Brits don’t want a US-style data center war … yet

LONDON — Donald Trump bet big at the U.S. midterm elections that voters liked tech bros and data centers as much as he did. He lost.

A string of Democrats beat their MAGA opponents, in part, thanks to a promised crackdown on data centers springing up across the country that are resented by many American voters.

Now it is the turn of U.K. politicians to make major decisions about the industry here.

Andy Burnham’s Labour government wants the U.K., where data centers developers don’t yet have a firm footing, to shape the artificial intelligence boom and grab some economic growth along the way. His ministers know they have lessons to take from the U.S. approach.

“We’re learning from you. [But] we are way behind you,” Climate Minister Katie White said earlier this fall, when asked about the U.S. AI example.

White and her colleagues will be trying to plan and regulate the industry in a country where voters broadly support the idea of data centers — but where some government lawmakers directly affected by their growth are starting to sound the alarm

The midterms moment

Democrats swept to wins while pledging to crackdown on data centers.

In Texas, incoming Democrat Governor Gina Hinojosa won her race after calling for a moratorium on data center buildout until tougher local rules are in place, in the process flipping a seat which had been Republican for over three decades.

In Georgia, voters elected Democrats in state-wide seats following their own calls for a slowdown on data centers.

“I will always be on your side — always. I do not work for the utility companies. I do not work for data centers. I do not work for Wall Street,” Sen. Sherrod Brown said at his victory rally after winning his senate race in Ohio, a state which backed Trump at the last three presidential elections.

What the polls say

The wave of anti-data center sentiment which helped Democrats whack their MAGA opponents hasn’t washed up nationally in the U.K., experts say.

Polling from the agency PF Global, shared exclusively with POLITICO, shows two-thirds of Brits admit to knowing only a little about data centers. Nonetheless, 48% backed their development, citing the need to keep ahead on the technology, compared to 32% opposed.

When U.S. voters were polled, the numbers were flipped almost exactly in reverse: 32% support and 46% oppose.

Polling suggests voters are swayed less by data centers themselves than what they represent, said Asra Zyar, policy manager at PF Global. In the U.S. midterms, that was electricity bills.

“In Britain, they are seen more as a question of national resilience,” she added. “The joint top benefit people identify is not depending on other countries for AI infrastructure and data storage. That argument naturally carries less weight in the country [the U.S.] that is home to most of the world’s leading AI companies.”

Data centers and the doorstep

But that relative optimism is not felt by some MPs in pockets of the U.K. where data center developments are being proposed. Those lawmakers are already wary of backlash from their constituents.

In Blyth and Ashington, north-east England, where applications have gone in for three data centers, Labour MP Ian Lavery said he’s worried about the units “smothering the region.”

“When you take into consideration the energy requirements, the energy capacity, the grid connection, the water issues, the infrastructure, my issue is … the local people in my area, how are they going to benefit from these?” he asked.

In the South Norwich constituency, where a 150-megawatt data center has been proposed, Labour MP Clive Lewis said he gets “more mail on this than almost [anything] else.”

“Data centers are a live and burning issue in my constituency,” he said. “What I think is also agitating people is the sense that these things are going to have to expand exponentially, that they are in competition for water resources, for housing, new homes, farming, and drinking water. And on top of that, people can see very little benefit to their local community.”

‘Corrosive’

In those areas where data centers could be concentrated, some people believe it could become a top issue for local voters.

“People really only care about political stuff that they see as impacting their day-to-day lives,” said Chris Annous, a senior associate at the polling agency and think tank More in Common. “Where these data centers aren’t being built, I don’t see them necessarily as being a big issue. But where they are going to be built, they probably will be … a top issue for people voting.”

Research from More in Common, conducted in August, found only the prospect of a nearby nuclear power plant polled worse than an AI data center — which was viewed more negatively than a solar farm, onshore wind farm, gas power plant or waste facility.

The political risk, Annous added, comes if people feel data centers are being plonked on them without feeling any benefits in return — and that is where the U.S. elections are relevant. “That can be corrosive in a broader sense because as you’ve seen in politics, you’ve seen in America, people really feel like they are the last to get looked after,” he said.

Back in the U.K. — where the governing Labour party has pledged a relentless focus on cost-of-living worries — MPs are also concerned major data center builds and other projects could overwhelm communities already feeling the squeeze.

“People in our country have had to tighten their belts and struggle to stretch the pound for so long,” said Labour MP Rachael Maskell. “I think we need to stabilize people’s security before we kind of just leap forward into another huge expenditure and demand on our very fragile infrastructure.”

Setting the rules

U.K. ministers know they have to address some of these worries. Alongside existing regulations, the government last month published a list of requirements which developers are “encouraged” to meet. The so-called Data Centre Covenant includes voluntary agreements that developers cover their own energy costs, invest in local communities and minimize water use.

This is a positive sign, says PF Global’s Zyar.

“In some ways, the government appears to be getting ahead of public concern rather than reacting to it,” she said, pointing out that “opinion is still forming.”

“I’d see this less as an early warning than an early opportunity: a window for government and industry to agree a responsible framework that allows data centres to be built, before the debate has a chance to harden,” she said.

PF Global polling shows many voters want ministers to use that window to tighten those voluntary deals into law.

Two-thirds said developers should be required by law to shoulder any energy costs they create to shield households from further bill hikes. Fifty-eight percent said companies should be required by law to limit their use of public water supplies, while 50% said they should invest in the communities where they are built.

Headlong

A government spokesperson said: “The U.K. already has robust planning and environmental rules enshrined in law, which consider the impacts of data centres on local communities, infrastructure and the environment.

“The Data Centre Covenant goes further,” they added, “setting out new tests on responsible development that all data centres are encouraged to meet, and which strategic data centres must meet to qualify for additional government action.”

More in Common’s Annous agreed that political risks could be minimized where the government got a “proper community benefits” package right, to show how local people might gain from the data center on their doorstep.

Meantime, Maskell said plans for new data centers should also be weighed against other political priorities, including decarbonizing the energy system and overhauling the water sector.

“All I’m saying is: just don’t jump headlong into this without thinking what the endpoint is,” she said. “And I just haven’t heard a constructed argument about what that endpoint looks like.”

Sara Schonhardt contributed reporting from New York.