” for the land, the environmental history discussion shifts to a reciprocal
relationship, where the interactions between humans and the land change each other
through time. In a way environmental histories can show how human aspirations and
13
Nash,
Linda.
"Furthering
The
Environmental
Turn."
Journal
Of
American
History
100.1
(2013):
131-‐135.
2015.
P.133
10
failures are met in a world of finite resources organized in almost infinitely complex
interrelationships.
Considering scientific methods when researching events that took place over a
hundred years ago is complex business. Still there are important ways to consider
balancing historic and scientific methods in this study. In fact the years leading up to the
period of study saw scientific advancements that vastly changed the brewing industry and
its capacity to influence larger and larger landscapes. Pasteurization, new industrial
technologies, artificial ice, and changes in glass bottle manufacturing and capping are but
a few examples. While brewing methods may have changed a little in the past century
most of the advances were geared toward achieving greater output. It is not too far of a
reach to assume that modern breweries of the same scale most likely use similar methods
and techniques as Leopold Schmidt did at the turn of the twentieth century. Another
example of how scientific and historical methods can both be brought into this study is by
examining farming practices of the time. An example of this is written in notes from
Schmidt’s trip to Rubicon, Wisconsin in 1905. He wrote, “The farmers are learning from
experience, to go into diversified farming, and are also being taught that by the
Agricultural Experiment Stations. They are beginning to follow barley with pea, or
clover crops, and sometimes corn, and seldom sow barley two years in succession”. 14
By looking into where and perhaps how the crops used to brew beer were farmed I will
be able to discuss relevant changes to the land.
14
Olympia
Brewing
Company
Archives,
The
Olympia
Tumwater
Foundation.
Corporate
Reports,
annual
reports
1905
box
3
notes
from
Rubicon
page
4.
11
Scale in Time and Space
When considering “scale in time” it is important to understand that humans have
been interacting with the natural environment throughout time.15 While this statement
may seem a bit trite, it is important because the understanding, or concern for the
environment, is not something exclusive to the modern world. The environmental
awareness that exists in our contemporary world is not only the result of an understanding
of the rapid changes we have seen, but also it is the result of a long history of
relationships between humans and nature. Whatever period of study is selected—it is
important to acknowledge that all history can be environmental history, it is a matter of
choosing to explore the relationship that people had with their environment in their time.
The consideration of the scale of space is similar to that of time, in that the entire
world is the space of concern.16 While any particular study may place special attention to
a specific region it is important to acknowledge that nothing occurs in a vacuum and that
each event or place is intimately connected to the rest of the world, especially when
considering the aggregate effects of events of the past. The space within the ecosphere
that is chosen must not be treated as though it exists uncoupled from adjacent places and
larger landscapes.
One particular article in Conservation Biology addresses the issue of the
need for greater connection between science and history in order to aid in conservation. 17
The authors argues that the majority of differences between ecology and history are a
15
Hughes
pp.
326-‐327
Hughes
p328
17
SZABÓ,
PÉTER,
and
RADIM
HÉDL.
"Advancing
The
Integration
Of
History
And
Ecology
For
Conservation."
Conservation
Biology
25.4
(2011):
680-‐687.
Environment
Complete.
Web.
28
Jan.
2015.
16
12
result of miscommunication and even though the methods and concepts are quite
different,18 there is actually a great deal of overlap in both the scale of time and space
between history and ecology. Therefore, it is important to for any study of environmental
history to set the appropriate scale and time frames.19 It is important to integrate both
science and history into an environmental history study; the trick is to set both sides of
the equation on equal footing.
Figure 3. Spatial temporal overlap areas of history and science20
While a study of The Olympia Brewing Company in the late nineteenth and early
twentieth centuries does not at face value seem like a topic in which one would consider
the vastness of time and space, it is important to consider that the events that occurred
18
SZABÓ
et
all
(2011)
p.
682
SZABÓ
et
all
(2011)
p.
684
This
is
important
for
my
research
in
order
to
focus
the
main
time
and
spatial
components
of
my
study.
20
SZABÓ
ET
all
(2011)
Graph
showing
overlap
in
science
and
history.
19
13
during this period were influenced by history’s long shadow. The railroad is an example
of a technology and social enterprise that forever changed the landscape by making the
most distant horizons easily accessible, allowing Olympia beer to be more widely
distributed. Without such connection to the greater historical timeframe the story lacks a
critical dimension.
Another way to consider how scale in time and space is linked to the OBC story
is to illustrate how it affects us today. An example of this becomes very evident by
simply taking a trip to Tumwater to witness actual changes to the land made over time.
And while the beautiful falls have been changed greatly by the brewery and other
industries that have called the site home, those industrial activities also influenced
significant changes in a vastly larger landscape that can be understood to this day. While
striving to understand the environmental and economic impacts that the OBC had on the
local region and economy it is also wise to place it into the larger context of the nation or
world. During this time agriculture was rapidly changing as farmers tried to maximize
yields and reduce waste. Some crops, such as barley and hops, were taken up as quickly
as breweries could produce them, while others were raised to feed a growing and hungry
nation. The relationship between industry and agriculture is one that stretches across
both the geographic landscape and the temporal landscape. As an industrial process
improves efficiency, it then creates the ability, and perhaps the need to fill the new space
created. Likewise, the profit motive often leads to efficiencies such promoting crops to be
grown closer to the industries that use them.
Spatial and temporal landscapes are also intertwined and far reaching in the case
of the OBC is found in the slogan “It’s The Water.” Imagine the great tectonic shifts and
14
glacial cycles that have created the landscape that lends itself to water, good for brewing
beer, which was brought to the surface by artesian wells.
Lastly in the discussion of where the OBC during the time of this study fits into a
discussion of having a larger effect in time and space would be to draw attention to the
current lack of a brewery where the OBC once stood, examining the negative impact that
it’s loss had on the town of Tumwater. The historic brewery examined in this study is
just one of many that surely played equally vital roles in their own regions.
Environmental History and Historic Breweries
The environmental history of breweries is an area of study that is vastly
underrepresented today. Environmental histories are often focused on larger industries
whose environmental impact is obvious and sometimes horrific. It is of course very
important that those environmental histories be told, but it is also important to tell the
story of smaller regional industries, whose environmental impact is less evident but
especially profound when the larger landscape is considered. While there have been no
similar studies to this environmental history of the OBC, such an omission makes the
work even more significant. Not only are there likely many other breweries, or similar
industries, that are a perfect subject for environmental historians, but the realization that
each of them influenced a vastly larger landscape than its home footprint is essential to
understand. When looking at the old brick building, the remnants of the 1906 OBC
brewery on the Deschutes, few would understand the dramatic land use influence the
company had on the Pacific Northwest and beyond. Ultimately I am not only arguing
15
that the Olympia Brewing Company is a good subject for an environmental history, I am
also arguing for a conceptual framework about brewing and beer manufacture useful in
structuring an environmental history. Life Cycle Assessment provides that useful
framework.
Life Cycle Assessment
Like environmental history, Life Cycle Assessment began to emerge as a research
method in the 1960s and 1970s as environmental issues such as pollution and resource
conservation captured the public’s attention.21 A study for the Coca Cola Company in
1969 became one of the first recognized uses of LCA methodology. Taking into account
waste, resource requirements and emissions, that study compared different types of
beverage containers.22 Soon LCA gained attention from government organizations such
as the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the models became more sophisticated.
During the 1990s, LCA studies became more standardized and consistent through the
efforts of the Society for Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry and the International
Organization for Standardization.23 Currently, LCA has proven to be an important part of
environmental research focused on sustainability and has become an important method
used by the United Nations Environment Program. LCA will surely remain a useful tool
and become more useful as it is refined and studied.
21
Guiney,
Jeroen
B,
et
al.
"Life
Cycle
Assessment:
Past,
Present,
And
Future."
Environmental
Science
&
Technology
45.1
(2011):
90-‐96.
MEDLINE.
Web.
9
Feb.
2015.p.90
22
Guinée,
Jeroen
B,
et
al.
2011
p.
90
23
Guinée,
Jeroen
B,
et
al.
2011
p.
91
16
According to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), an LCA provides an
approach for assessing the environmental impact of a process, service, or product in three
ways: first is the creation of an inventory of material and energy inputs and releases at all
stages of the system; second, is an evaluation of the environmental impacts that may be
associated with those releases; and third is an interpretation of the findings to provide
guidance in decision-making. These three aspects provide the structure for how LCA is
best used.24
While LCA is rarely used to determine the environmental impact of a past
industry, the method should be as useful in analyzing historical information as
contemporary information, provided sufficient data are available. The extensive and
nearly untapped but richly abundant Tumwater Olympia Brewing Company archives will
yield the necessary information to make the historical application viable. While this
approach may seem rather unconventional it is also a worthy experiment in
interdisciplinary studies.
Life Cycle Assessments about beer and brewing
There are a few examples of the application of LCAs to the brewing industry
today. While the studies are not applied to historical breweries, the studies establish an
approach that may be emulated. In general the research has provided useful guidelines to
those in the industry, which wish to achieve a smaller environmental footprint. The
studies also emphasize stages of the manufacturing process that need to be addressed in
order to reduce any negative influence on the environment. Those publications about
24
United
Stated
Environmental
Protection
Agency,
Life
Cycle
Assessment
(LCA)
nd
http://www.epa.gov/nrmrl/std/lca/lca.html#define
Accessed
Feb
2
2015.
17
LCA research applied to the brewing industry can provide both guidance and a method of
assessment useful to a study of environmental history.
One feature of the LCA method that lends itself to the brewing industry is that the
approach seeks out areas of the greatest potential of lessening the environmental burden
of the product. The production of packaging materials as well as transportation of
products and raw materials provides great potential for lowering the environmental
impact.25 A study conducted on a popular Spanish beer followed the manufacture of a
bottle of beer from raw materials to consumption and included every stage of the process.
Among the improvement proposals were replacing the barley malting with facilities
closer to the brewery, using returnable glass bottles as well as using recycled glass
bottles. Interestingly, all of the recommended changes to the manufacturing process were
in existence at most breweries, including the OBC, at the turn of the 20th century.
Another contemporary study was designed to assess the lowest environmental
impact between two packaging options.26 This study noted that the packaging solution
that provided the least amount of environmental impact was the steel keg as opposed to
the glass bottle. Fossil fuel consumption and land use change were listed as contributing
the most to environmental impact. Also of note in this article is that the environmental
impact of the consumption of the product was also evaluated. It was found that fossil
fuel consumption and wastewater treatment costs generated by consumers was a large
part of the environmental impact in this LCA. For a historical LCA it is difficult to
25
"Environmental
Analysis
Of
Beer
Production."
International
Journal
Of
Agricultural
Resources,
Governance
&
Ecology
4.2
(2005):
N.PAG.
Environment
Complete.
Web.
3
Feb.
2015.
26
Cordella,
Mauro,
et
al.
"LCA
Of
An
Italian
Lager
Beer."
International
Journal
Of
Life
Cycle
Assessment
13.2
(2008):
133-‐139.
Environment
Complete.
Web.
3
Feb.
2015.
18
determine particular aspects of environmental impact, such as amounts of fossil fuel used
and pollutants released into the wastewater, but there is data on period transportation
technologies such as steamships and trains. It is also worth noting that a significant
portion of the OBC business involved the transportation of kegs not bottles.
In an attempt to propose improvements and optimize the system of manufacture
for a brewery in Greece an LCA was conducted.27 This study also followed the brewing
process from raw material acquisition to distribution but did not consider consumer
impacts in the system boundaries. Like the studies above it found that bottle production,
packaging, and transportation were the parts of the system that contributed most to
environmental impact. In these studies of modern breweries there are common factors
that contribute to environmental impact and these factors may also be applied to an
analysis of historical breweries.
Life Cycle Assessment and Environmental History
According to the guidelines provided by the EPA an LCA could be adapted to fit
an environmental history once again provided there is enough data. Specific information
available in the Tumwater Olympia Brewing Company records for the years that I am
studying includes detailed annual reports, which provide information about the amounts
and origins of raw materials purchased by the company. Those annual reports also detail
where the finished products were distributed. The records of various accounts detailing
27
Koroneos,
C.,
et
al.
"Life
Cycle
Assessment
Of
Beer
Production
In
Greece."
Journal
Of
Cleaner
Production
13.4
(2005):
433-‐439.
Business
Source
Complete.
Web.
3
Feb.
2015.
19
to whom beer and other products were being sold supplement that information. Those
annual reports along with other archival sources such as letters, meeting minutes, and
other forms of correspondence will provide enough information to create an inventory of
energy releases and inputs. By looking to environmental practices of the day as well as
brewery design and brewing methods it will be possible to draw conclusions about the
environmental impacts using LCA. While applying this assessment to a historical
situation cannot change past practices, the conclusions reached will provide a window
into the environmental impact of those practices—many of which are part of the brewing
industry yet today.
Barley
Grains were most likely the first ingredients of the earliest beers, barley in
particular, along with water often fermented on its own. Throughout Europe barley
became one of the main crops used in beer production. In the new world barley, which is
not native to the Americas, also became a major crop for baked goods and animal feed
but primarily for the production of beer. As European settlers spread westward many of
them searched for lands suitable for growing barley. Over time it became a major
production crop, especially across the northern tier of states and territories and along the
west coast. As settlement moved west barley growing, industrial malting, and brewing
quickly followed.
There are two main types of barley used for brewing, each having different
qualities that affect the end product, as well as managing the brewing operation. These
20
two types are two-row and six-row barley, which at the time grew in different areas and
were used differently. The name of each type of barley is a description of how the seeds
are arranged on the stalk if one where to look down on it from above. The seeds on tworow barley grow in two lines down the stalk while the six-row form a star like pattern.
Figure 4. Two Row and Six Row Barley28
Along with the differences in physical appearance the two different barley types poses
different chemical properties that can be exploited in the malting and brewing processes.
Two-row barley, which was almost exclusively used in Europe for brewing, yields more
extract, meaning that more beer can be brewed from the equivalent of the six row variety.
In the United States however, brewers tended to favor the six-row barley over two-row.
One of the main reasons for this preference was that the climate of the Midwestern states
was better suited the six row variety. While the two-row variety can produce more malt
extract it was more expensive and lacked the higher enzymatic properties of the six-row.
The higher enzymatic properties of the six-row meant that other starches added to the
28
http://www.homebrewersassociation.org/attachments/0001/5009/barley1.jpg
21
brew, such as rice or corn, could more easily be converted to sugars and consumed by the
yeast. Both varieties were used by the OBC throughout the years, which meant that the
different regions that produce it supplied the barley. In some cases the different barley
malts were described as eastern and western, where western malt was the two-row variety
and eastern was the six-row. During the period under study, the barley from the Midwest
(Wisconsin especially) supplied the six-row and western states produced the two-row.
The question of why such a large portion of the barley was grown far away in the
Midwest can be answered by taking into account the qualities of the type of crop that was
grown in this region. The reason that the different types of barley were grown in
different areas of the country is due to irrigation practices. Two-row barley grows best
when irrigation practices are used which is the case in most western barley. In many
cases the irrigation in western states was under contract with the maltster. In the mid-west
it was cheaper to grow the six-row barley because irrigation was not as widespread.29
Hops
As with barley there are different varieties of hops. Some are chosen for the
bittering agent that gives beer a particular flavor and some for their aromatic qualities.
The beer brewed at the OBC was some of the most sought after in the region and
customers gladly paid a premium for it. Good hops were an integral part of that recipe.
One particular variety of hops used by the OBC was a variety grown in Saaz, Bohemia,
29
Schwarz,
Paul.
Horsley,
Richard.
“A
Comparison
of
North
American
Two-‐Row
and
Six-‐Row
Malting
Barley.”
The
Brewers
Market
Guide
Online.
http://morebeer.com/brewingtechniques/bmg/schwarz.html
Accessed
1
June
2015.
22
which is still sought after for refreshing aromatic flavors. The relationship that the
brewery has with hops and hops growers could lead to success or ruination.
23
Chapter 3: Brief History of The Olympia Brewing Company
The Olympia Brewing Company’s history is one that is deeply rooted in the place in
which it is located. The Deschutes River at Tumwater, Washington cascades over basalt
that was laid down by ancient lava flows.30 This area had been a gathering spot and
important resource for Native Americans as well as early European settlers. Besides the
falls this portion of the Pacific Northwest was perfect for brewing because of the access
to ideal water from the artesian wells as well as its placement on the Puget Sound at a
deep-water harbor and close proximity to burgeoning railroads. The importance of the
existing landscape and resource will of course be discussed in greater detail later. Before
the passion and ingenuity could bring forth an industry, the table was set by the land and
geological history of the place.
The realization of what would become the Olympia Brewing Company is the
result of the work of many brought forth by the talent, intellect, and drive of one German
immigrant—Leopold Frederick Schmidt. Schmidt was trained as a seaman in Europe, a
profession that influenced him deeply and from which he gained scientific training and a
wanderlust that eventually brought him to the United States. Once in America he
followed a number of pursuits including carpentry, tobacco pipe manufacture, and
involvement in a musical instrument factory that produced zithers. Schmidt’s entry into
the world of brewing did not take place until 1874 when he was asked to oversee a
brewery in Montana, which led to the establishment of the Centennial Brewing Company.
Schmidt quickly developed a passion for brewing, which inspired him to delve deeply
30
Stevenson,
Shanna.
Olympia,
Tumwater,
and
Lacey:
a
pictorial
history. Virginia
Beach,
VA:
Donning
Co.
1996
P.158
24
into the chemistry and science of the industry and eventually obtain his master brewer’s
certificate at the only brewing academy in the world at the time located in Worms,
Germany.
Schmidt was in Olympia, Washington on other business when he discovered the
future site of the OBC. 31 After the water from the artesian wells was tested and found to
be very desirable for brewing he decided that he had found the location for what would
become his new enterprise and future legacy. In 1895 the location, which previously had
been a tannery was purchased and on October 1, 1896 the first beer was produced at what
was then called the Capitol Brewing Company. The brewery would soon become the
familiar Olympia Brewing Company, through which Schmidt would come to control a
significant portion of brewing in the Pacific Northwest. Along with the OBC, Schmidt
would control five other breweries in Washington, Oregon and California by 1909. The
year that this study concludes is 1916 which is the year that prohibition took effect and
two years after Leopold Schmidt passed away. Because of Leopold Schmidt’s keen
business sense the OBC would weather prohibition, afterwards continuing on to many
more decades of brewing led by his sons Peter and Adolf.32 33
31
There
is
certainly
more
to
tell
about
Leopold
Schmidt
but
this
short
biography
of
his
early
life
is
only
to
set
the
stage.
Brewery
Gems.
Biography
of
Leopold
F.
Schmidt,
Founder
of
Olympia
Beer.
Website
http://brewerygems.com/schmidt.htm
accessed
February
8,
2015
32
Stevenson,
Shanna.1996
P158
33
There
is
more
detailed
information
in
the
listed
sources
about
Leopold
Schmidt
and
The
Olympia
Brewing
Company.
This
section
is
only
meant
as
an
introduction.
25
Chapter 4: Methods
The two main goals of this study are to research and write an
environmental history of the early years of Olympia Brewing Company operations, and
apply Life Cycle Assessment methods to a more traditional historical analysis. By
combining environmental history with LCA, this research not only develops an
environmental history of great importance to the Puget Sound Region and beyond, it also
broadens the field by applying LCA to a historical topic, thus creating a new lens through
which the information gathered in environmental history may be evaluated.
The Olympia Brewing Company Archives
The primary archives I have used for this study are located in the Schmidt House
in Tumwater, the historic home of Leopold Schmidt. When the OBC was sold the
archives were brought to the house, which has been owned by the Olympia Tumwater
Foundation since 1983. At that time the archives were in a state of disarray and were in
danger of being lost. Due to the diligent work of the Olympia Tumwater Foundation
staff, the archives were organized and placed into a temperature and humidity controlled
room. Currently archivists are working on another effort to better organize and index
records in the archive, further cataloging and preserving the collection.
Even though the archives are located in a single room in the basement of a
historic landmark, they contain a wide range of period information including letters,
meeting minutes, annual reports, architectural drawings and much more. Most of the
26
collection is currently in banker’s boxes and organized topically and chronologically.
Although changes are underway, the current index is in the form of Excel tables.
While much of the material is useful to this study, I have found that the annual
reports are particularly germane because each provides a single-year snapshot of the
company’s history. Those reports include information such as the amount of raw
materials purchased, the geographic location of those materials, and the volume and
location of beer sales. More detail and support for research conclusions is found in
family letters, newspaper clippings, telegrams, and other related documents.
Historical Research Methods
In narrative-based historical research methods, the researcher applies a controlled,
rigorous, systematic, verifiable, empirical, and critical approach to information gathering
and analysis. Because reputable history draws a large distinction between the validity of
tertiary or secondary sources and primary sources, the researcher is expected to follow
leads from sources where others have already offered their own structure and
interpretation, to original sources of the time and place under investigation. Useful
primary sources may include physical evidence such as archeology, extant architectural
structures, and landscape features, as well as archival sources such as letters, period news
reports, business records, photographs, maps and plans, and telegrams. Historical method
also requires the researcher to leave a clear record of her or his study through wellwritten analytical notes, clear and accurate citations, and a comprehensive bibliography,
27
so that future researchers may follow the same trail and also double check the reliability
and validity of the researcher’s conclusions.
Life Cycle Assessment and Historic Data
A crucial part of any environmental history is the interpretation of past events and
the description of change over time. The LCA part of this study plays a very important
role, in that it takes the information that I have gathered and places it into a quantitative
context. Despite its usefulness, this study is not meant to be a stand-alone LCA, because
several important parts critical to the overall interpretation of the narrative do not
perfectly link to an LCA approach.
That reality led me to adopt a hybrid approach to LCA. The way in which the two
methods of environmental history and LCA were incorporated was by finding places
within environmental history that could be informed by methods of LCA. LCA was used
to help form the environmental history by setting a different type of framework that is not
normally used. It was also necessary to use a hybrid approach because when applying the
method to historical information, I found that most LCA software incorporates databases
inappropriate to a historical analysis, because they were created to be applied to complete
contemporary information sources. The direct application of that modern software would
also be inaccurate because of changes in technology and science that have taken place
over the last hundred years. A simple example of this problem is that modern
transportation data includes diesel-powered trains and trucks and not coal-powered trains
and steamships. Agriculture has also changed significantly since Leopold Schmidt’s
28
time. All of the data that I have looked at includes environmental impacts from synthetic
pesticides and fertilizers that were not in widespread use until after World War II.
Nevertheless, it is possible and very useful to use the basic LCA approach as part of an
environmental history as long as the historical data can be analyzed applying general
LCA guidelines.
Procedural Guidance
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency provides useful guidelines on
conducting LCA that are applicable to many different types of studies and do not rely
upon any particular software or database.34 This document, which is available for
download on the Internet, provides guidance about LCA basics as well as recommended
procedures and discussion. As I conducted this study I have used this document to focus
and apply the work to the appropriate context. According to the EPA there are four
phases of an LCA.35
1. Goal Definition and Scoping: Define and describe the product, process or
activity. Establish the context in which the assessment is to be made and
identify the boundaries and environmental effects to be reviewed for
assessment.
34
United
States
Environmental
Protection
Agency
(“Life-‐Cycle
Assessment
|
Sustainability
Analytics
|
Research
|
US
EPA”)
2006
35
United
States
Environmental
Protection
Agency
(2006)
pg.2
29
2. Inventory Analysis: Identify and quantify energy, water and materials
usage and environmental releases (e.g., air emissions solid waste disposal,
waste water discharges).
3. Impact assessment: Assess the potential human and ecological effects of
energy, water, and material usage and the environmental releases
identified in the inventory analysis.
4. Interpretation: Evaluate the results of the inventory analysis and impact
assessment to select the preferred product, process or service with a clear
understanding of the uncertainty and the assumptions used to generate the
results.
Figure 5. Phases of LCA36
36
http://www.lcafood.dk/lca/lca.htm
30
Those guidelines form the basis of how I apply LCA to the environmental history
of the OBC.
Goal Definition and Scoping
This phase of an LCA study sets the course for the rest of the research. This part
of the study defines the boundaries and ensures that superfluous or unaccounted for
variables do not disrupt or hinder the study. Decisions made during the goal definition
and scoping phase effect both the relevance of the results as well as the way in which the
study will be conducted.37 The goal and scoping of this study was carefully designed, in
keeping with the type of evidence available.
For the environmental history of the OBC the goal is to inform the reader about
far-reaching and often overlooked impacts. Three types of information categories were
needed and sought out in the archives and other sources used in this study. 1)
Information pertaining to the raw materials used in the brewing process in the first part of
the cycle was studied. 2) The distance and location of raw material and distribution sites
was also analyzed as a part of the LCA method. 3) Finally, important consideration was
given to the types of waste or reuses of resources that were part of the life cycle. By
further breaking down these three categories the scope of the study becomes clear.
37
United
States
Environmental
Protection
Agency.
2006Pg.7
31
Functional Unit
In this study the functional unit is one barrel of beer during a particular cycle of
brewing. In order to get to the small scale of one barrel I needed to examine an entire
month of brewing during selected years. The months and years used were chosen with
consideration of the season, since there is a lot of seasonal variation in brewing. This unit
works best because it most closely coincides with primary documents and how records
were originally kept by the OBC. Many studies of modern breweries are able to use one
bottle of beer as their functional unit but that was not applicable to my study, because I
am concerned with a twenty-year time span instead of a fixed moment in time and
because so much of the beer produced in this period was never sold by the bottle.
Because some of the information in my timeframe were more complete than others this
method also allowed me fill gaps by to extrapolating information from other months or
adjacent years to complete a picture of the entire time frame. Using this approach I was
able to study how the OBC changed as it grew in relation to land use, transportation
needs, and waste products.
Raw Materials
The raw materials that were considered for this study are the agricultural and
natural resources that went into the brewing process. While there are other materials
involved such as bricks, stationary, bottle caps and many others, I set the boundaries of
the study as such due to the scope and time constraints. Each raw material was also
studied based on available information about quantities, places of origin, and agricultural
32
acreage. Those data plus an estimate of crop yield per acre from other evidence found in
primary correspondence and other sources provided the amount of land used to grow
these crops. This raw material analysis is the first part of the historical LCA that I have
developed. 38
k *i-',i*
iin-"
'i;t
"
i'r
',,r
14
):;,*,yqtaSil;.i.aE
,.;n*l),:i3-
$;.'fr
.
#;tnu;r*";/,
-{fir"!
ra i r
-;l i.l, f i.t""t.i":
u
t.'
T
.s- r,ik;
+r: "'dr'l
n
n
I
1l)$St-it i
n
:;
!r
'l
i;;
r
flr3*tr#
q.4_(1..
l'r
'*-1.*Ji.J
3"ii?#;.lqi
r - ! ,.i
1
r.i
.
r,t ' ,..1L. 1,
tt''' 'l .
'-'i-"r
-.i. r u*{. ",!-r'
f,-t 1 ,'
S;:ni},
il]"*s4r'
$44S{r
,,'v
ii*r-x:,
"+
E't*irJ
lY
i:r'
i.
'
"f
i.i.,'l t.,
,r,"1
t.;*..,1-ri.r
.! r"! -! If s
;*'{}
, ,, i .': : r i.r. .'1
4 1i ?k:*r ar:l-a.'
n
.J;i:""r',
:1
o
1r
, .i;rt,
r .L.,. ... l
l.a,'-.Il
-'"{-; liu, .
,
]
i;,i.)i,ii
rr
rr.n*;l
:i."1
i,-i*9 :..it,,:
"&_ . f L)\l
:i. !i!t:f"}
if
"l
{ \j'r,l ,r'
*":
1i ':
ci.+
.:i\q
rlb
#Jr"$.
!
o\;i ii:+
;j i,lpT
i-::rr"a.1t3:
r.; i .,{,...,i.'r,i
"
!-1.jii"l .rr;-
',i'l;'
;1"i
$
i.
'; .
- n4aa
.
.
t ' : ,'
'
.
'5..
.
.
13
i'}$ti
d:i,S't:;{i
i .r
S."; .': ;*"
".i.
f,i
1l
i'i
L
.':
.
.
"
ua.l
-)r/
ri
wffiffi,ffil$i
38
Barley
Grain
=
48
lbs.
I
1,
,
.,",r:.J fif;""Jdi
i-l . "i.i,, ,.1
s
:.j
. :. \tlj
, '!
"'
i
.
I :: i.'
1
t.l. {.};r+i
:'.!
ren*:i'i;j. {r i.'
l:}
:
J
i:*
,.':
j:jdi:13'l?
}' $:' i::lli.'r'l;,:.1 i.i i':r!r'J i:U 1'i*
ii r al ",r rj;:''r1",
;1 ,,1..:r.,;:
lig" ,r'rr,iilt*jlr;t1} fii*I"i.*i:L
r, .,4?.*s#
Barley
Malt
=
34
lbs.
Malt
is
sprouted
and
dried
barley.
AY".:f+ii1* $$r$ber *t p*{i}xss 04 l?*ps '$s *!e*.h ?:l,-fyttX sf
i?ti:.lr' 'r-,!.l.ltrAi:a{ituf$dt,. r *.... *. r r 4r r i r.' r r r I i,...0.?4$$
].t:S.
*r*rti**t
33
Figure 6. Sample list of raw materials for beer
Transportation
The next step in the life cycle of the OBC is the transportation that took place in
both bringing the raw materials to the breweries as well as bringing the product to the
consumers. There is evidence of where the raw materials came from in most years since
the type of malt and hops used, often were named for their places of origin. There are
also lists of accounts naming locations to which beer was distributed. This information
coupled with information about the transportation modes of the time can provide
34
evidence of the transportation methods and networks that were needed.
Figure 7. Examples of Accounts Showing Distribution
Waste Products and Recyclables
The waste products of this LCA was the most difficult to quantify. There are
several bits of information that assisted in fleshing out this part of the study. For
example, there are numerous references to the cost of buying back empty bottles, freight
to bring them back and machines used to wash them. This reusing of bottles is of great
35
importance when considering the waste products of the OBC. The historical record also
indicates that spent grains from the brewing process were supplied to farmers as feed for
livestock. Along with these examples of reuse there are also concerns about water
pollution and solid waste disposal that, while not really quantifiable because those
records weren’t kept, are definitely worth discussing especially if some estimate can be
gathered from the historical record. It was important to bring the LCA study to the
conclusion of the final waste products in order to see the bigger picture.
After reviewing the information that is available I found that the study focus that
would be most meaningful for the quantitative portion of this study would be on the
barley and hops used to brew the beer. Because it is a lengthier case study there were
two years selected for examining the brewing for an entire month. For this portion of the
study the month of October in the years 1900 and 1910 was chosen. This allowed me to
examine an entire month of brewing to assist in determining the total acres used during
that time. It was necessary to do this in order to determine that the batches chosen for a
barrel analysis would be representative of the batches brewed at the time. When focusing
the results down to one barrel of beer, I was able to choose seven different batches
brewed in the years of 1900, 1903, 1907 and 1910. During these years there were two
different types of beer brewed, a lager and a bock. The differences between lager and
bock beer allowed me to look at another comparison based on style of beer brewed.
36
Chapter 5: Results
The information collected for the study of the origins and land use impact of
barley and hops production yielded interesting results. One important factor in
considering the results of this study is that the quantifiable results are formulated by using
the primary source of brew records and correspondence. In conducting this study of
historical information I tried to use evidence that was as close to the years of the
information in the brew records as possible. Because of this, the information concerning
calculations, such as yield per-acre, are based on evidence from the time period of this
study. Working with this evidence was particularly rewarding because much of the
information was hand written and provided a more personal connection to the events that
took place more than a hundred years ago.
Case study for barley October 1900 compared to October 1910
By examining the places from where malt was purchased during the month of
October for the years of 1900 and 1910, I was able to gain concise information about the
land use required to brew beer during those two short periods. As a result of this study I
was able to determine where the malt was manufactured based on correspondence from
the period and other sources that reference places and names listed in the brew records.
Because the malting process creates a lighter product than the original barley, it was
necessary to develop a reasonable conversion formula. The respective weights are
important when considering the actual dollar and resource costs of travel to the OBC.
37
Total Malt
October
Pounds
Used
Total Malt
1900
86571
October 1910
Pounds Used
166580
Table 1 Total amount of malt used in 1900 compared to 1910.39
The total amount of malt used represents the amount that was used during the
entire month, showing a significant increase over the ten-year period. The increase of
more than eighty thousand pounds of malt used was necessary as the brewing operation
continued to expand and become more efficient in an effort to keep pace with the
growing demand. While table I illustrates this overall expansion, it does not place the
products used in brewing into a geographic location.
Location of Malt Manufacture
During the years chosen for this study the malt came from two regions and from
three different maltsters.40 The two regions, from where the OBC obtained barley
converted to malt, were California and southern Wisconsin. All of the malt used from
California was purchased from San Francisco, most likely from the Bauer Schweitzer
malt company. The malt from Wisconsin came from two different locations, the LadishStoppenbach Company in Jefferson Junction and Rubicon Malting and Grain Company
in Rubicon. The place names are referenced in the brew records and were confirmed by
examining correspondences and brewing journals from the historical time period. I made
39
The
amount
of
malt
used
during
these
years
was
gathered
by
adding
amounts
recorded
in
the
Brewery
record
books.
Each
line
item
represented
a
particular
brewing
session.
These
Brew
Records
are
located
at
the
Schmidt
House
or
“Three
Meter”
and
are
in
the
control
of
The
Olympia
Tumwater
Foundation.
40
Maltster
is
a
term
for
malt
manufacturing
that
I
came
across
a
few
times
in
the
historical
records.
38
the assumption that the barley used for malt manufacture would have come from areas
nearby where the malt originated.41
42
Figure 8. Letterhead from Bauer Schweitzer Hop & Malt Company
Figure 9. Letterhead from The Ladish-Stoppenbach Co43
41
Historical
maps
later
used
show
where
barley
was
grown
which
is
clustered
around
the
places
mentioned.
42
This
letter
from
the
Bauer
Schweitzer
Hop
and
Malt
Company
was
written
to
the
OBC
about
moving
operations
after
the
Malt
House
was
damaged
by
fire.
The
company
had
been
in
existence
since
the
1870’s.
Olympia
Brewing
Company
General
Files
Subject
Files
A
–
Z,
1900-‐1903,
Box
1
43
This
letter
from
the
Ladish-‐Stoppenbach
Co.
concerns
a
shipment
that
was
low.
This
letter
is
from
1913
but
Jefferson
Junction
is
mentioned
throughout
the
years
studied.
There
are
a
couple
of
changes
in
the
names
of
the
title
of
the
company
but
Stoppenbach
is
consistent.
Olympia
Brewing
Company
General
Files
Subject
Files
A
–
Z,
1900-‐1903,
Box
1
39
Figure 10. From The Index of The American Brewer's Review44 45
Malt to Barley Conversion
One factor to consider in assessing the land use associated with the malt that was
used is the fact that a bushel of barley does not weigh the same as a bushel of malt. A
bushel of malt weighs 33 or 34 pounds, depending on whether or not it is cleaned or
uncleaned, and a bushel of barley weighs 48 pounds. However, bushel weight should not
be used to determine the malt to barley conversion because some of the “Malt Increase”
is turned into profits for the maltster.46 Determining the conversion from barley to malt
can be cumbersome because of the many variables to be considered in the calculation.
The type of barley, the moisture content and even the weather during the growing season
can affect the conversion rate. Because of the difficulty in determining all of these
ancillary factors on historical information across many regions it was necessary to
determine a simple conversion that could work for all of the areas studied. After
44
th
Peter
Kreutz
of
the
Rubicon
Malting
and
Grain
Co.
attended
an
open-‐air
concert
on
August
6
1902
at
the
Duetscher
Club
for
an
event
hosted
by
The
Milwaukee
Malting
Co.
American
Brewer’s
Review,
index,
Volume
16.
1902
Pg.
75
Original
from
the
University
of
California
Digitized
Mar
21,
2013
45
In
1905
Leopold
Schmidt
visited
malt
houses
in
Rubicon
and
Milwaukee,
letters
from
his
trip
exist
in
the
archives.
46
One
bushel
of
barley
weight
is
per
the
USDA.
This
was
also
true
in
1901.
American
Handy
Book
of
the
Brewing,
Malting
and
Auxiliary
Trades:
A
Book
of
Ready
Reference
for
Persons
Connected
with
Brewing,
Malting
and
Auxiliary
Trades
...Editors
Robert
Wahl,
Max
Henius
Edition
2editors,
1901
the
University
of
Wisconsin
-‐
Madison
Jun
19,
2009
1266
pages
40
searching historical records I decided to use an average decrease of 20% from barley to
malt. The number that I finally settled on was a result of a 1912 court case where it was
stated, “100 pounds of barley yields 80 pounds of malt.47 48 The decrease in weight from
barley to malt makes it possible to determine the amount of barley that was used, because
the records clearly indicate the amount of malt purchased.
Pounds
Malt
1900
Pounds
Barley
Jefferson Malt
44,209
55,261.25
California Malt
42,362
52,952.5
Table 2 Increase from malt to barley in 1900
1910
Pounds Malt
Pounds Barley
Jefferson
64,515
80,643.75
Rubicon
77,715
97,143.75
California
24,350
30,437.5
Table 3 Increase from malt to barley in 1910.
47
The
increase
in
barley
from
malt
is
derived
from
a
court
case
in
1912
where
the
shipper
was
buying
at
barley
prices
and
selling
at
malt
prices.
There
a
many
variations
on
what
percent
of
barley
weight
is
lost
in
malting
but
this
seems
to
be
a
good
middle
point.
Traffic
World,
Volume
9
Traffic
Service
Corporation.
1912
University
of
Minnesota
Aug
18,
2014
48
A
former
brew
master
of
the
Olympia
Brewing
Company
also
stated
this
number
to
be
a
good
estimate.
41
Land Use Per Acre
In order to make a statement about the land use that was necessary to grow the
barley that made the malt, the yield per acre of barley crop must be known. This
information is available in The Yearbook of The Department of Agriculture. Fortunately,
in the case of barley, I was able to use yield information as it pertains to the particular
years of this study. According to the yearbook the bushel yield per acre in 1900 was 25.5
for Wisconsin (Jefferson) and 16.7 for California.49 In 1910 the yields were 25.9 for
Wisconsin (Jefferson and Rubicon) and 31 for California.50 By dividing the total pounds
of barley used by the 48-pound bushel weight that was previously discussed the total
amount of bushels used can be found. The amount of acres needed to grow the barley in
the times and places of the study were found by dividing the total bushels by the yield per
acre. While it may not be possible to determine on which farms the barley was grown it
is an accomplishment to narrow the land use to a quantifiable number of acres in a
particular region on the country.
Acres Used
Jefferson
Rubicon
California
1900
1910
45.14
64.86
N/A
78.14
66.05
2.09
Table 4 Acres used to grow barley for beer brewed in October 1900 compared to October 1910.
49
U.S.
Department
of
Agriculture,
National
Agricultural
Library,
Yearbook
of
the
United
States
Department
of
Agriculture
1906.
Volume
1907
U.S.
G.P.O
Pg.
572
50
U.S.
Department
of
Agriculture,
National
Agricultural
Library,
Yearbook
of
the
United
Stated
Department
of
Agriculture
1910.
Volume
1911
U.S.
G.P.O
Pg.
537
42
Distance Barley Traveled
When considering the environmental impact of the barley that was used in the
brewing for the months of this study, it is crucial to take into account the distance the
converted barley traveled to the brewery. Ideally it would be best to use the particular
routs and means of travel to do this calculation, narrowing the distance to one or two
options. Due to the uncertainty involved in which routes were chosen and how the
product was moved during the time period I have chosen for now to use linear distances
from the place of origin (malt manufacture) to the brewery. The furthest distance away
from Tumwater, in the case of malt, was Rubicon, Wisconsin, while California is
considerably closer. Most likely during the first part of the twentieth century the malt
would have moved across the country in rail cars. I have determined that during that time
boxcars could carry 40 tons of freight (information that will be useful in later study).51
For now it can reasonably be assumed that shipping from further distances required more
energy, in this case coal. Considering the distance that the raw materials travel is
important when assessing the land use and environmental impact of any product.
51
The
Railway
Age,
Volume
31
Published
1901,Original
from
the
New
York
Public
Library.
Digitized
Jan
8,
2010
Pg.
138
43
Location
Linear distance to Tumwater in
miles
Jefferson
Junction, WI
1,679.24
Rubicon, WI
1,687.37
San Francisco,
CA
637.25
Table 5 linear distances from source of malt to Tumwater Washington.
Case Study for Hops October 1903 compared to October 1910.
Hops are another of the main ingredients required for the brewing of beer and
have one of the largest impacts on land use. Ideally I would have liked to compare hops
along with barley for the same years. Unfortunately the brew record for hops in 1900
does not list the locations. The next year that I was able to find where the source of the
hop crop was listed was 1903. I still used the month of October to compare the two years
due to the seasonal variability of the beer recipe and what crops were available. This
comparison still demonstrates change in where the hops were grown as the OBC
prospered. The change in the places where the hops were grown is rather dramatic in just
the few years from 1903 to 1910. This change represents a shift in agriculture that
followed the demand.
44
Location of Hops Growing Regions
In the first year of the study the hops were all grown outside of Washington State
and in the later years I found that most hops were grown in the same region as the
brewery. For the hops that were purchased from California I used San Francisco as the
place of origin because the same company that produced malt, Bauer Schweitzer, also
provided hops. For Oregon there is evidence that the hops was bought from a broker in
Salem. The place names that were listed in Washington are towns that are still in
existence and the land around them is known for historically producing hops. The most
far-flung location of Saaz Bohemia is very well known for producing high quality
desirable hops even today. The locations used to grow hops for the OBC represent a shift
in agriculture as the demand grew in the Pacific Northwest.
Figure 11. Letterhead from Kola Neis, a Hops Broker in Salem, Oregon52
52
This
Correspondence
from
a
hops
broker
is
discussing
a
legal
matter
concerning
by
laws.
Olympia
Brewing
Company,
General
Files,
Subject
Files
Correspondence,
Miscellaneous
1890-‐1917
Box
1
45
Figure 12. Letterhead from Epstein Mendl and Grube Purveyors of Choice Bohemian Hops53
Amount of Hops Used
The total amount of hops from each location for October of each year was
calculated from the brew records. In the case of 1903 the amounts were listed by origin
for each brew, of which there were several each day. For 1910 the list is a simple tally of
inventory received and used, which was separated by location. In October 1903 the most
hops were grown in Oregon, followed by Bohemia and California. The case is different
in 1910 when the largest amount of hops were grown in Washington State followed by
Oregon, California then Bohemia.
53
This
Correspondence
is
concerns
a
visit
of
Mr.
Adolphus
Kaufmann
to
Tumwater
for
sales.
The
emblem
of
the
emperor
of
Austria
is
gold
and
still
shines.
Olympia
Brewing
Company
General
Files
Subject
Files
A
–
Z,1900-‐1903
Box
1
46
1903
Pounds of Hops
Salem, OR
1,668
San Francisco,
CA
782
Saaz, Bohemia
471
Total
2,921
Table 6 Hops used by location in October 1903.
1910
Pounds of Hops
Salem, OR
741
Orting, WA
180
Chehalis, WA
1,230
Saaz, Bohemia
422
San Francisco,
CA
611
Total
3,184
Table 7 Hops used by location in October 1910.
Hops Land Use Per Acre
Finding a yield per acre value for hops was a little more difficult than it was for barley.
Because, unlike with barley, I was unable to find yield per acre values for hops from each
specific year, I needed to rely upon a 10-year average found in a crop report from
47
1907.54 Fortunately the states that were listed were Oregon, Washington and California.
The reported values were Oregon at 1000 pounds per acre, Washington at 1300 pounds
per acre and California at 1200 pounds per acre. For Bohemia the yield per acre was
found in The International Brewers Journal to be 500 pounds per acre but of exceptional
quality.55 Because hops crops experience drastic gains and declines it would be best to
know the yield each year by state specifically, but the averages are a good estimation.
These yield per acre values were used to determine the land use impact in terms of area
for the hops used during the years of the study.
1903
Salem, OR
San Francisco,
CA
Acres Used
1.66
1.30
Saaz, Bohemia
0.39
Total
3.36
Table 8 Acres used to grow hops in October 1903.
54
United
States.
Dept.
of
Agriculture.
Bureau
of
Statistics.
Crop
Reporter
...,
Volumes
8-‐10
U.S.
Government
Printing
Office,
1906.
University
of
Chicago,
Digitized
Jun
17,
2011
Pg.
77
55
International
Brewers'
Journal,
Volume
44.
W.
Reed.
1908
the
University
of
California,
Digitized
Apr
24,
2013
Pg.497
In
these
journals
weights
are
often
given
in
cwt.
which
means
hundredweight,
just
the
number
plus
100.
48
1910
Acres Used
Salem, OR
0.74
Orting, WA
0.13
Chehalis, WA
0.94
Saaz, Bohemia
0.70
San Francisco,
CA
0.50
Total
3.03
Table 9 Acres used to grow hops in October 1910.
Distance Hops Traveled
As with barley it is very important to consider the distance that the hops needed to
travel to the brewery in order to more comprehensively understand the environmental
impact of the raw materials used. As with barley the hops most likely traveled to the
brewery by train, with the exception of the crop of Bohemian hops, which would have
made a long steamship voyage. If the information concerning resources and routes used
to make these journeys could be found it would further improve the accuracy of this
study. For the time being I have used the linear path along the ground to determine
distances.
49
Column1
Linear Ground
Distance in Miles
Salem, OR
143.36
Orting, WA
33.38
Chehalis, WA
24.8
Saaz, Bohemia
5242.28
San Francisco,
CA
636.59
Table 10 Distance from source to Tumwater, WA.
Land Use Per Barrel
While it is of great use to study the origin and land use impact of the raw
materials over an expanse of time, it is also critical for use in a life cycle assessment that
the functional unit be paired down to what would go out to the consumer. It would have
been extremely difficult to start with this small unit without first understanding the larger
picture of the supply chain as it existed in the historical context. So far I have examined
he land use of the beer in terms of the yield per acre that I have found for the times of the
study over an entire month of brewing. In order to examine the land use of the OBC and
how it changed over time, I calculated the land use of one single barrel of beer. Using
that information, along with information in the annual reports of the company, the land
use was scaled to something that is more tangible.
50
By using the annual report information that is available I was able to identify the
average amount of raw material that was used per barrel.
Figure 13. Barrel Breakdown of Raw Materials Used in 190256
For some years the yield in barrels for each batch appears in the ledger, but
unfortunately it is not for other years. For this reason I used this average barrel
breakdown from 1902 in order to come to a good estimate for how many barrels were
brewed in each batch for the years that do not explicitly show that yield. I chose this
breakdown from the annual report of the following year because it is the first year during
the period of study that calculated a barrel in this way. Taking the amount of hops and
malt for batches in 1900, for example, I came to the estimate of about fifty barrels per
batch. Luckily there are a few batches in that year (1900) with the actual barrel yield and
my results were close enough so that I am confident this is a good method of estimation.
I used this method of estimation only when the batch that I looked at did not have a yield
in barrels listed.
56
Olympia
Tumwater
Foundation.
Olympia
Brewing
Company,
Corporate
Records,
Reports,
Annual
Reports,
Olympia
Brewing
Company
1900-‐1915
Box3
51
Although there was a good deal of bottling at the time, a barrel is the easiest way
to scale the brewing operation down to a single unit. While one barrel of beer is more
beer than any one person could drink within a reasonable amount of time (about 331
bottles),57 it is the amount that was most commonly sold and tracked in the records. Also
a large portion of beer in those days was consumed in saloons and not purchased as
individual bottles. Bottling was done in the most cases in order to better preserve the
beer for shipping.
October 1st 1900
Pounds Malt
Pounds
Barley
Bushels Barley
Acres
Used
Per
Batch
Jefferson Junction
900
1125
23.43
0.91
California
900
1125
23.43
1.40
Pounds Hops
California
0
35
0.029
Total Acres
Used For Batch
Per Barrel
Acres Used
2.35
0.047
Table 11 Lager Brewed on 1900.
57
Dodge,
John
“Old
Olympia
Beer
Brewhouse
Remains
Object
of
Fascination”
The
Olympian.
November
24th
2013
52
October 1st 1903
Pounds Malt
Jefferson Junction
California
Pounds Barley
Acres
Used
Per
Batch
Bushels
Barley
1750
2187.5
45.57
1.64
100
125
2.60
0.10
Pounds Hops
Oregon
0
0
0
California
21
0.017
Bohemia
18
0.03
Total Acres
Used For
Batch
1.79
Per Barrel
Acres Used
0.035
Table 12 Bock Brewed in 1903
October 3rd 1903
Jefferson Junction
California
Pounds Malt
Pounds Barley
Acres
Used
Per
Batch
Bushels
Barley
1700
2125
44.27
1.59
100
125
2.60
0.10
Pounds Hops
0
Oregon
25
0.025
California
15
0.012
Total Acres
Used
1.737
Per Barrel
Acres Used
0.034
53
Table 13 Lager Brewed in 1903.
In an effort to broaden the results for acres used in the production of barley and
hops I have added two batches brewed in 1903 and 1907 along with the previous study of
1900 and 1910. The reasoning for this is that it allows for the study of more points along
the timeline of this analysis. It also provided the opportunity to compare the differences
between the bock and lager beers that were brewed at that time. Because of this I added
in a couple of malt manufacturers previously unmentioned. The first new malt is called
Northwestern, which was most likely made from barley grown in Washington and Idaho,
on what is known as the Palouse region.58 The other source of malt in 1907 and 1910
was the Rahr sons company of Manitowoc Wisconsin.59 By adding these years I was
able to make the study of land use per barrel more meaningful.
58
I
came
to
this
conclusion
based
on
a
conversation
with
Paul
Knight
who
was
the
brew
master
for
the
Olympia
Brewing
Co.
from
1974
until
a
few
years
before
the
end
of
the
company.
It
is
important
to
note
that
there
was
the
Northwestern
Malt
and
Grain
Co.
in
Chicago
during
that
time.
Because
of
the
conversation,
and
that
Chicago
was
further
east
than
where
most
barley
was
grown,
I
based
the
calculations
for
Northwestern
malt
on
Washington
yields.
59
United
States
Brewers
Foundation,
Proceedings
of
the
Annual
Convention,
Volumes
45-‐47,
United
States
Brewers'
Association
1907.
The
William
Rahr
sons
Co
won
the
grand
prize
for
beer
in
1906.
54
October 1st 1907
Pounds Malt
Jefferson Junction
10,310
Pounds Barley
12,887.5
Bushels
Barley
268.48
Pounds Hops
Acres
Used Per
Batch
10.36
0
Oregon
56
0.056
Chehalis
73
0.056
Bohemia
75
0.125
Total
Acres Used
10.60
Per Batch
Acres Used
(292)
0.036
Table 14 Bock Brewed in 1907
October 2nd
1907
Pounds Malt
Pounds Barley
Acres
Used Per
Batch
Bushels
Barley
Northwestern
4,800
6,000
125
4.31
Rubicon
5,700
7,125
148.43
5.73
Pounds Hops
0
Oregon
182
0.18
Puyallup
22
0.016
Total Acres
Used
10.24
Per Barrel
Acres Used
(300)
0.034
Table 15. Lager Brewed in 1907
55
October 4th 1910
Pounds Malt
Jefferson Junction
12980
Pounds Barley
16225
Bushels
Barley
338.02
Pounds Hops
Orting
Acres
Used Per
Batch
13.05
0
70
0.053
California
110
0.091
Bohemia
20
0.033
Total
Acres
Used
13.23
Per Barrel
Acres
Used
(291)
0.045
Table 16 Bock Brewed in 1910.
56
October 2nd 1910
Pounds Malt
Pounds Barley
Bushels
Barley
Acres
Used Per
Batch
Rubicon
8,635
10,793.75
224.86
8.68
California
2,435
3,043.75
63.41
2.04
Pounds Hops
0
Oregon
60
0.06
Chehalis
135
0.10
Total
Acres
Used
10.89
Per Barrel
Acres
Used
(291)
0.037
Table 17 Lager Brewed in 1910.
57
Chapter 6: Discussion
The results of this study yielded some findings that were to be expected and some
that were a little surprising. One of the expected results was that, as the OBC grew in
size the acres used naturally increased. This was the case for barley when comparing the
month of October in the years 1900 and 1910. One surprising result is that the acreage
used to grow the hops during those years was found to have slightly decreased. When
looking at the acreage consumption per barrel what is striking is the lack of fluctuation.
The variation in per barrel acres used only fluctuated from 0.034 to 0.47 of an acre. The
consistencies and variation found in this study are likely the result of a combination of
business practices, changes in agriculture and economies of scale.
Barley and The Olympia Brewing Company
While some barley was directly grown for the OBC for several years during the
period of study, those experiments met with a mixed record of success. One of the most
important factors in the choosing of where barley was grown was the variety of barley
that was grown in each particular region. Another factor that led to barley being
extracted from a particular area was the density of barley crops being produced in that
region. Barley itself is not useful for brewing until it has undergone the malting process,
which was and remains a labor-intensive industrial undertaking. Transportation also
would have played a major role in where barley was sourced. Another important factor
to consider is the professional relationships that existed between the brewer and the
producers of malted barley. The soil, which produced the barley that produced the beer
58
brewed by the OBC, is as much of a subject of cultural forces as it is of nutrients, sun and
rain.
Density of Barley Farming
While Barley farming was possible in many areas of the country it is important to
consider where the highest concentration of barley farming would have occurred. The
reason for this is that, like brewing, the malting process depends upon a centralized
location where the crop can be gathered and malted. Like many other forms of
manufacturing industry during this time period, malting went through changes and
advancements. The improvements that were made, such as mechanization of laborious
tasks, gave the maltsters the ability to process more barley into malt. This is an example
of how advancements in industry can create the ability to use more material and, in turn,
create a larger market for that material.
Barley and malt manufacturing for the OBC took place over a very large portion
of the United States during the entire time period that was studied. As early as 1899,
1900 and 1901 the barley for the malt used was grown in Wisconsin and California.
What does change over the time period studied is that while staying mostly in the same
regions malt production begins to take place at different sites. In 1910 malt is being
produced in Rubicon as well as Jefferson County, Wisconsin. This is a reflection of both
the growing demand for barley and malt from the OBC and many other breweries
throughout the nation, as well as the great increase in the area of land being used to grow
the crop.
59
Figure 12. Map Showing Areas of Barley Production in 1899
Figure 13. Map Showing Expansion of Barley Production in 1909
This explosion in the cultivation of barley created many more opportunities to purchase
barley and malting operations also grew rapidly. Still, most of the barley used in brewing
60
came from the mid-west and southeast Wisconsin in particular. One of the most
important factors in the places that produced the barley and malt for the brewery was the
density of barley farming that took place in the region.
Even with these basic consistencies there were a few places of variation. One
place where malt was purchased for a brief time was Manhattan, Montana, particularly in
1904. This was a venture by wealthy businessmen from New York to farm Gallatin
Valley and produce high quality malt. While there was a significant market for the
product, the land available to grow barley there was not as plentiful, and consequently
most of the malt continued to be shipped from the Midwest. Other places where the malt
that was used for brewing was purchased were Red Wing and Shakopee, Minnesota.
These places became hubs for malt manufacture later in the study period as barley
cultivation continued to expand westward into Minnesota, making Minneapolis and St.
Paul, Minnesota, more competitive because of their access to an extensive rail network.
61
In addition to the expansion of the cultivation of barley as a factor in determining
where the OBC malt originated, the availability of transportation to get the product to the
brewery also played and important role. This proximity to rail transportation was one of
the main factors that led to the consistency of the places from where malt was purchased.
When the company was first getting started the supply lines that brought the raw
materials to the brewery already existed and these same routs were likely used as long as
the railroads were used. It is worth mentioning again that Leopold Schmidt was well
traveled and successfully ran a brewery previously and would have been knowledgeable
about the logistics of running the business.
Figure 14. Railroads 1898
62
When transportation is considered, it is also evident that the places chosen to buy malt
were advantageous from the beginning. While the railroad system grew significantly
over the years, the major lines that were needed existed the entire time. The additional
construction of spur lines were generally built in order to better accommodate product
shipping.60 In the case of barley consistency and security were gained by linking the
source of the supply chain to an area where growing and production would only expand.
One of the most interesting observations that can be made about this analysis is
that it tells a story of consistency in a time and place of dynamic change. The
consistency in the beer produced by the OBC is a result of the careful attention given to
the ingredients from which it was made. With few exceptions the barley that was used
for brewing was grown within the same regions over the entire time period.
Hops and the Olympia Brewing Company
Hops production differed from barley because the places where the crops were
grown followed the growth of brewing. During the years of 1900 and 1903, much of the
company’s hops were grown further away in areas where the yields were not as good.
But during the years of 1907 and 1910 they were grown to a large extent in Washington
State and were cultivated in areas close to the brewery. Those lower transportation costs
and increased yields helped the company’s bottom line and led to a more efficient use of
resources. The hops that were grown in Bohemia were a special case and were likely
60
Olympia
Tumwater
Foundation.
Annual
Report
1906,Olympia
Brewing
Company,
Corporate
Records,
Reports,
Annual
Reports,
Olympia
Brewing
Company
1900-‐1915
Box3
63
chosen for their well-known aromatic character. Having good land nearby that produced
a lot of quality hops helped produce quality beer and helped reduce the land use impact.
Completing The Cycle
Barley and hops are crops that are of critical importance in brewing beer but it is
important when attempting a life cycle analysis that the other ingredients and
environmental impacts are also identified. In the case of the OBC rice and corn were
used in conjunction with the malt to create a certain taste and lower cost. The water used
would have also played an important role both for use in beer and powering the brewery.
The transportation systems that supplied the raw materials and distributed the products
needs to be better understood. Finally, the waste that was created could be quantified in
some way. In an effort to understand the land use impact this study goes a long way, but
in order to complete a more encompassing life cycle analysis more information would be
needed.
64
Chapter 7: Conclusion
The goals of this research were to research the environmental history of the
Olympia Brewing Company and to explore the ways in which Life Cycle Assessment
could be used in environmental history research. Through the use of archival and
historical research an avenue of exploration into the environmental history of the OBC
was established. By examining the brew records, brew house logs, and annual reports the
information was gathered to form a study of the land use that was needed to grow the
barley and hops used to make beer in the early 20th century. This research forms the
beginning of a full LCA of the early years of the OBC and provides proof of the concept
for the practice of using the method in an environmental history.
Environmental history is at the core of this study and was present from its
inception. Early in my research I did not find any evidence of environmental history that
was done with a brewery as a subject. Also there was not significant research on
environmental history that attempted to use a local industry in an attempt to flesh out its
environmental reach far beyond the actual site of that industry. The Olympia Brewing
Company is a fascinating subject that justifies as much research and understanding that
can be discovered.
Life Cycle Assessment is a method that can be used by environmental historians
examine the relationship between human development and the natural environment. One
of the advantages of trying to use LCA in the research of environmental history is that it
forces the historian to work within a certain framework that encompasses a big picture
view of the subject. LCA also gives the historian a way of analyzing quantifiable data
65
that may present itself through the course of research. Using environmental history in
conjunction with LCA brings together two very useful methods of understanding our
place in this world.
66
Bibliography
American Handy Book of the Brewing, Malting and Auxiliary Trades: A Book
Of Ready Reference for Persons Connected with Brewing, Malting and
Auxiliary Trades...Editors Robert Wahl, Max Henius Edition 2editors,
1901 The University of Wisconsin – Madison Jun 19, 2009 1266 pages
Brewery Gems. Biography of Leopold F. Schmidt, Founder of Olympia Beer.
Website http://brewerygems.com/schmidt.htm accessed February 8,
2015
Comandaru, I. M., Bârjoveanu, G., Peiu, N., Ene, S., & Teodosiu, C. (2012).
LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENT OF WINE: FOCUS ON WATER USE
IMPACT ASSESSMENT.
Cordella, M., Tugnolil, A., Spadoni, G., Santarelli, F., & Zangrando, T. (2008).
LCA of an Italian Lager Beer. International Journal Of Life Cycle
Assessment, 13(2), 133-139.
Cronon, W. (1991). Nature's metropolis: Chicago and the Great West. New
York: W.W. Norton.
Dresen, Boris, and Michael Jandewerth. "Integration Of Spatial Analyses Into
LCA-Calculating GHG Emissions With Geoinformation Systems."
International Journal Of Life Cycle Assessment 17.9 (2012): 10941103.
Environment Complete. Web. 26 Feb. 2015.
Dodge, John “Old Olympia Beer Brewhouse Remains Object of Fascination”
The Olympian. November 24th 2013.
Environmental analysis of beer production. (2005). International Journal of
Agricultural Resources, Governance & Ecology, 4(2), N.PAG.
Fava, J., Baer, S., & Cooper, J. (2009). Increasing Demands for Life Cycle
Assessments in North America. Journal Of Industrial Ecology, 13(4),
491,494.
Guinée, J. B., Heijungs, R., Huppes, G., Zamagni, A., Masoni, P., Buonamici,
R., &Rydberg, T. (2011). Life cycle assessment: past, present, and
future. Environmental Science & Technology, 45(1), 90 96.
Hospido , Almudena. Moreira, Theresa. Feigoo, Gumersindo. Environmental
analysis of beer Production, International Journal of Agricultural
67
Resources. Governance and Ecology, Vol 4, No.2 2005.
Hoverson, Doug. Land of Amber Waters the History of Brewing in Minnesota.
Minneapolis: U of Minnesota, 2007. Print.
Hughes, J. Donald. "Three Dimensions Of Environmental History."
Environment & History (09673407) 14.3 (2008): 319-330. Environment
Complete. Web. 19 Jan. 2015.
International Brewers' Journal, Volume 44. W. Reed. 1908 the University of
California, Digitized Apr 24, 2013 Koroneos, C., Roumbas, G., Gabari,
Z., Papagiannidou, E., & Moussiopoulos, N. (2005). Life cycle
assessment of beer production in Greece. Journal Of Cleaner
Production, 13(4), 433-439. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2003.09.010
Loiseau, Eléonore, et al. "Adapting The LCA Framework To Environmental
Assessment In Land Planning." International Journal Of Life Cycle
Assessment 18.8 (2013): 1533-1548. Environment Complete. Web. 26
Feb. 2015.
Mattila, T., Helin, T., & Antikainen, R. (2012). Land use indicators in life
Cycle assessment. International Journal Of Life Cycle Assessment,
17(3), 277286.
Mattila, T., Lehtoranta, S., Sokka, L., Melanen, M., & Nissinen, A. (2012).
Methodological Aspects of Applying Life Cycle Assessment to
Industrial Symbioses. Journal Of Industrial Ecology, 16(1), 51-60.
Mattila, T., Leskinen, P., Soimakallio, S., & Sironen, S. (2012). Uncertainty in
environmentally conscious decision making: beer or wine?.
International Journal Of Life Cycle Assessment, 17(6), 696-705.
McCarthy, Mary. On the Contrary. New York: Farrar, Straus, and Cudahy,
1961. Print.Mittelman, A. (2008). Brewing battles a history of
American beer. New York: Algora Pub.
Nash, Linda. "Furthering The Environmental Turn." Journal Of American
History 100.1 (2013): 131-135
Norris, G. A., Della Croce, F., & Jolliet, O. (2002). Energy Burdens of
Conventional Wholesale and Retail Portions of Product Life Cycles.
Journal Of Industrial Ecology, 6(2), 59-69.
Ogle, M. (2006). Ambitious brew: The story of American beer. Orlando:
68
Harcourt.
Olympia Brewing Company Archives, Olympia Tumwater Foundation.
Tumwater WA
Oosthoek, K.J.W. (2005), What is Environmental History?, www.ehresources.org/environmental_history.html. Accessed: 14 February
2008.
Opie John. “Environmental History: Pitfalls and Opportunities,”
Environmental Review 7 (1983): 8-16,
Pattara, C., Raggi, A., & Cichelli, A. (2012). Life Cycle Assessment and
Carbon Footprint in the Wine Supply-Chain. Environmental
Management, 49(6), 1247-1258.
The Railway Age, Volume 31 Published 1901,Original from the New York
Public Library. Digitized Jan 8, 2010
Satran, Joe “Craft Beer Growth Pushes Number of Breweries in U.S. Higher
Than Ever Before” The Huffington Post 12/13/2012.
Stack, Martin. “A Concise History of America’s Brewing Industry”. EH.Net
Encyclopedia, edited by Robert Whaples. July 4, 2003.
URL http://eh.net/encyclopedia/a-concise-history-of-americas-brewingStevenson, Shanna. Olympia, Tumwater, and Lacey : a pictorial history.
Virginia Beach, VA : Donning Co. 1996
Sutter, Paul S. "The World With Us: The State Of American Environmental
History." Journal Of American History 100.1 (2013): 94-119.
SZABÓ, PÉTER, and RADIM HÉDL. "Advancing The Integration Of History
And Ecology For Conservation." Conservation Biology 25.4 (2011):
680-687.
Taylor, Bron. "“It's Not All About Us”: Reflections On The State Of American
Environmental History." Journal Of American History 100.1 (2013):
140-144
Traffic World, Volume 9.Traffic Service Corporation Traffic Service
Corporation, 1912 University of Minnesota Aug 18, 2014
United States Brewers Foundation, Proceedings of the Annual Convention,
Volumes 45-47, United States Brewers' Association 1907.
69
United Stated Environmental Protection Agency, Life Cycle Assessment
(LCA) http://www.epa.gov/nrmrl/std/lca/lca.html#define Accessed Feb
2nd 2015.
United States. Dept. of Agriculture. Bureau of Statistics. Crop Reporter ...,
Volumes 8-10 U.S. Government Printing Office, 1906. University of
Chicago, Digitized Jun 17, 2011
U.S. Department of Agriculture, National Agricultural Library, Yearbook of
the United Stated Department of Agriculture 1906. Volume 1907 U.S.
G.P.O
U.S. Department of Agriculture, National Agricultural Library, Yearbook of
the United Stated Department of Agriculture 1910. Volume 1911 U.S.
G.P.O
United States Environmental Protection Agency (“Life-Cycle Assessment |
Sustainability Analytics | Research | US EPA”) 2006
White, Richard. The Organic Machine. New York: Hill and Wang, 1996. Print.
70