Wine closures: the facts

Positive effect

Amorim’s Dr. Miguel Cabral says that cork-derived phenolics “allow for a balanced wine ageing”

Cabral’s latest research centres not on the role of low levels of oxygen in the maturation of wine, but extractible compounds in a natural cork, which, he says, may have a positive effect on wine development.

“A cork in a bottle will slowly release compounds into a wine that will react with it and produce complex compounds that probably have a role in colour stabilisation and reducing bitterness and other roles we don’t know,” he says.

He continues: “You put wine in a barrel because you want these phenolics, and when you put wine in a bottle, it receives some phenolics from the cork – data collected over 36 months shows that the cork will release a small amount of phenolics, and this is a linear release.”

Notably, Cabral said that these cork-derived phenolics “allow for a balanced wine ageing”, which, he said, was in contrast to other closures, commenting that “synthetics accelerate ageing,” while the almost hermetic seal formed by a Sarantin screwcap, which is tin-lined, “accelerates a reductive wine ageing” – referring to the production of volatile sulphur compounds that, it is believed, are formed as a wine ages in bottle without sufficient oxygen (although these characters are more commonly believed to result from reductive winemaking).

The next stage for Cabral is to see if he can select a cork for its higher phenolic content, so it can be used for wines destined for extended ageing in bottle.

“Phenolics are variable in cork, and some corks release more than others, so our idea is trying to get a technique that will determine the amount of phenolics in the corks using infrared technology,” he says.

Such an approach is already used by barrel manufacturers, observes Cabral, who says a cooper such as Radoux is using near-infrared spectrometry to grade oak staves according to the phenolics, specifically tannins, that will be released into the wine. Cabral says: “Our objective is that in the future, a wine producer could specify a cork with a high concentration of phenolics.”

9 Responses to “Wine closures: the facts”

  1. Bruce Devlin says:

    No one ever considers the fact that cork type closures usually come with a capsule, and its impacts on the environment. Weather Tin, Poly, or plastic. It is part of the closure choice, and I’m pretty sure it would skew the environmental results in a different manner. It is rare you find a cork/synthetic bottle without some sort of capsule. An advantage of the screwcap is that it performs both jobs in one unit.

  2. Bottom line is there is no one closure that is perfect for all wines. Research has shown that most wines retail for under $20 per bottle and will be consumed within a week of purchase. No need to use a closure that is expensive or not easily recycled. Consumers do not buy a bottle of wine based on the closure! They buy a wine because it tastes good, is in their budget and is easy to open. Newer consumers are not adept at using a cork screw so why make opening a bottle of wine so complicated? Do you think Coke or Pepsi would enjoy the sales volume they have today if it required a special tool to open each bottle? When will the wine producers learn to simplify the package and get rid of the “mysticism” that surrounds wine.

  3. Michael Quirk says:

    In reference to people not buying wine due to the closure sounds like a the cork industry trying to redeem itself, or simply call it for what it is “Bull”. Ignorance is the biggest issue but as people around the world become more wine savvy and aware of what they do choose (mostly retail) for the easiest and best option available. As for the environmental aspect besides the capsule you also has to consider all the wine that has had to be tipped down the sink due to oxidation, TCA and poor storage all closures may be exposure but the majority of the time it’s the cork closure as the major culprit.
    The inconsistency of the each wine due to the cork quality and being a natural product that it effects every bottle of wine differently so a case of wine has a huge variation of flavours both good and bad. Ordering wine by the glass in a bar or restaurant shows clearly how different each bottle is and very annoying for the bar and the customer.
    As a natural product they degrade and crumble and annoyingly you only remember that when trying to remove the cork. So out come all the tools to try and get rid of all the cork floating in the bottle and the mess all over the bench.
    Even being TCA free and guaranteeing the cork doesn’t mean getting the damn cork out of the bottle any easier. Really we just what great wine not effected by the closure and the Screwcap is the best option at present.

  4. Martin Thompson says:

    Just to present a counterpoint, as I live in Portugal and love wandering the montado – cork oak forests – when I get the time. Aside from the significant environmental benefits, (very fair point regarding the need for a capsule though!) there are multiple downstream social benefits associated to the extraction and processing of cork.

    As a ’79 vintage, I still appreciate pulling a cork and honestly the risk of a tainted bottle doesn’t bother me much but it reminds me that wine still does have some mystical allure, hence the fantastic prices fetched per litre versus a soft drink.

    To be sure there is a market for fast consumption wines that is well served by screw cap closures, they are not to my taste but it has nothing to do with the practicality or technical supremacy of the stopper or even the wine itself. I guess I just really like to hear that pop!

  5. Angeliki Tsioli says:

    Very interesting reading and facts on a controversial subject.
    Just wanted to mention a false number in page 5 of the article, where the detection level of TCA is mentioned to be 0,5 ng/l. Of course this is correct in the previous page, so by 5 ng/l or just 5 ppt.
    I enjoyed reading this,
    Angeliki Tsioli

  6. Angeliki Tsioli says:

    In relation to my previous comment, I admit to have confused the two different kinds of thresholds:

    1. The threshold of detection by humans is about 5 ng/l, while
    2. the threshold of detection by a machine or technique, like that of ND (developed by Amorim) lies far lower than that at 0,5 ng/l.

  7. Tim Keller says:

    What is also missing from this discussion is the topic of VARIANCE in OTR. I developed the first oxygen controlling screwcap closure (the VinPerfect Smartcap ) focusing not just on the oxygen rate – but on how consistent it is. Cork proponents are correct in the fact that some oxygen is needed for higher quality – but the problem is just how wide the range is in terms of OTR performance with cork – it spans several orders of magnitude.

    The other thing to understand is that different suppliers offer oxygen control – but in widely different ranges. My screwcaps go from 0.11 ppm of oxygen per year for the light to 0.27 ppm for the medium+. And you can tell the difference in the aromatics of those wines with that little bit of difference within 6 months.

    By contrast, the tightest oxygen controlling synthetic cork is about 1ppm per year. Wine is pretty resilient and can take that, if not be improved by that in the very short term. – and yes, most are consumed young – but the problem is that the consumer does not see wine as perishable – instead they expect to to hold up if not improve with age. So if you use a closure such as a synthetic cork that is guaranteed to oxidize the wine in 1-2 years, then the responsible thing for producers to do is to add an expiration date to the label.

    Also – one needs to be careful when producers talk about oxygen. Many producers including Diam and the vinolok are very vague when they talk about their oxygen rates. Quality closure producers should not be afraid to publish OTR data in mg or ccO2 units including variance data – yet few do. So I would not take them at their word when they say vague things like “will last 30 years”

  8. Neil Monnens says:

    In 2009, 2012 and 2015 I surveyed my WineRelease.com audience about their closure preference for red vs white wines. Most studies I have seen ask their audience their wine closure preference without discerning between red and white wines. Results are consistent among the years and in 2015 77% preferred natural cork for red wine and 52% preferred screw cap for white wines. Full study is available in the “other” section of WineRelease.com (questions 17 and 18).

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Subscribe to our newsletters

Account Manager - Manchester

Black Fire Tequila
Manchester, UK

Marylebone Sales Manager

Philglas & Swiggot
Marylebone, London

Sales Administrator

Les Caves de Pyrène
Guildford, UK

General Manager

3Cs Cider
UK

Buyer

BrandAlley UK LTD
London EC2A

Liquid Production Assistant

Atom Group
Tonbridge, UK

Brand Manager

Hallgarten Druitt
Luton, UK

Brand Manager

Kilchoman Distillery Co Ltd
Edinburgh, UK

Wine Bar Supervisor

Henny's
London, UK

Partner Manager - On-trade - North West

Maverick Drinks
Manchester, UK

Pays d'Oc Tasting

London,United Kingdom
28th Jun 2018

CHILE: From The Very Top To The Downright Hot

Manchester,United Kingdom
2nd Jul 2018

CHILE: From The Very Top To The Downright Hot

Edinburgh,United Kingdom
3rd Jul 2018
Click to view more

The Global Malbec Masters 2017

the drinks business is proud to announce the inaugural Global Malbec Masters 2017

The Global Sparkling Masters 2017

the drinks business is thrilled to announce the launch of The Global Sparkling Masters.

Click to view more