Best Supplier Of Compost 2023

But your end mix still would be reduced peat, what percentage would depend on the rate of additives you blend in to the mix
Hydroponic suppliers sell a 60% coir 40% clay pebble mix, I have experience of growing using coir but not with clay pebbles incorporated into the mix.

The retail stockists are focused on cost, they will tend to stock the cheapest brand which limits what is available to the consumer. As an example, as these threads are about the best supplier of compost, most replies are about how much we pay, which is not an issue, however there is a but.

Now if you are having to incorporate additives in to the mix, what is the end product cost? If we are using perlite and depending where it is purchased and what ratio we are using, what is the end cost per litre?
When you look at the likes of Wilko, B&Q, Wickes, Dobbies and Homebase etc etc the cost for a 10 Litre bag of perlite varies from £9 to £13 an average of £11 for 10 litres. So if your mixing 1 part perlite to 9 parts multipurpose that increases your cost per litre by 11p. Now I sell perlite to the public but for £7.95 so not only am I cheaper you actually get 150% more as that is the cost for 25 Litres.

If your adding other additives to blend with compost, then a hydroponic retailer would be worth checking out. They are more likely to stock clay pebbles, perlite and vermiculite, they will also tend to stock larger bags which will work out cheaper per litre.

 

Like lots on here I make up my own mixes for different plants but we are keen gardeners but others are happy with just what comes in the bag and the ££ cheapest

 

Had a good chat with a rep of one if not the largest companies that manufacture compost to the commercial sector. According to their figures, of all the edible food grown in the UK and Europe 52% is either grown in peat or the seedlings are set off in peat based composts.

An example, there is a horticultural grower in Boston Lincolnshire, I have passed their nurseries numerous times over the years, I have actually passed them three times this year. They are the largest brassica plant module propagators in the UK, possibly Europe. In the 45 acre glass houses they grow a staggering 600 million brassica plants a year with a 96% germination rate, all these module plants then all go to the agricultural sector. With the compost needing to be superfine to fill the modules they use 100% peat, mixing bark or wood fibre would prevent many of the modules filling properly as the bark and fibres would bridge the modules, the only other substitute would have to be coir.

I actually received today my first ever load of compost green waste PAS 100 certified, the weight ticket was 25.4 ton and I received 32 cubic metres, when you compare that to 90 cubic metres of peat that was delivered on Saturday in my yard with a weight of 26.2 ton, just goes to show what a heavy dense product this PAS 100 certified is.

 

I'm growing houseplants at hobby level. I used to have many african violets and streptocarpi. Now I'm hooked on hoyas. I don't think I use even 100l of sustrate mix during a year, so I don't look that much at price. I simply enjoy watching plants developing and flowering.
For me freshly excavated peat is a clean sterile substrate with an initially added fertilizer and certain ph when it's being sold. Everything composted, what's for sale now, isn't clean, I find rubbish, mushrooms grow. Why should I have everything of this inside my home? Plus they are keeping silent of salts residue levels in these composts. If there are too high level of salts, some plants won't be able to absorb needed "food" from such a compost.
I'm not persuaded yet, that coco based substrates are as good as peat based. I add a bit of it, but I wash it a few times before use (soaking in a bowl).

 

Defra red flagged the use of coir for three reasons.

1. The volume of water being used to wash the coir of salts, standard wash, 400 litres of water to 1000 litres of coir, or super washed 600 litres of water to 1000 litres of coir.

2. The poor working conditions, coir is a very dusty product.

3. Fossil fuels, both in the processing of coir in the far east and in the UK, plus shipping it thousands of miles.

So we go from being told to look at using alternatives instead of coir, only to be told last year that coir will now be accepted as a viable alternative to peat. So why the U-turn, two reasons and this is what all the commercial compost manufacturers are saying, including me. Reason 1 the alternatives only work well when blended with either peat or coir and secondly there is not enough alternatives to fill the gap if we ban peat.

 

I have found glass in the so called green compost !!

 

Makes you wonder if there should be somekind of exemption regarding houseplant compost, I must admit some of the stuff I've bought is growing toadstools and not really ideal for use in the house.

 

I've found plastic, rubber which looked like a part of a condom and a cow tooth

 

Well, yesterday I went and visited four of these green waste recycling sites, from York to just North of Newcastle. The amount of plastic that is in this green waste when first tipped is unreal, however the PAS 100 is surprisingly very clean. Two of the sites stored the end product undercover in sheds but the other two stored outside which allowed plastic to blow back into the bays.

When chatting with those in the office, they all went with, this PAS 100 certified compost, it even does on their website's and government websites. But when you start chatting with those on the ground, they clearly don't agree and that it is a soil conditioner, which I already knew. The empty packaging that two sites supply and allow you to fill your own, clearly state not to be used on its own as a potting mix and it should be mixed 50/50 minimum with other materials.

I was also surprised by how little end product of PAS 100 there was considering the number of windrows and large heaps. To expensive to process but the end product is being subsidied to get more gardeners to use more, so I was basically told it will soon be going up in price in the future.

Biomass and farmers are taking the bulk, paying more for something that involves less processing. No sites have an issue of getting rid of the waste compared to the past with availability being low in the winter months when hardly any green waste is collected and its to wet and cold to garden.

At the site in York, the manager was telling me they to supply over 2000 tons to three commercial growers as they were going to use the waste mixed with farm manure to heat water which will be pumped into the glass house's. It is something that I have thought about for years and even mentioned on here. When the green waste is first shredded, those first windrows get the hottest with 84 to 87c being recorded weekly. He knows that at two sites they are going to dig trenches and lay water pipes while the other site is using straw bales to make raise beds. If a ground source heating system can warm water from the soil, then it will certainly be hotter water using green waste. These windrows will loose heat over time but even the ones that are 12 weeks plus old they are still recording 70c plus.

This is not really something knew, the Chinese started using this method and it was also very common in France. They did not use this method to heat water but to heat the soil to extend growing season of edible crops. They dug shallow trench's which they filled with 20 to 25cm of fresh horse manure and other organic matter, then covered with soil. The heat from the decomposing manure warmed the surrounding soil.

 

It was often used in Victorian times to grow pineapples all year round with no other heating.

 

So you have confirmed that , like peat, it
A) has little nutritional value (but provides a food source to soil organisms)
B) has little if any microbes due to high process temperatures
C) is a readily available but finite filler to which essential nutrients can be added
D) has become in demand ,raising its realisable value ?
Was any mention of phenolic acids and/or chemical contaminants which would dissuade use for food production?
Did you get to see any data to cause you to believe that the nett carbon effect is lower than use of natural peat; how do they equate the gases liberated in the composting /transport compared to extraction/transport?

 

This has got to be a compost problem but I didn't make a point of which compost I used for each, same seed same position, but some are looking sick and some are still growing.
I'm guessing its a feed problem in the compost.