top of page
biochar nottm U.jpg

Overcoming Financial Barriers for Paludiculture with Biochar Integration

© Nottingham University

PEF banner.png
Project Overview

Integrating biochar into paludiculture systems to boost revenues from carbon financing presents a significant opportunity to overcome financial barriers to adoption. This project focuses on identifying cost-effective biochar application methods and suitable biochar types to minimise input costs. At the same time, it aims to maximise carbon finance potential by determining paludiculture-specific biochar management practices that deliver optimal carbon removal and long-term storage.

Key Objectives

  • Identify biochar application methods that can be integrated with minimal investment

  • Identify the most cost-effective biochar that can enhance revenues from C financing

  • Maximise C finance and product market revenues by establishing the maximum levels for biochar amendments, either in a single or in successive applications, assessing the potential for biochar to suppress methane emissions, and any agronomic benefits biochar integration can deliver

  • Identifying policy barriers for biochar integration with paludiculture

  • Exploring the economics of biochar C markets versus the generation of C credits, and (if it is possible in future and meets additionality tests) the impact of stacking peatland and biochar C on the financial viability and attractiveness of paludiculture.​​​​​​​

biochar bags.png

The project focused on five main areas:

  1. Scientific testing – Modelling, lab, and field experiments to see how biochar behaves in rewetted peat, including decomposition tests at 13 sites, a field trial at Winmarleigh Carbon Farm, and mesocosm studies on water quality and emissions.

  2. Policy analysis – Reviewed UK and international policies to spot opportunities and barriers for biochar in paludiculture.

  3. Stakeholder engagement – Interviews and workshops with farmers and biochar suppliers to understand perceptions, challenges, and practicalities.

  4. Economic modelling – Compared the financial outcomes of different farming models with and without biochar, looking at crop sales, payments, and carbon credits.

Policy brief – Pull together findings into practical recommendations for government, industry, and land managers.

Main findings

  • Biochar is stable in rewetted peat – It decomposes very slowly, suggesting strong potential for long-term carbon storage. Interestingly, “lower-stability” biochars (produced at lower temperatures) may perform better than expected in wet peat, which could make production cheaper and more scalable.

  • Short-term trade-offs – Surface application of biochar reduced photosynthesis in moss-based systems at first (by shading), but vegetation generally recovered within a season. This is unlikely to be a trade-off for taller vegetation.

  • Water quality risks – Biochar itself caused little concern, but gypsum (tested alongside biochar for methane suppression) raised sulfate levels at high doses.

  • Economics – Paludiculture on its own is not financially competitive with conventional farming. But with the right mix of agri-environment payments + carbon credits, it can be viable. Biochar strengthens the case, especially if farmers can make their own biochar from local biomass. Buying biochar in is not affordable at current prices.

  • Policy gaps – There’s no clear UK framework for biochar in paludiculture. Better carbon credit rules, “stacking” of payments, and stronger support for peatland rewetting is required.

  • Farmer & supplier perspectives – Farmers were generally open but cautious, with most of the hesitation focused on the transition to paludiculture rather than the application of biochar itself. They emphasised the need for financial incentives and confidence that yields, and food security would not be compromised. Suppliers felt existing machinery could be adapted for use but noted that operating on wet ground would require more innovative, lighter equipment.

Publications and more information

​

​

The sites used for the national litterbag experiment.

Blue dots: paludiculture sites only.

Green dots: paludiculture paired with business-as-usual site (drained peat).

Location

National

PEF Map.png
Project partners
UK Centre for Ecology & Hydrology (UKCEH) -

Project PI Dr Jennifer Rhymes – A UKCEH research scientist specialising in sustainable agriculture, with a particular focus on lowland peat. Jenny is the demonstrator site lead for the GGR-Peat paludiculture trials and has successfully led the WWF-Tesco Regenerative Vegetable Production on Lowland Peat project.

 

Project Lead - Jenny Rhymes

Email: jenrhy@ceh.ac.uk

https://www.ceh.ac.uk/

​

ADAS -

Project partner ADAS (lead Dr Liz Lewis-Reddy)- have extensive expertise in evidence synthesis, policy evaluation and data analysis. Their policy and economics work incorporates direct engagement with farmers and landowners via surveys, workshops and interviews to aid designing and implementing agricultural support mechanisms and policy analysis on behalf of Defra, the EU and the Welsh Gov.

 

University of Nottingham -

Project partner University of Nottingham (Prof Colin Snape and Dr Helen West)- The University of Nottingham is the leading university for biochar research, leading the UKRI funded GGR-D Programme Biochar Demonstrator and successfully leading a BEIS GGR Phase-1 project on converting fibre from food AD into biochar.

​
Bangor University -

Bangor University (lead Ashley Hardaker) has specific expertise in combining agricultural economic modelling and LCA to deliver practice relevant research for decision making on land use change and decarbonisation.

 
SRUC -

Project partner SRUC (lead Mark Reed)– Mark Reed, Professor of Rural Entrepreneurship and Co-Director of the Thriving Natural Capital Challenge Centre at SRUC, sits on the Executive Board of the Peatland Code as Research Manager for the IUCN UK Peatland Programme. He is co-Chair of the UN Environment Programme's Global Peatlands Initiative Research Working Group.

​

Lapwing Energy -

Project partner Lapwing Energy (lead Jonathan White) – Lapwing have extensive industrial links that will help resolve logistical barriers that could negatively impact the cost-effectiveness for biochar integration adoption (e.g, sourcing feedstock at scale). They have specific practical experience of biomass paludiculture.

​

Project contact : Jonathan White - jonathan.white@lapwingenergy.co.uk

                                                           jamie.smith@lapwingenergy.co.uk

​

​

bottom of page