Opening photograph: data centre server racks. Taylor Vick / Unsplash. Illustrative photograph.
Britain wants to lead the artificial intelligence revolution. Yet an anchor tenant has withdrawn from a flagship Essex project after power delays, a Scottish developer has revised its supply model, and an American AI company is reportedly buying billions of dollars of gas generators. [3] [4] [7] [8]
These developments bring a serious policy conflict into view: the race for computing power needs electricity, networks and resources that can actually be delivered. Ministers must reconcile that demand with legally binding emissions budgets, electricity prices and pressure on water supplies.
The Government can’t have its cake and eat it.
It must demonstrate how its technology and energy ambitions fit together—and what they mean for the people expected to live alongside the infrastructure and pay the bills.
The Fourth Industrial Revolution—and Hawking’s warning
The language of technological revolution has been with us for years. In the Commons on 20 December 2019, Boris Johnson spoke about the Fourth Industrial Revolution, saying:
“pioneer standards for the fourth industrial revolution” [1]
Professor Stephen Hawking saw enormous potential in AI, including advances against poverty and disease. He also warned about powerful systems developing goals that conflict with humanity’s. At Cambridge in October 2016, he described creating AI as potentially civilisation’s greatest event, then warned:
“But it could also be the last, unless we learn how to avoid the risks.” [2]
His warning was conditional: humanity’s choices about control, responsibility and safeguards mattered. Today, those questions sit alongside immediate physical demands. The technology needs electricity, cooling and industrial infrastructure. Its benefits must justify the resources it consumes.
The thirst for power is already reshaping the race
The International Energy Agency’s updated 2026 outlook projects global electricity consumption by all data centres rising from 485 terawatt-hours in 2025 to around 950 TWh in 2030. AI-focused data centre consumption grows faster, tripling over that period in its projection. [17]
That is a forecast, with uncertainty over demand, efficiency and delivery. It nevertheless describes a substantial expansion that energy systems must accommodate.
On 8 November, Reuters reported the Financial Times’ account of Anthropic securing 1.7 GW of gas-fired generator commitments for about $3.4 billion from OnePWR Solutions. The FT said Anthropic took over Caterpillar equipment orders. Reuters stated that it could not independently verify the report. [3]
Our reading is straightforward: equipment availability and access to dependable electricity have become strategic commercial constraints. Buying generators is one response; it still leaves fuel supply, permissions, construction and operating costs to resolve.
Microsoft’s withdrawal shows what a connection delay can mean
Microsoft withdrew from its agreement to anchor Nscale’s Loughton development in Essex after electricity supply delays pushed the expected grid connection into the 2030s. Data Center Dynamics reported that National Grid had not agreed the earlier 2026 connection target. [4]
The withdrawal concerned that site. Microsoft reaffirmed its broader UK investment commitment, while Nscale said it remained committed to Loughton and was exploring alternative power supplies. [4]
The lesson is about deliverability. An investment announcement, an intended opening date and a usable electricity connection are separate milestones. Ministers should judge progress against the power that will actually be available when a customer needs it.
Scotland’s renewable promise has become a grid supply plan
The before-and-after evidence in Lanarkshire comes from the Government and DataVita themselves.
The Government’s 29 January announcement said the new AI Growth Zone’s energy would be “drawn from on-site renewables”. DataVita’s original announcement described 500 MW of AI-ready data centre capacity alongside more than 1 GW of renewable infrastructure linked by private wires. [5] [6]
Its November FAQs now state: “Our data centres are fully grid served”. The company says nearby renewable generation could supply the campus directly in future, through separate proposals. Its current energy page describes the same model. [7] [8]
That is a material change in the published supply description. Grid capacity and the wider electricity system now sit explicitly at the centre of the plan, while direct renewable connections remain a future possibility.
DataVita also says it has no plans to use gas within its data centres. That distinguishes this Scottish proposal from Anthropic’s reported gas equipment purchase. The evidence supports scrutiny of the revised electricity plan; it does not establish that DataVita has cancelled every renewable proposal. [7]
There is public financial exposure, too. Separately, a £202 million National Wealth Fund guarantee supports approximately £300 million of financing for two data centres within the wider growth zone. This is a guarantee backing specified lending, rather than a cash grant for the whole advertised programme. [9]
The public deserves a clear explanation of the revised power arrangements and how the financing, connection timetable and delivery commitments fit together.
The thirst for water brings the consequences closer to home
Water deserves the same scrutiny as electricity. The IEA’s October 2026 report finds that nearly 40% of the identified capacity of data centres dedicated to AI is in areas with high or extremely high baseline water stress. This is a global finding, highlighting the importance of location. [18]
The report also explains the trade-off: cooling systems that minimise water consumption can use more electricity, while the largest share of water use across the data centre value chain occurs upstream in power generation. [18]
Different designs have different impacts. DataVita says its closed-loop system recirculates cooling water and releases heat through dry coolers, giving it near-zero ongoing cooling-water consumption. That claim should be assessed through the project’s detailed design and reporting. [7]
The Government’s 28 October statement acknowledges the need to assess local water availability and the interaction between energy and water use. It calls for water-efficient design and assessment of recycled supplies before additional freshwater is relied upon. [19]
For communities, the practical questions are clear. How much water will a particular site need during normal operation and extreme heat? Where will it come from during drought? What electricity demand will its cooling system create? What conditions will protect existing users and the environment?
Humanity’s interests extend beyond faster computing. Drinking water, food production, healthy rivers, affordable energy and public services all depend on responsible resource decisions. These questions belong in the assessment before infrastructure commitments become difficult to reverse.
Ministers already recognise that the grid cannot deliver every ambition on time
The Government’s Data Centre Covenant says Britain needs 6 GW of AI data centre capacity by 2030. It proposes a controlled framework for temporary on-site generation at exceptionally strategic projects where other measures cannot secure grid capacity in time. [10]
The same covenant promises that developers will cover the energy costs they create so other consumers do not pick up the bill. It argues that well-integrated demand could spread fixed system costs more widely. [10]
Those outcomes depend on location, timing, contracts and infrastructure. The IEA likewise finds that data centre growth can affect prices differently depending on how investment, demand and regulation are coordinated. [17]
The test is a published, enforceable allocation of costs and risks. Households should be able to see how the Government’s promise will work.
Gas brings another conflict: dependable power carries a carbon cost
Large gas generators in Great Britain generally face UK emissions trading obligations and Carbon Price Support, subject to the applicable rules and exemptions. Generating on-site provides no automatic exemption. [11] [12]
HMRC’s current gas Carbon Price Support rate is £0.00331 per kWh of fuel, or £3.31 per megawatt-hour of gas. For an illustrative plant converting 55% of its fuel energy into electricity, that component alone is approximately £6.02 per MWh of electricity, before emissions allowances, fuel and other costs. [11]
The Government plans to remove Carbon Price Support from April 2028. UK emissions trading will remain. The charges are separate tax and trading policies operating alongside the Climate Change Act. [14]
The price effect reaches beyond the generator. As the Commons Library explains, when gas sets the price in wholesale auctions, its fuel and carbon costs influence the electricity traded at that price. [13]
Carbon pricing is intended to encourage lower-emission alternatives. The affordability challenge is delivering those alternatives while meeting the demand that still requires gas. Wind, solar, nuclear, storage and flexible generation must be assessed together against cost, availability and delivery dates.
Climate law requires the ambitions to add up
The Climate Change Act sets the legally binding 2050 target and five-year carbon budgets. Clean Power 2030 is a separate government policy aiming for at least 95% clean generation in a typical weather year, with gas retained for essential backup. [15] [16]
Emissions from gas burned at a British data centre still enter UK emissions accounting. Private generation can solve a connection problem while creating additional pressure elsewhere in the national emissions plan. [15]
AI expansion and emissions reductions can be compatible where the supply, efficiency, flexibility and infrastructure are delivered. Ministers must demonstrate that compatibility for their chosen programme, with credible costs and contingency plans.
For HOPE, defending a timetable while leaving those tests unresolved is where policy risks becoming ideology.
Crunch time: show the power, the water and the public benefit
The Government must publish an independent national impact assessment bringing these choices together.
Show the power. Identify dependable supply, necessary network works, binding connection milestones and what happens when construction slips.
Show the price. Publish the total cost, the effect of carbon charges, who funds reinforcement and how households are protected if forecast demand fails to arrive.
Show the water. Set out site-specific demand, cooling choices, drought resilience and safeguards for communities, agriculture and nature.
Show the benefit and the safeguards. Explain the jobs, public value, financial exposure and accountability arrangements. Hawking’s warning makes scrutiny of powerful AI part of that responsibility.
Britain should be capable of developing useful technology while protecting the resources and communities that sustain it. That requires evidence, honest choices and a willingness to change course when a chosen route fails the test.
The Government can’t have its cake and eat it. It is now crunch time: will ministers adapt policy to deliver secure, affordable progress—or defend their chosen timetable while investment and public confidence move elsewhere?
Help us make them show the evidence
Our Parliamentary petition calls for Climate Change Act targets to be suspended and a full national impact assessment undertaken. It has passed the 10,000-signature threshold for a Government response. The next goal is 100,000 signatures, at which point it would be considered for a Parliamentary debate. [20]
Sign, share and help us demand a complete account of the costs, consequences and choices.
MAKE THEM SHOW THE EVIDENCE.
Shane Oxer — Hope to Save Our Countryside
Evidence checked on 8 November 2026. This article distinguishes reported transactions, developers’ statements, forecasts and HOPE’s commentary.
Sources and evidence
[1] Hansard: Boris Johnson, 20 December 2019
[2] University of Cambridge: Stephen Hawking’s speech, 19 October 2016
[3] Reuters: reported Anthropic generator transaction, 8 November 2026
[4] Data Center Dynamics: Microsoft’s Loughton withdrawal, 19 October 2026
[5] UK Government: Lanarkshire AI Growth Zone announcement, 29 January 2026
[6] DataVita: original AI Growth Zone announcement
[7] DataVita: FAQs updated November 2026
[8] DataVita: current renewable-power description
[9] National Wealth Fund: DataVita financing and guarantee
[10] HM Treasury: Data Centre Covenant, 28 October 2026
[11] HMRC: current Carbon Price Support rates
[12] UK Government: participation in the UK Emissions Trading Scheme
[13] House of Commons Library: electricity bills and marginal pricing
[14] HM Treasury: Budget 2026, planned CPS removal in April 2028
[15] Climate Change Act 2008: targets, budgets and UK emissions
[16] UK Government: Clean Power 2030 Action Plan
[17] IEA: Key Questions on Energy and AI, 2026 executive summary
[18] IEA: Powering Artificial Intelligence, October 2026 executive summary
[19] UK Parliament: energy and water reporting statement, 28 October 2026
[20] Parliamentary petition 780321
Leave a Reply