Erbamat: Franciacorta's climate-change mitigator

I have previously written a post on the Franciocorta wine region and a series of posts comparing the wines from Champagne, Prosecco, Franciacorta, and Cava:

Part I -- Origins
Part II -- Regulatory histories
Part III -- Macro-Level characteristics

Part IV -- Production zones

Part V -- The vineyards
Part VI -- Fermentation and aging
Part VII -- Wine styles
Part VIII -- The nonconformists
Part IX -- Production levels and markets

Part X -- The Future

This demonstrated interest garnered me an invitation to a recent tasting of a selection of the region's wines held at the Miami Culinary Institute.

It had been a while since I had visited the detailed characteristics of the Franciacorta wine so I was rather surprised when Mr Silvano Brescianini, the President of the Franciacorta Consorzio, mentioned a grape called Erbamat as one of the constituent varieties. To the best of my knowledge, the mix was Chardonnay, Pinot Nero, and Pinot Bianco but, according to Mr. Brescianini, Erbamat could contribute as much as 10% of a blend. Some research was in order.

That research has revealed that Erbamat is a high-acid, late-ripening white grape that is native to the region and with a history that stretches back to circa 1500. The cultivar had slipped into obscurity until a recent study by a university professor highlighted its characteristics.

When compared to Champagne, Franciacorta is riper, fuller, and rounder, the result of a warmer growing environment -- and the resultant riper fruit (Champagne has about 1000 growing degree days while Franciacorta experiences approximately 1500). Further, climate change is causing the region's grapes to ripen earlier. In the 1980s, for example, Chardonnay was picked in early September; today, the warmer parts of the zone begin picking that variety in late July.

Erbamat is seen as potentially mitigating the ripeness and climate effects of the region. Its primary characteristics are as follows (Aldo Fiordelli, Decanter, 3/21/17):

• Pale straw color with greenish tinge
• Thin skin
• Compact bunches
• Late ripening (20 - 30 days after other varieties)
• Higher levels of malic acid (produces lean-bodied, high-acid wines)
• Low sugar production (low alcohol wines).

The thin skin and tight bunches render the grapes subject to disease pressure but that risk is more than offset by the freshness, white florality, and chalky minerality which this wine brings to the blend. The variety is allowed in all of the Franciacorta styles with the exception of Satén.

©Wine -- Mise en abyme

Part X -- The Future: The definitive comparison of Champagne, Franciacorta, Prosecco, and Cava

Over the course of nine prior posts, I have explored varying characteristics (Origins, regulatory histories, macro-level characteristics, production zones, vineyards, fermentation and aging, wine styles, nonconformity, and production levels) of Champagne, Franciacorta, Prosecco, and Cava. In this post I explore the future of these wines.

Broadly speaking, the sparkling wine markets of the future will not map seamlessly to the markets of the past: they will differ in both size and scope. According to a study done by the research firm TNR (Glittering future for Champagne and Sparkling Wines, beveragemedia.com, 8/16/12), the share of drinking dollars devoted to Champagne and sparkling wines will grow from 5.1% to 7.8%, growth resulting both from increased consumption in existing markets as well as new drinkers in the developing world. According to TNS, spending in this category will increase by 4.2% in Brazil, 5,4% in Nigeria, 4.2% in South Africa, and 4.1% in the UK. Factors that could potentially mitigate these growth projections are perceptions that these wines are (i) indulgences and (ii) only to be consumed on special occasions.

Now let's look at the prognosis for each of the wines under consideration.

Champagne

Champagne has experienced a decline of 4.4% in shipments from 2011 to 2012 with declines occurring across all producer types: 5.3% for Growers; 4.2% for Champagne Houses; and 3.5% for Cooperatives. The challenges faced by Champagne include:

• Customers turning to lower-priced alternatives
• Declining wine consumption in traditional wine-producing European countries 
• Grape price increases averaging 3.5% over the last three growing seasons .

Jean-Marie Bassillère, President of Unions des Maisons de Champagne sees the Champagne growth markets as being primarily non-European with an especial focus on America and Asia. Retooling for those markets will require extensive planning and bountiful resources (Giles Fallowfield, UK "not the future of Champagne growth," decanter.com, 4/2/2013). Luxurysociety.com (BRICs: The Future of Champagne, 5/28/12) supports the focus on emerging economies because (i) there are now more high-net-worth individuals in the Asia/Pacific region than anywhere else outside the US and (ii) they are conspicuous consumers of luxury items, a mantle that Champagne wears easily.

Africa is also viewed as a key target market of the future. Nigeria and South Africa have in common cultural linkages to European countries to go along with oil wealth (Nigeria) and an in-place and growing wine culture (South Africa).

The combination of declining regional consumption, shifts in destination markets, and increasing product costs may have a deleterious effect in the producers lacking strong brands. Without strong presence, the smaller players will be poorly positioned to pass price increases along to the market with attendant negative effects.

Franciacorta

As was shown in Part IX of the series, Franciacorta production levels pale in comparison to the levels of its compatriots. Further, only 8% of its production is exported. That dynamic represents a potential future problem for this wine. Small production and declining consumption could place a squeeze on the product. It will face the uphill task of seeking growth in strange new markets  -- that may be more amenable to the luxury cachet associated with Champagne -- while its home base is being eroded. The region is blessed with deep-pocketed owners with capital from other industries and the ability to stay in the game until they figure it out.

Prosecco

A key driver of Prosecco's growth is the overall growth in sparkling wine sales in the US, UK, and Australia, a result of the breaking of the linkage between sparkling wine and celebration.  In these countries sparkling wine has become an everday drink and this plays right into the hand of Prosecco, the quintessential everyday drink: low in alcohol, light, and affordable.

Also, Prosecco is a key ingredient (along with Aperol orange liquer and soda) in the Aperol Spritz, an aperitif that originated in Italy in the 19th century and is growing in popularity in the major Prosecco markets.  According to italiandishblog.com, this aperitif is a great way to start a meal because it is (i) low in alcohol and (ii) light and refreshing.

And there is no wane in sight.  First, the extra-territorial "imitators" have been cast into disarray by the shrewd strategic move of the Prosecco producers to take their future back into their own hands.  The Prosecco DOC was first awarded in 1969 and was restricted to wines produced in the Conegliano-Valdiobbadene region.  Growers felt that the brand was under attack by "imitators" using just the grape variety and moved to isolate those competitors by changing both the rules and the venue of the game.  Prosecco growers agitated for, and gained regulatory acceptance of: (i) the extension of the Prosecco DOC to cover all of Friuli-Venezia-Giulia and approximately two-thirds of Veneto; (ii) promotion of the original Prosecco DOC to DOCG status; (iii) changing the name of the source grape from Prosecco to Glera; and (iv) restricting the use of the name Prosecco only to Glera sparkling wines produced within the delimited zones.  The growers felt that these actions would serve to protect their territory, the brand, and the quality of Prosecco.  The regulations authorizing these actions came into law in 2009.

Second, the Managing Director of leading Prosecco player Mionetto USA sees the current sales levels as just scratching the surface (shankennewsdaily.com).  The core consumers of the product are 40- to 50-year-old women and this segment has been lightly penetrated.  Younger drinkers are still experimental but they are trading up to Prosecco from "cheaper Cava."  Deeper penetration of these markets, plus pushing into other market cohorts and demographics, provide plenty of opportunities for this wine in the future. As a matter of fact, the Prosecco region estimates that its production will grow from 220 million bottles today to 1 billion bottles within the next 25 years (Rebecca Gibb, Prosecco region "to grow fivefold," Decanter, 11/10/11).

Cava

Spain, currently with an 8.7% share of the sparkling wine market, is the only country projected to show declines (0.4%) in market share over the course of the study period. Cava is a low-cost alternative to Champagne in a future where consumption is declining locally and the newer markets are susceptible to luxury and status as buying decision points. In addition, Cava has some internal issues which need to be addressed in order to retain the long-term viability of the brand.

First, Cava has to deal with the causes and effects of a breakaway wine appellation. Ravento i Blanc had quit the Cava DO appellation because of its "low image." The DO is perceived to: be volume oriented; have no geographical distinction as it relates to climate and soils; have low viticultural standards (Jane Lawrence, decanter.com, 3/15/2013). Ravento I Blanco sees its proposed new appellation -- to be presented to the Consejo Regulador this spring -- as addressing the problems of the Cava DO. The appellation will be built around a small geographic area surrounding the Anoia River and will have tighter production rules than is the case for Cava DO. The risk for Cava is defections of producers to this, now competing, brand or the formation of multiple breakaway appellations by similarly disenchanted current members.

There is another faction within the Cava DO which acknowledges that the described problems exist but see breakaway appellations as a cowardly solution (Lawrence). According to this faction, change should be wrought from the inside where the benefits would accrue to all members. Towards that end, two recommendations will be made to the authorities as potential solutions to the problem: (i) shrink the appellation and (ii) have the entire Penedès region designated organic. The latter proposal is seen as adding value and allowing market differentiation.


Either way, Cava has to resolve these internal issues so that it can quickly pivot to addressing the shifting market dynamics. Its past success as an export-driven brand will stand it in good stead in this new environment. Cava needs for Champagne to be successful in the new markets so that it can come in and pitch itself as a low-cost alternative.

*****************************************************************************************************

Well this has been a long and, on my part, pleasurable trip. I hope that the insights provided will aid in your thoughtful exploration of these brands in the future. Thank you for accompanying me on this trip.

For a look back at previous posts in the series, please click on the appropriate link below.

Part I -- Origins
Part II -- Regulatory histories
Part III -- Macro-Level characteristics

Part IV -- Production zones

Part V -- The vineyards
Part VI -- Fermentation and aging
Part VII -- Wine styles
Part VIII -- The nonconformists
Part IX -- Production levels and markets

©Wine -- Mise en abyme

Part IX -- Production levels and markets: The definitive comparison of Champagne, Franciacorta, Prosecco, and Cava

Champagne production is significantly larger than the levels for the sparkling wines under consideration in this series as indicated in the chart below.  The specifics regarding production levels and market for each wine type follows.

2011 Production (000 bottles)

A total of 322 million bottles of Champagne were produced in 2011 of which 69% (222 million bottles) were produced by the Champagne Houses with the remaining 31% produced by Growers.  Fifty-six percent of the Champagne produced was consumed in France with the remainder being shipped abroad to the United Kingdom, United States, and Germany among others.  This export market is dominated by the Champagne Houses as only 13% of Grower Champagne is exported.  The Champagne House-Grower split is more evenly balanced within France with 55% of consumption being sourced from the Champagne Houses.

Franciacorta production in 2011 was 11,080,000 bottles of which 8% is exported. The primary export markets are Japan, Germany, Switzerland. and North America.

Prosecco production has grown from 5 million bottles in 1970 to 200 million bottles in 2011, a 3900% increase over the period (Ben Cooper, Prosecco leads the sparkling wine charge, justdrinks.com, 9/13/12). There is some disagreement as to the mix of domestic consumption and foreign exports (Gambero Rosso pegs domestic consumption at 70% while Italian Wine Club (itwineclub.com) pegs it at 40% and beveragemedia.com shows it as being 60% (Roger Morris, Prosecco's bubble not bursting ..., June 16, 2011)) but there is no disagreement as to the most significant foreign markets for Prosecco: US, Canada, Japan, Russia, Baltic States, Austria, Germany, and Great Britain.  Foreign markets penetration proceeded through Germany, then the UK, followed by expansion to North America, Japan, and South America (Gambero Rosso).

Cava production in 2011 was 239,556,000 bottles, 63.5% of which was exported. While domestic consumption in 2011 fell by 8.7% over 2010 ( a result of current economic conditions within the country), exports increased by 2% resulting in an overall reduction in production of 2.14%. The primary export markets for Cava are Germany, the UK, Belgium, and the US in that order. The leading Cava producers are Codorniu, Freixenet, and Segura Viudas.


For a look back at previous posts in the series, please click on the appropriate link below.

Part I -- Origins
Part II -- Regulatory histories
Part III -- Macro-Level characteristics

Part IV -- Production zones

Part V -- The vineyards
Part VI -- Fermentation and aging
Part VII -- Wine styles

Part IX -- Production levels and markets

©Wine -- Mise en abyme

Part VIII -- The nonconformists: The definitive comparison of Champagne, Franciacorta, Prosecco, and Cava

Over the course of the seven posts to date comparing Champagne, Franciacorta, Prosecco and Cava, I have detailed the accepted orthodoxy associated with the production of these wines. For the most part, this orthodoxy is followed religiously by all participants but there are some dissenters in the worlds of Champagne and Cava. In this post we explore the areas of departure from this "natural order."

Source: personalitycafe.com

Champagne

Champagne undergoes layers of manipulation before the final product emerges. The wine undergoes:

• Chaptalization -- as necessary to bring the juice up to 11% potential alcohol
• Alcoholic fermentation
• Blending
• In-bottle fermentation
• Solution of wine, sugar, and yeast added
• Captured carbon dioxide dissolved in wine
• Aging on lees which (Aromas & Flavors: Explanatory Notes, wine-pages.com):
• Releases reducing enzymes that inhibit oxidation
• Absorbs certain essential yeast nutrients (limits potential for refermentation at dosage)
• Increases amino acids and other nitrogenous matter, precursors to "Champagne character"
• Produces acetal which possibly adds a biscuity or brandy-like complexity
• Produces MP32 which reduces tartrate precipitation
• Liqueur de dosage
• Adds sweetness, roundness, and complexity (Walters)

The vines in Champagne average 20-25 years old and that average is maintained to ensure vigorous output of less-complex fruit.  A combination of less-complex fruit picked early aids in the production of the austere base wines which the Houses prefer as the starting point for Champagne.  The argument for austere base wines is that the complexity and richness added by the process would make the wines heavy and elegance-free if less-austere wines were used as starters.

A number of growers in the Champagne area are walking away from this model in favor of what Walters (Alternative Champagne 2, The World of Fine Wine, Issue 35, 2012) refers to as "Champagne de Terroir," a wine which "maximizes the expression of the vineyard and removes the influence of the winemaker."  These Champagnes de Terroir are, according to Walters, "only produced successfully by a handfull of the finest growers." In Issue 36 of TWoFW, Walters describes the methods of these "Superior Grower Producers."  They:

• Own or manage their own vineyards
• Make wines from their own grapes
• Begin with a desire to make wines that reflect their origins
• Single-vineyard or single-commune wines
• Manage the vineyards with little or no chemical input
• Biodynamic or organic
• Plow the soil
• Seek lower yields than customary for the region
• Pursue intense fruit so that lower dosage is needed
• Use dosage in minimal amounts (when used) to balance acidity
• Mature slowly; no fining or filtering.

The products emanating from this process are wines first and Champagne second, according to Walters.  They are drier, more vinous, clean, pure, and long of finish.  They tend to age well and, in his view, are better with food than a traditional Champagne.

The Growers that fit this mold are Egly-Ouriet, Selosse, Agrapart, Larmandier-Bernier, Jérome Prévost, and Cedric Bouchard (Walters).

Cava

A 1972 Spanish Ministerial Order established the Regulatory Board of Sparkling Wines to oversee the growing, production, and marketing of Cava and the wine was granted DO designation in 1986. According to an article on decanter.com (Friday, November 2, 2012), producers in the Penedès wine region are deserting the Cava appellation and branding their offerings as Spanish sparkling wine or building their own sparkling wine brands. According to Josep Albet, President of the Regulatory Council of Penedès (as quoted in the article), nine producers have already deserted the appellation and five others were poised to follow. The producers were taking this action because they felt that the Cava brand had a poor image, with low prices the accepted norm in many markets. One of the producers identified in the article was Mas Comtal whose proprietor claimed to have left the DO in 2011 because the Cava brand was "detrimental" to her business. Another producer, Raventos i Blanc, announced plans to "adopt a new and un-certified regional appellation designation named Conca Del Riu Anoia" (decanter.com, 11/14/2012).

Further, these producers felt that the appellation is too large to be managed or regulated effectively. Josep Albet promised to make two recommendations to the authorities as potential solutions to the problem: (i) shrink the appellation and (ii) have the entire Penedès region designated organic. The latter proposal was seen as adding value and allowing market differentiation.

This is an issue in its early stages and it is not yet clear how it will evolve but the Prosecco approach could point the way to a viable solution. The driving forces were different but Prosecco ended up with a broader DOC, more narrowly defined DOCGs, and specific, high-quality labels (Cartizze, Rive).

*****************************************************************************************************

For a look back at previous posts in the series, please click on the appropriate link below.

Part I -- Origins
Part II -- Regulatory histories
Part III -- Macro-Level characteristics

Part IV -- Production zones

Part V -- The vineyards
Part VI -- Fermentation and aging
Part VII -- Wine styles

©Wine -- Mise en abyme

Part VII -- Wine styles: The definitive comparison of Champagne, Franciacorta, Prosecco, and Cava

In Part VI of this series, I examined the fermentation and aging processes of the considered spartkling wines. In this post I examine the styles of wine that result from the application of those processes, beginning with the termination of the aging process.

As described previously, practitioners of the methode champenoise age their wine on the lees (the dead yeast that falls to the bottom of the bottle after all the sugar has been used up in the in-bottle fermentation process). When the producer deems that the sparkling wine has spent enough time on the lees, steps are taken to remove said lees from the bottle.  This is a two-step process with the first step (remuage) designed to move the sediment from the body of the bottle into the neck and the second step (dégorgement) designed to expel the sediment from the bottle.  In the first step, the bottle is moved slowly from a horizontal to a vertical, neck-down position, while simultaneously turning it a few degrees at a time to dislodge the sediment from the walls.  This process had historically been done by hand but is now done by a machine (gyropalette), a change that has yielded dramatic reductions in transit time and a marked increase in throughput. Large format bottles are stilled "riddled" by hand.

In the disgorgement phase the bottle is passed neck-down through a cold brine solution which freezes the sediment-containing liquid in the neck of the bottle.  Removal of the crown cork seal will cause the pressure in the bottle (6 atmospheres) to forcefully expel the frozen material from the neck.

There is no such remuage and disgorgement process for Prosecco. Secondary fermentation occurs under pressure in large vats and when the desired sweetness level is attained, fermentation is arrested and the wine drawn off the lees and placed into bottles under pressure.

Once the lees have been expelled, a mixture of base wine and sugar (liqueur de dosage) is added to the bottle in order to top it up and to attain the desired sweetness level. The bottle is then plugged with a standard Champagne cork and a steel cage placed around the neck and over the cork to hold it in place.  The bottle is shaken vigorously and left to sit for 6 months to ensure full integration of the liqueur de dosage into the wine.

There is no dosage process for Prosecco. When the desired sweetness level is attained, fermentation is arrested and the wine is drawn off the lees and placed into bottles under pressure.

The range of styles utilized in sparkling wines made using the traditional method is shown below.

The in-bottle fermentation process, with its associated autolysis, strips out aspects of the varietal flavors and replaces them with signature yeasty, sourdough flavors.  The longer the wine remains on the lees, the more pronounced these flavors become. Also the longer the residence on the lees, the richer the wine. Champagne is heralded for its elegance and complexity but the greater ripeness of its fruit, and the longer residence on the lees, renders Franciacorta a little richer and fuller and possessing a "softer, more generous mouthfeel" than does Chamapagne.

The attractiveness of Cava is tied to its perception as a "crisp, fruity, well-balanced" sparkling wine with straightforward flavors which can be acquired at prices well below the cost of Champagne. For example, I have called upon the services of the NV Segura Viudas Cava Aria Brut on many an occasion and have been impressed by the pineapple, honey, pear, and bread aromas and flavors which have been delivered at the pocket-pleasing price of $12/bottle

The range of Prosecco styles are shown below. Once the fermentation has been

arrested, the Prosecco is filtered off the lees thus preventing significant erosion of the variety flavor profile. Gambero Rosso characterizes the Prosecco profile as being "fresh and light" with a fruity, floral fragrance and a slim, graceful structure.  Ben Cooper (Prosecco leads the sparkling wine charge, justdrinks.com, 9/13/12) sees Prosecco as being less acidic, having softer bubbles, and having lower alcohol levels than Champagne.  Ben O'Donnell (The Italian (Sparkling) Renaissance, winespectator.com, April 4, 2011) sees Prosecco as being lighter and less yeasty than Champagne.

*********************************************************************************************************
In the next installment of the series I will be examining the heretics -- those who have strayed from the accepted path. For a look back at previous posts in the series, please click on the appropriate link below.

Part I -- Origins
Part II -- Regulatory histories
Part III -- Macro-Level characteristics

Part IV -- Production zones

Part V -- The vineyards
Part VI -- Fermentation and aging

©Wine -- Mise en abyme

Part VI -- Fermentation and Aging: The definitive comparison of Champagne, Franciacorta, Prosecco, and Cava

All four of the wines under consideration obtain the desired bubbles in a two-step process: (i) development of base wines through alcoholic fermentation and (ii) creation of the bubbles in a secondary fermentation process.  Champagne, Franciacorta, and Cava conduct that secondary fermentation in-bottle and that overall process is called the Champagne method (or methode traditionelle) while the large-tank method utilized by Prosecco is called the Charmat method.  I consider these two methods of production in this post beginning with the steps associated with alcoholic fermentation and then looking at the steps associated with secondary fermentation.

Base-Wine Creation

Harvest

In all the cases, rapid picking and crushing of the grapes are required to preserve freshness.

In the case of Champagne, the starting date for picking the grapes is set by the CIVC (the organization that "coordinates the common interests of wine growers and producers in Champagne") which bases its decision on input from the ripening observation network which was initially established in 1956.  This network allows input variables from 450 control plots to be analyzed and the grapes tracked for ripeness by cru and variety.  Decisions on picking dates, quantities, and alcohol levels are a direct result of this analysis. Over 100,000 pickers are involved in harvesting the ripe grapes and moving them from the field to one of the 1900 pressing stations that are located throughout the region.  The grapes are picked in clusters and then placed gently into waiting plastic bins.  Picking normally begins in the cool of dawn in order to preserve as much of the grapes' freshness as possible.  Chardonnay is generally picked one or two weeks later than Pinot Noir and Pinot Meunier.

In the case of Franciacorta, harvesting begins around the middle of August with picking of grapes around the base of Franciacorta.  Berlucchi, one of the leading Franciacorta producers, hand-harvests on a lot-by-lot basis using over 1000 pickers. Careful harvesting is designed to retain the freshness and flavors of the grapes.  Given the variability of the zones, harvesting can extend over 3 weeks on occasion.  Chardonnay is harvested first followed by Pinot Noir and then Pinot Bianco. The picked grapes are transported to the crushers in 18-kg crates to keep the bunches perfectly intact during transportation to the winery.

The Glera grapes (Prosecco) are handpicked and transported to the winery for further processing. The grapes from the Cartizze area are the last to be harvested as, coming from the steepest hills, they are the most difficult to be accessed. The grape stalks are removed and the grapes crushed after which the must is moved to a press for separation of the juice from the skin and seeds. The grapes are pressed gently in order to ensure that only the most desirable juice makes it into the wine. The remaining material is set aside to be used in the production of grappa.

The Cava harvest runs from mid-August to the end of October and the picked grapes are quickly transported from the vineyards to the cellars either in 25-kg-capacity boxes or in stainless steel trailers.

Pressing

The Champagne grapes are weighed at the pressing center and relevant information recorded in the pressing logbook.  The grapes are then pressed as whole bunches in a process that is called fractionated winemaking.  In this process, the free-run juice is drawn-off first in three successive pressings.  The product of these pressings is called the cuvée and the middle of the three is called the coeur de  cuvée (heart of the cuvee) and is said to possess an ideal balance of purity and structure. The maximum amount of juice that can be harvested during the cuvée pressing is 20.5 hl. The second component of this fractionated winemaking is the heavier press called the taille.  In this stage the juice is harvested in two or three high-force presses that occur subsequent to the removal of the cuvée.  The juice collected at this point is darker due to the impurities extracted from the grape skins.  A total of 5 hl of juice can be legally harvested at this stage. The cuvée and taille have similar levels of sugar but the cuvée has higher levels of malic and tartaric acids while the taille has higher levels of oxidants, minerals, and pigments.  A total of 25.5 hl of juice can be legally harvested from a 4000-kg marc of fruit.

After harvesting, the Franciacorta grapes are placed into special presses for a soft, gradual crushing. The first-press must is used for alcoholic fermentation.

Unlike the Champagne case, only free-run juice is used in the production of Prosecco and the allowed yield is 70 liters of wine from 100 kilogram of grapes, almost 10% greater than the yield allowed in Champagne.

Once harvested, Cava grapes are subjected to quality inspections and then transported rapidly to the winery to ensure freshness retention. Must is extracted with gentle pressing in order to obtain highest quality juice.

Coquard presses at Berlucchi in Franciacorta

Addition of Sulphites

The fruit extracted during the press of the Champagne grapes flows into open tanks which are separated by cru, variety, and pressing (If the intent is to make Rosé Champagne via maceration, then the juice stays in contact with destemmed black-skinned grapes  for 24 to 72 hours until the desired color is obtained.).  Sulphites are added to the juice at between 6 and 10 g/hl in order to combat mold and bacteria and reduce the risk of flavor-killing oxidation.

Settling

Impurities are removed from the Champagne must in a process called débourbage where the solids fall to the bottom of the tanks while the clear juice is drawn off from the top.

In the case of Prosecco, the cloudy must is chilled to 5 - 10℃ and kept in stainless steel tanks for 10 to 12 hours during which time the solids settle to the bottom. The Cava must is also clarified prior to alcoholic fermentation.

Alcoholic Fermentation

The resulting clear juice is transported to the vat room for alcoholic fermentation.  Today most fermentation is carried out in stainless steel tanks, a change from the prior norm of oak fermentation  (Oak seems to be making a comeback in Champagne).  In Champagne, the juice is chaptalized as necessary to bring it up to 11% potential alcohol after which yeast is added to initiate alcoholic fermentation. Fermentation runs between 10 and 20 days (10 - 14 in Champagne and 15 - 20 in Franciacorta) before all the sugar in solution is converted to alcohol and carbon dioxide.  The carbon dioxide produced at this phase is allowed to escape. Malolactic fermentation is initiated if is a part of the house style.

In the case of Berlucchi in Franciacorta, the result of the vinification process is 200 base wines, some of which undergo battonage in order to stir up the lees.

Cold Stabilization and Clarification

The base wine is cold stabilized to prevent tartrate precipitation later in the life of the wine.  The wine is then racked off the solids and clarified further through fining and/or filtering.

Secondary Fermentation

Blending

The next step in the process sets Champagne apart from other sparkling wines.  In order to produce Champagne that aligns with the House style, the Chef de Cave has to memorize and blend wines from a broad array of crus from the current vintage plus wines from the reserve as necessary.  The other sparkling wines, on the other hand, draw from a smaller number of "crus" and a far smaller number of vintages as the base wines for their blends.  In the case of a vintage sparklers, the blend can only contain wines sourced from grapes that have been harvested and fermented in the vintage year.

Fermentation

For Champagne, Franciacorta, and Cava, the blended wines are placed into Champagne-style bottles to which liqueur de tirage (a solution of wine, sugar, and yeast) is added and then the bottle is capped with a crown cork seal.  This addition precipitates a second fermentation, this time in the bottle.  As the bottle is capped, the carbon dioxide created during fermentation cannot escape and the bubbles formed as a result are absorbed into the liquid.  The process by which these bubbles are formed is called prise de mousse and the longer the period, the more refined the bubbles.

At the conclusion of alcoholic fermentation, the Prosecco base wines are assembled into batches and pumped into large, sealed tanks (autoclaves) for the secondary fermentation. Sugar and yeast are added to the tanks and the consumption of the sugar by the yeast results in the Carbon Dioxide that gives the sparkling characteristic to the finished wine.  This method of sparkling wine production is called the Italian (because it was first demonstrated as industrially viable by an Italian, Martinotti) or Charmat (the name of the Frenchman who refined the process such that it became feasible for large-scale industrial production), or Martinotti-Charmat method.  It is felt that this method preserves the aroma of the grapes yielding fruity, floral wines. This second fermentation can run between 20 days and 3 months after which the wine is bottled.

Aging

After the sugar has been exhausted, the yeasts die.  The breakdown of the dead yeast cells by enzymes -- autolysis -- adds complexity to the aroma, flavors, and mouthfeel of the Champagne if residency is maintained.  Aging on lees (Aromas and Flavors: Explanatory Notes, wine-pages.com):

• Releases reducing enzymes that inhibit oxidation
• Absorbs certain essential yeast nutrients (limits potential for refermentation at dosage)
• Increases amino acids and other nitrogenous matter, precursors to "Champagne character"
• Produces acetal which possibly adds a biscuity or brandy-like complexity
• Produces MP32 which reduces tartrate precipitation.

Champagne is legally required to remain on the lees for at least 16 months if a non-vintage and at least 3 years if designated as vintage.  Quality houses normally age their non-vintage wines for 3 to 4 years and their vintage wines for 7 to 8.

Non-vintage Franciacorta wines are aged for a minimum of 25 months with 18 of those months being on the lees in the bottle.  Vintage wines are aged for a minimum of 37 months with 30 of those months being in the bottle on the lees.  Riserva wines are aged for 5 years on the lees.

In order to be called Cava, the sparkling wine made in the region has to be aged a minimum of 9 months before being taken to market.  Many producers age their wines for 2 to 4 years in order to provide wines with more character.  To be classified as Gran Reserva, a Cava has to be aged for at least 30 months.

The Prosecco aging requirement is the shortest for the sparkling wines under consideration in that the wine rests in bottle for between 20 and 40 days before being shipped.

**********************************************************************************************************

In the next installment of the series I will be examining the styles of wines offered by these brands. For a look back at previous posts in the series, please click on the appropriate link below.


Part I -- Origins
Part II -- Regulatory histories
Part III -- Macro-Level characteristics

Part IV -- Production zones

Part V -- The vineyards

©Wine -- Mise en abyme

Part V -- The Vineyards: The definitive comparison of Champagne, Franciacorta, Prosecco, and Cava

This is the fifth installment in a series designed to compare the attributes and merits of four of the world's leading sparkling wines. This post examines the overarching industry structure for each of tjhe subject wines, the grape varieties utilized in the winemaking, and the vineyard pruning systems utilized.

Industry Structure

The overarching industry structure in Champagne differs significantly from the Franciacorta, Prosecco, and Cava structures.  Champagne has a multi-layered, multi-responsibility structure while the structures in the other areas are a little more streamlined. The Champagne industry has 15,000 growers (an average of 2 ha per grower), and150 cooperatives, and 300 Champagne Houses.  Growers own 90% of the vineyards but sell most of their production to Champagne Houses.  The Champagne Houses own 10% of the vineyards but account for 69% of Champagne shipments (champagne.fr). Rather than grower-negociant interaction (as is common in Burgundy, for example), the growers sell their grapes to a Cooperative which crushes them and create communal and varietal blends which are delivered to the Champagne Houses (This approach creates two problems.  First, the separation of the grower from the negociant has implications for quality.  The grower knows that his/her grapes will be incorporated into a communal blend anyway so there is no incentive to make an extra effort to ensure that the grapes are breaking any quality barriers.  Second, no vineyard characteristics will be evident in the final blend.). The Champagne House blends, ages, and markets the company offerings.

All of the sparkling wine produced in Franciacorta is estate grown by its 104 producers while there are 165 base wine producers and 254 cuvee producers in the Cava DO. This inequality between the base wine and cuvee producers informs that a number of Cava producers procure value-added base wines as raw material for production of their wines.

Grape Varieties

The dominant grapes used in Champagne are Pinot Noir (35% of region's plantings), Chardonnay (25%), and Pinot Meunier (40%).  After many years of testing, these grapes have been shown to best provide the needed inputs for quality Champagne: (i) a good balance of sugar and acid; (ii) rich, subtle taste, and (iii) an affinity for bubbles.  In addition to these three, Champagne can also include Petit Meslier, Pinot Blanc, Pinot Gris, and Arbane.  These are rarely used and only in small quantities.  Yields in Champagne range between 13 and 15 tons/ha.

The approved varieties under the Franciacorta DOCG classification are Chardonnay (80%), Pinot Noir (15%), and Pinot Bianco (5%) grapes. Yields are approximately 9.8 tons/ha.

Prosecco is primarily made from the Glera (formerly Prosecco; also known as Prosecco Bianco and Proseko Sciprina) grape variety, a native of northeast Italy which has been used to produce wines since Roman times. In addition to Glera, Prosecco wines can contain as much as 15% of other grape varieties.  The most oft-used supplements are Verdiso, Branchetta, Perera, Glera Lunga, Pinot Bianco, Pinot Noir, Pinot Grigio, and Chardonnay. Allowed yields for the various Prosecco zones are as follows: DOC -- 20 tons/ha; DOCG -- 13.5 tons/ha; Rive -- 14.3 tons/ha; and Cartizze -- 12 tons/ha.

The prime varieties used in Cava are Macabeo, Xarel-lo, and Parelleda but small amounts of Chardonnay, Malvasia, Pinot Noir, Trepat, Red Grenache, or Monastrell can be used in the blend. Macabeo, Xarel-lo, and Parellada are grown in both Baix and Central Penedès but the highest-quality Parellada grapes are grown in Penedès Superior.

Pruning Systems

A wide variety of pruning systems have been deployed in the subject vineyards. The allowed vineyard pruning methods specified in the Champagne AOC requirements are Cordon de Royal, Taille Chablis, Guyot, and Valle de Marne.

Franciacorta has three primary pruning systems tied to the phases of vine plantings in the region.  In the 1960s and 1970s, the first vines were planted in a wide-spaced format with densities of 1500 - 2500 vines per ha.  These vines were trained high with espalier or modified pergola systems.  During the 1970s and 80s vines were planted with wide spacing to support mechanization and the training system used was the Miotto style, a modification of the Casarsa style.  In the 1990s and onward the philosophy changed to higher-density planting (4 - 5000 vines/ha) on low-vigor rootstock.  The vine training system employed within that period was the Guyot Cordon system.

Prosecco pruning systems include Double Royat, Guyot, Sorellas Bronca, and Sylvoz while the Cava DO employs Double Guyot, Cordon Royat, and Gobelet, among others.

***************************************************************************************

To view earlier posts in the series, please click below.


Part I -- Origins
Part II -- Regulatory histories
Part III -- Macro-Level characteristics

Part IV -- Production zones

©Wine -- Mise en abyme

Part IV -- Production zones: The definitive comparison of Champagne, Franciacorta, Prosecco, and Cava

This is the fourth installment in a series designed to compare the attributes and merits of four of the world's leading sparkling wines. Whereas my last post examined the physical characteristics of the individual environments at a global level, this post seeks to become increasingly granular by drilling down through sub-regions, communes, and vineyards.

Sub-Regions

Both the Champagne and Prosecco zones are further subdivided into sub-zones; Franciacorta and Cava DO are not. Because Champagne is a wine region, its subdivisions are geographic in nature.  Montagne de Reims is a forested plateau south of Reims that is known for rich, full-bodied Champagnes and the dominance of Pinot Noir and Pinot Meunier. Vallée de la Marne has Epernay at its center as it hugs the banks of the River Marne. The soil here is a limestone topsoil overlaying layers of Belemnite and Micraster chalk. Chardonnay is dominant here as it is in the Côte des Blancs and Côte de Bar. The soil in the Côte de Bar is Portlandian cap rock overlaying Kimmeridgian soil, a geologic profile that is much closer to Chablis than to the rest of Champagne.

Source: champagne.fr

Within the broader Prosecco DOC, there are two sub-zones: DOC Treviso Prosecco and Prosecco di Trieste. These sub-zones cover Prosecco made within these two provinces and wines made therein can so indicate on their labels. Prosecco wines made in other provinces cannot carry the province name on the labels. There are two separate Prosecco DOCG zones, both falling within the borders of the province of Treviso. The first, and having the greatest repute, is Prosecco di Conegliano-Valdobbiadene. This zone is approximately 50 km from Venice and 100 km from the Dolomites. It runs east to west from the plains to the foot of the Alps and incorporates the 15 hill communities that lie between Conegliano and Valdiobbadene. The second DOCG zone is Colli Asolani/Asolo and is located in the Montello e Colli Asolani wine region. It encompasses a 5-mile-long ridge of gently rolling hills running between the towns of Cornuda and Asolo. The best vineyards are found on south-facing slopes where the gentle gradients and loose soil combine for excellent drainage and optimal sunlight exposure.

Vineyards Distribution and Aspect

There are 32,900 hectares of vineyards in Champagne (3.4% of France's vineyard total) distributed across 319 communities (357 after the most recent revisions are adopted). The best Champagne vineyards are planted on slopes at elevations falling between 90 and 200 meters. Such locations situate the vineyard high enough to be clear of the frost and low enough to avoid extreme weather. This siting also places these vineyards smack dab in the middle of the Belemnite formations that are slope-located. The vineyards are predominantly located on south-, east-, and southeast-facing slopes which average 12% but can be as high as 60% in areas. Franciacorta -- located in the "gentle" hills in the area of Brescia -- lies in an amphitheater which was carved out by a falling glacier and encompasses all or part of 19 Brescian municipalities. The zone is approximately 18,000 hectares in size with 2665 hectares under vine. Cava is produced in 159 municipalities spread across Catalonia (Barcelona, 63; Tarragona, 52; Lleida, 12; Gerona, 5), Aragon (2), Alava (3), Navarra (2), Rioja (18), Badajoz (1), and Valencia (1) but fully 95% of that production originates in Catalonia's Penedès, a wine region located about 40 kilometers southwest of Barcelona. Elevation in Penedès range between 0 and 800 meters.

Vineyards Classification

Of the sparklers under consideration, only Champagne and Prosecco have vineyard-classification schemes. Unlike the Burgundy wine region, the Grand/Premier Cru designation for a Champagne vineyard is not necessarily an indication of a vineyard's quality. Rather, the designation -- Échelle des crus (ladder of growths) -- is an index of price based on the quality of grapes from classified vineyards. Grapes from Deuxieme Cru vineyards can be assigned scores of between 80% and 89%, grapes from Premier Cru vineyards can be assigned scores between 90% and 99%, while Grand Cru grapes are assigned scores of 100%. As formulated, the score that a grape-lot is assigned within a specific season is an indication of the price that the Champagne House is willing to pay in relation to the pricing for Grand Cru grapes in the season. The Champagne vineyards with Grand Cru designation are shown in the table below.

Within the Valdobbiadene area, the steep hills around the villages of San Pietro di Barbozza, Santo Stefano, and Saccol were considered the Grand Cru of the DOCG. This 106-ha area, called Cartizze, has a mild microclimate and a varied soil to include moraine, sandstone, and clay components. The vineyards are positioned on south-facing slopes and have excellent drainage. Another cru-style called Rive has been added where 43 localities with steep hills in the Conegliano-Valdobbiadene region are allowed to so designate their wines. The requirements for a Rive are : (i) it must be so designated; (ii) production is limited to 14.3 tons/ha; (iii) the grapes must be harvested annually; and (iv) the vintage must be indicated on the label.

Summary

The production zones of the subject wines can be thusly summarized:

Click below to read earlier posts in the series.

Part I
Part II
Part III


©Wine -- Mise en abyme

Part III -- Macro-Level characteristics: The definitive comparison of Champagne, Franciacorta, Prosecco, and Cava

What I refer to as macro-level characteristics are critical determinants of wine quality and in this post I detail the relative positions of each of the subject wines vis a vis these elements.

Location

The first major characteristic examined is location. Champagne is located at 49ºN latitude, 160 kilometers to the east of Paris, while Franciacorta (represented by Brescia) and Prosecco DOC (represented by Treviso) are at 45.5ºN  and Barcelona is 600+ miles south of Champagne at 41ºN latitude. The northern location of Champagne (close to the outer limit of accepted viable grape-growing zones) makes it difficult for grapes to ripen, resulting in acidic base wines which require the bubbles of the second fermentation to make them sparkle. Grapes in Franciacorta, for example, have no difficulty ripening and the resultant wines are richer than Champagnes of an equivalent sweetness level.

Climate

Climate is the average course of weather in a region over an extended period as measured by temperature, precipitation, and wind speed, among other variables. The climate of a grape-growing region will determine, to a large extent -- and all things being equal -- both the grape varieties that can be grown and the styles of wine that can be produced. That is not to say that these varieties cannot be grown outside of these environments; that is to say, however, that varietal typicity is compromised when these varieties are grown outside of their "zones."  Again, there are key differeneces between the regions.

Located as far north as it is, Champagne has the lowest average temperature of any French wine-growing region and, consequently, grapes do not ripen adequately over the course of a growing season. The northernmost outposts of the region are about 290 kilometers from the English Channel and are subject to oceanic influences. These areas experience regular rainfall but very little variation in temperature from season to season. As the traveler journeys south, however, continental climatic influences come into play to include: winter and spring frosts; summer sunshine coupled with violent thunderstorms; cold, wet weather in June; and hailstorms. Mean rainfall in the region is 700 mm.

Franciacorta is mild in the winter and hot in the summer. The climate is moderated by winds blowing in off Lakes Iseo and Garde which protect the region from the autumnal and hibernial fogs that threaten from the Brescian plains. Rainfall in the region is concentrated in the spring and fall.

Prosecco DOC wines are authorized for production in all of Friuli-Venezia Giulia and Veneto (provinces of Treviso, Belluna, Padova, Venezia, and Vicenzia) while the DOCG wines are authorized for production in Treviso.

In general, Friuli-Venezia Giulia has a humid, temperate climate which varies according to the landscape; areas to the north experience an alpine continental climate while those in the south experience a Mediterranean climate. The Alpine system protects the region from icy north winds but air movement from east to west causes low pressure systems which can bring summertime hailstorms and thunderstorms. Being open to the Adriatic, the region experiences Sirocco winds which can bring heavy rainfall. The climate is modified by the presence of the Adriatic Sea and the Alps resulting in warmer winter temperatures and cooler summer temperatures. Mean temperature in the summertime is 22.8℃ (73℉) and mean rainfall is 1524 mm (60 inches). Vineyards to the north and east lie above the level of the fog that flows in occasionally from the Adriatic and this allows the grapes to take advantage of the increased hang time to promote phenolic ripening. The diurnal shift is somewhat mitigated by maritime influences closer to the coast. There is a constant breeze known as "la bora" flowing in from the Adriatic and this provides great air flow in the vineyards as well as serving as a deterrent to fungal outbreaks.

Veneto has two major climatic regions: an alpine region -- characterized by cool summers and snowy winters -- and the mild winters and warm summers that are associated with the hills and plains. The overall region is protected from the severe northern European climate by the Alps, the foothils of which abut the area's northern flank. One of the most well-regarded Prosecco growing areas -- Connegliano-Valdobbiadene -- sits halway between the Alps and the sea and is blessed with a cool climate, bountiful sunshine, and generous rainfall.

Fully 95% of the Cava produced originates in Catalonia's Penedès, a wine region located about 40 kilometers southwest of Barcelona, and, as such, its climate will be the basis for our discussion of the DOs climate. Penedès is surrounded by the Monserrat range which provides a protective barrier from the heat and humidity of the Mediterranean as well as the cold winds -- levanter -- from the north and east. The climate is Mediterranean with annual temperatures averaging 15.5℃ (60℉) across the region but with slightly differing micro-climates within its three sub-zones. In Baix Penedès, the area closest to the coastline, elevation ranges between 0 and 250 meters and the temperature is milder, thanks to its proximity to the sea. In Penedès Superior -- 500 - 800 meters elevation -- there is greater rainfall than in the companion zones and a greater differential between maximum and minimum temperatures. Penedès Central (250 - 500 meters) experiences a mix of the Superior and Baix microclimates.

The grapes grown in Champagne would be expecetd to have higher acidity levels at harvesting than grapes from the other regions resulting in greater freshness in the wine. This increased acidity comes at the cost of less sugar resulting in higher levels of sugar added to the wines in order to attain end-state sweetness levels. Freshness levels would dedcline with movement towards the south.

Soils

The soil in Champagne is composed of massive chalk deposits interspersed with rocky outcroppings and covered with a thin layer of topsoil (mix of sand, marl, clay and lignite which requires constant renewal through fertilization. The chalk deposits in Champagne are finer-grained and more porous than other French limestone soils -- and have extremely high concentrations of the mineral marls Belemnite (younger and found higher up on the growing slopes) and Micraster (older and located on the valley floors) -- while the rocky outcroppings are 75% limestone plus chalk and marl. Chalk has excellent drainage as well as water-retention properties in that its micro-pores can absorb water during wet periods and slowly release it during drier periods. In addition chalk will also reflect sunlight and heat thus aiding in the ripening of the grapes. The chalk soil allows the vine roots to dig freely and deeply in search of water and nutrients and also retains a constant temperature year round.  One of the disadvantages of this alkaline lime-rich soil is that it prevents the uptake of minerals -- such as iron, copper, and magnesium -- which are needed for the prevention of chlorosis. The Côte de Bars region of Champagne has a Kimmeridgian soil of the same construct as the soils that underpin the vineyards of Chablis and Sancerre. This ridge of limestone and shellfish is nutrient rich and provides the optimal level of water retention and drainage for the growth of high-quality grapes.

Thanks to exhaustive zoning studies conducted in the Franciacorta region in the late 1990s by the University of Milan, a very clear picture of soil differentials -- and the contributions of each type to the finished product -- has been established. The figure below shows that the combination of landscape units (formations by geologic era) and soil types results in six distinct regional terroirs. The figure illustrates that the soil, vegetative productive, qualitative, and organoleptic characteristics of each terroir has also been identified. The details of those characteristics are contained in the table following.

The Friuli-Venezia landscape can be divided into four major areas: (i) the mountainous region to the north which includes the Carnian and Julian alps with peaks in excess of 2000 meters; (ii) a hilly area that is south of the mountains and along the Slovenian border; (iii) the central plain which is characterized by poor soil which has been made fertile through irrigation; and (iv) the coastal flatlands which is low and sandy to the west of the Isonzo River and rocky to its east. The soil in the region is calcium-rich marl and sandstone in hilly regions and clay, sand, and gravel elsewhere.
According to bottlenotes.com, Veneto has "silty, sandy soil with influences of clay and calcareous debris."

The soil in the Penedès region is a mix of limestone, sand, and clay with a chalky top layer preceding a layer of clay which in turn overlays a rocky base.

The regions have differing soil types with the Champagne region appearing to have a complexity of composition which is exceptionally beneficial for its grapes.  The thinness of the topsoil, and associated fertilization costs, plus the poor uptake capability regarding minerals are noted.  These have not been gating factors based on the history of the region and its wines.  In a future post in this series we will investigate how much soil matters to sparkling wine given (i) blending across soils in some regions and (ii) the degree of manipulation that is associated with construction of these products.

***********************************************************************************************************

The table below summarizes the points discussed in the foregoing.

The next post in the series will cover the production environments.  Click below to read earlier posts in the series.

Part I
Part II

©Wine -- Mise en abyme

Part II -- Regulatory histories: The definitive comparison of Champagne, Franciacorta, Prosecco, and Cava

The regulatory histories of Champagne and Prosecco are bound up in brand protection strategies and questions as to the physical boundaries of the brand and who/what would be excluded from the brand inner circle.  The case of Champagne was further complicated by an internecine war between the French Departments of Marne and Aube as to wheteher Aube should be considered a part of Champagne or a part of Burgundy. The regulatory histories of Prosecco and Franciacorta were tame in comparison.

In the 1890s and early 1900s, the grape growers in Marne and Aube felt that the Champagne Houses were bringing grapes in from other French regions, blending it with local grapes, and calling the resulting product Champagne.  This was a problem on two levels: (i) It had quality implications in that bad product would reflect directly on the "Champagne" growers and (ii) more importantly, it provided competition for local grapes in an environment where prices were already deathly low. Growers organized themselves into the Fédérations des Syndicats Viticoles de la Champagne and lobbied the government to pass laws that would make it a fraudulent act to sell a wine as Champagne if it was made, wholly or in part, with grapes from "foreign" sources. The Law of August 1, 1905, went a long way to meeting the organization's goal in that it allowed the government to regulate the composition and origin of wine "of general and specific areas" (maisons-champagne.com) and to pursue offenders.

In order to "flesh out" the 1905 Law, a December 1908 Law defined the areas that would be considered as Champagne for wine-production purposes.  The areas designated as such were Marne and selected communes in Aisne to a total of 33,500 hectares.  A subsequent Law passed on the 17 June, 1911 designated Aube as a Champagne-Deuxième Zone, a classification which would prevent Aube-resident growers from selling their grapes into the main Champagne region.  The Aube growers were unhappy with this solution and they took the issue up again after the end of WWI and got relief with the Law of May 6, 1919 which defined the Champagne wine-growing region in terms of size as well as grape varieties.  Marne inhabitants disputed the Law and it was placed in the hands of an arbitrator for final resolution.  His findings, which made their way into the Law of 1927, defined the AOC system for all of France, did away with the Champagne-Deuxième Zone, and included Aube in the Champagne AOC (maisons-champagne.com).

Champagne region post the 1927 Law (Map source: terroir-france.com/wine/champagne_map.htm)

Beginning in 1935, a governing body was put in place to "ensure that wines called Champagne consistently meet definitive quality standards, both inside and outside the region" (Margaret Weeks, A Toast to the Good Life: Exploring the Regulation of Reason, April 2003, leda.law.harvard.com).  Organizational names have changed over the years but the mission has remained the same. The progression of organizations are as follows: Commission of Chalons -- established by the French Government in 1935; Commission of Chalons dissolved by the Vichy Government during WWII and replaced with the Bureau National de Repartition des Vins de Champagne; and Vichy organization was replaced by the Comite Interprofessional du Vin de Champagne (CIVC), the organization that manages the process up to this day.

On Friday March 14, 2008, decanter.com reported (New Champagne areas defined) the first major changes to the Champagne region since the passage of the 1927 Laws. According to the report, the grape-growing zone was to be expanded from 319 communes to 357, the wine-production zone was to be expanded from 634 communes to 675, and two wine-growing communes were to be struck from the  list of approved growing areas.

The Prosecco DOC was first awarded in 1969 and was restricted to wines produced in the Conegliano-Valdiobbadene region.  Growers felt that the brand was under attack by "imitators" using just the grape variety and moved to isolate those competitors by changing both the rules and the venue of the game.  Prosecco growers agitated for, and gained regulatory acceptance of: (i) extension of the Prosecco DOC to cover all of Friuli-Venezia-Giulia and approximately two-thirds of Veneto; (ii) promotion of the original Prosecco DOC to DOCG status; (iii) changing the name of the source grape from Prosecco to Glera; and (iv) restricting the use of the name Prosecco only to Glera sparkling wines produced within the delimited zones.  The growers felt that these actions would serve to protect their territory, the brand, and the quality of Prosecco.  The regulations authorizing these actions came into law in 2009.

Pre-2009 Prosecco regulated zone (Map source: prosecco.it)

Post-2009 Prosecco regulated zone (Map source: prosecco.it)

As I mentioned previously, there were no perceived existential threats to either the Cava or Franciacorta brands so their regulatory histories were relatively tumult-free. The Trade Regulations for Sparkling and Fizzy Wines was first established in Spain in 1959 and was formalized in the 1969 Order of the Ministry of Agriculture wherein Cava was acknowledged as the term for sparkling wines made with second fermentation in the bottle. The 1972 Minesterial Order established the Regulatory Board of Sparkling Wines -- comprised of vinegrowers, producers, and Community Representatives -- which oversees the growing, production and marketing of Cava. Cava was granted DO designation in 1986 and is considered a quality wine under the EU Laws.

The Franciacorta Consorzio was founded in 1980 and the region obtained DOCG status in 1986.

My next post in the series will focus on the physical characteristics of the regions.

©Wine -- Mise en abyme

Part I -- Origins: The definitive comparison of Champagne, Franciacorta, Prosecco, and Cava

I know. This is a rather presumptuous title. But over the course of the past two years I have penned quite a few posts on the individual regions and wines and I will, in this series, attempt to bring those previous writings together in a way that allows the attainment of the promise of the post title. I begin this series with today's post on the origins of these sparklers. Enjoy (I hope).

The Champagne founding myth has been built around Dom Pérignon, a monk and cellarmaster at the Abbey of Hautvilliers, near the city of Reims, and his apocryphal statement "Come quickly ... I am tasting the stars."  This origin story has been called into question by the facts on the ground. According to Don and Petie Kladstrup, in their seminal work on the history of Champagne (Champagne, Harper 2005), "... most of the wine that Dom Pérignon made was red, not white, and definitely not sparkling." Rather, the good monk thought of bubbles as faults and worked assiduously to get rid of them. Further, according to the authors, an inventory of the Abbey's wines taken two years prior to the Dom's passing shows mostly red wines and some whites.  Finally, the type of bottles that were being utilized at the Abbey were not strong enough to withstand the pressures associated with secondary fermentation in the bottle.

It is more likely that the secondary fermentation process -- the hallmark of Champagne -- was invented by Christopher Merret (1614 - 1695), an English Scientist who is credited with being the first person to deliberately add sugar to wine in order to create bubbles. Merret's experiment is documented in a report to the British Royal Society titled "Some Observations Concerning the Order of Wine" (Maurizio de Rosa, On Wine: Who invented sparkling wine? The Epoch Times, 8/30/11; James Tozer, Pardon Messieurs, but Champagne was a BRITISH invention, claims new research, dailymail.co.uk, 9/26/08). Further adding credibility to this origin story is the fact that Merret also worked on the strengthening of glass bottles (Tozer).  At the time English bottles were stronger because they were blown over coal fires (higher temperatures) while the French were restricted to blowing glass over lower-temperature, charcoal-fueled fires.

Franciacorta's origin does not stretch as far back as does Champagne's.  Enologist Franco Ziliani had been engaged by the Berlucchi estate to help with the stabilization of its wines. While undertaking that effort, Ziliani also sought to convince Guido Berlucchi that the area was well suited to the production of a sparkling wine using the methode champenoise.  Berlucchi gave him the go ahead and, after a number of tries, Ziliani successfully produced his first batch of sparkling wine in 1961.

Cava's history begins with the experimental work of Luis Justo Villanueva while he was attached to the Institut Agricola Catalé de Sant Isidro, work that was built on by Francesco Gil and Domingo Sobrano de Reus when they made sparkling wine to be displayed at the 186l Exposition in Paris (Cava, the Spanish sparkling wine made by the Champagne method, spanish-wine.org).  It should be noted that all these early tests utilized Champagne varieties as the source material. In 1872, the first bottles of Cava using the second-fermentation-in-bottle method were made in the town of of Sant Sadurni which eventually became the Cava capital of Spain.  Phylloxera-induced replantings in the late1880s led to the supplanting of the Champagne varieties with the varieties utilized today and the distinctive nature of the wine vis a vis Champagne.

Historical records show a knowledge of Prosecco that stretches back to Roman times; there is some speculation that it may have even been the vinum pucinum praised by Pliny the Elder (wine-grape.findthedata.org, folladorprosecco.co.uk; intowine.com).  The Prosecco that was drunk 150 years ago was, based on the production method, slightly fizzy and sweet. Grapes were pressed and fermentation initiated but winter would kill the yeast and halt fermentation prior to completion.  This partially fermented wine was bottled and, in the spring, would evidence trapped carbon dioxide (probably the result of refermentation initiated by dormant yeast cells). The writing was on the wall for this style of Prosecco with the opening of the Carpené Malvoti winery in 1868 and its practice of making Prosecco in large tanks, implementation of a proto-Charmat method of sparkling wine production.

According to Bortolomiol.com, Maumèné was the fiirst person to consider speeding up the process by fermenting sparkling wine in large containers rather than in bottles.  In 1852 he built a machine called the "afroforo" in which he tested this proposition. Once the sediment had settled out, the wine was siphoned off and bottled.  This application, while demonstrating the workability of the process, was not considered commercially feasible.  The former Director of the Enological Experimentation Institute of Asti, Federico Martinotti, was the next person to move the ball down the field.  In 1895 he patented the use of an autoclave -- a pressurized metal container -- for fermentation of the grape juice.  This advancement served to industrialize the process but did not improve its market acceptability.  Instead it was the improvements -- including the use of lined steel autoclaves -- of Eugene Charmat, a Frenchman, which finally made the Charmat method a commercial success.

******************************************************************************************************

The classic method, as implemented in the production of Champagne, is clearly the oldest of the sparkling wine production methods and its success has been a catalyst for the efforts of other regions.  Based on the data presented, it was approximately 200 years after the introduction of Champagne before the commercial efforts at modern sparkling wines were undertaken in the Cava and Prosecco initiatives.  Prosecco and Cava development activities were co-incident.  While the consensus is that it is more economical to produce sparkling wines using the Charmat method, three of the four sparkling wines described herein, opt for the traditional method.

My next post will cover the regulatory history of these regions.


©Wine -- Mise en abyme

Tour of Berlucchi Franciacorta operations and Palazzo Lana Berlucchi

The evening before the the Berlucchi tour had been devoted to the Grand Finale Dinner of the 2011 European Wine Bloggers Conference and an "after party" but we were all at the appointed meeting place in the heart of Old Brescia at the appointed time.  As sleepy as I was, I wished the buses would be there on time so that I could catch a quick snooze en route.  No such luck.  The buses showed up eventually and we boarded and wended our way out of Brescia and onto the Autostrada Milano-Brescia in a northwesterly direction.  We exited the Autostrada at Via Provinciale and travelled due north to Borgonato and the Berlucchi facility.

We were welcomed outside the winery by a large group which included Arturo Ziliani, Vice President and Chief Winemaker and Cristina Ziliani, Head of Public Relations, Communications, and Image.  Cristina did most of the speaking at this time and informed us that we had been tardy and would have to hurry in order to complete the appointed program.  Headsets were distributed to us as we made our way into the winery and positioned ourselves in a semicircle around Arturo and, as he explained, his translator.  Hence the headsets.

When we had settled down, Arturo utilized a presentation on a large flat screen TV to explain the estate's viticultural and vinicultural practices.  He was especially proud of the company's Coquard presses.  According to www.winenews.it, these presses are insatiable and, further, "A fast and efficient press avoids the insurgence of uncontrolled microbiological processes that occur among the grapes in the crate. The Coquard's inclined plate favors the rapid descent of musts, thus clarifying the wine with this first natural filtration while at the same time limiting the time in contact with the skins."  The pressure exerted on the grapes by the press can be automatically adjusted based on its reading of pre-set parameters.  According to Arturo, every major Champagne House utilizes this technology but Berlucchi was the first non-French estate to acquire it.

After completing our tour of the vinification facility, we re-boarded our bus for the trip over to the cellar and Palazzo Lana Berlucchi.   We were warmly welcomed there by another staff contingent and taken on a tour of the cellars where the wines are bottled for re-fermenting and aging after assemblage.  Depending on the wine style, a bottle can spend anywhere from 18 to 60 months in the Berlucchi cellar.  Berlucchi still uses some manual riddling to concentrate the spent yeast into the neck of the bottle but has supplanted it with machines for the most part.  Automatic riddling, via the gyro palette, was developed by the Cava industry in the 1970s and has been adopted by traditional sparkling wine makers the world over.  The method can reduce the riddling time to as little as three days in comparison to an average of six weeks for a hand-riddled wine.

As Arturo explained it, the pressure in a Franciacorta bottle is six atmospheres (with the exception of Satén which is bottled at 5 atmospheres of pressure).  He demonstrated that this pressure is contained within the wine itself by opening a bottle, placing it on a flat surface, and then tapping gently on the outside of the bottle with a metal object.  The resulting eruption of wine was a sight to behold.

Our tour was actually conducted in reverse to the construction and maturation processes in that we started with the bottles at rest, went next to the remuage process, on to the bottling facility, and then ended at the base-wine tasting room.  In the base-wine tasting room we were allowed to taste a number of base wines from different lots, different vintages, and different varieties.  In the actual assemblage of the wine, a four-person tasting team, to include Arturo, convenes to determine the composition of the estate's offerings.

At the conclusion of the cellar tour, we were taken over to Palazzo Lana Berlucchi, the early 16th century chateau that nests alongside the cellar, for a tour and light repast.  The delicate finger foods to which we were treated paired exquisitely with the array of wines to which we were treated.  While in the palace, Arturo revealed a special, wine-blogger-specific bottling of a "61 Franciacorta and said that we would take it outside to the vineyards and crack it open.  And so we did.

All in all a wonderful day.  The management and staff at Berlucchi were kind, attentive, and informative.  The ongoing back and forth between Arturo and Cristina exhibited a fun, close familial relationship.  The knowledge and passion of Arturo for Berlucchi and Franciacorta were on display for all to see.  If there was one disappointment it was that Franco Ziliani, the father of Franciacorta, was too sick to meet with us on the day of our visit.  But no matter, his spirit was in every glass that I drank that day.  And every glass that I have drunk since.