What is an old vine?

We are sometimes told that wines made from “old vines” are special, in some way. However, it has also been noted that "the global wine market does not structurally value old vines, or treat old vine wine as a premium category of rich and enduring worth" (The Old Vine Conference). Old vines have their own worth as the heritage of the wine industry, irrespective of the wines themselves, and independently of their low production levels.

However, oldness is a relative thing. In the USA “old vine” seems to mean anything more than 30 years old. In Australia, they don't call them “old” unless they come from the 1800s (the oldest recorded ones seem to have been planted before 1850). If I look out my back window, I can see a dozen oak trees that seem to be a couple of hundred years old, so even 1850 may be a bit young, for a plant.

If I look out my front window, I can see across the field to the farmhouse that used to own the land on which my house stands — it appears on a map dated 1699. My house, on the other hand, dates from 1990. If I look out my side window, I can see across the creek to the church, which is dated c. 1400 AD. In front of it stands the original small chapel, which is dated c. 1200 AD.

This is not an exercise in one-up-manship, but is intended simply to emphasize that oldness is relative, not absolute. A medieval church is obviously older than almost all plants. We therefore need to compare plants with plants; and also we should really use the word “older” instead of “old”.

There is, as far as I know, no official definition of “old vines”, or “vieilles vignes” if you prefer French. As far as individual plants are concerned, you can read about the oldest known grapevines in Wikipedia; but we are talking here about whole vineyards, producing commercial wines.

Let’s start with what are believed to be the oldest vineyards, so that we have a baseline. They are all in Australia, which has the advantage of isolation in order to preserve much of its heritage.

The Freedom Shiraz vineyard, at Langmeil in the Barossa Valley (South Australia), was apparently planted in 1843, by Christian Auricht. His original plantings survive today (c. 1 acre), although the vineyard now combines younger vines with the originals. Similarly, the Turkey Flat Shiraz vineyard, also in the Barossa Valley, was planted in 1847, by Johann Frederick August Fiedler. These seem to be the oldest vines whose age has been authenticated; but today they are also a combination of younger vines with the originals.

The oldest vineyard that is claimed to consist entirely of original vines is another Shiraz one, but this time from the Goulburn Valley (Victoria). The Tahbilk Shiraz vineyard was established in 1860, with Ludovic Marie as vigneron. It has had a checkered history, but the original cellars and vineyard from 1860 are still in use.* Incidentally, Tahbilk also claims to have the largest single holding of Marsanne grapevines in the world (100 acres), originally also planted in 1860, although the current vines date from 1927.

There are apparently a couple of other vineyards in the world, some of whose vines date back to this same period. Jancis Robinson's Old Vine Register was originally compiled by Tamlyn Currin in 2010, and it has been updated occasionally since then (last updated 27 Nov 2019). It lists two such vineyards:

• Henri Marionnet, Domaine de la Charmoise (Touraine, Loire, France) — c.1850
• Hess Family, Colomé (Calchaqui Valley, Salta, Argentina) — 1854

However, most of the other vineyards that have been formally recorded date from the 1880s onward.

For example, California's Historic Vineyard Society has a Registry of Heritage Vineyards, based on three criteria:

• A currently producing California wine vineyard
• Original planting date at least 50 years ago
• At least 1/3 of existing producing vines can be traced back to the original planting date.

This register lists 10 vineyards dating from the 1880s, and 21 from the 1890s. The oldest 10 are:

• Saucelito Canyon (San Luis Obispo) — 1880?
• Cazas Vineyard (Temecula Valley) — 1882
• Old Hill Ranch (Sonoma Valley) — 1885
• Bechthold (Lodi) — 1886
• Monte Rosso (Moon Mountain) — 1886
• Dona Marcelinas (Santa Rita Hills) — 1887?
• Bedrock (Sonoma Valley) — 1888
• Martinelli Road / Banfield) (Russian River Valley) — 1880s
• Old Crane / G.B. Crane Vineyard (St. Helena) — 1880s
• Picchetti (Santa Cruz Mountains) — 1880s

There is also a South Africa Old Vine Project, which has a list of the 30 Oldest Old Vine Blocks in South Africa. The oldest three date from 1900 (in Wellington, Swartland, and Breedekloof).

Given the number of older vines in the Barossa Valley, it should come as no surprise that there has been one attempt to formalize a few definitions of oldness, in the form of the Barossa Old Vine Charter (2009):

• Barossa Old Vine — at least 35 years of age
• Barossa Survivor Vine — at least 70 years of age
• Barossa Centenarian Vine — at least 100 years of age
• Barossa Ancestor Vine — at least 125 years of age

These refer to individual vines, not whole vineyards; but at least ten vineyards in the Barossa and (adjacent) Eden Valleys are listed as having patches of Ancestor Vines (see Australia’s Old Vines). These include 31 acres Shiraz, 19 acres Grenache, 11 acres Cabernet sauvignon, 9 acres Sémillon, and 7 acres Mourvèdre. Some of the other very early vineyards include:

• Cirillo Estate Wines (Barossa Valley) — 1850
• Old Garden Vineyard (Barossa Valley) — 1853
  
• Torbreck Russell Vineyard (Barossa Valley) — 1857

Vineyards meeting the definition of Ancestor Vine do also occur elsewhere in Australia. For example, we have:

• Tyrrell’s Wines (Hunter Valley) Stevens Vineyard Old Patch — 1867
• Bests's Wines (Great Western) — 1868
• Tyrrell’s Wines (Hunter Valley) 4 Acres Vineyard — 1879
• Mount Pleasant (Hunter Valley) Old Hill Vineyard — 1880

Incidentally, Tyrrell’s Wines also has what they believe to be the oldest Chardonnay vines in the world, in their HVD Vineyard, dating from 1908. The oldest Cabernet sauvignon vines are believed to be in Penfold's Kalimna Vineyard Block 42 (Barossa Valley), dating from 1888. It should not surprise you that most French vines post-date World War I, and many post-date World War II, as well. Australia's isolation has served it's wine industry well, in this case.

---

* The winery is definitely worth a visit. I still remember a visit at the beginning of a cold winter day, in which I literally had to cup the tasting glass in my hand for a minute, to warm it enough to smell its contents.

The world’s best vineyard experiences?

Every inspirational web site tells you to: ‘Fill your life with experiences, not things; have stories to tell, not stuff to show.’ In one sense this sounds like a good idea; but it is also debatable whether any of us want to listen to all of your stories about places we have never been, and to which we will probably never get to go, rather than simply have a quick look at your holiday snaps.

Anyway, given this philosophy, it is hardly surprising that carefully prepared vineyard and winery experiences for tourists have come to the fore in recent years. Some of these are described in: Out-of-the-box winery experiences help wineries reach new customers: “From helicopter and horseback to Peloton rides, brand awareness and customer engagement are the goal — not ROI.”. This seems quite unlike the old days, where the main idea was to taste the wines.

In this regard, The World’s Best Vineyards Academy tries, each year, to compile a list of the world’s best vineyard experiences. It works like this:

The Academy comprises nearly 600 leading wine aficionados, sommeliers, and luxury travel correspondents from across the globe. Each has been selected for their expert opinion of the international wine and wine tourism scene. [Each year,] they each vote for 7 vineyards in preferential order. There is no pre-determined checklist of criteria, except that the vineyard must be open to the general public. Each vote is a nomination for a vineyard experience that they deem to be the best in the world. The experience will take in all things connected with the visit — the tour, tasting, ambiance, wine, food, staff, view, value for money, reputation, accessibility. It’s everything that makes a vineyard visit a valuable and rewarding experience for visitors, and makes guests want to return or recommend a visit to their friends.

Sounds reasonable, at least to me. Three ranked lists have been released to date: 2019 (a list of 50 vineyards), 2020 (also 50 vineyards), and 2021 (a list of 100 vineyards). Obviously, the thing for us to do in this blog is to compile the three lists, to compare and contrast them. So, I downloaded all three of them, and then created a combined ranked listing, which I report on here.

There are 112 vineyards listed at least once, but only 31 of them appeared in all three lists. This is somewhat less than 30%, which seems to imply that vineyard experiences are not all that repeatable from year to year.

There are 26 vineyards that appeared in two of the lists; and 55 that appeared only once. That is, c.50% of the vineyards had only one good showing. Of them, the unexpected ones are from the 2019 list, where: R. López de Heredia Viña Tondonia (Rioja, Spain) came in 3rd, but was never listed again; and Weingut Tement (Styria, Austria) came 15th, while suffering a similar fate. These are serious falls from grace.

For those vineyards that appeared in two out of the three lists, there were 2 that appeared in the first two lists but not the third (ie. they faded from view through time), and 16 that appeared in the second and third lists but not the first (ie. they rose to prominence). What is odd, though, is that there are also 8 vineyards that appeared in the first and last lists (ie. 2019 & 2021) but not the middle one (2020).

This latter point does make me wonder a bit about the choices by the experts, and how much of a lottery the results might be. After all, it is not like all of these vineyards were borderline in the lists. For example, Bodega Colomé (Salta, Argentina) was listed 25th (2019) and 35th (2021), Viña Santa Rita (Maipo Valley, Chile) was 26th and 28th, Creation Wines (Walker Bay, South Africa) was 45th and 10th, and El Enemigo Wines (Mendoz, Argentina) was 41st and 24th. It is hard to believe that they all went off the boil for a year in the middle.

Anyway, we do have 31 vineyards that were consistent across the three lists. These are listed below, in the order of their average rank across the lists.

Zuccardi Valle de Uco (Mendoza, Argentina) was listed at the top of all three lists (pictured below), while Bodega Garzón (Maldonado, Uruguay) was 2nd, 2nd and 4th (pictured above). So, a vinous trip to South America is clearly called for. In addition, in the top 7 were Montes (Colchagua Valley, Chile), Catena Zapata (Mendoza, Argentina) and Viña VIK (Cachapoal Valley, Chile), thus providing three more reasons to buy that plane ticket. This may explain the recent interest in The new cult vineyards of South America.

Overall, there were 7 (of the 31) vineyards from Chile, 3 from each of Argentina and France, and two from each of Australia, Germany, New Zealand, Spain, Uruguay and the USA. There was one vineyard each for Austria, Greece, Italy, Lebanon, Portugal, and South Africa. Fortunately, that does cover the major wine-producing countries, so, no matter where you are there is an experience nearby.

In one sense, to me this is all beside the point. The best wine experience, it seems to me, is to sit down with the actual winemaker in a relaxed manner for a chat about the wines: all of the rest makes it seem more like Disneyland than a genuine life experience.

In this sense, one of my personal favorite stories involves Llew Knight, of Granite Hills winery in the Macedon region of Australia. This was a long time ago, when both of us were much younger. His parents were looking after the tasting room when I came in. However, when they realized that I was not just a passing tourist, but had specifically targeted them, they called their son in to take over. He was clearly watching the football at the time, but came out anyway, for which I have always been grateful. This sort of simple country friendliness is one of the things I value most.

To bore you with a second story, I once visited Talijancich Wines, of the Swan Valley in Western Australia (back in the 1980s). It had until recently been called Peter’s Wines, and a colleague of mine (named Peter Valder) liked to serve his dinner guests with a label that matched his own name; so he asked me to get a supply for him, since I was in the area. I knew nothing about the place before arriving. However, I still remember having my socks knocked off by their fortified wine, which had more flavors competing for attention than anything else I have ever tasted. They explained to me that it was simply a blend of all of their wines that had ever won an award. This sort of pleasant surprise is my sort of experience.

---

This list covers the 31 vineyards that made it onto all three lists of the World’s Best Vineyards (2019–2021). They are listed in order of their average rank.

Winery Zuccardi Valle de Uco Bodega Garzón Montes Bodegas de los Herederos del Marqués de Riscal Catena Zapata Quinta do Crasto Viña VIK Antinori nel Chianti Classico (Marchesi Antinori) Château Smith Haut Lafitte Rippon Craggy Range Domäne Wachau Château Margaux Clos Apalta Robert Mondavi Winery Schloss Johannisberg Weingut Dr Loosen Penfolds Magill Estate Delaire Graff Estate Opus One Winery d’Arenberg Familia Torres — Pacs del Penedès Bodegas RE Château Mouton Rothschild Viña Casas del Bosque Viu Manent Bodegas Salentein Bodega Bouza Château Héritage Viña Errázuriz Domaine Sigalas

Region Mendoza Maldonado Colchagua Valley Rioja Mendoza Douro Valley Cachapoal Valley Tuscany Bordeaux Central Otago Hawke’s Bay Wachau Bordeaux Colchagua Valley Napa Valley Rheingau Mosel South Australia Stellenbosch Napa Valley South Australia Catalonia Casablanca Valley Bordeaux Casablanca Valley Colchagua Valley Mendoza Montevideo Bekaa Valley Aconcagua Valley Santorini

Country Argentina Uruguay Chile Spain Argentina Portugal Chile Italy France New Zealand New Zealand Austria France Chile United States Germany Germany Australia South Africa United States Australia Spain Chile France Chile Chile Argentina Uruguay Lebanon Chile Greece

Are alcohol-free wines drinkable (by wine drinkers)?

We have recently been told that the biggest growth segment in the wine industry is low-alcohol and alcohol-free wines (Rising trend: low alcohol and alcohol free wine). Estimates of growth over the past few years are in the region of  25% (Trend towards low and no alcohol gathers pace, outstripping overall wine category) to 33% (The majority of non-alcoholic drinkers in the US also buy booze) and on to 45% (Low- and no-alcohol category gets a boost from consumer wellness trends).

This does not, of course, mean that such wines are taking over the industry, as the segment apparently still accounts for less than 1% of the market (Non-alcoholic beer, wine and drink sales soar as quality improves). However, this does mean that the current state of the art is worth looking at.

Low-alcohol wines seem to include everything that is below the common alcohol concentration for any given wine type — eg. <11% ABV for reds and <10% for whites. This seems more like “lower” rather than “low”. It is often achieved, in practice, by choosing grapes from varieties that naturally produce wines with the desired alcohol level (eg. Gamay, Riesling, Moscato, or the Vinho Verde varieties such as Alvarinho).

Alcohol-free wines are another thing entirely. Here, we need to remove the alcohol from the fermented grape-juice, getting it to <1% ABV — without impairing the expected wine sensory perception, including mouth-feel (texture), balance (acidity), and typicity (aromas and tastes).

On the face of it, this seems to be a hopeless task. What we do first is convert the grape sugar into alcohol (by fermentation); and then we try to remove that alcohol from the resulting juice (eg. by spinning cone technology, or by reverse osmosis). It seems to me that this is likely to leave us with strange-tasting sugar-free grape juice.

Apparently I am not the only one to think this (What are the opportunities for the no- low-alcohol wine category?): “The consumer data collected by Wine Intelligence over the past 5 years has been telling a similar story: no- and low-alcohol wine is a good idea in theory, but consumers are often disappointed by the taste profile of products in these categories”.

So, some manufacturers subsequently add a bit of grape concentrate at the end (eg. 5%), in an attempt to improve matters; and some makers even add a bit of flavoring, and even gum arabic for texture. All of these things can be produced organically, of course, so that the resulting alcohol-free wine can legitimately be labeled “organic”. Mind you, I have noticed that several wineries do not actually mention their alcohol-free wines on their websites!

However, would a wine drinker want to drink the result? This is a question I asked myself recently; and I decided to find out. [Updated: 18-Nov-21.]

To find out empirically, I bought most of the wines available in my local Swedish liquor chain (Systembolaget), as well as my local supermarket (ICA), which cover a range of styles, and a range of prices (40 unique brands). I expect these wines to be representative of those available elsewhere, and many of them are also available in other countries. None of them are actually made here in Sweden, although they are quite popular here — for example, the data on Exports of Australian reduced alcohol wine by market show that 47% of their total goes to Sweden.

My long-suffering wife and I then drank all of them, one per day. Here, I report on the results, which are summarized in the table at the bottom of this post. Our thoughts focus on the taste, because without alcohol there is not much aroma. Interestingly, the amount of residual alcohol (0%—0.5%) seemed to make no difference to the wines.

Starting with the reds (9 wines), all of them tasted awful, although the Domaine de la Prade is drinkable. They all tend to taste the same, irrespective of grape or geographic origin — that is, they taste like grape juice, not wine. The producers describe this as “bursting with bright red fruits”! It's like discovering that all of red-wine diversity has been reduced to Beaujolais Nouveau. There is nothing wrong with Beaujolais Nouveau, but there is more to red wine than solely this. Interestingly, like Beaujolais Nouveau, the wines do taste better chilled.

The whites (9 wines) are definitely a step up, as they can handle the grapey fruitiness, by being chilled. However, they also tend all to taste the same, irrespective of grape or origin — they do not taste anything like the nominated grape, unlike wine. This is not to say that they are not a refreshing beverage, of the simple and fruity type (although the Santa Monica was a bit acidic).

The rosé drinks (5 wines) are very similar to the whites, and thus similar comments apply. In this case, for the cheap alcoholic versions, no-one expects rosé to taste like any particular grape; so, the lack of diversity is no surprise. You would not, however, mistake any of these for a real rosé.

This brings us to the sparkling versions (17 wines). These are far and away the best of the segment. The bubbles can handle the grape fruitiness, by cutting through it. They are all carbonated, of course, and the cheapest ones go flat fast. However, as a refreshing aperitif, or even with a meal, most of these are quite acceptable. In terms of flavors, they tend to taste more like pear or apple than anything else. However, the top-7 in terms of price were a step above this, and actually tasted a bit more like wine.

I am not the first to note that the sparklings do better than the others ( “the carbonic acid provides freshness and mouthfeel”). Indeed, it is reported that Brut sparkling wines demand to dominate, yielding a third of the global revenue share.

Overall, I remain unimpressed. Alcohol-free wine may be good for your health, but that does not make it is good for your taste buds. It has been reported that quality is increasing (Pleasure without remorse: the best non-alcoholic wines; Best non-alcoholic wine 2021), and I hope so.

However, I would probably much prefer just to drink fresh fruit juice, rather than trying to consume doubly-processed grape juice. After all, making wine and then de-alcoholizing it is more complicated than just making the wine in the first place, and yet most alcohol-free wine is less expensive than its alcohol-containing counterpart — that should give you a hint about what to expect in terms of quality.

To test the idea of preferring fruit juice, I also purchased two of the ones in wine bottles, available on the same shelves in the shops:

• Azienda Iris P.Lex Pure Sparkling Glera (Italy; $7.50) (carbonated grape juice)
  
• Le Petit Béret Organic Chardonnay (France; $10.25) (grape extract, grape juice, apple concentrate)
  

These both tasted like grapes, although the latter had a hint of apple. They were the equal to fruitiness of the de-alcoholized whites.

We tasted all of these wines so that you don’t have to. The best summary is indicated by my wife's expression of relief when she got a real wine with her dinner, after five evenings of drinking the de-alcoholized stuff (and several more nights afterwards). If I want grape juice, I will just buy unprocessed grape juice. If I want still wine, then in order to cut down on my alcohol intake I may be better off choosing ones that are naturally lower in alcohol (eg. Gamay, Alvarinho). However, the top-level sparkling wines would probably pass muster even with a (co-operative) wine-preferring guest.

---

Producer   Reds Jacob’s Creek Carl Jung Les Grands Chais de France Enjoy Wine & Spirits Treasury Wine Estates Treasury Wine Estates Sommestad & Malmnäs Oddbird Edenvale   Whites Carl Jung Henkell Freixenet Casa de la Ermita Miguel Torres Enjoy Wine & Spirits Treasury Wine Estates Jacob’s Creek Josef Leitz Edenvale   Rosé Carl Jung Jacob’s Creek Reh Kendermann José Maria da Fonseca Josef Leitz   Sparkling G. Patritti Henkell Freixenet Henkell Freixenet Les Grands Chais de France Treasury Wine Estates Treasury Wine Estates Arc-en-Ciel Enjoy Wine & Spirits Henkell Oddbird Pernod Ricard Domaine Wines GodDryck i Sverige GodDryck i Sverige Oddbird Oddbird GodDryck i Sverige

Wine name     UnVined red Carl Jung JP Chenet So Free Barrels and Drums Lindeman’s Rawson’s Retreat Cognato Domaine de la Prade Premium Reserve     Carl Jung Chapel Hill Santa Monica Natureo Barrels and Drums Lindeman’s UnVined white Eins Zwei Zero white     Carl Jung Rosé UnVined Rosé Black Tower Rosé Periquita Rosé Eins Zwei Zero     Billabong Brut Chapel Hill Chapel Hill Rosé Nozeco Lindeman’s Rawson’s Retreat Rosé Mousseux Brut Barrels and Drums Mionetto 0.0% Spumante Campo Viejo Gran 0% Richard Juhlin Blanc de Blancs GodDryck No 1 Sparkling White GodDryck No 2 Sparkling Rosé Rosé Blanc de Blancs GodDryck No 1 Prestige Cuvée

Grape(s)     Shiraz Merlot Cabernet sauvignon + Syrah Merlot Cabernet sauvignon Cabernet sauvignon Cabernet sauvignon + Cinsault Merlot + Shiraz Pinot noir     Chardonnay Chardonnay Viognier + Macabeo Muscat Chardonnay Semillon Chardonnay Mostly Riesling Riesling Pinot gris     unspecified Shiraz Grenache + Tempranillo + Syrah Syrah Pinot noir     unspecified unspecified unspecified unspecified Chardonnay + Pinot noir + Muscat Chardonnay + Pinot noir + Muscat Grenache Chardonnay Glera Glera Xarel-lo + Macabeo + Parellada Chardonnay Sémillon + Airén + Sauvignon blanc Cabernet sauvignon + C. franc + Merlot Chardonnay + Pinot noir Chardonnay Chardonnay + Sauvignon blanc

Source     South-eastern Australia Germany (Spain) France Germany (Spain?) South-eastern Australia South-eastern Australia South Africa France South-eastern Australia     Germany (Spain) Hungary Spain Spain Germany (Spain?) South-eastern Australia South-eastern Australia Germany South-eastern Australia     Germany (Spain) South-eastern Australia Germany (Spain) Portugal Germany     South-eastern Australia Hungary Hungary France South-eastern Australia South-eastern Australia France Germany (Spain?) Italy Italy Spain France Spain + France France France France Spain + France

Alcohol ABV   0.5% 0% 0.3% 0% 0% 0.5% 0.5% 0% 0.5%     0% 0% 0.5% 0% 0% 0% 0.5% 0% 0.5%     0% 0.5% 0% 0.5% 0%     0.3% 0% 0% 0.4% 0% 0.5% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0.2% 0.2% 0% 0% 0%

USD     $4.50 $5.00 $4.50 $6.50 $6.50 $6.75 $8.00 $10.25 $11.50     $4.75 $4.75 $6.50 $6.50 $6.50 $6.50 $6.75 $8.00 $9.25     $4.75 $5.75 $5.75 $5.75 $8.00     $4.50 $5.00 $5.25 $5.75 $6.75 $7.00 $7.00 $7.00 $9.25 $9.25 $10.25 $10.25 $10.25 $10.25 $11.00 $11.00 $14.00

Unrecorded versus officially Recorded alcohol consumption

Reports of national alcohol consumption (either total or per capita) have always seemed a bit odd, to me. How do the people reporting this know how much people are drinking? Well, obviously, they can do surveys, and ask people how much they are prepared to say that they drink (eg. Completeness and validity of alcohol recording in general practice within the UK). The reporters could also estimate the total amount of alcohol officially available (local production plus the imported stuff), and then divide by the number of people involved.

However, all of this ignores what is usually called the “unreported” or “unrecorded” consumption. This includes all sorts of alcohol, such as home-made fermented wine and beer, home-made distilled spirits (moonshine), smuggled alcohol, re-purposed alcohol (eg. originally intended for industrial or medical uses), surrogate alcohol (eg. ethanol), etc. What are we supposed to think regarding all of this? Doesn’t this also count as “alcohol consumption”?

Well, it turns out that the World Health Organization has had a go at trying to look into this topic. Their WHO Global Status Report on Alcohol and Health 2018 has data for both Recorded and Unrecorded alcohol consumption for each of 189 countries (or territories). You can also find the data tabulated on Wikipedia (List of countries by alcohol consumption per capita).

The data are 3-year averages for 2015–2017, based on persons 15 years and older. The Recorded alcohol “is alcohol consumed as a beverage that is recorded in official statistics, such as data on alcohol taxation or sales” (see the WHO Global Survey on Alcohol and Health), while the Unrecorded amount was mathematically modeled based on the data from several surveys, including expert judgements (see Appendix IV.1.2 of the WHO report). Both data are reported as pure alcohol consumption in liters per capita per year.

I have graphed the data in the following figure. Each point represents one country (or territory) in the WHO table, with the Recorded consumption horizontally and the Unrecorded consumption vertically. The so-called western countries are represented by the orange dots, with the remainder in blue.

The pink line represents the situation where the two types of consumption are equal — above the line, estimated Unrecorded consumption exceeds the officially Recorded consumption, and vice versa below the line.

Note, first, that there are not actually 189 dots visible in the graph, as some countries are superimposed, notably those with both consumptions reported as zero: Bangladesh, Kuwait, Libya, Mauritania, Somalia, and Yemen. Other countries have minuscule consumption, including: Afghanistan, Egypt, Iraq, Kiribati, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, and Syria. These are, as expected, all Moslem-dominated countries.

For the western countries (orange dots in the graph), Recorded consumption usually far exceeds Unrecorded consumption. For example, the countries at the bottom-right of the graph include (from the right); Estonia, Lithuania, Czechia, and Austria. However, there are five such countries where Unrecorded consumption exceeds 30% of the total consumption (the orange points towards the top of the graph): North Macedonia (43%), Greece (40%), the Ukraine (36%), Albania (33%) and Russia (31%). Conversely, those countries where Recorded consumption is less than 10% of the total consumption include: Austria (3.4%), Estonia (6.5%), Italy (6.6%), the Netherlands (7.4%), Australia (7.7%), Lithuania (8.0%), the United States (8.3%) and Belgium (8.8%).

The non-western country at the top-right of the graph is Nigeria, with the sixth biggest total consumption, but with 28% of this being Unrecorded. The countries on the left of the line (Unrecorded > Recorded) are (from top to bottom): Vietnam, Myanmar, Tajikistan, the Maldives, East Timor, and Nepal. Here, access to professionally produced drinks is apparently very limited.

Note that Haiti is on the bottom axis (zero Unrecorded consumption), and Bahrain is only just above that axis. Similarly, a few of countries are on the vertical axis (zero Recorded consumption), including: Comoros, Niger, Iran, Sudan, and Afghanistan.

I have included below a list of the countries, ranked in decreasing order of how far they are from equality of Recorded versus Unrecorded consumption. That is, a large positive number in the ranking means that Recorded >> Unrecorded, whereas a negative number indicates Unrecorded > Recorded.

If you would like to see some neat graphs and maps about recorded alcohol worldwide, then consult Our World in Data — Alcohol Consumption.

---

The saga of the iPad Mini, mentioned in my last post, has continued. In spite of being a recent device, it has an old version of iOS. This version cannot be updated wirelessly, according to the error message I get, when I try to update it. The message says that I must instead use iTunes on a Mac. However, my Mac Mini is old, and when I connect the iPad it tells me that the Mac does not have a version of iTunes that will allow me to do this. I tried to use my MacBook, which is more recent, but its OSX operating system no longer has a separate iTunes app. I eventually found an iMac with an intermediate version of OSX — old enough to still have iTunes but recent enough to allow me to connect the iPad. Why is modern computing like this?!?

---

The following list sorts the countries by the extent to which Recorded consumption exceeds Unrecorded consumption. At the top of the list are those countries that are furthest from the line of equality, to the right in the graph (Recorded > Unrecorded), while those countries at the bottom are those furthest from the line of equality, to the left in the graph (Unrecorded > Recorded). The numbers are simply the shortest distance from each graph point to the line.

Territory Estonia Lithuania Czechia Seychelles Austria France Moldova Bulgaria Germany Ireland Belgium Hungary Cook Islands Latvia Slovenia Slovakia Australia Poland United Kingdom Portugal Luxembourg Andorra Equatorial Guinea Croatia Saint Kitts and Nevis Switzerland Denmark Romania Saint Lucia Belarus United States South Korea Cyprus New Zealand Barbados Gabon Grenada Serbia Bahamas Antigua and Barbuda Canada Argentina Uruguay Netherlands Spain Malta Italy Chile Finland Iceland Trinidad and Tobago St Vincent & the Grenadines Nigeria Namibia Uganda Japan Haiti Panama Dominica Brazil Sweden Georgia Niue Norway South Africa Thailand Rwanda Belize Eswatini Montenegro Russia Dominican Republic China Cameroon Botswana Mongolia Paraguay Mexico Kazakhstan Guyana Peru Laos Angola Venezuela Suriname Cuba Colombia Tanzania São Tomé and Príncipe North Korea Bosnia and Herzegovina Costa Rica Albania Cape Verde Bolivia Philippines Nicaragua Ukraine Zimbabwe Jamaica Ecuador Greece Gambia Armenia Bahrain Kyrgyzstan Congo Honduras Burkina Faso El Salvador Singapore Israel Mauritius Turkmenistan North Macedonia Samoa Liberia Fiji Ivory Coast Sierra Leone Sri Lanka Nauru Lesotho Guinea-Bissau Zambia Tunisia Lebanon Micronesia Guatemala Tuvalu Burundi Qatar Turkey Solomon Islands Ghana Uzbekistan Tonga Vanuatu India Kenya Brunei United Arab Emirates Malawi Togo Cambodia Azerbaijan Djibouti Kiribati Mozambique Papua New Guinea Algeria Malaysia Benin Morocco Syria Central African Republic Ethiopia DR Congo Oman Jordan Egypt Iraq Yemen Bangladesh Kuwait Libya Mauritania Somalia Eritrea Mali Saudi Arabia Indonesia Bhutan Afghanistan Madagascar Chad Senegal Pakistan Niger Guinea Sudan Maldives Comoros Nepal East Timor Iran Tajikistan Myanmar Vietnam

Distance 10.4 8.9 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.3 7.1 7.1 7.0 7.0 6.6 6.6 6.6 6.5 6.4 6.2 6.2 6.2 6.2 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 5.9 5.9 5.9 5.8 5.8 5.7 5.7 5.6 5.5 5.5 5.5 5.4 5.2 5.2 5.2 5.1 5.1 5.0 5.0 4.9 4.7 4.7 4.7 4.6 4.5 4.4 4.4 4.2 4.1 4.1 4.1 4.1 4.1 4.0 3.9 3.7 3.7 3.6 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.4 3.4 3.3 3.3 3.2 3.1 3.0 2.9 2.8 2.8 2.8 2.8 2.8 2.8 2.8 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.4 2.3 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.1 1.8 1.8 1.8 1.8 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.6 1.6 1.6 1.6 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.4 1.4 1.3 1.2 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.7 0.7 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 -0.1 -0.1 -0.1 -0.1 -0.1 -0.1 -0.1 -0.1 -0.2 -0.2 -0.2 -0.4 -0.4 -0.4 -0.5 -0.6 -0.6 -0.7 -1.0 -1.1 -1.6

Is the future of wine on the blockchain?

I grew up without computers, let alone social media. I learned to use a mainframe computer while I was a university student; and I used my first personal computer when I started a full-time job. Over the next few years, I became something of an expert, even teaching computing to biology students. So, I kept up to date for the first 30 years of my life.

However, the world has changed just as much during the subsequent 30 years, in a way that has at least partly passed me by.* Yes, that is right — I do not have a Facebook, Twitter or Instagram account, and my mobile phone does little more than receive phone calls. I have, however, run two blogs (including this one), if that counts for anything.

The point here is that I do like to think about where things are heading, even if I do not necessarily like to follow along. One thing I sometimes contemplate is the application of modern technology to the wine industry. So, the future of wine production and sales is of interest.

However, the title of this post is somewhat of a pun, because what I am talking about in this particular case is (the future of) Wine Futures — the idea of paying for your wine now, after the grapes have been crushed, but before the wine has been matured and bottled, and then taking delivery of your possession at some time in the future. How will this century-old idea change in the modern world?

The idea of Futures is very straightforward. The winery gets its money up front, so that it can spend the money on finishing the current vintage, and starting the next one. This is quite an appealing idea if you happen to be in the agriculture business, with new expenses throughout the year but income only once per year. In return, the customer gets to pay the current price, rather than the future price, as the latter is expected to be much higher. This is quite an appealing idea if you happen to be the one forking out the money, where it is often difficult to balance income with expenditure. So, both parties avoid the use of banks (and bankers) in the transaction!

So, why aren't there more Futures markets in the wine industry? The most famous (and oldest) is the en primeur system in Bordeaux, although we are told that “the system is increasingly used for wines from other regions, notably Burgundy, California, the Rhone Valley, Italy and Port” (Wine futures and en primeur). I don’t know about “increasing”, because it has been tried in some other places without much success. However, given the limited quantities of some burgundies on release, for example, buying them via wine futures is sometimes the only route to ownership. So, the idea is clearly here to stay.

Mind you, pay now / receive later does not always benefit the buyer. The Wine Spectator (How (and why) to buy wine futures) notes an example of each possible outcome — some parts of the 2000 Bordeaux vintage are now valued at double or triple their release prices, while the all-time high en primeur prices of the 2010 Bordeaux vintage have not held up at all (current wines are now available for well below their release prices).

What has all of this got to do with the blockchain? Well, the latter is simply an electronic ledger, in which all changes can be made only in public (in computer terms, it is a “distributed ledger”). This is clearly a potential tool for Futures, which require both a certificate of authenticity and a certificate of ownership (of the wine). Indeed, the same thing can be said of all “fine wine” sales, especially on the secondary market. Fine wine is said to currently be a hot investment; and a standardized way of demonstrating authenticity and ownership clearly has a role to play. The blockchain seems to be a good candidate.

The blockchain was invented as part of the development of the first successful cryptocurrency (Bitcoin). However, its application extends far beyond cryptocurrencies, irrespective of your attitude towards such non-government coinage. An electronic ledger can be used anywhere that a ledger is required. For example, it can also be used for contracts, in which case a trustee is not needed (and it is thus called a “smart contract”), as well as supply-chain management, anti-counterfeiting, etc. These days, companies offering blockchain services are proliferating.

An important distinction is that a cryptocurrency is a Fungible Token, which means that one coin can be exchanged for any other coin of the same type — each entry in the ledger refers to one of a large set of interchangeable items. A Non Fungible Token (NFT), on the other hand, is absolutely unique — each entry in the ledger refers to one thing and one thing only (ie. the tokens are non-interchangeable). NFTs are therefore what we are interested in for investments (whether it be in art, or land, or wine), or any other sort of financial service.

So, using NFTS on a blockchain would be one way to bring the Futures (en primeur) system into the 21st century.

But who would be using it? Given that the Futures approach is not usually used by ordinary wine drinkers, the potential market is presumably investors, and the rich in general, as well as the wine trade, in the broadest sense. In this regard, it is important to note that an electronic ledger details the entire history of the NFT in a verified and public manner; and it can contain whatever information is desired, in this case including, but not limited to, things like grape provenance and wine storage conditions.

There is at least one old-style example of using the Futures approach for individual wines for the general public, as well as the trade. Way back in 1977, the Saltram winery (in the Barossa Valley, Australia) decided not to fund the 1978 vintage, due to a fruit surplus. The winemaker at the time, Peter Lehmann, then literally became legendary, by deciding that this was no way to treat the grape-growers, all of whom he knew personally. So, he took out a bank loan, assembled the necessary equipment, and built a small winery to process their grapes. The first wine, in 1980, was called The Futures, because it was marketed on a “pay now and pick it up after two years in the cellar” arrangement, which was literally the only way it could ever work. When the money started coming in, naturally Peter made sure to pay the growers first. The high quality of this wine, incidentally, marked the beginning of the current resurgence of the Barossa Valley as a premier wine-making district.

So, there are good precedents here. The way to find out how this works in the 21st century, of course, is to try it, by releasing some wine using NFTs. It should therefore come as no surprise that this is, indeed, happening. A short while ago, a PR release appeared noting that the entire Neldner Road (Barossa Valley) 2021 vintage wines are to be sold by NFTs (Neldner Road winemaker Dave Powell’s “vintage of the century” to be sold by NFT). You can read a bit about the wines on the OpeanSea NFT website. This seems to be a world first; and I will be interested to see how it goes.

Mind you, this is not going to be cheap. Dave Powell, the winemaker, used to run Torbreck wines, and their prices were way out of my league. The current Powell & Son (now Neldner Road) wines are not much better, at $US 100-500 per bottle. If you want to buy the entire 2021 vintage, which you technically can do by purchasing a single NFT (rather than a set of NFTs), you will thus need the upper side of $US 9 million. [Update: you can now read more here: Aussie winemaker pivots from China to crypto] [Later update: other wine NFTs have started appearing; Luxury vintage wine barrel to be sold as NFT]

Finally, what are the currently known downsides of an NFT? The main criticism has been the energy cost of the computing needed for validating blockchain transactions, so that they have a high carbon footprint. This is not a trivial issue, if the blockchain is to be a widespread part of the future.

I wrote this post at least partly to prove to myself that I am not such an old fuddy-duddy as I sometimes think.

---

*  I am currently trying to set up a new iPad Mini, which is now such an automated process that it is impossible to sort it out the problem, when things are not happening the way the description says they should. I cannot set it up from my old iPad, because I was never given the option, and the messages say that I cannot restore from the old iCloud backup, nor update the iOS wirelessly. I am seriously considering putting the thing back in its box, and continuing to use the old one until it collapses completely. Thanks Apple!