CLIMATE pollution from the burning of rubbish in Scotland has almost doubled in five years, according to new data, with some incinerators releasing higher amounts of toxic chemicals than ever before in 2024.

The country's biggest rubbish-burning sites produced more than one ­million tonnes of carbon ­dioxide (CO2) last year - a record high - ­despite government promises to cut emissions and a ban on new ­incinerators three years ago.

Figures from the Scottish ­Environment Protection Agency (Sepa) also show rising emissions of chemicals which can pose health risks, such as mercury, arsenic and chromium from some plants.

Campaigners described the ­increase as "striking" and say incinerators are causing "preventable harm" to the climate and human health. One told The Ferret Scottish ministers had "lost control" of waste burning.

The Scottish Government said all incineration sites are required to meet "strict environmental standards" and are subject to "rigorous monitoring".

Incineration is playing a growing role in how Scotland deals with its rubbish. Around 1.6 million tonnes of waste were burned in 2023, more than triple the amount disposed of this way in 2011.

Most incineration sites around the country are marketed as "energy from waste" plants, because the rubbish they burn is used to produce heat and electricity for consumers.

The industry argues this reduces overall carbon emissions because it turns waste that would otherwise ­decompose in landfill - where it ­creates potent greenhouse gas - into a resource that powers homes and businesses.

But critics say that much of the waste burned at the sites could ­instead be recycled and that ­incineration is a particularly dirty way to generate ­energy.

The new figures show that ­emissions of CO2 - the main gas causing global warming - from major Scottish waste incinerators have nearly doubled since 2019, from 570,000 tonnes five years ago to 1,074,000 tonnes in 2024.

The biggest polluter was the ­Dunbar Energy Recovery Facility in East ­Lothian, which is owned by ­Viridor - a subsidiary of the US ­private equity company, KKR.

Dunbar emitted 392,000 tonnes of CO2 in 2024, a 43% increase from 2019.

It also recorded air pollution by ­arsenic and ammonia for the first time, as well as emissions of ­chromium. Exposure to all three of these ­pollutants poses health ­dangers, with both arsenic and chromium linked to increased risk of cancer.

Viridor's other Scottish incinerator - at Polmadie in Glasgow's southside - has also seen climate pollution rise sharply and reported its highest-ever mercury output last year.

A Viridor spokesperson said the company "operates in a highly regulated sector" and takes its environmental responsibilities seriously. They said its facilities at Dunbar and Glasgow "provide a critical ­service" by "managing residual waste and ­diverting it from landfill, while ­supplying power to the grid".

Both plants have systems to recover recyclable material "where possible" before incineration, the company added.

The next largest emitter was the Earls Gate Energy Centre in Grangemouth, run by Brockwell Energy.

Despite only becoming fully ­operational in March 2024, it still ­emitted 218,000 tonnes of CO2 ­during the year, along with 11 tonnes of ­chlorine, 3.6 kilograms of ­mercury and trace levels of highly toxic ­dioxins.

Other large polluters include the Millerhill plant near Edinburgh and Dundee's Baldovie incinerator - where emissions have increased by 80% since 2019 after a second ­waste-burning facility was opened there in 2022.

MVV Environment, which operates Baldovie, said the increase reflected the continued operation of the old ­incinerator alongside the new one. "By not closing down the original facility, the amount of CO2 emitted will, inevitably, increase," they said.

In total, Scotland's five biggest ­incinerators produced more than one million tonnes of carbon dioxide in 2024. Their combined emissions were considerably higher than some of the country's usual big polluters, ­including fossil fuel sites like the ­now-closed Grangemouth refinery and Peterhead power station.

(Image: Free)

Supporters of incineration argue that, despite these emissions, ­burning rubbish is better for the climate than sending it to landfill, where ­decomposing waste releases methane - a greenhouse gas far more potent at heating the atmosphere in the short term than CO2.

Sepa pointed out that as ­incineration rates have increased, landfill and its associated emissions have fallen. "Today, Scotland ­landfills less than a third of the waste it did in 2005 when our records began," a spokesperson for the agency told The Ferret.

An independent expert review into incineration in Scotland in 2022 found that energy from waste plants were "preferable" to landfill and ­exporting waste, but that the priority should be reuse and recycling.

However, it warned that Scotland should not "construct more ­capacity than it needs" otherwise it risked "lock-in". In this scenario, future waste could be burned rather than ­recycled because councils need to fulfil contracts with the companies behind the incinerators.

A 2023 study by Zero Waste ­Scotland found that more than half of the residual waste in the country could be recycled.

Campaigners point to Wales as an example of where restrictions on new incineration capacity have improved rates of recycling. After introducing a moratorium on rubbish burners in 2021, Wales achieved a 67% recycling rate the following year, compared with Scotland's stagnant 43.5%.

Scotland also introduced a ­moratorium in 2022. But that ban did not cover plants already granted ­planning permission or under ­construction.

This "loophole" has allowed ­incineration capacity to keep ­growing, with a number of new sites coming online or in construction since the moratorium was introduced.

One example is the new South Clyde Energy Centre in Glasgow, which is being built close to the city's Queen Elizabeth University Hospital.

The plant - which is being ­developed by a partnership ­involving Finland's state energy company ­Fortum - will have the capacity to burn 350,000 tonnes of waste a year, comparable to sites like Dunbar. It is expected to be built and up and ­running by next year.

Its owners - Fortum Glasgow - ­defended the environmental record of incineration. It argued that ­landfill also produced toxic pollution and pointed to figures which suggest "landfill is 100 times more ­damaging" to the climate than energy from waste plants.

That claim is based on UK ­Government data, which estimates the emissions produced per tonne of waste using different treatment ­methods.

Environmental groups say the Government's approach makes ­incineration appear cleaner than it is, because the figures factor in emissions "saved" by energy production. As Scotland's power grid becomes increasingly renewable, they argue, those savings are shrinking.

South Clyde Energy Centre was ­approved back in 2019, and at the time there appeared to be little awareness from the local community - although Fortum Glasgow says engagement with the community is now a top priority. Records from a consultation about the incinerator show there were no public responses to the permit application.

According to Friends of the Earth Scotland (FoES), very few people ­locally seem to be aware of the ­project - a situation which they say is concerning in the context of rising toxic emissions from existing sites.

Kim Pratt, a campaigner at FoES, said the data from last year shows that "as the chemicals in the products we buy increase, the toxic impact of burning rubbish also rises."

Pratt continued: "The doubling of the climate impact of waste ­incinerators is a preventable harm of which the Scottish Government has completely lost control.

"With even more ­incinerators in the pipeline, the Scottish ­Government must start putting the health of ­people and nature before short-sighted ­industry plans before it is too late."

Shlomo Dowen, national coordinator of the UK Without Incineration Network, said it was "striking that so many of Scotland's worst ­polluters are incinerators," and that much of what is burned could be reused or recycled. He called for a ­"strengthening" of the Scottish Government's moratorium to prevent "more unnecessary and wasteful incineration capacity".

Sepa said incineration remains a necessary part of waste management in the short-term while Scotland ­transitions to a circular economy.

"The choice isn't between ­recycling or energy recovery, but rather a firm focus on improving recycling with ­energy recovery from what's left over," said a spokesperson.

"What is clear is that in order to ­reduce the need for Energy From Waste facilities, we all must strive to reduce the waste we produce and recycle as much as possible."

(Image: PA)

The Scottish Government's ­Climate Secretary, Gillian ­Martin (above), said: ­"Energy From Waste schemes are ­required to meet strict ­environmental standards and are ­subject to ­rigorous monitoring and enforcement ­activities."

She stressed the Scottish Government was introducing measures to help cut emissions from incinerators, including "ending the unnecessary burning of plastics".

Martin added that ministers are working to include incinerators in the UK's emissions trading scheme and to develop a cap on incineration capacity to ensure Scotland's waste plans align with its climate targets.

All of the companies named in this piece were asked to comment.