In a written answer to a parliamentary question on 4 August 2026, European Commissioner for Energy Dan Jørgensen defended the confidentiality clause in the EU's data centre rating scheme, arguing that it is compatible with EU law and the Aarhus Convention, while committing to annual transparency reviews. The clause, which restricts disclosure of individual data centre indicators to aggregated data, has been criticised by experts for potentially undermining public access to environmental information.
The answer comes in response to a question from Spanish MEP César Luena (S&D), who cited studies suggesting the clause was 'copied word for word' from a Microsoft proposal and could conflict with the Aarhus Convention, Directive 2003/4/EC, and Regulations (EC) No 1367/2006 and (EU) 2021/1767. Luena asked how the Commission ensures compatibility, why it opted for automatic confidentiality rather than case-by-case assessments, and whether it would review the clause in the upcoming Data Centre Energy Efficiency Package.
Jørgensen reiterated that the European database on data centres, established under the Energy Efficiency Directive (EED), provides aggregated data via a public dashboard, and that confidentiality is compatible with EU law. He noted that the Commission has committed to analysing reported figures annually, with the first-year analysis already public and the second in preparation. He also clarified that Member States decide which data data centres must publish, and that national authorities can disclose information during permitting or local consultations. Crucially, he stated that the upcoming Data Centre Energy Efficiency Package is not foreseen to review the EED, signalling no immediate change to the clause.
The answer offers no concrete proposals to alter the confidentiality regime, instead emphasising existing transparency measures and national discretion. This suggests a preference for maintaining the status quo, balancing business confidentiality against public access to environmental data. The Commission's position may face continued scrutiny from MEPs and environmental groups who argue that automatic confidentiality could enable greenwashing and hinder local impact assessments. The annual analysis and transposition checks provide some oversight, but the lack of a commitment to revise the clause leaves the debate open. Stakeholders affected include data centre operators, who benefit from protected business information, and local communities and environmental NGOs, who seek greater transparency on environmental impacts. The Commission's stance prioritises industry confidentiality, potentially at the expense of public access to information, a tension that may resurface as the energy efficiency package is developed.