Labour’s £1bn green belt land grab will power “chatbots and deepfakes”
Outrage as Rayner approves 18-metre-high digital fortress on protected land—without a single environmental study
Angela Rayner is facing a storm of protest—and now a legal challenge—after approving a vast data centre on protected green belt land in Buckinghamshire, sparking outrage from local residents and environmental groups.
The Deputy Prime Minister signed off on the 90MW site near the M25 last month, despite Buckinghamshire Council previously rejecting the scheme over fears it would scar the countryside, threaten habitats and worsen local air quality.
Campaigners claim the Labour government, in its dash to become an “AI superpower”, has ridden roughshod over planning rules and ignored environmental obligations.
No environmental impact study
Foxglove, a tech equity campaign group, and environmental charity Global Action Plan are bringing the challenge. They argue it is “baffling” that no environmental impact assessment was carried out before permission was granted.
Oliver Hayes, head of campaigns at Global Action Plan, said: “Are the societal benefits of chatbots and deepfakes really worth sacrificing progress towards a safe climate and dependable water supply? The government must reconsider its rash decision or risk an embarrassing reality check in court.”
The proposed site, on what was once a landfill in Iver, will see two 18-metre-high blocks built, “dwarfing” the surrounding landscape, according to furious locals. Ramblers complain the development will be an “eyesore”, while others say datacentres are noisy, intrusive and deliver little benefit to the community.
Although developers Greystoke insist the £1 billion project will bring 230 direct jobs and hundreds more in the supply chain, residents remain unconvinced.
“Grey belt” strategy sparks fury
Last summer, the council threw out the plans, branding the scheme “inappropriate development” that would damage the green belt. But after a public inquiry, ministers were persuaded that no environmental review was necessary. They had previously rejected a larger version of the scheme in 2022.
Even former Conservative Secretary of State Michael Gove upheld the refusal after it was appealed by Greystoke Land and Altrad UK, citing a lack of “very special circumstances” that would outweigh the harm of “inappropriate development in the green belt.”
In March, Technology Secretary Peter Kyle railed against “archaic planning processes” that delay digital infrastructure, mocking opponents who complain data centres “ruin the view from the M25”.
Rayner subsequently gave the go-ahead, hailing it as part of Labour’s new “grey belt” policy—a push to reclassify supposedly low-value green belt land for development.
But critics fear the decision sets a dangerous precedent. Rosa Curling, co-executive director of Foxglove, warned: “Local people and businesses in Buckinghamshire will soon be competing with the power-guzzling behemoth to keep the lights on—which, as we’ve seen in the States, usually means sky-high prices.”
AI’s growing power demand
The row comes amid growing alarm over the sheer energy and water demands of the AI revolution. Industry forecasts suggest data centres could devour a tenth of Britain’s electricity by 2050—up to ten times more than today.
While the Iver site will use air cooling, many others rely on water. Thames Water has already sounded the alarm, warning that some centres may use 1,000 litres a second—equivalent to the daily consumption of 24,000 homes.
One confusing aspect to the Government's so-called data centre “AI revolution” is that air-cooled data centres aren’t considered modern efficient designs for the higher compute requirements of AI—liquid cooled designs are needed for more efficient cooling.
So based on this design’s size, capacity and cooling technology, it’s unlikely to be part of the AI revolution—it’s just another commercial data centre creeping onto green belt land for corporate gain.
Calls for a new approach
Opponents insist Britain must rethink where it allows these energy-hungry facilities. Environmentalists argue data centres should be confined to brownfield sites and positioned near urban areas where their waste heat can actually serve local communities.
This model is already proving successful across Europe. In Odense, Denmark, excess heat from a Meta data centre now warms more than 11,000 homes through the local district heating network. In Stockholm, Sweden, several data centres have been linked directly to the city’s heating system, providing warmth for up to 10% of residents while cutting carbon emissions.
Instead of wasting free heat by expelling it into the air, data centre designs should have to collect and repurpose this heat for good, as part of a mandatory local community benefit, helping to reduce energy bills for residents.
Our Fair Future believes Britain should follow suit rather than bulldozing green belt land. “We don’t have to choose between digital innovation and environmental responsibility”, one member said. “Put these centres where they make sense—not in the middle of the countryside.”