Data Centre & Environmental Impact: From Reporting to Actionable Insights
To download the report please enter your email address below:
Data Centres & Environmental Impact: From Reporting to Actionable Insights
Data Centres & Environmental Impact: Separating Evidence from Noise
Data centres are being built across the UK faster than anyone is measuring their environmental cost. Every AI prompt, cloud contract and digital service depends on them, yet no UK data centre is required to report the energy, water, refrigerants or waste behind them.
This working paper, by Dr Jayne Manley of Sunnyhill Consultants, Dr Ashwin Mehta of Mehtadology and Dave King of Differentis, sets out what is known, what can be estimated and what nobody yet collects across six areas of impact. It does not argue for or against data centres. It shows where the evidence runs out, and makes six recommendations to close the gap.
It is written for policymakers, developers and operators, communities facing a proposal, and organisations buying AI and cloud services. Below, you’ll find what the report covers, its headline findings and what the authors have to say. Enter your details to download the full report free.
Data Centres & Environmental Impact: From Reporting to Actionable Insights
It’s time to ask what our data centres really cost
The debate has moved from planning committees to primetime, and positions are hardening on both sides. Government and industry point to investment, jobs and digital infrastructure. Campaigners and some councils point to water scarcity, grid strain and pressure on land. Both have real evidence, and both are arguing with very little verified data, so the argument too often goes to whoever makes the boldest claim.
The stakes are rising. Government expects UK demand for compute to reach about 6.3 GW by 2030 and is designating AI Growth Zones to help meet it. In Scotland, around two dozen major proposals totalling about 6,000 MW compare with around 15 small sites operating today. Most existing capacity sits around London and the south-east, one of England’s most water-stressed regions.
Elsewhere, the facts are already on the table. Since 2024, every EU data centre of 500 kW or more has reported its energy and water performance each year, and a public A to G rating is proposed from 2027. A data centre in Frankfurt will soon have a public rating. An identical facility in Slough need report nothing.
This is your evidence base for a polarised debate
This working paper sets out what is known, what can be estimated and what remains unknown across six areas of impact: water; energy and carbon; land; chemicals and waste; noise, air quality and light; and the governance meant to keep them in check. It draws on peer-reviewed research, parliamentary evidence and live UK planning cases, and it says where the evidence runs out.
It is written for policymakers, developers and operators, communities facing a proposal, and organisations buying AI and cloud services. It does not argue against data centres, and it does not weigh their environmental costs against their economic benefits, which are argued elsewhere. It sets out six recommendations to close the data gap, and the questions anyone is entitled to ask in the meantime.
84%
new UK data centres proposed in areas already water-stressed or expected to be by 2040 (Global Action Plan, April 2026).
4 of 23
key questions about UK data centres’ environmental impact that published data can answer,
More than double
projected growth in global data centre electricity use between 2024 and 2030, with AI servers growing fastest (International Energy Agency, 2025).
19,000,000
Thames Water’s estimate for a single large data centre, equivalent to more than 50,000 households (Thames Water Business Plan 2025–30).
What the authors said…
The most important finding in this paper is not a number. It is the absence of one. Planning committees, regulators and communities are being asked to make decisions that will shape water supplies, land and carbon budgets for decades, without the basic facts they need. The data could be collected; nobody has yet been required to collect it. This paper sets out what we know, what we don’t, and the questions people are entitled to ask in the meantime.
Dr. Jayne Manley
Founder, Sunnyhill Consultants, and environmental strategist in partnership with Differentis
This paper asks difficult questions about the environmental impact of the technology we increasingly depend on. If we expect clients and suppliers to answer those questions, Differentis has to be ready to answer them too. We will put the questions in this paper to our own technology partners, and during the first half of 2027 we will publish a roadmap, developed with Jayne, setting out how we intend to apply environmental best practice across our operations and our client work.
Dave King
Chief Executive Officer, Differentis
AI is changing the arithmetic. Efficiency is improving per query, but newer uses such as reasoning models and AI agents need far more energy for every request, and agents running all day inside everyday processes will use more than per-query figures suggest. None of that is a reason to stop using AI. It is a reason to understand what it costs, and to make the choices that could reduce that cost substantially.
Dr Ashwin Mehta
Founder and Director, Mehtadology
Three key findings from our Data Centre and Environmental Impact report
What is the Data Centres and Environmental Impact report?
It is a working paper on the environmental footprint of UK data centres. It covers six areas of impact: water; energy and carbon; land; chemicals and waste; noise, air quality and light; and governance. For each one it sets out what is known, what can be estimated and what nobody yet collects. It then makes six recommendations to close the gap.
Who wrote it?
Dr Jayne Manley of Sunnyhill Consultants, Dr Ashwin Mehta of Mehtadology and Dave King of Differentis. Their backgrounds span environmental strategy, AI and technology transformation. The paper is published by Differentis, and Jayne works with Differentis as an environmental strategist.
Who is it for?
Four groups making decisions about data centres now: policymakers, developers and operators, communities facing a proposal, and organisations buying AI and cloud services. None of them needs to be a specialist. The evidence is the same for all four; the decisions they face differ.
Is the report against data centres?
No. It takes no side on whether data centres should be built. It assesses environmental costs and says where the evidence runs out. It does not weigh those costs against economic benefits such as investment, jobs and tax revenue, which are real and argued elsewhere.
What is the main finding?
The data needed to assess the environmental impact of UK data centres does not exist in usable form. Of the 23 key questions the paper examines, only 4 can be answered from published data. Without that evidence, planners, regulators, communities and buyers are left to guess.
Do UK data centres have to report their environmental performance?
No. Since 2024, every EU data centre with an IT load of 500 kW or more has reported its energy and water performance each year, and a public A to G rating is proposed from 2027. The UK has no equivalent requirement. Since September 2026, Scotland has required an Environmental Impact Assessment for data centre applications over 50 MW. That assesses impact at the planning stage, but it is not ongoing performance reporting.
How much water does a UK data centre use?
Nobody knows for certain, because no UK data centre is required to report it. Thames Water’s business plan estimates that a single large facility could use between 4 and 19 million litres a day. That is equivalent to more than 50,000 households. Global Action Plan found that 84% of new UK data centres are proposed in areas already water-stressed or expected to be by 2040.
What does the report recommend?
Six things:
– A legal duty for data centres to report energy, water, refrigerant and waste performance.
– Cumulative water assessments in catchments with data centre clusters.
– National planning guidance.
– Transparent modelling of data centre electricity demand in carbon budgets.
– A public national register.
– Buyers of AI and cloud services requiring suppliers to disclose the energy, water and carbon behind them.
What can my organisation do now, before any new law?
Start with your suppliers. The paper includes ten questions that anyone is entitled to ask, and most of them work just as well put to a cloud or AI provider. Building disclosure into contracts and tenders is the paper’s sixth recommendation. Any buyer can act on it today, ahead of legislation.
Is Differentis following its own advice?
Yes. Differentis will put the paper’s questions to its own technology partners. During the first half of 2027, it will publish a roadmap, developed with Dr Jayne Manley, setting out how it will apply environmental best practice across its operations and client work.