We keep hearing about how the new wine consumer, AKA the Millennial, demands transparency and authenticity in products they purchase. There have been numerous articles and blogposts detailing this shift in marketing approach.
At the same time, there has a marked increase in online discussions and articles about how the grapes are grown and about the winemaking process in the cellar. The organic, biodynamic and natural wine niches have become so popular, they will soon no longer be niches but will become relatively absorbed into mainstream winemaking practices.
All of the above, has led to a new level of transparency from winemakers about what exactly goes into that bottle of wine you are drinking with dinner.
Randall Grahm, owner of Bonny Doon Vineyards, has been a trail blazer in this movement as he has been so many times before in the wine world.
I recently sampled a bottle of Bonny Doon Central Coast Syrah 'Le Pousseur' 2006 $18. This was a great domestic syrah with exuberant blackberry fruit upfront as well as a solid mineral quality & firm acids to provide balance.
This is the list of ingredients listed on the back label: Grapes, tartaric acids, tannin and sulfur dioxide.
Other ingredients used for winemaking: indigenous yeasts, yeast nutrients, cultured yeasts, copper sulfate, untoasted wood chips, and French oak barrels.
At time of bottling, this product contained: 58 ppm total SO2 and 25 ppm free SO2.
I applaud Randall Grahm's candid admissions, as well as his evolving winemaking style.
I am thinking that many wine lovers would cringe if they knew how many additives are routinely added to commercial wines, even more so if they also understood why the additives were being used.
My line of logic is that people who are attempting to eat healthier and purchase fewer processed foods, are probably going to eventually start caring about wines that are less 'processed' as well.
My question is this: Are wine consumers ready to know more about what exactly what's in the wine bottle? If so, what will they do with this information and how will it change winemaking styles as a result?
*The Bonny Doon Syrah 2006 Le Pousseur was received as a sample.
12 comments:
I think the sooner producers start following the lead of Randall Grahm and others like him, the better off consumers will be in terms of understanding what's going into the wines they drink. Many organic or natural wine producers are already offering transparency. Hopefully, as more information becomes available on bottle labels, producers' websites, the blogosphere, and mass media, consumers will become more informed as to what's okay and what's not when it comes to additives in wine. I've recently started a series on this topic and would welcome your comments.
Amy, even as the OBN wine market segment grows, it is still a long way from significant market share, never mind shelf space in mass retail outlets. I very much hope it will continue to grow steadily.
I'm a little concerned by how "Le Possuer" was made. Adding acidity and utilizing wood chips may be needed to "craft" wines meant for broad commercial appeal but it's counter to what is implied by OBN wine production. It's understandable that Randall plays it safe as a businessman with those practices but I'd like to see
less of that myself.
I think wine production techniques are subject to a lot of misinterpretation, misunderstanding and controversy. Still I'm in favor of full disclosure labeling, many people either won't know or care
what's there but for those who do it will be a good thing.
Amy, thanks for this. I applaud such transparency, and believe that in the long run disclosing ingredient lists and winemaking processes will aid those who favor a non-interventionist style. In the short run, though, it will quite likely unnerve, or at least distract, the consumer unaccustomed to seeing chemical terms on a wine bottle. Education is the best answer, and this post helps.
It is always tricky when one finds oneself betwixt and between, and the '06 Syrah was a bit of a relic of winemaking techniques past. The reference to oak chips, copper sulfate and tannin is a bit jarring to me, and if memory serves, these elements ended up on the back label because one lot of syrah that went into the wine had those additives. (The other lots were made in a more hands-off, non-manipulated style.) So, as embarrassing as it was to own up to this, I think that if you're committed to transparency, you had best be transparent. (Subsequent vintages will reflect a lot better on us.)
As nerve wracking as it is to the consumer to digest this information, it does begin a greatly important dialogue. Consumers do need to know about what goes in their wine; it makes them smarter consumers and ultimately may help them understand a little bit more about what they like and don't like in a wine. As significantly, it makes winemakers more careful winemakers and if you are committed to disclosing everything you do in public, you will think a bit more about what it is that you do.
I am a little bit disappointed that there has not been more discussion in the last year about this subject. Perhaps it has not seemed to be the most pressing issue in the wine business (above and beyond sheer survival). But as winemakers and consumers gradually move beyond survival mode, it would be very useful to them both to think about values and ethics.
Amy- great post! I absolutly think that consumers are ready. This is long over due. I think the industry however is not ready because it means that consumers will finally see that the myth, that all wine is a natural agricultural product, will be dispelled (after all 95% of wines are manipulated one way or another). I recently wrote about thus subject on my blog as well!
Cheers,
chrisO
Hi Amy - I've chatted on Thad's blog about this and I do believe full disclosure is simply a matter of when, not why. Ultimately it's in the best interest of consumers and consumer advocacy groups are driving this in Washington DC. It's going to create upheaval of course - but if consumers become better aware of additives and artificial production - that's best. And tartaric or oak chips are not the real threat here, it's more like the purple die and crazy color additives and that go in mass produced wines. One could argue that people know the ingredients of lots of crappy food products and consume them anyway (Diet Coke for instance) - but at least they are making that choice. Then the good guys really stand apart because their "ingredients" are clean. I make a choice to NOT buy products with high fructose corn syrup added, but I have no problem with sugar. (As in the Mexican Coke formula)
Ok, Thanks for letting me bla bla bla...
Like most things involving alcohol and regulation, I wouldn't plan on seeing anything instituted as rule anytime soon, at least not from the Feds. Perhaps a state like California, Oregon or Washington could take the lead or a wine industry group.
I'd love to see varietal composition added to the list, along with dosage and disgorgement dates for bubblies. I think it doesn't hurt and while most consumers could care less (they just want a good bottle of wine after all), there are those of us who enjoy those finer details.
Randall, I salute your bravery, both in deciding to list all ingredients, but also because you continue to push yourself as a conscientious winemaker.
And I agree with Denise that I am not near as concerned about oak chips as I am with many of the less savoury additions made to 'enhance' wine.
Hi Amy,
Thanks for commenting on my blog about your blog! I didn't leave a comment on your blog, but I'm happy to do so now.
Perhaps 'conflict of interest' is a bit strong, but what I said (that you have "an interest in promoting wines that have no 'additives'") remains. Surely you'd agree, no?
Of course, you're absolutely right in saying that wine makers and sellers have a right to write (!) about wine. What I was essentially saying was that much of what is written on wine in social media comes from a 'biased' viewpoint. Which is fine, as long as the readers can discern this.
My other point was that if we are to ask for transparency in regular wine production, you also have to enable transparency in biodynamic or organic production (telling people, for example, that many organic and biodynamic producers add Potassium Metabisulfate to their wine).
That doesn't detract from your interesting and thought-provoking post. It might interest you that DrVino wrote a similar thing a few days ago.
Best
Oliver Styles
Welcome Oliver,
And thanks for pointing out DrVino's post as I had not seen it yet.
I normally do not mention my blog when leaving comments on other blogs but it seemed rather relevant since you yourself referenced my wine company and my blog several times throughout your piece.
Yes, of course, transparency should be expected of all producers, not just the commercial wineries.
Thanks, Amy
Lists of ingredients hardly encompass everything in which an inquiring consumer might be interested. Spinning cones or reverse osmosis? Was juice bled off before fermentation, or was the wine watered back? Should materials used for fining be listed as "ingredients"? (None were listed in the case of the '06 Le Pousseur; did the wine fall bright all by itself?) If the wine was filtered, should we specify filtration media and pore size? If anything was sprayed on or fed to the vines before or during the growing season, is that an "ingredient" in the resulting wine?
More transparency is better, but there isn't room on a label to disclose every possible thing. And unless disclosure of everything is absolutely required, producers less scrupulous than Mr. Grahm will inevitably use disclosure to create the appearance and image of naturalness where the opposite is closer to the truth. There is no effective substitute for educated, interested, informed consumers.
It would be great to know. I've broken out in hives 3x now after drinking red wine. If I could identify the ingredient that causes the hives I could avoid those wines.
Post a Comment