Bordeaux reds were clearly preferred to California cabernets at the turn of this century

In last week’s post, I used some data from a wine-tasting conducted by Bob Henry (What happens when you score wines at comparative tastings?). I looked at the odd effect in wine tastings, where the preferences for wines within a single flight of similar wines does not necessarily match the preferences produced when two flights are combined into a single group. Wine tasters are people, after all, and we reserve the right to do things our own way!

This week, I will take a retrospective look at three more of Bob’s tastings, from the end of the 1990s, in which his tasters compared red Bordeaux wines and California cabernets at the same session. Each tasting covered a different vintage, but only a few of the wineries were repeated across the vintages.

There were 15 participants at the Winter 1998 tasting of the 1985 vintage (wines 13 years old), with 8 Bordeaux wines and 8 California wines. There were 15 participants at the Summer 1997 tasting of the 1986 vintage (wines 11 years old), with 6 Bordeaux wines and 7 California wines. There were 16 participants at the Autumn 1997 tasting of the 1990 vintage (wines 7 years old), with 7 Bordeaux wines and 7 California wines.

The wines were tasted blind (ie. the bottle in a paper bag, although the order of wines was not random). Each person was asked to rank-order their three preferred wines from the total wines tasted for each vintage, which were then assigned points: 3 points for 1st preference, 2 points for 2nd preference, and 1 point for 3rd preference (yielding a total of 90, 90 and 96 points for the three tastings, respectively).

It is important to note that these results are relative only to each other, and there is thus no assessment of the wines on any absolute scale (eg. a score out of 100). Bob Henry made it clear in his comment on the previous post: “At my wine-tasting luncheons I never asked participants to assign a rating / score to any wine ... I knew each participant had her or his own interpretation of some undefined rating system ... I did believe that rank ordering (1st, 2nd, 3rd) would fairly elicit the degree of preference each participant found in the wines.” These results are from wine tasters, not wine critics.

The results of each of the tastings are summarized in these three tables. The wines are listed in decreasing score order within each tasting, with the California wines shown in bold-face.

There is usually one clearly preferred wine in each tasting (with a higher preference score than the others). The other wine preferences then drop off quickly, with quite a few wines at the bottom of each table that did not make it into anyone’s top-3 list.

In this regard, it is worth noting that Château Cheval Blanc (from the Saint-Émilion region of Bordeaux) makes it into into the Top-3 at all three tastings, while Château Margaux (Médoc First Growth) is in mid-table in all three cases. [1] Being a Bordeaux First Growth is not necessarily beneficial, apparently, although Château Mouton Rothschild (the other First Growth tasted) is at the top of the second table. Not all wines are always in form, apparently, especially when they are not at stage-managed events (Some wines are beyond criticism).

It is thus also interesting to note that what is clearly the top wine in the first tasting, Château Lynch–Bages, is actually a Médoc Fifth Growth of Bordeaux (the only one among the three tastings). The Médoc Second Growths tend to be down the lists a bit, while the Saint-Émilion wines tend to do quite well, in the top third of the lists. The Saint-Émilion wines are principally a Merlot blend, of course, rather than the Cabernet sauvignon  of the Médoc. Château La Conseillante, a Merlot-based wine from Pomerol, also does well (in the first and third tastings).

Sadly, in all three tastings, the French wines were generally preferred to the U.S. Cabernet wines. The wines tasted cover many of the most famous names, mostly from the Napa Valley (Cabernet sauvignon is still Napa Valley’s top varietal; see: Napa County up 35% in crop value with record in wine grape production). Indeed, only the Caymus “Special Selection” (in the second and third tastings, but not the first tasting) and the Beringer “Reserve” (in the first tasting) got any sort of respectable placing. The Spottswoode did poorly in all three tastings, along with the Montelena in the second and third tastings, although the Dominus did better in the third tasting than it did in the first.

It is perhaps also of interest to compare these results to the current online review-site comments. Wine Searcher makes the current comments about the three vintages tasted:
1985 Vintage
    Bordeaux: Excellent
    California was the only major wine region outside of Europe to give a star performance.
1986 vintage
   Bordeaux: Good
    In the New World, both California and Australia enjoyed fantastic years.
1990 Vintage
   Bordeaux: Legendary
   In the New World, both California and Australia produced some fantastic wines.

These days, of course, the tendency is to note that the Bordeaux vintages are “Modern classic” wines (Bordeaux 2023: vintage overview), unlike the old-style vintages tasted here from the end of last century. Things have changed considerably for the Napa Valley in the ensuing quarter-century, as well, as they now give the Bordeaux wines a much clearer run for their money. However, there are recent comments that are clearly not in favour of California reds, compared to those from Europe (Dan Berger on wine: The reddish europhile).

Indeed, it is perhaps worth noting that most of the vineyards are composed of plants that are French vines grafted onto American rootstocks. This is due to the phylloxera outbreak in Europe, arising from transporting American vines to Europe (Did Darwin save wine?). Very few places in Europe avoided phylloxera (eg.  Colares: wines by the waves). The US vines are also usually grafted, since the original French cultivars could not survive in the phylloxera-infested USA.

There are, of course, many many published comparisons of Napa wines with those of Bordeaux. One particularly relevant one here is that in Wine Spectator Sept. 15 1996, pp. 32—48.

---

[1] Bob Henry comments: “The 1990 Cheval Blanc is among the five best red wines I have ever tasted in my life. And has been every time I have tasted it. Simply sublime.”

What happens when you score wines at comparative tastings?

I rarely write about specific wines in this blog. However, I first learned about wine by doing comparative tastings in the early 1980s. My local “bottle shop” (or “liquor store” or “off-licence”, etc) in Australia would have a few bottles open on Thursday evening (late-night shopping night), which had been left as samples by distributors, in the hopes of getting the owner to stock them. We customers would comment.

Eventually, the proprietor realized that there were enough of us doing this that he could organize special comparative tastings on weekends, for which we would pay. I would often bring along a special old bottle in lieu of paying cash. I now do comparative tastings of my own, nearly 40 years later, to which I invite my vinous friends. *

It is therefore worth looking at the results of these sorts of comparisons, to see what we can learn. Bob Henry, who was introduced a couple of weeks ago (in the post: Some new notes on Rudy Kurniawan and his activities), has conducted many such tastings while “moonlighting” on weekends on the sales staff of leading wine stores around Los Angeles, and as an organizer of wine cellars for private parties in Los Angeles. I will look at a few tastings that he conducted in the mid—late 1990s. In particular, I will look at tastings that compared two distinct groups of wines on the same tasting occasion.

As a starter, there was a tasting of seven Bordeaux chateau wines from both the 1989 and 1990 vintages, tasted in the winter of 1994:

• Château L’Angélus
• Château Pichon Longueville Baron
• Château La Mission Haut-Brion
• Château Palmer
• Château La Conseillante
• Château Montrose
• Château Léoville-Las Cases.

There were 16 participants, who tasted each of the 14 wines blind (ie. the bottle in a paper bag, although the order of wines was not random). Each person was asked to rank-order their three preferred wines from the seven for each vintage, which were then assigned points: 3 points for 1st preference, 2 points for 2nd preference, and 1 point for 3rd preference (yielding a total of 96 points).

It is important to note that these results are relative only to each other, and there is thus no assessment of the wines on any absolute scale (eg. a score out of 100). The results are summarized in this first graph.

Clearly, the “best” (La Conseillante) and “worst” (La Mission Haut-Brion) wines were consistent across the two vintages; but otherwise there are some notable issues here. For example, three of the wines got the same score for the 1990 wine (13 points) but differed greatly from each other for the 1989 wine: 7 (Pichon-Baron), 11 (Léoville-Las Cases), and 24 (L’Angélus) points. Vinous things were apparently not consistent for these chateaux in those days.

This tells us nothing about how the two vintages compared, of course. So, at the end the participants were also asked to rank all 14 wines simultaneously, with points once again for their first, second and third preference — only then were the wine identities revealed. These results are summarized in this next graph, where the score from graph 1 is plotted horizontal and the overall score is vertical. The 1989 wines are in blue and the 1990 wines in pink.

Clearly, the 1989 wines were preferred to the 1990 wines, at this particular tasting, when the wines were still fairly young. Subsequent assessments usually place 1990 slightly ahead of 1989 (eg. Bordeaux vintage chart 1959 to today), although both vintages were streets ahead of the half-dozen Bordeaux vintages before and after them. [Bob has noted that the 1989 La Conseillante remains one of his all-time favorite wines in the world; and he has consistently declared that the 1989 red Bordeaux vintage ranks among the very best in half a century.]

However, the interesting thing is the apparent inconsistency that arises — wines do always get an overall score that matches their score within their own vintage flight. ** For example, three wines all scored 13 in the 1990 flight and yet got different overall scores (0, 1, 4). Even worse, several of the wines did better when compared overall (across the two vintages) than they did within their own vintage flight.

These results are quite illogical. This appears to be the answer to the question posed in the post’s title!

---

* “Baby Boomers prefer the luxury and educational experience of wine” (Millennials and Gen X want a wine vacation, not an education).

** What’s a wine flight and why is it called that?

The (curious) saga of health and drinking wine continues

There are now increasingly vociferous anti-alcohol messages emerging from the World Health Organization. I am concerned about this as a (retired) scientist. I am concerned, not because I have anything original to offer in the matter, but because I do care about scientific and medical data. There appears to be very little data in support of the WHO, in the sense that there is at least as much data refuting their position as there is supporting it (see my post: Science and wine).

The issue is thus that Health risks should be discussed with evidence from all sides: “Alcohol abuse is a serious matter, which deserves a serious discussion. However, any position which aims to stop advancement should provide data to support its conclusion. Doing otherwise does a disservice to everyone involved.”

So, at the moment there are lots of discussions of health and alcohol, some of which I have linked below. Here, I hope to synthesize some of the arguments, in order to clarify them. I have discussed this topic several times before in this blog, over the past couple of years, and I will link to some of those posts below, for further information. Indeed, I have previously asked: Aren’t you sick of hearing about wine and health? Well, my main answer to that is my own viewpoint: A scientist looks at alcohol and health, and is concerned.

My main concern is the explicitly stated WHO claim that alcohol is toxic to the human body: No level of alcohol consumption is safe for our health (“Risks start from the first drop” — Dr. Carina Ferreira-Borges, WHO European Regional Advisor for Alcohol and Illicit Drugs). This is patent nonsense within the biological sciences (my speciality), and so the medical people cannot justifiably claim its inherent veracity. I have introduced the WHO’s situation in: Who started the current WHO completely negative attitude towards alcohol?

The basic issue is that almost everything is toxic to living beings at some concentration, and we need to be told this level, if the information is to be of some practical use to us — some things are toxic even at very low levels, while others do not become toxic until there is a lot of it, and we need to know which is which. Importantly, there are actually two things we need to know. There is usually a level below which the substance has one negative effect on us (“too little”), and another level above which it has a different negative effect (“too much”) — in between is “just right” for continued life.

This applies to everything, not just alcohol, including oxygen and water, which I am sure you agree we really do need to have “just right”. Too little oxygen and we suffer what is called Hypoxemia, and too much oxygen is called Hyperoxia — in between we live to a ripe old age. Too little water is called dehydration, and too much is called drowning — in between we maintain our bodies healthily.

This situation is technically called a J-curve (shown in the next picture), which I have discussed in more detail (with examples) in: A scientist looks at alcohol and health, and is concerned. What concerns me most is that WHO makes no mention of this situation at all — to them, increasing alcohol is increasing danger. * However, science shows that for living organisms there is usually a borderline for most substances — above this line the substance is toxic (ie. can cause disability or death) and below this it has a whole other set of effects.

Well, the same thing is true for what we call “drinking” alcohol, also called ethyl alcohol or ethanol. ** The human body metabolizes it to acetaldehyde (by the chemical process of oxidation), which is what causes the hangover — this is because acetaldehyde is a carcinogen, and poses notably greater toxicity in humans than does ethanol itself. In other words, many of the health hazards in humans typically associated with ethanol consumption can be attributed to acetaldehyde toxicity, rather than to the ethanol itself (see: The effects of alcohol on the human body).

However, acetaldehyde also has the J-curve, where there is a lower limit below which it has no noticeable effect (the body protects itself from any harm by converting the acetaldehyde to acetate, a harmless fatty acid), and an upper limit above which the acetaldehyde turns nasty on us. So, if we keep our intake below the latter level, then we are fine. This is very important for a very practical reason: acetaldehyde occurs in all sorts of things that we treat as regular foodstuffs. Indeed, Lewis Perdue (who founded Wine Industry Insight, and ran its News Fetch newsletter) has pointed out (The hidden hitches in Dry January/Mediterranean diet plans) just how long this list is, including: apples, coffee, cheese, yogurt, chicken, green tea ...

You should definitely read that linked article,*** because the list of what we consider to be perfectly normal (safe) foods, but which contain acetaldehyde, is impressively long. An abbreviated version is also available at: Lewis Perdue’s analysis of Dry January & alcohol cancer claims:

Why Lewis Perdue believes cancer links to alcohol are over stated. If you are in the midst of Dry January here is a sobering analysis by US wine and medical writer, Lewis Perdue, into the scientific and medical research and health claims made by certain US government regulators and alcohol control organisations about how damaging drinking alcohol is and in particular the supposed threat of the acetaldehyde compound commonly found in alcohol beverages that is claimed to be linked to cancer. Research and evidence that Perdue believes is far from proven.

The basic point here is that a normal Mediterranean diet contains alcohol, especially with meals. People have been living on this diet for many centuries, but only by controlling their alcohol intake, and consuming it mostly with food. This topic is discussed in more detail in: Underrated aspects of a true Mediterranean diet.

For most of us, however, there is a catch, as pointed out in that last article:

Most existing research on the health effects of alcohol has been conducted in populations outside the Mediterranean region, where drinking patterns differ significantly from those of the traditional Mediterranean diet. Therefore, future studies are needed to investigate the impact of different drinking occasions and patterns more precisely. These studies could provide a clearer scientific basis for recommendations on alcohol consumption, balancing the need for caution against potential benefits when consumed moderately or as part of meals.

Sadly, doing proper scientific experiments (what is technically called: A Randomized Control Study) is difficult on humans, especially with regard to human behavior. This is because we cannot properly control what the people taking part in the experiment actually do, day by day (see: The fight over moderate drinking: why studies on effects are unlikely to happen). So, most experiments rely on self-reported behavior by the people involved, which is a poor substitute (see, as an example: Why are older Americans drinking so much?). Technically speaking, the studies thus confuse cause with correlation (as done, for example, by the American College of Physicians, in their current policy brief: Excessive Alcohol Use and Alcohol Use Disorders).

It is sometimes argued that Health risks should be discussed with evidence from all sides, but it is actually best to focus only on the best experiments. I have contributed a few posts of my own on this topic:

• The alleged health benefits of wine depend on who funded the research
• Wine and health — why is there so much argument, pro and con?
• Why we are never going to know whether wine is good for us, or not
• Wine and health is never a simple topic
• Health and the wine drinker, yet again

The bottom line, however, is the increasing negative societal attitude (Is wine heading for an iceberg?), just like the lead-up to Prohibition exactly a hundred years ago in the USA (1920–1933) (How neo-prohibitionists came to shape alcohol policy). In practice, this is leading to the requirement for containers of beer, wine and liquor sold to have cancer-warning labels (Should alcoholic beverages have cancer warning labels?). Ireland, for example, will require them starting in 2026.

This places alcohol in the same position as tobacco (Is wine the “2024 cigarette”? Younger generations say all alcohol is ‘literally poison’), which I have discussed before (Is consuming wine really as unhealthy as tobacco?). Next, they will presumably put these warnings on the sun, which is far and away the biggest cause of skin cancer, especially in places like Australia (where I grew up, and had my first skin cancer removed at age 27).

There are none so blind as those who will not see. The so-called “sober curious” are currently not seeing very much. Even the national liquor chain here in Sweden is getting in on the act: “alcohol consumption in Sweden fell during the past year, by 2.7 percent. It is a positive trend that benefits public health”.

---

* For a discussion of the WHO and their failure to ever mention the J-curve, see: Wine and health: challenging the ‘no safe level’ claims.

** Wine contains many chemicals, of course; see: The effect of red wine is different from white: did you know that?

*** Disclosure: I made a small contribution to this web page.

Some (new) notes on Rudy Kurniawan and his activities

Rudy Kurniawan is a well-known name in the wine industry, especially in the USA. He was born in Indonesia, but he attended California State University (Northridge) from 1998, and so became integrated into American society. Sadly, he then became a well-known wine forger, and was sentenced to 10 years’ imprisonment in 2013, then being released in 2020 and being returned to Indonesia.

However, it seems to me that some of the numbers cited with regard to his original case do not add up sensibly; and I discuss here some notes from one of my correspondents that might shed some light on the matter.

Kurniawan apparently acquired a taste for fine wine in c. 2000, and became a purchaser of old and expensive bottles. Indeed, by the end of 2006 we he was reported by The Los Angeles Times ($75,000 a case? He’s buying) like this:

Kurniawan’s outsize taste for old wine, however, has changed the market, say auction house insiders. Since he started buying, prices for rare wine have skyrocketed. As he stepped up his acquisitions in 2004, a dozen other ultra-rich buyers emerged to compete with him for the best bottles. And the market for old wine exploded.

Not bad for a recent migrant. The newspaper article further notes:

It was at a birthday dinner honoring his father at a restaurant on San Francisco’s Fisherman’s Wharf just before he died that Kurniawan took his first sip of fine wine — a 1995 Opus One, the most expensive wine on the list at $150 a bottle. The restaurant is long forgotten, he says, but after that first taste, wine became a consuming passion.

Turning now to the scale of his nefarious activities. Most commentaries tend to be sensationalist, and therefore quote dollar amounts, like $150 million, for the amount of fake wine involved. Few articles have looked at the number of bottles. The best of them is: Running the numbers on Rudy’s fake wines. This article translates the dollar amount as 70,000 bottles, and questions whether this is even feasible in the 10 years available.

Obviously it is not feasible, but nor are some of the other numbers bandied around. For example, the 2016 Sour Grapes documentary notes at the end: “It is estimated that there may be as many as 10,000 of Rudy’s bottles still in private collections”, while The Globe and Mail review of that documentary (Caper-tale doc explores a world of greed, wine and money) suggests 40,000.

Let’s do some basic maths. Even the most wildly optimistic estimate might suggest that Rudy spent 30 minutes to create a fake bottle of wine — from sampling the fraudulent wine blend for verisimilitude, creating the fake front and back wine labels using his laptop computer and digital scanner/printer, marking up the cork, and affixing the “correct” looking capsule. That’s only 2 fake bottles per hour of time, perhaps three.

So, 10,000 bottles equals 5,000 hours. A 40-hour week yields 125 full weeks of doing little else than bottle wine. Is this likely?

My correspondent in answering this question is Bob Henry, a wine consultant based on the west coast of the USA.* He comments:

I knew Rudy fairly well. We first met when he would hang out on weekends at Pasadena Wine Merchants, near Caltech. I managed the wine bar on Fridays and Saturdays; he visited and sampled. He later joined my wine-tasting luncheons here in Los Angeles, each based on a “theme”.

He liked to drink and eat and have long conversations about the finer things in life. He hated actually “working”. I can’t see him having created that many fake bottles of wine. Rudy is many things, but having an indefatigable “work ethic” to crank out tens of thousands of fake wine bottles is not one of them. He liked to party very late into the night with his wine friends (not me), and then sleep in late.

Bob (a former administrator for one of the leading law schools in the U.S.A.), and his friendly acquaintanceship with Kurniawan, should not, of course, be misconstrued as him condoning any of Rudy's nefarious deeds.

Anyway, one of the wine-tastings that Bob mentions above is especially worth looking at here (see the table below). Bob continues:

Rudy attended many of my organized wine-tasting luncheons here in Los Angeles. His participation preceded his nefarious deeds… The first event he attended was a 20-year-vertical of Opus One [1979–1998], in 2001 (or perhaps 2002). The first “great” wine he claimed he ever tasted [see the quote above]. Before the tasting began, Rudy predicted from his first-hand drinking experience that the 1996 vintage would show best / be the preferred wine. And he was correct.

He brought to the event the first three vintages in magnums. I sourced the next 17 consecutive vintages in 750ml format. The wines were not tasted “single blind”, because I wanted to showcase how the wine’s style evolved over time, through successive “hands” of winemakers. First “style” from the outset was very “French-like” due to the influence of the folks at Mouton. Second “style” was more of a hybrid between France and California. Third “style” is distinctively Californian. No-one confuses it with a red Bordeaux these days.

For reports on more recent Opus One verticals, by other people, see:

• Looking back at the Opus One vertical tasting evening
• Opus One vertical tasting

Anyway, there you have it. It seems to me that Rudy Kurniawan was credited by those who met him with having a superb wine palate, especially for older vintages. It seems to me that, with a palate like that, he might have done a lot better by creating his own legitimate wines, rather than by misleadingly imitating those of others. Sadly, his fame apparently continues, in SE Asia, where the drinkers know they are getting a re-creation: Wine forger who duped Hollywood producers and California billionaires strikes back.

---

* Bob Henry CV:

• consumer goods marketing advisor
  
• nonprofit fundraising advisor
• wine advisor to Los Angeles area wine stores
• wine advisor to Los Angeles restaurants
• wine-tasting luncheon organizer
• current and former wine judge for magazines and county fairs
• private wine-locker organizer
• personal wine shopper for private wine collectors
• wine blog commenter [the one that introduced him to me].

American producers are making the current wine problem worse

Last year, I wrote a post expressing my disbelief at the poor reaction of much of the global wine industry to the ongoing issues regarding the fact that global production exceeds global consumption (When is the wine industry going to wake up to itself?). This situation is illustrated in the graph below, showing that production has exceeded consumption since 1960 (taken from: The smallest global wine production for 55 years?).

Well, it turns out that, at least in California, things are worse than I thought. So, it is worth writing about this topic again.

In a previous post (Why does world wine production always exceed consumption?), I noted that, in most countries, wine production is not increasing, so that increasing global over-supply must logically involve decreasing consumption. That is, the wine industry presumably sees the situation as “under-consumption” rather than over-production!

As has often been reported, this is happening because younger people currently prefer both beer and RTD to wine. That is, changing consumer preferences are a key driver of the downward trend in the wine industry. Even in French supermarkets, last year beer sales surpassed wine for the first time (How France is turning from wine to beer); and Bordeaux wine has never been cheaper (The only solution for Bordeaux — cut volumes and raise prices).

Since this is a global issue, several national governments have had to address the situation. For example, in France surplus wine has been distilled, at government instigation (and expense). However, the grape growers have argued that this is only a short-term response, so that the economic crisis will continue (French government offers aid to struggling grape-growers, but no long-term solution). So, removing vineyards has been the way to go, and has already started (Bordeaux bloodbath! France pays winemakers to dig up vines).

So, not unexpectedly, there are currently trade tensions between many of the wine export and import countries. This has been tangled with other trade issues — for example, when he was president, Donald Trump imposed tariffs on French wine as part of a long-standing transatlantic feud over subsidies to aircraft makers Airbus and Boeing; but this has now supposedly ended.

In this sense, I would expect the wine-producing countries of the world to follow each other, in terms of reducing production. However, this still leaves the issue of the current global wine lake, and what to do with it. Clearly, it must be sold cheaply, either as wine for retail or as a source of spirits.

If it is sold as wine, then it must be transported to the retail location, presumably in bulk (to cut costs), and then packaged locally. The big question, though, is: how is it packaged? It can be either packaged as is (with its origin clearly indicated), or it can be blended with something else. How familiar are you with the latter concept in the USA?

One might think that the incremental cost of transporting bulk wine to the USA would out-weigh discounts achieved by buying domestic fruit, especially during a wine-grape glut. However, this is apparently not always so (The international bulk wine market: mysterious price drops). This can lead to the situation where any given retail wine can contain both American and foreign fruit, blended.

This is all well and good, so far — but how is the resulting blended wine labeled? According to the US Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (Wine labeling: Appellation of origin), the American rule for wine is a percentage:

• If a vintage-dated wine lists a specific AVA, 85% of the grapes must come from the stated year and AVA
• For wines labeled with a state or county, the minimum is 75%
• All wines listing a varietal designation from the USA must be made from a minimum of 75% of the stated grape variety grown in the USA.

In other words, a wine labeled “American” can be one-quarter from anywhere in the world!

Well, apparently the larger US producers know this, and are currently exploiting it increasingly (Global wine glut compounds headaches for struggling California vineyards). That is, it is currently cheaper to blend the foreign and local stuff than to blend just the local stuff. You can read all about it from the Lodi Wine Growers a week ago: Imported foreign bulk wine: the dirty secret no one in California wine is talking about. They pull no punches, and cite the numbers to show just how much of this is apparently going on. *

They don’t stop there, though. The Lodi Growers point out that the local California grocery stores are equally cavalier about the sources of the boxed wines they are retailing. Distinguishing the local stuff from the imported stuff currently takes effort on the part of the purchaser, because the retailer often puts in no effort at all at distinguishing them (see the picture above). This is no way to behave towards one of their most important local industries.

I am an outsider to the industry, in the sense that I am a consumer rather than a producer. In that sense, this is California’s problem more than anyone else’s. And yet, many locals apparently are not putting their money where their mouths are, either at the level of production or the level of retail. So, this is hard to say, but: I weep for them not — they have made their own bed. Sadly, the rest of the locals have to lie in that same bed, too.

---

* Dan Berger has also looked at this topic, a couple of days ago, after I had written this post, in: The growing wine lake.

Re-using (re-cycling) wine waste is essential in the modern world

Recycling, or re-use, is an important concept in the modern world. For example, where I live, the supermarket car-parks have bins where we can recycle: clear glass, colored glass, plastic containers, cardboard containers, metal containers, and newspapers (see the picture). My household collection has one roadside bin for compostable material, and a separate one for refuse. *

So, it is hardly surprising that the wine industry is involved as well.

We all should know that compost and mulch are of great benefit when growing plants. Since grape-vines are plants, this applies to them as well — for some details, see Vineyards benefit from compost and mulch (from UC Berkeley) or Compost as mulch for vineyards (from CSIRO, Australia). One of the key components is carbon, and soil contains about twice as much carbon as the atmosphere and plants combined (A new estimate of US soil organic carbon to improve earth system models). There is growing recognition that agriculture should invest in building up this level through sustainable land management practices.

However, the wine industry sometimes goes further, by way of providing monetary incentives. For example, the California Association of Winegrape Growers has announced the California Compost Tax Credit Legislation. This legislation “seeks to incentivize sustainable agricultural practices, undertaken by winegrape growers and other ag producers, by offering a tax credit for the utilization of compost to enhance carbon sequestration efforts.” Other wine-grape regions should follow suit, around the world.

Moreover, we can also go one step further than this, into a broader perspective.

Obviously, what are usually called “winery wastes and by-products” are organic matter, and thus eminently suitable for re-use. The main solid by-product generated through winemaking is called Grape Pomace (GP). It comprises skins, seeds, stems, and disrupted cells from the grape pulp, and is reported to represent 20–25% of the total weight of processed grapes. So, there have been suggestions that we need to plan for its sustainable disposal.

This topic has recently been reviewed in: Grape pomace — advances in its bioactivity, health benefits, and food applications. The first step is what is fancifully called ‘valorization’, which simply means working out what each of the pomace components is worth, in terms of future use, such as offering new functional foods, but also contributing to solve waste management problems in the wine industry.

It is noted that GP comprises nutritional and bioactive compounds (eg. polyphenols, organic and fatty acids, vitamins, etc). Particularly, GP polyphenols have been recognized as exhibiting technological and health-promoting effects in different food and biological systems. This could be used as a food additive / ingredient in the development of novel food products (eg. enhancement of physicochemical, sensory and nutritional quality), along with technological and functional advantages. So, the review paper summarizes the current knowledge about the bioactivity and health–promoting effects of polyphenolic–rich extracts. There seems to be enormous potential; and the grape industry should be actively involved.

There is also the matter of organic viticulture (also called biodynamic farming, which name is celebrating its 100th anniversary this June) — this seeks to leave the vineyard as natural as possible. For further information, this is discussed in a multi–part web resource by Britt Karlsson, at: Organic, biodynamic and sustainable wine, an overview.

This approach can be taken even further, by adopting what might be called ‘regenerative’ practices. This basically involves leaving the ground undisturbed (ie. no ploughing of the soil), and also keeping the ground permanently covered with vegetation. This aims to increase the microbiological life and carbon content in the vineyard soils. One interesting example of this approach, aiming to re-instate the native vegetation where possible, is discussed in: Why Doña Paula is embracing nature in Argentina.

As a final point, at the moment it seems that re-cycling / re-using is one area in which Artificial Intelligence is not yet involved for the wine industry (What’s ahead for wine and artificial intelligence?). Currently, AI seems to be focused on productivity gains, rather than environmental sustainability. After all, in France, Bordeaux wine is now cheaper than bottled water (Winemakers’ anger over €1.66 Bordeaux wine)! You could also check out: A new definition for natural wine: it’s the people who are “natural”, not the wine (no AI here).

[Don’t miss last week’s short post on Easter and wine]

---

* I gather that in California, all of this recycling is done via three kerbside bins.

Easter and wine

Today is a public holiday throughout much of the Western world (Easter Monday). It therefore seems to be appropriate to briefly consider the topic of Easter and wine, a topic that I have not really touched on before in this blog. I will not say much, since religion is often a sensitive subject, sometimes with very strong opinions from all directions.

Easter is fairly early this year — it is a movable celebration that falls on the first Sunday after the first full moon on or after the spring equinox — this is called the Paschall Full Moon (How is Easter determined?). (If the Full Moon is on a Sunday then Easter is celebrated on the following Sunday.)

Easter is, among other things, a Christian festival and holiday commemorating the resurrection of Jesus Christ. We are told that Jesus of Nazareth was, himself, raised in a Jewish culture, and thus his association with wine was presumably that of a regular adult member of his place and time.

Wine therefore makes regular appearances in the Bible, at many events associated with Jesus. Indeed, his first reported miracle was turning water into wine, at the wedding at Cana in Galilee (Gospel of John 2:1-11).

I learned much of this because my father was a Methodist minister (in what was then the Methodist Church of Australasia) at the time of my birth (it is now part of the Uniting Church in Australia). * He continued in this role for some time afterwards (as also did his younger brother); but he eventually discovered, during my teenage years, that he was a much better computer programmer than a minister.

Easter Sunday is one of the most festive events among Christians; and, as suggested above, wine is commonly a part of those festivities. However, there are many references in the Scripture warning against drinking too much wine (eg. Proverbs 20:1, Isaiah 5:11), so we can conclude that excess intoxication is certainly a sin and should thus be avoided. Consequently, many people conclude that it is better to be safe than sorry, and stay away from alcohol altogether.

However, the latter is one of the two possible opposite interpretations. We can also go the other way, and ask relevant Easter questions like: Did Jesus drink wine at the Last Supper? ** As a Passover meal, it is likely that they would have drunk fresh grape juice if they had it (Last Supper: What wine was served at Jesus and the Apostles' final meal?). Along with the unleavened bread (ie. without yeast), they could have also have had unleavened drink (ie. without yeast). The question then would be where would they find fresh juice, with no refrigeration and the harvest being over for 6—7 months? Wine could be made with as little as 0—3% alcohol content, so perhaps this is the wine that was used. ***

I will finish with a comment more typical of this blog, which is about data not religion. Naturally, scientists are also interested in the topic of wine and the ancient world. As an example, you can read about one especially intriguing approach with the cheeky title: Could we soon drink the same wine as Jesus? DNA from ancient seeds is being used to resurrect 2,000-year-old drinks. ****

In the meantime, I hope that you have been enjoying your 2024 Easter, with or without suitable wine. *****

---

* The current President’s 2024 Easter message can be heard in this video.

** According to all four Gospels, the Last Supper was Jesus’ last meal with his disciples during the Passover week, before he was crucified on what is now called Good Friday (or Långfredagen in Swedish).

*** By way of contrast, see also: Low- and no-alcohol wines really do need to be the way of the future.

**** The oldest known evidence of wine-making dates back 6,000 years, in what are now Georgia and Armenia.

***** On Easter Saturday (Påskafton in Swedish), my wife, her sister, and I tasted: three small beers (Slottskällan Easter Dark Lager, Wisby Påsk, Nääs Påsköl), a red dinner wine (Vasse Felix Cabernet sauvignon 2012), and a small sweet white wine (Gardo & Morris Noble Riesling 2017). They were all excellent.

Decreasing wine consumption nearly (but not quite) everywhere

As a wine lover in the modern world, the hardest thing to write about is wine consumption. It is decreasing, consistently, and has been for quite some time (see my post: Global wine consumption has been declining for a long time). My new blog post this week simply compiles a collection of the related data released in very recent months. The data all say the same thing: in most places you should sell your vineyard now, while you still can get some money for it. I wouldn’t go into the wine-production business any time soon.

So, let’s start with world wine consumption, as depicted in the report: the OIV State of the World Vine and Wine Sector report for 2022. As you can see (above), consumption has been decreasing (erratically) for the past 15 years. with a steeper decrease for the past 5 years. The media make it clear that it is the younger generations (Millennial and Gen-Z) who are responsible for much of this, by not taking up wine drinking in the same way that their elders did (Why the world has a huge wine glut and why it’s only going to get worse). So, this situation is not likely to change any time soon. Part of this attitude is due to alcohol moderation, of course; and it is not yet really clear how much this is directly affecting the wine industry (Who is winning from the moderation trend?).

We can now look at the consumption in various individual countries. The above graph covers several well-known wine-consuming (and producing) countries (these FAO data come from: Gro Intelligence). So, France and Italy are going down, China and the USA are going up, and Africa is steady. This means that it is not all gloom and doom.

We can even look at the declining consumption in Sweden, which is also down, for even longer than the global trend. This graph is from my local newspaper, Uppsala Nya Tidning (16 mars 2024). (Oddly, the downward trend started at exactly the time I moved to Sweden, from Australia!)

The reasons for decline are discussed by, for example: Why are so many wine regions dealing with oversupply? Dan Berger also discusses the issue (Growing price sensitivity among consumers):

The decline in wine sales is pervasive, challenged by an increasing array of non-alcoholic beverages and changing consumer behavior. Gone are the days of reasonable wine markup in many retail shops and restaurants, leaving a market now brimming with quality wines that are still overpriced. This shift comes as American wine consumption per capita has dipped to its lowest in two decades, signaling a significant change in consumer preferences.

These data interact with the traditional value-versus-volume distinction (eg. Germany books wine exports value growth but dip in volumes). In this case, the volume of consumption decreases but the consumed wine is of higher value — it is the cheaper stuff that usually decreases, leaving the up-market consumers still drinking.

Furthermore, these graphs refer to the total consumption. We can also look at the per capita consumption (ie. per person), which often shows a different pattern. The above graph is from: Is wine consumption set to decline in the U.S.?, where the overall US increase is matched by the consumption per person. At that link, Tom Wark discusses this pattern in detail.

For comparison (above), are some equivalent data for European countries per person (from: Europe's heaviest drinkers: These are the countries that are drinking more alcohol than before). It shows that overall per-person alcohol consumption in the E.U. has declined by 0.5 liters between 2010 and 2020. However, the individual countries differed a lot, so that consumption fell in 25 countries but increased in 11 countries. In 2020, annual alcohol consumption varied from 1.2 liters in Turkey to 12.1 liters in Latvia.

It is also of interest to compare the wine sales to the accumulating wine inventory, which we do above for the U.S.A. (from: Growing price sensitivity among consumers) — both sales and inventory have plateaued recently. In this regard, global consumption patterns can, of course, have a big effect on all wine-exporting countries (eg. Global decline in wine consumption further reduces Australia’s export performance), which consequently increase their inventory when their export sales decrease.

Mind you, America’s love of wines from southern Europe, (France and Italy especially), is a one-sided affair (America’s one-sided love of European wine). According to Eurostat data, the U.S.A. imported more than 5 million hectoliters from France and Italy between August 1 2022 and July 31 2023, while Europe’s five largest wine producers imported little more than 300,000 hectoliters of wine from the U.S.A.

I have also wondered about the data saying that nearly 68 million gallons of foreign bulk wine was imported by California wineries in 2022 (Imported foreign bulk wine: the dirty secret no one in California wine is talking about). How can this be happening when local U.S. production is at risk? After all, 2023 was a dreadful year for wine sales, with a 9% drop in shipments from producers to distributors (The big US wine market roundup). If you want to read up on this, the data at that link are sliced and diced by age group, race and gender.

Finally, on a brighter note, it is worth noting that: China bucks the Gen-Z wine trend, with increasing alcohol consumption in that particular generation. Also, IWSR forecasts suggest a continued upward trajectory for India’s beverage alcohol market in 2024 and beyond (Bucking the trend: India’s promise as a beverage alcohol market). Against a backdrop of 1% volume growth for global total beverage alcohol in 2022, spirits volumes in India increased by 12%, with beer up 38%, wine up 19% and RTDs up 40%. Even the U.S.A. has people predicting a “turnaround in the middle of 2024” for wine sales, followed by “a slow recovery in 2025” (Turnaround predicted for wine sales in the US in 2024).

I have produced a few other previous posts on this topic of wine consumption:

• When will world wine consumption finally catch up with production?
• Does wine production increase wine consumption?
• Why does world wine production always exceed consumption?

Is AI in the wine industry all that it is cracked up to be?

Well, of course not. After all, the people advocating Artificial Intelligence (AI) are often the ones selling it; so they are wildly enthusiastic. Moreover, it is probably not the biggest issue currently facing the wine industry (for examples, see: California isn’t on track to meet its climate change mandates; or Wine Market Council explores demographics and engagement). However, there are clearly uses for AI, or no-one would be pursuing it. So, let’s look at some of the suggestions for the wine industry.

AI involves the use of computers to perform tasks previously done by humans, but without immediate direct human control (sometimes called Machine Learning). So, using a spreadsheet to calculate the farm budget does not count as AI, but having a computer run your farm tractor does. The tractor’s computer program was, originally, written by a human being, of course, but after that the computer takes control of the tractor.

Given the very broad nature of the wine industry (agriculture, production, distribution, wholesale, retailing), there are lots of ways AI can get involved. So, let’s look at some of the AI involvements that have been suggested (see also: How artificial intelligence will change the world of wine, from vineyard to wine glass). A complementary idea is the Internet of Things (IoT), which refers to devices with sensors, processing ability, software and other technologies that connect and exchange data with devices and systems over the internet (or other communications networks) — it is usually a valuable complement to AI.

We’ll start with what is perceived to be the current situation and the expectations. Simone Loose, head of the Institute of Wine & Beverage at Geisenheim University, has said (Wine industry needs to professionalise to survive):

The wine industry is years behind other sectors in terms of technological advancement. Two-thirds of producers aren’t even using Excel, which means they’re not analysing their commercial business. This is a big problem ... How are wine businesses going to reach the consumer? If they’re not profitable as a business, how are they going to pay for marketing strategies? The ones who will survive are those who are the most professional.

She has described how AI can help boost professional productivity, particularly when it comes to smaller producers who have yet to properly commercialize or strategize engagement with customers. Sadly, AI is currently cost-prohibitive across the supply chain for most people, except for the larger producers (small producers and Big Wine live in completely different universes!). Yet, she contends, utilizing AI in more focused areas could help make a big difference to smaller producers’ sales.

So, it has been reported that vine-growers and winemakers are, indeed, incorporating technology into their production process, as the industry faces challenges with consumer demands and the climate crisis (Vineyards embrace AI and IoT for better, tastier wine). We have often done this sort of thing in the past (eg. planting entire vineyards with a selected preferred grape-vine clone), but not always to our ultimate benefit in the modern world of changing climates (Why producers are reviving this ancient planting system).

So, I guess that we should start with the vineyard. First, here we encounter the IoT, where sensors can be installed across the vineyard. These allow viticulturists to visualize data about the relevant environmental parameters, like temperature, humidity, soil moisture, and wind speed. These parameters matter because grape-vines are perennial plants, so that each one lives for many years in the same spot, accumulating the effect of its local environment. * There is also the idea of using AI-powered robots to control vineyard pests without chemicals (Robots in the vineyards: could AI be a green winemaking solution?), by naturally disrupting the mating of those pests.

Similarly, it is reported that Monarch Tractor, for example, which is the maker of the MK-V, the world’s first fully electric, driver-optional (autonomous) smart tractor (pictured above), is expanding globally (Monarch tractor expansion across the US and Europe). This follows on from the original appearance of electric tractors themselves (First Monarch electric tractor arrives at Oregon vineyard). Moreover, using AI-robots for harvesting (grapes, apples, strawberries, etc) is actively being worked on — it seems to be only a matter of time (it was all the rage in 2020, but you don’t hear quite so much about it these days).

In the winery, we also encounter IoT sensors, which, when inside fermentation tanks, can help detect leaks, monitor the fermentation activity, and show temperature trends. Computers already control things like press cycles, fermentation temperatures, and other processes. Furthermore, AI-powered tools can be used to help wine-makers find optimal wine blends, where AI and chemistry combine to create wine-blending recipes.

When it comes to bottles, it has been reported (Greencroft Bottling: ready to offer most sustainable packaging possible) that the latest artificial intelligence technology has been integrated into some of the systems (for example, AI drives the inspection equipment on the labeling machines).

Of course, as mentioned above, the cost of the grapes, the wine-making, packaging, shipping, additional warehousing and transportation, and then the multiple layers of distribution, all need to be budgeted. This has long been where computers are very useful, and where forecasting can thus benefit from AI. This may not have much to do with wine-making, since grapes are seldom more than 10% of the total cost (Gross margins: breaking down the price of a bottle of wine).

Retailing is a whole other thing. As an example, linguistic tools such as ChatGPT have the capability to convert information on a producer’s inventory and brand into marketing or e-commerce strategies. Conversely, one of the most interesting discussions of the negative effects of AI is: The smartphone’s role in wine's decline.

When it comes to recommending wine to the wine-buying public, there are, indeed, AI-powered wine recommendation tools, which are reported to increase sales (New data shows DRINKS AI-powered personalized wine recommendations deliver surge in online wine sales). Indeed, this prompts us to ask the basic question: Can machines taste wine? The answer is currently “yes and no”; but it does prompt us to start Rethinking the role of wine professionals.

The bottom line, at the moment, is that electronic drinks recommenders are based on data from the established critics / commentators (Is AI like Chowbot coming for my wine critic job?). So, humans are still needed at this level. Indeed, it can be argued that To Save the wine industry, we’ll need a human intervention.

Conclusion

So, AI and the IoT should be helpers not replacers — we must benefit from them not rely on them. They do not allow us to work less (or not work at all), but mean that we will now work differently. AI is a tool that can make things better, but which can also be abused.

AI seems to be here to stay (EU Parliament approves the Artificial Intelligence Act), so we need to get the hang of it, and its impact. However, I am not sure that it is yet giving most of us anything that we either want or need. All it is doing is making things different.

I taught for years at several different universities, in both Australia and Sweden, and it is not sarcasm to note that Human Intelligence varies greatly among individuals. One of the great hopes of Artificial Intelligence is to try to level the playing field, so that we all get subjected to the same level of intelligence around us. Does it yet match that goal?

At the moment, my car’s computer system makes a lot of suggestions for what my driving should look like, at any given moment. However, I still do the steering, and press the accelerator and brake pedals (the clutch is automatic!). I am not sure how safe I would feel if the computer was doing the latter tasks, as well; but I and the drivers around me may actually be a lot safer if it was. **

Mind you, it was recently reported that two Indonesian airline pilots both fell asleep simultaneously on a flight (A plane flew for 28 minutes with both pilots asleep), thus relying entirely on the autopilot. They drifted off course a bit, but landed safely at their destination after they both woke up. This is AI at its best!

---

* The downside of being perennial is that grape-growers are loathe to pull them out (USA: Growers are pulling out grapevines — but not fast enough; Australia: Vineyards rush to sell millions of litres of wine at cut price).

** However, much of modern car technology is very expensive to maintain (The insanely high cost of tech failures in newer cars); and it also feels very much like an invasion of privacy, given how much of our personal behavior the newer cars record and permanently store (Mr Orwell, your car has arrived).