An interesting article in the IHT this weekend, talking about an
environmental impact study done at Sicilian vineyard Milazzo,
for the wine Terre Della Baronia.

http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/10/...ess/wbwine.php

A single bottle produced 1.1 pounds of total waste and released 16 grams of
suldur dioxide.

"Producing the 2004 vintage of some 100,000 bottles generated
10,000 kilograms of plastic waste alone, 5,000 kilograms of paper,
and oceans of wastewater."

Food for thought, indeed. It makes one wonder about the environmental impact,
globally, of our personal habits...

Kudos to this winery for participating in the study.

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

Hi Emery,

> A single bottle produced 1.1 pounds of total waste and released 16 grams of
> suldur dioxide.
>
> "Producing the 2004 vintage of some 100,000 bottles generated
> 10,000 kilograms of plastic waste alone, 5,000 kilograms of paper,
> and oceans of wastewater."
>
> Food for thought, indeed. It makes one wonder about the environmental impact,
> globally, of our personal habits...

Our habit doesn't have to mean excessive waste. I think it's a matter
of how a winery weighs vinting their product for efficiency, versus
environmental impact. And how much waste we consumers are willing to
put up with. If we care at all.

I've noticed that biodynamic and other "green" vinting methods are
catching on a lot in Oregon. The wines are spectacular, and prices
about the same as other commercially produced wines. The difference is
that there is more effort required on the part of the vintner to make
it happen. If I recall... several winemakers at the Carlton Winemakers
Studio use natural fertilizers from local farms... gravity-flow
irrigation from rainwater... and their vinting studio uses renewable
electricity to power their winery equipment.

On a much smaller scale, green methods are in use everywhere... think
about home vintners who don't need all that fancy packaging... We home
winemakers makes wine using less materials, and in a simpler fashion --
and certainly, with much less waste -- than most commercial wineries.
Recycling bottles for multiple vintages (which does not require wasted
energy from recycling and reforming the bottles), and re-using vinting
equipment that, while fine for home use, may not be up to specs for a
commercial outfit (again, repurposing materials so new ones don't need
to be purchased), are just two ways I can see the home winemaker
helping contribute in a "healthy" manner.

Add to this the fact that many vineyard owners who make wine also have
livestock, to whom they feed the leftover pomace, pips, stems, etc. Now
you have the makings of a recycling program right on your own property.
The livestock produce the fertilizer, and there you go.

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.

Thanks for sharing,

David

This is horrible. For those of you concerend the most about global warming
and the kyoto treaties should immediately stop drinking the classified top
growths of Bordeaux and Burgundy.

I will make sure this product is properly disposed up. :-)



"Emery Davis" > wrote in message
...
> An interesting article in the IHT this weekend, talking about an
> environmental impact study done at Sicilian vineyard Milazzo,
> for the wine Terre Della Baronia.
>
> http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/10/...ess/wbwine.php
>
> A single bottle produced 1.1 pounds of total waste and released 16 grams
> of
> suldur dioxide.
>
> "Producing the 2004 vintage of some 100,000 bottles generated
> 10,000 kilograms of plastic waste alone, 5,000 kilograms of paper,
> and oceans of wastewater."
>
> Food for thought, indeed. It makes one wonder about the environmental
> impact,
> globally, of our personal habits...
>
> Kudos to this winery for participating in the study.
>
> -E
> --
> Emery Davis
> You can reply to ecom
> by removing the well known companies
>

Emery Davis wrote:
> An interesting article in the IHT this weekend, talking about an
> environmental impact study done at Sicilian vineyard Milazzo,
> for the wine Terre Della Baronia.
>
> http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/10/...ess/wbwine.php
>
> A single bottle produced 1.1 pounds of total waste and released 16 grams of
> suldur dioxide.

I wonder if Sicily is the best place for this type of study. Consider
Mt. Etna. I would not be surprised if it belches out by far more sulfur
compounds in various forms(including sulfur dioxide) than wine
production in Sicily does. :-) .

"cwdjrxyz" wrote ...............
>
> I wonder if Sicily is the best place for this type of study. Consider
> Mt. Etna. I would not be surprised if it belches out by far more sulfur
> compounds in various forms(including sulfur dioxide) than wine
> production in Sicily does. :-) .>


My sentiments exactly - one decent sized puff from Etna or nay of over 550
volcanoes which have erupted in historical times, makes a mockery of the
measurement of sulphur emissions.

As to the amount of plastic and or paper, I can only comment from my
experience within a small grape growing / wine making operation.

The place to which I was contracted was about twice the size of the Sicilian
producer.

Without seeing exactly how that figure was arrived at; I can categorically
say that we never generated 10 tonnes of plastic; nothing like it.

Yes, there are chemical containers and plastic wrap around bottles (all of
which can be recycled or otherwise disposed of with care and attention) -
but 10 tonnes is OTT.

--

st.helier

On Mon, 16 Oct 2006 11:39:53 +1300, "st.helier"
> wrote:

>"cwdjrxyz" wrote ...............
>>
>> I wonder if Sicily is the best place for this type of study. Consider
>> Mt. Etna. I would not be surprised if it belches out by far more sulfur
>> compounds in various forms(including sulfur dioxide) than wine
>> production in Sicily does. :-) .>

Well, yeah, but then there's that whole thing of how much global
warming and air pollution is caused by methane gas from cowpies, too.


I think the point he's trying to make is that certain items and
products now contributing to the waste stream don't necessarily have
to, or could be substantially reduced, given proper care and more
environmetally conscious management techniques

>Yes, there are chemical containers and plastic wrap around bottles (all of
>which can be recycled or otherwise disposed of with care and attention) -
>but 10 tonnes is OTT.

How does one dispose of a plastic "cork?" That's got to be one of the
stupidest ideas for wine packaging I've ever seen. Yeah, I know all
the arguments for it (and plenty against it), but the bottom line is
that we'd have millions of those things filling up landfill trenches
if every producer went plastic. My real corks get recycled and
re-used, and if I had a decent parrot to grind them up (hah!) I'd mix
'em into the compost bin.

Similarly, what does one do with styrofoam from wine shippers? (Or
from any other product?) I can only re-use or recycle so much of it.
The rest inevitably goes to the dump because, at least as far as I
know, there's no commonly accepted system for recycling styrofoam.

JJ

On Sun, 15 Oct 2006 16:17:01 -0700
wrote:

> On Mon, 16 Oct 2006 11:39:53 +1300, "st.helier"
> > wrote:
>
> >"cwdjrxyz" wrote ...............
> >>
> >> I wonder if Sicily is the best place for this type of study. Consider
> >> Mt. Etna. I would not be surprised if it belches out by far more sulfur
> >> compounds in various forms(including sulfur dioxide) than wine
> >> production in Sicily does. :-) .>
>
> Well, yeah, but then there's that whole thing of how much global
> warming and air pollution is caused by methane gas from cowpies, too.
>
>

What I find personally interesting is that my "environmental footprint" is
not limited to wine consumption. Personally I would have thought it a
particularly benign process, being largely natural and all that. Not much
like, say, commercial pork farming, or computer PCB production.

Here's a quick back of the envelope calculation. Average wine production
is 271,212,000 hl. Using the sicilian numbers,

271,212,000 hl * 1 l/100 hl * 1 bt/0.75 l x 0.016 kg/bt ~= 58 metric tonnes.

Is that a lot? Not compared to a volcanic eruption. (Mt St Helens emitted
about 4 orders of magnitude more). Of course, it's a little bit specious to
use the analogy, much like saying Lets keep that coal fired generator, it
produces almost nothing compared to Vesuvius! (I do understand the
humor of the situation, though).

I came across figures that UK power production (2003) produced 677
metric tonnes of SO2, refineries about 63. That puts wine production
about on par with refineries on an annual basis.

Is that negligible? Of course not. Can it be substantially reduced? The
Sicily study says it can. Should we be concerned about reducing it?
I think so, but you can decide for yourselves!

> I think the point he's trying to make is that certain items and
> products now contributing to the waste stream don't necessarily have
> to, or could be substantially reduced, given proper care and more
> environmetally conscious management techniques
>
> >Yes, there are chemical containers and plastic wrap around bottles (all of
> >which can be recycled or otherwise disposed of with care and attention) -
> >but 10 tonnes is OTT.
>

At the Sicilian operation they are now recycling but previously it went to
landfill.

> How does one dispose of a plastic "cork?" That's got to be one of the
> stupidest ideas for wine packaging I've ever seen. Yeah, I know all
> the arguments for it (and plenty against it), but the bottom line is
> that we'd have millions of those things filling up landfill trenches
> if every producer went plastic. My real corks get recycled and
> re-used, and if I had a decent parrot to grind them up (hah!) I'd mix
> 'em into the compost bin.
>
> Similarly, what does one do with styrofoam from wine shippers? (Or
> from any other product?) I can only re-use or recycle so much of it.
> The rest inevitably goes to the dump because, at least as far as I
> know, there's no commonly accepted system for recycling styrofoam.
>

Indeed. AFAICT the study doesn't seem to deal with any impact once
the bottle leaves the winery.

-E

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

Jef,
I try pretty hard to get my shippers to retailers with a mail order
business. They're usually quite happy to reuse (in one case when I
delivered about 8 shippers at once as I was leaving an owner called me
back to give me a sample bottle as thanks).

I think it behooves every business, small or large, to think what they
can do to reduce enviromental harm.

I admit I mostly buy a lot of biodynamic or organically farmed* wines
due to liking the wines, but it's an added benefit if less damaging,
and if all other factors are equal I will chose the wine I regard as
more responsible.

Thanks Emery for link
Dale

* I'm differing between organically-farmed and wines that are certified
organic in US. I seldom buy the latter, too many spoilage issues.

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.

Mark Lipton

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