The place for all things wine, focused on serious wine discussions.

Production

Moderators: Jenise, Robin Garr, David M. Bueker

no avatar
User

Bob Henrick

Rank

Kamado Kommander

Posts

3919

Joined

Thu Mar 23, 2006 7:35 pm

Location

Lexington, Ky.

Production

by Bob Henrick » Tue Dec 04, 2007 5:27 pm

In the US grape production (and by extension wine) is expressed in tons per acre. In Europe, it is expressed in hl/ha and I don't know how to gauge one against the other. I am chilling an inexpensive Louis Latour chardonnay for dinner tonight and went looking on the web for info about the wine. It is the Grand Ardèche 2004 chardonnay. Truthfully I saw the regular LL Chardonnay Chardonnay d'Ardèche 2005, and this the Grand Ardèche 2004. each was priced at $9.99 and, I probably should have picked up a bottle of each, but decided on the 04 alone. I will be tasting it with game hen from the grill, so it will likely be at least drinkable. If any one can explain the hl/ha vs tons per acre I would be appreciative to the point of pouring you a glass of the wine at table tonight. :-) The LL wines production is expressed (of course) in hl/ha and this is what set me off on this quest.(Edited to add the last sentence.)
Bob Henrick
no avatar
User

Max Hauser

Rank

Ultra geek

Posts

447

Joined

Thu Jul 19, 2007 2:57 pm

Location

Usually western US

Re: Production

by Max Hauser » Tue Dec 04, 2007 6:55 pm

It's easy to convert, say, (English) tons/acre to (metric) tonnes/hectare because the corresponding units have fixed conversion factors (found in good dictionaries and many other reference books; and online, where they may even be accurate :-) ). Unfortunately the volume of finished wine (in hectoliters, gallons, or any other volume unit) from a tonne of fruit depends both on the fruit and the winemaking and is far from fixed. (I know that at least French wine laws, aimed at governing things like maximum wine production in a given district, have long been written in liquid yield per unit area, while worldwide in general, agricultural crop numbers are in weight per unit area which is how fruit, rather than wine, is sold.) Some typical numbers can be found in industry reports, maybe someone here has handier data than I do. (There's probably something useful at The Wine Instituteif you look around.)
no avatar
User

Howie Hart

Rank

The Hart of Buffalo

Posts

6389

Joined

Thu Mar 23, 2006 4:13 pm

Location

Niagara Falls, NY

Re: Production

by Howie Hart » Tue Dec 04, 2007 7:55 pm

Bob - a Hectare contains 2.471044 acres. A metric ton contains 1.102311 tons. I used a very handy program for doing all kinds of conversions, which can be found here:
CONVERT
Chico - Hey! This Bottle is empty!
Groucho - That's because it's dry Champagne.
no avatar
User

SteveEdmunds

Rank

Wine guru

Posts

985

Joined

Thu Mar 23, 2006 3:05 am

Location

Berkeley, CA

Re: Production

by SteveEdmunds » Tue Dec 04, 2007 8:39 pm

Bob; the rough measure used by most of the folks I know here in CA is that a ton per acre is the rough equivalent of 15 hl/ha. Very rough, but gets you in the ballpark. (do they have ballparks there?) :)
I don't know just how I'm supposed to play this scene, but I ain't afraid to learn...
no avatar
User

Bruce Hayes

Rank

Wine guru

Posts

2935

Joined

Wed Mar 22, 2006 10:20 am

Location

Prescott, Ontario, Canada

Re: Production

by Bruce Hayes » Tue Dec 04, 2007 9:12 pm

Am looking forward to your WTN Bob. As it turns out, I have a bottle of the Grand Ardèche 2002 chilling in my wine fridge.
no avatar
User

Victorwine

Rank

Wine guru

Posts

2031

Joined

Thu May 18, 2006 9:51 pm

Re: Production

by Victorwine » Tue Dec 04, 2007 9:32 pm

In Europe, South America, and Canada where the metric system is considered the standard, wine production figures or yields, are usually expressed in the volume of wine produced for a given area (hl/ha). (For all intentional purposes we will assume only “free run” juice is considered and “pressed juice” is excluded. Some might ask is this fair? In a white wine production area, where crushing and maybe a light pressing is performed before fermentation, this way of obtaining production figures is adequate. However in a red wine production area, where pressing is done after fermentation, and this “pressed juice” is sometimes held in reserve to be added to the “free run” at a later date to possible add more structure, complexity, and body to the “finished wine”.)
Hectoliter (hl) is a capacity unit equal to 100 liters.
1 hl = 100 l = 26.418 US gals = 22 imp. Gals
Hectare (ha) is a unit of surface area approximately equal to 2.471 acres
1 ha = 2.471 acres

In the US wine production figures or yields, are expressed by the weight of the grapes produced in a given area (tons/acre).

Even though these two expressions basically measure the same thing, the yield of a given vineyard site, one should realize that depending on the grape variety and at what ripeness level it was harvested at will be a determining factor in the volume and quality of the juice produced and hence the wine made from such a grape variety. How the grapes are handled before fermentation will also determine the volume and quality of the juice produced.

In comparing European yields to those of the US, 1 hl/ha is equivalent to approximately .183 tons / 2.471 acres.
Example: A European vineyard with a yield of 50 hl / ha
50 X .183 = 9.15
50 hl / ha = 9.15 tons / 2.471 acres = 3.7 tons / acre

Salute
no avatar
User

Bob Henrick

Rank

Kamado Kommander

Posts

3919

Joined

Thu Mar 23, 2006 7:35 pm

Location

Lexington, Ky.

Re: Production

by Bob Henrick » Tue Dec 04, 2007 10:12 pm

Howie, thanks for the link, I have saved it and will try to make sense of it tomorrow. Thanks again.
Bob Henrick
no avatar
User

Bob Henrick

Rank

Kamado Kommander

Posts

3919

Joined

Thu Mar 23, 2006 7:35 pm

Location

Lexington, Ky.

Re: Production

by Bob Henrick » Tue Dec 04, 2007 10:14 pm

Steve, This looks like just the kind of thing I was seeking. It5 will be an easy convert for me now. BTW, I need to get in touch with you concerning some wine you have in either barrel or tank. will be doing that soon.
Bob Henrick
no avatar
User

Bob Henrick

Rank

Kamado Kommander

Posts

3919

Joined

Thu Mar 23, 2006 7:35 pm

Location

Lexington, Ky.

Re: Production

by Bob Henrick » Tue Dec 04, 2007 10:16 pm

Victor, your examples makes it easy to convert, and I appreciate you giving it to me. I will save the numbers and use them in the future. Thanks again.
Bob Henrick
no avatar
User

Max Hauser

Rank

Ultra geek

Posts

447

Joined

Thu Jul 19, 2007 2:57 pm

Location

Usually western US

Re: Production

by Max Hauser » Tue Dec 04, 2007 11:16 pm

Victorwine wrote:In Europe, South America, and Canada ... wine production figures or yields, are usually expressed in the volume of wine produced for a given area (hl/ha). (For all intentional purposes we will assume only “free run” juice is considered and “pressed juice” is excluded. ...) In the US wine production figures or yields, are expressed by the weight of the grapes produced in a given area (tons/acre).

Even though these two expressions basically measure the same thing...

Good follow-ups, I especially appreciated Steve's practical rule-of-thumb.

Not to nitpick but avoid potential confusion -- please correct me if I'm wrong -- there's one solid but two liquids here (juice and wine) -- not equivalent, and they must be kept distinct. And in US industry reports I read, wine production is in gallons (each 3.79 liters or 0.0379 hectoliters), i.e. volume units like liters, but crop yields are in weight per area.* To my knowledge, crop yields worldwide are also in weight per area. It's only when you get to wine, not fruit, that volume per area (hl/ha) yield units make sense. US yield unit corresponding specifically to hectoliters/hectare is gallons/acre.

1 hl/ha = 10.55 gal/acre if that helps.

From data below, 2005 California-wide average (including all kinds of wines, high- and low-yielding) is 16.3 hl/ha finished wine for one ton/acre of crop yield. Pretty close to Steve Edmonds's rule of thumb.

* 2005 Example: Sonoma County Pinot Noir grapes, 23062 tons produced from 10027 acres (McGourty). California total crush 3.76 million tons producing 648 million gallons from 445141 bearing acres, 470997 total acres (Wine Institute).
no avatar
User

Paul Winalski

Rank

Wok Wielder

Posts

8879

Joined

Wed Mar 22, 2006 9:16 pm

Location

Merrimack, New Hampshire

Re: Production

by Paul Winalski » Wed Dec 05, 2007 12:37 am

Bob Henrick wrote:In the US grape production (and by extension wine) is expressed in tons per acre. In Europe, it is expressed in hl/ha and I don't know how to gauge one against the other. I am chilling an inexpensive Louis Latour chardonnay for dinner tonight and went looking on the web for info about the wine. It is the Grand Ardèche 2004 chardonnay. Truthfully I saw the regular LL Chardonnay Chardonnay d'Ardèche 2005, and this the Grand Ardèche 2004. each was priced at $9.99 and, I probably should have picked up a bottle of each, but decided on the 04 alone. I will be tasting it with game hen from the grill, so it will likely be at least drinkable. If any one can explain the hl/ha vs tons per acre I would be appreciative to the point of pouring you a glass of the wine at table tonight. :-) The LL wines production is expressed (of course) in hl/ha and this is what set me off on this quest.(Edited to add the last sentence.)


To paraphrase Gone With The Wind, frankly, Bob, I don't give a damn what the yield is, whether expressed in tons per acre or hectolitres per hectare.

You cite Lous Latour. This is an estate that puts all their wines through Pasteurization, because this is how their great-great-grandfathers treated their wines, on recommendation of Pasteur, himself. And back in the mid 1800s, it was probably sage advice. Nowadays, it cooks the life out of what would otherwise be great wines, and reduces them to mediocrity.

Given Louis Latour's mistreatment of their wines in this fashion, factors such as yield (however expressed) are entirely secondary and irrelevant.

-Paul W.
no avatar
User

Bob Henrick

Rank

Kamado Kommander

Posts

3919

Joined

Thu Mar 23, 2006 7:35 pm

Location

Lexington, Ky.

Re: Production

by Bob Henrick » Wed Dec 05, 2007 9:07 am

Paul Winalski wrote:To paraphrase Gone With The Wind, frankly, Bob, I don't give a damn what the yield is, whether expressed in tons per acre or hectolitres per hectare.

You cite Louis Latour. This is an estate that puts all their wines through Pasteurization, because this is how their great-great-grandfathers treated their wines, on recommendation of Pasteur, himself. And back in the mid 1800s, it was probably sage advice. Nowadays, it cooks the life out of what would otherwise be great wines, and reduces them to mediocrity.

Given Louis Latour's mistreatment of their wines in this fashion, factors such as yield (however expressed) are entirely secondary and irrelevant.
-Paul W.


Thanks Paul for the info regarding LL and pasteurization. I was not aware that LL did this. However I did open the wine last evening, and had I not known better, on the nose the wine could have been a rather decent Central Coast wine. In particular I might have guessed it to be from Monterey County, with more than the usual body and less wood than most $10 California wines.

I am a little confused by why you don't care about the yield, and wonder if that is true only about LL wines because of their pasteurization, or wines in general. It would seem to me that over cropping is exactly what we don't like about many of the less expensive wines of the world. And, if I do not know the difference between ha/hl and tons per acre how am I to make a distinction before I purchase. Of course The production numbers have to be out there for me to read in the first place, which they are in this instance.
Bob Henrick
no avatar
User

Paul Winalski

Rank

Wok Wielder

Posts

8879

Joined

Wed Mar 22, 2006 9:16 pm

Location

Merrimack, New Hampshire

Re: Production

by Paul Winalski » Wed Dec 05, 2007 12:29 pm

Bob,

I look at the bottom line--how the wine tastes from bottle. How the producer arrived at the bottle contents is not something I worry about. It certainly does seem to be the case that lower yields contribute to higher quality, but that it the producer's worry, not mine. I will pass judgment on the final product.

-Paul W.
no avatar
User

Bob Henrick

Rank

Kamado Kommander

Posts

3919

Joined

Thu Mar 23, 2006 7:35 pm

Location

Lexington, Ky.

Re: Production

by Bob Henrick » Wed Dec 05, 2007 12:36 pm

Paul, yours is an argument that I can't argue with.
Bob Henrick
no avatar
User

Paul Winalski

Rank

Wok Wielder

Posts

8879

Joined

Wed Mar 22, 2006 9:16 pm

Location

Merrimack, New Hampshire

Re: Production

by Paul Winalski » Thu Dec 06, 2007 12:37 am

But of course, Bob, it's always fun to do coaching from the stands, so to speak.

It seems, from my own observation, that the very best winemakers tend to be those who start with top-quality, low-yield fruit, then let the wine make itself. But they stand at the sidelines with a full arsenal of manipulative techniques that they will employ if things start to go wrong. As one of the great winemakers I've spoken with said, in a great vintage, any idiot can make great wine. The skill comes in knowing when to intervene, and how, in a poor or tricky vintage, and still end up producing a good wine instead of a disaster. Another great winemaker said that a lot of the skill is knowing when to leave well enough alone.

-Paul W.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: AhrefsBot, ClaudeBot, Google AgentMatch and 0 guests

Powered by phpBB ® | phpBB3 Style by KomiDesign