Greenpeace threatens legal action over Crown Estate wind farm monopoly

Greenpeace is poised to take the Crown Estate, which finances the royal household, to court, alleging that it is inflating the price of wind power by capitalising on its exclusive hold over the seabed around England and Wales. The campaigners accuse the estate of devising a system that has dramatically heightened profits for itself and, by extension, the official income of the royal family, all at the expense of consumers and renewable energy developers.

The Crown Estate, a public corporation responsible for administering the monarchy’s historic land and property assets, owns virtually every inch of the UK’s seabed out to 12 nautical miles. This right originates from 1760, when George III relinquished management of “Crown Lands” to parliament in exchange for a fixed annual payment, with any profits funneled to the Treasury. Since 2012, royal family funding has been tied to estate profits via the sovereign grant, which is calculated as a percentage of these earnings.

Today, the estate auctions leaseholds on seabed blocks to offshore wind developers, earning revenue through option fees and rent. Greenpeace argues that this process violates the Crown Estate’s duty not to abuse its monopoly position. Will McCallum, co-executive director at Greenpeace UK, maintains that the Crown Estate should manage the seabed for public benefit, not simply as a profit generator for itself and its executives.

The last major auction in 2021 transitioned from fixed prices to a system of sealed competitive bids, causing a pronounced increase in Crown Estate income. Although Crown Estate Scotland capped option fees that year, six developers operating in English and Welsh waters agreed to pay a combined £879 million annually in option fees, adjusted for inflation. This fuelled a surge in the Crown Estate’s profit to over £1 billion for the year ending March last year, up from £443 million the previous year. The resulting boost to the sovereign grant pushed the annual sum supporting royal duties from £86.2 million to £132 million.

The Crown Estate insists Greenpeace’s interpretation is mistaken, arguing that option fees reflect market demand as determined by open auctions, not arbitrary price-setting by the estate. The estate contends that its net revenue returns value to taxpayers, given income is channelled back to the Treasury.

Greenpeace counters that the sharp increase in option fees is being passed on twice to consumers—both directly, and when power generated in Scotland cannot be transmitted south, leading to wind farms being paid to curtail output. The group is calling for an independent review of seabed auction practices and fee structures to ensure the common good remains central as offshore wind capacity is set to quadruple this decade. Should no action be taken, litigation may be the inevitable next step in this pivotal dispute over the future of British clean energy and the stewardship of public assets.