Ending the sale of peat: consultation analysis

8. Environmental considerations and impacts

Two questions – Q5 and Q21 – focused on the environmental impact of using peat and banning the sale of peat. However, related themes were also raised in response to other questions. This chapter presents an analysis of these environmental themes.

The vast majority of respondents - 91% of individuals and 97% of organisations - stated that they consider environmental impacts when using peat. Only two types of respondents recorded more than 10% who do not consider the environment – 32% of individual peat extractors/fuel users and 17% of other individuals.

Qualitative responses to Q5 fell into three broad categories: an awareness of the impact of using peat on the environment, how respondents avoid using peat, and problems encountered with peat-free alternatives. The first two areas accounted for most responses.

Awareness of the environmental impacts of using peat

While many commenting at Q5 did not elaborate on their considerations, others provided greater detail about their usage of peat and decisions they have made after considering the impact on the environment.

Many mentioned the role peat has in storing carbon and the negative outcomes of cutting peat. Many others commented on the role peatland plays in maintaining biodiversity in Scotland, and the positive impact restoring peatland would have for wildlife. Preservation of natural heritage and landscapes, and concerns about the degradation of peatlands, were also themes mentioned by many.

“Peat bogs store vast amounts of carbon. Peat can safely lock carbon away indefinitely, providing the peat bog is wet and has not been drained or extracted.” – Peat Free April

“As an Ecologist and botanist in my working life, I am aware of the biodiversity and other environmental benefits of protecting and restoring peatland habitat. It always seems counterintuitive to me that gardener's desire to produce an attractive garden is at the same time destroying valuable wildlife habitat. The role of peatlands in combatting climate change by sequestering carbon is also a major factor in the urgent need to move to using alternatives to peat-based composts and other products.” – Individual

While respondents spoke about the impact of peat extraction on the environment, some noted that small-scale peat extraction may be more environmentally friendly for some, especially those in rural or island communities, rather than importing and using other fuels.

“I burn peat knowing it’s a carbon sink but also know it is more environmentally kind compared to coal when sourced locally. The carbon cycle is local and follows highland traditional heritage. The heat output is good with the whole house (insulated 3 bedroom detached) being heated by a single 5kw multi fuel stove plus air ducting system to move heat throughout the house. The stove / system can heat the house easily 30’c above outdoor temperatures. This method of heating is saving mains gas usage and also electric consumption through heating, cooking & drying appliances. I view peat as an offset to dirtier carbon emitters (mains gas and ‘non green’ electricity).” - Individual

Several respondents also suggested that while they do consider the environmental factors, cutting peat is a traditional activity that is also a part of cultural heritage.

Peat-free horticulture

Many respondents highlighted their decision to use peat-free products for their gardens or in their businesses to mitigate environmental considerations. Almost half of all respondents to this question said they use peat-free compost. Many suggested they no longer use any peat products, while others are attempting to reduce their use of peat. Homemade composting was highlighted by many as their alternative to allow them to garden peat-free.

“I think peat is a superior product, however, there are some good alternatives available. I try and use good alternatives if they are available and good enough quality.” – Individual

“I'm a private gardener, creating a regenerative polyculture home garden, focused on food (edible perennials where possible), native plants/trees and other wildlife friendly gardening elements. I avoid the use of peat-based products, opting for more sustainable options like home composting, home-made comfrey fertiliser, soil association approved coconut coir etc. I also take advantage of the free compost provided by the council - and occasionally buy specialist compost from stores e.g. for acid loving plants - but again, I look for peat-free versions.” – Individual

One respondent noted that they also search out peat-free whisky.

Barriers to moving away from peat

Examples of a need to continue to use peat despite environmental concerns were provided by many. This ranged from using peat as a fuel source, which is discussed in greater detail in Chapter 7 and for the whisky industry, discussed in Chapter 6. Others continued to use peat as they felt alternatives were of poorer quality, more expensive and less available, as described in Chapter 4.

Q21. Could outcomes arising from this consultation have implications, positive or negative, for the environment?

Positive outcomes

Around eight in 10 of the 336 respondents answering Q21 cited positive implications for the environment arising from this consultation. Positive outcomes included, from most mentioned to least prevalent:

• General statements about positive improvements to the environment and climate, without any further detail being provided.
• Better protection for peatlands and more peatland restoration.
• Increased carbon storage.
• Improved biodiversity.
• Flood reduction.

“There would be clear, quantifiable positive environmental impacts of banning peat from decreased carbon emissions from growers to opportunities to restore formerly exploited peatlands. Peat-free growing media have standards to assess their sustainability in more detail, so users can make an informed choice.” – Individual

“Implementing these proposals would have significant environmental benefits in relation to climate emissions. Peatlands are the single most important terrestrial carbon store in the UK and Scotland. Our peatlands store several times more carbon than all of our forests put together. Intact peatlands have an important role to play in improving water quality, acting as flood protection, and storing water to act as a reserve during dry periods. However, over 80% of our peatlands are degraded meaning they are currently emitting carbon rather than absorbing it, as well as contributing to poor water quality… ending the demand for peat extraction and facilitating expanded peatland restoration would also result in significant biodiversity benefits.” – Stop Climate Chaos Scotland

In Q16 - Will your business be affected by a peat ban? - Several respondents highlighted an environmental impact arising from a ban on selling peat. Half mentioned positive benefits, with a few explicitly stating that a ban would align with their organisation’s mission statement or that Scotland could lead the way globally.

Potential related economic benefits were also mentioned by small numbers, including improvements to the circular economy, increased research into peat-free alternatives, and new economic avenues opening up for non-peat-related businesses.

“I see a ban on peat bringing in a positive change. Instead of employing companies to extract peat, companies will be employed to restore peatlands and make a positive change to our planet. Restored peatlands could also benefit from employing all manner of persons, including peatland restoration professionals, ecologists and wildlife specialists, carpenters and builders who could create boardwalks over peatlands, tour guides, cafe owners, etc.” - Individual

One organisation called for more action to deliver local composting.

“We’d also like to see more opportunities for semi-commercial community composting operations to be supported to collect and compost green waste providing job opportunities. There is very mixed provision of local authority green waste schemes and some great examples of local solutions to green waste recycling from within our network, however for these solutions to be scaled up where there is no existing local authority provision, community groups require support and resource to do so.” – Community Growing Forum Scotland

Negative outcomes

Just over one fifth of respondents in Q21 highlighted negative environmental outcomes possibly arising from the consultation. Most common was the environmental impact of transporting or using alternatives, including the carbon footprint of transportation, the possibility of introducing pests and diseases from using coir or alternative growing media, and the use of fuels with a worse environmental footprint in rural and island communities.

“Most non-peat-based compost is imported, often at considerable distance. Whilst banning peat sales is good for Scotland there is an increase in the fuel mileage burden of importing non peat-based products. It's not sufficient to reduce the carbon footprint by banning the sale of peat then replacing that footprint with a transportation carbon footprint. Better alternatives to peat need to be sourced at a more local level” – Individual

“Two-thirds (66%) of businesses will need to increase their water-use given the different irrigation and nutrition requirements for peat-free grown plants.” - Growing Media Taskforce

Some identified negative environmental impacts at Q16 including reduced work experience opportunities in maintaining peat banks and the countryside, undermining conservation achieved by traditional crofting, and greater use of less sustainable substrates. Two horticultural trade organisations highlighted that there could be greater water use given different irrigation and nutrition requirements for other growing media.

A few organisations, including the Peat Alliance and Growing Media Europe, highlighted how a ban on peat for horticulture could hamper other climate change mitigation. For example, cities need to be made greener to adapt to climate change, plants are needed to reforest destroyed forests, and Peat Alliance noted that the European Union has set a target to plant 30 million trees by 2030 but argued that this is unachievable without peat as a growing medium. These organisations also noted that global food security and supply chains have become more important during the pandemic and the war in Ukraine and that a ban on horticultural peat use could create further food insecurity due to lower yields and disrupted supply, and significantly increase demand for non-peat media.

Non-environmental concerns were highlighted by a few, such as increased crime, a negative impact on culture and heritage, and depopulation of rural areas.