The battle over peat: why do some gardeners still insist on using it?

The ban on peat-based compost for home gardeners, which came into force in England last year, was supposed to end one of the most environmentally damaging practices in British horticulture. But peat is still being sold, and some gardeners are still buying it — raising the question of why a product that does such demonstrable harm to some of the planet's most important carbon stores remains so stubbornly popular.

The answer, according to growers, retailers and the gardeners themselves, is a combination of habit, performance and the uneven quality of the alternatives. Peat has been the standard growing medium for British horticulture for decades. It is consistent, it holds water well, and it produces reliable results. The alternatives — coir, composted bark, wood fibre, green waste compost — are improving, but experienced gardeners say they still do not perform as consistently as peat.

The environmental case against peat is overwhelming. Peatlands cover about 3 percent of the Earth's land surface but store approximately 30 percent of its soil carbon — more than all the world's forests combined. Extracting peat releases that carbon into the atmosphere and destroys habitats that take thousands of years to form. The UK's peatlands have been so degraded by extraction and drainage that many are now net emitters of carbon rather than net sinks.

The government's ban applies to bagged compost for home use, but peat is still permitted for commercial horticulture, and enforcement of the ban has been patchy. Environmental groups are campaigning for the ban to be extended to all uses and for stronger enforcement, but the horticulture industry argues that the alternatives are not yet available at the scale and quality required.

The battle over peat is, in miniature, the battle over consumption itself: the tension between what is convenient and what is sustainable, and the difficulty of changing behaviour even when the evidence for change is clear.