The top myths of the European peat industry debunked
If there is something strange in your neighbour’s bog, who are you gonna call? Myth busters!
The European peat industry LOVES to make us think that mining peatlands is the best possible thing we can do in these times of ecological collapse and global heating. Sensing the pressure of public dissent to polluting industries, they’ve put their marketing team to the task and came up with some pretty creative arguments for their case. But -spoiler alert- the only benefits of their business as usual are the money pockets of the people high up in these peat and potting soil companies.
Did you find yourself finding it a bit hard to distinguish the brown from the brown, the bullshit from the peat? Not to worry, we’ve got you. Below we have lined up our favourite peat industry myths and debunked them one by one. So that next time someone throws one of them into your face, you’ll know exactly what to say.
Myth #1 - Peat is essential for food security
Mmm we love to see this one. Hitting people right in their fear of not having their basic needs met. Real classy, peat guys. And they’re not being sneaky about it either, with the slogan at this year’s peat industry gathering the Baltic Peat Producers forum being: “Peat - a strategically important resource for food production and the environment“.
But the opposite could not be more true. The climate crisis is the largest threat to food security. This means that by destroying the rare and precious carbon stores that peatlands are, peat companies only drive us further into food insecurity (WFP, 2021). On top of that, less than a quarter of the peat that is used in the Netherlands is used for food production. As such, the bulk of peat use is even less justifiable.
And if you are wondering if it is possible to grow food without peat, the answer is: absolutely yes! In fact, peat only started becoming a popular substrate ingredient post World War II, at a time where standardisation, scaling up and monocultures were on the rise. Popular for its reliability and low price, peat became a favourite. However, peat has never been and will never be essential for food growing. Prior to peat usage, growers around Europe were using other substrates, such as leam, leafmould, bark and compost [source]. What’s more, growers across the UK have successfully shown to grow crops completely peat-free [source].
Myth 2 - Peat mining is fine, as long as you restore the peatland afterwards
Remember, peatlands take thousands of years to form, at the pace of 1 mm per year. A peatland can never truly be restored, and it will take thousands of years to recover all lost carbon and restore the hydrological capacities of the peatland. So, if a peatland is still intact, there is no excuse for destroying it. That being said, there are good reasons for taking care of destroyed peatlands, bringing them back to a state of rich ecology and carbon absorption. Currently, peat companies are only restoring a tiny fraction of what they destroy. If you want to know more about all the intricacies and complexities of peatland restoration, then follow us on substack to learn more.
Myth 3 - The peat industry is trying very hard to phase out peat, they just need more time & data
Already in 1996, the IPCC identified peat as a solid fossil (IPC), a clear sign for the peat industry to change their ways. And what was their response? Lobby HARD for their existence. In 2004, around a time when climate change entered with force in the public debate, the peat industry was pushing for the recognition as a fuel that is “good for the climate” (IMCG newsletter 2004-1, 16-20). And to this day, the peat industry is tightly holding onto its precious peat. But don’t be fooled, the science is crystal clear: the peat needs to stay in the ground to avoid climate collapse. To meet the 1.5 target of the Paris agreements, not only do we need to keep all remaining peatland intact, but we also need to restore at least 50% of all drained peatlands (Ramsar). And, yes more data would be better, but it does not change this bigger picture. This cannot be a reason to wait with action. Would you wait till your entire house is burnt down before calling the fire brigade? In other words - there is absolutely no room for further peatland destruction.
Myth #4 - Peat is a slow renewable
Yes, you read that right, we are not making things up. Sweden and Finland, infamous for their large-scale peat extraction, lobbied at EU level to have peat be classified as a slow renewable. But if we go down this line of reasoning, we can put coal, oil and gas in that very same slow renewable category. Because, sure, renewal can happen over thousands, if not millions of years. But if the extraction heavily outweighs the renewal, the purpose of this classification is fully defeated. And when we stick to this logic, we can see that peat is actually fossil, if anything. Because with an accumulation rate of 1 mm per year on average, most bags of compost contain matter from Before Christ!
Here we find a classical argument in any debate about carbon reduction and climate action. If we close a factory here, another one will open there, if we close a mine here, another one will open there. Sure, sometimes that happens. But if we followed that logic, nothing would ever change on this planet. And let’s be real: countries that got rich through extraction and colonialism don’t get a free pass to keep wrecking ecosystems just because someone else might. Quite the opposite, they should be the first to show it’s possible to leave this way of being behind. Because change isn’t only about cutting emissions; it’s about setting the tone, proving alternatives work, and showcasing a kind of leadership that catches on.
