As was posted by a number of well wishers, thanks for your kind words.

My wife, who just survived where 2 others got killed, is doing well.

The big news is the wide spread distruction at various wineries.

I had looked at many wineries and noted the high stacks of wine
barrels. My opinion, which I kept to myself, was that there would be
big problems in case of a earthquake. However, the last major quake in
this area occured roughly 150 years ago and the assessment that it was
roughly a 6.

In my old age, I felt that it wouldn't have gone over too well --
simply that most would have said that nothing could be done about it.
Well, the impact perhaps could be mitigated, but not eliminated. So, I
just kept my mouth shut.


I went out to Stephan Asseo's winery, to whom I sell my grapes. Stephan
is presently in France, due to return on saturday (12/27). There was a
nice jumble of barrels, smashed bottles of wine and the big
fermentation tanks which had been move roughly 1 foot -- even though
they had 3,000 gallons of juice in them. My understanding is that the
wine in the tanks are spoiled because when the tanks moved, the cooling
lines (for fermentation temperature control) ruptured, putting gycol
into the juice.

I spoke to Dave Debusk, who is Stephan's assistant. Turns out that he
had just stepped out of the winery when the quake occured. There is no
doubt in my mind that he would have either been killed or crippled when
the barrels come tumbling down, if he was in the storage room.

My opinion is that SLO county needs to address building code to provide
barrel tie-down points to at least minimize what occcured. But that
will not happen overnight, let alone arguments that another like quake
wouldn't be seen in another 100 years (cynic I am).



I hape that you had a nice wine imbibing Christmas. We in Paso will
recover and will do our best to provide top quality wine to you.



As an after thought:

I got up in the middle of the night (12/25 am), went to the toilet,
went back to bed and then felt an after shock. The AP says that it was
a 4.4, from roughly 10 miles west south west of Paso, roughly 30 miles
from the original quake epicenter. This location is interesting because
it is in the area of Atascadero, where I was went the original quake
occured. In my previous posting on this topic, I noted that it felt as
though that Atascadero was at the epicenter. Perhaps my gut feel about
the force I felt in Atascadero does have some basis of reality.

As the USGS states, that after shocks as high as 5 can be expected for
the next few days. Hopefully, there isn't more winery damage. Except
for the possiblilty of underground irrigation pipe damage, there isn't
much to damage in my vineyard - however, tomorrow I will check out my
well depth (I should have done it sooner). Wind and vine loading on the
trellis is compariable to the quake shaking. I will only be able to
check out the underground plumbing once I turn on the irrigation come
this spring.

Thanks very much for the update. I visit Paso 2-3 times a year and have gotten
to know a few of the winemakers around the area. I was afraid that Stephan's
place would have some damage, since so many others on the Westside are
reporting losses. I haven't heard anything yet from Matt Trevisan at Linne
Calodo, but he had barrels stacked 5 high so I'm worried that he might have
lost a lot. I saw photos from Turley that look pretty bad. Even Justin Smith at
Saxum reported tumbled barrels and he only had them stacked 2 high. Fortunately
he didn't lose much wine. The main thing at all the wineries is that everyone
is ok.

When I toured the local wineries in Paso I once asked if the barrels were
strapped in any way as a precaution against quakes. I was surprised to
hear that they were not. At my work even small electronic devices are
required to be strapped with velcro if they are placed on shelves taller
than 5' or so. Straps won't prevent all damage, but they are better than
nothing and would be quite cheap to implement.


Dimitri

(D. Gerasimatos) adds....

I was surprised to hear that they were not.

Nor are *any* if even one, typical warehouse pallet racked goods anywhere in
California (strapped or otherwise secured in place) and why should they be?
Some of those warehouse pallet racks are better than 50 ft off the floor. Ever
seen a furniture warehouse like Levitz? 500 lb sofas 40 ft in the air.

To even "strap" as you say, a full barrel weighing on average 500 lbs. (225
liter) against a seismic load of 6.0, would be horribly cost prohibitive when
calculated at better than 2 barrels high. You could apply "token" measures like
bungees or even less elastic methods, but to have a barrel secured in
accordance with what's known as UBC Seismic, would cripple most but the largest
on vineyards.

Not to mention the inconvenience to daily activity, etc..

It's one thing to have the state EHS boys mandate strapping than 3 lb.
electronic devices or other in a state university against falling, afterall,
that's their job and they have to produce something or they're out in the real
world, but to translate that to the business environment, especially in the
razor thin margin of operating in California as it is today, is just not even
worthy of discussion.

Sad as it sounds, "that's" the reality.

Always here for my fellow syngraphist or oenophile.
--=*=----=*=----=*=----=*=----=*=----=*=----=*=----=*=----=*=----=*=--

In article ,
Jim wrote:
(D. Gerasimatos) adds....

I was surprised to hear that they were not.

Nor are *any* if even one, typical warehouse pallet racked goods anywhere in
California (strapped or otherwise secured in place) and why should they be?
Some of those warehouse pallet racks are better than 50 ft off the floor. Ever
seen a furniture warehouse like Levitz? 500 lb sofas 40 ft in the air.


I think the answer to "why should they be" is rather obvious.


To even "strap" as you say, a full barrel weighing on average 500 lbs. (225
liter) against a seismic load of 6.0, would be horribly cost prohibitive when
calculated at better than 2 barrels high. You could apply "token" measures like
bungees or even less elastic methods, but to have a barrel secured in
accordance with what's known as UBC Seismic, would cripple most but the largest
on vineyards.


Perhaps they shouldn't be stacked so high in the first place then. I
realize you are saying that there are costs involved, whether to strap or
to buy more floor space. The question is then if the risks are worth the
costs.


Not to mention the inconvenience to daily activity, etc..

It's one thing to have the state EHS boys mandate strapping than 3 lb.
electronic devices or other in a state university against falling, afterall,
that's their job and they have to produce something or they're out in the real
world, but to translate that to the business environment, especially in the
razor thin margin of operating in California as it is today, is just not even
worthy of discussion.

Sad as it sounds, "that's" the reality.


Well, I don't work at a state university so I really don't know what their
requirements are. I realize that business will get away with whatever
it can, and that includes poisoning the environment and taking advantage
of workers in 3rd world countries. In this case, some businesses were hurt
by their lack of foresight and people were hurt as well. It costs more to
do business in California and earthquake safety is one reason why. Shall
we just forego it entirely in the name of operating margins?


Perhaps it is time to design a better way to rack and/or secure barrels. I am
sure an industrious engineer is already thinking about the problem.


Dimitri

(D. Gerasimatos) adds....

I think the answer to "why should they be" is rather obvious.

Not really, anymore than to say why don't all cars have 360 degree air bagging?
Why did ABS braking technology take 30 years to cross from the aviation sector
to cars before it did? Why wasn't all residential glass in hurricane alley,
laminated safety glass long ago? Why aren't all houses or any properties built
with sprinkler systems?

Do you understand what I said above? NO warehouse that I'm aware of anywhere in
the world, protects the palletized/racked inventory from falling, none. The
racks themselves may be seismically engineered against collapse, but the stock
still tumbles in the event of a strong enough quake. Why in CA alone, I'll bet
there is billions of sq footage in warehouses filled with unsecured
"everythings" you can imagine. So why should wine barrels be any different?

The question is then if the risks are worth the costs.

Apparently so.

Shall we just forego it entirely in the name of operating margins?

Are you as a consumer prepared for the additional cost otherwise? I didn't
think so. No one is. That Turley that was $75 will now be $110. You gonna put
back a few more cases anytime soon?

Perhaps it is time to design a better way to rack and/or secure barrels. I am
sure an industrious engineer is already thinking about the problem.

The solutions exist. The parameters are simple. Each barrel is x big divided by
x available storage area (floor x elevation). The issue is $$$, plain and
simple. Whether up front, or in increased labor, it's all $$$. Period.

and taking advantage of workers in 3rd world countries.

Oh boy......The whole world should be "entitled" to pull down 80K a year with
free health plan and stock options, right? And again, you and everyone else is
prepared to carry that load? Please......

Always here for my fellow syngraphist or oenophile.
--=*=----=*=----=*=----=*=----=*=----=*=----=*=----=*=----=*=----=*=--

Perhaps it is time to design a better way to rack and/or secure barrels. I am

sure an industrious engineer is already thinking about the problem.


You're right about that - here's a website with some seismic restraint devices
for barrel stacks: http://www.vingenuity.net/home.html

ospam (Kzinns2) adds....

You're right about that - here's a website with some seismic restraint devices
for barrel stacks: http://www.vingenuity.net/home.html

Very interesting. A two part system of elements that work by increasing the
brow of the barrel cradle w/snap on clips and adding (screw attached) locator
blocking to the drum face, they've addressed the X + Y swaying axes and
dramatically reduced the fall over potential of multi barrel storage.

While they offer no guarantees (that I could find) it appears to be a workable
add on for a limited investment. Fork lift drivers will require more training
and time to load and rack, but it may be negligible in the long run.

The "third" part of their system relies on strapping, though they don't appear
to furnish those. Odd.....

Makes you wonder though, why someone long ago didn't manufacture a cradle with
more restrained diameter in the first place. But I suppose w/o a barrel
standardization, the present form was certainly more universal and user
friendly.

Always here for my fellow syngraphist or oenophile.
--=*=----=*=----=*=----=*=----=*=----=*=----=*=----=*=----=*=----=*=--

"Kzinns2" wrote in message
...

Perhaps it is time to design a better way to rack and/or secure barrels.
I am

sure an industrious engineer is already thinking about the problem.

Here's the latest thing in barrel racks. They're about the same price
(~$125 US) as the standard racks in stainless steel:
http://www.winebarrelracks.info/barrelracks.htm

I particularly like the fact that the barrels themselves do not support the
weight of other barrels. These would also be a lot easier to forklift. It
makes me **very** nervous to stack full barrels five high!

Tom S