Vulnerable young people forced to the street by ‘unfair’ rental market

Many young people are finding themselves trapped in homelessness, unsafe conditions or relying on crisis services due to the “unfair” rental sector, charities have warned.

Vulnerable young people are being rejected by landlords due to their age, profession, lack of guarantor or connection to a homelessness service, charity EveryYouth has found.

The group organises a network of 10 youth homelessness charities across the UK. A survey of these services showed young people are mainly facing discrimination due to not having a family member who can be a guarantor (90 per cent), followed by their income level (70 per cent) despite being able to afford rent.

Kalvin, 18, said he struggled to find a landlord who would accept him, eventually leading him to a homelessness charity in Devon after a period of rough sleeping while being in work.

Originally from Glasgow, Kalvin says he moved to Devon for a “fresh start”, working for two years as an apprentice in the motor trade industry.

Although not earning much – an under-18 apprentice wage in the UK is £7.55 an hour – he was making at least £1,000 a month. This would be enough for a one-bedroom flat in North Devon, at an average of £597, or to live in a houseshare. Despite this, Kalvin says finding a place to rent proved impossible.

He said: “There have been multiple occasions where I’d see a place I really, really liked and they wouldn’t accept me because I was too young. It was very difficult to get somewhere that I could stay and call home.

“Places say ‘you’re too young’, or ‘you get paid a certain way’ or ‘you do not get paid enough’, and they question your income. It put a lot of stress on me.”

Kalvin added he is unable to rely on family for money. Now staying in supported accommodation provided by the Amber Foundation, part of the EveryYouth network, the 18-year-old said he’s “actually now interested in college, and they’re helping me go for that”, adding he will be doing his GCSEs so he can pursue a course in IT.

From May this year, new protections will come into effect for renters as part of the Renters’ Rights Act. This will tackle discrimination by making it illegal for landlords to refuse tenants in receipt of benefits or with children, and by ensuring they give a legal reason for eviction.

But there is “real concern” that this won’t benefit young renters and could even have a knock-on effect, said Nicholas Connolly, EveryYouth CEO.

He said: “It’ll put greater obligations on landlords, and ultimately they will try harder to avoid those obligations. And there are so many ways that they can discriminate legally.

“The young people that we support have no savings, very little or zero familial support, they’ve got nothing to fall back on. The ones we support are in homelessness services, but they have to leave that at some point. There isn’t social housing for most of them.

“So the only option is the private rented sector, and unless there is some additional support that recognises that they don’t have the social or economic capital that other people in society have, they will just not be able to get anywhere to live.”

Rosie, 19, works full-time, 35 to 45 hours a week, at a pub in Hampshire. She left a “toxic and abusive” family household when she was 17 and moved into supported accommodation provided by EveryYouth partner charity, Step by Step.

When she was ready for independent living, Rosie started looking for a private rental with the help of her support worker. It took eight months for a landlord to accept her.

Rosie said: “I was consistently turned down because of my age or because Step by Step was put on my application [as my current address]. One [landlord] did outright tell me they didn’t want to take me because ‘they know what kind of people end up in Step by Step’ and other landlords beat around the bush and say, ‘We don’t think this house share is for you’.

“I have been fully employed, full-time, since I was 17. It does feel quite condescending. I can’t help the situation I’m in. Landlords should be considering how much you earn and if you can pay the rent. Instead they’re just considering the fact that I’m under the age of 20.”

EveryYouth said it is calling on the government to strengthen protections against discrimination linked to age by introducing meaningful penalties for landlords who discriminate.

At the same time, it calls for greater incentives for landlords to provide tenancies to vulnerable young people, like council-backed guarantors or deposit help schemes, which could help them leave supported or temporary accommodation faster.

A spokesperson from the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government said: “Discrimination against anyone based on their age is completely unacceptable.

“Through the Renters’ Rights Act we’ve already taken action to stop discrimination against people who are receiving benefits or have young children.

“We will keep action under review to extend these powers so we can make sure everyone has a safe and decent home.”

‘Why do I have to wait in long queues if I’ve signed up to the EU entry-exit system?’

As you will know if you have been following the saga of the EU entry-exit system: more and more British travellers are becoming subject to the digital borders scheme for the Schengen area, which is due to be complete by 9 April.

As that deadline approaches, more concerns are being raised by readers. Over the past few days I have been snowed under with questions about the EU entry-exit system. I have answered a fair spread of the main concerns and selected a few common questions below.

Those of us who have registered still have to wait in the massive queues at European borders! We are registered, where is the quick entry system? Kristen Covo

Wouldn’t it be marvellous to imagine that there is a separate queue for people who have passed the test and had their fingerprints and facial biometrics registered? However, that was never part of the plan. The only difference is that, after you join the long queue for biometric registration, you will not have to do the fingerprint part – just the facial biometric.

There is a widely held misapprehension that, having gone through biometric registration once, you are qualified to use e-gates in future. Unfortunately, this is far from the case. The entry-exit system registration is entirely a European Union enterprise, while the system for admitting third-country nationals is down to each member state.

There should, in theory, be some kind of electronic message sent from the registration kiosk saying roughly, “Kristen has passed the registration hurdle; she will be along soon to enter the country.” But that is a long way from sauntering up to the eGates and smiling (or rather frowning) your way through.

Which countries might be having the most difficulty dealing with the EES? “Paul the Youtuber”

Briefly, to turn your question around: the nations probably having the least difficulty coping with the roll out of the entry-exit system are those where entry points have a very high proportion of European Union citizens – well above the 65 per cent average for a typical Schengen area border crossing. That might be “non-hub” airport locations such as Luxembourg, Berlin or Gothenburg.

At the other extreme: holiday airports serving Spain, Portugal and Greece where very large numbers of arriving and departing passengers are from the UK. But this week I asked the Spanish tourist office in London how it was going and was assured: “Spain fully intends to meet the EU stipulated guidelines and to have the EES running by 10 April.”

Is it worth booking a quick trip to a quiet airport this winter to complete the first biometric registration? If we do this would our second visit to the Schengen area require kiosk use or would we be able to go straight to border control – missing the kiosks? Matthew Pile

A tempting strategy: go to Luxembourg, Berlin or Gothenburg now to save time later. But as explained above: being registered allows you only to shave a few seconds off the time taken for the obligatory re-registration. In time, most British (and other non-EU) nationals will be registered, and the overall process for a planeload of passengers should be noticeably swifter.

If the queues are really deterring you, then waiting might help. A decade or two would be even better, because by then I predict facial biometric technology will be so advanced that you and I will breeze through formalities – even as second-class, third-country nationals.

Couldn’t we allow UK travel agents to install these machines in shops and allow British citizens to use them before they travel? Stephen Brunt

Another excellent idea – but one that will never happen, I fear. What would be good: rolling out the smartphone app created for the EES by Frontex, the EU’s borders agency. Unfortunately it would save only a small amount of time – you cannot register your fingerprints – and take-up has been negligible.

For EU citizens arriving in Schengen area from a non-Schengen country: is it also so difficult to go through the passport control? Marek Zalinski

No, all citizens of European Union nations – and the wider Schengen area – are carrying on as always. At a Schengen area frontier, there are basically two queues. The fast one, labelled EU/EEA/CH, is for:

The slow one is for everyone else.

You will find at many ports of arrival there is an additional queue – but this will be for entry-exit system kiosks or pre-registration, which is just a necessary hurdle to cross before you are allowed to line up for the non-EU processing.

You may or may not thank me for pointing out that, had we not voted to leave the European Union and negotiated to become “third-country nationals”, we would be whizzing past the non-EU stragglers, too.

In fact, what we chose to do is to more than double the length of those lines – because British passport holders make up more than half of the people who cross borders in and out of the Schengen area.

Simon Calder, also known as The Man Who Pays His Way, has been writing about travel for The Independent since 1994. In his weekly opinion column, he explores a key travel issue – and what it means for you.

‘I’ll never pay off my student debt in full – but it doesn’t matter’

When it comes to my student debt, I have adopted the same approach as millions of other graduates in my position: out of sight, out of mind.

I knew, when I finally graduated in 2022 after three years as an undergraduate and a one-year Masters course, that the amount I owed was staggeringly vast and, on my meagre first salary in the world of full time work, it was not a problem for now.

But after Rachel Reeves decided to freeze the threshold at which we start paying our loans back, I decided to finally reopen my student finance account and see how bad the damage was.

My debt when I graduated was £84,541.66. I had paid a total of just £310, and yet, thanks to the interest on the debt, I now owe £87,264.76 – £2,700 more than the amount I owed when I left university.

I am one of millions of unlucky people on a Plan 2 loan – widely believed to be the most punishing of the five loan plans.

Plan 2 was introduced in 2012, with loans given an interest rate of retail prices index plus up to three percent; it increases the more the graduate earns. Graduates repay nine per cent contributions from their earnings above the threshold of £28,470.

This will be frozen at its April 2026 level (£29,385) for three years, instead of increasing with inflation. It is set to increase each year in line with RPI from April 2030.

The education secretary has vowed to “look at” Plan B student loans but refused to commit to changing the system amid widespread concerns over costs. The chancellor has been characterised as a loan shark by the NUS after changes to university loan repayments, while Martin Lewis is among those who have predicted many will pay back larger chunks while interest continues to accrue, meaning many will feel the pinch in their monthly earnings as the cost of living continues to rise.

The level of student debt has risen sharply in recent years, with the average graduate now leaving university with around £53,600 in debt.

But, experts insist graduates concerned they may never pay off their student debt shouldn’t worry. According to IFS economist Kate Ogden, this was taken into consideration when the student loan system was set up.

She said: “I don’t think anybody should open up their student loan statement and panic. These are not like normal loans.

“It was fully expected from the start that a large proportion of people would not fully repay their loans. It was designed so that high earning graduates would repay more than they borrowed in real terms. And that would fund a kind of subsidy for lower earning graduates who’ll just never repay this. They were never meant to.”

The government has forecasted that around 56 per cent of full-time undergraduates starting in 2024/25 would repay them in full – more than double the forecast of the 2022/23 cohort at 32 per cent, because of reforms to student loan repayments for new students.

With the help of the Centre for Social Justice, I decided to work out what I would have to earn in order to pay off my student debt in full.

The results were, frankly, laughable.

According to their calculations, I would need a post-graduation starting salary of £68,346 – almost three times more than the average starting salary for graduates and significantly higher than the UK average salary at £39,039. And that would mean I would only just pay off my debt before the 30 year wipeout mark.

To pay off my debt in the next five years, I would have to go into a job that pays £207,773 which would put me in the top one per cent of earners in the UK.

The average graduate, leaving university with £53,600, fares no better, according to the Centre for Social Justice, which modelled what would happen to their debt in three different financial scenarios*. Based on these simplified scenarios, there was no outcome where the debt was paid off before it was written off after 30 years.

Ms Ogden added that while many people may never expect to pay back their loans, that doesn’t mean they won’t have an impact on their lives.

“Many people can still expect to repay a substantial amount towards these loans,” she explained. “So even if they don’t fully repay them, they are likely to have paid back thousands of pounds over the next few decades.

“These repayments will have an affect on people’s living standards, on their take home pay.”

Dan Lilley, head of youth at the Centre for Social Justice, has said that the repayment terms was just one of many indications that the education system needed to change.

He said: “The repayment terms in the bloated student loans system are bonkers, but they are just one of many indications that our education system needs wholesale rewiring.

“For too long we have pushed young people into expensive university degrees whether or not they suits them without being honest about labour-market outcomes or cost, damaging the value of these degrees in the process.”

He suggested that more investment in apprenticeships could go a long way to helping generations get into work: “Apprentices not only earn while they train, but earn on average some £5,000 more than graduates five years after qualifying.”

Martin Lewis is among the many experts who have called for better financial education in schools and universities, so that people who are making decisions about their future understand just what they’re getting themselves into.

He said, in a post on Money Saving Expert last month: “Even after all these years we still, tragically, educate many of our youth into what we call a debt, but never educate them about debt.”

John Webb, head of consumer affairs at Experian, said: “Many young people are committing to complex, long-term student loans at 18 without fully understanding how interest builds, how repayments work or what it means for their financial future.

“We’ve made progress on financial education in schools, but it’s nowhere near enough. Young people should be equipped with a clear, practical understanding of borrowing, budgeting and how to protect their credit score, especially as they head into a tougher jobs market.”

A government spokesperson said: “We inherited the student loans system, including Plan 2, which was devised by the previous Government. Threshold freezes have been introduced to protect taxpayers and students now, alongside future generations of learners and workers. The student finance system protects lower-earning graduates, with repayments determined by incomes and outstanding loans and interest being cancelled at the end of repayment terms.

“Since we were elected, we have been committed to supporting the aspiration of anyone who can and wants to attend higher education.”

*Economic and income-based variables make it near impossible for graduates to predict exactly how much they will pay off their student loan. These calculations were based on a simplified scenario where the RPI averaged 2.4 per cent to match the long run forecast, and wages grew at two per cent per year to reflect the Bank of England’s inflation target.

Atkin soars to half-pipe bronze to cap Team GB’s best Winter Olympics

Zoe Atkin capped Team GB’s best ever Winter Olympics with a bronze medal in the freeski half-pipe, to go with three golds and a silver won earlier in the Games.

The 23-year-old is the reigning world and X Games champion and had qualified in top spot, but China’s Eileen Gu recovered from a poor qualifying performance to win gold in her best discipline, defending her title from Beijing four years ago.

Atkin was a disappointing ninth in Beijing and withstood the pressure in Livigno Snow Park to seal a first Olympic medal despite a crash on her second run, equalling her older sister Izzy’s slopestyle bronze from Pyeongchang 2018.

China took gold and silver through Gu – the most decorated freeskier in history, who added a gold to her slopestyle and Big Air silver last week – and Li Fanghui, with whom Atkin shared the overall World Cup crystal globe last season.

Atkin’s bronze takes GB’s overall medal haul up to five, matching the record set in Sochi 2014 and Pyeongchang, but an improvement with three golds compared to just one at each of those Games.

The final was initially delayed by an hour and a half due to heavy snowfall in Livigno which completely blanketed the half-pipe, with poor visibility making it unsafe for the event to go ahead, before the decision was made to push it back to Sunday.

Fortunately the weather gods smiled on Livigno on the final day of the Games, and 11 athletes – missing Canada’s Cassie Sharpe, who qualified third but crashed hard and withdrew with a concussion – took to the Snow Park in bright sunshine.

Nerves were on show for much of the field, with several of the early starters crashing on their first run and struggling to maintain balance landing on the fresh snow.

Gu produced a huge first trick but landed slightly awkwardly and bailed on the remainder of her run, having lost all her speed, and scored on 30.00 to go into eighth place.

But Li was on impeccable form, launching up the 7m wall fearlessly and transitioning well between difficult tricks to post 81.25, going into provisional third.

A relaxed-looking Atkin, who had qualified in first place, chatted to her coach at the top of the half-pipe and spent some time on her phone selecting her music choice for the run before setting off.

The 23-year-old’s amplitude – the height she gets on her jumps – is her major advantage over her rivals, and she powered into the lead with a superb, consistent opening run to score 90.50, remaining in the lead and with more difficult tricks in her locker.

Gu put together a much better second run – successfully landing the trick she erred on in qualifying – to soar into the lead with 94.00, putting the pressure back onto Atkin.

Australian 16-year-old Indra Brown recorded the first 1080 of the day – a cork 1080, three full rotations in the air – but only scored 65.00, while Li pushed Atkin down to third with a 91.50.

Atkin soared 5.4m, nearly 2m higher than most of her rivals, into the air with her first trick but came unstuck later in the run, clipping the pipe with her skis and crashing hard, unable to improve her score.

Gu posted a 94.75 with her best run yet, reaching a height of 4m to maintain her position at the top of the standings and guarantee a medal.

The 22-year-old ran to hug compatriot Li after the latter completed another strong final run, posting 93.00 to put China in the top two podium spots.

Atkin dropped into the half-pipe last, recovering after her crash to put in an excellent run including a huge switch 900 for her final trick. Her amplitude was again miles higher than any of her rivals but it was only enough for bronze, a 92.50 – half a point off silver.

But she was delighted to make the podium and celebrated with her fellow medallists, the tears flowing as she prepared to accept her medal, while Gu dropped to the snow in joy and disbelief after defending her title.

Minister fails to rule out retaliation over Trump tariffs

A Cabinet minister has refused to rule out imposing retaliatory tariffs on the US, but insisted that it is better to negotiate with Donald Trump’s administration “behind the scenes”.

Bridget Phillipson also said the government would “hope and expect” its preferential tariff deal with the US to continue after the president announced 15 per cent global tariffs in the wake of a Supreme Court ruling which struck down his previous import levies.

The latest announcement from the US president has thrown the UK’s trade strategy into disarray, with questions arising over whether or not previous deals struck with the US still stand.

Asked whether UK plans to retaliate over Mr Trump’s latest tariff threat, Ms Phillipson told Sky News: “We always stand up for what’s right for Britain. And I think the prime minister demonstrated that with the approach he took around Greenland.

“But the reality is that if you want to get things done, it’s better to do that behind the scenes.”

Pressed on whether we could respond with our own levies, the education secretary said: “In reality, you get more done when you have serious conversations, often not in front of cameras or out there in the public, but actually behind the scenes, working closely with between governments.

“And we do have a really strong relationship with the US, that is something that is not about one president or one prime minister.

“It’s about that long standing and enduring relationship that is right for our country and is right for national security, and also really important at a time when we see significant global instability that we work together on those key questions like defence.”

She insisted that discussions are ongoing with the US, saying ministers want “the best possible deal for British businesses”.

Asked about the implications of the new rate for the UK, Ms Phillipson said: “We did secure a preferential deal.

“We, through the work that the prime minister has been leading in engaging with the US government and with President Trump, we would hope and expect that to continue, but these discussions are ongoing.

“This is an evolving situation. But of course, we want to get the best possible deal for British businesses.

“I understand the uncertainty it does cause for them, but they can be assured that we will always be working to make sure they get everything that they need.”

The US president’s “reciprocal tariffs”, imposed on most of the rest of the world last April under an emergency powers law were overturned by the US Supreme Court on Friday in a major blow to the president’s economic agenda.

On Friday, Mr Trump said he would replace the tariffs axed by the court with a 10 per cent tax on all goods entering the US. But in a post on Truth Social on Saturday he announced plans to increase this to 15 per cent.

But he doubled down on imposing levies following the decision, claiming the court “has been swayed by foreign interests” and other countries were “dancing in the streets, but they won’t be dancing for long, that I can assure you”.

The UK previously received the lowest tariff rate of 10 per cent, and a subsequent deal struck by Sir Keir Starmer and Mr Trump saw further carve-outs for Britain’s steel industry and car manufacturers.

But the US president’s latest tariff announcements raise questions over whether those deals still stand.

Officials are currently understood to believe it will not impact on most of Britain’s trade with America, including preferential deals on steel, cars and pharmaceuticals.

A UK government spokesperson said on Friday: “This is a matter for the US to determine but we will continue to support UK businesses as further details are announced.

“Under any scenario, we expect our privileged trading position with the US to continue and will work with the administration to understand how the ruling will affect tariffs for the UK and the rest of the world.”

WIN: a £2,500 Crystal Ski Holidays voucher

Fancy hitting the slopes with £2,500 to spend on your next winter escape? We’ve teamed up with Crystal Ski Holidays to give one lucky reader the chance to win a £2,500 voucher – perfect for powering an unforgettable mountain adventure!

Whether you’re dreaming of family-friendly runs, après-ski evenings by the fire or exploring top ski resorts, Crystal Ski Holidays makes it easy. With flights, transfers and a wide range of accommodation all taken care of, they’ll help you plan a seamless trip from doorstep to downhill.

Enter your details below to be in with a chance of winning – your next snowy getaway could be closer than you think!

To enter, simply fill in your details on the form below:

Prize Draw T&Cs

18+. UK, the Channel Islands and the Isle of Man residents only. Promotion closes at 23:59 GMT on 31st March 2026. Winner will be drawn at random from all entries received by the closing date. The prize is non-transferable and no cash alternative is available. Standard Comps & Offers rules apply, see here.

The prize is for one Crystal Ski Holidays voucher of two thousand and five hundred pounds (£2500). The voucher can be redeemed against any package holiday featured in the Crystal W2026/27 programme which departs from the UK between 01 December 2026 and 30 April 2027.

Details of available holidays can be found at www.crystalski.co.uk. All holidays are subject to availability. The prize must be redeemed by 31 December 2026. The voucher will be in the form of a unique code which will be e-mailed to the winner once the prize has been accepted and this can be redeemed either online, through a Crystal Hub or via phone direct with a Crystal holiday Advisor. The Promoter reserves the right to substitute prizes of equal or greater value. The prize is not transferable, is not redeemable for cash and no alternative will be offered. The code must be treated as cash and the balance cannot be refunded if the code is lost, stolen or destroyed. The prize is valid on new bookings only, cannot be combined with any promotional offers and can only be used against one package holiday including ski essentials. The winner will be required to pay any remaining balance exceeding the prize value of £2500. It is the winner’s responsibility to check all visa and passport requirements are fulfilled prior to making any booking. Booking terms and conditions apply to any holiday purchased in part or full using the code. Booking terms and conditions apply to the holiday; see https://www.crystalski.co.uk/ for details.

Should I worry about how much water my AI conversations are using?

Artificial Intelligence (AI)’s thirst for water has sparked widespread environmental fears, with many concerned that the rapidly advancing technology is putting further strain on the world’s resources.

Each prompt or question a person feeds AI will require energy and water to cool the data centre containing the software. The estimates of how much water AI is using have been widely debated, and different AI companies report varying numbers.

Sam Altman, the chief executive of OpenAI, has said ChatGPT uses less than 1/15 teaspoon for an average query. A Google Gemini study claims an average AI prompt uses less than 0.3ml of water.

But other estimates suggest it uses far more. Research from the University of California in 2023 calculated that ChatGPT “drinks” roughly 500ml of water for every 10 to 50 medium-length responses.

A report by the UK Government Digital Sustainability Alliance predicts that AI could drive global water usage up from 1.1 billion to 6.6 billion cubic metres by 2027, an amount equivalent to more than half of the UK’s total water usage.

Data centres, which power software like ChatGPT or Google Gemini, rely on water to cool the systems and prevent them from overheating.

They also use water for electricity generation, and during the manufacturing of the hardware they run on.

The Lincoln Institute of Conventional Policy said a mid-sized data centre will consume as much water as a small town, and a larger one, which requires up to 5 million gallons of water every day, will use as much as a city of 50,000 people.

People are concerned about AI’s water consumption as they fear it is putting growing demand on already limited supplies.

By using local water supplies, data centres are putting pressure on surrounding communities, which people fear will only worsen as AI expands, especially in areas where water is already scarce.

Members of the Government Digital Sustainability Alliance Planetary Impact working group said that almost 68 per cent of data centres were near protected or key biodiversity areas, where the ecosystems rely on clean water supplies, and whose communities depended on them.

As the demand for water increases, water scarcity and water stress are becoming more prevalent issues.

The group said: “Demand for fresh water is expected to exceed supply by 40 per cent by the end of the decade and 55 cent of global data centres are in river basins with high risk of water pollution, meaning much of the local water may be unsafe for use, increasing the pressure on clean water supplies and worsening the overall water scarcity in the regions.”

Many experts say the amount of water AI is consuming is a global crisis. However, others say that fears have been overstated.

Andy Masley, the director of Effective Altruism DC, a not-for-profit focused on improving the community through research, claims that the amount of water used by an individual is far smaller than most assume.

He said that hundreds of thousands of ChatGPT “prompts” would require less water than your pair of jeans, which the UN says takes around 7,500 litres of water to produce.

“That’s incredibly small by the standards of how most people use water in their day-to-day lives,” he told The Independent. “Almost all of our water footprint is actually invisible to us because it happens off-site and in other places.”

Mr Masley estimates a person would need to submit more than 1,000 prompts in a day to increase their daily water footprint by just one per cent.

Staying home and generating that many prompts could actually result in a smaller water footprint than going out and using electricity, he said.

A water footprint measures the total amount of freshwater used to produce a product. The European Union now requires data centres to report their annual freshwater consumption.

Sam Gilbert, a researcher at the University of Cambridge’s Bennett School of Public Policy, said the issue is not individual consumption but the impact that centres have on their immediate environment, and the demand they place on local water supplies.

He said there needs to be more transparency from companies that build and use these data centres around what the real environmental footprint of them is going to be.

Mr Gilbert said that the estimate that ChatGPT uses 500ml of water for every 10 to 50 responses is “probably overstated”.

“But even if it was correct, that’s just not very much water in the context of the amount of water that people use in their everyday lives,” he said.

However, Nick Couldry, a sociologist from the London School of Economics, said: “Whatever the rival calculations on water use, we have to consider the sustainability of the massively increased data processing that an economy and society largely dependent on AI will require.”

He said even if water usage can be reduced, technology companies “want and need us to use AI constantly for even more of our lives”.

“It is hard to see how this addictive business model won’t lead to unsustainable demands on the physical environment and rival versions of AI development will demand even more energy,” he added.

Shaolei Ren, an engineering professor at the University of California, said one of the main issues is that many data centres have a high peak water usage over the summer, which is putting immense pressure on the public water system.

Thames Water has previously warned data centres that could face restrictions on use during the hottest and driest times of the year.

Mr Ren said: “Water is a local and seasonal resource. There’s plenty of water in total, but just not everywhere or every time we need it. Only looking at the total volume without considering locational or timing contexts can miss the important nuances.

“The water infrastructure must be sized to support the peak demand. But expanding the water infrastructure capacity is extremely costly for public water systems.”

Mr Ren said that AI can also help save water from other processes. Some of the ways in which it is already doing this is through technology that is able to detect leaks and improve energy-efficient water distribution.

In 2024, a water company in Surrey began using AI to reduce leaks across its network. The World Economic Forum reported that once AI-enabled water solutions in the United States are fully implemented, they will be able to reduce water use by 15 per cent.

Google’s data centre in Waltham Cross uses air-cooling to limit the amount of water it uses. A spokesperson told The Independent: “As a pioneer in computing infrastructure, Google’s data centres are some of the most efficient in the world.

“Beyond our operations, Google is committed to improving local watershed health where it operates office campuses and data centres and replenishing 120 per cent of the water it consumes, on average.”

London Bridge attack hero sacked by police for using ‘p*key’ slur

A police officer who was among the first on the scene of the 2017 London Bridge terror attack has been fired for gross misconduct.

Detective Constable Mark Luker of the British Transport Police used the word “p*key” in WhatsApp messages about Gypsy, Roma, and Traveller people.

In one message, he used the term “dags” – a reference to the film Snatch, in which one character struggles to understand another’s accent when he mentions dogs, a misconduct panel heard.

In another message, the panel was told, he referred to “scrap metal, lead roofing and cable”, which he accepted was a joke to associate the Irish Traveller community with theft.

The panel concluded that Mr Luker probably knew that the language was “offensive” to a minority community and ruled it gross misconduct.

The officer was a member of a WhatsApp group called ‘Selbie Gumshoes’ with other members of the Major Serious and Organised Crime (MSOC) team, the panel heard.

On 31 December 2024, during a conversation about someone winning a bottle of whiskey which still had a security tag attached, he wrote: “Was this a raffle on a certain kind of site? Lots of mobile type homes? Lots of ‘Dags’”, the panel was told.

He then added: “You are the MSOC p*key liaison.”

The panel found that these were “deliberate messages, that clearly link the Irish Traveller community to acts of theft”.

It added that the use of the word “dags” in the messages was “derogatory” as it refers to a scene in Snatch where a Gypsy character’s accent is “mocked”.

On 17 March 2025, another group member shared a video of “Paddy Day parade on Inishbofin”, with the message: “Just like a Disney World Parade. They know how to put on a show,” the panel heard.

Mr Luker replied: “Off to find some scrap metal, lead roofing and cable”, the panel was told.

The panel concluded that this was “deliberate and discriminatory” in linking the Gypsy, Roma and Traveller community to theft.

On 27 March 2025, he used the word “p*key” again, which the panel found to be “disrespectful”.

Mr Luker said that he was one of the first responders to the 2017 terrorist attack on London Bridge and one of his coping mechanisms for dealing with the day can involve the use of humour.

He said he did not intend for the word “p*key” in the messages to be offensive.

The panel accepted that DC Luker is not “inherently racist”.

However, it wrote: “As an experienced BTP police officer used to dealing with a whole range of people, the panel found that, on the balance of probabilities, he probably would have known that this was an especially offensive use of language directed towards members of a minority community.”