Two planned datacentres could emit more carbon than ExxonMobil
Two data centres set to rival ExxonMobil UK emissions
Two data centres planned for England are expected to produce more carbon emissions than ExxonMobil's entire UK operations once fully operational. According to analysis by campaign group Foxglove, the Wapseys Wood site in Buckinghamshire and Quest Park in Bedfordshire will together emit approximately 4.577 million tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent each year. For context, ExxonMobil's UK emissions totalled 3.9 million tonnes in 2023.
The figures emerged in reporting published on 25 August 2026. They highlight the scale of emissions tied to the next generation of digital infrastructure, particularly where facilities rely on dedicated gas-fired power rather than grid electricity. Both sites are being planned with private gas power stations because grid connection timelines remain prohibitively long. Consequently, these facilities would burn fossil fuels directly on site while also drawing substantial electricity from the national network.
The comparison between data centres and an oil company raises questions about how the UK manages the carbon footprint of its digital economy. Moreover, it illustrates the tension between rapid infrastructure expansion and the country's net zero commitments. As cloud computing and artificial intelligence drive demand for processing power, the energy cost of that growth becomes harder to ignore.
Foxglove's modelling assumes both facilities will operate at full capacity. However, a UK government spokesperson has challenged this assumption, describing the figures as misleading because facilities rarely run at 100% load from day one. Nevertheless, campaigners argue that infrastructure projects are routinely assessed at design capacity for planning and environmental purposes. This methodological dispute sits at the heart of the debate over whether the emissions comparison holds up under scrutiny.
Combined power demand reaches 1.3 gigawatts
The two data centres would together draw around 1.3 gigawatts of power. That is enough to supply more than a million homes under typical consumption patterns. Wapseys Wood and Quest Park are not isolated cases. Instead, they form part of a wider surge in large-scale data centre development across the UK, driven by growing demand for cloud services and machine learning infrastructure.
Both sites are being designed with on-site gas generation to bypass the queue for grid connections. Developers face waiting times that can stretch to several years for new high-capacity connections. As a result, some are opting to build their own power stations rather than delay projects indefinitely. This approach locks in fossil fuel use at a time when the grid itself is steadily decarbonising through renewable energy expansion.
Foxglove calculated the projected emissions using UK government carbon intensity figures for electricity generation. The analysis treats the facilities as running at full design capacity throughout the year. This is standard practice in infrastructure planning, where environmental assessments typically model maximum impact rather than average or phased use. Specifically, the 4.577 million tonnes of CO2 equivalent includes both the direct emissions from on-site gas combustion and the indirect emissions associated with electricity drawn from the grid.
ExxonMobil's UK operations, by comparison, produced 3.9 million tonnes of CO2 equivalent in 2023. That figure covers the company's refineries, chemical plants, and other industrial facilities across the country. Therefore, the comparison is between two data centres and the entire UK footprint of a major multinational oil and petrochemicals business. It does not include ExxonMobil's global emissions, which are substantially higher.
Government disputes full-capacity assumption
The UK government has contested the basis of the emissions estimate. A spokesperson stated that the figures are misleading because they assume both data centres will operate at 100% capacity immediately. In practice, facilities of this type ramp up gradually as tenants move in and computing loads increase. Consequently, actual emissions in the early years would likely be lower than the projections suggest.
Foxglove and environmental campaigners counter that full-capacity modelling is the accepted standard for assessing infrastructure projects. Planning authorities routinely require developers to demonstrate the maximum environmental impact of a proposed facility. Furthermore, the design capacity represents the intended long-term operational state, even if it takes several years to reach that level. Ignoring design capacity would understate the eventual climate impact of projects with decades-long lifespans.
This disagreement over methodology matters because it affects how policymakers and the public understand the trade-offs involved in data centre expansion. If the 4.5 million tonne figure is taken at face value, it suggests that two buildings could contribute more to UK emissions than a major oil company. However, if the figure is treated as a worst-case scenario that may never fully materialise, the urgency of the issue appears less acute.
Meanwhile, the underlying problem remains unresolved. The UK grid cannot currently accommodate the pace of data centre development without significant upgrades. As a result, developers face a choice between waiting for grid capacity or building their own generation. When that generation is gas-fired, the climate cost is immediate and measurable, regardless of how quickly the facility reaches full utilisation.
Why developers are turning to private gas generation
The decision to build on-site gas power stations reflects the strain on the UK's electricity infrastructure. National Grid ESO reported in 2025 that the queue for new connections had grown to unprecedented levels, with some projects facing waits of up to a decade. Consequently, developers of large energy users such as data centres are exploring alternatives that allow them to proceed without delay.
Private gas generation offers a solution that keeps projects on schedule. However, it also undermines the broader shift toward renewable energy. The national grid has been steadily reducing its carbon intensity as wind and solar capacity expands. Data centres that bypass the grid in favour of dedicated gas plants miss the opportunity to benefit from that decarbonisation. Furthermore, they lock in fossil fuel use for the life of the facility, which could be 20 years or more.
The carbon intensity of grid electricity varies by time of day and season, but it has fallen dramatically over the past decade. In 2023, the average grid intensity was approximately 200 grams of CO2 per kilowatt-hour, down from over 500 grams in 2012. By contrast, gas-fired generation produces around 400 grams per kilowatt-hour even in modern efficient plants. Therefore, a data centre running on dedicated gas power will typically produce double the emissions of one drawing from the grid, all else being equal.
Developers argue that they have little choice if they want to meet demand from hyperscale cloud providers and AI companies. These clients require guaranteed capacity on short timescales, and the grid cannot deliver that under current constraints. Nevertheless, the climate implications of this workaround are significant, particularly as the number of such projects grows.
What this means for UK climate targets
The UK has committed to reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 68% by 2030 compared with 1990 levels, and to reaching net zero by 2050. Data centre emissions are currently a relatively small part of the national total, but rapid expansion could change that. If multiple large facilities proceed with dedicated gas generation, they could collectively add millions of tonnes of CO2 to the annual inventory.
The challenge is that digital infrastructure is not discretionary. Demand for cloud services, streaming, e-commerce, and artificial intelligence continues to grow. Consequently, the UK faces a choice between constraining data centre development, which could harm economic competitiveness, or finding ways to accommodate it within carbon budgets. The latter requires either accelerating grid upgrades or mandating that new facilities use low-carbon generation from the outset.
Some industry observers argue that data centres should be subject to the same emissions performance standards as other major industrial facilities. For example, new gas-fired power stations are required to demonstrate carbon capture readiness or commit to future retrofits. Applying similar rules to data centres with on-site generation would ensure that emissions are minimised even when grid connection is not feasible. However, no such requirement currently exists in planning policy.
Another option is to prioritise grid connections for low-carbon users. If data centres could be fast-tracked for renewable energy connections, they would have less incentive to build gas plants. This would require regulatory changes and significant investment in network infrastructure, but it could align digital growth with climate goals. Without intervention, the gap between ambition and reality will widen as more projects come forward with similar proposals.
Key points from the Foxglove analysis
- Wapseys Wood in Buckinghamshire and Quest Park in Bedfordshire are projected to emit 4.577 million tonnes of CO2 equivalent annually when fully operational.
- ExxonMobil's entire UK operations produced 3.9 million tonnes of CO2 equivalent in 2023, making the data centres' combined emissions higher than those of a major oil and petrochemicals company.
- Both sites are planned with dedicated gas power stations due to long grid connection waiting times, which means they will rely on fossil fuels for a significant portion of their energy needs.
- The two facilities will draw approximately 1.3 gigawatts of power, enough to supply well over a million homes under typical consumption patterns.
- The UK government disputes the emissions estimate, arguing that it assumes unrealistic full-capacity operation from day one, while campaigners maintain that design-capacity modelling is standard practice for infrastructure assessment.
- The comparison highlights the climate cost of digital infrastructure expansion at a time when the UK is committed to reducing emissions by 68% by 2030 and reaching net zero by 2050.
Planning for energy-intensive infrastructure in a net-zero economy
Businesses increasingly face questions about the carbon footprint of their digital operations. For many, cloud computing and data-heavy applications are essential to competitiveness. However, the emissions associated with those services are often invisible until analysed at scale. The Foxglove figures make those emissions tangible by comparing them to a familiar industrial benchmark.
Companies that rely on data centres may find themselves under greater scrutiny as supply chain emissions reporting becomes mandatory. Under carbon reporting regulations such as PPN 06/21, public sector suppliers must already disclose Scope 1, 2, and 3 emissions and demonstrate progress toward net zero. Private sector firms are moving in the same direction as investor pressure and regulatory requirements converge. Consequently, the carbon intensity of digital infrastructure will become a material consideration in procurement and compliance.
From an advisory perspective, businesses should understand where their data is hosted and how it is powered. Not all data centres have the same carbon profile. Facilities connected to renewable-heavy grids produce far lower emissions per unit of computation than those relying on fossil fuels. Therefore, choosing a provider with transparent energy sourcing can reduce a company's Scope 3 emissions significantly. This is particularly relevant for firms seeking carbon reduction targets or preparing for mandatory climate disclosures.
The broader issue is how the UK balances infrastructure growth with decarbonisation. Data centres are not going away, and demand will only increase as artificial intelligence and machine learning become embedded in business operations. However, allowing large facilities to bypass the grid and burn gas on site creates a parallel energy system that runs counter to national climate policy. Addressing this requires coordinated action across planning, energy regulation, and industrial strategy.
We work with businesses navigating the intersection of regulatory compliance, carbon reduction, and sustainable procurement. The data centre emissions debate illustrates how quickly infrastructure decisions can create long-term carbon liabilities. Whether you are a supplier, a tenant, or a business assessing your digital footprint, understanding the energy profile of your operations is increasingly essential to managing risk and meeting obligations.
Where to find further information
The original analysis and reporting provide detailed context on the emissions estimates and the policy debate. The Guardian's article on the Foxglove analysis is available on their website. Additionally, the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero provides guidance on electricity carbon intensity and emissions accounting methodologies.
For information on grid connection timelines and the constraints facing new large users, National Grid ESO publishes regular updates on connection queues and network capacity. The Department for Energy Security and Net Zero also sets out the government's approach to balancing infrastructure development with net zero targets.
Businesses concerned about supply chain emissions and carbon reporting obligations can find practical guidance through training resources on Scope 3 emissions and compliance frameworks. Understanding the carbon profile of your digital infrastructure is an important part of broader emissions reduction planning.