The planning appeal for an Edinburgh hyperscale data centre is on hold until developers submit an EIA. The DPEA, the Scottish Government Department dealing with the Edinburgh Gyle data centre appeal has said that the developers must now submit an Environmental Impact Assessment or the appeal cannot progress.
This has been covered in:
The National Environmental Impact Assessment needed for South Gyle AI data centre
This comes after Environmental Rights Centre Scotland wrote to the Scottish Government to request an Environmental Impact Assessment direction (which would.overrule Edinburgh’s decision not to require one) on behalf of Rupert Nash who is a research fellow at the EPCC, the UK’s first National Supercomputing Centre, at Edinburgh University.
In the response to the screening direction the case officer writes to the developer:
“You are required to confirm within 21 days beginning with the date of this notice whether you will submit an EIA report. Under regulation 15(4) of the EIA regulations, if you fail to give such confirmation, I will be under no duty to deal further with the appeal.”
The Reporter also noted [1] that:
- The proposals will use a huge amount of energy which “has the potential for significant effects on climate and the environment in terms of the sources of this energy and release of greenhouse gases”
- It isn’t clear how the developer’s assertion that they would use 100% renewable power would work
- the Reporter rejected the argument from the developer that the data centre will not impact on climate targets because the National Planning Framework says it won’t.
- There will be backup diesel generators and these have not been adequately detailed in the application
The documents are live on the DPEA Webpage
This is significant because, at present 7 of the 12 hyperscale data centres that have reached the EIA screening stage have not been required to the an EIA. Now that the Scottish Government has made this direction for a data centre at appeal, which Ministers will need to decide on, we believe that they will need to ensure that this is the case for all hyperscale data centres in the planning system.
The Cabinet Secretary for Climate Action and Rural Affairs, in a response to a Parliamentary Question, assumed that hyperscale AI data centres should have EIAs. In response to a question in the Scottish Parliament on 24 June from Julie Macdonald MSP, Cabinet Secretary Gillian Martin said the following:
‘Our stance on the growth zone initiative is that, obviously, we recognise that, where a data centre development is proposed, it must have strict environmental impact assessments associated with it.’
In the case of the development in the AI Growth zone at Chapelhall, one of the two sites we know of has received an EIA screening decision so far and it will not be required to do an EIA.
The Government must act now to ensure EIAs for all hyperscale data centre developments
We believe that, now the Scottish Government has asked for an EIA to be produced to help them make a decision on one of the smallest hyperscale data centres that is in the planning system, they will need to insist that all hypercsale data centres should be subject to EIA. We believe they can do this via powers they hold under the EIA Regulations, without having to change Schedule 1 of the EIA Regulations, which they have been reluctant to do.
The advice we have received from ERCS regarding this is the following
“The Scottish Government has the power under The Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) (Scotland) Regulations 2017 to “give directions that development which is both of a description set out in Column 1 of the table in schedule 2, and of a class described in the direction, is EIA development for the purposes of these Regulations” (Regulation 50).
“The Scottish Government could use this power to issue a direction which says that all data centre planning applications above a certain size require an EIA (so long as they fall within sch. 2, column 1 – which most will as ‘industrial estate development projects’ or ‘urban development projects’).
“The Regulation 50 power to issue EIA directions is separate from the Scottish Government’s power to issue directions to call in planning applications. The latter comes from S46 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997.”
Rupert Nash, who brought the challenge said:
“I am very pleased the Reporter largely agreed that an EIA is necessary, particularly that she rejected the applicants’ circular reasoning around NPF4 allowing them to assume greenhouse gas emissions are automatically negligible and, given emerging evidence of a data centre heat island effect, she ordered that waste heat be included.”
Ben Christman of ERCS said:
“We are relieved that the Scottish Government’s planning reporter has decided an EIA is required for this proposed data centre.
“We requested the reporter to intervene in this matter. Both the Council and the developer opposed our request.
“The Reporter’s decision effectively overturns a previous screening opinion made by Edinburgh Council, where the Council decided that no EIA was required. The Reporter’s decision raises questions about the rigour of the Council’s screening process.
“Data centres can have significant effects on the environment because of their vast demands for energy and water. It is vital that these effects are fully considered and understood during the planning process, so that the Scottish Government and members of the public can properly consider whether proposals for data centres should be granted planning permission.”
Kat Jones, APRS said
“The Scottish Government have evidently realised that, in order to make an informed decision in the planning appeal for the Edinburgh hyperscale data centre, they need to see an Environmental Impact Assessment.
“We now need to see the Scottish Government make EIAs mandatory for all similar developments so that local authorities also have access to adequate information for their own decision making. ERCS and ourselves have been calling for this to happen since late last year and it is now becoming urgent, with two live applications which will require decisions from Fife and Falkirk councils in the autumn.”
[1] Extract from the Reporter’s findings
“The proposals require a large quantity of energy to operate (estimated at 210MW). This is in addition to energy for the construction of the proposals. This level of energy use has the potential for significant effects on climate and the environment in terms of the sources of this energy and release of greenhouse gases.
(i) Whilst the appellant indicates that energy would be provided from renewable sources, it is not clear how this could be achieved and therefore that it is not likely there would be significant effects on climate or the environment from greenhouse gas emissions either individually or cumulatively. The appellant has suggested it would agree a Power Purchase Agreement (PPA) but this does not guarantee that all energy used by the proposed datacentre would be generated through renewable technologies or whether this would result in consequences such as a requirement for additional renewable or alternative generating systems to supplement the national grid. (That is, whether the datacentre would use ‘surplus’ energy generated from existing renewable projects, or whether it would necessitate additional renewable projects). The degree of uncertainty on this matter, when interpreted in light of the precautionary principle, means that likely significant effects cannot be ruled out and an EIA is required
(ii) The appellant has relied on wording in NPF4 as justification that the proposal would not have effects on greenhouse gas emission reduction targets, but there is no evidence to support this. Such an approach is also inconsistent with Circular 1/2017 paragraph 35, which advises: “It is emphasised that the basic test of the need for EIA in a particular case is the likelihood of significant effects on the environment. It should not be assumed, for example, that conformity with a development plan rules out the need for EIA.”
(iii) The proposals include back-up generators. These can have significant effects on
the climate and environment through discharge of greenhouse gases. Scale of effects will depend on the number of generators and the fuel used. The Energy and Sustainability Statement Including Waste Heat Strategy refers to these as diesel generators. It indicates that further consideration could be given to use of hydrogenated vegetable oil (HVO) and the addendum to this document (F001) suggests that HVO generators would be used. Any oil-based fuel will give rise to potentially significant greenhouse gas emissions, either through emergency use or routine maintenance testing. No details of numbers of generators have been provided.
(iv) Figures for energy usage during construction and operation do not appear to include an assessment of all aspects of the whole of the proposed development (e.g. the proposed sports pitches)