Correction: Hussain et al. GIS-Driven Regional Assessment for Sustainable Data Center Siting in the United Kingdom. Land 2026, 15, 516

Error in Figures

In the original publication [1], there were mistakes in Figures 6, 9, 12 and 16 as published. The corrected Figure 6, Figure 9, Figure 12 and Figure 16 appear below.

In Figure 6, the figure title and the legend were inaccurate in the earlier version. The title did not correctly reflect the variable depicted, and the legend contained an incomplete label in which “Relative Humidity” appeared without units. The title has been corrected to accurately represent the data shown and has been revised to “MEAN RELATIVE HUMIDITY (%)” to clearly indicate the unit of measurement. The figure has been updated accordingly.

Figure 6. Mean relative humidity (%) across the UK (1991–2020) [45,46].

Figure 6. Mean relative humidity (%) across the UK (1991–2020) [45,46].

In Figure 9, the visual clarity of the figure has been enhanced across all polygon areas, with particularly notable improvements for small and medium polygons, enabling readers to distinguish environmental designations more effectively. Additionally, the title in the earlier version was abbreviated and insufficiently descriptive. It has been corrected to “Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty, Sites of Special Scientific Interest, Natural Recovery Projects, and Heritage Coasts in England.” The figure has been revised to present the complete and accurate title and associated information.

Figure 9. Protected environmental areas in England and Wales, including Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty (green), Sites of Special Scientific Interest (purple), Heritage Coasts (orange), and designated Nature Recovery project sites (brown) [48]. The GIS analysis excluded sites within these zones to avoid environmental conflicts.

Figure 9. Protected environmental areas in England and Wales, including Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty (green), Sites of Special Scientific Interest (purple), Heritage Coasts (orange), and designated Nature Recovery project sites (brown) [48]. The GIS analysis excluded sites within these zones to avoid environmental conflicts.

In Figure 12, the legend title contained a typographical error, where “Great Britian Substations” appeared instead of “Great Britain Substations.” Moreover, the figure included Northern Ireland despite the absence of available electricity substation data for that region. The figure has been revised to correct the typographical error and to clarify the geographic data limitation.

Figure 12. High-voltage electrical substations in Great Britain (33 kV, 66 kV, 132 kV, 275 kV, 400 kV) [53]. Concentrations of substations (and thus strong grid infrastructure) are apparent in central, southern, and northwestern England, whereas parts of Scotland, Wales, and southwest England have sparser coverage.

Figure 12. High-voltage electrical substations in Great Britain (33 kV, 66 kV, 132 kV, 275 kV, 400 kV) [53]. Concentrations of substations (and thus strong grid infrastructure) are apparent in central, southern, and northwestern England, whereas parts of Scotland, Wales, and southwest England have sparser coverage.

In Figure 16, the legend title was omitted in the earlier version, resulting in insufficient description of the metrics presented. The title “REGIONAL SUITABILITY METRICS FOR SUSTAINABLE DATA CENTER SITING IN THE UNITED KINGDOM” has now been added to the figure to accurately characterize its content. The caption has also been revised to read: “Regional suitability metrics for sustainable data center siting in the United Kingdom.”

Figure 16. Regional suitability metrics for sustainable data center siting in the United Kingdom.

Figure 16. Regional suitability metrics for sustainable data center siting in the United Kingdom.

The authors state that the scientific conclusions are unaffected. This correction was approved by the Academic Editor. The original publication has also been updated.