Start the conversation
Same form, every page. Tell us once — we route it to whoever's closest to your tote.
The situation
A 14,000-bbl/year cidery in Hudsonville, Michigan was buying new HDPE drums for unpasteurized cider hold between primary fermentation and bottling-line copacker pickup. Drums cost $98 each. They averaged 380 drums per year. That's a $37,000 packaging line they couldn't write off.
The switch
We supplied 22 Grade A reconditioned 275-gallon IBCs in two tranches. Each tote holds the equivalent of 3.5 drums of cider — the math says they replaced 380 drums per year with 109 IBC trips.
Their copacker required a Grade A chain-of-custody tag on each inbound tote. Ours satisfied the requirement on the first audit, no re-tagging needed.
The numbers
- Replaced: 380 drums × $98 = $37,240/yr
- New tote spend: 109 trips × $148 avg per Grade A = $16,132/yr
- Add tote washing labor (in-house rinse between trips): $4,500/yr
- Add freight inbound: $2,100/yr
- Net new cost: $22,732/yr
- Savings: $14,508/yr — 39% of the drum line, ~11% of total packaging cost
"Their Grade A totes shaved 11% off our packaging cost. The chain-of-custody tags satisfied our copacker on the first audit."
— Production Lead, Hudsonville Cidery
What didn't change
- Cider quality — blind tasting through Q4 showed no difference
- Customer-facing packaging — same bottles, same labels
- Production schedule — totes integrated into existing CIP rotation
The carbon side
Replacing 380 drums with 109 tote trips and washing them in-house cut their cider-program embodied packaging carbon by approximately 68%. Their B Corp annual filing referenced the change.
Cider, beer, syrup, juice?
Same playbook works across food-grade liquids. Tell us your spec.
What didn't fit in the executive summary.
The first conversation. Hudsonville's production lead reached out in November 2025 after a colleague at another cidery mentioned us. The first ask was simple: 'do reconditioned totes really pass copacker audit?' We sent the chain-of-custody template. They forwarded it to their copacker. The copacker's QA director sent a one-line reply: 'this works.'
The pilot batch. We supplied two Grade A 275s in January 2026. The cidery ran a single batch through them, sampled the cider for off-flavors, ran a basic microbiological check. Everything came back clean. They ordered six more in February.
The full switch. By April they were running 22 totes through three rotations — that's the steady state covering their full 14,000-bbl annual production. The drum-based packaging line was retired in May.
The annual report mention. Their B Corp annual filing for 2026 references the switch under packaging-related Scope 3 reduction. The 68% embodied-carbon reduction was material to their reporting.
What surprised them. Two things, in retrospect: (1) the audit went smoother than expected — their fear was the largest blocker, not the actual paperwork; (2) the labor reduction from fewer container handlings was bigger than they projected, because each drum handling has fixed-time overhead that doesn't scale down.
If you only read one section.
- 01$14,508/yr savings. ~11% of total packaging cost.
- 0268% embodied-carbon reduction on the cider-program packaging line.
- 03Audit cleared first pass — chain-of-custody tag did the work.
- 04Pilot batch first, full switch second. Low-risk staged adoption.
- 05Labor reduction turned out to be a bigger win than projected.
“The thing we'd tell other operators is to run a pilot. We spent way more time worrying than the audit actually took. If we'd known we would have switched a year earlier.”
— Production Lead, Hudsonville Cidery