Hi welcome to Taiga Bonzai, in this article we discuss the bureaucracy bought into being on the use of peat and the problems it is said to create via carbon release.

Introduction – evidence indicates that the use of peat also known as turf dates back to Roman times, where it was used for domestic purposes – heating and cooking. In the 7th century peat continued to play a significant economic role in countries where trees were scarce for example, Ireland, Scotland, the Netherlands and Estonia.

From a biological viewpoint peat is the formation of plant material that has not fully decayed in acidic or anaerobic conditions. It is comprised of wetland vegetation, bog plants, mosses, sedges, and shrubs. Peat as it forms holds water, which slowly creates wetter conditions allowing the area of wetland to become more extensive.

Peat is harvested usually in blocks (briquettes) is left to dry prior to being used and in some countries it is used today on an industrial scale to generate electricity; elsewhere peat is mainly used in horticultural applications.

The hue and cry – peat is unique to natural areas referred to as mires, bogs, moors or muskegs. These which cover approximately 3% of the global land surface are highly significant to global efforts in combating climate change.

According to environment correspondent Matt McGrath “Peat is the most efficient carbon sink on the planet, because peatland plants capture carbon dioxide (CO₂) naturally released from the peat, maintaining an equilibrium.” Meaning that the carbon stays in the bog, locked away from the atmosphere, but it takes thousands of years for peatlands to develop.

In the UK there has been a huge drive by the government’s Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs (Defra) to phase out the use of peat by both amateur and professional gardeners, their argument is as follows:

“When we mine peat for gardening we unlock those reserves of stored carbon and three things then happen:

1. A peat bog is drained prior to mining. It immediately starts emitting greenhouse gases. After mining, the remaining peat continues to release carbon dioxide and methane into the atmosphere

2. The carbon in peat, when spread on a field or garden, quickly turns into carbon dioxide, adding to greenhouse gas levels

3. The unique biodiversity of peat bogs is lost. Rare birds, butterflies, dragonflies and plants disappear. It is much harder to restore a peat bog than to replant a forest.”

In 2011, the UK government set voluntary targets to end sales of peat-based compost for domestic use by 2020. Natural Environment Minister Richard Benyon stated that “The horticultural industry has made real progress in reducing peat use, but I want to see peat eliminated from the amateur gardener market by 2020”.

In a letter to Environment secretary George Eustace, signed by TV gardeners Alan Titchmarsh, Kate Bradbury and James Wong, “this has been an abject failure.”

Others supporting this argument are a few garden centres including B&Q and the Blue Diamond group of garden centres, who sated they were committed to phasing out peat but gave no date as to when. Asda, Lidl and others said they had targets to reduce peat sales but not yet to end them. Wyvale Garden Centres, Morrisons and Sainsbury’s have yet to respond to the survey.

Nonetheless, gardeners love peat because it delivers superb results in gardening, but some argue that peat is not the only way to get organic matter into soil. Moreover it is not even the best way; so why is it making a comeback?

Because it’s cheap, peat bogs are cheap to buy – cheaper than farmland. You drain them, dig out the peat, put it in a bag and it’s ready to sell. Nothing sustainable can compete with peat on price, so it enjoys fat profit margins. Profit margins that the above mentioned garden centres will not relinquish; does the word hypocrisy spring to mind here.

But is there an alternative to peat? – Carbon Gold was created by Craig Sams, founder of Green & Blacks Chocolate, in 2007 as an organic, peat-free planting aid for the retail sector. The company has created composts that mimic the properties of peat. Peat is a blend of black carbon and lignin the fibrous woody matter. Whereas black carbon is made by using charcoal making techniques that convert woody materials into pure horticultural carbon or ‘biochar’.

According to a Sams spokesperson, “We blend it with lignin-rich woody material such as coir from coconut husks, to reproduce the profile of peat.” “It works as well as peat in the garden and it stays there much longer, the carbon in biochar remains for centuries and is porous, so it represents a long-term investment in improved soil fertility.” The Sams spokesperson added that, “Commercial organic growers, who are looking for a high-performing peat-free alternative, are adopting it on an increasing scale.”

But carbon gold is expensive over 23€ for 20kg and this does not include the cost of delivery, much more than the price of peat – the above cost may seem trivial but much depends on the amount required.

Finland is the world’s leading manufacturer of peat supplies and according to recent reports, said Finnish government is now looking at ways to reduce its peat consumption. But at what cost and to whom? Moreover, since the recent pandemic (C19) took hold unemployment has risen, prices have sky-rocketed as products have diminished. Hence 30 million new gardeners have joined the horticulture brigade and the numbers are increasing.

Perhaps peat harvesting will eventually be phased out, but many arguments and debates on this issue both for and against remain. Taiga Bonzai’s policy is not to get involved in controversy, but to bring to our readers attention issues that concern all aspects of horticulture. In the next article we discuss why flora needs carbon, until next time, BW, Nik.

Hi welcome to Taiga Bonzai, in this article we discuss the need for carbon in all forms of horticulture, which allows for healthy growth and food production.

Global warming is the result of the carbon cycle being out of sync due to the burning of coal, oil, and natural gas in large quantities. The result is vast amounts of gas released from the ancient carbon stored in the ground for millennia. A practice that mankind is totally responsible for.

Introduction - what is Carbon? According to science reporter Hayley Dunning from Imperial and Bruntwood SciTech "All living things are carbon-based, carbon atoms bond with other atoms to form chains such as proteins, fats, and carbohydrates. These in turn, provides other living things with nourishment, this is known as the carbon cycle." 

Plants use carbon dioxide during photosynthesis, a process where the plant converts energy from the sun into a chemical carbohydrate molecule. Plants use this carbon chemical to grow. Once the plant’s life cycle is over and it decomposes, carbon dioxide is formed again to return to the atmosphere where it begins the cycle again.

Plant Growth – this carbon dioxide is converted to energy for growth. The role of carbon in plants is to create healthier and more productive growth of the plants. Adding organic matter to the soil fertilizes the plants giving extra nourishment, hence carbon and plant growth are then intrinsically linked.

Some of this source of carbon is converted into carbon dioxide and released into the atmosphere however, some of this carbon is locked into the soil. This stored carbon helps to combat global warming by binding minerals or remaining in organic forms, that slowly break down over time; aiding in the reduction of atmospheric carbon.

Amending soil with organic carbon not only facilitates healthier plant life, but it also drains well, prevents water pollution. It is beneficial to useful microbes and insects and eliminates the need for using synthetic fertilizers which are derived from fossil fuels.

Dunning points out that “Our dependency upon those very fossil fuels is what got us into this mess in the first place and utilizing organic gardening techniques is one way to combat the global warming debacle.” Whether carbon dioxide from the air or organic carbon in the soil, the role of carbon and plant growth is extremely valuable. Without this process, life as we know it would not exist.

Under warmer conditions, plants can take up more carbon dioxide by using carbon more efficiently for growth. Plants take in or ‘fix’ carbon dioxide from the atmosphere during photosynthesis. Some of the carbon is used for plant growth and some of it is used in respiration, where the plant breaks down sugars to get energy. Plants may be more capable of compensating the negative effects of warming on carbon fixation than previously thought.

The balance between the release of carbon dioxide (CO2) during respiration and fixation of carbon during photosynthesis affects the growth of the plant. Across the globe, this balance also affects the global carbon balance for example, how much is stored in living things compared to free in the atmosphere. In addition, the faster the rate of photosynthesis relative to respiration and the greater the rate at which atmospheric carbon is ‘sucked in’ by ecosystems.

As CO2 rises in the atmosphere from human input, it leads to the planet warming, the balance between photosynthesis and respiration can shift in individual plants.

In a new study published this week (November 2024) in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, researchers have found that in warmer conditions plants change how they use carbon – using more for growth. By using more CO2 for growth, plants are ‘fixing’ more CO2 from the atmosphere as they lock it up in their leaves and stems.

Previously, scientists had measured the simple ratio between photosynthesis and respiration rate at a given temperature to estimate plant responses. However, the team have discovered a third fundamental factor that determines the ratio, called the ‘carbon allocation efficiency’.

The new study, led by researchers from Imperial College London and the University of Exeter, should allow scientists to more accurately predict the response of plants to climate change using carbon allocation efficiency.

This factor determines what happens after the CO2 is taken in during photosynthesis – whether it is used for growth or respiration. The team found that as temperatures rise, plants can allocate more carbon for growth, effectively improving their net carbon gain.

To find this out, they used a combination of mathematical modelling and data from laboratory experiments with algae. They also looked across diverse plant species, both on land and in water and concluded that a warming-induced increase in carbon allocation efficiency is a general phenomenon.

Study co-author Dr Samraat Pawar, from the Department of Life Sciences at Imperial, said: “Plants may be more capable of compensating the negative effects of warming on carbon fixation than previously thought, across both aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems. Our study provides a new way to better predict the effect of warming on carbon fixation by individual plants, and ultimately whole ecosystems.”

Other scientists played their part in the study of carbon in the journal ‘Role of carbon allocation efficiency in the temperature dependence of autotroph growth rates’ by Bernardo Garcia-Carreras, Sofia Sala, Daniel Padfield, Dimitrios-Georgios Kontopoulos, Elvire Bestion, C.-Elisa Schaumb, Gabriel Yvon-Durocher, and Samrat Pawar is published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

https://www.imperial.ac.uk/news/187327/how-plants-carbon-affects-their- response/#:~:text=Plants%20take%20in%20%E2%80%93%20or%20’fix,down%20sugars%20to%20get%20energy.

Other comments – (Monday, 26 June 2023) according to Tony Gadsdon “I always thought plants grow much better with carbon and actually rely on it. Humans are trying hard to reduce it and think we are going to destroy our planet if we don’t. The study shows that nature itself can adapt to having more carbon and actually store it for growth. Whilst I am not for polluting our planet I question the quest for zero carbon which is destroying Britain and many other nations”.

Mr Gadsdon has hit the nail on the head with his statement and we are in total agreement with it. The problem in reality does not stem from the average man/women in the main as they are aware of the consequences of destruction. The problem is that of the so-called politicians whom make decisions without doing any research, probably because they are unable to do so as remarks were made in the articles ‘unseen invasion’ 53 and 55′ as to their stupidity.

Instead they get their minions to write a paper with bogus facts and figures which, paint a picture of gloom. When they should be talking to the scientists, the ones who really know what is going on. Europe including the UK is in decline with little hope of returning to what it once was, a heavy price to pay due to their incompetence behaviour.

Is there a chance they can apply the brakes and reverse course, from what we have witnessed it seems highly unlikely, they and the general public are now in a ‘ Thelma & Louise’ situation, until next time, BW, Nik.