ARE we sleepwalking into an AI data centre disaster in Scotland?
That is certainly the point of view of campaigners such as Kat Brown from Action to Protect Rural Scotland, who fear that the 18-or-so projects looking for planning permission and a further six in the pipeline across Scotland could drastically impact on electricity prices.
Not to mention the extremely high use of water by these centres, as well as the potential toll on communities and the environment.
Of course, for many, such warnings are seen as simple doom-mongering. The industry claims today’s AI data centres are, in fact, quite green. And that the economic benefits are huge.
But in the face of such a rapid expansion, Ross Greer called on the First Minister at FMQs today to introduce a moratorium on these so-called "hyperscale" data centres in Scotland before parliament breaks for the summer.
In other words, let’s press pause on all this until there is a clear national strategy.
The Scottish Greens co-leader highlighted that if all the current proposals are approved, they'll need up to 6000MW of electricity – which is more than 1.5 times Scotland's current peak demand.
“There currently isn’t any clear government strategy or guidance for councils on how to deal with these applications,” Greer said.
“They are completely different to the kind of data centres which already exist in Scotland. We’re not talking about socially and economically useful projects like the Edinburgh University supercomputer here.
“The Government’s policy is to support what they refer to as ‘green’ data centres, but this position was decided before ChatGPT even existed, before Elon Musk launched Grok, and before any of these hyperscale proposals came forward."
But Swinney refused to make any commitment to a pause or bringing in a national strategy.
The First Minister said that in defining green data centres it is for councils to interpret and apply national planning policy and in each case they should consider renewable energy use and use of energy efficient technologies.
He added that parliament would need to have an open discussion about making any changes to national planning policy.
Now, not even the most adamant of anti-AI data centre campaigners argues that these facilities wouldn’t bring any economic benefit. But the question is always at what cost.
I recently spoke with a campaigner from the US state of Virginia , which now hosts the largest concentration of data centres anywhere in the world – more than 600 currently operational.
“Scotland is beautiful, and if you want to keep Scotland beautiful, you should run like a plague is approaching you from this industry,” said Elena Schlossberg, the executive director for the Coalition to Protect Prince William County, one of the areas of Virginia most impacted by the industry.
“You guys are really vulnerable, and you’re vulnerable because you have water resources, you have rural land, and you have renewable energy that this industry will not only suck all of that, but then they’re going to have to rely on fossil fuel. That’s the reality.”
Schlossberg described AI data centres as “heavy industrial” – saying that it changes the topography of the land that not only absorbs water, but also cleans and filters the water that flows into drinking water supplies.
She added: “What is happening in Virginia and across the country is what will continue to happen until this industry is forced to innovate.”
The campaigner went on to say that it is true that the industry does bring some economic benefit, but added that it has its drawbacks too.
Speaking about Loudoun County in Virginia, which has over 200 data centres alone, Schlossberg said: “Their budget is now so heavy in data centres, I think their entire economic framework would collapse if the industry left. Which is also a cautionary tale. We call that: all your eggs in one basket.”
She added: “So, there can be some revenue that is realised on a local level. But once again, looking at Virginia and across the United States, our utilities are under such stress.”
Asked what she believes the UK and Scottish Governments can do to mitigate some of the negative effects she has seen in the US, Schlossberg said that energy is crucial.
“The AI data centre industry has to pay for its transmission lines. It has to pay for its substations. It has to pay for its generation,” she said.
“Are you going to allow private property to be absorbed by this infrastructure for the transmission lines? Well, I would say no. Why should any community bear the brunt or be forced to sacrifice?”
She added that the transmission lines should instead be underground.
But, of course, decisions and discussions such as these might already be happening (or soon will be) amid this raft of applications.
Today, The National also revealed routine backup power tests could make a “green” AI data centre in Larbert one of Scotland’s top 10 polluters .
In the worst-case scenario, the developer’s air quality modelling predicts nearby homes and facilities could be exposed to “very high” nitrogen dioxide levels of up to 8800 micrograms per cubic metre, exceeding the healthy hourly limit of 200 micrograms per cubic metre 44 times.
The figures were included in the environmental impact assessment (EIA) required as part of the planning application.
Of note, campaigners have also pointed out that many other AI data centre proposals, including the 600 MW in Auchtertool, don’t require an EIA, meaning planning applications could proceed without known impacts on air quality.
The technology may be new, but the warning signs with this AI data centre boom are all too familiar: strain on infrastructure and the environment, opaque corporate promises and communities afraid of the consequences.
If these decisions are rushed, the long‑term consequences could be baked in with minimal scrutiny.
It should certainly be food for thought for the First Minister. Because if these plans are rushed, Scots may live with the consequences for decades.
