As we mentioned in one of our first articles debating the merits of the Climate Change and Wine conference, feeling a little frustrated that adaptation was given more weight than prevention, we were left with two predominant voices who appeared to agree that prevention, albeit important, must go hand in hand with adaptation. One Richard Smart, an internationally renowned viticulturalist, suggested that even if we globally cut carbon emissions, it would still take another fifty years before the climate would balance itself out. Hence, he emphasized acceptance toward change, and that we as an industry need to push forward in our research, while investing in adaptive measures now. Some of his suggestions included investing in real estate to ensure a prosperous future, “The warming temperatures are opening up new regions.” These “new” regions lie south of the equator in countries such as Chile, Argentina, Tasmania and New Zealand, where temperature change will be moderate as compared to the northern half of the globe, containing greater land mass and less water to absorb the sun. Cooler and/or higher regions are also worthy of consideration, as is research into varietals that will be better suited to your future regional climate. However, keep in mind that although Richard accepts climate change as inevitable, he also adamantly advocats political activism on behalf of concerned citizens who want to act now.

Miguel Torres, owner of the legendary Spanish winery, Bodegas Torres (podcast with Miguel’s daughter, Mireia) not only agreed wholeheartedly with Richard’s assessment, but has implemented strategic measures to both conserve resources now, while preparing for dramatic changes in the future. Señor Torres made it known that consumption was one of our greatest human faults, driving the climate to change faster than if we used in moderation and shared resources. Hence, he …

In Al Gore’s speech to us in the final hour of the II International Conference on Climate and Wine, he was asked by an attendee of the conference if children were being adequately educated on the topic of climate change. His response was simply that no, they weren’t, but that we needed to take great caution when we do choose to educate them on the inevitable, considering that it is they who will see the most dire consequences of this phenomenon. And if, and when, we do decide to step up to the plate and present them with the facts of figures of tomorrow’s changing world, we must do so with great caution so that they may not look upon the future with fear and hesitation, but rather hope. And when they look back to the past at their parent’s efforts during a time of change and instability, they will do so with pride that their ancestors stood up against great odds to make the hard choices necessary to permit change towards a greener, healthier, more balanced, existence: an existence that changed its focus from consumption to preservation, from greed to sharing and from fear to openness.

As an educator, I took these ideas to heart, because I still feel that the majority of people look at this issue as if it is too big, too large and too ominous to tackle. And because CO2 is odorless and invisible, we can’t quantifiably measure our contribution against it. If we had a little dial mounted in our kitchen tracking each time we chose not to use our car, chose energy efficient appliances or recycled our waste, maybe this would make a difference, but for now, many feel as if they cannot do anything to significantly change …