COMMENT 17
COMMENT
Do wood burning stoves belong in future homes?
Ben Paul of Neu Architects puts his case for why he believes architects should not specify wood burning stoves as part of future homes, based on the reality of their use.
A
s the UK moves toward net zero and cleaner, healthier housing, architects are increasingly asked to specify energy- effi cient and resilient systems. Yet claims that modern wood
burning stoves provide a “low carbon” or “sustainable” option do not withstand scrutiny. Independent evidence shows that wood burning is a source of harmful pollution, misleadingly marketed as green, and incompatible with the Future Homes Standard’s environmental and health ambitions.
Low carbon, local fuel source? Wood burning is routinely described as ‘carbon lean’ because trees absorb CO2
as they grow. But burning wood releases that carbon
back immediately, while new trees take decades to reabsorb it – time we do not have in a climate emergency. More importantly, trees should be recognised for what they are: a living carbon capture system, not a fuel source. Left standing, they absorb carbon, fi lter pollution, cool urban areas, and reduce fl ood risk. Burning them undermines one of the most effective and affordable forms of carbon capture we currently have. The UK Climate Change Committee has warned explicitly against relying on domestic biomass heating, stating that its carbon benefi ts are overstated when compared with genuinely low-carbon systems such as heat pumps.
The reality of what people burn
The stove industry presents an image of burning neatly stacked, seasoned hardwood. In reality, many households burn far less suitable, and far more dangerous, materials, including: • Treated timber, releasing arsenic and chromium from CCA preservatives, and copper or borates from other treatments
• MDF, chipboard, and plywood, which emit formaldehyde, isocyanates, and phenols from glues and resins
• Painted or varnished wood, producing dioxins and furans – among the most toxic and persistent known compounds
• Unseasoned or ‘green’ logs, which burn poorly, waste energy, and generate dense smoke and particulates.
ADF JANUARY 2026
The stove industry presents an image of burning neatly stacked, seasoned hardwood. In reality many housebholds burn far less suitable, and far more dangerous materials
These substances are not just harmful but also carcinogenic, neurotoxic, and persistent in the environment. They accumulate in the air, soil, and even food chains. Even with so-called ‘approved fuels,’ enforcement is practically impossible. Local authorities cannot police what people burn in their living rooms, so real world emissions are far worse than test data suggests.
Cleaner technology?
Even the most advanced Ecodesign stoves burning properly seasoned wood emit around 335 g/MWh of PM2.5 compared to just 0.72 g/MWh for a gas-fi red boiler. So while they may be ‘cleaner’ than an open fi replace, they are still almost 500 times more polluting than a gas boiler (based on Defra data). Meanwhile, they also emit ultrafi ne particles, PM10, carbon monoxide (CO), volatile organic compounds (VOCs), formaldehyde, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), nitrogen oxides (NOx
), sulphur dioxide (SO2 carbon (soot).
The industry often compares eco stoves to open fi res, but that is irrelevant; open fi res are already obsolete, and so extraordinarily polluting that anything will look better in comparison.
Health Wood burning (however effi cient it may be) generates pollution, which is not in question, and people will breathe it in. It is not feasible to go out and buy ‘bottled’ air to avoid it. Fine
WWW.ARCHITECTSDATAFILE.CO.UK ), benzene, toluene, and black
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68
