Google dossier developments: The Mouvement is right – more transparency is needed!

There are developments in the Google dossier: if you search carefully, you will find the environmental impact assessment (EIA) documents for the data centre on a subpage of the Ministry of the Environment’s website ( www.emwelt.lu ). The dossier submitted by Google is informative, as are the statements from various administrations on the available documents.

In recent weeks, the planned data centre has once again been the subject of press coverage, which has given the impression that the cooling issue has now been resolved: instead of water cooling, air cooling will now be used.

It is incomprehensible that the public was not informed about the availability of the currently available documents on the aforementioned website. It is also irritating that the dossier is only listed there under the name “London Bridge“; this does not exactly help to draw the attention of interested parties.

What insights does an initial review of the dossier provide? On one extremely important point, the Mouvement Ecologique has been proven right in its years of campaigning. As a reminder, the Mouvement Ecologique’s main objection to Google was the expected high water consumption. How often did officials say: “We can handle it, this is an exaggeration.” And now? The facts prove the Mouvement Ecologique right! Google is abandoning water cooling and now relying on air cooling. One quote (representative of others) from the Water Management Authority’s statement on Google’s impact study speaks volumes.

Given the local constraints on water availability in Bissen (volume and flow rate), wet cooling is incompatible with the site as it would require too much water. Such water requirements could not be met by either the municipal drinking water network (Syndicat des Eaux du Barrage de la Haute-Sûre (SEBES)) or the Muschelkalk or Buntsandstein aquifers. Indeed, the two aforementioned aquifers are exploited locally for the production of drinking water and are called upon to contribute to meeting the growing needs of the population. Their preservation is therefore essential. (Bold print Méco). Why did the government not recognise this earlier?

The documents also show that Google must provide much more detailed information if the lack of transparency in the dossier is to finally come to an end. The dossier on display contains problematic passages and is characterised by insufficient transparency. Three aspects should be highlighted here:

• Further uncertainties regarding cooling: The following analysis, made by the Ministry of the Environment in its overall critical statement, is extremely disconcerting: “The authors of the project estimate (page 52) that cooling would be achieved ‘during a very large part of the year’ in ‘free chilling’ mode, but then specify that this mode would only allow cooling for 20% of the time. The consistency of this statement needs to be verified. Similarly, further details are requested on the external conditions required to apply this cooling mode.” How will the cooling of the data centre be ensured outside of this 20%? In the absence of further information from Google, questions remain about the actual cooling solution.
• There is a lack of concrete specifications and data on energy consumption: air cooling means significant energy consumption and waste heat. It is stated that the energy supply should come from renewable energies. But how high is the total energy consumption? What about the necessary power grid? And also: why doesn’t Google produce more energy itself; why aren’t all halls and car parks systematically equipped with solar panels (this is only partially planned)? But above all: in the interests of energy transition and climate protection, it is now absolutely essential to use the waste heat from such centres – precise data on the available waste heat must be presented in a way that is comprehensible to anyone interested! The dossier currently states succinctly: “A noter dans ce contexte également, en cas de demande, la valorisation de la chaleur fatale en-dehors du site.” What does “en cas de demande” mean here? Who creates this “demand”? And who determines the conditions? Google must be required, as is common practice in some other countries, to make every effort to attract customers and negotiate fair terms with them. It should not be left to the discretion of the data centre operators to decide whether or not to use the waste heat.
• Inaccurate data – Very liberal interpretation of trade secrets: In its statement, the Ministry of the Environment also argues that London Bridge currently classifies a large amount of data relating to energy as “secret de fabrication” and therefore not for public consumption. Mouvement Ecologique notes that the applicant interprets this term very narrowly, which may result in important information being withheld from the public.
  It also points out that, for example, the noise study is not yet available to the required extent and the non-technical summary is still incomplete.
  However, the Ministry of the Environment also highlights other weaknesses: according to the dossier, the excavated soil/construction waste could amount to between 102,000 m3 and “only” 22,000 m3. According to the Ministry, it is clear that the project must be based on the “lowest value”.

In a recent article (*), Bissen Mayor David Viaggi stated that the criticism of the Google project was “absolutely understandable” because “the level of information was also problematic in some cases,” to which the US corporation contributed “with its secretive behaviour.”

Unfortunately, the currently available documents from the environmental impact study are unlikely to change this assessment…

If there is one lesson to be learned from the disputes of recent years, it is that maximum transparency must be ensured in future. Mouvement Ecologique expects Google to make the urgently needed improvements and disclose basic data on energy and resource consumption before the public procedures are initiated.

(*) Review – abridged version (6/12/2025)

Mouvement Ecologique – 9 December 2025

Translated by Deepl