I wrote a feature article about the European Union Deforestation Regulation in Pellet Mill Magazine. The main point was that although well intended, there has been considerable controversy surrounding the EUDR. This has been largely stoked by a delay in the issuance of much-needed guidance regarding key provisions, as well as the short amount of time (and cost) to prepare, among other factors. Under the regulation, operators and traders who place certain commodities, including wood pellets, on the EU market or export from it must provide proof that the products haven’t originated from or contributed to deforestation. Operators must collect information, documents and data showing that the product is deforestation-free and legal, such as geolocation coordinates, quantity and country of production. The geolocation requirement is perhaps the biggest challenge for wood pellet exporters, considering the often complex supply chain when it comes to wood fiber feedstocks.

The language of world leaders speaking on Tuesday at the United Nations climate summit was diplomatic, but the underlying message was clear: There’s friction over the big issue at the conference. The negotiations are focused on delivering a new plan to provide developing countries with funds to adapt to a warming world. Ali Mohamed, Kenya’s climate envoy, said there was widespread agreement that cutting emissions and making countries more resilient to storms, floods and heat would require “trillions” of dollars. But just days into the talks, there were pointed comments from the leaders and squabbling in the negotiating rooms about the details, including exactly how much money should be raised, who should pay, where it should come from and how it should be spent. “How? Where? By whom?” said Mr. Mohamed, the lead negotiator for the African group of countries. “That’s the discussion that’s currently underway.” [A New York Times subscription is required to read this full story]

Carbon markets are one step closer to being part of global climate plans after a speedy COP decision. …Last night, this version of Article 6 was quickly adopted by countries in what COP29 lead negotiator Yalchin Rafiyev called an early “breakthrough” for the summit. …But the gavelling through of Article 6 was criticised by climate justice groups, who said carbon markets allow major polluters to keep emitting at the expense of people and the planet. “It sends a bad signal to open COP29 by legitimising carbon markets as a solution to climate change,” says Ilan Zugman, Latin America and Caribbean director of global climate campaign groups 350.org. “They are not – they will increase inequalities, infringe on human rights, and hinder real climate action.” Here’s a look at Article 6 and the carbon credits system it aims to implement – and why it’s so controversial.