14 hours ago
- Business
- Irish Independent
Energy regulator ‘ignored' High Court ruling that could boost powers to restrict data centres
Sinn Féin MEP Lynn Boylan has now called on the regulator to publish its legal advice, as concerns mount over the expansion of the data centre sector.
Ms Boylan sought documents under Freedom of Information (FOI) after the regulator, the Commission for Regulation of Utilities (CRU), issued a proposal last February on the regulations that should apply to new data centres.
Data centres currently use 22pc of all the country's electricity and multiple agencies and experts have warned that the electricity system cannot cope with their growing demand.
The CRU proposed that new data centres could be permitted if they generated all the power they needed themselves.
In theory, that could mean developing windfarms or solar parks, but because the proposal stated the generation plants must be on site, in reality they would be installing gas-fired generators.
Such a move would drive up gas use and emissions, contrary to the Climate Action Plan and legally-binding emission-reduction targets.
The CRU in its proposal said it had taken legal advice on potential measures such as requiring data centres to meet 'net zero' emissions standards.
'Following legal review, the CRU considers that the current provisions under the Climate Action Act do not provide a mandate to CRU to deliver a connections policy which requires explicit emissions reduction,' it said.
However, just days before this was published, the High Court delivered a landmark ruling on the climate action responsibilities of state agencies and public bodies.
It was made in relation to Coolglass Windfarm proposed for Co Laois, which An Bord Pleanála refused to grant planning permission for on the basis that it would contravene the Laois County Development Plan by being a visual intrusion on the landscape.
ADVERTISEMENT
Mr Justice Richard Humphreys said the grounds on which An Bord Pleanála based its decision were outweighed by the requirements of the Climate Act, specifically section 15 which deals with the responsibilities of public bodies to behave in accordance with the act.
It was the first time the strength of section 15 was tested and has potentially massive implications for all public bodies.
Yet the FOI documents show that a draft of the CRU proposal, drawn up before the highly publicised judgment, was the same as the decision made public after it.
"The Coolglass ruling gave the CRU a clear legal footing to act decisively on data centres, yet the CRU's policy reads like business as usual, as if ruling never happened,' Ms Boylan said.
"The claim that they lack the legal authority to act decisively on data centre emissions now rings hollow. The CRU must publish their legal advice.'
