Oh dear, another alarming press release from Stanford’s Noah Diffenbaugh. Apparently according to his super duper climate model, climate change is going to affect only premium wine grapes. So it appears Ripple, Franzia Box wine, and MD 20/20 are safe from climate change. Winos everywhere are rejoicing.
Diffenbaugh must not get his data from GISS, because they show the temperature as significantly higher in Napa, CA over 100 years ago and the last 7 years of data is downtrending sharply.
It seems the hottest annual temperature in Napa since 1900 was during the 1998 El Niño peak. Hmmm. Of course even that might be elevated a bit, since I found the USHCN station is sited next to an air conditioner vent and a large parking lot.
And in Walla Walla, Washington, another area studied, there appears to be no century scale trend in the data:
But what effect do observations have over the power of models and worrisome press releases sounding the alarm? Apparently none. Thank goodness we can safely exclude the last 110 years of data in favor of the model.
From Stanford University – Global warming could alter the US premium wine industry in 30 years, says Stanford study
Higher temperatures could significantly impact California and other premium winegrowing regions of the United States in the next 30 years, according to a new study led by Stanford University climate scientists.
Writing in the June 30 edition of Environmental Research Letters, the scientists report that by 2040, the amount of land suitable for cultivating premium wine grapes in high-value areas of northern California could shrink by 50 percent because of global warming. However, some cooler parts of Oregon and Washington State could see an increase in premium grape-growing acreage due to warming, according to the study.
These results come on the heels of the researchers’ 2006 climate study, which projected that as much as 81 percent of premium wine grape acreage in the U.S. could become unsuitable for some varietals by the end of the century.
“Our new study looks at climate change during the next 30 years – a timeframe over which people are actually considering the costs and benefits of making decisions on the ground,” said Noah Diffenbaugh, an assistant professor of environmental Earth system science and a center fellow at the Woods Institute for the Environment at Stanford, who co-authored both studies.
Climate change, from global to local
Most U.S. wine comes from the West Coast. California alone produces on average more than 5 million gallons per year, accounting for about 90 percent of the nation’s total wine production, according to the Wine Institute, a trade organization representing California winemakers. The institute estimated the retail value of the state’s wine industry in 2010 at $18.5 billion.

The new study focused on premium wines – the 25 percent most expensive wines on the market – and how global warming could affect growing conditions in four premium wine-producing counties by 2040: Napa and Santa Barbara counties in California, Yamhill County in Oregon’s Willamette Valley and Walla Walla County in Washington’s Columbia Valley.
“We focused on these counties because their mild climates have made them major sources of high-quality grapes, and because they represent both cool and warm growing conditions,” Diffenbaugh said.
But that could change, and soon.
“There will likely be significant localized temperature changes over the next three decades,” Diffenbaugh said. “One of our motivations for the study was to identify the potential impact of those changes, and also to identify the opportunities for growers to take action and adapt.”
Climate change for lovers of fine wine
The study was based on the assumption that there will be a 23 percent increase in atmospheric greenhouse gases by 2040, which could raise the average global temperature by about 1.8 degrees Fahrenheit (1 degree Celsius) – a conservative scenario, according to Diffenbaugh. “World governments have said that to reduce the negative impacts of climate change, global warming should be limited to an increase of 1 degree Celsius,” he added.
To predict how much land area will be suitable for premium wine grape cultivation in coming decades, Diffenbaugh and his colleagues used a very high-resolution computer model that incorporated local, regional and global conditions, including factors such as coastal wind speeds and ocean temperatures. The researchers compared their simulations to actual weather data collected between 1960 and 2010 to see if their model could accurately “predict” past temperatures.
Using the climate model and the historical weather data, the researchers predicted that by 2040, all four counties are likely to experience higher average temperatures during growing seasons, along with an increase in the number of very hot days when the thermometer reaches 95 F (35 C) or above.
In the experiment, the scientists divided premium grape varieties into separate categories based on their tolerance to different temperature ranges. For example, Napa Valley – widely known for its pinot noir, cabernet sauvignon and other premium wines – has historically experienced growing seasons with an average temperature of less than 68 F (20 C) and fewer than 30 very hot days. Grapes that thrive in that climate have done well there.
According to the study, the average temperature in Napa Valley during the growing season could increase as much as 2 F (1.1 C), with the number of very hot days increasing by 10. As a result, the amount of land with historically hospitable growing conditions could shrink by half over the next three decades, the study found. In Santa Barbara County, the amount of suitable grape-growing acreage with similar climate conditions is projected to decline by more than 20 percent as temperatures rise.
“I was surprised that local temperature changes could have such a big impact on an important industry with only 1 degree Celsius of global warming.” Diffenbaugh said.
The study also predicted higher temperatures in Oregon and Washington by 2040, but with potentially different outcomes for winegrowers. Oregon’s Willamette Valley could see a slight increase in the amount of total suitable acreage and a large increase in area suitable for more valuable varieties, according to the study. But in Washington’s Columbia Valley, varietals that are sensitive to severely hot days could see a 30 percent reduction in suitable land area, the results showed.
Risky business
The researchers also looked at how much land could be available to growers who adapt to warmer conditions, such as by planting heat-tolerant vines or altering their cultivation practices. The study found that suitable acreage in Napa and Santa Barbara counties could actually be increased if growers are able to produce quality grapes that can tolerate up to 45 very hot days and average temperatures of 71 F (22 C) in the growing season. However, varieties currently grown in those conditions tend to produce considerably lower wine quality and value, the authors noted.
Winegrowers, with their knowledge of which cultivation techniques are most appropriate in a given climate, could benefit from the study’s forecasts of temperature conditions, Diffenbaugh said.
“Climate change over the next few decades is of particular relevance for the wine industry,” he said. “It’s a big investment to put plants in the ground. They’re slow to mature, and once they mature they’re productive for a long time.”
Some decisions growers make now could affect their vineyards in 30 years, he added, whether they consider the potential effects of local climate change or not. Moving a vineyard to a cooler location or planting different varietals could be costly for winegrowers, the study said. But in areas where less drastic temperature change is likely, growers may be able to maintain the quality of their grapes by using existing cultivation and winemaking techniques, Diffenbaugh said. Possible strategies include special trellis systems that shade vines, using irrigation to cool plants and adjusting fermentation processes in the winery.
“It’s risky for a grower to make decisions that consider climate change, because those decisions could be expensive and the climate may not change exactly as we expect,” Diffenbaugh said. “But there’s also risk in decisions that ignore global warming, because we’re finding that there are likely to be significant localized changes in the near term.”
“Humans are amazingly resilient, and individual growers will of course make decisions as they read the signs on the ground,” he added. “We’re trying to understand how the climate that works so well for growing great wine grapes right now might be affected by even modest global warming. We can’t know the future before it happens, but if we don’t ask the question, we may be surprised when reality unfolds.”
Other coauthors of the study are Michael White of Utah State University, Gregory Jones of Southern Oregon University and Moetasim Ashfaq of Oak Ridge National Laboratory, a former postdoctoral researcher at Stanford.
The study was supported in part by a National Science Foundation CAREER award to Noah Diffenbaugh.
This article was written by Sascha Zubryd, a science-writing intern at the Woods Institute for the Environment at Stanford University.


@Ian George and Crosspatch,
I hope you two aren’t laboring under the mistaken idea that I am a warmist (or even a lukewarmist). The point I made above about there being some warming in the past in this region and that warming having something to do with some people’s agricultural crop preferences is not controversial.
I personally do not rely on GISS to produce anything of lasting value with respect to temperature records. It has been fiddled with at every level by people whose motives are suspect. It is my personal recollections that I rely upon as I have lived here for nearly 40 years. While my memories are imperfect, I suspect however that they are more reliable than the goosed records of GISS (even those they call RAW).
Ian, it was you that asked if I had anything to back my statement about the past warming. Sorry if by giving you the GISS link I offended you and got you going, but it was you who asked.
My position on AGW, CAGW, global warming, climate change, or whatever its adherents wish to call it is that it is clever scam cooked up by some wolves in environmentalist clothing whose real goals have nothing to do the environment.
I grant that there is some valid science at its core and there are some real scientists working on some valid ideas within the overall framework (otherwise I do not think it would have gotten so far), but the central idea of it – that CO2 drives the climate – has been shown to be false. This was done to some degree back in the 1990’s, but the cooling of the last 10 years really drives it home.
Yup – http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&q=Walla+Walla,+WA&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wl
@Doug in Seattle
I am just making the point that there has been no warming in the continental US since 1998. That’s 13 years of no warming at all yet we still see people in the US putting out “information” about what damage “the warming” is going to do. There just hasn’t been any. That’s the point I am making, and the data doesn’t come from any “denier” site, it comes from the US government’s own database.
Pamela Gray says:
July 2, 2011 at 3:41 pm
“If red wine is too acidic/fruity and leaves not that warm glowing caramel aftertaste but a burning gut instead, cut it with a good sherry. It improves bad red wine tremendously. I’m not a fan of white so I don’t know how to improve a bad bottle of that stuff.”
I imagine that wine snobs will be OMGing your comment but rest assured that you are in good company. I never buy an unproven red wine without adding a bottle of good sherry as insurance. If the red is good, you still can enjoy the sherry separately.
….A question for Doug: does the temperature record and the precipitation record for the last 30 years support your remark for the Northwest’s wine growing regions individually, and also for the Northwest as a whole? ….
Grapes grow in the various Eastern Washington Appalachia desert BECAUSE there exists the ability to draw water from the Columbia and other aquifer. Without that water, central Washington would return to the desert that it is. No grapes, no row crops, no fruit trees, no asparagus, no corn, no potatoes, or tomatoes and the economy that it generates.
Same with California, no irrigation, no grapes, or other produce. One should worry more of extended cold years. Heat is the crop producer, not lack of heat. Dry heat gives us the intensity of flavor, as demonstrated by the art of talian Aaerone.
Personal preference: It’s hard to beat a fine bottle of California Cabernet; however I enjoy some fine WA cabs as well.
Dry heat gives us the intensity of flavor, as demonstrated by the art of talian Aaerone.
Here’s to the fine J Lohr CabI had last evening. Cheers!
Doug
‘I hope you two aren’t laboring under the mistaken idea that I am a warmist (or even a lukewarmist). ‘
No. I was supporting your view but I was a bit clumsy in the way I phrased the original comment. I totally agree with you that GISS has manipulated the data and posted later comments to that effect (see above).
In the late fall/early winter of 1978 I was working on a radar antenna on an oil tanker at Cherry Point (North of Seattle). The wind was recording >40 kts and the temperature uncorrected for chill factor was 18º. That, sir, was cold. More so since I’d been living in Washington only since May, having moved here from Newport Beach, CA. Then we had the ice storms, more wind storms, and it does rain some, here. We also get crippling snow fall – crippling only because Seattlites don’t yet know how to drive in the stuff, and the threat of 1/4″ of snowfall is a stay-home event.
Good news for our new crop of Minnesota vintners? 😉
crosspatch says:
July 2, 2011 at 8:23 pm
1998? That El Nino? Come on, isn’t that pretty serious cherry picking? Try shifting the time period one year earlier and you get -0.47 degF / Decade.
Check out global data at http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/wti/from:1997/plot/wti/from:1998/trend/plot/wti/from:1997/to:2010.33/trend – click on “raw data” to see the trends:
#Time series (wti) from 1979 to 2011.33
#Selected data from 1998
#Least squares trend line; slope = 0.00359712 per year
1998 0.214075
2011.33 0.262037
#Time series (wti) from 1979 to 2011.33
#Selected data from 1997
#Selected data up to 2010.33
#Least squares trend line; slope = 0.00679967 per year
1997 0.179855
2010.33 0.270518
I’m a climate skeptic, but I really, really hate cherry picking. If you play around for a while on WoodForTrees or the NCDC site you can demonstrate pretty much anything you want….
This is mildly interesting – the last three 10 year periods.
Your cherry picking may vary.
http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/wti/from:1977/plot/wti/from:1981.33/to:1991.33/trend/plot/wti/from:2001.33/to:2011.33/trend/plot/wti/from:1991.33/to:2001.33/trend
I think we may have a math error or typo here:
“California alone produces on average more than 5 million gallons (of wine) per year…the retail value of the state’s wine industry in 2010 at $18.5 billion.”
That would come to about $3700 per gallon on average. Premium wines, but sheesh!
Cold stress and short seasons have been the rule not the exception in NorCal for the past several years.
We have already proven we can reduce vine stress by 40-50% and water use by 30-40%
by using our Genesis Soils Rhizo-Gen mycorrhizal components with our proprietary technologies. Canopy management in concert with many other cultural practices can and will defer the additional heat stress of this minute but significant change in temperatures.
It makes no sense to me to question the authority of possible change in temperatures by global changes, I simply do not know. They may be right, and thank god we have the ability to change the way we practice in “slightly” warmer conditions as a proactive stance!
Bruce Coulthard/ Owner Founder.
http://www.genesis-soils.com