Sulfites--Natural Wine.

[G_D_y_e_r]

@Bruce G

Not sure that I understand the distinctions being drawn here. Nor do I necessarily agree with the idea (I think it’s implied, but correct me if I’m wrong) that a non-ideological approch to the subject will lead us away from a desire to support n@***@! winemaking.

Definitely thinking critically about it makes me want to support more natural wine producers. The majority of what natural winemakers do seems to make sense–minimal intervention to express vintage and vineyard, and also to produce wines that aren’t harmful to consumer and environment. I just don’t think there can be black and white boundaries because what works for one region or vintage might not work for another. Even if a vintner wants to impose a house style above all else, though, is that so bad (assuming wines are made conscientiously)?

It seems to me there is a spectrum of things that can be done from industrial Central Valley production all the way to small scale minimal intervention. And it seems like a lot of the choices come down not to whether a tool is used, but how it is used. From my understanding wines micro-oxygenate when in barrel. But there are also special tools for micro-oxing that bubble air through wine in tanks. I don’t think they’re inherently evil, even if they can be abused in ways that melt wines into caricatures of real wine. It’s the same oxygen after all, so what matters is not the vessel or tool, but the intent and application. I don’t think these gray areas can or should be viewed in moralistic terms as a simple dichotomy.

[David_Glasser]

The way I heard it, sulfites are responsible for 87.24% of all headaches, 67.34% of erectile dysfunction, global warming, the BP oil spill, and all those eggs contaminated with Salmonella.

[John_Kight]

@Peter Cargasacchi

If you can label a wine as not having added sulfites, why wouldn’t you state that on the label, unless the wine actually contained added sulfites?

Because it’s irrelevant to the vast majority of people, and it could require constant tinkering with the label from vintage to vintage and wine to wine (if a winemaker doesn’t adopt a consistent approach on the use of sulfites)…

I agree that for a winemaker that takes an ideological stance against ever adding sulfites, one would expect him/her to “advertise” this fact on the bottle…But it doesn’t shock me that some winemakers who don’t add sulfites wouldn’t bother with the complexities of what the law requires in order to make claims on the label.

[Eric_Texier]

@Paul Romero

I’m opposed to using copper sulfide because it’s a harsh chemical that has lots of better alternatives to achieve the same results (JMS Stylet Oil, Oxidate, Kaligreen). I’m in favor of potassium metabisulfite because there are no better alternatives.

At the same time, I’m not going to take my opposition to some farmer in France spraying copper sulfide.

Especially since none of these are efficient against mildew (Plasmopara viticola)…which is mostly why european growers use copper under various forms.

All these alternative treatments are mostly effective against Erysiphe necator (Oïdium) and sulfur powder is perfectly efficient against it -no need of copper.

[N_Weis]

@Paul Romero

At the same time, I’m not going to take my opposition to some farmer in France spraying copper sulfide. If that’s his best alternative that works in his environment, who the F am I to tell him he’s ‘wrong’. If he’s doing it out of habit or lazyness then shame on him, that I could be critical of, but if he’s doing it to get a crop in and feed his family because he knows that will work and the alternative won’t? I’m keeping my mouth shut.

Couldn’t agree more.

Probably the only ideologies I am opposed to are armchair farming and winemaking. I would never preclude someone’s right to engage in these ideologies, but will exercise my privilege to ignore them.

[Cory_Cartwright]

Because a lot of the wines you are talking about are labeled not by the winemaker but by the importer, and for the importer it is easier to say “contains sulfites” for approval purposes?

[Hank_Gillespie]

@Peter Cargasacchi

…A wine can make the claim:

“Sulfite Free”
…

ALL, I repeat ALL, wines contain sulfites, Peter, but I’m sure you already know that.

It’s possible, I suppose, to add 3% Hydrogen Peroxide to eliminate the sulfites, but the remaining liquid wouldn’t be very attractive to drink.

Hank

[Ben_Sherwin]

@Jon Hesford

I’m almost bored with saying that we don’t need zealots and idealists laying down laws. We need to differentiate between spoofulated (or whatever you want to call it) wine and wine that is made with minimal intervention. We don’t need Natural Wine Inspectors or little clubs who are holier-than-the-rest. That just alienates and confuses people. We need to educate the wine-buying public and clarify the difference. There is no line, there is a twighlight zone.

It was worth slogging through the marass of posts here to get at this rational manifesto.