On Mon, 16 Oct 2006 11:37:24 -0400
Mark Lipton > wrote:

> Dave wrote:
>
> > Green vinting certainly costs a bit more up-front to set up, and may
> > have some higher operating costs (mostly labor, I should think), but it
> > can be done successfully, at least on a small-to-medium scale. I should
> > think that we (wine drinkers) really don't need nice foil wrappers,
> > expensive labels, or custom-crafted/etched bottles (all of which
> > contribute to excessive waste), because what matters is the wine, not
> > packaging. I think we could all start by letting our favorite wineries
> > know that we would support them in choosing greener production methods.
> > You might be surprised how many step up to the plate and offer to look
> > at new ways to make their wines, while reducing the impact on the
> > environment.
>
> Dave,
> I agree with you that green agricultural practices are one way of
> combating the waste discussed in the article (which, unfortunately, was
> a bit short on details). One thing that I couldn't help wondering was
> what sort of operation they were studying. Did they machine harvest?
> Did they use pesticides and fertilizers? I was struck by their mention
> of irrigation since I thought that most Old World wines were dry farmed.
> Like others, I suspect that the numbers might change quite a bit if the
> operation were a bit lower tech.
>

Hi Mark,

I wonder if they didn't put the entire article on line... I didn't look at it
there.

In the print version they specifically mentioned hand harvesting, but
liberal use of pesticides. Also heavy irrigation, which took me aback
too.

They did say that following the study the winery eliminated pesticides,
so once again kudos to them.

-E

--
Emery Davis
You can reply to ecom
by removing the well known companies