Police in Scotland have issued a stark warning about the need for “robust security measures” to stop proposed AI datacentres from being attacked by protesters.
There has been mounting opposition to AI infrastructure globally, including in the US where such projects have become a significant political rallying point.
Police Scotland said “a great deal of public opposition is likely” to a datacentre planned in Larbert, about 30 miles west of Edinburgh, in a letter submitted as a part of a planning consultation this month.
The letter encouraged the datacentre’s developer to liaise with the police to prevent “unplanned incursions for the purposes of disruption”.
It appears to be one of the first official acknowledgments of mounting public unease about datacentre development in the UK. Police Scotland declined to comment.
There are hundreds of datacentre projects in various stages of planning in Britain. Only some of these appear to be viable developments, with research groups warning of a glut of “zombie projects” waiting to connect to the grid.
In Scotland there are at least 23 “hyperscale” datacentre developments in the planning process, according to the Edinburgh-based charity Action to Protect Rural Scotland (APRS). Combined, they would use more than one and a half times the power that Scotland uses at peak demand.
Groups across Scotland have started organising opposition to planned datacentres. More than 100 people attended a protest in Larbert on Thursday, according to local campaigners. Nearly 7,000 people have filed objections to the proposed development.
Similar protests are planned in the coming weeks, including one in Edinburgh in early September, when the Scottish parliament will be back in session.
This summer, the Scottish National party passed a motion to freeze all new datacentres in Scotland. If that motion becomes Scottish government policy, it could pose a serious threat to the UK’s AI strategy. British officials have been pushing datacentre developers to build in Scotland.
Some of the opposition to datacentres is about the physical footprint of the projects. Michael Maciocia, a Larbert resident who attended Thursday’s protest, said he and others were worried about the 200 diesel generators that Apatura, the site’s developer, planned to install as backup power for the datacentre.
APRS is concerned that these could release significant quantities of nitrous oxide into the air, which could negatively affect the health of people living nearby.
“Where this datacentre is planned to be built, within 50 metres of one of the buildings is a 56-bed care home for the terminally ill … Within 400 metres, there’s the 860-bed Forth Valley Royal hospital,” said Maciocia. “The amount of pollution and the noise created by these things will be horrendous in every direction.”
Hazel McQueen, who also lives nearby, said: “I live extremely close to the proposed site, and since this application was submitted it has become a huge part of my life.” She says she has spent hours on top of her full-time job reading about the datacentre, attending meetings and helping to organise opposition to it.
She says she is concerned for the health of her family, and of her grandson who has leukaemia. “I need to fight this for his future and the future we are leaving for him.”
Cecilia Rikap, a professor at University College London, says there is a larger, symbolic dimension to public anger around datacentre development.
“It’s the physical manifestation of AI, and there is a growing opposition to AI. People are seeing how AI is replacing the good part of their work, people are seeing how AI is undermining younger people’s capacity to think,” she said. “Ultimately, if you want to protest against generative AI or the role of big tech, you would protest at a datacentre. That’s what you can see. All the rest is much more invisible.”
A spokesperson for Apatura said: “We’re committed to developing data centres in line with world-leading safety and environmental standards and in compliance with all planning regulations. We recognise that there has been opposition to the planning application and remain committed to working closely with government and local community throughout the planning process to ensure concerns are listened to and carefully considered.”
