AI (Artificial Intelligence)
Data centres
Jobs
Environment
Industry

UK Government job estimates for the new wave of hyperscale data centres are ‘ludicrously inflated’, according to analysis by countryside charity, Action to Protect Rural Scotland (APRS).

The charity found that claims by UK Government that, for instance, a new AI Growth Zone, in Lanarkshire, comprising a 500MW data centre, would create 3400 new jobs, appear inflated compared with real case scenarios.

It also looked at publicly available figures globally to estimate the cost, in terms of investment, per job delivered and compared these with other sectors.

Analysis of data from the United States found that each job created through investing in data centres cost $33 million (£24.5 million), 400 times the cost of a job from IT investment in other parts of the tech industry.

“Data centre investment has astronomically poor value, in terms of job creation, compared to all other sectors, even Utilities, which was the next most expensive investment per job created at $2.2 million (£1.65 million) per job.”

The analysis looked at multiple sources, including audited reports related to government funding schemes and other data from independent sources. Hyperscale data centres differ from traditional data centres in their massive scale, rapid scalability, and efficiency, and are primarily designed to power the growth in use of Artificial Intelligence (AI).

Dr Kat Jones, Director of APRS, said: “It’s about time the hyperscale data centre developers were called out on their ludicrously inflated job projections. Data centres famously employ extremely few people, and have enormous environmental impacts, so we should expect more scrutiny of exactly what benefits hyperscale AI data centres would bring to Scotland.”

“We have found that data centres tend to employ far fewer than a hundred staff, usually between 20 and 50 but we are being told that the proposed hyperscale data centres suggest will each create thousands of jobs.

“Developers and the UK Government seem to be taking the actual estimate of jobs, adding temporary construction and indirect employment, and then assume that each of these jobs create up to 6 additional jobs. This is the only way we think it would be possible to come up with these preposterous figures.”