CoreWeave Told Ministers It Wanted Four More Scottish Dat…

Internal papers show the American AI company wanted to expand rapidly after its first Lanarkshire facility. The same documents warn that accommodating a data centre could delay electricity projects needed for Clean Power 2030, while promised jobs, community benefits and access to computing capacity remained under discussion.

The documents were published by the Scottish Government on 15 July 2026 following a freedom of information request.

CoreWeave told Scottish ministers that it wanted to move urgently towards building four more data centres in Scotland after establishing its initial facility, according to internal government papers released under freedom of information law.

A briefing prepared for the First Minister records that Mike Mattacola, then CoreWeave’s UK general manager, had expressed a wish to invest further in Scotland and build another four centres. He regarded Scotland as capable of meeting the company’s demand for lower-carbon electricity and commercially attractive because grid constraints had created what the document called “significant pockets of inexpensive power”.

The papers do not establish that CoreWeave submitted four planning applications, selected four sites or committed financing to four completed projects. They record an expansion ambition conveyed to ministers while the company and DataVita were seeking government assistance with electricity connections, planning and coordination.

The disclosure nevertheless widens the potential scale of the development beyond the Lanarkshire AI Growth Zone announced by the UK Government in January.

That announcement said £8.2 billion of private investment would create more than 3,400 jobs. Around 800 were expected to include AI researchers, programmers and permanent data-centre workers; the remainder were described principally as construction jobs. The government’s own notes state that the employment and investment figures were supplied by DataVita. The Growth Zone designation is also conditional upon delivery milestones and continued compliance with legal and regulatory requirements.

Government support began before the winning bid was selected

The newly released records show that Scotland attracted considerable early interest. Officials recorded 41 bids relating to Scottish sites during the first phase of the UK competition, four of which were considered to have high potential because of their power-delivery timescales and wider proposition.

Scottish officials initially decided it would be inappropriate for the Deputy First Minister to endorse individual proposals when so many were competing. A general letter of support was instead offered to all Scottish bidders, describing Scotland as a natural location for AI Growth Zones and promising support where local considerations allowed.

Once DataVita’s proposal had advanced, the approach became more concentrated. A First Minister’s briefing said the Scottish Government wanted to facilitate the investment, maximise its economic value and “find a path through” grid-connection and planning problems. DataVita and CoreWeave wanted a dedicated taskforce addressing planning, power and coordination between industry and national and local government.

Officials proposed a “Team Scotland” response involving the Scottish Government, the UK Government, North Lanarkshire Council, Scottish Enterprise, ScottishPower Energy Networks and the National Energy System Operator. CoreWeave had also met Scottish planning officials to discuss the system and build confidence in the process.

The records do not show ministers ordering an approval or granting CoreWeave a preferred electricity connection. They expressly recognise that network operators must avoid undue discrimination and that Scottish ministers cannot direct the system operator or ScottishPower to move a data centre ahead of other applicants.

Cheap power for whom?

The reference to “inexpensive power” arises from an awkward feature of Scotland’s electricity system.

At certain times, renewable generators can produce more electricity than the transmission network can carry to demand elsewhere. Generators may then be paid to reduce output. Placing a large electricity user near constrained generation could absorb some of that power rather than allowing it to be curtailed.

That does not mean Scottish households would receive the same inexpensive electricity. DataVita says its model relies upon renewable-energy parks connected directly to data-centre substations through private wires. It claims this could deliver power below 10p per kilowatt-hour because much of the electricity would avoid public-network, balancing and policy charges. The grid would provide backup when private generation was unavailable. Those figures and anticipated savings are company projections.

The internal government assessment says using data centres to absorb constrained electricity may appear a neat solution, but is “significantly more challenging” in practice. Scotland’s electricity network is already heavily constrained, while manufacturers’ order books for cables and substation equipment are filled years in advance. Available equipment is already assigned to transmission reinforcement and customers holding connection offers.

The strongest warning in the papers is that ScottishPower Energy Networks had advised that projects critical to the UK’s Clean Power 2030 programme could potentially be delayed to accommodate a data-centre connection, even if regulations were changed to permit prioritisation.

That warning deserves greater attention than the general proposition that data centres might reduce curtailment. A project could absorb surplus renewable power once connected, while still competing for the cables, substations and reinforcement required to connect housing, renewable generation and other industries.

No published project-level assessment yet shows which infrastructure would be needed for the Lanarkshire development, who would finance it, which existing projects might be displaced or what proportion of its electricity would be drawn from the public system before its proposed energy parks became operational.

Planning policy already favours green data-centre development

Scottish planning policy designates green data centres as national developments. According to the due-diligence assessment, this means the principle of the development does not have to be established again during later consenting processes.

The papers also point to Masterplan Consent Areas, which can provide planning permission, road-construction consent and certain heritage consents in advance, removing the need for separate applications.

That does not amount to automatic approval. The government’s assessment says developers must still present a strong case under National Planning Framework 4 and engage robustly with the planning authority. Officials were also conscious that ministers might later have a formal decision-making role and recorded the need to keep investor engagement separate from subsequent planning decisions.

North Lanarkshire Council was already increasing staffing in planning, building standards and environmental services “at risk”, before the corresponding development income was assured. It was considering changes to its education curriculum in anticipation of employment linked to the Growth Zone. Scottish Enterprise and Skills Development Scotland were also reorganising work around data centres, investment and prospective employees.

Jobs and benefits were still being negotiated

The documents do not establish a firm CoreWeave employment commitment for the four additional centres.

Before the November meeting, Scottish officials said they wanted to understand what skills and employment commitments CoreWeave was considering. They were also instructed to ask what the company would bring through partnerships with universities, Scotland’s technology sector and environmental measures.

A DataVita community blueprint was projected internally to produce £36 million a year and £550 million over 15 years, although officials noted that work with partners was continuing. The later public announcement gave a slightly lower figure of up to £543 million and said the fund would grow as data-centre capacity came online.

The records also show that government and council officials were still deciding what additional public value should be secured. North Lanarkshire Council was considering local benefits, while the Scottish Government was examining whether computing capacity could be made available to universities and technology partners. The status of the community blueprint was still listed as an action to be confirmed.

Those are aspirations rather than published contractual conditions. The released material does not identify enforceable guarantees covering the number of permanent Scottish jobs, local recruitment, university access, procurement from Scottish suppliers or the delivery timetable for the community fund.

Water and the two-site proposal

The due-diligence assessment also reveals unresolved water questions.

It says a disused reservoir about three kilometres from one proposed site might reduce demand on the drinking-water system. Further investigation was required to establish how much water could be removed without environmental harm. A drainage-impact assessment might also be necessary, together with possible network upgrades. Officials concluded that a feasible solution appeared possible, but only after timescales, costs and environmental feasibility had been established.

The assessment describes the DataVita bid as spanning two sites in North and South Lanarkshire, with adjacent renewable-energy parks intended to supply hyperscale data centres and AI innovation parks. It also refers to potential heat reuse for facilities including the new Monklands hospital.

The later public announcement centred upon DataVita’s existing site around Airdrie in North Lanarkshire. The released annex does not identify the complete boundaries of both original sites. Land ownership, acreage, remediation details and parts of the planning assessment remain redacted as commercially confidential.

The public can therefore see that a two-site regional proposal was assessed, but cannot reconstruct the full bid, determine how the South Lanarkshire element evolved or match every investment and employment claim to a named parcel of land and consented development.

Before another four centres move beyond an expression of interest, the public account should identify their proposed locations, electricity requirements, network consequences, permanent employment, water demand and binding local benefits.