Scottish police expect ‘great deal of public opposition’ to planned Larbert datacentre
Scottish police have warned that a proposed datacentre in Larbert is likely to face significant public opposition and may need strong security measures to prevent disruptive incursions. The warning is an early official sign of wider unease over the rapid growth of datacentre proposals in Scotland, which could complicate UK plans to expand AI infrastructure.
Almost 7,000 objections have been lodged against the Larbert scheme, and campaigners said more than 100 people attended a local protest. Residents and environmental groups are concerned about its scale, including 200 proposed diesel backup generators near a terminally ill care home and a large hospital; across Scotland, at least 23 hyperscale projects are in planning, with combined projected electricity demand exceeding 1.5 times Scotland’s peak use.
- Police expect substantial opposition to Larbert’s proposed datacentre.
- Nearly 7,000 objections cite health, noise and environmental concerns.
- Scotland’s datacentre expansion could strain power and AI policy.
Both sides, in good faith
The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.
The case for
Supporters of the Larbert datacentre could argue that it would provide essential digital infrastructure, help attract investment and skilled jobs, and strengthen Scotland’s capacity to host data and AI-related services locally. They may say that opposition should be addressed through transparent consultation, careful siting, environmental safeguards and proportionate security, rather than treating resistance as a reason to forgo development that could serve wider economic and technological needs.
The case against
Opponents could argue that large datacentres can impose substantial costs on nearby communities through land use, energy and water demand, noise, visual impact and pressure on local infrastructure, while delivering fewer lasting local jobs than their scale suggests. They may regard the police warning as evidence that consent and trust have not been secured, and contend that developers and public authorities should demonstrate a clear local benefit and credible environmental limits before proceeding.