This is a rant, so if you don’t want to read about industry irresponsibility toward the environment, read on. What has my hackles up, still, is that far too many wine bottles are heavier than needed and that’s not good for the environment.
Cold statistics won’t solve this problem, so I’ll just say that for months I have sampled hundreds of wines, imported and American, packaged in deeply-punted bottles that weigh 
more than the standard bottle filled bottle with wine, which is 40 to 42 ounces, depending on the glass maker. That’s the total package: Bottle, label, closure and capsule. Unnecessarily heavy bottles full of wine can weigh anywhere from 50 to 70 ounces, or nearly twice the weight of a standard bottle.
Why so many extra-heavy bottles? You’d have to ask wine marketers, winery owners and winemakers. My guess is that in the arcane world of wine marketing, size is important, so a bigger, heavier bottle full of wine will attract more consumers. The other reason why there are more heavy bottles on shelves is ego. A tall, deeply-punted 57 ounce bottle of an expensive red wine is an extension of a vintner’s ego, the same kind of affliction seen in the purchase of huge houses, big cars and boats and lots of bling.
Why do so many of the heavier bottles have deep punts or push-ups in the bottom of the bottle, especially when the punt adds more glass to the bottle, increasing the weight? Originally the punt served two purposes. If the bottle was intended for sparkling wine, then a push up in the glass provided added strength to the bottle, against internal pressure. For still red wines meant for long aging, the punt provided a circular collection trough for sediment to gather. Strength is still needed in sparkling wine bottles, although advancements in bottle manufacturing have produced stronger bottles without the need for a deep punt. And since few modern red wines are cellared long enough to throw sediment, and if there is any sediment to throw, then punts in bottles intended for still wines are unnecessary.
There is a small glimmer of hope for the environment. In one of my recent tastings, I came across a standard 750ml bottle of California red wine that weighed a mere 40 ounces, a featherweight compared to the many heavy weights I see regularly. I had twelve bottles lined up, a few weighing in at 57 ounces full, so when I picked up Cellar No. 8 2009 California red wine it was noticeably lighter than the other bottles of wine. When I inquired about the lighter bottle, the reason given was a savings due to less shipping weight. I wanted to hear an expression of concern about the environment, but indirectly, the less shipping weight will help the environment.
So, what’s the point of this rant about heavy wine bottles? The ego-driven practice of using heavy glass bottle is not good for the environment: More glass, more transportation weight requiring more fuel to transport and so on. And, heavier bottles are unnecessary. What is necessary is the quality of the wine and not the size and weight of the bottle. So, consumers, e-mail wineries that insist on heavy glass bottles with your concern and the next time you find a 55-ounce bottle on the shelf, remember, bottle size has nothing to do with wine quality.
6