Fair enough. Not trying to start a fight here.
Ben,
I’m not attempting to start a fight either so please don’t read my smarmy comment as such. I think it’s a fascinating topic. However, there just is not anywhere near enough actual legit data to make the claim that climate change is happening. Warm years, cold years and the like are not climactic changes.
The reduction in a glacier here or there is not change - just as the increase in a glacier here and there is also not change.
Our ability to really understand this big blue ball with real data is pretty darn limited. Perhaps, PERHAPS as early as 1950 - but odds are it’s later than that.
For a planet that’s how old??? is a 20-60 year view enough? Not in my opinion. But, my opinion carries no weight either.
So, to the topic at hand…grape growers will adapt to whatever changes do occur. Access to water, different grapes, access to heat, shelter etc.
It will be fascinating to say the least. That is, of course, if they really do need to change.
That’s right. And you’re welcome [thank_you.gif]
Huh, what? Oh sorry, I was mesmerized by your avatar. Holy schmoley!
'Munch, do you believe that the only climate data available to us is what we’ve collected in 20-60 years? Surely, you don’t. That sounds dangerously like a creationist who doesn’t believe we can “know” anything about dinosaurs because we didn’t live with them contemporaneously. Paleoclimatologists have a tool box full of techniques to study the past, just like paleontologists, anthropologists, geologists, etc. How about deep core samples from glacial ice? Sediment in rocks? Tree ring data?
How about nearly ALL glaciers receding to places man has never seen them or even imagined they would be? How about the Artic Sea being navigable for shipping? The ostrich act is getting old. The world changes and holding on to the current and past ways of operating never helps anyone succeed. This is no different. Prepare for change rather than hiding from it in the hopes it will disappear.
Thanks for the EPA break down Ben. The misunderstandings that go along with climate change can be frustrating when it comes to discussions and coverage. The warming trend doesn’t mean we all just get hotter. It means localized weather patterns are small and large scales are changing and will change more in ways that are hard to foresee. Just reading weather reports all ones life should make that fairly easy to see.
Hey guys, since there is a sanctioned politics forum here, maybe keep the wine part to this thread and the political part to the other forum? I know it is a tough balancing act.
A few years ago I had a 1978 Phelps Eisele Cabernet. Clearly a true 12.5% Napa Cab and a wine that was completely at home in a lineup of great Bordeaux. It sparked a long and wistful discussion with 10 people at the table if we would ever see a wine like this again. FWIW the group was pretty politically split, but the conversation never even went there. Rather, most people were thinking more of the alleged ‘Parkerisation’ as the reason with wines turning to grape jelly due to a desire for very long hang times, ripe phenolics and no hint of anything green or leafy in Cabernet. However warmer vintages of late seem to play into that as well, especially if you consider more extreme wines like those from Realm. (I don’t love those wines, don’t hate them.) I would be fascinated to see a winemaker who works with Napa Cab comment on all of this.
Thank you, Eric - excellent point.
Might be a good idea to start one over there, too, however, it is sure to become heated. (no pun intended)
Eric et al - interesting topic and I’ll stay out of the global warming debate (suffice to say I align with Freemott’s opinion) and say, well let’s look at two fairly cool years, even 3 in the last 10 or so for CA Cabs.
1998, 1999, 2000 - Cooler years, winemakers didn’t get to the level of ripeness they did to produce those great 97’s, 96’s, 2001’s etc. Those wine, well there have been a few gems, are largely panned b/c they didn’t get ripe enough or don’t have the plushness of older vintages or whatever. Also, with those older wines, I don’t know what the actual alcohol levels were. They may have said 12.5% or 13% but may have been much higher, or at least a little bit higher.
Getting back to the topic, climate change, whether cooling or warming, will affect wine. It’s called vintage variation. Some cooler vintages will appeal to some for their restraint while warmer vintages will appeal to those who like really plush fruit and there will be vintages that allow for both depending on when the wines are picked.
Like Ed, I’m not looking to buy northern Canadian vineyards and nor do I expect Bdx to be the hot bed of Chateauneuf du Pape any time soon.
I’ve got no data at hand, nor any idea of where to look for it but I do have this question.
In 19xx (pick any year) and compare the number of acres under vine then to today.
If you do this by decade and by region I’d love to see the growth and the reason for it is the never-ending debate on micro-climates in winemaking.
If you’re xxxx feet up a mountain or xxxx feet down a valle you’ll have different crops right? If you’re north xxx miles (feet? yards?) you’ll get different results as well.
So in the context of climate I think it’s going to be exceptionally difficult to have any compelling evidence for a long long time as you have to start collecting it before you can chart change.
You’re talking about one hell of an experiment. And you’re talking about externalities (you changing the land) that can be accounted for, but only through estimates.
Climates change - no doubt. The Sahara was once lush. Kansas was under water and it’s pretty darn likely that South America was attached to Africa. So, sure, only the obtuse would assume that climate change doesn’t happen.
I’m guilty of ASSUMING that this would lead to are we changing the climate (which, I contend is absolute horse shit).
But, if we could steer this to how are winemakers planning on, or have wine makers done anything, to adjust to their climates - I’m game to listen and learn.