Two planned datacentres will have higher UK carbon emissions than ExxonMobil, analysis finds
Analysis by the non-profit group Foxglove has found that two planned English datacentres will, once fully operational, produce more carbon emissions annually than ExxonMobil's entire UK operations, prompting warnings from campaigners and MPs that unchecked datacentre growth poses a "serious threat" to Britain's legally binding climate targets. The Wapseys Wood site in Buckinghamshire and Quest Park in Bedfordshire are among the first projects fast-tracked through the government's nationally significant infrastructure project regime, which bypasses local planning authorities, and both are seeking to build their own gas-fired power stations because of long delays connecting to the national grid.
Foxglove calculated the two datacentres will use 1.3GW of power and emit more than 4.5m tonnes of carbon a year, compared with ExxonMobil's 3.9m tonnes in the UK in 2023. A government spokesperson called the figures "misleading" as they assume 100% utilisation from the outset, though Foxglove and Friends of the Earth defended the methodology as standard practice. There are currently 315 datacentres queued to connect to the UK grid, representing 73GW of demand — almost double the UK's peak winter energy usage — and critics including Caroline Lucas, Toby Perkins MP and lawyers from ClientEarth warned the rollout could undermine progress on fossil fuel reduction unless stricter controls are introduced.
- Two UK datacentres could out-emit ExxonMobil's entire UK carbon output
- Both plan on-site gas power stations due to grid connection delays
- Government disputes the figures; critics call rollout a climate risk
New here? Start with this
Datacentres are buildings packed with computer servers that store and process information for websites, businesses and online services. They need large amounts of electricity to run and keep their equipment cool, so their power use can lead to carbon emissions, depending on how that electricity is produced.
The UK government can classify very large projects as nationally significant infrastructure, allowing decisions to be made through a national process rather than by local councils. The Wapseys Wood and Quest Park proposals are seeking their own gas-fired power stations because they face long waits for a connection to the national electricity grid.
The debate is about how to meet rising demand for digital services while reducing emissions under the UK’s climate targets. Plans for hundreds of datacentres are in the grid connection queue, but estimates of their future emissions depend on assumptions such as how much they will operate.
Both sides, in good faith
The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.
The case for
The scale of projected annual emissions—exceeding ExxonMobil's entire UK operations—is genuinely concerning, particularly when 315 datacentres are queued for grid connection representing 73GW of demand. Fast-tracking these projects through planning systems that bypass local scrutiny, whilst requiring temporary gas-fired power stations and without firm commitments to renewable energy, threatens to lock in decades of high-carbon infrastructure that could undermine the UK's binding climate targets unless far stricter environmental controls are imposed.
The case against
The analysis applies unrealistic worst-case assumptions of immediate 100% utilisation that don't reflect operational realities, and these datacentres represent essential digital infrastructure for UK economic competitiveness and technological capability. The gas-fired plants are interim solutions whilst grid connections are established; the focus should be on accelerating grid development and mandating renewable energy transitions rather than blocking projects vital to Britain's digital future and technological leadership.
Americas Business Climate Companies Science Technology UK World