ShareThis Page
Believe it or not, screw caps might replace corks on bottles |

Believe it or not, screw caps might replace corks on bottles

| Wednesday, August 20, 2003 12:00 a.m

One might think that an industry would be doomed when it knowingly sells a product that 5 percent to 8 percent of the time is defective and unusable at the time it leaves the factory.

Brazen conduct such as this would no doubt cause massive consumer backlash, and the public would quickly lose confidence in the product as the news spread.


Ordinarily, yes — except when it comes to the wine industry.

Producers worldwide traditionally have used corks to seal bottles. Made from the bark of cork oaks, corks are bleached in chlorine as part of the manufacturing process. This sometimes can result in chemical contamination from 2,4,6-Trichloroanisole (246-TCA), a compound that eclectic wine wag Randall Grahm of Bonny Doon Vineyard satirically refers to in his humor tabloid, The National Vinquirer, as “2,4,6 tricootieanisole” or “cork cooties.”

Whatever the chemical name, contaminated corks impart an unmistakably foul, stale, moldy odor and taste to the bottled wine. The only thing to do with a “corked” wine is pour it down the drain.

Discovering a wine is corked is particularly galling, because the producer and wine retailer who long ago pocketed their margins when the bottle cost $20, $50 or even $100 normally can’t be located to make restitution.

Recognizing the problem, but being loath to tamper with the hallowed tradition of “pulling the cork” to open a bottle of wine, producers have experimented with alternate closures. Synthetic corks came into vogue for a while, but consumers have been reluctant to accept the hard plastic cylinders that often are more difficult to wrench out of a bottle with a corkscrew than a real cork.

Another possibility is the Stelvin screw cap closure, popularly known as the screw top, much maligned in wine circles. Screw-cap seals have commonly been associated with cheap wines intended for immediate and quick consumption. The common wisdom of wine snobbery is that no decent, well-made, ageworthy wine comes in a bottle with a screw cap.

But the times they are a changin’.

The trend of using screw-cap closures for fine wines began primarily in New Zealand and Australia and has spread to the United States. An inert food-grade polymer seal ring at the base of each metal screw cap preserves wine, eliminating the risk of taint.

Obviously, screw caps are a snap to open. An easy twist breaks the seal. No more crumbling or stuck corks, and resealing is just as easy as opening.

Even so, the move to screw caps is fairly risky, because numerous skeptics — not to mention the cork producers — are ready to pounce if these wines do not catch on. However, evidence already is mounting to show that screw caps might be the wave of the future.

According to the New Zealand Screwcap Wine Seal Initiative, screw-cap seals permit wines to evolve and age in the bottle while being cellared. Screw-cap seals still permit a small amount of oxygen in the head of the bottle to allow gradual aging; researchers also note that much of the development of wine takes place anaerobically (without oxygen) inside the bottle.

Tests on “library wines” over the past 30 years, according to the initiative, have demonstrated the effectiveness of screw caps in preserving cellar-worthy wines while allowing them to develop complexity. Bob Campbell, a New Zealand master of wine, recently asked, “I have one question for the winemakers who … continue to use corks. If you know that screw caps will produce better and more consistent wine than corks, how can you continue to shortchange your customers?”

I have not tasted a screw-capped wine that’s been cellared, but I have tried a variety on the market with screw-cap closures. All have been fresh and without taint.

  • 2002 Kim Crawford Sauvignon Blanc, Marlborough, New Zealand (Specialty 27862, $15.99): Cold fermentation was used to create arresting, fresh aromas of guava, pineapple and grapefruit opening to rich, fruity flavors of grapefruit and guava with light herbal touches. Lively, refreshing acidity lends nice balance to this delicious, stylish dry white wine. Try it either as an aperitif or with grilled tuna. Highly Recommended.

  • 2002 Wolf Blass “Gold Label” Riesling, Clare Valley and Eden Valley, South Australia (Specialty 27864, $12.49): Classic aromas of apples and peaches with accents of spicy cloves lead to refreshing flavors of crisp apples, limes and touches of cloves and honey, balanced with refreshing acidity through the slightly off-dry finish. Try this lively and refreshing wine as a BYOB with either Thai or Vietnamese cuisine. Recommended.

  • 2001 Bonny Doon Winery Ca’ del Solo “Big House Red,” Calif. (8774, $11.99): This classic California “field-blend” style offers aromas of cassis, blackberry, mint and chocolate leading to rich, fruity flavors of cassis, green pepper and chocolate with medium tannins and a fruity finish. Try it with grilled meats. Recommended.

    Best Buy Recommendation (with a cork):

  • 2001 Rothbury Estate Chardonnay, New South Wales, Australia (8834, on sale, $9.99 for 1.5 liters): Aromas of citrus, pineapples and coconut followed by rich, soft flavors of citrus and pineapples are balanced with a touch of oak and good acidity. This easy-drinking, tasty, crowd-pleasing wine is a great value at the sale price. Try it with late-summer grilled fish and poultry. Recommended.

    Cellar Key

    Recommended: Indicates a well-made table wine ready for immediate enjoyment with everyday meals and offering good value.

    Highly Recommended: Indicates a well-made table wine ready for immediate enjoyment and offering very good value on a particularly well-made example of its type.

    Cellar Selection: Indicates a well-made table wine that requires additional bottle aging in a temperature-controlled cellar to reach peak enjoyment.

    Note: Code numbers and prices refer to the Pennsylvania Liquor Control Board system unless otherwise indicated.

    Categories: News
  • TribLIVE commenting policy

    You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

    We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

    While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

    We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

    We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

    We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

    We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

    We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.