Tech
UK government datacentre planning decisions queried over environmental oversight admission | Computer Weekly
Permission for the development, dubbed the West London Technology Park (WLTP) by its developers Greystoke, was granted by the government in early July 2025. This is despite Buckinghamshire Council twice denying planning permission for the project on green belt protection grounds.
In Foxglove and Global Action Plan’s view, planning permission for the project should not have been granted without an environmental impact assessment (EIA) being carried out first.
For context, Buckinghamshire Council initially stated the developers did not need to submit an EIA, having received assurances from them about how little impact the project would have on local energy and water supplies.
This view was later upheld by the planning inspectorate, when the government placed Buckinghamshire Council’s planning permission denial for the project under review.
Government U-turns on planning approvals
However, ahead of the court case’s first hearing on 22 January 2026, the government issued a legal letter admitting that its decision to grant planning permission for the project should be quashed.
The government said in the letter – seen by Computer Weekly – that it had received assurances that a “suite of mitigation measures” would be in place that would negate the need for an EIA, but it admitted that not all of these measures were secured at the time permission for the project was granted.
“The secretary of state accepts that in screening out EIA based on mitigation measures, but then failing to secure those measures, there was a serious logical error… [and] the secretary of state accepts that the [legal] claim is arguable and permission [for the project] should be quashed.”
This admission has now prompted calls for a reassessment of two other hyperscale datacentre projects the government has previously decided should go ahead, despite planning permission for them being initially denied at local authority level.
Among those calling for a reassessment of past projects the government has given the green light to, in the wake of the government’s U-turn on the WLTP project, is Tom Hegarty, head of communications at Foxglove.
“That should be an urgent wake-up call to halt the mad rush to build out massive datacentres at any cost that has been an obsession of this government,” he told Computer Weekly. “Having acknowledged the shoddy state of their decision at [WLTP], we have to hope ministers will now learn that pushing these power-guzzling monsters through without a thought for the environmental consequences is not the right way forward.”
This is a also view shared by Mark Butcher, founder and director of IT sustainability consultancy Posetiv Cloud, who said the government’s stance on the WLTP development makes it “difficult, if not impossible” to justify not re-examining other large datacentres approved under similar circumstances.
“At the very least, [these projects] should be reviewed for consistency,” Butcher told Computer Weekly. “This is not about opposing datacentres in principle, but from a planning and legal perspective, [it is] about ensuring there is credibility in the planning system and that due process has been followed.
“There is also an important planning-system angle here. Inconsistent application of EIAs creates real problems for planners. It undermines professional judgement, increases legal and judicial review risk, and makes future decisions harder to defend.”
The government’s other green-lit projects
Out of the other projects the government has given its seal of planning approval to, one is also based in Iver, Buckinghamshire and is being overseen by US investment company Affinius Capital. The government granted that development permission to proceed in December 2024.
Computer Weekly contacted Affinius Capital for an update on how the project was progressing, given more than a year has passed since approval for the build was granted. At the time of writing, no response had been received.
However, Computer Weekly is aware that the go-live date for that development hinges on work the National Grid is doing in the local area to bolster energy availability through the creation of its new Uxbridge Moor substation, which is due for completion in 2029.
The other hyperscale datacentre the government has given its blessing to is another Greystoke development, located in Abbots Langley, Hertfordshire. Planning for that project was originally denied by Three Rivers District Council in January 2024, before the government overturned that decision in May 2025.
As is the case with the WLTP development, the local councils overseeing both projects said the developers did not need to submit an EIA as part of their planning applications.
Computer Weekly contacted Greystoke for a progress update on the Abbots Langley development, but the company said it had no comment to make regarding the project at this time.
According to Butcher, the fact one of these approved developments has been retrospectively deemed to require an EIA leaves the government open to questions about why other projects of comparable scale are being treated differently. And that kind of uncertainty and inconsistency is likely to concern investors, but also developers plotting similar projects across the UK, he continued.
“[It will] likely push more cautious capital towards regions with clearer, more predictable planning frameworks,” he said. “From a government perspective, the approach also looks hugely short-sighted. By prioritising speed of approval and treating datacentres as nationally critical infrastructure without robust scrutiny, environmental and social risks are effectively pushed down to local authorities and communities.”
As mentioned, two of the projects the government has approved are in the same area, with approximately 10 miles separating them. They are also set to be built on the outskirts of West London and within the South East, which are already densely populated with datacentres.
If developers were mandated, for example, to complete an EIA as part of their planning permission applications, it would make it easier to assess the combined and cumulative impact of building so many datacentres in one area, added Butcher.
“Individually, sites may appear manageable, but without EIAs there is no proper mechanism to assess the combined effect of multiple hyperscale developments on regional power capacity, water stress, carbon intensity and community infrastructure,” he said. “That is exactly what we are now seeing in London and the South East, and is a significant part of wider infrastructure and resilience risk assessments.”
One of the drawbacks of planning for projects being viewed in this siloed way can be seen from the concerns previously raised about the impact that the influx of datacentres into West London, specifically, has had on the region’s energy security.
Speaking to Computer Weekly, John Booth, managing director of sustainability-focused IT consultancy Carbon3IT, said this is precisely why the UK datacentre industry is so keen to see the government deliver on its promised national planning policy statement.
“We’ve been asking for planning guidance for years and were advised that a national planning policy statement would be published in December 2025, but we are still waiting,” he said. “If planning guidance was in place, EIAs would be required, but most operators ask for a screening assessment for EIA prior to outline planning. If a local authority says no, then the EIA is still probably done but just not submitted.”
And datacentre operators are keen to do the right thing and would rather submit an EIA than not because they want to be seen as good citizens in the local communities where they are plotting to build their server farms, said Booth, adding: “Datacentres are trying to be as environmentally sound as they can be, but with a confused policy environment, this is difficult for them – hence our desire for guidance.”
Having planning approvals for datacentres based on a set of standards that are being “consistently applied” across different projects would be a huge benefit to operators, said Positiv Cloud’s Butcher. “Failing to do [so] risks the accusations and perceptions that the planning system is biased and being applied selectively, which ultimately slows the sector down through opposition, legal challenge and loss of trust,” he said.
In terms of what should be contained in such guidance, Foxglove’s Hegarty said it would be good to see the inclusion of an EIA made a “mandatory baseline for any datacentre planning application” as a starting point.
“[We also need to] mandate credible and enforceable conditions that require each datacentre operator, from Amazon to Equinix, to supply the full power needs of each site through new renewables at all times, so they don’t drain the grid and jack up prices for everyone else,” he said. “Otherwise, ministers will have demonstrated once again they are happy for Big Tech to reap the profits of polluting datacentres while our environment carries the cost.”
Computer Weekly contacted the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government for comment on the points raised in this story, but no response was forthcoming by the time of publication.
Tech
I Tested Garmin Watches for a Decade While Hiking, Biking, and Climbing. Here’s What You Should Buy
Last year, Garmin introduced a Pro version that incorporates the inReach’s satellite communications savvy. Not only does it cost at least $400 more than the Apple Watch Ultra and $200 more than the regular Fenix 8, but you also have to pay for the inReach subscription plan, which has several tiers and ranges from $8/month to $50/month depending on whether you want features like unlimited texting or sending photo messages.
What you get for this mind-boggling price is a sports watch that can do anything and everything. It has best-in-class battery life (every Fenix can last for weeks on a single charge, and up to a month with solar charging) and features like the depth sensor from Garmin’s Descent line, which means this watch works as a full-on dive computer for scuba and free diving. It has a microphone and speaker for basic voice commands (although no onboard cellular connectivity), the surprisingly useful built-in LED flashlight, and Garmin’s signature built-in topographic maps, 24/7 health monitoring, and tracking for over a hundred different activities.
I’ve taken the 51-mm version on pretty much every outdoor sport—snowboarding, trail running, mountain biking, and rock climbing. Every time I use it, its capabilities far outclass my own. I have irritated many a fellow climber by attempting to track route difficulty, duration, and falls while integrating my Body Battery metrics and so on. The danger is always that you’ll spend more time fiddling with your Garmin Fenix 8 than you do with your actual sport. I have the version with the sapphire glass face and the titanium bezel, and have smashed it into rock faces with nary a scratch. If you’re up for paying the price and want a good-looking watch that will last forever (I have friends who are still wearing their Fenix 5s and 6s, and honestly, they’re fine), this is the one to get.
Best Running Watch
The Garmin Forerunner series launched in the early 2000s and has become the quintessential runner’s watch. Like all Garmins, the Forerunner comes in a range of price points, each offering different features. Last year, Garmin released the Forerunner 570 ($550), a midrange model with no LED flashlight or onboard maps, and the Forerunner 970 ($750), which is the premium version. Before I go into detail about why the Forerunner 970 is the best option, I should also say that I have tested many previous Garmin Forerunners at various price points. If you’re not a triathlete, the older Forerunners are still worth considering, and the entry-level $200 Forerunner 165 is aimed explicitly at runners, instead of including triathletes as the more expensive models do.
Tech
Save Up to 40% With These Acer Promo Codes and Discounts
Acer is one of the top largest PC manufacturers in the world, perhaps best known for its gaming line and budget-friendly options. If you’ve already got your eye on an Acer product like a laptop or monitor, and are shopping at the company’s online storefront, you should be using one of these Acer promo codes and coupons to save some cash on your purchase.
Save 40% on Accessories When You Build an Acer Bundle
If you’re buying from Acer, you’re most likely shopping for either a desktop PC or laptop. With this discount, you can get a really solid deal on accessories if you bundle it with a mouse, laptop bag, or headset. When you go to purchase a PC, just click “Build Bundle” and you’ll see some of the eligible options, all of which are reduced by 40%. The Nitro Mechanical Keyboard, for example, goes from $50 to just $30. That 40% is a real discount, too, as that same keyboard costs $50 on Amazon when I checked.
Beyond peripheral add-ons, you can also save 10% off Acer Care Plus extended service plans or McAfee LiveSafe antivirus subscriptions. You can bundle up to five products together to save the most money. If you’re headed off to college (or have a kid in the family), a bundle like this can get you everything you need for a gaming or studying setup on the go.
Shop Rotating Weekly Deals on Monitors and Gaming Gear
Acer’s PC gaming offerings come in either the flagship Predator brand or the budget-tier Nitro. Acer offers rotating weekly deals on everything from monitors to gaming laptops, some of which are my favorites that I’ve tested in their given category. The Acer Nitro V 16, for example, was a budget gaming laptop that I recommended quite a lot last year because of its incredible price. The one I tested was the entry-level version with an Nvidia RTX 5050 inside, but Acer has the RTX 5060 model in its own storefront. It’s $100 off right now at $1,200, which comes with 16 GB of RAM and a terabyte of storage. In fact, it’s only $30 more than the RTX 5050 model, despite offering a significant jump in gaming performance. These discounts are reflected right on the product pages, so there’s no promo code, discount code, or coupon code required.
Acer has a wide selection of monitors available, too, whether that’s a massive 49-incher or a more modest 27-inch gaming workhorse. One of my favorite discounts I saw right now was the Acer Nitro XV2, a 27-inch 1440p display with a 300 Hz refresh rate. It’s 44% off at the time of writing, bringing the price down to just $250. Because these discounts are swapped out on a weekly basis, it’s worth checking back to see if the product you’re eyeing has a new discount.
Select Customers Can Get 15% Off Their Purchase
Acer also offers a number of added discounts at checkout, including 15% off for students. Students will need to verify through Student Beans or SheerID. Because a lot of the devices Acer offers are budget-friendly, they can be attractive for students, and the extra 15% off is the icing on the cake.
We tested the Acer Swift 16 AI last year and really enjoyed the high-resolution, OLED screen and impressively quiet performance. Acer has the smaller version of this same laptop available, the Swift 14 AI, which is currently $150 off. You also might check out the Acer Chromebook Plus 514, a laptop we liked quite a bit when we reviewed it in 2024.
Acer offers this same 15% discount for active duty military, veterans, and their families. It also applies to healthcare professionals, which can be verified through its healthcare discount portal.
Tech
AI Research Is Getting Harder to Separate From Geopolitics
The world’s top AI research conference, the Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems—better known as NeurIPS—became the latest organization this week to become embroiled in a growing clash between geopolitics and global scientific collaboration. The conference’s organizers announced and then quickly reversed controversial new restrictions for international participants after Chinese AI researchers threatened to boycott the event.
“This is a potential watershed moment,” says Paul Triolo, a partner at the advisory firm DGA-Albright Stonebridge who studies US-China relations. Triolo argues that attracting Chinese researchers to NeurIPS is beneficial to US interests, but some American officials have pushed for American and Chinese scientists to decouple their work—especially in AI, which has become a particularly sensitive topic in Washington.
The incident could deepen political tensions around AI research, as well as dissuade Chinese scientists from working at US universities and tech companies in the future. “At some level now it is going to be hard to keep basic AI research out of the [political] picture,” Triolo says.
In its annual handbook for paper submissions, issued in mid-March, NeurIPS organizers announced updated restrictions for participation. The rules stated that the event could not provide services including “peer review, editing, and publishing” to any organizations subject to US sanctions, and linked to a database of sanctioned entities. It included companies and organizations on the Bureau of Industry and Security’s entity list and those on another list with alleged ties to the Chinese military.
The new rules would have affected researchers at Chinese companies like Tencent and Huawei who regularly present work at NeurIPS. The database also includes entities from other countries such as Russia and Iran. The US places limits on doing business with these organizations, but there are no rules around academic publishing or conference participation.
The NeurIPS handbook has since been updated to specify that the restrictions apply only to Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons, a list used primarily for terrorist groups and criminal organizations.
“In preparing the NeurIPS 2026 handbook, we included a link to a US government sanctions tool that covers a significantly broader set of restrictions than those NeurIPS is actually required to follow,” the event’s organizers said in a statement issued Friday. “This error was due to miscommunication between the NeurIPS Foundation and our legal team.”
Before they reversed course, the conference organizers initially said that the new rule was “about legal requirements that apply to the NeurIPS Foundation, which is responsible for complying with sanctions,” adding that it was seeking legal consultation on the issue.
Immediate Backlash
The new rule drew swift backlash from AI researchers around the world, particularly in China, which produces a large quantity of cutting-edge machine learning papers and is home to a growing share of the world’s top AI talent. Several academic groups there issued statements condemning the measure and, more importantly, discouraging Chinese academics from attending NeurIPS in the future. Some urged Chinese academics to contribute instead to domestic research conferences, potentially helping increase the country’s influence in relevant science and tech fields.
The China Association of Science and Technology (CAST), an influential government-affiliated organization for scientists and engineers, said Thursday that it would stop providing funding for Chinese scholars traveling to attend NeurIPS and would use the money instead to support domestic and international conferences that “respect the rights of Chinese scholars.”
CAST also said it will no longer count publications at the 2026 NeurIPS conference as academic achievements when evaluating future research funding. It’s unclear if the organization will reverse course now that NeurIPS has walked back the new rule.
-
Business1 week agoFlipkart group CFO to leave co amid IPO plans – The Times of India
-
Fashion1 week agoChina’s textile & apparel exports surge 17% to $50 bn in Jan-Feb 2026
-
Sports1 week agoRating Adidas’ 2026 World Cup away shirts: Argentina, Spain, Mexico and more
-
Sports1 week agoAmerican Conference Commissioner Tim Pernetti thanks Trump for Army-Navy game executive order
-
Tech1 week ago
The Corsair 4000D RS PC Case Keeps Your System Cool
-
Business1 week ago‘Marriage penalty’ in Washington state’s new millionaire tax stirs debate
-
Tech1 week agoGamers Hate Nvidia’s DLSS 5. Developers Aren’t Crazy About It, Either
-
Business5 days agoProperty Play: Home flippers see smallest profits since the Great Recession, real estate data firm says
