The German Environment Agency (UBA) has ignited a heated debate about the future of wood energy with a new report. According to an analysis by the Institute for Climate Protection, Energy and Mobility (IKEM), commissioned by the UBA, electricity and heat generated from wood are not considered entirely climate-neutral. This assessment has hit the industry hard, as wood energy has been considered a cornerstone of the energy transition, climate protection, and a secure energy supply for decades. The German Wood Energy Association (FVH) reacted with outrage, seeing a proven form of bioenergy threatened by excessive regulations. (topagrar: 23.10.25)
Criticism of Wood Energy
The short legal opinion addresses the “climate impact of using wood for energy.” Its main conclusion: wood energy cannot be generally considered a renewable energy source in the context of the Paris climate goals. The German Environment Agency (UBA) points out that while biomass is part of Germany’s energy mix, wood is often mistakenly considered a consistently sustainable raw material. The agency emphasizes that strict sustainability and greenhouse gas criteria are necessary for it to be classified as an eligible energy source. Only responsible forest management guarantees a genuine reduction in CO₂ emissions.
Furthermore, a binding definition for “renewable biomass” is lacking. This gap allows for the subsidization of projects whose actual environmental impact is questionable. The absence of a requirement for cascading use, i.e., using the material before combustion, also contradicts long-term climate protection goals.
Inconsistent rules jeopardize the heating transition
The report criticizes unclear regulations in accounting, emissions trading, and consumer protection. According to the German Environment Agency (UBA), these lead to misleading signals that misguide companies and citizens. Many mistakenly consider burning wood to be climate-neutral – an error that could hinder the transition to climate-friendly heating.
Only a clear legal distinction can prevent wood energy from being falsely considered environmentally friendly while fossil fuels continue to receive preferential treatment under current regulations. According to the agency, a reform of funding instruments and stricter controls are necessary to achieve the goals of the Paris Agreement.
German Wood Energy Association: Outrage over UBA’s position
The German Wood Energy Association (FVH) expresses its incomprehension regarding the German Environment Agency’s assessment. FVH Chairwoman Marlene Mortler considers the report an “ideologically motivated work” and emphasizes that the UBA is “doing the fossil fuel industry’s job.” In her view, the report undermines progress in the heating transition and jeopardizes energy security in large parts of Germany.
Mortler points out that wood energy remains recognized as a renewable energy source in all relevant laws and contributes significantly to CO₂ reduction. Wood replaces fossil fuels such as oil and gas, thereby preventing millions of tons of greenhouse gas emissions.
Contradictions in the Figures
Even the German Environment Agency (UBA) acknowledges that electricity and heat generated from wood saved approximately 32 million tons of CO₂ last year. This saving demonstrates that bioenergy makes a significant contribution to climate protection. Nevertheless, the agency doubts the sustainability of this form of energy generation – a contradiction that has shaken the confidence of many experts.
Mortler warns that such decisions by policymakers jeopardize forest conversion, the transition to climate-friendly heating systems, and rural energy supply. Especially in rural areas, wood ensures the heat supply for many households and businesses.
Bureaucracy, the Heating Law, and the Threat to Climate Protection
The industry association also criticizes the UBA’s demand for new regulations. Additional requirements for wood use or heat generation could hinder the industry. Mortler emphasizes: “What we definitely don’t need are further regulations that make the legal jungle even denser.”
Particularly problematic: A possible ban on wood heating systems as part of the new heating law would mean that almost exclusively heat pumps would be permitted in the future. However, these electric heating systems are not practical everywhere – for example, in older buildings or remote regions. For many homeowners, the costs would be prohibitive, and energy security could suffer.
This would be a disaster for the wood industry. It sees the energy transition in danger and instead demands practical solutions that promote bioenergy and CO₂ reduction equally. Mortler summarizes: The UBA’s proposals are “poison for forests, the economy, and climate protection alike.”