.jpg)
But increasing environmental concern over peatlands, as carbon sinks, as habitats, and in terms of biodiversity, means pressure is rising on policy makers to restrict peat extraction or usage.
In Scotland, the government has proposed or consulted on bans or strong restrictions on the sale of peat, which would have knock-on effects for whisky makers.
So how might distilleries respond, adapt, survive — and perhaps even thrive — under such a change?
What the Stakeholders Say
Before talking solutions, it’s worth summarising what distilleries, regulators, and research bodies are saying now:
The Scotch Whisky Association (SWA) has emphasised that peat-smoked malt is essential to peated single malts, and that a total ban would threaten jobs in rural areas.
In government consultations, many whisky organisations argued for an exemption for the whisky industry, or for phased approaches, citing lack of current viable alternatives.
On the environmental side, restoration of peatlands, improved extraction practices, and research into more efficient peat use or substituting materials are being proposed.
Research at places like the Scotch Whisky Research Institute (SWRI) is underway looking at whether other biomass sources might replicate—or partially replicate—the flavour-profile peat smoke delivers.
Some of the key obstacles they must overcome:
Flavour loss / identity risk
Peated single malts have built their identity on the smoke/peat phenols. Changes in peat source, intensity or eliminating peat altogether can alter that flavour in ways consumers will notice. The distinction is not just “smoky vs un-smoky” but subtleties: the type of peat, the phenol content, other chemical components.
Regulatory constraints
Scotch whisky’s regulations are strict: you can’t add flavouring or smoke-imparting agents that aren’t part of the traditional process. Any alternative must fit within those legal definitions if the whisky is still to be called Scotch.
Supply and cost of peat / alternatives
If peat becomes more restricted, the price may rise; supply chains might shrink. Also, any alternative (other biomass materials, technologies, different peat sources) might be more expensive or less well-tested.
Consumer expectations
Many drinkers expect certain brands and styles to continue delivering a particular smoky profile. If flavours change, there’s risk of brand damage or loss of market segment.
Environmental and ethical pressures
Even without regulation, there’s growing consumer demand for sustainability. Distilleries will need to show they are minimizing environmental harm, restoring peatlands, etc.
Coping Strategies: What Distilleries Can Do
Given those challenges, here are some strategies distilleries might adopt (and some already are):
Phased reduction rather than abrupt ban
Gradually reducing peat usage, lowering phenol levels, sourcing peat more sparingly. Some distilleries already experiment with adjusting the malting schedules (time, airflow, amount of peat smoke) to use less peat while keeping as much flavour as possible. Highland Park, for example, has examined how “tiny adjustments to the schedule … meant they could reduce the amount of peat needed to achieve the right balance of phenols.”
Peat provenance & “better peat” sourcing
Using peat from sources that allow more sustainable extraction, perhaps hand-cut peat rather than mechanically cut; selecting peat from less sensitive bogs; working with planning frameworks that limit or manage extraction.
Peatland restoration & environmental offsetting
If peat is used, then restoring peatlands to help sequester carbon lost. Projects like the Peatland Water Sanctuary initiative by Beam Suntory (Ardmore, etc.) aim to restore peatland equivalent to or greater than that used by distillery operations.
Scotch Whisky Association
Isle of Arran Distillers is restoring 325 hectares of peatland on Dougarie Estate, with long-term emission reduction goals.
Alternative smoke sources / biomasses
Research into other kinds of biomass smoke (wood, heather, other organic matter) that might replicate some of the aroma or phenolic character of peat smoke. Whether these are acceptable under Scotch whisky regulations is another question, but as an area of R&D this looks promising.
Using ex-peated casks or re-using smoke character
One creative idea is using casks that were previously used to mature peated whisky, allowing some of that peat character to transfer (or linger) in subsequent spirits, without using peat smoke in the malting. There has been at least some experimentation in this direction.
Marketing & style diversification
As peat becomes more expensive or tightly regulated, distilleries might diversify: expand the non-peated lines, emphasise lighter smoke, or different flavour profiles (sweet, fruity, sherry finishes). This gives options for consumers and helps maintain sales if peated styles become less feasible. Some already exist in that space.
Regulatory engagement / exemptions
Whisky producers can engage with policy makers to seek specific exemptions, transitional periods, or carve-outs recognising that for some styles, especially peated single malts, peat use is not just tradition but a defining trait. Also, distilleries can work with regulators to define what count as acceptable alternatives.
Innovation in process efficiency
More precise control over the peat smoke in the malting process, improved kilning techniques, better control over moisture/airflow/etc to get maximum phenolic transfer with minimal peat. This could reduce the volume of peat needed while retaining flavour.
What Might a Future Distillery Landscape Look Like?
If bans or severe restrictions come into force, here are some possible scenarios:
Some distilleries will shift to producing lighter or no-peat whiskies; others will become more specialised, producing heavier peat whiskies but perhaps at smaller volumes, premium prices.
We might see greater segmentation: “peat-less” single malts, lightly peated, heavily peated, etc., with more transparent labelling about peat intensity or source.
Brands that can afford R&D and environmental concessions will lead; smaller distilleries may find the transition harder without financial or institutional support.
The regulation might allow some peat use under strict licensing, for heritage brands, or for small-scale distilleries, similar to how some other industries have special status during transitions.
Risks & Considerations
A substitute that fails (in flavour or in legality) could hurt reputation.
Costs of change: R&D, investment in new kilns or process modifications, sourcing alternative materials.
Potential loss of brand loyalty among consumers who expect strong peat smoke; balancing sustainability with tradition will require careful communication.
Challenges maintaining distinct regional “terroir” peat flavour is tied to where it comes from. If peat sources are restricted or replaced, flavour uniformity might increase, reducing diversity.
What will you do? Wait to see what the peat-free Scotch tastes like? Or buy as many bottles as you can afford in order to try to keep a good supply of peated Scotch for you to enjoy?
