Hannah Campbell specialises in data, and AI workforce transformation. She was Parliamentary candidate for Telford in 2024 and is currently the Regional Deputy Chairman (Political) for the West Midlands.
When Donald Trump announced a £150 billion investment package for the UK during his State Visit in September, ministers were quick to present it as a vote of confidence in Britain’s economic future. Much of this investment was flagged for AI, cloud and data centre expansion.
At first glance, it sounds like a transformative opportunity for jobs, growth and Britain’s status as a global technology hub. In reality, without the infrastructure to power and cool these facilities, it is like being gifted a shiny new Christmas toy only to discover there are no batteries in the box.
The uncomfortable truth is that Britain does not yet have the energy system to sustain a rapid build-out of data centres. Global demand for data processing is rising at speed. The International Energy Agency projects that electricity use from data centres will more than double by 2030, and BP forecasts a nine-fold increase by 2050. In the United States, data centres could soon consume close to one in ten units of national electricity. The UK will not be immune from this curve.
Each new AI-ready campus requires the power of a medium-sized town, delivered continuously. These sites provide what is known as “compute,” which simply means the processing power needed to run advanced digital services and AI models.
Britain’s grid is already stretched. Ofgem has introduced reforms to speed up connections, moving away from the outdated first-come-first-served approach. Yet reinforcement projects take years to deliver. Pylons, substations and storage cannot be magicked into existence on the timetable of a press release.
Planning reforms will help at the margins. Treating major data centres as nationally significant infrastructure, rather than leaving them to uncertain local planning battles, will accelerate decision-making.
The National Policy Framework now encourages data centre growth, so planning consent should be easier to obtain. But planning consent does not produce electrons. Without reliable and affordable energy behind it, approvals risk becoming paper promises rather than operational sites.
Water is another overlooked challenge. AI workloads drive high-density computing which consumes vast amounts of water for cooling, directly and indirectly through power generation. The Government Digital Sustainability Alliance has warned that AI could increase global water use six-fold by 2027. In the UK, regulators already admit that they cannot fully assess local water stress because usage data from data centres is opaque. Without mandatory reporting, it is impossible to know whether new sites are compatible with long-term resilience.
This all collides with Ed Miliband’s energy policy. Labour’s plan to make Britain a clean-energy superpower rests on rapid renewables expansion and early closure of oil and gas fields. Yet concentrated, round-the-clock data centre demand requires secure supply now, not in 20 years’ time. Without drilling in the North Sea, new nuclear build-out, investment in long-duration storage and rapid transmission upgrades, Britain will face an impossible choice: either delay AI campuses, or lean on imports and back-up generation – usually diesel-powered – while pretending the system is green.
The previous Conservative government recognised this reality. It backed both large-scale nuclear projects and the development of Small Modular Nuclear Reactors (SMNRs), knowing that firm, low-carbon baseload power is essential to balance renewables and guarantee energy security. The question now is whether Labour will hold to those commitments when faced with a challenge from Zack Polanski’s Green Party, which opposes nuclear outright. If they fold, Britain’s ambitions to be a global technology leader will collapse under the weight of its own energy shortfall.
A credible Conservative position must be built on five pillars.
First, sequencing. No new data centre corridor should be designated unless there is proven local grid capacity and contracted power to supply it. Intentions should be tied to firm connection offers, not optimistic projections.
Second, secure power for compute. Operators must be required to procure a rising share of reliable energy, whether from North Sea production, new nuclear, or offshore wind supported by storage. This is about matching 24/7 demand with 24/7 supply, not relying on averages that disguise back-up generation.
Third, water resilience. Every campus must publish site-specific data on water use, recycling systems and drought planning. Transparency is the first step to trust and sustainability.
Fourth, location and infrastructure. National planning should steer data centres towards areas with existing or planned generation and transmission capacity. It makes little sense to build vast new campuses in areas where substations are already over-stretched. At the same time, we must protect our green and pleasant land. New power generation and infrastructure should be delivered where it makes sense and where local communities give their approval, not imposed from Whitehall without regard for those who live nearby.
Fifth, innovation realism. Future technologies may well reduce the footprint of compute, but they are not here yet. Photonic processors and nano-scale computing remain in research labs. Policymakers should support their development while grounding today’s decisions in present-day realities.
Britain can be a global data power. But it must first invest in the energy and water infrastructure that will make such a role sustainable. Without that, grandiose announcements of foreign investment will remain empty promises.
Trump’s £150 billion pledge is not a gift in itself. It is a challenge.
The question for Ed Miliband is whether his policy of shutting down North Sea production while bending to Green Party pressure on nuclear will leave Britain uncompetitive.
A Conservative government must take the practical path: back the North Sea, back nuclear, protect our green and pleasant land, and build the infrastructure that will actually deliver the power Britain needs.
Otherwise, it might be quicker to take a retiring Polaris sub, moor it in Hartlepool and hook it up to the planned data campus there!
Hannah Campbell specialises in data, and AI workforce transformation. She was Parliamentary candidate for Telford in 2024 and is currently the Regional Deputy Chairman (Political) for the West Midlands.
When Donald Trump announced a £150 billion investment package for the UK during his State Visit in September, ministers were quick to present it as a vote of confidence in Britain’s economic future. Much of this investment was flagged for AI, cloud and data centre expansion.
At first glance, it sounds like a transformative opportunity for jobs, growth and Britain’s status as a global technology hub. In reality, without the infrastructure to power and cool these facilities, it is like being gifted a shiny new Christmas toy only to discover there are no batteries in the box.
The uncomfortable truth is that Britain does not yet have the energy system to sustain a rapid build-out of data centres. Global demand for data processing is rising at speed. The International Energy Agency projects that electricity use from data centres will more than double by 2030, and BP forecasts a nine-fold increase by 2050. In the United States, data centres could soon consume close to one in ten units of national electricity. The UK will not be immune from this curve.
Each new AI-ready campus requires the power of a medium-sized town, delivered continuously. These sites provide what is known as “compute,” which simply means the processing power needed to run advanced digital services and AI models.
Britain’s grid is already stretched. Ofgem has introduced reforms to speed up connections, moving away from the outdated first-come-first-served approach. Yet reinforcement projects take years to deliver. Pylons, substations and storage cannot be magicked into existence on the timetable of a press release.
Planning reforms will help at the margins. Treating major data centres as nationally significant infrastructure, rather than leaving them to uncertain local planning battles, will accelerate decision-making.
The National Policy Framework now encourages data centre growth, so planning consent should be easier to obtain. But planning consent does not produce electrons. Without reliable and affordable energy behind it, approvals risk becoming paper promises rather than operational sites.
Water is another overlooked challenge. AI workloads drive high-density computing which consumes vast amounts of water for cooling, directly and indirectly through power generation. The Government Digital Sustainability Alliance has warned that AI could increase global water use six-fold by 2027. In the UK, regulators already admit that they cannot fully assess local water stress because usage data from data centres is opaque. Without mandatory reporting, it is impossible to know whether new sites are compatible with long-term resilience.
This all collides with Ed Miliband’s energy policy. Labour’s plan to make Britain a clean-energy superpower rests on rapid renewables expansion and early closure of oil and gas fields. Yet concentrated, round-the-clock data centre demand requires secure supply now, not in 20 years’ time. Without drilling in the North Sea, new nuclear build-out, investment in long-duration storage and rapid transmission upgrades, Britain will face an impossible choice: either delay AI campuses, or lean on imports and back-up generation – usually diesel-powered – while pretending the system is green.
The previous Conservative government recognised this reality. It backed both large-scale nuclear projects and the development of Small Modular Nuclear Reactors (SMNRs), knowing that firm, low-carbon baseload power is essential to balance renewables and guarantee energy security. The question now is whether Labour will hold to those commitments when faced with a challenge from Zack Polanski’s Green Party, which opposes nuclear outright. If they fold, Britain’s ambitions to be a global technology leader will collapse under the weight of its own energy shortfall.
A credible Conservative position must be built on five pillars.
First, sequencing. No new data centre corridor should be designated unless there is proven local grid capacity and contracted power to supply it. Intentions should be tied to firm connection offers, not optimistic projections.
Second, secure power for compute. Operators must be required to procure a rising share of reliable energy, whether from North Sea production, new nuclear, or offshore wind supported by storage. This is about matching 24/7 demand with 24/7 supply, not relying on averages that disguise back-up generation.
Third, water resilience. Every campus must publish site-specific data on water use, recycling systems and drought planning. Transparency is the first step to trust and sustainability.
Fourth, location and infrastructure. National planning should steer data centres towards areas with existing or planned generation and transmission capacity. It makes little sense to build vast new campuses in areas where substations are already over-stretched. At the same time, we must protect our green and pleasant land. New power generation and infrastructure should be delivered where it makes sense and where local communities give their approval, not imposed from Whitehall without regard for those who live nearby.
Fifth, innovation realism. Future technologies may well reduce the footprint of compute, but they are not here yet. Photonic processors and nano-scale computing remain in research labs. Policymakers should support their development while grounding today’s decisions in present-day realities.
Britain can be a global data power. But it must first invest in the energy and water infrastructure that will make such a role sustainable. Without that, grandiose announcements of foreign investment will remain empty promises.
Trump’s £150 billion pledge is not a gift in itself. It is a challenge.
The question for Ed Miliband is whether his policy of shutting down North Sea production while bending to Green Party pressure on nuclear will leave Britain uncompetitive.
A Conservative government must take the practical path: back the North Sea, back nuclear, protect our green and pleasant land, and build the infrastructure that will actually deliver the power Britain needs.
Otherwise, it might be quicker to take a retiring Polaris sub, moor it in Hartlepool and hook it up to the planned data campus there!