Carinthia's energy transition: acceleration for a few, standstill for the rest?

The amendment, intended to implement EU requirements for speeding up permitting procedures[2] and largely set to enter into force on 21 February 2026, is the result of a political compromise[3] and carries far-reaching consequences: it replaces the previous open-site project development system with a rigid framework that creates a two-tier structure for energy projects.

1 The new logic: spatial steering and hard deadlines

To achieve acceleration, the legislator is fundamentally reforming the system. The draft centres on adjustments to spatial planning, supplemented by a tight procedural framework:

• Central spatial steering: With new Sections 7a to 7c of the Carinthian Spatial Planning Act (Kärntner Raumordnungsgesetz, K-ROG), Carinthia is implementing a development mandated at the European level. The decision about "whether" and "where" renewables may be built is shifting from case-by-case assessments to steering via centrally designated acceleration areas.
• Streamlining of permitting procedures: In parallel, the Carinthian Electricity Industry and Organisation Act (Kärntner Elektrizitätswirtschafts- und -organisationsgesetz, K-ElWOG) introduces maximum procedural durations that apply from the authority's confirmation that the documents are complete.
  • In acceleration areas: 12 months for new plants and six months for repowering projects.
  • Outside acceleration areas: 24 months for new plants and 12 months for repowering.
  • PV on artificial structures: a "fast lane" of just three months.

If a deadline expires, a deemed approval (Genehmigungsfiktion) is introduced.

2 The critical points: what the amendment really means for applicants

At first glance, this new logic creates clarity, but a closer look reveals considerable hurdles and a clear reallocation of opportunities.

For wind turbines over 5 kW, the amendment designates four acceleration areas directly in an annex to the law: Soboth/Lavamünd, Steinberger Alpe, Bärofen, Peterer Alpe. These wind power zones, which coincide with sites where projects are already operating, permitted or planned, account for a vanishingly small fraction – just 0.077 % of the state's area[4]. Outside these four acceleration areas, wind turbines are no longer permitted, effectively blocking market access for new players. The consequence is significant: Carinthia's already modest national expansion targets (0.89 TWh[5]) are clearly missed with the planned zones (approx. 0.4 TWh[6]). For existing plants outside these areas, repowering is capped at a maximum hub height increase of 30 % – a brake that in many cases de facto prevents sensible replacement with modern, higher-capacity units from an energy industry perspective.

For other renewable technologies such as ground-mounted PV, the amendment creates different procedural speeds. It replaces the general six-month period under the General Administrative Procedure Act (Allgemeines Verwaltungsverfahrensgesetz, AVG) with significantly longer, technology-specific maximum periods (12 or 24 months). In return, the legislator offers a trade-off: a longer wait for the (theoretical) certainty of an enforceable maximum duration, sanctioned for the first time through the deemed-approval mechanism. Whether this swap benefits developers will be shown in practice. As long as the state government does not designate acceleration areas, projects remain under the 24‑month regime and are therefore excluded from the primary acceleration that was originally intended.

The deemed approval (Genehmigungsfiktion) is also limited in effect. Although it is supposed to lead to automatic approval if deadlines are exceeded, it has two decisive weaknesses:

• Exception for EIA/NIA projects: The fiction does not apply where an environmental or nature impact assessment (EIA/NIA) is required. This creates a practical dilemma: if the competent authority remains inactive, the question of whether an assessment is required also remains unresolved. The approval thus rests on shaky legal ground.
• No cure for defects: Even if no EIA/NIA is needed, fundamental legal uncertainty remains. According to prevailing doctrine, the authority's silence formally replaces the decision but does not cure substantive defects in the project. An approval "granted" in this way is therefore only of limited suitability for project finance and remains open to judicial challenge[7].

3 Legal risks and the national dimension

Beyond the critical points already mentioned, the draft gives rise to a series of legal risks:

• Rigid legislative structure: Setting the designated wind zones directly in the law makes the system extremely rigid; any correction requires a politically cumbersome legislative amendment.
• Interference with pending proceedings: Because there is no explicit transitional provision for electricity law, the new law applies to pending proceedings at the time of the decision. For projects that no longer meet the new, stricter siting and procedural requirements, this may mean that substantial sunk planning costs are frustrated.

In addition, the federal government's planned Renewable Expansion Acceleration Act (Erneuerbaren-Ausbau-Beschleunigungsgesetz, EABG)[8] creates a strategic three-track system, mastery of which will be decisive for project success: (i) the federal "overtaking lane" under the EABG for prioritised projects; (ii) the accelerated state procedure as the default path; and (iii) the classic EIA procedure as a fallback. Strategically aligning on the optimal procedural track becomes the key decision for project success.

4 Outlook: acceleration only with the right foundations

This legislative package constitutes a programme of site steering rather than a pure acceleration act and, for wind power, effectively operates as an expansion brake outside a limited number of privileged zones. Acceleration will only materialise where the mapping is accurate, the environmental underpinnings are rock-solid and grid connections are in place.

The future of Carinthia's energy transition depends on how quickly, and with what degree of legal certainty, the state government defines the missing acceleration areas for PV and other technologies, as well as on how the complex interplay with the federal level functions in practice. For developers and investors, this means that site selection and a forward-looking procedural strategy are more crucial than ever. Success will hinge on mastering the new framework and aligning projects strategically to avoid delays.

Update 24 February 2026:

The omnibus amendment was subsequently passed by the Carinthian State Parliament (Kärntner Landtag), promulgated as LGBl No 11/2026 and entered into force on 21 February 2026.

The substantive core provisions (procedural deadlines, deemed approval, the four acceleration areas for wind power and the repowering cap) remained unchanged compared to the draft circulated for public consultation. The enacted version diverges, however, in one material respect. Whereas the consultation draft provided for a transitional provision only for proceedings pending under the Carinthian Building Code (Kärntner Bauordnung, K-BO), Article VI para 2 of the enacted version now stipulates that all proceedings pending at the time of entry into force are to be continued under the previous provisions of the Carinthian Spatial Planning Act (K-ROG).

The wording, however, raises interpretive questions. Article VI is a self-contained provision of the omnibus amendment, sitting alongside the substantive amendments (Articles I to V), and its reference to "this Act" (dieses Gesetzes) accordingly encompasses the omnibus amendment as a whole. On a plain reading, the transitional provision therefore covers not only spatial planning proceedings but potentially also proceedings pending under the K-BO, the K-ElWOG or the Carinthian Electricity Lines Act (Kärntner Elektrizitätsleitungsgesetz, K-ELG), to the extent that provisions of the K-ROG fall to be determined as a preliminary issue. An applicant in pending permitting proceedings under the K-ElWOG for a wind turbine site outside the four acceleration areas could thus argue that whether its site is permissible under the spatial planning rules must still be assessed under the previous law. At the same time, the new provisions of the other statutes amended by the omnibus amendment (K-BO, K-ElWOG, K-ELG, Carinthian Environmental Planning Act (Kärntner Umweltplanungsgesetz, K-UPG)) would already apply, since Article VI para 2 saves only the previous provisions of the K-ROG. This bifurcation between spatial planning law and the other areas of law amended by the omnibus amendment is neither addressed in the statute nor in the explanatory notes (Erläuterungen).

As regards electricity law, there continues to be no self-contained transitional provision. The issue described above therefore remains unresolved.

author: Valentin Dignös