Meanwhile... 7 years later...
Yeah, the article is not wrong in relation to the numbers... but, it is wrong in not quite fully and correctly connecting the dots... and wrong in attributing any "nefarious" intent...
Winemakers typically respond to two primary concerns...
They care what the critics (and thus also consumers) think of their products... and they care that what they do in the winery sustains compliance with the rules...
The first problem there is that consumers might "say" they want to consume lower alcohol wines... but, that's not what they actually "demand"... either when perusing critics evaluations in making choices, or when tasting the wines themselves.
But, for those who DO want that... there are brands that have adopted that feature that deliberately... to make reduced alcohol or even alcohol free products... but, which products, almost no one is going to mistake as that "great wine" that they want ?
The Science Behind Nonalcoholic Win
The article you posted gets that mostly right... that the "features" consumers want tend to come paired with "riper" fruit... while "riper" fruit, for the most part, requires grapes with higher sugars... and higher sugars means either higher alcohol wines, or wines with a higher residual sugar content. California has been, for a long time, trending along that line in consumers preferences... by producing wines with BOTH higher alcohol... and higher residual sugar levels in wines that are no longer "dry"... but creeping up toward 1% residual sugar. That's not my preference in wine... Not a huge fan of Cabs (etc.) with that sweet mid-palate and sweet cloying finish.
It IS possible, still, to get "riper fruit' with lower alcohol... which you accomplish by growing grapes in cooler climates... where longer hang times with much less heat have grapes ripen a lot more slowly... and make "fruit" faster than "sugar"... but, with corresponding requirements imposed by the climactic difference. "Cool" vineyards... mean you can ripen only a fraction of the fruit you might ripen in a warmer site... so, probably, in the range from 2 (ideally) up to 4 tons to the acre... while in warmer sites you can get the same ripeness from fruit cropped at 8 to 12 tons to the acre, or more. So, you might choose to drink better quality "cooler site" wines from France, often with sugar added to get them up to 12% alcohol, and much higher natural acidity (which they're not allowed to add), rather than wines from (relatively) smoking hot vineyards in Napa or Sonoma, with 14.5% alcohol (even though not allowed to add sugar), with 1% residual sugar, and no acid at all... except for that they've added (which they are allowed to do) ? [ Naturally, the rules are different in different places... to disallow you from doing that which you have no real need for... while criticizing competitors for doing it.]
But, most consumers don't want to know any of that... and they aren't expert tasters... they just know what they like, and want to be allowed to like it without over-thinking what that is. That means both that they like those features paired with higher alcohol... but, also, that they don't trust themselves too far in judging wine quality, so "like" what they're told is good by Wine Spectator... or, whichever critic or review they follow as best matching their own preferences. And, beyond that, what you think is "good"... depends on where you are. Frenchmen generally prefer "fruitier" in terms of European wines, with higher acidity. American's prefer "fruitier" in American terms... and many actively dislike wines with higher acidity.
But, its a big market... and you can find a bit of everything, everywhere... if you know where to look.
Then, as much as they might try to deny it... the critics also bear a lot of responsibility... because the tyranny of the 100 point scale determines quite a lot about what wine makers can do, or want to do. And, in the work they do, as in other "tasting events"... one of the truisms that is when you're tasting a lot of wines, that one "just like the others" but with a little bit higher alcohol... is like that one stalk of wheat with its head poking up a couple of inches higher than all the others in the field. It gets noticed. Tasting... generates more of that bias that already exists... as an artifact in work of making the comparison.
As far as "global warming is causing higher alcohol wines"... ? Mostly... total bullshit. The alcohol in the wine is a function of the wine maker deciding... telling the grower... when she wants the fruit picked. Warmer, longer growing seasons... usually called "great vintages"... will "allow" accumulating higher sugars in grapes... but, that means nothing, does nothing, to alter the part that matters... which is the wine maker making the call on when to proceed in picking the grapes. That's a complex decision... lots of factors considered... but almost ZERO of that is going to be about "lets work to make a wine with more alcohol"... rather than "let's shoot for optimal fruit quality, and balance"... as that is defined by wine makers, aware of both "the potential in a grape," their own take on wine quality, and both "critics" and "market preferences". It would be easy to make wines with far higher alcohol than most do have... but, then, the market only demands so much of that fruitless $10 a bottle >14% alcohol cough syrup ?
The other issue... "compliance"... is as they noted... about a couple of different things. Taxes is one of them... as a wine that bumps "just" over the bracket limits... gets itself bumped up into a higher tax bracket. So, yes, there are (used to be) more than a few wines that might report containing 14.0%... rather than 14.1%... to avoid that tax bump. And,it is also true that the rules, both as written, and as enforced, are pretty "flexible" in how you report the alcohol content... not really requiring that degree of precision. Read a lot of labels, and you might find a whole lot of wines reporting 12.5% (the generic value)... or 14% (the generic limit)... in a proportion that is hardly probable... But, given rules that (did) exist... ?
Only, the rules can change... the link from about two years after our posts... And, whatever it is today... it is what it is... ? The one useful bit in that first link worth noting... is that boutique / quality producers aren't really impacted by it at all... as a tax issue. As a quality producer, you mostly won't make wine-making decisions based on that tax concern... but, as they note, either the big boys who do care about the tax issue, will "remove alcohol"... as is done by large producers in California... or, "add water" as smaller producers might... as both are quick ways to get there... only, with both of them largely destructive of wine quality.
Note in the second link... the tax credit also changed... so ? There's really not any linkage that exists between "the taxes"... and "wine quality concerns"... much less "truth in labeling concerns... with the impact of the tax structure being mostly destructive of wine quality...
So, what's a consumer to do ?
Smaller producers will mostly be happy to talk to you about their wines... what they seek to make in them, etc., more even than you want to know. Find smaller quality focused producers you trust, who are willing to speak truth... while selecting those working in growing regions where "what you like" tends to be what they make anyway... because that's what happens where they are growing grapes and making wines. Deal with them directly... and add a relationship to your life, rather than another trip to the grocery store, to puzzle over the incomprehensible selection.
And, at some threshold in larger scale... producers will be happy to connect you to their marketing department.
Large producers, still... pick any big name producer in California... they're mostly all using the "alcohol reduction" technology... a dirty little secret called "the spinning cone"... the same as that noted in the Smithsonian article as giving alcohol free wines. They don't want you to know that use it to reduce the alcohol in their wines... because the wines that result are both less than they should be... and, they are really no longer "wines made by fermenting grapes... that reflect the qualities the grapes contained"... but are wines made by removing alcohol and other volatile compounds from wine... then putting some volatile compounds back... which may or may not be exactly the same as the ones removed... ie, they have about as much of the romance of the vineyard in them... as a glass of Kool-aid served in a vineyard. |
