Why Foxglove and Global Action Plan are opposing the Woodlands data centre
This week our co-Executive Director, Martha, made submissions to the public Inquiry into a proposed data centre in Buckinghamshire (you can read our submissions here!)
Data centres are large, industrial warehouses full of computers gulping their way through power and water every moment of every day. Recently, the demand for them has increased as more and more data is generated by our digital activities and particularly AI tools like Chat GPT. A ChatGPT query requires approx. 10 times the computing power of a Google search.
This Inquiry is taking place because planning permission for this Buckinghamshire data centre has been rejected twice due to its impact on greenbelt land, but Angela Rayner, the new Secretary of State, has intervened to order a review.
Much of the opposition to the data centre has focussed on the potential impact of the data centre on the local landscape, rather than on what its impact on critical resources like power and water might be, and its contribution to the climate crisis. This is where we focussed our efforts. We believe the Inquiry had not properly considered the wider environmental impact until Foxglove and Global Action Plan made submissions on Wednesday.
We focused on the complete dearth of information about its environmental impact, the vague detail provided by the developers on environmental benefits promised to the public, and the absence of any concrete measures to properly hold the developers to account.
There seems to be a trend of developers playing fast and loose with reality when it comes to the environmental “benefits” and impacts of data centres, and this project was no different.
For example, a particular concern to come out of the Inquiry so far has been the developer’s claim that no water will be used to cool this site, despite the enormous water consumption of data centres being a matter of public record. (See this study from Oxford University: https://eng.ox.ac.uk/case-studies/the-true-cost-of-water-guzzling-data-centres/)
Then there is the developer’s claim that data centres will in fact help tackle climate change. There’s little more to say on that particular claim because no proper evidence was provided to back it up.
Then there’s the problem of power. All those computers require a lot of electricity, and the UK’s power demand from data centres is predicted to increase 600% over the next decade. But this data centre’s massive electricity demands are not even mentioned in the proposal, let alone mitigated, and therefore an environmental impact assessment (EIA) was deemed not required.
The developers of the Woodlands project did, however, address the electricity required to power the buildings, but not the computers inside – which is like considering the fuel needed to make a car but not the fuel needed to drive it.
To fill in the lack of reliable information, our partners Global Action Plan used figures available in the energy statement to calculate that this data centre would use the same amount of electricity annually as 35,569 households. That’s more electricity than a medium sized town uses, just to power one data centre.
Foxglove is not anti-technology or anti-data centre, but we do think all major developments should be considered in the context of the deepening climate crisis. And with data centres, there are serious concerns to be addressed.
In the end, this Inquiry will make a recommendation regarding the Woodlands data centre, and Secretary of State Angela Rayner will then make the final call as to whether it can go ahead or not.
The UK already has hundreds of data centres, more than anywhere else in Western Europe, and wants even more. The government has been courted by Big Tech and has already been busy removing all obstacles to new construction with proposals to bypass local authority planning rules.
The decision in the Woodlands project is a line in the sand moment – will there be proper scrutiny of the environmental impacts of data centres and the claims of developers, or will fast and loose be allowed to win the day.
We have made submissions making our concerns known. But more action may be needed to ensure that Angela Rayner makes the right decision for the country and for the planet.
More to come soon.