1.      That peatlands are such an important habitat and provide a large service to millions of people in the form of clean fresh water but if peatland is degraded, extraction value is increased due to the need to change the water colour

 

2.     Use of chemicals at an atomic scale with nanotechnology can have unusual properties which can be beneficial but there are potential negative impacts and issues regarding possible increased concentrations in the natural environment 

 

Huh:

 

How agriculture and the Common Agriculture Policy is able to affect such a large amount of land, money and therefore people and to which extent incentives are required with conservation especially in economic sense and not moral or ethical obligations or desire

 I knew that peatlands were important wildlife corridors, but until reading this paper had underestimated their importance.  They are in decline and initiatives are underway to maintain current peatland habitats and restore degraded areas.  Peatlands also provide an importance to humans whereby much of our clean water is supplied by such habitats. 

 
Habitat banking is a financial instrument designed to offset activities that could damage wildlife in fragile identified environments.  I have viewed many examples of this in documentaries however did not know that this was “habitat banking”; I have been able to define these actions.  

 

Huh:

Ballast water treatment confuses me.  By using it to cull invasive species surely somewhere along the line other species are being negatively affected by this? What kind of negative affect does the removing of invasive species have on the food chain?