In the world of wine it often comes up a discussion which always brings up the
same doubts and the same fears, it stays on for some months, producing vivid
debates with plenty of victims, wounded and winners, then it is forgotten for
some time and, punctually, it comes up again to upset the minds of wine lovers
and producers. Anyhow the problem is serious and certainly requires attention:
corks used for sealing wine bottles have become in the last ten years a
disturbing and painful subject. We all like the romantic and traditional image
of the cork we usually find on bottle's necks, the pompous ceremony of its
opening always attracts the attention and the respect of the ones who are going
to enjoy the content of the bottle, but when the cork is tainted, in a
second the magic of the moment is vanished and replaced by true disappointment.
Let's admit this, we are usually convinced a bottle sealed with a cork contains
a better wine, that small cylinder of cork seems to promise an excellent wine,
one of those important ones. Nevertheless quality does exist for corks as
well, there are high quality corks and corks having very low quality. Perhaps
the sight of a block of compact and tidy cork is the promising sign of an
expensive and refined product, therefore better. Sure, it is just a matter of
culture, our culture, that accustomed us to see the good wine contained in
bottles sealed with corks, therefore the presence of a cork made of a different
material disappoints this principle of quality. However anyone who knows wine
sufficiently knows cork conceals a feared snare which is revealed only after
the bottle has been opened: the possibility of the development of
tricloroanisole, a chemical compound also known as 2,4,6-tricloroanisole and
abbreviated as 246-TCA, that is the main responsible for the so called corky
smell.
|
 | |
Synthetic corks: a complete and valid
substitute for natural cork? | |
|
Cork is an extraordinary material, from a physical and mechanical point of view
it is an amazing miracle of nature, to tell the truth, one of the many. Its
structure allows it to have remarkable elastic capabilities, even when
subjected to strong compressions it is capable of restoring its original shape.
Moreover it also has excellent hermetical qualities, in particular for liquids,
and its structure allows it to breathe by the passage of tiny but precious
quantities of oxygen from one side to another: its indisputable qualities are
certainly useful for the keeping, aging and the refinement of wine contained in
a bottle. There is still the inconvenient corky smell to disturb the scene, a
fact that, according to recent figures, affects about 3-5% of the total world
production of wine. If we consider that, it is not something to take lightly,
it represents an economic loss for producers which is not negligible. Moreover
it should be considered that not very expert wine consumers, not being able to
recognize the corky smell, could misunderstand this defect as a sign of a low
quality wine therefore having prejudices on the wine itself and on its
producer.
Since many years they are studying new alternative solutions to this problem
and in particular they have been introduced on the market synthetic corks,
produced with many chemical compounds, and that have good elastic qualities,
just like natural cork, and ensure an absolute hermetic quality. In other
words, whether natural cork allows the passage of a tiny quantity of oxygen to
the inside of the bottle, an useful characteristic for the aging of some wines,
synthetic cork does not guarantee the same function. Probably this is not the
main problem connected to these corks, what limits the spreading of this
solution is the prejudice of consumers, in other words, synthetic cork is not
believed to have the same dignity of natural cork and it is often believed to
be used for low quality wines. As a matter of fact many producers are already
using synthetic corks in many quality wines, therefore, the prejudice connected
to a lower quality of the product does not have any concrete reason. Let's
admit that, the scarce acceptability of synthetic corks is simply prejudicial:
we are still tied to the idea about associating quality wine to natural corks
while forgetting that what we appreciate the most in our glasses is wine, not
the cork nor the label.
Does this seem to be a war in favor of synthetic cork and against natural cork?
Absolutely not. Indeed, this is a war in favor of common sense. Natural cork
offers indisputable advantages when compared to synthetic cork, thanks to its
capacity of allowing the passage of oxygen ensure a better aging of the wine
kept in the bottle, whereas synthetic cork, which offers a higher hermetic
quality, does not allow any passage of oxygen. Researches done on the
development of wine contained in bottles sealed with synthetic corks, have
discovered that after about 18 months the organoleptic qualities of wine
deteriorate, in other words, after two years, it seems, wine is not in good
conditions anymore. On the other hand natural cork can be cause of the
inconvenient corky smell, whereas synthetic cork does not. One could come
up with the conclusion that natural corks are excellent for wines to be aged in
bottle, with the risk of corky smell, whereas the synthetic ones are not suited
for long aging. If we carefully consider the problem and wines offered by the
market, how many of them are truly suited for long aging in bottle? Very few.
Most of the wines produced, in particular white wines, have a pretty short
lifetime, the same is true for many reds as well, usually believed to be
suited for aging in bottle, they lose their best qualities after two or three
years. We know almost the totality of white wines is to be consumed in their
youth, preferably within two years from the time they were released on the
market; white wines truly suited for long aging in bottle are few, very few.
Red wines suited for long aging in bottle are expressly created by producers
for this specific purpose, and they will certainly use natural corks for them.
Most of the red wines produced are suited for a rapid consumption and they do
not improve with the aging in bottle. Therefore synthetic corks are a good
solution for wines not suited for aging and this is the intelligent choice many
producers made no natter it is not very accepted by consumers. According to
this point of view, this seems to be a guarantee for the integrity of the
product while diminishing the risk of spoilage because of corky smell.
Honestly, we do prefer seeing in bottles of cheap wines not suited for aging,
synthetic corks instead of very bad and scarce natural corks of disputable
quality. In wines destined to the aging in bottle, no, in those we expect to
see high quality natural corks which ensure the best conditions for their
aging.
Whether synthetic cork is still a cause for the prejudice in many consumers, we
would like to know what they think about another alternative solution which has
been adopted by some producers already: screw caps. In case synthetic cork
offers some possibilities to the ceremony of the opening of a bottle by using a
corkscrew, screw cap does not even need that: a simple movement of the hand and
the bottle is opened. Even in this case corky smell does not have any chance to
develop and whether the acceptability of synthetic corks among consumers is
pretty low, screw cap is even less accepted. Natural corks are expensive, in
particular the ones produced from a single block, that is the ones which are
suited for keeping and aging wine for a long time. Synthetic corks are cheaper
and the prejudice still existing on their acceptability limits their usage and
spreading. Maybe this is because of consumers being accustomed and attracted to
appearance instead of substance: a bottle having a nice label and a cork
promises an excellent wine, nevertheless experience and our senses teach us
there are so many bottles with beautiful labels and corks containing wines not
really excellent, indeed, truly disappointing.
|