Hacker News Reader

Considering it takes 1,000 years for 1m of peat to build back up, I'm not sure it's reasonable to call it renewable.

well, you could extract it sustainably at 1000 cubic meters per square kilometer per year, and that is a thing that people have done in the past. but it's not going to be an economically competitive source of energy

Peat is worse than coal with regards to co2 emissions, so I will vote to keep it in the ground.

That's like saying coal is renewable. E.g. Lignite (brown coal) is just Peat that was compressed over many years.

Burning topsoil is kind of insane. Peat is not renewable on practical human timescales.