The Scottish Energy Compact — June 2026
Scotland’s planning leverage is real, immediate, and finite. The Compact sets the terms under which hyperscale data centres may operate in Scotland. It is built entirely within devolved planning powers. It does not require new primary legislation. It requires only the political will to pick up a pen before the concrete is dry.
Contracted pathway to 100% dispatchable supply — developer bears full grid costs, not households
£15/MWh Community Energy Fund — energy efficiency and bill relief for local residents
Evaporative cooling prohibited — mandatory WUE declaration, SEPA Environmental Authorisation before consent
100m planning setback from 400kV infrastructure; cumulative field contour assessment required
The Argument
A 600MW data centre will generate 180–480 permanent jobs — mostly requiring skills local residents do not have — in exchange for the electricity of a small city, millions of litres of water per day, hidden bill increases for every household in the distribution area, and profits booked in Dublin, Seattle or Singapore.
By any measure, that is a poor bargain. Scotland is being offered the costs, the land, the water and the infrastructure burden. The value flows elsewhere.
The Compact does not argue that Scotland should reject data centre investment. It argues that Scotland should set the terms of that investment — as Ireland, the Netherlands and Singapore have all done with formal policies, moratoriums, or revised planning frameworks when their pipelines reached comparable scale.
The four conditions below are each grounded in a specific, identifiable harm or omission in the current consent process. They are proportionate to the scale of development being approved. They are enforceable through existing Section 75 planning obligation powers. They require no new Act of Parliament.
| Metric | Current Framework | Under the Compact |
|---|---|---|
| Household bills | Rise £145–225/yr | Reduced via levy credit |
| Grid costs | Socialised to consumers | Developer-funded |
| Water impact | Unassessed | Capped & published |
| EMF risk | Unassessed | Planning setback + cumulative assessment |
| Electricity subsidy | £84m/yr per 500MW to developers | £52.5m/yr returned to communities (Condition 2) |
| Permanent jobs | Claimed 3,400; actual ~180–480 | Contractual targets |
| Scottish benefit | Indirect, speculative | Direct, contractual, permanent |
The Constitutional Landscape
Any serious policy proposal for Scotland must be honest about the constitutional landscape. Electricity market regulation, grid charging methodology, and UK-wide subsidy design are reserved to Westminster under the Scotland Act. A Scottish Parliament that legislated to override GB-wide electricity market rules would be acting beyond its competence and would face immediate legal challenge.
This is not an argument for passivity. It is an argument for precision. Holyrood has substantial, largely unused leverage in the one area that matters most at this stage: planning consent. No data centre gets built without planning permission. Planning is devolved. The conditions attached to planning consent are the Scottish Government’s to set.
The Compact is built entirely within the green rows of the table opposite. It does not require reserved-powers legislation. It does not depend on Westminster cooperation. It depends only on the Scottish Government choosing to use powers it already holds.
| Power | Status | Available Now? |
|---|---|---|
| Planning consent conditions | Devolved | Yes |
| Community benefit obligations (s75) | Devolved | Yes |
| Environmental Impact Assessment requirements | Devolved | Yes |
| Water abstraction licensing (SEPA) | Devolved | Yes |
| National Planning Framework (NPF4) guidance | Devolved | Yes — update required |
| TNUoS / DUoS charging methodology | Reserved (Ofgem) | No — Westminster only |
| DSIT electricity subsidy proposal | Reserved | No — but can formally oppose |
| GB Capacity Market | Reserved (DESNZ) | No — Westminster only |
| North Sea gas licensing | Reserved (NSTA) | No — Westminster only |
Source: Scotland Act 1998 (as amended); Scottish Government devolved competencies. The Compact operates exclusively within the devolved rows.
Part One — The Four Conditions of Consent
Each condition applies to any hyperscale data centre above 200MW IT load seeking planning consent in Scotland. Each is enforceable as a Section 75 planning obligation — a legally binding agreement between the developer and the planning authority, standard practice in major development consent. No new primary legislation is required. The conditions can begin operating immediately through a ministerial direction under the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997, reinforced by a Planning Circular, and consolidated permanently through a targeted update to NPF4 Policy 24 (Digital Infrastructure). The mechanism is a ministerial decision. The timeline is a matter of political will, not legislative process.
Every facility above 200MW must demonstrate, before planning consent is granted, a contracted pathway to firm, dispatchable power supply for 100% of its maximum demand. The developer must accept full cost-reflective charges for all grid infrastructure required to serve the development. No grid reinforcement, capacity market, or balancing costs triggered by the facility may be socialised onto the wider consumer base.
The firm supply pathway may be met through long-term power purchase agreements from dedicated dispatchable renewable sources, on-site generation, or other technologies capable of sustained delivery without drawing on grid balancing services at consumer cost. Gas peaking capacity, where included, requires a binding phase-out schedule as a condition of consent.
The developer must additionally contract renewable generation capacity plus grid-scale battery storage equivalent to at least 150% of average annual energy demand. This is not a requirement to match supply at every moment — it is a requirement to demonstrate a credible, contracted path to net-zero energy consumption before consent is granted, not after.
A mandatory Section 75 obligation requires each developer to contribute £15 per MWh of electricity consumed into a ring-fenced Community Energy Fund, administered by the relevant local authority.
The Fund is dedicated exclusively to reducing energy costs for residential properties within the local authority area hosting the facility. It is applied to energy efficiency measures, insulation programmes, heat pump installations, and direct bill relief schemes — not to a council general fund, not to discretionary grants. The distribution methodology, eligibility criteria, and annual expenditure must be published. Every year the facility operates, the Fund operates.
For a 500MW facility consuming approximately 3,500 GWh per year, the levy generates £52.5 million per year for local household energy costs. For context: the UK Government’s £24/MWh DSIT discount to the same facility is worth £84 million per year — paid by every household in Great Britain through their energy bills, flowing to corporations whose combined market capitalisation exceeds $5 trillion. Westminster pays the developer £84 million. Condition 2 requires the developer to return £52.5 million to the communities hosting them. That is not redistribution. It is the minimum a just planning framework should require.
Closed-loop or air-side economisation cooling is mandatory for all hyperscale facilities above 200MW. Evaporative (wet tower) cooling is prohibited. A SEPA Environmental Authorisation for water abstraction must be confirmed in principle before planning consent is granted — not after.
This is not a default that can be argued away. A 500MW facility using evaporative cooling draws approximately 17–19 million litres per day from the water supply system — requiring a dedicated 450–600mm mains connection at sustained industrial pressure. Scotland’s existing water infrastructure was not designed to accommodate this demand. The proposed Auchtertool facility in Fife demonstrates the gap: Scottish Water confirmed that even at the developer’s own declared demand, the existing mains pipe is too small. Lomond Hills reservoirs — the primary drinking water source for Fife — stood at 21% of combined capacity in 2025, the lowest level in 30 years. The River Eden catchment, which feeds the same supply zone, has had abstraction licences suspended under SEPA’s Significant Scarcity designation in both 2022 and 2025. In May 2025 SEPA confirmed all of Scotland was at some level of water scarcity. Adding an evaporative cooling load of 17–19 million litres per day to a catchment already at its environmental limit is not a planning risk to be assessed and mitigated. It is a planning harm that cannot be consented.
Every applicant must submit a Water Usage Effectiveness (WUE) declaration using Green Grid standard methodology, independently verified, specifying the cooling system, the WUE target in litres per kWh of IT load, and the resulting maximum daily and annual abstraction volume. The water source must be named, the connection point agreed with Scottish Water, and the pipe diameter required must be specified. The applicant bears the full cost of any infrastructure upgrade to Scottish Water’s distribution network as a condition of consent. A cumulative abstraction assessment covering all proposed facilities drawing from the same catchment or Scottish Water supply zone must be submitted alongside the individual application. Annual WUE performance must be reported to SEPA and the planning authority, with all reports published. Facilities failing their declared WUE target within three years face a mandatory consent review.
A 500MW data centre requires grid connection infrastructure on the scale of a small power station: 275kV or 400kV overhead transmission lines carried on 56-metre steel lattice towers, and an on-site substation of 2 to 6 hectares. That infrastructure has a measurable electromagnetic field footprint extending beyond 100 metres. An independent cumulative impact assessment covering that infrastructure must be completed before consent is determined.
Standard 400kV towers stand approximately 56 metres and are spaced at approximately 370-metre intervals. The on-site substation — whether gas-insulated or air-insulated switchgear — occupies between 2 and 6 hectares of land. Published measured data for 400kV overhead lines shows magnetic field levels of 5–10 microtesla (µT) directly beneath the conductor, falling to approximately 0.2 µT at 120 metres and approaching background levels at 150 metres. The IARC classification of ELF magnetic fields as Group 2B (possibly carcinogenic to humans) is based on an observed association with childhood leukaemia in long-term residential exposure above 0.3–0.4 µT. On published field decay data, levels from a 400kV line exceed this epidemiological threshold out to approximately 60–80 metres from the conductor at typical operating loads.
The Compact requires a 100-metre planning setback from any new 275kV or 400kV overhead transmission conductor or substation perimeter fence to the nearest residential property, school, or hospital. This is not a health regulation — it is a planning protection grounded in measured field data. At 100 metres, published measurements show that fields from 400kV infrastructure approach background levels. The 2009 UK Government decision not to impose mandatory buffer zones on the existing network was a cost-benefit judgement about retrofitting requirements on infrastructure already in place. It does not bind Scotland’s planning framework for new infrastructure consented under its own planning system. Full public consultation on grid connection routes and substation siting must be completed before consent is determined. The applicant must publish a grid connection statement identifying all above-ground infrastructure, substation footprints, and modelled field contours at 50, 100, and 200 metres from the nearest residential properties.
Part Two — Five Immediate Demands
The full Compact requires an updated NPF4 and political commitment. The five demands below can each be acted upon within this parliamentary session using existing powers. None requires a new Act. Some require nothing more than a ministerial statement or letter to a planning authority.
Pause all data centre consents above 200MW IT load for twelve months. Commission a government-led cumulative impact assessment covering energy grid capacity, water catchment impact, consumer bill cost, and EMF infrastructure exposure. Twelve months. One assessment. Before the irreversible decisions are made. Ireland, the Netherlands and Singapore have all enacted similar pauses when their pipelines reached comparable scale. This is prudent governance, not obstruction.
Can be enacted now — no legislation requiredThe Scottish Government should formally and publicly oppose the UK Government’s proposal to give data centre developers a £24/MWh electricity discount, and should refuse to facilitate the scheme in Scotland. A ministerial statement to the Scottish Parliament, followed by formal correspondence to DSIT, is the minimum required. The Scottish Government has expressed opposition to UK energy policy before. This is the appropriate occasion to do so again.
Can be enacted now — ministerial statementNational Planning Framework 4’s designation of “green” data centres as national developments streamlined consent at a time when the pipeline was a fraction of its current size. That designation must now be conditioned on Compact compliance. Planning authorities should be directed that national development status does not override the four Compact conditions — it co-exists with them. The mechanism is a ministerial direction to planning authorities, a Planning Circular clarifying how Policy 24 (Digital Infrastructure) applies to large-scale facilities, and a targeted Policy 24 update in the next NPF4 review — none of which requires primary legislation.
Requires ministerial direction and Planning Circular — no primary legislationThe Cabinet Secretary for Net Zero and Energy should direct SEPA and all Scottish planning authorities to require a standardised water abstraction and cooling methodology assessment for any data centre application above 50MW, with all results published before consent is determined. A single ministerial direction covers the entire pipeline. It can be issued today. No legislation is required. No committee process. A direction, signed and published.
Can be enacted now — ministerial direction onlyCommission and publish, within six months, an independent assessment of the cumulative network cost impact of the current planning pipeline on Scottish household electricity bills. The methodology should be agreed with Ofgem, National Grid ESO, and consumer representatives. The results should be published in a form accessible to the public — not buried in a technical annex. The public deserves to know what is being built in their name and at their expense before more consents are granted.
Can be enacted now — commission reportPart Three — The Westminster Asks
Several of the most significant levers sit with Westminster, not Holyrood. The Scottish Government cannot unilaterally reform grid charging methodology or cancel the DSIT subsidy. But it can use every available channel — Sewel conventions, intergovernmental frameworks, and direct public advocacy — to press for three specific changes.
These are not procedural requests. They are the conditions under which the current pipeline becomes genuinely fair to Scottish consumers rather than a transfer of public value to private capital.
The Scottish Government has spoken loudly on reserved matters before — on welfare, on immigration, on nuclear weapons. The question of who pays the electricity bill for hyperscale AI infrastructure is no less appropriate for formal, public advocacy.
The proposed £24/MWh discount is not justified by the flexible demand rationale offered for it. Hyperscale data centres do not operate flexibly. The subsidy transfers over £1 billion per year to corporations worth trillions, paid ultimately through household bills. It should be withdrawn entirely pending a genuine evidence-based review of whether data centre demand is actually flexible enough to justify the discount.
Under the current GB charging methodology, the network reinforcement costs triggered by a 500MW data centre are socialised across all consumers. Large new industrial loads should bear the full marginal cost of the grid infrastructure they require — not spread it across households who had no choice in the matter. Ofgem is reviewing charging methodology. The Scottish Government should formally submit that reform is required, citing this pipeline specifically.
The GB Capacity Market procures backup dispatchable generation to ensure security of supply. As data centres add enormous new baseload demand, the cost of procuring additional Capacity Market contracts rises — and those costs are recovered from all consumers. Data centre demand additionality should be accounted for separately in Capacity Market procurement, with costs allocated to the new loads that created them rather than spread across existing household and industrial consumers.
Part Four — Act Now
Every MSP in the Scottish Parliament has a constituency and regional role that includes potential data centre sites or households that will bear the grid cost. This is not a question of which party you support — it is a question of whether the government uses the powers it already holds before the window closes.
The Compact’s five immediate demands can all be acted upon before the end of this parliamentary session. The moratorium buys time. The ministerial direction on water costs nothing to implement. The opposition to the DSIT subsidy is a statement, not a statute. The household cost assessment is a commission. These are not legislative mountains. They are decisions.
This analysis may be freely reproduced for non-commercial campaign use with attribution to Michael Knox, June 2026.
Use the Scottish Parliament’s MSP finder to contact your constituency MSP and all seven regional MSPs for your area. Every Scottish voter has eight MSPs — constituency plus regional list.
Find your MSP → All current MSPs →⚠ Before you send: Please personalise this letter. Add your town, a local detail, or your profession. Emails that read as personal carry far more weight with MSPs than identical form letters. Unedited copies are easy to dismiss — a sentence or two in your own words makes all the difference.
SUBJECT: Scottish Data Centre Planning — Four Conditions Holyrood Can Apply Now
Dear [MSP Name],
I am writing as a constituent from [your town/area] with urgent concerns about the environmental impact of hyperscale data centre development in Scotland. Twenty facilities are currently progressing through the planning system, yet not a single cumulative environmental impact assessment has been carried out. Consents are being granted individually, in isolation, with no assessment of their combined effect on Scotland’s water supply, electricity grid, or the health of local communities.
The water risk is immediate. A 500MW facility using evaporative cooling draws up to 19 million litres per day from the water supply system — equivalent to the daily consumption of a city the size of Perth. In Fife, where several sites are proposed, Lomond Hills reservoirs stood at 21% capacity in 2025, the lowest level in 30 years, and the River Eden catchment has had abstraction licences suspended twice due to water scarcity. No developer has been required to declare their cooling system or their true water demand before consent is granted.
The electricity supply position is equally unassessed. The combined demand of the current pipeline exceeds Scotland’s entire winter peak consumption, yet no assessment of grid capacity, infrastructure cost, or household bill impact has been published. Each facility requires grid connection infrastructure on the scale of a small power station — 56-metre steel lattice towers carrying 275kV or 400kV overhead lines, and substations of up to 6 hectares. Published field measurements show that electromagnetic fields from 400kV infrastructure exceed the threshold associated with childhood leukaemia risk in the IARC classification out to 60–80 metres from the conductor at typical operating loads. No cumulative EMF assessment has been required as a condition of any Scottish data centre consent.
The Scottish Energy Compact proposes four planning conditions that address each of these failures directly. Crucially, all four operate within devolved planning powers — they require no Westminster legislation, no reserved-powers override, and no new Act of the Scottish Parliament. They are planning conditions, attachable to consent by ministerial direction under existing powers today:
Condition 1 — Firm Power: The developer must demonstrate a contracted pathway to 100% dispatchable power supply at full cost-reflective grid charges before consent is granted. No grid reinforcement costs may be passed to consumers.
Condition 2 — Community Energy Fund: A mandatory Section 75 planning obligation requiring £15 per MWh consumed to be paid into a ring-fenced local energy fund for bill relief and insulation — entirely within devolved powers, consistent with established wind farm community benefit practice.
Condition 3 — Water and Cooling: Evaporative cooling is prohibited for facilities above 200MW. The developer must declare their cooling system and obtain SEPA Environmental Authorisation for water abstraction before — not after — planning consent is granted.
Condition 4 — EMF Buffer Zone: A mandatory 100-metre planning setback from any new high-voltage transmission conductor or substation to the nearest home, school, or hospital, grounded in published field decay data showing EMF levels approach background at that distance.
I would ask you to raise these conditions in the Scottish Parliament and to press the Cabinet Secretary for Net Zero and Energy to issue a ministerial direction applying them to all applications above 50MW. No primary legislation is required. The full analysis is at scottishenergycompact.co.uk.
Yours sincerely,
[Your full name]
[Your postcode]
The more people who read the evidence, the harder it becomes to ignore. Share this analysis with your neighbours, your local press, your community council, and anyone standing for election in Scotland.
ScottishEnergyCompact.scot
Scotland’s leverage is real, immediate, and finite
The four Compact conditions require no new primary legislation. They require a minister to pick up a pen. The five demands can be enacted this session. The question is whether the government that claims to act in Scotland’s interest will use the powers it already holds.