.jpg)
What happens when you take one of the world’s most celebrated wines and submerge it 60 metres beneath the waves, surrounded by darkness, high pressure, and the gentle rhythm of the ocean? Well, according to some of Champagne's most respected cellar masters, time stops. The ageing process grinds to a halt, with some champenois even referring to the process as "botox for my best cuvées". The theory gained traction after shipwrecked bottles resting for over a century at the bottom of the Baltic Sea, were discovered with surprisingly fresh, youthful character.
As a bona fide champagne nerd and a skeptic of glitzy PR stunts, when I read about the first bottles being submerged about a decade ago, I knew the only way to uncover the truth about ocean-aged champagnes was to experience them firsthand. So, I did what any curious (and slightly obsessed) enthusiast might do: I tracked down three of these elusive bottles, spent a small fortune, and organised a blind tasting to pit them against their cellar-aged counterparts. What we discovered led to even more questions.
The tasting took place in Singapore and, to my surprise, became the stage for Asia's first comparative tasting of multiple ocean-aged and cellar-aged champagnes. The lineup featured a modest but groundbreaking total of six bottles—three aged beneath the sea and three identical counterparts matured in cellars. The rules were straightforward:
The wines had to be identical in every aspect except for the deep-sea mission (this included vintage, disgorgement dates, sourcing, transport, and storage).
The tasting was conducted blind, with the wines served in pairs. Guests were tasked with guessing which wine had undergone ocean ageing.
Sticking to the second rule proved trickier than anticipated. as after covering the first barnacle-encrusted bottle in aluminum foil and a wine sock, and slowly pouring the first glass to my guest, a small shell clinging to the punt of the bottle broke free and landed on the table. The shell was swiftly swept away before any of the other guests could notice.
The first pair were the Brut Nature by Champagne Drappier, one of the first houses with Leclerc Briant to jump the gun on this farfetched experiment. Their wines are submerged for two years at about 30 metres underwater in stable, cool temperatures, high pressure, and minimal light. The key here is the pressure, which as any scuba diver will tell you, increases 1 bar for every 10 metres below the surface. Drappier have found the optimal pressure in their own concession off the cost of Côtes d’Armor which mirrors the 5 to 6 bar inside the bottle. However, of the dozen champagne producers sea-ageing their wines, Drappier ages the shallowest, and the longest. Charline Drappier says this depth has been a conscious choice, as they wanted the wine to “experience the gentle movement” at that depth. The others tend to go further out to sea - to the island of Ouessant - and send their wines under for 12 months at 60 metres, where the wines are left in a completely still environment under the tides. Most outsource the process to French company Amphoris, headed by Denis Drouin, who contacted me when he heard of the tasting.
Over the past decade Drouin has been working with producers from all over France, and even as far as McLaren Vale’s d’Arendberg (of course they chose the aptly named Hermit Crab Viognier blend). He has countless requests to submerge wine, spirits, and even full barrels every year, but turns away most of them as he only wants to work with clients who believe in the process. “I refuse to submerge wines for less than 12 months. Anything less would be a pure marketing exercise, and I have no interest in that”. According to Drouin, the pressure exerted on the wines at those depths is similar to that inside the bottle. Therefore he recommends one of two different locations : around 50 to 60 metres for sparkling wines, and still wines and barrels are placed at around 20 to 30. This process not only slows down ageing, but also stops evaporation. This phenomenon, known as “la part des anges”, (the angels’ share) in French refers to the millilitres that are lost during maturation, and does not take place underwater. So, apart from getting a fraction more wine, what is the point of this labour intensive exercise?
Twelve guests participated in the tasting, with ocean-aged cuvées from Champagne Drappier, Champagne André Heucq, and Champagne Hostomme, each producer putting their best wines forward with single variety champagnes. After each pair was poured, there was an eerie silence, as some of Singapore’s best champagne palates nosed, sipped and pondered. The contrasts were immediately evident, with most guests noting that the cellar-aged wines exhibited fuller, more developed profiles, while the ocean-aged bottles retained a tighter, fresher character. One participant described the difference as “chalk and cheese,” while others debated whether ocean ageing enhances or preserves certain qualities in champagne.
One notable observation was the apparent speed of ageing post disgorgement. In just one year, the cellar-aged champagnes had developed significantly in complexity and aroma. By comparison, the ocean-aged champagnes seemed to age at a different pace, retaining more restrained, youthful characteristics, and a finer mousse. This raised questions about the ideal timing for submerging bottles - whether younger or more mature wines might benefit more - and how post-disgorgement ageing might influence the outcomes and apogées.
While this method clearly offers a way to preserve youth in wine, I couldn’t help drawing a comparison with the recent phenomenon of “baby-botox” - the hordes of twenty somethings bolting to their injectors at the first sign of expression etching itself onto their perfectly smooth skin. Much like these preventive tweaks, ocean ageing seems to suspend a wine’s evolution at a particular point, preserving its freshness and structure while slowing down the natural progression of time. Just as baby botox raises questions about the balance between nature and intervention, ocean-aged champagne invites debate:
Are we preserving the wine’s character, or are we halting its journey toward complexity?
And if so, which wines are the best candidates for it? And how do we optimise this for the longest plenitudes?
Although there are only a dozen deep-sea pioneers like M. Hostomme, Drappier, and André Heucq experimenting with this technique, it does have the potential to gain broader adoption as its impacts are studied further. It is estimated there are now tens of thousands of bottles resting on sea beds in France, and more again in concessions in Scandinavia, like the Veuve Clicquot experiment off the Åland Islands.
The future of ocean ageing is anyone's guess, and it’s uncertain how quickly collectors will start using underwater time capsules to preserve their wines for future generations. Only time - and tastings - will reveal its true potential. And while the sea works its magic, it’s only a matter of time before space-aged champagne becomes our next frontier.
Having worked in the industry since 2009, Lucy is a self confessed champagne nerd. When she joined the French Chamber of Commerce to help grower producers looking to import to Australia, she fell in love with champagne, not because of the glitz & glamour but because of the undeniable mix of art & science required to create the world’s most prestigious wines. Over the past 15 years, Lucy has consulted to houses such as Jacquart, Pertois-Lebrun & Grande Charte, and was a pivotal in developing the Vranken-Pommery Monopole brands in Asia Pacific over 5 years. She has an acute knowledge of wine and specifically champagne and is passionate about bringing more interesting cuvees to wine lovers and collectors.
コメント