I’m sorry, but your argument makes absolutely no sense in light of verse 10.
You can’t get “well drunk” on unfermented beverages, so that would be a nonsensical statement. Unfermented beverages also do not produce the effect that is spoken of, where, as people consume them, they become impaired in detecting the quality of the beverage (which is why people bring out the cheap wine when people are drunk). Only alcoholic beverages produce the effect.
Not only that, but it flies in the face of common sense. People have always, since the beginning of recorded history, served alcoholic beverages at wedding ceremonies. That is why everyone who reads this verse assumes it is speaking of wine, because it is a completely understandable situation we can all relate to. Only people from cultures like the Mohammedans and Puritans (who came much later than the NT) would think that a wedding might NOT serve alcoholic beverages.
So, if we try to read verse 10 as talking about unfermented beverages, it makes no sense at all. Now, God does not write things in the Bible that are nonsense. So if the equation of: your interpretation + the Bible = nonsense, then it is obviously your interpretation that produced the nonsense.
Why don't you go back and read it without being so overwhelmed by your own viewpoint that you cannot see that the phrase containing "well-drunk" does not refer to this event(the interpretation of μεθυσθωσιν means "they being intoxicated"). The phrase is just the governor's general observation of how the sponsors of typical feasts usually organize their programs. Clearly, it does not refer to how this wedding was conducted. His introductory phrase says NOTHING about the prior schedule of this particular event, nor does he say whether or not he had been provided liquid refreshments of any kind to serve so far.
The reason you don't think my argument makes sense is because you do not grasp what the text says. So read it very carefully, and don't read it from a biased English translation or from a biased mindset.