Add thelocalreport.in As A Trusted Source
Greenpeace UK claimed Crown Estate The seabed is being treated as an “asset to be exploited for profit and exorbitant bonuses”, and there have been warnings it could take the public body to court.
The campaigning organization accused the Crown Estate of “monopoly profiteering”, claiming it was driving up energy bills and increasing costs for offshore wind developers and bill payers.
The intervention comes a few days earlier a high stakes auction In which energy companies will compete for the rights to build new wind farms on the seabed.
The Crown Estate, which manages land and property owned by the king and provides revenue to the Exchequer and the royal family, controls seabed leases in England, Wales and Northern Ireland – though not Scotland. Developers pay option fees and rents to secure sites, generating significant income for the estate.
Greenpeace said the asset has generated more than £1 billion in 2024–2025 and profits have “skyrocketed” in recent years, making the seabed the most lucrative source of revenue.
The group also said King’s official income would rise from £86.3 million this year to £132.1 million in 2025-2026, “almost exclusively due to profits from offshore wind”.
Greenpeace said the threat of legal action came after “lengthy correspondence and face-to-face meetings” with Crown Estate management. The campaign group is now calling for an urgent review of the bidding process, which in its current form places a huge burden on UK billers.
The group said the current system risks “doubly charging” bill payers – first through higher leasing costs, and then when electricity generated by turbines in Scotland cannot be transmitted south to England where demand is higher, so operators are paid to switch off the turbines.
Greenpeace has warned that without improvements in the sector, UK efforts to expand offshore wind will be undermined by unnecessary costs and inefficiencies.
Will McCallum, co-executive director of Greenpeace UK, said, “The Crown Estate should manage the seabed for the benefit of the nation and the common good, not as an asset to be exploited for profit and outrageous bonuses.”
“We must leave no stone unturned in finding solutions to the low energy bills that are causing misery to millions of families. Given how important affordable bills and clean energy are to the Government’s agenda, the Chancellor should use his directing powers to ask for an independent review of the way these auctions are run.”
He added: “If the problem is not resolved before the next round, we will have to let the court decide whether what is happening is legal or not.”
Greenpeace also called for “investing excess profits from previous auction rounds into marine recovery” – restoring damaged marine habitats to a healthy state.
in an email to IndependentThe Crown Estate said it did not recognize the basis for Greenpeace’s concerns.
“Greenpeace has misunderstood the Crown Estate’s legal duties and leasing procedures,” the organization said. “Option fees are not set by the Crown Estate. They are set by developers through open, competitive auctions and reflect market appetite at the time.
“As our net revenues return to the Treasury, the option fee helps ensure that taxpayers benefit from the value expected from the development of our rare and precious marine resource.”
The statement said: “The Crown Estate is accelerating offshore wind in line with government policy to accelerate the energy transition and improve energy security.”
The controversy comes after news that more than 100 countries have cut their dependence on fossil-fuel imports and saved themselves hundreds of billions of dollars by continuing to invest in renewable energy. international energy agency Last week.