Excuses, excuses …


The author of this article makes a lengthy and unconvincing effort to defend the use of chemistry in wine.

If people don’t know why or how to make wine without the addition of SO2 (and tartaric acid, and yeast, etc) they have not studied enough. I will refer them to the articles of Erl Happ for some ideas.

The author is right about one thing though: “And here we return to the idea of ancient but wildly incorrect practices.” And she continues straight into contradicting herself in the very next sentence: “Lead has nearly as noble a history in winemaking as sulfur does.”

So sulfur (and other additives) have a “noble history”? Interesting suggestion, given the rise and rise of consumers’ awareness of additives in wine and food.

Despite the author’s disregard for “a minor fraction of asthmatics”, they and many, many other wine lovers make the right choice today to reject the many additives that were, and still are put in wine.

And, similarly to lead which “was banned in (…) 1696”, it won’t be too long before most of today’s wine additives are banned too. Or at least the winemakers will be required to list them all on their wine labels. Like it’s the case with food labels. Laws are now coming in force in some countries, and it’s going to be an interesting dilemma for wine lovers and winemakers alike when those laws become widespread around the world.