Somepeople say: Like political hacks on TV whom overutilize the term, "some people say" in order to cast doubt on folks that are working for real environmental progress, we take up the discussion of such things as carbon footprints.
First of all let me address the concerns of folks who might ask why sustainability is such a focus for First Crush Wines, and why, we as importers of wines from France, Australia and New Zealand can say we are focused on sustainability when wines are available from domestic producers that "theoretically" carry a lower carbon footprint from producer to consumer. I'm in favor of total carbon footprint accounting and transparency. Only then we can have a real discussion of the facts regarding sustainablity.
Like any other industry in the US, the wine industry is outsourced to the gills in making our vertical market as efficient as possible. We buy most cork from global sources, not just Portugal, or synthetic from a variety of materials native or not; glass from the lowest cost producer, a lot from China, our biggest producers top up their vats with cheap malbec, cab, etc from South America under the 15% TTB laws regarding vintage and appellation. We buy a lot of oak barrels from France, Hungary and Russia. We grow our grapes using irrigation, one of the most rare commodities on the planet where European producers for the most part are forbidden to irrigate during the growing season. And we still use a lot of chemicals. All those chemicals take a lot of energy to produce in factories.
Obviously I'm sensitive to the point. I put wine on boats and have them travel to Seattle from Marseilles. 30 days on the water. Why is it then, that wines from France are still less expensive and better than the vast majority of wine that is grown within 200 miles of Seattle, and in total use less carbon than those same wines. That is the rhetorical question for you!
