CityLab and Quartz write about the increase in sales of canned beer in How the craft beer revolution made cans cool again. They describe how cans came to be acceptable for beer.
Concerns about canned beer bearing a metallic taste, which once was a factor that made bottles more appealing, should be long gone now. Decades ago, when the cans were made of tin and lined with lead, that was a valid worry. Today’s cans are made from aluminum and have a water-based polymer lining, though, so the beer doesn’t even touch the metal.
Quartz credits Oskar Blues Brewing with starting this return to canned craft beer, and yes, they have BPA in their cans. According to Frank DiGennaro in Table Matters,
Oskar Blues Brewing Company, who exclusively can their beer, point to the lack of substantial evidence deeming BPA toxic and re-direct inquiries about its safety to the fact that much research is going in to development of BPA-free cans.
On principle, we never let beer touch plastic in our process and upon researching cans we decided that it was very similar to bottling in a plastic bottle due to the lining. The BPA issue strongly affected this decision. We decided that we didn’t consider any type of plastic available truly food-safe by our standards. In our mission to make wholesome beer as beer was made for 5,000 years, plastic simply does not work with that philosophy.
An alternative to BPA lining doesn't exist yet. Until it does, why does anyone take the risk of drinking canned beer? Why would people who threw away their Nalgene bottles because of BPA willingly get the same stuff from their beer? I will never understand this.
More on the same subject in an earlier post: More Americans Drinking BPA in Canned Beer, Thanks to Economy and Pabst Drinking Hipsters