Five nights drinking wine from something besides a bottle

The results were uneven, and helps explain why the glass bottle still dominates packaging

We’ve discussed alternative packaging on the blog for years, so what better way to see where wine is with something other than glass bottles than to drink wine packaged in something else?

That’s what the Wine Curmudgeon did last week – five nights drinking wine at dinner from a variety of “premium” 3-liter boxes (so no Franzia) and 250-ml cans. Why dinner? Because that remains the occasion where most wine is consumed.

Sadly, the results were uneven, and reminded me why the glass bottle – despite all its flaws – still dominates wine packaging.

My thoughts after five nights with something other than glass bottles:

• Convenience. Boxes and cans don’t do well at dinner. How do you keep track of how much wine you’ve had when it comes from a box? In addition, wrestling the spout into its holder remains a challenge, as does pouring the wine into a glass. And where do you put the box when you’re eating dinner? It needs to sit on a counter, to make pouring easier, so you have to get up every time you want another glass. And finding space in a normal-sized refrigerator for chilling the box? Good luck. Cans aren’t as awkward, but opening another can after the first is empty – and disposing of the empties – remains an inconvenience.

• Quality. Uneven, which was really depressing. Most of the canned wine tasted like it should, though some had a noxious, sour aroma when first opened (which I’m told isn’t unusual). The box quality, sadly, was all over the place. One rose was undrinkable, tannic and bitter. One red blend was OK, but nothing more. In this, boxed wine consistency hasn’t improved much over the years – decent one year, not so decent the next.

• Price. Again, uneven. The point of 3-liter boxes is price, and most figure out to $6 to $8 a bottle. Hence, the theory is we’ll put up with crappier wine since it costs less. But, as my experience with the rose proved, that’s not always the case. Just the opposite is true with cans – prices are higher because we’re paying for the convenience. For dinner, though, that means a $10 bottle of wine costs $15. And what’s the point of that?