peatpeat

Peat Policy at Glendoick Gardens


Last update September 2021

In line with UK government advice, Glendoick Gardens Ltd runs a reduced peat-use policy for its nursery stock production. Unlike almost all other UK rhododendron and azalea growers, most of Glendoick's stock is grown in the open ground, requiring almost no peat to be used. Following extensive trials, in Glendoick's open ground production, less than 10% peat is used as a planting medium. The remaining 90% consists of top soil,  loam, composted bark and composted conifer needles and chipped trimmings. We estimate that our open-ground rhododendron production is the most peat-friendly in the U.K. At Glendoick Gardens, peat is used mainly in propagation and container production. Most peat used is from renewable sources in Scandinavia and the Baltic states. (see below).

Glendoick still uses peat in propagation and in its container mixes (50% peat) as we believe that Ericaceous plants (which grow naturally on peat) require at least some of it for best results. I visited the Ericaeous peat free trials last summer near Cambridge and was dismayed at the terrible results of all the Ericaceous composts tested. All turned the plants grown in them stunted and yellow. So even if we wanted a suitable ericaceous alternative, there is not one available yet.

Peat: what is so good about it?

  • It has a low pH ideal for Ericaceous plants. Indeed most of the world's Ericaceous plants have evolved to grow on and in peat.

  • Peat's high water and air holding capacities which mean that it can retain and subsequently provide moisture and air to the roots of plants.

  • It holds added nutrients available for plant growth as required.

  • It is an easy material to handle.

  • It is normally free of pathogens.
  • It is the best component available for commercial container production and propagation.
  • it is freely available with vast reserves all over Scotland, Ireland and Northern Europe.

 

The Peat Debate: how on earth did we get there?


Glendoick Gardens believes that the environmental pressure on reduction of peat use by the horticultural industry is valid in protecting lowland UK peat bogs as few such habitats still exist. The campaign, began in the 1980s by David Bellamy, was successful in protecting many remaining lowland peat habitats. I spoke to David Bellamy shortly before he died, about the way the peat debate has evolved. He was dismayed at the attempts to ban peat use entirerly as this was not the purpose of his campaign.

Somehow, the worthwhile protection of these lowland peat bogs has lead, almost completely without justification, to a national compaign casting peat use as 'sinful' or morally wrong. There are several arguments put forward to justify the enforced reduction in use of peat but most of these are dubious at best and often factually inaccurate. 

Claims made to justify banning peat. Do they stand up?

1. The main claim leveled is that peat is a 'non-renewable' like oil. 

This is simply not true. If carefully harvested from live peat bogs, peat is a renewable resource and can be classified as a 'slowly renewable biofuel'. This can be clearly demonstrated in countries such as Sweden where peat is grown and harvested rather like tree plantations. Scientists have estimated that the annual growth in peat far exceeds the amount that is extracted each year, so it is in essence a renewable resource if well managed.

In November 2000 the European Parliament amended Article 21 of the Council Directive on the promotion of electricity from renewable energy sources in the international electricity market, adding peat to the list of renewable energy sources. 

2. It is claimed is that the world is somehow running short of peat. 

Again this is simply not true.

The area from Norway to Siberia is, rather simply put, the world's largest peat bog. Canada's is almost as large. A fraction of 1% of the reserves have probably been extracted. On a global scale peatland is not rare nor threatened, the earth is known to generate around 600 million cubic metres per year but only a maximum 200 million cubic metres is extracted each year. So unlike coal or oil, the amount is increasing year on year. Most of the land where the peat is, has little or no alternative use. Compared to farming, fishing, golf courses, or any other major land-use, peat production which is carefully managed, is a sound, sustainable and 'green' activity.

Looking at Scotland for example, around 50% of the land is peat covered as can be seen on the maps, linked to below.

Map of the deep peat deposits in Scotland http://www.macaulay.ac.uk/explorescotland/soils_bp2.html

And this of heather moorland http://www.macaulay.ac.uk/explorescotland/lcs_sc_hm2.html

3. The threat to rare ecosystems from peat extraction: 

UK. lowland peatland habitats are scarce and mostly protected. Most of these were drained long ago for farming and forestry. In the UK upland peatland is not threatened. Peat producers have already agreed not to seek or to extract from areas with a conservation value. Peat Extraction for Horticulture is NOT the main cause of damage to the UK peat lands. In fact, since 1960 only just over 500 hectares have been introduced for peat production whereas 95,000 hectares have been lost to forestry. The peatlands of Great Britain cover an area of some 17 500 km2, most in north and west. Scotland has c. 68%, England 23% and Wales 9%. There are about 1 700 km2 of peatland in Northern Ireland, mostly located in the western half of the province.

In Great Britain, commercialised peat extraction takes place on only some 5400 ha (equivalent to about 0.3% of total peatland). Almost all peat industry output is for the horticultural market; there is however still quite extensive (but unquantified) use of peat as a domestic fuel in the rural parts of Scotland and Northern Ireland. 

4. Carbon Sink. 

Peat bogs soak up carbon dioxide. So does farmland. It is claimed that is we harvest peat this CO2 will be lost. But in fact this is not the case. Peat lands used for extracting peat can be quite easily restored. Draining the peat bogs can be reversed. The Department of the Environment, Peat Producers Association and many other conservation bodies are all working together to restore the peatlands back to their natural state. The carbon sink impact of peat extraction is negligible if the land is correctly managed. This is simply a matter of legislation.

The effect on peat extraction on global warming is complex.

'Temporal studies of peatlands reveal that they may act as CO2 sinks in some years and sources in others, depending on climate. Emissions of CH4 and N2O are similarly variable in space and time.' 

In addition, the production of methane in peat bogs contributes to global warming and at best peat bogs are carbon neutral in terms of climate change. (Implementation of an Emissions Inventory for UK Peatlands Client Department for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy 2017)

From 'Peatlands and Climate change' Available as a pdf from this link. http://www.peatsociety.org/index.php?id=236

Every time a farmer ploughs a field, CO2 is lost into the atmosphere. This is a consequence of turning soil. All soil. Peat is just one example of this.

The release of carbon dioxide is mostly released when peat is drained and not when it is extracted, so this is the key: it has little to do with peat use in horticuture:'

 'When peatlands are drained, the peat is no longer conserved. It decomposes, which leads to vigorous releases of carbon dioxide. It is estimated that the total carbon emissions from degraded peatlands currently amount to almost half of the worldwide emissions from land use changes and Forestry (lUlUcF) and to 5% of the total global anthropogenic carbon emissions' 

Factbook for UNFCCC policies on peat carbon emissions    authors:  Alex Kaat, Wetlands International, Hans Joosten, Greifswald University

Implementation of an Emissions Inventory for UK Peatlands Client Department for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy 2017

SUMMARY AND KEY FINDINGS

The UK’s peatlands are estimated to occupy a total area of around 3.0 million hectares (12.2 % of the total UK land area).

Of the UK’s total peat area, approximately 640,000 ha (22%) is estimated to remain in a near-natural condition. This area of near natural bog and fen is believed to be continuing to act as a significant net sink for CO2, of c 1,800 kt CO2 yr-1 . This CO2 sink is however counterbalanced by similar emissions of methane (CH4) when its greater 100-year Global Warming Potential is taken into account making near-natural peatlands close to carbon neutral.

A further 1,213,000 ha (41%) of the UK peat area remains under some form of semi-natural peatland vegetation, affected to varying degrees by human activities including drainage, burn management, and livestock grazing. This has led to drying of the peat, loss of peat-forming species and erosion, converting these areas into net Greenhouse Gas sources. Although the emissions per unit area of modified peatland are relatively low, their great extent makes them significant contributors to overall UK peatland GHG emissions

Arable cropland occupies just 7% of the UK’s peat area, but has the highest GHG emissions per unit area of any land-use, with high rates of both CO2 and N2O emissions as a result of drainage and fertilisation. As a result, cropland is estimated to emit 7,600 kt CO2e yr-1 , 32% of total UK peat GHG emissions.

Industrial peat extraction for horticultural use occupies a comparatively small proportion of the UK’s peat area (4,600 ha).

Since 1990, an estimated 95,000 ha of UK peatland have been subject to some form of active restoration intervention, of which around 70,000 ha has involved some form of re-wetting. These activities have occurred in all of the UK administrations, with the majority having taken place in areas of modified blanket bog. Some re-wetting and restoration to peatland vegetation has also occurred in areas of plantation forest, cropland, grassland and peat extraction. In total, these activities are estimated to have generated an emissions reduction since 1990 of 423 kt CO2e yr-1 . 

Future emissions projections to 2050 based on a set of illustrative scenarios suggest that currently legislated peat restoration measures (mainly the phasing out of peat extraction in England) will have limited impact on emissions, but that current levels of ambition on peat restoration in all four UK countries could deliver over 4 Mt CO2e yr-1 of emissions reductions by 2050. A more ambitious restoration scenario, including removal of 50% of forest planted on peat since 1980, could deliver over 8 Mt CO2e yr-1 of emissions abatement. However none of our scenarios incorporated large-scale cessation of drainage-based agriculture on lowland peat, which (as it accounts for 60% of all current emissions) placed effective limits on the degree of emissions abatement that could be achieved.

Why does the Environmental Lobby Pedal deliberate or ignorant missinformation?

The anti-peat use loby seems happy to publish information which is simply not accurate which is then copied, or misscopied by garden writers perpetuating the false information. For example Joe Hashman's otherwise useful book Pocket Guide to the Edible Garden states:

'During the latter part of the 20th century 94% of British peat lands were destroyed by the horticulture industry.' His source for this is a Friends of the Earth claim that ‘less than six per cent of Britain's original lowland raised peat bog habitat remains in a near natural condition’. 

The Friends of the Earth statistics refer to lowland peat bogs only. Most peat in the UK is in highland peat bogs. And most of the lowland peat bogs were destroyed by draining them for farmland and forrestry and not for horticulture. Joe Hashman has apologised to me for this error. But it wont stop this sort of information being spread around.

Horticulture seems to be unfairly blamed by the anti-peat lobby: The reality is that horticulture accounts for only about 2% of peat use. Highland peat on slopes has limited carbon capture and so could be harvested with little environmental impact. 

Most peat is burned for fuel. World-wide it may be that as little as 0.1% of the world's peat is being used in horticulture. For some reason, UK environmentalists are unfairly pinning everything onto horticulture.

Banning Peat, England's Unilateral Approach. Is it sensible or desirable?

 

No other European Country has taken the steps that the UK Government are advocating.  Germany is considering restricting peat use. There is clearly no perceived problem in the rest of Europe using peat for horticulture. I have contacted nursery assocications in Holland, France, Germany, Scandinavia and Italy and currently all are perfectly free to use peat in horticulture. This means that UK producers are going to be unfairly penalised if Dutch and German growers are allowed to carry on using peat in their container production. U.K. Governments dont appear to be proposing the banning of importation of plants grown in peat, which is the only fair way to proceed if they wont allow UK producers to grow in peat.

So why is that the UK alone has a fully fledged anti-peat lobby which has chosen to use all sorts of rather underhand propaganda to further its aims. As has been explained, few of its arguments stand up to scrutiny. 

 

The Best way Forward for peat use in horticulture


The UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has changed the classification of peat from a 'fossil fuel' to a 'renewable biomass resource' in recognition that peat can indeed by harvested and cultivated sustainably. 

At Glendoick, we believe that limited sustainable peat production for horticulture is fully justifiable and the anti-peat lobby are guilty of exaggeration and misinformation. Particularly in propagation, there is no substitute for peat. And many of the alternatives, such as coir, are have very unsound environmental credentials: this is 3rd world organic matter which should be used by local farmers, not shipped expensively round the world. It really is not sound 'green' sense. It needs to be washed and heat sterlised, both of which have envirnonmental consequences.

Are peat free composts any good?

Peat free composts are fine for soil amelioration and for growing most plants in the garden. They are less effective for container growing as they tend to decompose in an unpredictable pattern.

The dilemma for the gardener is that peat based composts are significantly better than peat free composts for sowing seeds and potting on young plants. Time after time trials reveal this to be true.

Which reported that composts with at least 50% peat were far better than peat free composts in 2010. Which compost trials

Beechgrove Garden trials in 2010 growing potatoes in containers found poor results with peat free composts compared to composts containing at least 50% peat. (Search the factsheets on their website for the results) Beechgrove Garden

The RHS trials published in January 2011 showed the poor results germinating seedlings and potting on young plants most peat alternatives, including loam, wood fibre and coir particularly for plants with very small seeds.

Peat free composts tend to be inconsistent, unstable and often require the addition of extra food and trace elements and many gardeners have complained to me of the poor results with peat free composts. Coir, often used as a replacement for peat is shipped from Sri Lanka which cannot be good for the environment.

Jumping on the anti-peat bandwagon

The RHS, National Trust RBG, Kew & Edinburgh and other influential organisations, as well as t.v. presenters such as Monty Don should have a little more courage than simply to jump on this bandwagon. Instead they should appraise themselves of the facts and have the courage to portray both sides of the argument. Rather than condemn peat they should explain the facts and defend the sustainable and sensible of peat. At the moment the only reduction in peat seems to be in sales of bags marked 'peat'. If the bag says 'multipurpose compost' or 'ericaceous compost' it sells as well as ever. Such bags usually contain 40-90% peat.

Many well informed gardeners and writers such as Peter Seabrook and the best selling author Dr Hessayon (author of the 'Expert' series) take a pragmatic view. Dr Hessayon writes: 'dont use peat as for overall soil improvement- it is not efficient and garden compost and manure will do a much better job. However moss peat has a role to play in planting and seed composts where there are no substitutes of equal merit' (The Bedside Book of the Garden


Horticulture Week report on peat at COP 26  November 2021

IPS's van Berckel says demand for growing media will increase by 400% to 59m cu m to 244m cu m by 2050. There is 40m cu m current use, with 7m to 11m tonnes co2 emissions annually. 

He says:

  • demand for peat will double from 42m cu m to 80m cu m
  • percentage of peat used will fall 70% to 30% in 2025, whilst volumes double
  • coir use will rse 700% from 5m cu m to 35m cu m
  • bark from 1m cu m to 10m cu m
  • wood fibre from 2m cu m to 25m cu m
  • compost from 1m cu m to 5m cu m
  • perlite from 1.5m cu m to 10m cu m
  • stone wool from 0.9m cu m to 4m cu m
  • soils from 8m cu m to 33m cu m
  • new materials will be 23m cu m

To replace peat is a "massive challenge" despite 40 years of research. Materials are not available in the right quantities or qualities.

To help Governments and NGOs focus on the "real problems" he says percentage land use for peat extraction is 0.05% of worldwide peatlands, and CO2 emissions from drained peatlands, peat extraction is 0.3%. 

Van Berckel, of Griendtsveen AG, the Netherlands, says: "Peat is still the most important constituent of growing media, which is important for food production and climate change mitigation, for instance, by providing tree seedlings for afforestation. Worldwide demand is even increasing. Peat replacement by circular materials is already taking place, but this is often a challenge due to quality and quantity issues. Peat for horticulture is only extracted from 0.05% of all peatlands globally. The industry is committed to the Sustainable Development Goals and responsible management, e.g., via certification."

His conclusions are "we need smart solutions" to meet UN goals, including certification of peat extractions according to RPP rules.

Maureen Kuenen, of Responsibly Produced Peat (RPP), the Netherlands, says: "Responsibly Produced Peat can play an important role during the transition time needed to gradually replace peat in horticultural growing media with qualified and climate friendly materials. As long as peat needs to be used it shall come from responsible sources. RPP certification means that impact on High Conservation Values is prevented, and restoration or other wet after-use is secured. It creates opportunities for large scale restoration and paludiculture." 

Bernd Hofer, chair of IPS Commission Peatlands and Environment adds:

"Germany's National Peatland Conservation Strategy aims to reduce annual GHG emissions from peatlands by 5 million CO2 tonnes-equiv. by 2030. Only a small element of this can be achieved by phasing out peat extraction and the horticultural use of peat. In relation to the larger share, the rewetting and restoration of around 150,000 hectares of agricultural and forestry land is a major challenge, if this goal is to be achieved by 2030.


 

Glendoick director Kenneth Cox is happy to debate the use of peat in any relevent forum, and in any medium. Contact details are on our home page.

Are peat reduction targets of 90% achievable or desireable? 

The Government’s Peat Working Group initiated the search for suitable materials and this was recognised by re-naming the group in 2005 as the Horticultural Growing Media Forum (HGMF), whose focus was on delivering the peat reduction targets. Some parts of the industry have made significant progress, with the three large national retailers all achieving 50% peat replacement in their bagged product ranges. Partial dilution is becoming the norm for previously all-peat products and several manufacturers have now invested in wood fibre production plants and/or green composting facilities. Unfortunately in the UK, even with the HGMF in place, conflicts of interests, technical problems, increasing costs, reluctance and apathy have all contributed to slow progress towards achieving the 90% target for 2010. 

Mires and Peat, Volume 3 (2008), Article 08, www.mires-and-peat.net ISSN 1819-754X

 


 

Peat and the Environment in Scandinavia 

Swedish peatlands and Swedish peat constitute a natural resource that renews itself through steady and relentless plant growth. The peat industry's extraction of peat, 4-5 million cubic meters per year, is barely a quarter of a year's growth. Between one and two thousandth of the peat-covered ground is made use of for the present. Additionally, thanks to the fact that new drainage has practically stopped in agriculture and forestry operations, it is now highly likely that the total area of peat grounds is also increasing in size. 

Scandinavian Peat Extraction Supervision 
Before a peat extraction operation can be approved in Sweden, the county administration or alternatively the environmental protection agency, perform a careful examination of the site. This is done to evaluate the proposed operation's impact on the area with regards to public benefit as well as the environmental effects. The operations that are finally approved will have been judged suitable and not in conflict with legitimate preservation interests. In addition, extensive rules apply to the activities. 


The Peat Debate

Many Journalists and interested parties have contacted me to say that this is the only balanced account of the peat debate that is available. All the literature and papers have an agenda: envirnmental (anti) or peat producing (pro) and both sides tend to ignore the counter arguments. As usual the truth seems to be more nuanced and complex than either side are willing to conceed. Feel free to quote and link to these pages.

 

Peat: what is so good about it?

The Peat Debate: how on earth did we get there?

Claims made to justify banning peat. Do they stand up?

Why does the Environmental Lobby pedal deliberate or ignorant missinformation?

Banning Peat, England's Unilateral Approach. Is it sensible or desirable?

Is the Proposed Peat ban legal Under EC law?

The Best way Forward for peat use in horticulture

Are peat reduction targets of 90% achievable or desireable? 

Experts pour scorn on Defra peat research for failing to reach meaningful conclusion

DEFRA PUBLICATION Consultation findings June 2011

Peat and the Environment in Scandinavia 

Comparing C02 emissions for peat to other growing media per metric tonne

UK peat greenhouse gas emissions (CO2)

Peat Extraction & harvest 36kg    per metric tonne
Processing 24kg
Transport 42-123kg
End of life 543kg
Carbon storage -136kg
Total 509-590kg


Total CO2 emissions from other growing media per metric tonne

Green compost 12-93kg
Coir 113-350kg
Bark 82-85kg
Wood fibre 56-145kg
Perlite 736-817kg
Vermiculite 772-853kg

http://randd.defra.gov.uk/Document.aspx?Document=IF0154_9283_FRP.pdf       REPORT IN FULL HERE

 

 
Glendoick Garden Centre Directions Logo