Facts worth spreading.
Download free. Share everywhere.

50 GW — three times Britain's entire peak demand

Applications to connect data centres to the British grid. The number that shows the scale of speculative excess.

The queue is 21× what is actually built

A proportional bar chart showing queued vs needed vs connected. The most shareable data graphic from this research.

12 weeks — and most communities never know the clock is running

The consultation window every resident facing a data centre application needs to know about.

"Communities deserve better than a 12-week window"

Scott Seivwright on why communities facing data centre planning applications deserve proper time, information, and a real say in decisions that last decades.

928 million litres — one data centre, one year

Meta's Clonee campus in Ireland. The number that puts the scale of data centre water use in plain sight.

928 ML vs 2.7 ML — the 340× difference

Two data centres in the same city. The difference is entirely the cooling system. Low-water design exists. It is not required.

"The planning system never asks what happens to this river in a drought year"

Scott Seivwright on the fundamental gap in how planning authorities assess data centre water impact.

1,125 ML per year — and the Environment Agency says it's an undercount

England's data centre water consumption, 83% in the already water-scarce South East, peaking in summer when rivers run lowest.

2× — the poorest pay twice the national share on water

3.7% of income versus a 1.6% average. The boom pushes that bill higher — onto the people least able to carry it.

Private reward, public risk

Operators get cheap power and £80m a year in support. Billpayers carry the risk. The clearest framing of the whole debate.

£0 — the household-cost estimate nobody will publish

~140 data centres want 50 GW — more than Britain's entire peak. Tens of billions committed, and nobody says what it costs you.

A 1% rise: a rounding error, or heating versus food

Bills are flat-rate. The same increase is nothing to a wealthy household and an impossible choice for a struggling one.

National, not local — who decides on the biggest sites

Routed through the Nationally Significant Infrastructure regime, the largest data centres are decided by central government — not your council.

Speed vs. consent

The same mechanisms that remove barriers to investment also remove the channels for a community to be heard. Right now, the framework favours speed.

Benefits vs. costs — be honest about both

Benefits are real but their long-term local delivery is unproven. The resource costs are concentrated and certain. Both belong in the decision.

Make the safeguards binding

Confirmed water supply and social-value assessment as enforceable conditions, not descriptions. Independent oversight. Sunset clauses on accelerated powers.