The concept is a single pour of only 100ml, which is actually less than the smallest small glass of wine in the UK (currently 125ml), in a tear-away package that requires no corkscrew, and probably no glass!

The package is meant to look like a cardboard cut-out of a bottle, and  is so thin it could probably be taken for this. I imagine it would be really easy to take on travels, picnics, or even into those places that might usually frown on alcohol being consumed.

It’s almost like getting a wine postcard!

Interestingly, although I had no idea how long it had been in this package, nor how it had been handled, the wine was not tainted, and pretty much delivered what it promised – a drinkable Italian Sangiovese.

What more can you ask of a pack?

No idea how many producers will use these, nor how consumers will adapt to the package or the serving size, but it is certainly a brave concept.

Update: there is a limited amount of further information, and a lot of marketing spin, on the producer’s website at http://www.oneglass.it/:

The materials are apparently:

Oneglass, made of paper (75%), polyethylene (20%) and aluminium (5%), is a packaging that can either be entirely recycled or used as a bio-fuel.
In the former case, it is disposed of with waste paper and then its elements are separated and re-used, in their raw material state, respectively in the paper and plastic industry. As a bio-fuel, however, the paper is burned cleanly, the polyethylene is transformed into water vapour and carbon dioxide, while the aluminium becomes aluminium oxide, a substance that is then used to produce paper.  Two different ways for 100% recyclability.

Related articles

• Boxed Wine At Its Best (mywinesdirect.com)
• Here’s to Wine in a Cup (blogs.wsj.com)
• Just One Thing: Green Your Wine – Go Boxed (abcnews.go.com)
• Adventures in Alternative Packaging (wine-by-benito.blogspot.com)

1. Innovations might appeal to the imagination of consumers and give them new reasons and opportunities to explore wine
2. The wine business, like all others, needs to move with the times and ‘go green(er)’
3. (and I quite like checking out new things .. oh, wait, that’s 3!)

When producers innovate with their packaging, moving away from heavy glass towards recyclable plastic or tetra-pack containers, or using new closures such as screwcaps or glass stoppers, we should applaud them for their concerns and their commitment.

But what about the effect on the wine?

Would you drink wine from a plastic bottle, can or carton?

Sample bottles

When it comes to some changes, such as the use of screwcaps instead of cork, research has already demonstrated the many potential benefits to the wine itself (in certain conditions). It has actually also helped to improve the cork business and fostered innovation there too.

However, plastic bottles are another issue, and one that has not been explored scientifically until now (that I know of).

So, why use ‘plastic’ bottles? The main arguments are:

• They are MUCH lighter, so transport costs (and therefore the ‘carbon footprint‘ of the bottle) are much reduced
• Certain plastics are less energy intensive to produce and recycle than glass
• The demand for recycled green glass is not high (in UK), so let’s focus away from it
• Usually used where wine is shipped “in bulk” to modern plants near where the wine will be bought, and not in inefficient small lots in wineries around the world
• Better from a health & safety perspective (fewer bits of broken glass)

If all else was the same, then it would seem sensible, right?

The problem, all else does not seem to be exactly the same, but until now wine experts could be accused of being ‘snobbish’ about these bottles if they criticised them. However, the Institut des Sciences de la Vigne et du Vin (ISVV) in Bordeaux are conducting a long-term study on the effect of different wine containers on the same red & white wines.

The ISVV packaged the same wines in large & small bottles of glass, two types of plastic bottle (single PET and multi-layer PET) and also in a 3L Bag-in-Box. It is still early days, but there are some key and obvious results already after 12 months. If you are interested, the overview presentation is included here (but I list some key observations below)

For white wines, the cheapest and lightest plastic (single-layer PET) shows dramatic deterioration compared to glass. This is confirmed by the ISVV tasters observations and scientific analysis (and my own tasting). In fact, for the smallest bottles (187ml) the damage starts after only 3 months with oxygen levels increasing (oxidation) and the protective SO2 (sulphur dioxide) levels decreasing rapidly after 6 months. In summary, it would seem that these bottles are really not suitable for white wines for more than a few weeks, not months.

The situation is not much better for more expensive multi-layer PET or bag in box, but in any case there is a marked difference of all alternatives compared to glass.

The results are less conclusive for red wines – so far. It does look like a similar pattern will hold true, but it takes longer to be noticeable on red wines I guess.

The ISVV could not include other alternatives such as tetra-pack or wine pouches as they could not put the same wine they used in the study in these formats.

I can’t say any of these conclusions comes as a great surprise to me, but it is good to have some sort of numbers and ‘evidence’ to point to. Thinner plastic bottles that flex more are more likely to create opportunities for gasses to get in/out of the bottle, and wine is a very delicate product. Smaller bottles will suffer proportionally more as the volume of wine is smaller. A delicate white wine will suffer from oxidation faster than a more robust red.

So, should we simply stop experimenting and stick to glass?

Not at all. We need to continue to innovate and look for opportunities to make changes that will help consumers, be better for the environment and be better value for producers. However, the wine itself should not suffer.

So, next time you are shopping for wine (for example, see below for announcements by M&S), will you be tempted by the plastic bottle? What would make you try them?

Related articles by Zemanta

• M&S moves wine into plastic bottles (telegraph.co.uk)
• Greenwash Alert: What’s With The Wine In Plastic Bottles? (treehugger.com)
• Synthetic corks, screwtops stopping more wine bottles (timesunion.com)
• Marks & Spencer’s mini wine range goes a shade greener with plastic bottles (guardian.co.uk)
• What Happens When You Cellar a White? (winevoice.blogspot.com)
• Plastic Bottles for Carbon-Saving Wines (seriousaboutwine.co.za)
• Screwcap v Cork – the photographic evidence (shirazshiraz.blogspot.com)

I was at the Wines from Spain tasting today and I met Sarah. In fact we were already “friends” on twitter in our various alter-egos as @thirstforwine and @bottlegreenltd but had not really met in person. In any case, this twitter-enabled chat encouraged us to taste some of each others’ wines, and in the process I was asked what I thought of this label:

Knowing that such things are subjective, I thought I’d ask for wider input, so I shared the photo with twitter. Within 20 minutes, I had 15-20 responses to be able to gauge a more general view. In this case, unlike my own personal luke-warm stance, the response was overwhelmingly positive. Check out some of the reactions below (some are not included as the messages are private):

1. 
   quaffability @thirstforwine I do like. Very nicely executed. But my first reaction is that it’s vermouth, and I think that is a problem. 11 Mar 2010 from web in reply to thirstforwine
2. 
   ryanopaz @thirstforwine Love the new label…nice and retro! 11 Mar 2010 from TweetDeck in reply to thirstforwine
3. 
   wineboffin I like it. RT @thirstforwine: http://twitpic.com/17xb65 – A new ‘retro’ Rioja label. What do you think? Like? 11 Mar 2010 from TweetDeck
4. 
   JustinELLiddle @thirstforwine Like. Where did you come across that? 11 Mar 2010 from TweetDeck in reply to thirstforwine
5. 
   fmvwines @thirstforwine I think I like it 11 Mar 2010 from web in reply to thirstforwine
6. 
   ChampagneW @thirstforwine quirky! 11 Mar 2010 from web in reply to thirstforwine
7. 
   whereisjeannie @thirstforwine love it! Would buy it for the label. 11 Mar 2010 from TweetDeck in reply to thirstforwine
8. 
   joanna_h85 Love them!! RT @elliott_people: @thirstforwine – Bottlegreen are a great company, fab people and product! 11 Mar 2010 from TweetDeck
9. 
   GollyGD @thirstforwine It’s attractive, but at first glance I’d think – ooo is that Cafe Rouge’s new house wine label? 11 Mar 2010 from web in reply to thirstforwine
10. 
    7SpringsWine @thirstforwine Yes I like it, different, standoutish on the shelves, looks a bit ‘devilish’. Tim 11 Mar 2010 from TweetDeck in reply to thirstforwine
11. 
    emmab1984 @thirstforwine http://twitpic.com/17xb65 – I don’t think I like it! 11 Mar 2010 from TwitPic
12. 
    RedWhiteorPink @thirstforwine I like – very retro 11 Mar 2010 from Tweetie in reply to thirstforwine
13. 
    WineChallenge @thirstforwine Yes, we like! Very Art Deco. 11 Mar 2010 from web in reply to thirstforwine
14. 
    AlexDuran_ Fine! RT: @thirstforwine: http://twitpic.com/17xb65 – A new ‘retro’ Rioja label. What do you think? Like? 11 Mar 2010 from Echofon
15. 
    RichieWine Great label… RT @thirstforwine: http://twitpic.com/17xb65 – A new ‘retro’ Rioja label. What do you think? Like? (via @wineboffin) 11 Mar 2010 from web
16. 
    vinosity @WineChallenge @thirstforwine I would say more Nouveau than Deco, but I also like it a lot. 11 Mar 2010 from web in reply to WineChallenge
17. 
    ccarter126 Classy RT @thirstforwine: http://twitpic.com/17xb65 – A new ‘retro’ Rioja label. What do you think? Like? 11 Mar 2010 from TweetDeck

— this quote was brought to you by quoteurl

How about that for value for business? With a properly planned out strategy for getting input and feedback from fans, friends and consumers in general, twitter and other social media tools can be very useful without being complicated or time-consuming. And they can be fun too!

“There could be a hint of natamycin in your wine.” Should you jump for joy, or jump away from the glass?

What if I told you there may be a trace of resveratrol? Drink up or Throw up?

What about knowing that isinglass, bentonite and copper sulphate had possibly been used in the making of your wine? Would that make you think: “Ooh! The wine maker cares that I get a fresh, clean and clear bottle every time, I’ll buy it!” or “Cripes! This wine is adulterated and manipulated. I couldn’t possibly drink this“?

There is a bit of a story brewing concerning the first item – Natamycin. This is a “fungicide and anti-microbial agent” that is allowed in some food stuffs in the EU, so at low doses is deemed to be fine for your health. Except, it is not listed as an allowable ingredient of wine, and therefore by (EU) definition is “banned”. It now appears that new testing methods, developed in Germany, are able to detect it, and they’ve identified it in several wines from Argentina, so the law says they cannot be sold.

[Poor Argentineans! Every time we think we might see more of their wines on sale, something happens to dash their hopes (I for one will continue to buy and drink Argentinean wines).]

So where does it come from and what does it mean? Who knows!?! (the source of this may be the real story)

I (personally) am going to operate on the assumption the ban is a mainly bureaucratic issue, that the substance is safe (at low levels) and that the issue will be more about wine making processes (and who might be cutting corners) rather than any real health scare.

But what about the bigger picture?

The bigger issue relates to those other items I mentioned. Which of these are good, and which are bad? Is the average consumer going to know? Or care?

There is a movement in the wine business that says that all wines should carry ingredient labelling (see what Bonny Doon are doing) just as most other food & drink products do. The question will be, will any consumer understand those ingredients, what they mean, and what the effects are? Are we defending the consumer, or simply confusing them “for their/our own good”?

Wine is a strange beast. In principle it is simple.

You take some grapes. You crush them. You let the yeast turn the sugar into alcohol. You filter the resulting alcoholic liquid and put it into bottles. You drink it.

Except the modern consumer demands certain reliable, high quality, clean wines, clear and without funny ‘floaty bits’, harmless or otherwise. Unfortunately, to achieve that, most wines go through a few processes that may leave mere ‘traces’, for which we need to invent new tests just to know they are there, of certain substances. Does the wine drinker need to know that? I’m not sure. As long as it is safe and fair (all wineries do more or less the same), is it necessary to know as long as it isn’t actually hidden?

I’m all for educating and informing consumers that want to know more, and 110% behind the idea of analysis to ensure what they drink is safe, but after that … ?

When the EU law changed and wines had to say “contains sulphites” I personally received several calls and emails from concerned consumers that their favourite tipple was now adulterated and “gave them headaches” when in fact nothing had changed, just the label.

In the near future, wine bottles will be “encouraged” (though I don’t think forced) to carry the pregnant-women-should-not-drink-alcohol symbol, a “responsible drinking” reminder, the usual legal source and content information, and the reminder that “this wine contains sulphites/sulfites”. I wonder how much further this will go, and whether, in a few years’ time, there will be any space left for the name of the wine maker and the name of the winery?

I hope that the reaction to this particular ‘event’ is not too bad for the Argentinean wine industry, and I also hope that common sense prevails. The rules in force are strong, the tests are in place and consumers are protected – let’s also hope that bureaucracy, even if well-intentioned, does not damage the wine industry for no particular gain.

What do you think? Would you like to see ALL ingredients listed on a wine label, or are you happy as things are? Do you trust the tests to keep you safe? What would you do with the information if it was provided? I look forward to hearing what you think of this issue

<end rant>

For the record:

• resveratrol is, in theory, good – it is associated with positive effects on the heart … but there is the rest of the body to consider!
• isinglass is used (by some) to get “bits” out of your wine, and all of it falls out of the wine (actually called ‘fining’) or is filtered out
• bentonite is a clay that is a good filter for wine, nothing stays in the wine
• copper sulphate is a bad substance on its own, but in tiny quantities can remove “off odours” (stinky, bad egg) from wines and is itself them removed too

VOGA wine bottle

In the interests of giving readers a little more of what they want, I decided I’d buy a bottle when I spotted it in Canada recently, and find out a little more about it.

I’m still amazed, as I was when I wrote my last post, that this producer can make any money with what must be incredibly expensive packaging. It isn’t quite a diamond encrusted bottle, but the investment required to buy these unique bottles and add several layers of closure (see pictures below) must be awfully high.

One of the main reasons most wineries (whose margins are small compared to beer or spirits companies) use standard shapes of bottles is that they are produced in large quantities. This makes them easier to source, and cheaper – something rather important in these cost-cutting, margin-slashing times. However, clear differentiation is difficult to achieve on wine shelves so I commend them for trying.

I heard at one stage that these wines were to be available in the UK, but the importer mentioned at the time does not have them listed on their site, so I assume it fell through. My enquiries through the VOGA site remain unanswered several weeks later – not great customer service.

I don’t write tasting notes on this blog, but you can probably find some recommendations on Snooth, but the VOGA Quattro did match a spicy pork dinner well

Layers of packaging 2 & 3 (Plastic Cap, Plastic Seal & Cork)

Until today, I thought nobody could. But now, thanks to TheDieline.com I believe I may have found the answer:

The Wine Can

(photo borrowed from TheDieLine.com – please visit their site for more photos and other cool designs)

Not ANY old can, but a gloriously modern looking package with matt colours, nice graphics, and it is easily recyclable (I believe).

Of course, this is only at the prototype stage, but apparently the designers are looking for investors (and presumably wineries) to get involved and get this to market.

Of course, the issue will be cost. As with all innovations, this will probably be expensive, at least at first, on a per unit basis. The effect will be either to make the wine in this can appear more expensive than it is (limiting sales), or will require the marketing/distribution company to fill it with cheaper wine to offset this.

That would be a shame. What would be interesting would be to see an innovative, premium priced brand take the plunge and provide good quality wine in this package to attract early adopters to buy it AND enjoy the wine inside.

I’m always on the look out for packaging that is interesting, so if you know of any other such developments, please do let me know.

The packaging on fruit and vegetables, the coating added to tablets for washing clothes and dishes, and packaging materials for goods bought over the internet (if couriers could just be trusted to treat ‘fragile’ goods properly much waste could be avoided).

One thing that I don’t normally object to is glass bottles for wine. I must say I am still of the belief that this is the best alternative at the moment, even if recycling rates could be improved.

I was struck, therefore, when I saw a bottle on the shelf of my local Co-op that looked ridiculously large and heavy, and not only that, was selling for £3.99 (that’s around $8).

J.P. Chenet is already known for its quirky bottle shapes which have helped to increase its brand profile. But this bottle, from what appears to be a premium range, was like the original bottle after a course of Mr Universe quality steroids.

I was intrigued, so I parted with the paltry sum and took it home.

Now, I have weighed a number of other bottles in my rack and the average weight is around 1.25kg when full, so imagine my surprise when this came in at 1.623kg – thats a 30% increase.

So that is where all the missing glass in Europe has gone!

Maybe in future, those consumers just getting into wine might, instead of using the time honoured calculation of “best value”: BV=ABV/RSP (otherwise known as ‘most alcohol for your money’), might instead say something like:

“Wow, this Argentinian Chardonnay weighs a ton and is only £4.49!”
“That’s nothing! Over here is Chilean Cabernet is a ton and a half and is just £4.27 if you buy three bottles”

Let’s just hope that we live to see the day – or maybe not.

Oh, and unfortunately the wine delivered exactly what the price promised, not very much. How could it, after spending so much on packaging??

I was surprised, therefore, to stop by my local Sainsbury’s Express (attached to a petrol station) and see a whole promotional shelf of these boxes.

Each box (retail £3.99) contains two 187.5ml PET glasses of wine. I thought I’d pick one up to examine the product in the interests of checking out new packaging experiments – I’ll be honest and say I had low expectations on the wine, however. Am I too close-minded?

Well, the twin glass box idea is certainly innovative. A cleverly folded light cardboard box holds the two glasses that, apparently, have been designed to be near indestructible. I have not tested that point.

I chose the red. This is a South Australia Trencherman Shiraz 2004, 13.5% ABV [which also contains sulphites (who would have guessed!)]. I’d love to give you a tasting note, but as you know I don’t generally do that on this site. I did consider it, but as my notes started with “overripe nose”, “cooked”, “past it” and “bitter finish” I probably shouldn’t.

[To be fair to it, the lot number on the glass was L7185HA5 which I interpret as the 185th day of 2007 which would mean that this wine has already passed its 6 month shelf life. I have emailed the company to find out.]

So, what about the idea in principle?

The package says that the wine is:

“Perfect for picnics, BBQs, days on the beach and afternoons in the garden. Simply peel off the seal, sit back and enjoy”

Most packaging innovations claim to be about the environment as well as convenience, such as the tetrapack and the pouch. Although the glass is recyclable PET this is almost entirely aimed at the convenience market. It claims to be replicating the ‘single serve’ options of beer, cider, etc. with something more appropriate to wine, hence the glass.

IF I happened to be going to a picnic, and IF I chose not to have a bottle and ALSO did not have my own glasses to bring, I might like to have this option, but I somehow don’t see it working.

The problem really is that as you are appealing to a cross section of wine drinkers (those who happen to want to drink wine at a picnic or BBQ) it is very difficult to do this only with one style of wine. However popular South Australian Shiraz (or Chardonnay, or rose) is, it still does not appeal to a lot of people. Also, the wine is aimed at the lower end (in terms of wine quality) to try and reach the masses, but how many people really think “I wish I had just 2 glasses of wine to take with me”?

It would be much better to sell empty picnic glasses alongside the range of wines rather than pre-filling them.

Even if it did take off, after you have bought one box, you now HAVE the wine glasses for your picnic. You don’t need any more, so why continue to buy it? The idea that you might buy the glasses to re-use them is rather far-fetched.

All this, of course, is added to the fact that at 187.5ml of wine, the ratio of plastic to wine makes this packaging rather environmentally “challenged” to say the least.

I can’t help feeling that this is a PET drinking vessel solution looking for a problem, rather than the other way around.

However, encouraging people to drink slightly less, and offering them something better than the standard white plastic cups used for water coolers to drink out of, must be a step in the right direction.

I look forward to how this project develops, particularly over the summer as the BBQ season kicks in.

Le Village du Sud is a new brand concept from the well respected Mont Tauch cooperative in the South of France (specifically in Fitou).

It caught my attention as, once again, they are being pretty innovative with their branding and their route to market. They have usually provided wines that are a cut above the competition, and they have also been much more willing to take on marketing activities, such as bringing wine makers and grape growers (who speak no English but really look the part) to wine tastings across the UK, including the BBC Good Food Show where I saw them.

This time it is the Tetra Pak, something I have written about in the past. Once again it is available from The Coop. They are certainly keener than most to do something ‘sustainable’ and positive for the environment – whether environmentally friendly or fairtrade.

The wine in question is an Old Vine Grenache in a 1 litre tetra pak. The packaging itself is a little different, with extra angles and a “prism shape”. However, what I found intriguing is that they have managed to move the design away from being a pseudo glass bottle. They have realised that a tetra pak allow you to do a lot more with the packaging than simply copy the information from a label (which is always extremely limited) or to show a picture of a bottle or glass (the usual cop-out).

This one has a series of cartoons that give the wine an extra dimension of personality not usually associated with Vin de Pays d’Oc, especially as it is in English. This is very bold, forward-thinking and fun.

Shame about the wine!

As I always point out, this is not a site for tasting notes, but I did try this wine to see if I could detect something specifically “tetra pak like” in it, just to see if the packaging affected the taste. Now, I admit this was not done blind, but I have no problem liking wines in other packaging, so I was not negatively predisposed. However, I found a very unpleasant aftertaste in the wine which I assume must come from the packaging as I do actually like their wines normally. I’d love to read more informed views on whether this is a truly inert packaging format for wine.

Finally, a niggle. If you look at the front of the packaging, you’ll see a badge which I also saw on the previous tetra pak I reviewed called masterpeace.

“33% free” and “33% more wine free compared to a standard 75cl bottle”

FREE? There are lots of objections to this statement, chief of which is that this wine is NOT available in 75cl glass bottles, so how can it possibly be compared? Also, this wine was already discounted, ostensibly for the launch, from £4.99 to £3.99. Quite how much of a cheap and “drink loads” mentality do they want to associate with this wine?

I do hope that 1L formats will not keep using this statement.

Overall review; nice idea, but once again more show than substance, largely due to the final quality of the wine.

I’ve never been totally convinced about this, but anyway it looks good on television and sometimes gets unexpected results (one less rocket launcher on the streets of Devon!) such as this.

So I was intrigued by a neck tag on a bottle of wine promising a “cork amnesty”. As a proud owner of quite a few corks, mainly because I collect them for a mysterious project my sister is working on, I wondered if I might have to visit a local police station to assuage my conscience. Alas, the truth was more prosaic.

[I bought the RH Phillips 2003 Zinfandel, but I believe there are/were other wines out there too]

RH Phillips, a Californian producer from Esparto, CA, USA (erm, time for the Wine Atlas I think), HAD created a site at www.corkamnesty.com that gave ideas of all the many things one could do with corks EXCEPT put them in the neck of a bottle of wine. This is a slightly aggressive form of evangelism for screwcaps, and it certainly got my attention.

Their neck tag as well as their back label are all about how cork is associated with TCA (cork taint, musty cardboard and walnut smells in wine) and should therefore be avoided.

Now, there is a big debate about corks, screwcaps, TCA, reductive wines, etc. that I will probably have to write about at some stage, but is probably FAR too dull for most people out there. I applaud RH Phillips for making a virtue of their packaging, but like with my politics, I prefer a positive message rather than a negative one. I happen to think that cork has a very important role to play, but screwcaps do too, and any radical position is unnecessary.

Unfortunately I delayed writing this post for some weeks and in that time, RH Phillips’ new owners (Constellation having acquired Vincor International) have closed down the site and redirected it to their corporate page.

Not only is this dull, it is silly as they lose any valuable traffic them might have got. It also means I cannot post any clever suggestions they may have had.

I’d like to think that unlike automatic weapons and Rambo-style hunting knives, there is no need to be concerned about corks. In the right hands they do serve a purpose and can benefit humanity. However, if you feel at all ashamed of your collection and you have not yet created your own cork trivet, notice board or wreath, then maybe you could decide to turn them in to the authorities and hope they ask no questions about how long it took you to accumulate such a collection.