GW Special last night

[Glutton4...]

I didn't watch it, but my Dad did. He said 'there was some old codger stating his case, and the young fella did a good job of putting him in his place!'

Perhaps I need to watch it after all.

(I hadn't realised it was on (stoopid moo) too busy gardening!)

[piskieinboots]

Speaking of which, isn't it your birthday soon?

no idea - is it? how old will I be?

[Matt.]

I didn't follow the CO2 argument. The carbon is locked up in peat bogs but CO2 will only get released if it is burnt. Spreading it around on gardens will just distribute the carbon not release it.

They had the chap who demonstrated that drained peat gives off far more CO2 that wet stuff. They had one sample sqeezed dry and one sample saturated. The machine showed that the dry sample was releasing CO2 wheras the wet one was not. They explained that the water and chemical mix in bog water acts a s natural preservative not allowing the peat to decompose hence locking in the CO2.

As for the replenishment stats the differences are down to what consttitues replenishment. If its just a covering of bog moss then I gathered a decade or two would be about right. However if replenishment means raising the ground level back to where it was that will take 1000's of year.

[SlugLobber]

I watched this programme and was most bemused to see that they are replacing peat using rotten down wood shavings. So, in using my own rotten down wood shavings (peed on), I seem to have accidentally stumbled upon John West's secret recipe, lol!

Matt is describing phenolic compounds. The same compounds exist in fruit (if anyone did Chemistry A level, they'll remember doing the experiment with apples and lemon juice - anti-oxidants in the lemon juice prevent oxidation of phenols and so the apple does not turn brown). Their oxidation (to quinones) releases CO2via the increase in microbial growth, as phenols inhibit bacteria. This can only happen when they are exposed to a sufficient concentration of oxygen i.e. the atmosphere.

Please don't ask me to expand on that. I am trying to purify two proteins at once today and my brain is currently taking a break while my samples thaw, lol!!!

[SlugLobber]

Just realised that lot might be confusing. Basically, phenols prevent bacteria from growing and dividing. Since bacteria are responsible for the breakdown of organic matter, the exposure of phenols to the atmosphere means that:

phenols are oxidised to quinones,
bacteria can then grow exponentially,
organic matter breaks down rapidly and releases CO2 and methane.

Back to the lab...

[Matt.]

Great science stuff

The downside is the bogs that were being harvested at 4" a year have already been drained and the CO2 release process already started. I'm not sure if reflooding would help and it cerrtainly wouldn't replace whats lost. In my way of thinking it means the damage has already been done and harvesting whats left won't make a lot of difference.

The message for me was that we shouldn't be harvesting new virgin bog land like in Eastern Europe and cutting down on peat usage via reduction or replacement.

[piskieinboots]

The message for me was that we shouldn't be harvesting new virgin bog land.

my view also

and thanks SlugLobber for the science bit

[SlugLobber]

You're welcome. I don't just lob slugs, ya know.

[piskieinboots]

I don't just lob slugs, ya know.

you sure?

[Capsid]

They had the chap who demonstrated that drained peat gives off far more CO2 that wet stuff. They had one sample sqeezed dry and one sample saturated. The machine showed that the dry sample was releasing CO2 wheras the wet one was not. They explained that the water and chemical mix in bog water acts a s natural preservative not allowing the peat to decompose hence locking in the CO2.

As for the replenishment stats the differences are down to what consttitues replenishment. If its just a covering of bog moss then I gathered a decade or two would be about right. However if replenishment means raising the ground level back to where it was that will take 1000's of year.

OK thanks for the explanation, I forgot the gas chromatography stuff. I was too busy looking at the readouts as I think the BBC cheated there and showed the same graph twice, one was a smaller version of the other. But locking in the CO2 makes sense. Thanks to sluglobber too!

The peat free stuff I got from Homebase doesn't look very good. It's very woody, but I'll wait and see how my seedlings get on.

[SlugLobber]

I noticed that the peaks were similar in the programme, too, but there is normally a solvent present in the samples, which would explain the identical smaller peak. Don't know much about GC, so they could have told me it was sausages in the sample and I wouldn't know any different!

[SueA]

I watched it & found it very interesting, I still sometimes use compost with peat in it if I've run out & can't find any peat free locally. I've used 'New Horizon' peat free in the past & found it great, some of the others have been a bit 'iffy' but they seem to be improving & I'm sure we'll all get used to them. I agree with Hilary & the others about Peter Seabrook, I know he's an experienced gardener but he seems to think everything has to have chemicals thrown at it & only his opinion on gardening matters counts. As for the 'environmentalists aren't gardeners are they ?' comment, how does he know, can't you be both? (Shouted at the telly!)

[Hilary B]

I watched it & found it very interesting, I still sometimes use compost with peat in it if I've run out & can't find any peat free locally. I've used 'New Horizon' peat free in the past & found it great, some of the others have been a bit 'iffy' but they seem to be improving & I'm sure we'll all get used to them. I agree with Hilary & the others about Peter Seabrook, I know he's an experienced gardener but he seems to think everything has to have chemicals thrown at it & only his opinion on gardening matters counts. As for the 'environmentalists aren't gardeners are they ?' comment, how does he know, can't you be both? (Shouted at the telly!)

I hadn't thought about the remark in terms of 'they might be', more that he was suggesting if someone isn't a gardener they can't know about their speciality of environmental matters. What I was shouting at the telly (do we ALL do that when irritated by nonsense?) was "so what if they aren't gardeners? That is irrelevant!"