AI data centres could ‘torpedo’ climate goals

As the UN climate talks COP31 begin in Türkiye, campaigners are warning that AI data centre developments in Scotland could ‘torpedo’ climate plans and make data centres the largest emitting sector in the country by 2030.

Campaigners are adamant that the remaining carbon budget should not be spent on ‘AI slop instead of food production.’

There are 23 proposals for AI data centres of different sizes and in various stages of planning across Scotland. If these were all given permission by the Scottish Government, the 14 million tonnes of new climate pollution they would create annually would swallow up over half of Scotland’s remaining carbon budget.

AI data centres impacts on climate budget

Scotland’s carbon budget allows for 406 million tonnes of climate pollution to be emitted between 2026 and 2045. If all 23 data centres were built, they would use 208 million tonnes of greenhouse gases – 51% of Scotland’s remaining carbon budget.

This would mean that other sectors of the economy would have to cut emissions further and faster to stay within national climate limits. Cuts on this scale would require huge and widespread additional changes to every sector of the economy, from farming, to housing and transport.

The climate warning comes ahead of a major march against AI Data Centres in Edinburgh on Saturday 14 November. This marks the midway point in the UN climate talks and is traditionally a moment of huge protest by civil society around the world.

Kim Pratt, Senior Campaigner with Friends of the Earth Scotland said:

“Data centres risk torpedoing Scotland’s climate plans. If ministers approved all these projects, every other sector of Scottish life would have to cut its climate pollution further and faster. We can’t allow our remaining climate budget to be wasted on AI slop instead of vital services, food production and things people genuinely need.”

“It would be a reckless dereliction of duty for the Scottish Government to continue allowing tech giants to push these enormous, polluting AI data centres without understanding the impacts they will have on our environment and our communities.”

“Imposing these AI data centres here would affect every person in Scotland. They would destabilise our energy systems, further increase the cost of household energy bills and seriously undermine any chance of meeting our climate goals.”

“The Scottish Government needs to show how AI data centres would benefit people in Scotland and who would bear the costs before any decisions are made. Thousands of people will march in Edinburgh this week to call for their right to have a say on AI data centres before it is too late.”

‘Massive’ demands for data centre energy

Current data centre capacity in Scotland is around 50MW of energy across a network of small data centres which support internet use and data storage. If the 23 new ones were approved, the total power demand would be 9100MW. These new data centres would be owned by giant tech companies and used for creating controversial AI slop, fake images and other content.

AI data centres have massive energy demands, which are not accounted for in the expansion of renewables or Scotland’s Climate Change Plan. In the longer-term, additional growth in renewables might be enough to meet the needs of data centres, but in the early years the mostly likely outcome is having to import more gas-fired electricity and burn more gas at Peterhead power station.

So far, only two of the 23 proposals have published assessments of their environmental impacts. Campaigners say that these assessments greatly underestimate the carbon impacts of the developments because of unrealistic projections of renewable energy supply.

Kat Jones, Director of Action to Protect Rural Scotland said:

“If every hyperscale data centre in the grid queue was to be built it would triple Scotland’s peak energy demand, we would see new records set for air pollution, and the process of decarbonising our economy would be set back by decades. These projects have come forward without a strategy, without a grid assessment, and without an assessment of their climate impacts.”