Already we are into the Chinese New Year – and this year it is the year of the dragon! What a great opportunity to talk Sweet Riesling – our best-selling Riesling adorned with a Dragon carrying a cauldron of fire on the label.

THE STYLE – The wine came out of a vision, the vision of a great American Kabinett. Of course we could not reproduce that style exactly (Eastern Washington weather and soils are not the Mosel) and we had to tweak things a bit to make a good wine years after years (more on this learning experience later). THE NAME – We also wanted this wine to talk to consumers; most Riesling wines just said “Riesling” and that drove us crazy: “how can consumers find a sweet Riesling if they all say just ‘Riesling’ on the label” – hence we came up with the name “Sweet Riesling” on our labels. At the beginning everyone (Distributors, large clients) told us we were crazy: “consumers do not like the word ‘sweet’ even if they like to drink ‘sweet’ – do not put ‘sweet’ on the label”. The popularity of this wine and the number of copycats since then (It always amazes me to see so many wine companies just copy one another) have proven that the “Sweet Riesling” wording was a winning ticket. THE DRAGON – The imagery was crystallized very early in our mind, we wanted an iconographic art piece that would clearly depict that this type of wine (low alcohol – high sugar – high acid) is made to go with spicy food – Sweet Riesling with hot/spicy food is a culinary experience that one cannot miss. An Asian dragon was perfect for this image – agile, light and deadly. Adding a cauldron of fire helped explain the great tension between a Sweet Riesling and hot food.
BACK TO THE STYLE – We knew we wanted a certain balance where high sugar levels would be balanced by high acidity. The first year we made the Sweet (2006), we’ve picked the grapes at the same time than the Dry Riesling and the acidity did not allow carrying more than 6% residual sugar – we thought: “need more acid”. 2007 brought a warmer harvest and we decided to pick early to keep our acids higher, we found out this was a great timing to harvest for that style and that same year we understood clearly that sugar alone was not enough of a parameter to pick grapes (I know we are a bit slow) – we also decided that we could do away with adding acid by simply picking earlier – yes! One less additive at the winery. What a revelation 2007 was, we’ve picked early, did not add acid and made a naturally balanced wine that tasted great. We narrowed on a slightly higher residual sugar level closer to 7% because now the wine could carry more sugar (and we love the tension between acid and sugar – that is what makes a great Riesling). In 2008 we’ve learned two more tricks; the first one was the use of native yeast and how well they worked for our wines. The second one was the importance of residual carbon dioxide in the bottle – we started obsessing about carbon dioxide and made sure that the residual carbon dioxide would be perfect at bottling. In 2009 we started to think about having a fraction of the blend coming from a botrytized vineyard – until then all our fruit was always clean and beautiful – to get complexity we had to find some botrytis and we’d decided to explore growing botrytized vineyard blocks (note – it does not work that well). We also started to understand deeply the relationship between our pH and the sensation of sweetness for the wines. 2009 brought also the first Sweet Riesling 100% fermented with native yeasts. 2010 gave us a LOT of botrytis. I was like mother nature heard our desire to get some Botrytis and said “you wanted some, here you go my friend” – I think this is my favorite vintage of Sweet Riesling (though the 2011 currently in tank is not shabby by any means), that year we really learned to work with Botrytis – all that rot is not all good. 2011 was similar to 2010, no major breakthrough this vintage. Every vintage brought its share of learning but after 6 vintages of Sweet Riesling we really are starting to get it down to a science – no acid addition, no yeast, pick early, keep your pH low, high residual carbon dioxide, some botrytis.

So for the year of the Dragon, remember to pick up a Sweet Riesling – a treat with Spicy food and now a great story to repeat at dinner time.

I was listening to the excellent Grape Radio featuring an interview with Louis Fabrice Latour (warning Grape Radio could be a bit intense for non wine nerds – consume at your own risk) and part of the conversation revolved around white wine maturity. Monsieur Latour had some great comments about how many people now do not understand older mature white wines especially as it relates to color. It seems that as soon as the color turns a little yellow many consumers – and experts – turn to the conclusion that the wine is oxydized and near total death. I was relating to many conversations I have had in the past with good clients about aged Riesling and how people are so darn sensitive to color and jump to conclusion – not everyone makes green Sauvignon Blanc to be drunk within 12 month! It did not use to be like this, great white Burgundies (the one that Louis Fabrice referred to), the great Rieslings, the great Chenin Blanc from the Loire, an old Bordeaux Blanc, they all turn yellow-yellow after 5 -6 years and if the wine is balanced (sometimes residual sugar helps a lot as well as a low pH/high acid combo), most experienced wine drinkers will consider those wines to be still young and very pleasurable. May be they are not youngsters and have developed more bottle bouquet, but by no mean they are dead. I would agree that some cheap white wines, aged under a lot of oak and often under a cheap natural cork – or a fake plastic cork (all great techniques for hyper oxygenation) can be oxidized and dead, but please do not jump to the conclusion that all yellow pigmented white wines are dead – you might be missing out on a great bottle of wine and another world of wine.

When you live and breathe Riesling, one of the recurring story that we talk about all the time is the many different types (read residual sugars) of Rieslings and how they all have a place at your wine table. This is a theme that we have tried to convey on the package of our main line of Riesling through the clear use of descriptors on the label such as “Dry” or “Sweet” because we want our customers to understand what they are buying (not a given in the wine business sometimes). For the record most folks out there told us we were crazy to use the word “Sweet” on a label and now you can see the numbers of wineries following our lead. Our leadership in this arena is also shown in the very early use of the International Riesling Foundation taste (sweetness) scale on all our Rieslings back labels – a scale that we’ve helped develop with Dan Berger and the team at the IRF.

Why all that matters would you ask? Well, it does matter (at least to us) because it is not always easy to convince some crowds to love, buy and sell several types of Rieslings. we have many cro-magnon folks out there that either think that all Rieslings are sweet and/or believe that sweet wines are waaayyy below them. Often those prehistoric thinkers believe that consumers needs to be categorized as a “cab drinker” or a “dry white drinker”; they love to categorize the world of drinkers like marketers categorize populations (by the way try the Claritas prizm marketing segmentation to see how those people like to categorize everything). If you are like me and enjoy many ways of life, you probably understand that there is a time for dry aromatic whites, a time for sweeter wines and a time for a red wine (OK, maybe not many occasion for red wines but I have to be open minded since this is what I am preaching). This is why I do not believe that most wine drinkers fall into one type of Riesling and that Riesling has to be sweet – I believe most people like many styles of Riesling though, I admit, wine drinkers might have a primary attachment to any given kind. There is a Riesling for Everything has we say at Pacific Rim that all have different Riesling for being.

Based on the unequivocal principle that all Riesling are not born equal and they are made for different occasions and food pairing, we are claiming that all decent wine lists and all decent wine shelves HAVE TO CARRY SEVERAL STYLES OF RIESLINGS and that, at a minimum, the price of entry in order to graduate from prehistoric behavior is to carry a Dry, a medium Dry (often just labeled “Riesling” in the USA) and a Sweet Riesling – 3 Rieslings for being. Note 1: a Sparkling and a dessert style in the set would be swell, but I won’t get mad at you for not having them – at least not yet. Note 2: Several Riesling regions (Mosel, Washington State, Eden Valley Australia etc…) would also be nice.

Let me remember 2010…

A cool growing season

My first harvest in Washington was 1998 (5^th warmest season on record ) and if you take out 1999 (The 4^th coolest season), it has been the coolest season in many years. The seventies and mid-eighties were very cool years as well but really for the past 20 years we have been used to 2,400 GDD (Growing Degree Days) every year. Well, not 2010. We had to go through a cold early spring and really a uber cool end of season – it almost felt like Burgundy at times. A cool season like 2010 brings its load of challenges in the vineyard especially late ripening, low maturity, low yields and potential for rot.

Winemaking to the rescue

The challenges the season brought us had to be dealt with at the winery, this is what they call a “winemaker’s vintage” – aka I will not sleep for 60 days and chew my fingernails to the bone. In challenging vintages, such as 2010, the trick is to accept that there will be compromises and to choose them carefully. The first compromise we made was to bring some fruit below optimal ripeness and avoid having to pick everything at once (it is challenging to bring too much fruit too fast). The second compromise we’ve made was to accept grapes with far higher noble rot levels than we usually do. The third one was to pick almost exclusively on acid level – we would pick once the acid level would go right below “deadly”. Still this was not enough to get away with such a cool season. We had to get out a few tricks out of our Magic Riesling Compendium book namely leaving grapes on cold soak to enrich the juices in potassium (thereby dropping some tartaric acid out of the wine), selectively de-acidify some lots, decide to not make any dry styles from the 2010 harvest and separate lots with higher botrytis levels for Sweet Riesling.

The wines we’ve made

Now we are just releasing the wines we’ve made from the 2010 vintage. They have in common a great high acidity, some level of noble rot (think about waxy, complexing aromas and flavors) and overall a tid bit more sugar than usual to rebalance the extra acid (and of course de facto lower alcohols). Below is a list of the wine we’ve made in 2010:

-        Riesling “Phoenix”: This is our Johannesburg style. We left a tid bit more sugar than usual to rebalance the wine (2.8% instead of 2.5%). Surprisingly close to the 2009 with some added acidity

-        Sweet Riesling: OK, this is a very very nice sweet Riesling; it has about the same sugar than usual (7%) but has a layer of botrytis that I have been fighting to get for years. I would say about 20% noble rot.

-        Riesling Made from organic Grapes: Watch out, this is our best to date (our first vintage was 1998). With a great natural acidity and the slightly above normal sugar level (3.8%) this is a very pure and somewhat crystalline Riesling – very different in the lineup and very cool.

-        Vin De Glaciere – Wallula Vineyard – Made From organic Grapes: A new twist on our quintessential VDG. Now it is made from Wallula so it can carry an organic certification. It was a bit of a challenge to make a dessert wine organically but boy it paid off. Note the 8.5% alcohol on this wine (16% Residual Sugar), it is a great wine in a 375ml bottle.

-        Sparkling Sweet Riesling: Well, when you can’t make a dry Riesling, you make a sweet one! That is what the Germans do and what we did. A new bubbly in the lineup dosed at 7% RS – think Sweet Riesling with bubbles

-        Solstice Vineyard Riesling: We’ve just bottled this one. It has been a fantastic wine so far though it needs a bit of bottle age. It ended up drier than in past year – this is the acid monster for those of us that like that with total acidity of 0.93 and Residual Sugar of 0.93. This is the wine of legends

-        Wallula Vineyard Riesling Biodynamic: This is a very interesting wine because we did not get the sugar we usually do at Wallula. We kept the sugar at around 1.1% as usual but the alcohol is 11.9%. This wine as usual is the best true read on the vintage – untouched from the vineyard to the bottle

-        Gewurztraminer: This is one varietal that fared well in 2010. Great concentration, very aromatic vintage and the best for us since 2008 probably (mmm 2008 was cooler too, may be a correlation?)

-        Framboise: A short harvest in 2010 though quite flavorful. Intense berry flavors, the only problem is that we did not make enough!

The wrap up

In retrospect, 2010 was a great year for Riesling producers – as long as you focused on sweeter styles save a few sites like Solstice. The only thing I wish is that our yields could have been higher and our quantities available larger. I probably lost way too much sleep on this vintage and lost a couple years of life expectancy – which I can regain by drinking additional Riesling every day in 2011. Please expect high acids in 2010 and trust that we did balance everything out with about 10% more sugar than usual. Enjoy the touch of botrytis on the wines, especially in the Sweet Riesling. Have fun with the results of a challenging vintage, meanwhile we are preparing for an equally challenging 2011 vintage (2011 is so far cooler than 2010!).

Sulfites are a top allergen triggering strong reactions in people (hives, swelling of throat etc..). Thankfully, studies have shown that few individuals are truly allergic to sulfites (I have read 0.5% of the population but 5% of the asthmatic population) and often sulfite allergies are mistaken with alcohol allergies (the headache you get the next day!). For the other 99.5% of the population sulfites are metabolized and excreted. They are cases of sulfite poisoning in young children but usually no one dies from sulfites present in the food chain (would not recommend eating spoons of sulfites though). So, really asthmatic should avoid food with high levels of sulfites or at least follow the recommendation of the FDA which is to avoid food with more than a 100ppm of sulfites. For the non-asthmatic folks, if you suspect a sulfite allergy (again very low likelihood), you can have yourself tested by an allergist to confirm your suspicion. Foods that are known to contain more than 100ppm of sulfites include dried fruit (excluding raisins), lemon and lime juice, wine, sauerkraut, grape juices, pickled onions for example. Now remember that your sulfite intake is additive, so you should not neglect foods that have less than 100ppm sulfites because they add up especially wine vinegar, maraschino cherries, fresh shrimps, corn syrup, relish, maple syrup, some cookies, many medications etc… The FDA requires that any product with more than 10ppm sulfites be declared on the label.

Sulfites in wine

Sulfites have been used in wines for thousands of year; Egyptians used sulfites starting 2,000 BC! Sulfites are used in wines because they have very interesting properties:

• they are a strong antioxidant protecting the wine from oxygen spoilage
• they are a good anti-bacterial agent (we have plenty of those in wines, few good bacteria and many bad ones)
• they have some decent anti-fungal activities (remember that yeasts that are fermenting wines are a unicellular fungus)
• they do enhance the taste of food, in the same manner than salt

Because of health concerns, governments of many countries have regulated the maximum total amount of sulfites in wines. The maximum limit is 350ppm in the USA, 200ppm in the EU – I think the USA should mirror the EU on that one; 350ppm is a LOT of total sulfites.
The winemaker should not really worry about the level of total sulfites (unless one is getting close to the legal limit) but should focus on the molecular sulfite levels. See, not all sulfites are born alike, and when the sulfite molecule is in suspension in wine, it dissociates itself into several forms that are more or less active chemically. The molecular fraction is by far the most active and the one that the winemaker needs to pay attention to. Several factors should influence the amount of molecular sulfite desired:

• The life expectancy of the wine and its window of consumption (if the wine is to be consumed in two years and for the next 5 years after that, then one should increase the sulfite concentration to help the wine survive)
  The expectation for oxygen ingress into the container (cork and bag in the box let more oxygen into the wine vs screwcaps for example requiring increased sulfites at bottling)
• The pH of the wine – very important factor, for a wine with low pH (like in Riesling) the molecular fraction become exponentially more prevalent reducing the need for more sulfites – note that red wines in general have higher pH that whites
• The presence of polyphenols (color, tannins mainly) that are natural anti-oxidant protecting the wine naturally (ie, at same pH levels red wines need less sulfites than white wines)
• The level of filtration, non-filtered wines being more unstable, they might require more sulfites to avoid bacterial spoilage in the bottle
• Barrel aged wines which see more oxygen (vs tank aged) require often more sulfites especially if they are aged for a long time

Overall I would say that wines need to be below 150ppm sulfites. I see very few instances (very sweet wines may be since sulfites benefits are inhibited by sugar) where the level should be higher and I would welcome legislation forcing wineries to put the final sulfite levels in their wines.

Organic, made from organic grapes, biodynamic requirements

The three certifications above all have more stringent sulfites requirement than previously stated. Made from organic grapes and biodynamic wines have an upper limit of 100ppm total sulfites. Organic wines cannot have sulfites added period – one caveat is that yeasts naturally produce sulfites usually around 20ppm, so no sulfite added does not mean no sulfite present. Still organic wines would be a perfectly good way to lower one’s sulfites intake. The only issue I have with organic wines is that they don’t age that well and have to be drunk soon after production which is not always possible.

Sulfites at Pacific Rim

As you might have gathered, I care a lot about sulfite levels. I wish we would not have to use it and still get a great bottle of wine that age and that is good now and for many years. Right now, this is a preservative we have to use to guarantee the freshness of our wines and its stability. I guess I find solace in the fact that at Pacific Rim we rarely (almost never) bottle any wines above 100ppm total Sulfites. Several reasons why we can get away with low levels of sulfites:

• Our wines are often fast turn, they are fresh whites that are meant to be drunk young needing less sulfites
• Riesling has very low pH, allowing us use less sulfites and still have a good amount of precious molecular sulfites
• We stop our fermentations (to make white wines) with a centrifuge which separates yeasts and wine without using sulfites
• We sterile filter our wines
• We use screwcaps – a very tight closure reducing oxygen ingress in the wine
• We make sure our wines go in the bottle with very little dissolved oxygen (we even chase the air between the wine and the wine

I have just finished a great conversation with Dr Jim Harbertson of WSU and one of his PhD students about bitterness in Washington white wines. In truth it must be said that I might be a bitter “super taster” meaning that I am more sensitive to bitterness than most folks – I do not like IPA beers, don’t appreciate super tannic red wines, can’t eat much unsweetened chocolate, like wimpy truck-stop coffee etc… It is very interesting because my palate might make me quite suited to make sweeter - low bitterness wine – maybe I was born, or my body was pre-programmed, to make Riesling (or other sweet “elegant” wine). OK, that suits me great, no Cabernet, no Chardonnay, no oaky monster, give me Riesling, Pinot Noir, Gewurztraminer.

Sorry for the personal digression. Back to bitterness in Washington whites which, albeit only a few gifted one might notice, is a real bummer. At Pacific Rim, we might be embarking on a quest to find out why many Washington white wines can be bitter if not properly fined (fining is a winemaking technique where a fining agent is introduced to bind with an unwanted molecule and then precipitate with the unwanted molecule at the bottom of a tank where it can be removed after racking off the clean liquid above). What is intriguing is the fact that most work on bitterness has been done on red wines and that we know very little about bitterness factors in whites. I have always felt that light exposure in Eastern Washington led to high skin phenolic content that in return could be extracted during juice skin contact (either due to maceration in a truck after machine picking or during pressing or both).  Stay tune for an update on this fascinating topic – at least fascinating to about half a dozen folks in the country….

We have seen large botrytis infections that dried out nicely but it ended up lowering yields dramatically. I expect a 20% drop in yield overall in Washington for mature Riesling vineyards. It is not clear right now if the new Riesling plantings will offset the loss from their older brethren – I suspect the total Riesling harvest to be down 10% overall versus the record 2009 harvest for the State. The botrytis flavors are adding a very nice fourth dimension to the sweet styles and the quality of sweet Rieslings is very high. Several wineries (us included) will make a noble rot infected Riesling this year.

Overall it was a very unusual harvest for Washington that should reward patient and skilled winemakers. It is definitely a vintage that will be made in the cellar.

We were hosting a biodynamic tasting at our offices in Portland. Pacific Rim was pouring a vertical of Wallula Vineyard Biodynamic Rieslings (picture above). This was an opportunity for me to taste through the first three vintages (2007-2008-2009) of the magnificent Wallula Vineyard and reflect on our winemaking and our progress. Remember that those wines are biodynamic wines (vs made from biodynamic grapes) which is pretty rare as I saw yesterday where most of the producers present were pouring made from biodynamic grapes wines. Nothing is added to those wines (no yeast, no acid, no nothing) and they are certified biodynamic. Wallula is probably one of the most thoughtful Riesling planting in the USA with a special trellis system, German clones and all biodynamically farmed (http://rieslingrules.com/the_book/about-our-wines/biodynamic-winemaking-at-pacific-rim/).

2007 Wallula Riesling BioD: It was our first year and were still learning about selecting the best rows and We might have picked a bit late. The resulting wine is very nice though may be missing some acid and it is rich in alcohol. It is rebalanced by a very low residual sugar (0.7%?). Overall a great wine but not the best we have made I would think. Would love to taste this in 5 years to see how it is aging.

2008 Wallula Riesling BioD: This was a cool vintage and also the first vintage we started to pick the grapes at different time (fractionnal picking). The wine was difficult to ferment and stuck at 1.2% residual sugar. It is a more complex version with some serious aging potential.

2009 Wallula Riesling BioD: Whao, may be our best vintage. It is zippy (we picked quite early) with a lower ethanol content (12.5%). We started to stop the fermentation early for a fraction of the blend so we could use that fraction to blend back into a dry fraction aged on lees. This technique  seems to be very appropriate for our conditions. This is a complex and hedgy wine. Very interesting and thoughtful.

Overall this was a solid line up and I could taste the vineyard through each wine. The common thread reflecting the site was the lovely floral nose of each wine. The  importance of the picking date and the amount of fractionnal picking (picking the same vineyard at different rippeness levels) really had a tremendous impact. I can’t wait to do a 10 year vertical with the press to taste what I think is one of the most thoughtful Riesling in North America.

2006 Sweet Riesling – rated 88 points Wine Spectator (Harvey Steiman): Great pale color still for this older wine, nice nose, fresh as can be. Great acidity on this wine, aging very gracefully, still very young. This has still California fruit in it by the way so it has no appellation on the front. This is still a very serious Riesling – impressive and complex. pH: 2.96, TA: 0.81, RS: 7%

2007 Sweet Riesling – rated 89 points Wine Enthusiast (Paul Gregutt): Our first wine in our new winery in Eastern Washington. Color is quite gold, some more age character, nose is still fresh, very Riesling like, nice honey, feels a bit more phenolic. Not as nice as 2006, more Washington in style – less Germanic. Probably my least favorite right now. This is the first year we also lowered our total sulfite content – may be some correlation between the way it ages and the amount of preservative? pH: 2.97, TA: 0.81, RS: 6.8%

2008 Sweet Riesling – rated 89 points Wine Enthusiast (Paul Gregutt): Interesting nose, on the floral side, color is going the way of the 2007 but not quite golden yet, lively mouthfeel that makes the wine quite refreshing. In the same vein than 2007 though may be a tid bit more lively. Finishes quite dry with notes of botrytis. pH: 3.03, TA: 0.80, RS: 6.5%

2009 Sweet Riesling – rated 89 points Wine Spectator (Harvey Steiman): Great color, loaded with apricot, a very fine and fruity nose, fresh, nice acid, this is a dynamite wine, great acid, whao – Did we make that? pH: 2.99, TA: 0.72, RS: 7%

Overall I am very impressed with how those wines are holding. The 2007 is probably on its way down but the 2006 is still very lively (would be interesting to see how it will evolve in the next 12-24 months). I must say that 2009 is a very nice vintage and drinking just amazingly well right now. Fun exercise to line them up all like this – I’ll do that again soon with the Dry Riesling.

We are releasing a new Riesling – we have now up to 10 different Rieslings in our lineup . This new release is a 2009 Riesling that we made in what I would call the “traditional” Johannisberg style (I know, I know, we are not supposed to use this term anymore). So, what is a “J” style? Well, J’s were usually bout 2% residual sugar Riesling and picked around 22.5 Brix (Auslese ripeness level) with about 12.5% of ethanol. It was and still is today the most proeminent style in Washington State. Our version of this American favorute is slightly different (of course) in the way that it is about 2.3% residual sugar and 11.5% ethanol therefore picked at 21.5 Brix (a ripe spatlese ripeness level). Like all of our Rieslings we like to pick grapes earlier than most folks in order to contribute a lot of natural acidity to balance the sugar and also to keep a lower alcohol content. The grapes come from the Yakima Valley, a cooler climate more appropriate for this style I believe. The wine is very fruity (think mango, guava, apricot with a hint of floral notes) and refreshing, a nice addition to the portfolio that does not replicate any other Riesling we make. When I was looking at the Riesling line up a few weeks ago it dawned on me that we have a geometric RS series in our portfolio: 0-2-4-8-16! 0% RS is our Dry Riesling, 2% RS is our new Riesling, 4% RS is our Riesling made from organic grapes, 8% is our sweet Riesling and 16% is our Riesling Vin De Glaciere Selenium Vineyard. Pretty fun, no? Riesling is really enjoying a true rennaissance in this country (likethe Phoenix on this label) and we are proud to be part of it.