European Forestry Pulse #112 🌲

Hello,

For forty years, we counted forest loss in hectares.

Hectares tell you how much forest changed. They do not tell you how much forest was there.

A hectare of old spruce in Bavaria is not a hectare of thin pine in Lapland.

Last week a team in Munich published the first Europe-wide measurement of what was actually lost.

Here's what's moving European forestry this week:

On 5 August, the Technical University of Munich published a study in Nature Geoscience.

The lead author is Dr Katja Kowalski. The senior author is Prof. Cornelius Senf.

It is the first Europe-wide assessment of changes in forest biomass, not forest area.

Earlier work counted where tree cover was lost. This work counts how much wood was standing there.

The team combined two satellite records. Annual maps of tree cover loss from the Landsat archive. A high-resolution map of how much biomass each forest held.

Overlay one on the other and you get tonnes, not hectares.

Here is TUM's own wording.

Since 2018, Europe has lost on average 46% more biomass per year per hectare of forest area than during 1985 to 2017.

Read that slowly. This is a rate per hectare. It is not a total.

It does not say Europe lost half its forests. It says that when forests are disturbed now, more wood goes with them.

The word for that is severity. Same map, heavier losses.

Between 1985 and 2023, 82% of Europe's biomass losses came from forest management.

Natural disturbances caused the other 18%.

But the split moved. Natural disturbances were 17% of losses in 1985–2017. They were 23% in 2018–2023.

So harvesting is most of the volume. Nature is most of the change.

Senf makes the second point himself. Biomass removed from a forest does not usually reach the atmosphere as CO₂ straight away. It often becomes buildings or furniture.

A harvested tree and a beetle-killed tree are not the same carbon event. Until now, satellites could not tell them apart.

Carbon released depends on where the disturbance happens.

Germany holds the largest standing timber stock in the European Union.

Disturbed German forest releases about 125 tonnes of biomass, or roughly 230 tonnes of CO₂ equivalent, per hectare each year.

Before 2018 that figure was about 170 tonnes of CO₂ equivalent.

Mediterranean and Scandinavian forests hold less biomass per hectare. So a disturbance there releases less.

This is the finding with money attached. Two identical hectares on a map can carry very different carbon liabilities.

The European Union wants annual forest carbon removals of 310 megatonnes of CO₂ equivalent by 2030.

TUM's release also points to recent studies. European forests stored about 72% less CO₂ equivalent in 2020–2022 than in 2010–2014. That figure comes from other research, not from this paper.

That gap is a policy problem. It is also a pricing problem.

Sink capacity feeds LULUCF accounting. LULUCF accounting feeds carbon markets and national targets. Those feed the assumptions inside forest valuations.

When the measurement gets better, the assumptions get repriced. That happens quietly, and it happens before anyone announces it.

Senf does not end on decline.

He says forests are certainly capable of recovering from disturbances. Most disturbed areas will eventually regain their role as carbon sinks.

His own phrase for it: "there is reason to be optimistic."

If you own forest: ask what your forest weighs, not only what it covers. Standing volume per hectare is now the variable that drives your carbon number.

If you value forest assets: a hectare is no longer a unit. Biomass density and disturbance exposure belong in the model separately.

If you manage forest: the 82/18 split is your strongest public answer. Most European biomass movement is planned harvest that becomes product. Say it with the number.

If you sell carbon or report under LULUCF: better satellite data means better verification. That helps credible projects and squeezes weak ones.

Europe did not suddenly start losing more forest. Europe started measuring it properly. Those are very different headlines. Sources: TUM — Unprecedented biomass loss in Europe's forests since 2018 | Kowalski, K. et al., Accelerating biomass loss from forest disturbances across Europe | ESA — Europe's forests losing more biomass since 2018

The German paper and pulp association published its half-year figures in early August.

Production fell 1.4% to 9.4 million tonnes in January to June.

Turnover fell 7.1% to €6.9 billion.

Look at the segments. Packaging paper and board held flat at 6.4 million tonnes. That is more than 67% of all German paper output.

Graphic papers fell 6.9% to 1.7 million tonnes.

Hygiene papers came in at 658,000 tonnes, down 2%. Technical and speciality papers at 722,000 tonnes, down 0.8%.

Turnover fell about five times faster than volume. That is our arithmetic, not the association's disclosure.

Why it matters: When volume holds and revenue drops, the mills are not making less. They are being paid less. That is a price story, not a demand story.

The takeaway: If you sell pulpwood into Germany, your buyer's tonnage is stable and its margin is not. Expect hard price conversations, not volume cuts. Ask which grade your wood ends up in. Packaging is flat. Graphic paper is not. Source: DIE PAPIERINDUSTRIE e.V. — Trendwende in der Papierindustrie bleibt auch im ersten Halbjahr 2026 aus

On 11 August, Metsä Group made two announcements together.

It will invest about €25 million in a new Muoto fibre packaging line at Äänekoski.

The line comes from Valmet. Start-up is planned for 2028. Nominal capacity is more than 100 million products a year.

Muoto is formed directly from wet wood pulp, with no intermediate steps. It is aimed at replacing plastic in food and serving packaging.

The site changed too. The line was planned for Rauma. Äänekoski won on existing infrastructure, the demo line already there, and cost.

The same release confirmed the Kuura textile fibre mill in Kemi will not go ahead.

Metsä's reason: significant global overproduction appeared quickly in man-made cellulosic fibres, mostly from new Asian capacity. Too few customers will pay a premium for responsibly made fibre.

Lignin and carbon capture projects continue as planned.

Why it matters: Both decisions are about the same cubic metre of pulpwood. One end-use got capital. The other did not. That is fibre demand being reallocated in public.

The takeaway: Watch where the pulp integrators put money, not what they say about the bioeconomy. Packaging has regulation pulling it. Textile fibre had a premium that buyers would not pay. If someone offers you a supply deal for a novel wood product, ask who has already committed capital to it. Sources: Metsä Group via PulpaperNews | PaperAge, 11 August 2026

Lesprom Analytics published Canada's softwood lumber export figures for the first half of 2026.

Canada exported 13.2 million cubic metres of softwood lumber. That is down 12%.

Export value fell 26%. The average export price fell 16%.

The United States still took 89% of it, down one percentage point. Shipments to the US fell 13%.

Six destinations grew: China, Taiwan, Mexico, Pakistan, South Korea and Hong Kong.

Together they covered about 4% of the volume the US stopped taking.

Why it matters: In EFP #110 we covered Canadian producers investing to diversify. Here is the first half-year scoreboard. Diversification is real and it is small.

The takeaway: Value fell twice as fast as volume. That is what a captive market looks like when the buyer has leverage. If your own sales go mostly to one country or one mill, run the same two numbers on yourself. Volume change and value change. If they diverge, you are the one absorbing the difference. Source: Lesprom Analytics — U.S. share of Canada's softwood lumber exports falls to 89% in first half of 2026

Find out what your forest weighs. Fifteen minutes.

Today's Big Story is about a change of unit. Hectares out, tonnes in.

Most forest owners can state their area instantly. Very few can state their standing volume per hectare.

That last line is your risk register. It is also, increasingly, your valuation.

Then ask whoever values your forest one question. Does your model use area, or volume?

If the answer is area, the model is using the unit Europe just moved away from.

Next time someone says Europe's forests are collapsing, you have thirty seconds.

The honest answer involves 82%, 18%, and why those two numbers are not the same story.

Can you say it out loud right now?

If your answer isn't ready, the Playbook is.

A shrinking carbon sink is a balance-sheet item, not a nature story.

Sink capacity feeds LULUCF. LULUCF feeds carbon accounting. Carbon accounting sits inside the valuation. Most people in the room nod at that chain without being able to follow it.

I wrote the Forest-Investment Dictionary with Danish forest economist Anders Tærø Nielsen. It has 151 pages, 11 chapters, 14 printable tools, and 3 calculators. Investors learn to read a forest. Foresters learn to read a term sheet.

When the market turns, the people who can read the numbers make the better calls. The price is €99. Get yours below.

The brief is free. The briefing is not.

ForestryBrief publishes verified intelligence — free, three times a week, in 25+ countries. When you need that intelligence applied to your specific situation, that's a ForestryBriefing.

Intelligence — Investment due diligence, market intelligence, EUDR compliance, cross-sector risk analysis, background verification in three languages.

Communication — Strategy, trade publication articles, stakeholder messaging, newsletters that people actually open. EN | DE | HU.

Live — Conference presentations, panel moderation, keynotes. Next: WAN-IFRA World Printers Summit, Rotterdam, October 2026.

First briefing guarantee: if it doesn't deliver intelligence you can act on, you don't pay.

→ See what a ForestryBriefing looks like | [email protected]

Until Tomorrow!

Wish you all the best: Peter

🤝 Need help with forestry communication, intelligence, or due diligence? See what we offer → ForestryBriefing

📩 Got this email forwarded to you? Subscribe to ForestryBrief here.

📚 Missed an issue? Browse the ForestryBrief archive

P.S. What’s the biggest challenge you’re facing in forestry right now?
Hit reply and let me know — I read every message personally.

P. P. S. Know a forest professional who’s drowning in EUDR complexity or missing out on timber market shifts? Forward this email to them!

Shauna Matkovich's Forest Invest Podcast is one of the best resources for understanding where forest finance is heading. If you are interested in Forest Investments, start there.

If you like FB be sure to subscribe to Boreal Tech Brief, a newsletter of my friend Axel covering tech in forestry with a Nordic angle: