Governments are set to take a decisive step at Cop28 towards making a long-awaited global carbon market governed by the UN a reality.
The Paris Agreement establishes ways for countries to “voluntarily cooperate” to meet their climate targets by allowing emission reductions and removals to be traded.
In Dubai, negotiators will finalise the architecture of a new mechanism allowing countries to sell offsets to other governments, companies and individuals under Article 6.4.
It comes at a pivotal time. The voluntary carbon market has faced more intense scrutiny than ever this year with report after report casting doubt over its integrity. But for many, carbon credits remain a valuable tool to channel much-needed finance to developing countries.
The stakes are high for the new system to get it right and correct problems with existing systems. We outline four critical questions for the outcome from Dubai.
Which activities are eligible?
Deciding which activities can produce credits is an important and fraught question.
If the criteria are too restrictive, countries may struggle to obtain any meaningful financial support from the mechanism. Too broad and projects with questionable climate credentials, or other significant environmental and social concerns, will undermine their credibility.
Over the last year, the UN’s Article 6.4 supervisory body has been evaluating the eligibility of carbon removals: activities that take carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere and store it. These can be nature-based, such as planting trees, or engineering-based, like machines to suck CO2.
Tensions emerged last May when an internal briefing note drafted by the UNFCCC secretariat advised against including technological solutions describing them as “unproven” and potentially risky.
While the supervisory body distanced itself from the document, it angered the industry which responded by flooding the consultation process with submissions putting their case forward.
It worked. The final recommendations, agreed upon after several extended meetings, do not directly encourage or discriminate against any type of activity.
Ministers still need to approve the package in Dubai. While a broad agreement is expected, certain groups may still have issues with it.
Papua New Guinea, representing the Coalition for Rainforest Nations, could be a blocker. It has long argued that credits issued for forest conservation under the Redd+ framework should automatically qualify for the new mechanism.
Most countries and experts disagree. “The intention of the Redd+ framework was never to generate credits”, says Pedro Martins Barata, a carbon markets expert at EDF and a former negotiator. “That mechanism is much less stringent. They should go through the same process of methodology submission and independent evaluation as all the other activities.”
Are the reductions additional and permanent?
As credits are used by governments or companies to compensate for their polluting activities, each unit must represent a real emission reduction. This has been a fundamental and long-standing issue with many carbon offsetting projects.
Among other things, rules need to make sure the activities would have not happened anyways without the carbon finance (additionality) and that any CO2 removed does not re-enter the atmosphere in a short amount of time (permanence).
The Supervisory Body has tackled those policy issues in the recommendations sent to Cop28 for approval.
On additionality, the document says that projects will have to take into account all relevant legislation and produce a detailed analysis of investment barriers to demonstrate that emission-cutting activities would have not occurred without the mechanism.
Experts told Climate Home these provisions should be stringent enough.
A community ranger standing in a mangrove forest restored as part of a nature protection project in Kenya. Photo: Anthony Ochieng / Climate Visuals Countdown
On permanence, concerns have been raised.
“The text leaves open the question of for how many years a credit is guaranteed to correspond to an actual removal without giving specific thresholds,” says Martins Barata, adding this should be established in further work.
Another contentious point is the possibility of relieving project developers of the duty to carry out permanence monitoring after they stop issuing credits. The risk is that, for example, protected trees could burn in a fire unleashing the stored carbon into the atmosphere.
The recommendations indicate this exemption can apply when a “negligible” risk of the emission removals being reversed is demonstrated.
Jonathan Crook of Carbon Market Watch argued the text could be tightened. “How do you define negligible risk? What sources will be accepted as evidence? These are all open questions that may cause potential issues,” he added.
What happens if a country wants to take back credits?
Article 6 has a provision to ensure that emission reduction activities are not counted twice, by both the seller and buyer, towards their respective climate plans. When a country transfers a credit to a government or a company it needs to deduct that from its greenhouse gas inventory.
As a result, countries need to strike a balance between attracting revenues and being able to meet their own climate plans.
But a contested rule could give struggling governments a way out. In Dubai, negotiators will be discussing whether countries may be allowed to withdraw any credits that have been previously authorised. This could also apply in cases where the projects are causing environmental and human rights violations.
Carbon Market Watch’s Crook said this provision poses a substantial threat. “If a country can revoke credits that have already been traded, and potentially used, then you have a serious risk of double counting,” he told Climate Home. “If revocations are allowed, at the very least they shouldn’t apply to credits already sold.”
Will the new market rescue the reputation of carbon credits?
A lot is riding on the Article 6.4 mechanism because of the impact it can have on the wider carbon offsetting world.
Crook said it needs to set a “high bar”, sending a strong message to the voluntary market that there needs to be improvements.
The new mechanism is set to include some positive elements that currently don’t exist in carbon markets used by corporations.
Already agreed rules have established that 2% of any credits traded in the new market will be automatically cancelled. This means that offsetting will not just be a zero-sum game, shifting emissions cuts from one place to another.
But when it comes to individual projects, experts said it was too early to say if they will have high integrity.
“You can have the best rules but it all comes down to implementation,” said Martins Barata. “They’re off to a good start. But come back to me when they start approving projects”.
If the recommendations are approved in Dubai, the new mechanism may start issuing credits towards the end of 2024.
Paradoxically, the first batch of credits to be traded may pose some of the biggest integrity risks. A process to transition credits created under the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM), the now-defunct UN carbon market established through the Kyoto Protocol, into the new mechanism is well underway.
CDM credits have been widely criticised for failing to contribute to real emissions reductions and causing human rights violations.
The post Four questions for Cop28 to settle about a global carbon market appeared first on Climate Home News.
https://www.climatechangenews.com/2023/11/29/four-questions-for-cop28-to-settle-about-a-global-carbon-market/
Climate Change
Leading scientists call for EPBC reforms to strengthen Great Barrier Reef protection
CANBERRA, Monday 27 October 2025 — More than 100 Australian scientists and researchers have called on the Labor Government to address deforestation in the new nature law reforms, warning that the impacts under the current Act “compound the damage caused by repeated mass bleaching events driven by climate change” to the Great Barrier Reef.
Environment Minister Murray Watt will soon table the draft bill to reform Australia’s broken nature law, the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (EPBC) Act. Leading environmental groups Greenpeace Australia Pacific, the Australian Marine Conservation Society, and the Australian Conservation Foundation coordinated the open letter with 112 leading Australian scientists, calling for the reforms to close loopholes in the Act that allow for rampant and unchecked deforestation, especially in the Great Barrier Reef catchment.
Read the letter here.
Elle Lawless, senior campaigner at Greenpeace Australia Pacific, said:
“Now is the time to act decisively for nature, and design a nature-first nature law that will do what it is set out to do: protect our environment. Toxic runoff from deforestation in the Great Barrier Reef catchment is poisoning the reef and suffocating the precious and fragile marine ecosystem. The Great Barrier Reef is a global icon, and we need a strong, robust EPBC Act that will safeguard and protect it. This is one of the most important pieces of legislation our country and our environment has and, done right, has the power to make serious and desperately needed positive changes to protect nature.”
Professor James Watson FQA, from UQ’s School of the Environment, said:
“Australia’s State of the Environment report, released by the federal government in 2021, shows that our oceans, rivers and wetlands are in serious decline. That report, and the Samuel review of the EPBC, make the point that there is a desperate need for stronger national nature laws that help protect these precious places for generations to come.
“Australia’s top environmental academics and experts have been sounding the alarm for decades: the large-scale destruction of Australia’s native woodlands, forests, wetlands and grasslands is the single biggest threat to our biodiversity. It’s driving an extinction crisis unlike anywhere else on Earth — and it’s threatening the Great Barrier Reef, one of the world’s seven natural wonders, right before our eyes.”
Continued mass deforestation threatens the Great Barrier Reef’s World Heritage status. In 2026, the World Heritage Committee will review Australia’s progress in protecting the reef and may consider placing it on the World Heritage in Danger list if major threats like deforestation are not addressed.
Recent figures from the Queensland Government show deforestation in Queensland is the worst in the nation and worsening under the current national environment law. Deforestation in the Great Barrier Reef catchment accounted for almost half (44%) of the state’s total clearing, an increase on the previous year.
Greenpeace Australia Pacific is calling for the EPBC reforms to meet four key tests:
- Stronger upfront nature protection to guide better decisions on big projects, including National Environmental Standards.
- An independent Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to enforce the laws and make decisions about controversial projects at arm’s length from politics.
- Closing deforestation loopholes that allow for harmful industries to carry out mass bulldozing across Australia.
- Consideration of the climate impacts on nature from coal and gas mines when assessing projects for approvals.
“We will continue to engage with the government constructively in the reform process but also hold decision-makers to account over these critical tests,” Lawless said.
—ENDS—
Leading scientists call for EPBC reforms to strengthen Great Barrier Reef protection
Climate Change
Close Major Deforestation Loopholes in the EPBC Act
22 October 2025
The Hon Anthony Albanese MP
Prime Minister
Parliament House
CANBERRA ACT 2600
Sent via email
To the Prime Minister, Federal Environment Minister, and Members of the Albanese Government,
As researchers who study, document and work to recover Australia’s plants and animals, insects and ecosystems, we are keenly aware of the value of nature to Australians and the world.
Australia has one of the worst rates of deforestation globally. For every 100 hectares of native woodland cleared, about 2000 birds, 15,000 reptiles and 500 native mammals will die. As scientists and experts, we have sounded the alarm for more than 30 years that the large-scale destruction of native woodlands, forests, wetlands and grasslands was the single biggest threat to the nation’s biodiversity. That is still the case today, and it is driving an extinction crisis.
New figures show that Queensland continues to lead the nation in deforestation. The latest statewide landcover and trees study (SLATS) report shows that annually 44% of all deforestation in Queensland occurs in the Great Barrier Reef catchment areas, where over 140,000 hectares are bulldozed each year.
Deforestation in Great Barrier Reef catchments is devastating one of Australia’s most iconic natural wonders. When forests and bushland are bulldozed, erosion causes debris to wash into waterways, sending sediment, nutrients and pesticides into the Reef waters. This smothers coral, fuels crown-of-thorns starfish outbreaks, and reduces water quality. These impacts compound the damage caused by repeated mass bleaching events driven by climate change.
The Great Barrier Reef sustains precious marine life, supports local and global biodiversity, and underpins tourism economies and coastal communities that rely on its survival. Continued mass deforestation threatens these values and could jeopardise the Reef’s World Heritage status. In 2026 the World Heritage Committee will review Australia’s progress in protecting the Reef and may consider placing it on the World Heritage in Danger list, if key threats to the Reef, including deforestation, are not addressed.
This mass deforestation happens due to a loophole in the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (EPBC) Act, our national nature law. Exemptions allow deforestation to continue largely unregulated by the EPBC Act through a grandfathering clause from 2000 known as “continuous use”. Without meaningful reform, deforestation will continue to drive massive biodiversity loss. This loophole must be closed as part of the proposed EPBC Act reforms. The law is meant to safeguard our wildlife and our most precious places like the Great Barrier Reef. Please support closing major deforestation loopholes in the EPBC Act as an urgent and priority issue for the Federal Government.
Sincerely,
Professor James Watson, University of Queensland
Dr. Michelle Ward
Mandy Cheung
Mr Lachlan Cross
Timothy Ravasi
Gillian Rowan
Dr Graham R. Fulton, The University of Queensland
Dr Alison Peel
Dr James Richardson University of Queensland
Luke Emerson, University of Newcastle
Dr Hilary Pearl
Dr Tina Parkhurst
Dr Kerry Bridle
Dr Tracy Schultz, Senior Research Fellow, University of Queensland
Dr. Zachary Amir
Prof David M Watson, Gulbali Institute, CSU
Naomi Ploos van Amstel, PhD candidate
David Schoeman
Associate Professor Simone Blomberg, University of Queensland
Professor Euan Ritchie, Deakin University
Dr Ian Baird, Conservation Biologist
Paul Elton (ANU)
Melissa Billington
Hayden de Villiers
Professor Brett Murphy, Charles Darwin University
Professor Sarah Bekessy
Professor Anthony J. Richardson (University of Queensland)
Prof. Winnifred Louis, University of Queensland
Dr Yung En Chee, The University of Melbourne
Dr Jed Calvert, postdoctoral research fellow in wetland ecology, University of Queensland
A/Prof Daniel C Dunn, Centre for Biodiversity and Conservation Science, University of Queensland
Lincoln Kern, Ecologist
Professor Corey Bradshaw, Flinders University
Dr. Viviana Gonzalez, The University of Queensland
Prof. Helen Bostock
Dr Leslie Roberson
Bethany Kiss
Assoc. Prof Diana Fisher, UQ, and co-chair of the IUCN Marsupial and Monotreme Specialist Group
Dr Jacinta Humphrey, RMIT University
Professor Mathew Crowther
Christopher R. Dickman, Professor Emeritus, The University of Sydney
Fiona Hoegh-Guldberg, RMIT University
Dr Bertram Jenkins
Dr Daniela ParraFaundes
Dr Jessica Walsh
Dr. GABRIELLA scata – marine biologist, wildlife protector
Katherine Robertson
Professor Jane Williamson, Macquarie University
William F. Laurance, Distinguished Professor, James Cook University
A/Prof Deb Bower
Dr Leslie Roberson, University of Queensland
Ms Jasmine Hall, Senior Research Assistant in Coastal Wetland Biogeochemistry, Ecology and Management, Australian Rivers Institute, Griffith University
Dr Kita Ashman, Adjunct Research Associate, Charles Sturt University
Genevieve Newey
Matt Hayward
Jessie Moyses
Natalya Maitz, PhD Candidate, The University of Queensland
Christina Ritchie
Liana van Woesik, PhD Student, University of Queensland
Benjamin Lucas, PhD Researcher
A/Prof. Carissa Klein, The University of Queensland
Conrad Pratt, PhD Student, University of Queensland
Dr Ascelin Gordon, RMIT University
Professor Nicole Graham, The University of Sydney
Professor Murray Lee, University of Sydney Law School
Dr Tracy Schultz, Snr Research Fellow, University of Queensland
Libby Newton (PhD candidate, Sydney Law School)
Hannah Thomas, University of Queensland
Professor Richard Kingsford, Director of the Centre for Ecosystem Science, UNSW Sydney
Dr Anna Hopkins
Lena van Swinderen, PhD candidate at the University of Queensland
Professor Jodie Rummer, James Cook University
Dr Nita Lauren, Lecturer, RMIT University
Dr Christina Zdenek
Madeline Davey
Dr Rachel Killean, Sydney Law School
Dr. Sofía López-Cubillos
Dr Claire Larroux
Dr Alice Twomey, The University of Queensland
Zoe Gralton
Dr Robyn Gulliver
Ryan Borrett, Murdoch University
Adjunct Prof. Paul Lawrence, Griffith University, Brisbane Qld
Professor Susan Park, University of Sydney
Dr Holly Kirk, Curtin University
Deakin Distinguished Professor Marcel Klaassen
Dr Megan Evans, UNSW Canberra
Dr Amanda Irwin, The University of Sydney
Dr Keith Cardwell
Professor Don Driscoll, Deakin University
Susan Bengtson Nash
Distinguished Professor David Lindenmayer
Dr Madelyn Mangan, University of Queensland
Dr Isabella Smith
Geoff Lockwood
Dr Paula Peeters, Paperbark Writer
Prof Cynthia Riginos, University of Queensland
Dr. Sankar Subramanian
Associate Professor Zoe Richards
Dr Jessie Wells, The University of Melbourne
Professor Gretta Pecl AM, University of Tasmania
Dr April Reside, The University of Queensland
Oriana Licul-Milevoj (Ecologist)
Dr Yves-Marie Bozec, University of Queensland
Dr Julia Hazel
Dr Judit K. Szabo
Ana Ulloa
Dr Andreas Dietzel
Philip Spark – North West Ecological Services
Jonathan Freeman
Dr/ Mohamed Mohamed Rashad
Climate Change
The Ocean We’re Still Discovering
The recent discovery of Grimpoteuthis feitiana, a new species of Dumbo octopus found deep in the Pacific, is a reminder of something both humbling and urgent: we still know so little about the ocean that shapes our lives. This fragile, finned creature, gliding silently more than a kilometer beneath the waves, has lived in these waters long before we mapped them, and its story is only now coming to light.

What moves me most about this discovery is not just the Dumbo octopus itself, but how it bridges science and culture. Its name draws inspiration from the flying apsaras of China’s Dunhuang murals, those graceful, winged figures that seem to dance through air and imagination. It reminds me that the deep sea has always held a place in our collective human story, — not only in myths and art, but in the ways we relate to nature, learn from it, and find meaning within it.
Pasifika connection to the ocean
For us in the Pacific, the ocean is more than a body of water. It is our identity, our culture, our history. Our ancestors read the seas to navigate, to survive, to connect communities scattered across islands. Discoveries like this Dumbo octopus awaken something deeper in me, — a sense that the ocean is alive with stories and wisdom we are only beginning to rediscover. And with that understanding comes a responsibility to protect it.

Each new species like the Dumbo octopus, each glimpse into the deep, is a warning as much as it is a wonder. The creatures of the abyss live slow, deliberate lives in fragile ecosystems, shaped by balance and patience. Deep-sea mining, pollution, and climate change threaten to erase them before we even learn their names. Protecting the Pacific’s oceans is not an abstract act of conservation; it is an act of cultural preservation, of love for our home, and for the unseen life that sustains us all.
Grimpoteuthis feitiana is more than a scientific discovery. It is a reminder that the ocean is still full of life, mystery, and wisdom — and that we have a duty to ensure these depths remain wild, healthy, and alive, for us and for the generations yet to come.
Reflection by Raeed Ali
Pacific Community Mobiliser
-
Climate Change2 years ago
Spanish-language misinformation on renewable energy spreads online, report shows
-
Climate Change3 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Climate Change Videos2 years ago
The toxic gas flares fuelling Nigeria’s climate change – BBC News
-
Greenhouse Gases1 year ago嘉宾来稿:满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Greenhouse Gases3 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Climate Change1 year ago嘉宾来稿:满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Carbon Footprint2 years agoUS SEC’s Climate Disclosure Rules Spur Renewed Interest in Carbon Credits
-
Renewable Energy3 months ago
US Grid Strain, Possible Allete Sale

