Finding a sustainable alternative to peat
Banning the commercial sale of peat has been on the environmental ‘to do’ list for over 30 years and is still to be achieved. DEFRA has announced a partial ban to be introduced in 2024, but whether it survives the proposed burning of regulations is debatable. Making the ban stick must be a ‘proof point’ on the government’s commitment to environmental protection and should be a key ambition in the efforts of NGOs to make government meet their conservation commitments.
Protecting peatlands has been recognised by the Committee on Climate Change as being essential in the shift towards Net Zero. As well as being important for biodiversity, peatlands store vast quantities of carbon helping offset the effect of human activities. Hastening the transition away from peat to more sustainable alternatives is the sort of challenge for which I established Sizzle. It is important, stubborn, requires collaborative solutions and new approaches.
With support from the Esmee Fairbairn Foundation, I have spoken to a wide array of experts from all sectors seeking to understand the opportunities and barriers that exist. The research will provide further momentum towards the shift away from peat and hasten the introduction of an effective ban.
As with all campaigns, there is no ‘silver bullet’ and a range of co-ordinated changes are required in five areas.
1. New collaborative partnerships are required
It is estimated that 1.7 million cubic metres of material is required annually to replace peat. Finding something that has the stability, consistency and growing qualities of peat is complex but possible. It requires changes in industry practices and the provision of a range of materials. One such material is green and food waste. To maximise this potential, new partnerships are required between the waste sector, local authorities and horticulture.
2. The role of consumers
In addition to lobbying, there is a significant role that consumers can play. Many are unaware of the importance of peat in the transition towards Net Zero and consequently use it as a mulch or soil enhancer for which other better options exist. Changing in purchasing habits will significantly drop demand.
More home composting would make a massive difference. If 3 million gardeners got composting and produced 150 litres of compost that would equal 450,000 cubic meters of compost that would fill the peat free replacement gap. This change in habit would reduce waste collection costs for local authorities which will be increasingly important with the government proposing that all households should have a separate food waste collection service from 2025.
3. A change in messaging
The framing of the conversation around a ‘ban’ has created an easy target for those opposing the legislation as they can point to it being anti-competitive, negative and difficult to achieve in the short-term for certain plant types. In reality the transition is supported by many progressive businesses within the sector. These businesses understand that the shift will move the industry to a more circular economy, will create green jobs and be part of the fundamental changes required to cope with the impact that climate change will unleash on gardening and growing.
The voice of these progressive companies needs to be amplified by NGOs, influencers and media to demonstrate to legislators that a transition is possible, has significant benefits and will be welcomed by many in the sector.
4. Innovation is required
The peat debate has become insular and technocratic with little innovative and entrepreneurial thinking being introduced. This needs to change as there are opportunities to create new products and services which can hasten the tradition.
5. Better NGO campaigning
Getting the peat ban across the line has become a Cinderella issue for many of the large conservation organisations, this needs to change as does their campaign tactics. The Defra announcement provides NGOs with a tangible opportunity to hold the government to account on environmental commitments.
Whilst remaining committed to the introduction of legislation, NGOs should seek to work more constructively with the progressive elements of the horticulture sector and acknowledge that exceptions will need to be made on the ban to allow added time to deal with some of the hard to address issues and ensure there are no unintended consequences of a blanket approach.
The Esmee backed research will seek to create a more informed debate, generate new areas of collaboration and potentially lead to a localised trial testing some of the more experimental solutions. The overall goal is clear, to get an effective and impactful piece of legislation in place enabling the environmental groups to finally get this off the ‘to do’ list.