Does the packaging of the future match the future needs of wine?

  • 3,609 views
Uploaded on

The results of a 12 month study highlighting the influence of packaging on wine preservation.

The results of a 12 month study highlighting the influence of packaging on wine preservation.

More in: Education
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Be the first to comment
    Be the first to like this
No Downloads

Views

Total Views
3,609
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
4

Actions

Shares
Downloads
147
Comments
0
Likes
0

Embeds 0

No embeds

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
    No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. SCIENTIFIC STUDY Influence of packaging on wine preservation 12 month study 2009 - 2010 HC /12.07
  • 2. ISVV (Institute of Vine and Wine Sciences of Bordeaux) The ISVV is the largest research and development centre on vine and wine in Europe. The 10,000m2 laboratory draws together over 150 professors who benefit from an exceptional range of technical resources including state-of-the-art equipment and the largest tasting room in the world. HC /12.07
  • 3. UMR OF OENOLOGY More than 82 researchers devoted to: 1. Sensorial analysis 2. Phenolic compounds 3. Wine chemistry 4. Winemaking process HC /12.07
  • 4. 1. Objectives 2. Packaging 3. Analysis HC /12.07
  • 5. OBJECTIVES To compare the organoleptic qualities of wine in current packaging types over a two year period. • Packaging types: - Glass bottle - Mono PET bottle - Multi PET bottle - Bag-in-box (BIB) • Various sizes: 75 cL/ 18.7 cL / 3 L • Two different wines: red and white Bordeaux HC /12.07
  • 6. PACKAGING TYPES 75 cL 1. Glass bottles 18.7 cL Screw caps 75 cL (30H60 and 22H40) 2. Monolayer PET bottles 18.7 cL 75 cL 3. Multilayer PET bottles 18.7 cL 4. Bag-in-box 3L HC /12.07
  • 7. ANALYSIS Sensorial analysis run by 25 tasters dedicated to wine oxidation and reduction phenomenon Triangular tests and tastings carried out by a professional jury were scheduled every 6 months HC /12.07
  • 8. ANALYSIS All analysis is done in triplicate All analysis is run over a two year period t0 t ½ month t 1 month t 3 months t 6months t 12 months t 18 months t 24 months HC /12.07
  • 9. ANALYSIS All analysis is carried out in the ISVV laboratory. The results are not influenced by temperature variations or transport conditions as they would be in standard storage situations. Preservation times are observed from the date of filling rather than when the product would have been launched on the market. It is necessary to highlight both factors because they make a difference to the overall results. HC /12.07
  • 10. MODALITIES Glass PET mono PET multi Bag-in-box 75cl & 18.7cl 75cl & 18.7cl 75cl & 18.7 cl 3L HC /12.07
  • 11. Physical analysis of gas HC /12.07
  • 12. WHITE WINE O2 EVOLUTION OXYGEN Glass 75cl PET mono 75cl PET multi 75cl Glass 18.7cl PET mono 18.7cl PET multi 18.7cl BIB 3L White wine’s properties do not naturally consume oxygen. The analysis clearly shows that bag-in-box , PET mono and PET multi bottles all oxidise the wine to varying levels, already after 6 months. HC /12.07
  • 13. WHITE WINE O2 12 MONTHS OXYGEN RESULTS Glass Glass PET mono PET mono PET multi PET multi BIB 75 18.7 75 18.7 75 18.7 0,01 0,01 0,97 2,62 0,09 0,40 0,58 mg.L-1 O2 levels significantly increased in bag-in-box, PET mono and PET multi bottles 18.7 cL. Wine’s organoleptic properties can be significantly affected when oxygen levels reach 0.5 mg.L-1 and over. HC /12.07
  • 14. WHITE WINE CO2 EVOLUTION CARBON DIOXIDE Glass 75cl PET mono 75cl PET multi 75cl Glass 18.7cl PET mono 18.7cl PET multi 18.7cl BIB 3L CO2 strongly decreases in bag-in-box, PET mono and PET multi. When CO2 decreases, it is replaced by O2. HC /12.07
  • 15. WHITE WINE CO2 12 MONTHS CARBON DIOXIDE RESULTS Glass Glass PET mono PET mono PET multi PET multi BIB 75 18.7 75 18.7 75 18.7 0,97 0,95 0,64 0,49 0,7 0,87 0,35 g.L-1 The decreasing levels of CO2 leads to an important increase of oxygen followed by oxidation in PET mono, PET multi and bag-in-box. Wine remains stable in the bottles of glass. HC /12.07
  • 16. WHITE WINE SO2 EVOLUTION SULPHUR DIOXIDE Glass 35 75cl 30 PET mono 75cl 25 BV1 SO2 (mg.L-1) 20 BP1 PET multi 75cl 15 BPM1 Glass BV2 18.7cl 10 BP2 PET mono 18.7cl 5 BPM2 BBIB multi PET 18.7cl 0 0 2 4 6 8 10 BIB Time (months) 3L SO2 has antiseptic and antioxidant properties. Its reduction leads to a microbiological risk, which can be seen here. HC /12.07
  • 17. WHITE WINE SO2 12 MONTHS SULPHUR DIOXIDE RESULTS Glass Glass PET mono PET mono PET multi PET multi BIB 75 18.7 75 18.7 75 18.7 21 11 5 3 10 6 8 mg.L-1 Bag-in-box, PET mono and PET multi bottles18.7 cL show significant decreases in SO2, with figures under a 5-10 mg.L-1 level that threaten stabilization. Only the 75 cL glass bottle safely preserves the wine. HC /12.07
  • 18. O2 EVOLUTION OXYGEN Except for bag-in-box, oxygen decreases at a normal rate because it is consumed by the wine’s phenolic components. HC /12.07
  • 19. O2 12 MONTHS OXYGEN RESULTS Glass Glass PET mono PET mono PET multi PET multi BIB 75 18.7 75 18.7 75 18.7 0,01 0,01 0,01 0,01 0,01 0,01 0,23 mg.L-1 Only the oxygen contained in bag-in-box increases significantly. There is an abnormal transfer of oxygen inside the bag-in-box container. HC /12.07
  • 20. CO2 EVOLUTION CARBON DIOXIDE The CO2 level should be stable. Its reduction means there is a leak and gas is transferred. Leading to a large quantity of oxygen and subsequently wine oxidation. HC /12.07
  • 21. CO2 12 MONTHS CARBON DIOXIDE RESULTS Glass Glass PET mono PET mono PET multi PET multi BIB 75 18.7 75 18.7 75 18.7 0,63 1,17 0,47 0,58 0,59 0,72 0,84 g.L-1 CO2 losses are not significant enough to draw valid conclusions on all packaging types. Bag-in-box is more permeable considering its larger capacity. HC /12.07
  • 22. SO2 EVOLUTION SULPHUR DIOXIDE SO2 has antiseptic and antioxidant properties. Its reduction leads to a microbiological risk, which can be seen here. HC /12.07
  • 23. SO2 12 MONTHS SULPHUR DIOXIDE RESULTS Glass Glass PET mono PET mono PET multi PET multi BIB 75 18.7 75 18.7 75 18.7 12 8 6 2 7 3 9 mg.L-1 Values that are under 5-10 mg.L-1 cannot ensure stabilisation. The SO2 contained in PET mono, PET multi bottles and bag-in-box is lower than this limit: it shows the wine is beginning to change. HC /12.07
  • 24. GAS ANALYSIS CONCLUSION WHITE WINE Bag-in-box, mono PET and multi PET significantly modifies the characteristics of the white wines, already after 6 months (oxidation). Glass preserves the wine characteristics without any degradation. RED WINE Several parameters can be observed from a container to another but the figures are not yet conclusive. The study must continue for a few months to ensure accurate results. HC /12.07
  • 25. Physical analysis of colours HC /12.07
  • 26. White wine shades HC /12.07
  • 27. WHITE WINE INTENSITY EVOLUTION The optic density at 420 nm (OD 420) shows the yellow shade of the wine significantly increases: this is due to oxidation. HC /12.07
  • 28. WHITE WINE INTENSITY RESULTS 12 MONTHS Glass Glass PET mono PET mono PET multi PET multi BIB 75 18.7 75 18.7 75 18.7 0,097 0,102 0,129 0,154 0,107 0,120 0,103 Differences between the shades of yellow are significant between mono PET, multi PET 18.7 cL and the other containers: they show a high level of oxidation. HC /12.07
  • 29. Red wine shades HC /12.07
  • 30. INTENSITY EVOLUTION The follow-up on the Indice Phénolique Total (IPT) shows a very slight variation from one container to another. Further time is needed to test. HC /12.07
  • 31. INTENSITY 12 MONTHS RESULTS Glass Glass PET mono PET mono PET multi PET multi BIB 75 18.7 75 18.7 75 18.7 51 52 52 52 51 52 52 There is no significant colour difference yet. HC /12.07
  • 32. COLOUR ANALYSIS CONCLUSION WHITE WINE A strong difference in colour can be observed between bag-in-box, PET mono and PET multi bottles 18.7cL and glass. Glass is the only container that keeps white wine safely and preserves its initial intensity. RED WINE Several factors can be observed but the results do not allow significant sensorial conclusions to be drawn. The study must continue for a few months. HC /12.07
  • 33. Sensory Analysis (Tasting) • Sauvignon characteristics • Oxidation evolution • Reduction HC /12.07
  • 34. WHITE WINE OXYDATION OXIDATION During tasting PET mono and PET multi bottles 18.7 cL show a clear oxidised structure, with rotten fruit flavour. HC /12.07
  • 35. WHITE WINE INTENSITY 5 4 3 2 1 0 During tasting mono PET and Expert PET bottles show an oxidised multi Novice different colour intensity: from green-yellow, it turns to gold yellow HC /12.07
  • 36. WHITE WINE SAUVIGNON CHARACTERISTICS 5 4 3 2 1 0 Glass is the best packaging to maintain Sauvignon’s characteristics, whereas PET has spoiled it. HC /12.07
  • 37. OXYDATION OXIDATION 5 4 3 2 1 0 Differences are not significant enough to draw conclusion HC /12.07
  • 38. REDUCTION In glass bottles, red wine flavours reduce: the wine is “shut” and needs to be reoxygenated in a decanter (the nature of the closure is strategic). HC /12.07
  • 39. Last but not least HC /12.07
  • 40. SENSORY ANALYSIS CONCLUSION WHITE WINE Bag-in-box, mono PET and PET multi bottles significantly affect white wine’s characteristics (oxidation process), even after a short 9 month period. The glass bottle preserves white wine’s original characteristics with stability. After 12 months, white wine is fully oxidised. The panel of professional and standard tasters all agree on its chew fruits flavour. RED WINE The results to date begin to show changes but they do not allow significant conclusions to be drawn from an olfactory point of view. The study must continue for a few months. HC /12.07