Issue link: http://winesandvines.uberflip.com/i/62516
WINEMAKING could figure out whether a wine sample has any residual sugar. But how do you know for sure? Geoffrey Anderson of Unitech is quite enthusiastic about the potential in the Chemwell, but he also sounds a cautionary note. "We only recommend automation for labs that already have a significant background in enzymatic testing; otherwise, they can get buried in numbers." After toiling more than 30 years in the vineyard of wine testing, Gordon Burns of ETS Laboratories captures the issue this way: "The key point, which is hard to communicate, is that ana- lytical results for wine are not a com- modity. You can buy and sell bushels of corn with the presumption that they all have the same value. But that number on paper—generated in-house, or by an independent lab, or with an advanced analytical instrument—can have signifi- cantly different value, depending on the accuracy and precision. And there is a big downside if your results are not of the same value." Every testing program needs a quality-control system running in tandem. Repeated surveys of winery lab work have found significant variability in test results, even among labs using the same techniques on identical samples. The range of results occurs not because of faulty testing technology, or a lack of knowledge of the correct procedures, but because too few wineries invest the time and money to make sure they are getting high-quality results. The irritating fact is that every testing program needs a testing program to make sure it is capable of delivering results that meet a winery's production needs. Every testing program needs a quality-control system running in tandem, specifying and implementing procedures for careful and consistent sampling, guaranteeing that any water used in analysis is itself free of analytes, cleaning equipment early and often, using reference wines to check test values on a frequent—probably daily— basis, calibration of equipment, keeping extensive records, and so on. Having strong confidence in a single test result 102 Wines & Vines nOVeMBeR 201 1 Assistant winemaker Jordan Kurbek performs lab tests at Okanagan Crush Pad in Summerland, BC. often means running a half-dozen other tests. Otherwise, having an upscale auto- mated analyzer perform dozens of tests in a single run could produce dozens of results that are all off, possibly by a dis- tance that matters. Does it require more time? It could be, in other words, that powerful, automated testing requires more time and energy spent by more highly trained staff, rather than allowing the whole business to be turned over to the harvest intern. Michelle Bowen of Vinquiry, another major wine industry testing lab, empha- sizes that you "need to know your answers are correct. You need reference chemistry samples and check wines, but that check wine is only good for a month. Whites differ in testing from reds, sweeter wines from dry, and even wines from area to area. There are massive databases out there for calibration. It's a big project for a small winery." "Years ago," says Patricia Howe, a long- time observer of laboratory practices now working for ETS in its Roseburg, Ore., of- fice, "the work of wine analysis was done by analytical chemists. Can a fancy toy give you the results an analytical chemist using reference methods would give you? To make sure the results are good, you need a more trained person to check on them. If you do have trained staff, these technolo- gies can be good stuff—but smaller winer- ies using them as a black box, that's not so good." The warnings coming from the testing services can sound a little self-serving: "Unless your winery lab can match our deluxe, ISO-certified standards, you have no idea what your numbers mean." Just as the high-powered, automated machines can be a little intimidating, so can the test- ing elite, always asking, "But still, how do you know your results are correct?" Am I really going to pick a fight with Gordon Burns about my wine's pH? The skeptics, however, seem to have two points right. First, a winery has to have a clear idea of what values need to be tested, how often and with what degree of accuracy. Is it good enough to have pH readings within a tenth of a point? Does an error of a tenth of a gram per liter of malic acid matter? Knowing the quality of results needed is essential for making the economic calculations about investment in automated testing equipment. And so is having the appropriate level of quality control on the in-house testing, regardless of the program. Moving to fancier equipment may well require an upgrade in staff training and laboratory procedures. The high-end auto- mated testing technologies can be valuable workhorses for wineries with a heavy test- ing schedule—but only if some flesh-and- blood humans are riding herd on them. In short, forget about the fantasy of hav- ing a machine do all that damn testing. Tim Patterson is the author of "Home Wine- making for Dummies." He writes about wine and makes his own in Berkeley, Calif. Years of experience as a journalist, combined with a con- trarian streak, make him interested in getting to the bottom of wine stories, casting a critical eye on conventional wisdom in the process. LEEANN CLEMENS FROESE