Wine industry discusses lighter packaging March 25, 2008
Jane Anson
Drinks suppliers and glass manufacturers are trying to think of ways of reducing the weight of glass bottles to lessen environmental impact.
At a forum in London last week organised by the Wine and Spirit Trade Association (WSTA) and WRAP (Waste & Resources Action Programme), wine retailers and brand-owners expressed their concerns about lightweight wine bottle supply.
This was the first time the wine industry and its supply chain has come together to discuss the issue.
Debate centred on barriers to the introduction of lightweight bottles, likely UK demand and the levels of commitment and capital investment required to answer industry needs.
The WSTA's Kate Coleman told decanter.com, 'There have been no concrete solutions yet, but we have agreed to work more closely together to find answers.'
She said over the past year WSTA had been approached by its members who wanted to use more ecologically-sound bottles but had found it hard to source the glass from manufacturers.
Attendees included Constellation Europe, Kingsland Wine & Spirits, Bibendum Wine, E & J Gallo Europe, Tesco, Sainsburys, Quinn Glass, Saint Gobain and Ardagh Glass UK.
John Corbet-Milward, WSTA head of technical and international affairs said in a press release, 'It's clear the UK wine sector needs to reduce the thousands of tonnes of packaging waste it produces every year.'
Have your say... To post your comment on this story, email us at news@decanter.com, making sure the relevant headline is in the subject field
Did you notice who the folks are who are pressing this issue? Constellation Europe, Kingsland Wine & Spirits, Bibendum Wine, E & J Gallo Europe, Tesco, Sainsburys, Quinn Glass, Saint Gobain and Ardagh Glass UK. These are not winemakers or consumers. These are financially driven corporations trying to take an industry in their own direction. Does anyone really think putting a quality wine in other than a glass bottle will improve its quality? Is there any consumer out there who is convinced that they will actually see lower prices if these corporations save money on lower cost and/or lighter shipping packages? Don't be fooled, these guys are looking for lower package costs, lower freight costs and a competitive advantage over the rest of the industry who stick with traditional glass. They will also claim a pat on the back from selling the whole idea as an ecological benefit.
Lighter, cheaper wine packaging will do little for the wine maker or the consumer, and these are the only people who add any value to the whole process of making and drinking wine.
Bill Williamson, Williamson Wines
Is the simplest answer not – for high-volume, low-value wine anyway – simply to ship the wine unbottled in bulk, and bottle it in its final market? This would negate the need to transport glass bottles half way round the world. In fact, the bottles would hardly need to move. Instead of shipping bottles from (say) Australia to the UK, where the bottles will eventually need to be broken down to be recycled, the wine can be bottled in the UK, and when the wine is drunk, the bottles can simply be collected and re-used, without having to be melted down or shipped anywhere. Thus each market could have its own re-usable bottles, and few bottles would need to be shipped anywhere.
I'm sure there are specific problems in transporting wine in bulk. However, if everyone is going to get serious about green issues, solving such problems will eventually become financially imperative. Similarly, if green trends continue, most wine drinkers* will eventually accept that the fate of the planet is sufficient reason to give up estate/domaine/chateau bottling.
The ideas about lightweight bottles are, of course, still perfectly valid, particularly at the premium end of the market. These (relatively) small producers, who regard their output as a luxury commodity, are effectively exempt from the argument anyway. No-one would expect the Screaming Eagles and Le Pins of this world to do anything in bulk. However, their volumes are too small to matter when looking at the global market. They could perhaps though be persuaded to adopt lighter weight bottles, so as to show solidarity with emerging global trends.
Tim Clark, Hong Kong
Bulk-shipped wine for local bottling, as suggested by one reader, is already a fact in one of the Scandinavian countries (it would be useful to taste some beside bottle-shipped versions of the same wine). Many lightweight packages are in one way or another unattractive, but before resorting to the TetraPak, bag-in-box, spigot sack or plastic the industry should switch to lighter glass bottles, such as empty I have just weighed at 15.7 oz/445 gm. That's about the minimum. A great many producers use far heavier bottles for marketing effect—they look bigger and feel substantial—that bolsters their image and helps to justify high prices. Many run between 20.5 and 26 oz (580-735 gm). The heaviest I've run across weighs 43 oz/1225 gm. You'd think it was a magnum at least, but no—it's a mere 750ml.
Bill Marsano, New York, USA
Bravo. There are large differences in the weight of existing glass bottles. I dislike pretentious wine marketers using big heavy bottles that provide no benefit for the consumer, but contribute more to carbon emissions. I welcome lighter glass bottles. I hate lugging heavy cases around my cellar – collecting fine wine might be a middle-aged sport, but it needs a young man's back! Byron Sharp
Register on decanter.com absolutely free for news alerts delivered direct to your email inbox, and our fortnightly newsletter with advance notice of what’s coming up in Decanter magazine, offers, competitions and more.
PLUS registration is a one-stop shop for the Decanter magazine Archive and Decanter Fine Wine Tracker.
Did you notice who the folks are who are pressing this issue? Constellation Europe, Kingsland Wine & Spirits, Bibendum Wine, E & J Gallo Europe, Tesco, Sainsburys, Quinn Glass, Saint Gobain and Ardagh Glass UK. These are not winemakers or consumers. These are financially driven corporations trying to take an industry in their own direction. Does anyone really think putting a quality wine in other than a glass bottle will improve its quality? Is there any consumer out there who is convinced that they will actually see lower prices if these corporations save money on lower cost and/or lighter shipping packages? Don't be fooled, these guys are looking for lower package costs, lower freight costs and a competitive advantage over the rest of the industry who stick with traditional glass. They will also claim a pat on the back from selling the whole idea as an ecological benefit.
