Page 1
Page 2
Page 3
Page 4
Page 5
Page 6
Page 7
Page 8
Page 9
Page 10
Page 11
Page 12
Page 13
Page 14
Page 15
Page 16
Page 17
Page 18
Page 19
Page 20
Page 21
Page 22
Page 23
Page 24
Page 25
Page 26
Page 27
Page 28
Page 29
Page 30
Page 31
Page 32
Page 33
Page 34
Page 35
Page 36
Page 37
Page 38
Page 39
Page 40
Page 41
Page 42
Page 43
Page 44
Page 45
Page 46
Page 47
Page 48
Page 49
Page 50
Page 51
Page 52
Page 53
Page 54
Page 55
Page 56
Page 57
Page 58
Page 59
Page 60
Page 61
Page 62
Page 63
Page 64
Page 65
Page 66
Page 67
Page 68
Page 69
Page 70
Page 71
Page 72
Page 73
Page 74
Page 75
Page 76
Page 77
Page 78
Page 79
Page 80
Page 81
Page 82
Page 83
Page 84
Page 85
Page 86
Page 87
Page 88
Page 89
Page 90
Page 91
Page 92
Page 93
Page 94
LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENT KEY FINDINGS Although hops comprise only about three percent of beer ingredients by mass the associated environmental impact of hops effects like ozone depletion eutrophication and water use is higher than the impact of other ingredients. Conclusively using premium hops like ours produced with a smaller carbon footprint is a step in reducing a beers overall environmental footprint. Because 78 percent of our local electricity mix comes from fossil fuels any improvements in energy efficiency have a large positive impact on GHG emissions. This finding is guiding our research into on-site renewable energy. IMPACT CATEGORY climate change eutrophication water use land use ozone depletion smog acidification toxicity UNIT kg CO2 eq g N eq liter m2 year g CFC-11 eq g 03 eq g H eq CTUe VALUE 0.69 1.40 60 0.43 32 26 0.11 2.2 INGREDIENT 18 66 75 91 74 59 68 93 LIFE CYCLE IMPACTS FOR 16FL. OZ. OF A HYPOTHETICAL IPA In terms of climate change our three largest emissions are electricity 28 direct processing 20 and direct farming 18 THE PRACTICE