SNP to dump 100 truckloads of waste a day in England
The SNP is set to dump up to 100 truckloads of rubbish into England each day after a landfill ban.
The Scottish Government has banned black bag waste from being buried in landfill north of the Scottish Border after Dec 31 this year.
But Scotland does not have enough incinerators to manage the waste, which experts have said could amount to 600,000 tonnes in the ban's first year.
Councils and commercial waste companies have approached rubbish-handling operators in England to negotiate 'bridging contracts'
However, most incinerators have limited spare capacity, meaning that much of Scotland's excess waste is expected to be sent to landfills in England instead.
The move has provoked fury, with the Scottish Tories questioning 'what the point is in introducing this ban if it is still going to result in so much waste just being shipped south of the Border'.
David Balmer, a waste expert from ERS Remediation, told BBC Scotland's Disclosure programme: 'You're looking at the equivalent of between 80 and 100 trucks minimum running seven days a week to take this material to a facility in England or abroad.'
The fleet of lorries transporting the rubbish to sites in England, which could include Cumbria, Northumberland or Manchester, would also cause a rise in greenhouse gas emissions.
'Temporary situation'
Gillian Martin, the SNP's climate action and energy secretary, said: 'The reason for the incineration gap is due to outside factors, particularly inflation and the cost of initially building them.
'We've got plans for more incinerators, with energy from waste schemes, to come on in the next year and over the next three years – so it is a temporary situation.'
She said 'the positive environmental impact of stopping landfill far outweighs any impact of any temporary measures to export' the rubbish over the Border.
Ms Martin explained that 'landfill produces methane, which is a particularly potent gas' and said this was 'vastly responsible in the short and medium term for warming up the planet'.
Methane is around 28 times more potent than carbon dioxide. However, it was pointed out that these emissions would still be created, only in England rather than Scotland.
'Some of them will be going to incineration in England. We're not the only country that has waste-to-energy plants,' Ms Martin said.
'The north of England has many as well. There's a very short-term measure until more of our incinerators and waste-to-energy plants come on stream.'
The Scottish Government had previously planned to impose a ban on sending biodegradable waste to landfill from Jan 2021, but the deadline was delayed five years after industry leaders warned that the country was not ready.
The lack of waste treatment capacity prompted warnings at the time that a million tonnes of rubbish would have to be disposed of outside Scotland, with the majority of it simply shifted across the Border.
This caused a rush to build more incinerators but SNP ministers decided to curtail the number of developments because of overcapacity concerns. There are currently eight operating in Scotland.
Capacity gap widens
Zero Waste Scotland (ZWS), an SNP quango, has estimated that the capacity gap is now 600,000 tonnes, but ministers have ruled out a further delay to implementing the ban.
Among the rubbish barred from landfill in Scotland will be non-recyclable black bag municipal waste, wood, textiles, paper and food. Some inert material, such as ash from incinerators and building rubble, will still be allowed at landfill sites.
Douglas Lumsden, Scotland's shadow net zero and energy secretary, said: 'There should be red faces all round among SNP ministers at this news.
'Their landfill ban has already been pushed back several years yet in typical nationalist fashion they have still failed to get their ducks in a row.
'The public will frankly be asking what the point is in introducing this ban if it is still going to result in so much waste just being shipped south of the Border.'
Earlier this year, the UK Government published a consultation on the 'near elimination of biodegradable waste disposal in landfill from 2028'. However, there is no immediate plan for a ban in England.
Scotland's recycling rates have increased by fewer than two percentage points over the past decade to 43.5 per cent of waste. They are lower than the figures for England and Wales, and far behind the 64.7 per cent recorded in Wales.
The Scottish Government said the 'vast majority' of councils had alternative measures in place before the landfill ban comes into force, but they will 'work closely with local authorities and sector bodies to monitor and review any related issues, which may arise as the date of the ban approaches'.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
13 minutes ago
- The Independent
MPs voting to legalise assisted dying is a momentous day for choice
Many of the great advances of liberal social legislation have been made in the form of bills promoted by backbench MPs under a benign Labour government. The abolition of the death penalty in 1965, by a bill sponsored by Sydney Silverman; the partial decriminalisation of homosexuality in 1967, by a bill from Leo Abse; the Abortion Act 1967, by a bill from David Steel; and the Divorce Reform Act 1969, which followed another private member's bill by Abse. To this roll call of liberal reform, the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Act is now likely to be added, and Kim Leadbeater's name will join those of her illustrious predecessors. In a week in which the House of Commons has also voted to decriminalise abortion, it is good to see that progress is still being made towards giving citizens more choice in how they live their lives – including in today's case how they end them. This is a difficult subject, and, as with any step forward to a more liberal society, there are those who object that the change breaches a fundamental moral principle. We understand that there are some difficult moral issues in assisted dying, but we do not accept that today's vote in the Commons crosses some kind of Rubicon. The Independent 's starting point is that it cannot be right to treat as criminal someone who is terminally ill and who wants to decide the time and manner of their death – or the people who assist them in this decision. The only question, it seems to us, is whether the protection against pressure being put on someone to end their life was strong enough. There were those MPs who argued today that those protections can never be 100 per cent secure, and it may be that in no part of life can people be absolutely protected from malign actors. But the protections in the bill are as good as they can be. They have been significantly strengthened since the bill was first published. The main change that Ms Leadbeater has made to the bill has been to replace a High Court judge with a panel of a lawyer, a social worker and a psychiatrist as the second line of defence after two doctors have approved a patient's decision. This is a better arrangement, drawing on a wider range of expertise. There remain concerns about the bill. One of the objections we take most seriously is from the Royal College of Psychiatrists, which says, among other things, that 'there are not enough consultant psychiatrists to do what the bill asks'. This is a question of whether the provisions of the bill will be adequately resourced, which is related to the worry expressed by Wes Streeting, the health and social care secretary, who is opposed to the bill on the grounds that end-of-life care in the NHS is under-resourced as it is. The Independent 's view, however, is that the issue of resources should not be a reason for blocking the bill. If, for example, there is a shortage of psychiatrists, it would be wrong to deny the right to an assisted death altogether just because it cannot be offered to all. After all, the current situation is that those with means can travel to Switzerland to take advantage of the law there, as Mary Dejevsky writes in a moving account of her husband's death. This bill will make that choice available to more people in England and Wales, and under rather stricter rules than apply in Switzerland. We welcome today's decision by the House of Commons. It was decisive, although we wish it could have been more so, because this is the kind of change that benefits from a wide consensus. We urge the House of Lords to take its role seriously as a revising chamber. Peers should not seek to block the bill, or to pass amendments designed to render it ineffective. Instead, they should look at those aspects of the bill that are most contentious and seek to improve the legislation if at all possible. Ultimately, however, the upper house should respect the democratic mandate of the Commons and pass this law, the most significant social policy shift by a private member's bill since abortion was legalised in 1967, to allow more people to make their own decisions about their lives and how to end them.
The Sun
15 minutes ago
- The Sun
Palestine Action ‘to be BANNED' like terror group after they broke into RAF Brize Norton & vandalised 2 planes
PALESTINE Action is set to be "proscribed" and "branded a terror group" by the home secretary in the coming weeks, according to the BBC. Activists from the pro-Palestinian group broke into RAF Brize Norton overnight in a video shared online by members. Now, Yvette Cooper is preparing a written statement before Parliament on Monday - which if passed will make becoming a member of the group illegal, reports the BBC. It will then need to be enacted through new legislation. Proscription is used to ban terror groups in the UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer condemned the attack as "disgraceful" today. The MoD earlier slammed the "vandalism of Royal Air Force assets" in a scathing statement. Brize Norton is the RAF's largest airbase and home to more than 6,000 military and civilian personnel as well as the UK's largest military aircraft. The MoD has slammed the "vandalism of Royal Air Force assets" in a scathing statement. A spokeswoman for the ministry said: "Our armed forces represent the very best of Britain. "They put their lives on the line for us, and their display of duty, dedication and selfless personal sacrifice are an inspiration to us all. "It is our responsibility to support those who defend us." 1
The National
15 minutes ago
- The National
Warning for Scotland as report finds time running out to limit climate change
On Thursday, top scientists warned that the Earth could breach the 1.5C global warming limit in as little as three years. It comes as the Scottish Government published its carbon budgets plan, a replacement for net-zero targets that were not reached. Campaigners described the move as a 'weakening' of climate policy. With the new climate change plan draft due later this year and only one full parliamentary term left before the Holyrood 2026 elections, campaigners have criticised the Scottish Government's 'slowing' approach to tackling climate issues. READ MORE: SNP councillor forces Labour to take action against Israeli arms sales Rising temperatures in Scotland could have a devastating impact on communities, with increasing risks of flooding, rising sea levels and coastal erosion, or dry hot weather causing sweeping wildfires and water scarcity. Jamie Livingstone, head of Oxfam Scotland, said: 'We're going to be having the new Climate Change Plan published in draft form in autumn that will cover from 2026 through to 2040. 'The near term of that is going to be absolutely critical, which means, you know, the next Scottish Parliament will make or break Scotland's ambitions to achieve net zero by 2045. 'But we will stand no chance of delivering that unless the Climate Change plan is backed up by meaningful investment.' Livingstone (below) added that the 'richest and biggest polluters are driving the climate crisis' and should have to pay up. 'If we don't invest now, then it will cost us much more down the line to respond to that,' he said. He added: 'What people don't want in Scotland is any more hollow climate promises. We've kind of been there, we've done that, that undermines public confidence. 'Actually what we need to see is near term action, properly financed and delivered in a way that is genuinely fair. That's what people in Scotland want to see going into the Scottish elections and throughout the next parliament.' Meanwhile, Rosie Hampton, oil and gas campaigns manager at Friends of the Earth (FoE) Scotland, also argued that companies who have 'contributed vastly' to the climate crisis should be made to pay. She said: 'I think if people felt like there was a clearer sense of who's coughing up and who's actually going to save money, I think people would feel a lot more confident that measures to address the climate crisis actually can save them money and improve people's lives. READ MORE: Scottish Labour drop below Alba and Greens in Highlands by-election 'There's that kind of absence of Scottish Government and political will to say - this is who's paying for it, because this is how you've contributed. People fill in the gaps and they think, well, I'm going to have to have to pay for it. 'That's not a just transition, it's not fair, because why should ordinary people be forced to bear the brunt of it? 'It's a legitimate concern. It should be big industry, who have profited off oil and gas and things like that for a long time when communities haven't seen the benefit.' 'We need to see a serious level of ambition and a recognition of just how much needs to change,' Hampton added. Scottish Greens co-leader Patrick Harvie told The National he had concerns that the Scottish Government's 'policy response is getting weaker' while the 'pace of warming is getting more alarming'. 'It's not just about the SNP, it's about our whole political landscape,' Harvie said. He said that when the party started talks with former first minister Nicola Sturgeon, that would later lead to the Bute House Agreement, Scotland was already missing its climate targets and needed to 'accelerate'. 'That means we need to do some of the politically difficult stuff, the easy stuff's all been done,' Harvie added. (Image: PA) 'If we're not going to be politically able to do the more challenging things, that means changing the way we move about, that means changing the way we heat our homes. It means changing agriculture as well and giving rural communities a viable way forward that isn't high carbon. If we're not willing to do those things, then we fail.' The MSP added that he was 'disturbed' by the Scottish Government refusing to accept certain recommendations from the Climate Change Committee (CCC) in its carbon budget plan. The Scottish Government has been contacted for comment.
