In 1910, the great-grandfather of German pellet producer Markus Mann added a small sawmill operation to his wood-turning business. More than a decade later, the eldest son of the wood turner, Mann&rsquo;s Grandfather Emil, founded a transport company that trucked wood and other raw material in the region. Emil&rsquo;s daughter Anna and her husband grew the small wood-turning company and sawmill into a larger operation, known today as Koch GmbH. The sawdust and woodchips from this operation feed one of three pellet plants that Mann&rsquo;s company, Westerw&auml;lder Holzpellets GmbH, runs today. Westerw&auml;lder installed its first pellet plant in 2001 in Mann&rsquo;s home village next to the family sawmill in Langenbach. In 2006, the company installed a 48,000-ton-per-year pellet plant in Oberhonnefeld, and four years later built another similar-sized plant in Hosenfeld. Westerw&auml;lder&rsquo;s capacity has grown from 2,000 tons of pellets in 2001 to 184,000 tons in 2013. Growth of this family-owned pellet company mirrors the evolution of the entire German pellet industry. Now the largest wood pellet producer in Europe, Germany got its start in the mid-1990s with pellet boilers from Austria and very small operations like Mann&rsquo;s. In 1996, pellets were approved as solid fuel and introduced to the German market two years later. At the beginning of the millennium, there was a parallel between the number of pellet heating system installations and pellet production. That continued until 2006, when demand for pellets outgrew capacity, mainly due to high oil prices. Over 100,000 pellet heating systems were installed through 2007. The rapid growth caused a shortage of pellets in 2006. &ldquo;This led to a great uncertainty in Germany, and people started hesitating to invest in a pellet boiler or stove, as they thought they might not get enough pellets in the winter time,&rdquo; says Barbara Pilz, former editor-in-chief of the German trade magazine Pellets&mdash;Markets and Trends and project manager of the international trade conference Pellets Industry Forum. &ldquo;That shortage led to a decline in demand of pellet heating systems. At the same time, new pellet production was being built up to cover the expected demand in the future.&rdquo; According to Martin Bentele, CEO of the German Wood Fuel and Pellet Association (DEPV) and German Pellet Institute (DEPI), booming demand of alternative energy, combined with the high price of fossil fuels in the late 2000s and the vast amount of raw material from sawmills, is what led to Germany becoming the largest pellet manufacturing presence in Europe. It is estimated that 2.15 million tons of pellets were consumed in Germany in 2014, approximately 60 percent in pellet stoves and pellet boilers smaller than 50 kW. DEPV estimated that at the end of 2014 there would be 116,500 residential pellet stoves installed in the country, 321,000 residential and commercial pellet boilers smaller than 50 kW and 10,500 strictly commercial applications greater than 50 kW, some with combined-heat-and-power facilities. These statistics reinforce one of the biggest differences between the German and North American pellet industries. The German pellet market is focused largely on the residential sector, while the North American pellet industry has grown rapidly in recent years by targeting the European utility market. Once larger producers entered the scene, Germany began producing for other countries in Europe. Germany&rsquo;s largest producer, German Pellets, began production in 2005 in the port city of Wismar in northern Germany. Anne Leibold and her husband Peter Leibold founded German Pellets with development of the greenfield investment of Wismar Pellet Mill. Besides the Wismar plant, GP controls 19 more, 14 of which are in Germany, three in Austria, one in Belgium, one in Woodville, Texas, and another under construction in Urania, Louisiana. The Woodville plant has up to 500,000-metric-tons annual production output, and a few of the company&rsquo;s large plants in Germany produce 250,000 metric tons. Others range between 75,000 to 150,000 metric tons. In total, the company is capable of producing approximately 2.6 million metric tons of pellets annually, and its German mills make up approximately 50 percent of the German pellet market. GP is one of the few pellet producers in Germany to produce pellets for both commercial consumers and utilities. Leibold says that from the beginning GP has followed an international strategy for sales and production, even when sourcing fiber. &ldquo;Our core market brands are German Pellets, Firestixx and Hot&rsquo;ts, but we have several others for different markets and distribution channels,&rdquo; she says. GP exports its pellets to Denmark, Belgium, the Netherlands, France, Italy, Austria and the United Kingdom. According to Leibold, in general, the main markets for residential pellets in Europe are Germany, Italy, France, Austria and Denmark. The U.K. is the main market for industrial pellets. Westerw&auml;lder exports about 20 percent of its annual production to France, Switzerland and Italy. &ldquo;There is no delivery to industrial like they have in Holland or Great Britain like Drax; no cofiring in Germany,&rdquo; Mann says. &ldquo;My 184,000 tons ran 99 percent into residential or school buildings, medium-sized heating systems.&rdquo; According to the DEPV, in 2013, Germany imported 387,295 tons of pellets and exported 666,988. Germany's largest customer was Denmark with 93,000 tons, followed by Belgium at 43,000 tons. Out of the 666,988 tons of exported pellets, less than 100,000 went to non-European countries. The main countries exported to were Austria, Denmark and Italy at 161,000, 121,000 and 100,000 tons, respectively. In second quarter 2014, 17 percent of German pellet production was exported, mainly to neighboring countries. Increased trade has led the industry to adopt a new pellet certification system. In 2010, the ENplus certification system for wood pellets based on the EN 14961-2 was introduced and implemented by DEPI. The standard was created in order to offer the same pellet quality throughout Europe. Bentele says that quality has been emphasized with ENplus, and a training program for installers. &ldquo;A constant challenge for us is quality, both for pellets and installers&rsquo; work,&rdquo; Bentele says. &ldquo;We have qualified both groups to offer a modern, comfortable and environmentally friendly heating system to their customers.&rdquo; Westerw&auml;lder&rsquo;s and GP&rsquo;s pellets are ENplus certified. Industry Insight Westerw&auml;lder and GP are joined by about 40 other pellet producers in Germany with an estimated 55 to 60 production sites, many located near sawmills in the densely-wooded, low mountain ranges of Germany. About 90 percent of German pellet production comes from sawmill industry residues. Only about 10 percent of round wood is sawed. German sawmills cut approximately 35 million to 40 million cubic meters of round wood, resulting in 13 million to 15 million cubic meters of sawmill residues that could annually supply 1 million pellet heating systems. Germany has the capacity to produce 3.5 million tons, but the current output is between 2 million and 2.2 million tons annually. Years ago, the industry grew quickly due to the rise in oil prices, amongst other factors, but recent events have led to a rise in sawmill residue price. Mann estimates the total cost of producing bulk pellets by the ton is between 171.50 and 181.50 euros ($215 and $228), whereas the market price for bulk is in the 165 to 175 euros-per-ton range. &ldquo;Due to the relatively high raw-material cost, not everybody is producing at 100 percent,&rdquo; Mann says. The increased price is partially attributed to a lack of sawmill residue in 2013 due to a reduction in sawmill activity in the country. In the first half of 2014, however, sawmill activity bounced back and pellet producers were able to buy residues at a lower cost. &ldquo;That, in combination with full storages due to the warm winter, led to a decrease in pellet prices from spring on,&rdquo; Pilz says. According to Pilz, pellet traders have had storages full since the beginning of 2014 and have been unable to sell enough pellets to gain their economic return. &ldquo;Quite some exigency in the German market at the moment,&rdquo; Pilz says. Overproduction has also occurred as a result of many plants built around five years ago. Over the past few years, this, combined with the sawmill residue shortage, has led some producers to bankruptcy or consolidation. &ldquo;The market did not develop as fast as everyone thought after the great interest in pellet heating systems in 2005 and 2006,&rdquo; Pilz says. Sleeping Giant Last years' warm winter led to decreased pellet demand, and Germans to postpone installing new pellet heating systems. &ldquo;I am very astonished that the people are thinking so short term and they are not investing now,&rdquo; Mann says. Mann believes now is a good time to install with low interest rates and the looming outcome of the Russia-Ukraine gas disputes. &ldquo;I think a big thing that could cause an explosion in the market would be higher oil prices due to the gas crisis with Russia.&rdquo; &ldquo;What we are facing at the moment, especially this year, is that people just postpone changing their heating system as long as it&rsquo;s possible and they&rsquo;re putting their money in bathrooms,&rdquo; Pilz says. She adds that as long as an old boiler functions, consumers often think their money is better spent elsewhere. Bathrooms are one upgrade people are doing, and in Germany, the people who install boilers also install bathrooms. &ldquo;For them, it does not matter if they do not sell boilers, as long as they have business,&rdquo; Pilz says. According to DEPV, 6 million oil heating boilers can be replaced in the long run. &ldquo;They have what&rsquo;s called the sleeping giant in Germany, there are so many old boilers and stoves in cellars and hardly anybody is going to replace them at the moment, even though it is really needed because they are so old,&rdquo; Pilz says. &ldquo;Everybody is waiting. If there is high demand, we might run out of pellets and therefore need some imports, but if pellet prices go up, it might incentivize new production in Germany with other raw materials.&rdquo; Pilz believes there is potential in other wood sources for pellet production. &ldquo;Besides using fast-growing trees, there would also be the option of using whole trees instead of sawmill residues, in order to increase the amount of pellets being produced in Germany,&rdquo; Pilz says. &ldquo;It only depends on the price of pellets.&rdquo; Although it is hard to predict which way the industry will turn, price is the main driver. According to Leibold, the cost of wood pellets as heating fuel is around 30 to 40 percent lower than petrol or gas, depending on the country. Other market drivers are the broad environmental consciousness of European consumers and government assistance. &ldquo;The German Market Incentive Program supports the replacement of old fossil boilers with modern pellet boilers and pellet stoves that support central heating with at least 2,400 euros ($3,000),&rdquo; Bentele says. There has, however, been a lack of consistent funding, which has left some to postpone changing heating systems in the hopes that subsidies might go up. &ldquo;A lot of people in Germany think it would be better to stimulate the renewable heating market by a feed-in tariff like the British implemented,&rdquo; Pilz says. A challenge in Germany is raising the exchange rate of insufficient fossil fuel or outdated biomass heating systems with new wood pellet systems. &ldquo;When the energy transition takes up speed in the heating market, we&rsquo;ll see a moderate yearly growth of both installations and pellet production,&rdquo; Bentele says. Author: Katie Fletcher Staff Writer, Pellet Mill Magazine 701-738-4920 <a href="mailto:kfletcher@bbiinternational.com" target="_blank">kfletcher@bbiinternational.com</a>

Markus Mann is the CEO of WesterwÃ¤lder Holzpellets. The company owns Germanyâ€™s first industrial 40,000 metric-ton-capacity pellet plant in Langenbach installed in 2001.

2015/01/FP-Pellet-Pelletwerk-0115_14207422640345_largethumb.jpg

2015/01/FP-Pellet-Pelletwerk-0115_14207422640345_thumb.jpg

2015/01/FP-Pellet-Pelletwerk-0115_14207422640345.jpg

German Pellets USA has a storage facility with loading system at the harbor of Port of Arthur in Texas. As part of a 25-year contract to export wood pellets to Europe the facility receives approximately 100 trucks every 24 hours. 

2015/01/FP-Biomass-GPArthur-0115_14207422622845.jpg

German Pelletâ€™s 250,000 metric-ton-per-year Wismar mill is located in the vicinity the Port of Wismar for importing fiber and exporting pellets, which is important for the pellet plant apart from the nearby wood processing industries and sawmill.

2015/01/FP-Pellet-Aerial-0115_14207422629987.jpg

Although Germany's pellet supply and demand has steadily increased over the years, recent factors have impacted growth.

Deutschland's Sleeping Giant 

When brothers Jim and Rob Swaan founded Pinnacle Renewable Energy Group&nbsp; over 20 years ago with the commissioning of its Quesnel, British Columbia, mill, they likely never imagined that one day the company would reach over 1 million metric tons of capacity from six plants spread across the province. Today, Pinnacle manufactures 56 percent of Canada&rsquo;s total pellet production, and, according to CEO Rob McCurdy, a seventh plant is in the works. &ldquo;It&rsquo;s in environmental approval, and most of the engineering work is done,&rdquo; he says. Most of Pinnacle&rsquo;s production is sent to large European customers, with a smaller portion to Asia. &ldquo;The Draxes of the world,&rdquo; McCurdy says. &ldquo;We do sell some into the European heating market, but the majority goes to power plants.&rdquo; Armed with the better part of a decade&rsquo;s worth of exporting experience, Pinnacle knows the ropes and has armed itself with enviable investments that have enabled the company to achieve huge successes in its overseas endeavor&mdash;specifically, construction of its own port facility in Prince Ruppert. The $42 million Westview terminal was built on the site of an abandoned grain terminal, designed specifically to receive wood pellets transported by rail from Pinnacle&rsquo;s facilities for loading into bulk cargo vessels. It includes private rail storage tracks, a wood pellet receiving and unloading building, a conveyor and ship loader system, and four silos with an expandable storage capacity of 50,000 metric tons. The terminal can unload rail cars at 1,000 metric tons per hour and has a vessel loading rate of 2,000 metric tons per hour. &nbsp;Prior to completion of the Westview terminal in late 2013, there was only one port in British Columbia, in Vancouver. Now, Pinnacle sends 60 percent of its exported product through its own terminal, and the remainder through the Port of Vancouver. Though Westview is able to accommodate Panamax vessels, McCurdy says Pinnacle ships mostly in Supramax ships. &ldquo;With our new port, we have lower rail costs to port for many of our plants, and less demurrage costs since our port is wood pellet specific, whereas the port in Vancouver has wood chips competing for the ship docking space.&rdquo; Though Pinnacle has put together a model that has seemingly made exporting a breeze, McCurdy admits that it is far from it.&nbsp; &ldquo;All of the pieces of the puzzle have to work to make it work economically,&rdquo; he says. &ldquo;That&rsquo;s whether it&rsquo;s for export or domestic [sale], but to export, you need good customers, your shipping logistics to work well, a port, shipping to the port and the plant, and a fiber supply. All of those pieces of the puzzle have to fit together and work properly, or it doesn&rsquo;t make sense.&rdquo; He notes that overseas conversions of big power stations takes years of planning, so the large customers often seek other large, established producers to source pellets from.&nbsp; And while there is competition, he notes that the business is not as easy to get into as people think. &ldquo;There are so many pieces to it, and they all have to be done well.&rdquo; From McCurdy&rsquo;s perspective, one challenge for a small producer is balancing payment and shipping schedules. &ldquo;To make the logistics work you need a big ship, and that might take two or three months of their capacity, so it&rsquo;s tough to get into a business where you make one shipment a quarter, and your payment comes once a quarter&mdash;that&rsquo;s a real lumpy cash flow.&rdquo; While it&rsquo;s easier for big producers to deal with the big customers, small and midsized producers have and continue to dabble in exporting&mdash;some with success, and others not. Plenty may still be on the fence, receiving inquiries on a regular basis, but determining which inquiries are legitimate, and which customers are reputable, can be difficult. For those reasons, as well as the turn the domestic market has taken, keeping business at home may be more appealing. That&rsquo;s the case for Trae Fuels, which purchased Ensign-Bickford Renewable Energies&rsquo; 120,000-metric-ton Bumpass, Virginia, plant in June 2013. After a stint of trying its hand in the export market, the challenges involved, as well as a domestic market surge, has removed much of the luster that attracted the company&rsquo;s attention to European and other overseas markets. Domestic Charm Trae Fuels has shipped containers overseas, but demand in the U.S. has drawn the company&rsquo;s attention away from those pursuits for now, says Chris LaRocco. &ldquo;Previously, the domestic industry was pretty much decimated&mdash;there were a couple years of soft winters and overcapacity in the marketplace, but last year was a breakout year. The industry is now at a point where it can make money.&rdquo; LaRocco says parent company Envirotech purchased the Bumpass plant with hopes of getting into the European bulk utility-grade market, but found that prices were below what it could get to pencil out. &ldquo;We thought we might be minutely profitable because of our location [near a port], but we&rsquo;re not big enough to be a direct supplier to the utility,&rdquo; he says. &ldquo;We transitioned back to 100 percent bagged product, which the plant was built for anyway, and lucky for us, the domestic heating markets exploded. We got in at the right time, and the market here is more robust than it has been in a long time. We can do some bulk, but we&rsquo;re not pursuing it.&rdquo; Not having a direct avenue to a desired buyer means looking to brokers to help move product, but LaRocco says it&rsquo;s difficult to weed out nonreputable players&mdash;on both the broker and customer end. &ldquo;One challenge to the export side is that there are a lot of brokers rushing to the wood pellet market,&rdquo; he says. &ldquo;The reality is that when we run a credit check, most of these companies who want to buy the pellets, they don&rsquo;t have any credit history. We&rsquo;ve also run into contracts for which the buyers haven&rsquo;t obligated themselves to adhering. There are still too many charlatans in the mix; weeding out whom to do business with in Europe is difficult, especially for producers who are stateside. There are a lot of challenges with these emerging markets, in part because of all of the players who have gravitated toward it.&rdquo; For example, in Trae Fuels&rsquo; experiences, the customer has backed away from initial price offerings once contract negotiations had begun in some cases, or changed terms to request paid freight costs&mdash;and not just by newcomers, but a reputable, well-known conglomerate looking to get into the pellet business. &ldquo;We got so frustrated that it pushed us [to focus on domestic sales],&rdquo; LaRocco said. &ldquo;They&rsquo;d want us to carry the freight cost&hellip;it&rsquo;s interesting because we just came out of period where things weren&rsquo;t so good and producers were giving everything away&mdash;freight, bagging&mdash;just trying to stay in business, to now, this explosion and shortage in supply.&rdquo; So, for smaller producers who have been figuring out ways to get a finger in the exporting pie, the tide may be changing. At least, it is for Trae Fuels. Acknowledging the importance of keeping its options open&mdash;thus allocating a certain amount of production that can be available to overseas market&mdash;LaRocco says the domestic market is more attractive right now. &ldquo;We&rsquo;re staying stateside for now. We&rsquo;ll entertain only those who are legitimate, established businesses overseas, or someone stateside who has the capacity and credentials to take it overseas. We're looking for legitimate, statewide brokers who have the wherewithal to handle negotiations, storage, shipping, all of it, leaving enough room at the table for themselves to make money, but paying us at the gate.&rdquo; For David Mancinelli, a small, stateside broker, the export woes small and medium-sized pellet producers are well-understood. He points out the challenges that brokers such as him face&mdash;those who know the ropes, but are often edged out of the market by the bigtime brokers who, though boasting well-known titles, may not have much knowledge of the industry or provide intimate communication that producers are likely more comfortable with. Overseas Obstacles Mancinelli has been in the pellet business for 10 years, mostly selling livestock bedding through Colorado-based Premier Livestock. Over the years, he has branched off into fuel pellets, and not surprisingly, he&rsquo;s commonly contacted by those in pursuit of pellets. &ldquo;But I&rsquo;ve found that many mills don&rsquo;t want to bother with exporting, the small and midsized producers,&rdquo; he says. &ldquo;And there are many reasons they don&rsquo;t want to.&rdquo; On broker challenges, Mancinelli says letters of credit (LOC) and guaranteed payment for product, are obvious hurdles, and problems that he&rsquo;s run into. &ldquo;The LOC can apply at several different times, one being when the product gets to the shipping port, the other when [product] arrives at the destination port. The wording has to be very exact in the LOC because it can cause problems. You don&rsquo;t want to take possession of something if you don&rsquo;t know it&rsquo;s real or there. And anyone can have a site say &lsquo;We can get you 10,000 tons of pellets, go ahead and pay for the first 10,000 and we&rsquo;ll see what happens from there.&rsquo;&nbsp; As a broker, anyone can tell me they need pellets and I can ship them, and then never get paid. And it has happened. Not to myself, but I know of cases that it has. It&rsquo;s a catch-22 to figure out who to deal with, when you&rsquo;re shipping them over here.&rdquo; Also related to payment, Mancinelli says that Korean buyers typically want pellets at very discounted prices, which is often not possible. &ldquo;I think they&rsquo;re realizing right now that there&rsquo;s a high demand in the U.S. for fuel pellets, and they&rsquo;ll have to pay more or they won&rsquo;t get them. I think as Korea starts to adopt more standards like Europe has, we&rsquo;re going to see a big change in that market.&rdquo;&nbsp; Perhaps the largest challenge producers and brokers such as Mancinelli face are freight costs. Mancinelli notes that it isn't necessarily the overseas freight, but instead the cost of getting product to an outbound port. &ldquo;Freight is more of a problem than the pellet cost. Pellet costs in the U.S. vary quite a bit, but in most cases, they can be found at a reasonable price.&nbsp; Even in Florida, they have to be shipped to Georgia to get them freighted out. Midsized mills in Tennessee, Alabama and Mississippi, by the time we get to the ports, the freight most definitely kills us.&rdquo; Freight costs aside, Mancinelli says one idea to help small and midsized producers become comfortable with exporting may be to form exporting co-ops. &ldquo;In this scenario, I would find a group of mills that may have 200 to 1,000 tons per month of pellets for overseas shipments,&rdquo; he explains. &ldquo;Most overseas accounts are looking for 2,000 to 4,000 tons per month, and that scares smaller mills for a couple of reasons&mdash;one because it hasn&rsquo;t worked out with past experiences, and the other is that they aren&rsquo;t guaranteed a customer will continue to pay the same price for the amount of pellets promised each month, and get burned.&rdquo; Though it&rsquo;s a concept Mancinelli is investigating and working on, it has yet to come to fruition. No matter the size, numerous factors come into play when it comes to determining the most profitable market for producer and broker products and services, and business models may change as global markets continue to grow and evolve. While Trae Fuels leaves its options open, but has found a niche in the U.S. market for the foreseeable future, if it weren't for the explosion of global markets, Pinnacle would look quite different than it does today. The company isn&rsquo;t likely to change focus, and will leave smaller producers to satisfy domestic markets.&nbsp; &ldquo;Industrial export is the market we&rsquo;re in,&rdquo; McCurdy adds. &ldquo;If it wasn&rsquo;t for export markets taking off, we wouldn&rsquo;t be close to the size we are&mdash;we couldn&rsquo;t do what we&rsquo;re doing today on the domestic market, that&rsquo;s for sure.&rdquo; Author: Anna Simet Managing Editor, Pellet Mill Magazine <a href="mailto:asimet@bbiinternational.com" target="_blank">asimet@bbiinternational.com</a> 701-738-4961

Pinnacle's Westview Terminal in Prince Rupert British Columbia connects Pinnacle's production with waiting global markets. Rail cars can be unloaded at 1,000 tons per hour (tph) and ships can be loaded at 2,000 tph. 

2015/01/Export-Pellet-terminal-0115_14207425015098_largethumb.jpg

2015/01/Export-Pellet-terminal-0115_14207425015098_thumb.jpg

2015/01/Export-Pellet-terminal-0115_14207425015098.jpg

The Darya Ganga bulk carrier loads 30,000 tons of wood pellets before departing the Westview Terminal at the Port of Prince Ruppert.

2015/01/Export-Pellet-Ruppert-0115_14207425007792.jpg

While domestic demand soars and export challenges remain daunting, small and midsized North American producers may choose to leave bustling foreign markets to the big guys.

All That Glitters

The Netherlands, just twice the size of Massachusetts with roughly 17 million citizens, lags well-behind most of its fellow European Union member countries in growing the renewable share of its overall energy portfolio. Renewables comprise just 4 percent of total energy consumed and the Dutch government continues to work towards a policy environment that will more than triple its share by 2020. As 2014 drew to a close, the pellet industry watched from some remove as a working group populated by the Dutch government, non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and the country&rsquo;s utilities tried to reach consensus on the particulars of a new policy framework, as well as the sustainability requirements that affect co-firing of woody biomass with coal. Optimistically, the policy may yield an annual Dutch pellet demand of nearly 3.5 million tons per year, but without a voice on the assembled working group, industry insiders are concerned that misguided sustainability requirements may blunt its market-generating intent. Reasons for Excitement The enthusiasm and excitement around the promise of new Dutch pellet demand is easy to understand. Pellet producers see the new policy discussions as a way to rekindle demand initially created in the mid-2000s when a different feed-in subsidy, the MEP premium, was passed and implemented. The program was closed in 2006 and the contracts that it created have expired or will in 2015. The Netherlands is also well positioned from an infrastructure perspective. The country serves as an important trade hub for Western Europe, bolstered by the region&rsquo;s largest and busiest ports. The port of Rotterdam is a massive complex covering over 46 square miles that remains Europe's busiest port. The port is connected to an impressive system of rivers and waterways that can be leveraged to deliver pellets efficiently by barge. Finally, because of the now-shuttered MEP program, co-firing with wood pellets has an antecedent in the Netherlands. RWE/Essent&rsquo;s Amer power plant is one example of a large coal station with deep experience in co-firing biomass. The facility began co-firing with biomass in earnest in 2001, ultimately growing its annual consumption to nearly 800,000 tons by 2010. The successful deployment of biomass co-firing at Amer serves as a strong proof of concept for the owner&rsquo;s of the country&rsquo;s other coal assets. All together, there are seven coal stations in the Netherlands with a total capacity of nearly 7,000 MW. According to Peter-Paul Schouwenberg, Manager Environment-Regulatory Affairs at RWE, the NGO&rsquo;s that are participating in the policy formation are generally opposed to coal stations, and are willing to entertain biomass co-firing only because of the strategy's ability to reduce CO2 emissions. Additionally, NGOs, energy companies, and Dutch policy makers all believe that robust sustainability criteria must be followed. State of Play The policy instrument driving all of this excitement, the SDE-plus (Stimuleringsregeling duurzam energieproductie), is a production-based subsidy that bridges the revenue gap for power producers between fossil-fuel based energy and a renewable alternative, including biomass co-firing. The SDE-plus is the policy manifestation of a comprehensive energy vision statement published in September of 2013 called the Energy Agreement for Sustainable Growth. This agreement offered a road map to both reduce energy consumption and increase the energy share of renewables in the country to 14 percent by 2020, aligning the Dutch trajectory with broader EU climate change mitigation targets. The agreement was developed in the tradition of a bottom-up consensus-building approach common in the Netherlands, known as the polder model. This same model was used to develop the SDE-plus program, and continues to be used to develop the sustainability requirements for biomass that Dutch power generators will have to adhere to in order to receive their production subsidies. &ldquo;We set up an expert group between utilities, NGOs and government who have been working on the sustainability criteria since January of the year (2014). They should be ready by the end of this year,&rdquo; says Schouwenberg. &ldquo;The expert group included government, the Ministry of Economic Affairs and the Ministry of Infrastructure and Environment. All utilities were involved including EON, Vattenfall, EDF-Suez, Eneco, RWE/Essent. From an NGO perspective, it was the WNF, the Dutch branch of the World Wildlife Fund, Greenpeace, and the Dutch NGO Natuur &amp; Milieu.&rdquo; While this collaborative approach is responsible for creating a policy environment incentivizing pellet-derived power, industry proponents feel there is a danger in the market ending up out of reach because of misguided sustainability requirements uninformed by the voices of North American pellet producers or the forest products industry that supplies them with wood fiber. &ldquo;Let&rsquo;s talk about the process of the establishing a sustainability criteria. In strong contrast, and I can&rsquo;t overstate this enough, in strong contrast to the process we watched unfold in the United Kingdom, which was open, transparent, and had an incredibly high level of stakeholder engagement, the Dutch have gone in the complete opposite direction,&rdquo; says Seth Ginther, executive director of the U.S. Industrial Pellet Association. The risk, Ginther points out, extends well beyond the Dutch pellet market. &ldquo;We want as open and free a market as possible. We want to tear down the barriers to entry and any obstacles that are put in the way so we have a truly open and commoditized market. Part of doing that is harmonizing sustainability criteria. The European Union has decided not do that at the EU level and has left these decisions to the member states. What you end up with is member states doing different things and if they&rsquo;re not careful, inevitably it ends up creating a fragmented set of policies that de-harmonizes everything. All that does is hinder trade.&rdquo; To fully appreciate the challenge that Ginther and others see, it is helpful to examine the world&rsquo;s largest globally traded commodities. Fossil fuels like coal and crude oil and agricultural products like corn, wheat and cotton are all efficiently traded at massive volumes. This efficiency can be attributed to the commodity&rsquo;s common attributes. As a result, these commodities can always be found in the global marketplace, traded and re-traded with ease. As countries begin to place restrictions on these commodities trade becomes less efficient. Look no further than the growing trade restrictions on the genetically modified agricultural products. As these restrictions grow, the requirements for keeping these commodities separated from their non GMO equivalents introduce new costs for producers and traders. Recognizing the risks that Ginther and others have articulated, a group of European utilities that are or will be using wood pellets has formed the Sustainable Biomass Partnership. The organization was formed by the utilities to drive the European Union member countries toward a harmonized set of sustainability requirements.&nbsp; &ldquo;The whole idea was to try and get some conformity throughout the various countries that use wood pellets,&rdquo; says Arnold Dale, vice president of bioenergy at the global forest products trading firm Ekman. &ldquo;Now we have the Dutch saying, &lsquo;No. We don&rsquo;t want to look at what other people are doing, we want to come up with our own dedicated system.&rsquo; My fear is it&rsquo;s going to be very, very strict and difficult for manufacturers to comply with, or if not difficult, certainly time-consuming. They&rsquo;re going to be asking the most detailed questions and demanding minutiae about the supply of the raw materials to the wood pellet manufacturers. I do worry about that.&rdquo; Certification Bottleneck The concerns for Ginther and his constituents do not stem from management practices they believe will be required. Industry advocates and their partners in the forestry sector point to a robust collection of federal and state laws and long-followed best management practices already in place. Instead, industry concern hinges on sustainability programs that mandate forest certification. Certification, not widely practiced in North America, adds cost for landowners and these increased costs strain the economics of managing forests. While no formal announcement has yet been made public, the momentum in the policy discussions from the Dutch seem to be leaning toward certification. &ldquo;If you look at the energy agreement, it certainly indicates that we should develop sustainability criteria based on existing forest management systems to bracket the Forest Stewardship Council and the NTA (Netherlands Technical Agreement) 8080, &rdquo; says Schouwenberg. The NTA 8080 is a certification scheme that includes carbon emissions reductions, land use changes, biodiversity and the working conditions along the biomass supply chain. The challenge for pellet producers if the Dutch implement a policy that demands certified content will be finding enough wood fiber grown on certified lands. According to a report published on the Forest Stewardship Council website as of November 2014, just 35 million acres of U.S. forests are currently certified, or just under 5 percent of total forest acres. The problem is more vexing when certification levels in the prime pellet producing region in the U.S., the southeast, are considered. &ldquo;At best, the level of certified content in the U.S. Southeast is at 1 percent right now,&rdquo; says Ginther. At the heart of the entire debate is the belief held by NGOs that increased demand for wood pellets will result in deforestation. NGOs see certification as the only way to ensure that this unintended consequence can be avoided. The pellet industry, North American foresters, global forest products traders and the utilities pursuing co-firing to generate lower carbon power see it differently. &ldquo;The real story here is the U.S. small landowner,&rdquo; offers Ginther. &ldquo;The fascinating thing is that when you look at what the Dutch are attempting to do with their sustainability, they are working to ensure that forests are regenerated and replanted. However, by creating too tight of criteria, calling for forest-level certification, what the policy will actually do is have an adverse effect on what they&rsquo;re trying to do. It will actually lead to less of that because they have reduced the market opportunities for these landowners. That&rsquo;s a fascinating concept to me.&rdquo; This Just In In the final days of the 2014, Pellet Mill Magazine was provided a copy of a letter authored by H.G.J. Kamp, the Dutch Minister for Economic Affairs. The letter, written to the Chair of the Dutch House of Representatives on December 24, 2014, establishes while Dutch NGOs and Dutch utilities were able to agree on sustainability criteria, they were not able to agree on an implementation timetable or the certification process. In the letter, Kamp acknowledges the difficulty in devising a plan that would &ldquo;achieve an ambitious set of sustainability criteria while creating an investment climate that gives companies the confidence to invest&rdquo;. Kamp then outlines a step-wise plan that would result in &ldquo;all of the biomass used as fuel for co-firing&rdquo; being able to clearly demonstrate sustainability at the &ldquo;forest-site&rdquo; level. Kamp's plan begins immediately requiring that fiber coming from forest tracts larger than 1000 hectares (2400 acres) having to demonstrate sustainability via certification.&nbsp; Over time, the size of the tracts required to prove sustainability drops to 2000 acres in 2020 and 1200 acres in 2022. Materials coming from tracts smaller than 1200 acres will be &ldquo;demonstrated at the pellet mill level&rdquo;. The decision is not irreversible as Kamp notes in the letter, but he reminds the Dutch house that final regulations for the SDE-plus program need to be published by the end of January 2015. The ability of the Dutch to achieve their renewable targets hinges on the ratification of the sustainability criteria. &ldquo;The Dutch have a 14% renewable energy target for 2020,&rdquo; Ginter says. &ldquo;I&rsquo;ve been told if they can&rsquo;t agree on a doable sustainability program, they will only be able to achieve 8 or 9 %. I believe the Dutch are painting themselves into a corner where they will not be able to attain their renewable energy targets in 2020 if North American producers are not allowed to participate in the market.&rdquo; Author: Tim Portz Executive Editor, Pellet Mill Magazine <a href="mailto:tportz@bbiinternational.com" target="_blank">tportz@bbiinternational.com</a> 701-738-4969

In so many ways, the Netherlands provides a market opportunity optimized for North American pellets. The country is home to the Port of Rotterdam, arguably Europeâ€™s most important trade hub. 

2015/01/Nether-Pellet-Waalhaven-0115_14207421004016_largethumb.jpg

2015/01/Nether-Pellet-Waalhaven-0115_14207421004016_thumb.jpg

2015/01/Nether-Pellet-Waalhaven-0115_14207421004016.jpg

The Netherlands' under-debate energy policies could create an additional 3.5 million tons of annual pellet demand or introduce inefficiencies that will put the market out of reach for most North American producers.

A Dutch Dilemma

Forest2Market announces change to sales team Forest2Market has promoted Gordon Culbertson to the director of international business, where he will work to establish relationships and identify new business partners across the globe. He previously served as manager of the Pacific Northwest region. Peter Coutu has been appointed sales director of North America. In his new role, Coutu is responsible for customer account management and sales of all subscription services in the U.S. and Canada. He previously served as sales manager. Forest2Market has also announced Suzanne Hearn, vice president of marketing and sales, retired at the end of September. She joined Forest2Market in 2006 and has been responsible for the launch of the company&rsquo;s bioenergy and lumber practices. Forest2Market began transitioning Hearn&rsquo;s responsibilities to other staff members last summer. Peter Coutu, director of North American Sales, will lead forest products industry sales, while Peter Stewart, president and CEO, is now overseeing Forest2Market&rsquo;s lumber service, Mill2Market. Tracy Leslie has been named director of forest biomaterials and sustainability services. In this role, she is responsible for opening new markets for Forest2Market data subscriptions and analytic services. She joins Stan Parton, manager of bioenergy sector sales. The new team will expand the use of Forest2Market&rsquo;s product offerings into existing bioenergy markets as well as emerging markets in biofuels, biochemicals and sustainability. Morbark promotes team member Morbark Inc. has promoted Larry Voelker as vice president of engineering and product development. Voelker previously served as director of engineering and was responsible for the planning and implementation of all engineering activities and providing the strategic technical leadership in continuous improvement of equipment and process capability. Prior to joining Morbark, Voelker held positions at QuickSet International, IMM Inc. and AAR Mobility Systems. Andritz announces wireless heat sensor Andritz Inc. and SST Wireless Inc. are collaborating to produce a customized version of SST&rsquo;s wireless heat sensor technology for deployment on Andritz&rsquo;s wood pelletizers as an OEM option.&nbsp; The system will include SST&rsquo;s high-temperature sensors that are installed directly onto the rollers to provide real-time monitoring of critical temperatures.&nbsp; Andritz will install a complete system at its Muncy, Pennsylvania, facility to demonstrate the technology and establish best practices and recommendations to reduce downtime and accidents caused by overheating of rollers and bearing shafts. Vermeer announces management changes As part of its family succession planning process, Vermeer Corp. has announced that third-generation family member Jason Andringa will serve as the company&rsquo;s next president and CEO, effective Nov. 1, 2015. On Nov. 1 of last year, he assumed the role of president and chief operating officer for one year, before transitioning to president and CEO. He previously served as president of forage and environmental solutions. Mary Andringa, current president and CEO, assumed the role of CEO and chair of the board on Nov. 1. She will transition exclusively to chair of the board Nov. 1, 2015. Bob Vermeer, current chairman of the board, will assume the role of chair emeritus. Viridis Energy adds to management team Viridis Energy Inc. has appointed Tim Knoop as senior vice president of operations. Knoop will oversee the company&rsquo;s Canadian west coast and east coast manufacturing operations with the goal of heightening cost efficiencies and fortifying the company&rsquo;s operational framework in preparation for its expansion strategy. Prior to joining Viridis, he served as general manager of Pacific Bioenergy, as well as director of Nazbec, a joint venture between Pacific Bioenergy and Nzko. Drax Group announces retirement of chairman Drax Group plc has announced that Charles Berry is expected to retire as a nonexecutive director and chairman of the board effective in April, following the conclusion of the company&rsquo;s next annual general meeting. He was appointed to the board as a nonexecutive director in December 2005 and was appointed chairman in 2008. The board has commenced a search process to find a successor.
&nbsp;
SHARE YOUR INDUSTRY NEWS: To be included in the Business Briefs, send information (including photos and logos, if available) to Business Briefs, Pellet Mill Magazine, 308 Second Ave. N., Suite 304, Grand Forks, ND 58203. You may also email information to <a href="mailto:evoegele@bbiinternational.com">evoegele@bbiinternational.com</a>. Please include your name and telephone number in all correspondence.

2015/01/BB-Pellet-Culbertson-0115_14207434811557.jpg

2015/01/BB-Pellet-Hearn-0115_14207434819397.jpg

2015/01/BB-Pellet-Jason-0115_14207434829171.jpg

2015/01/BB-Pellet-Knoop-0115_14207434839008.jpg

2015/01/BB-Pellet-Leslie-0115_14207434849198.jpg

2015/01/BB-Pellet-Mary-0115_14207434858668.jpg

2015/01/BB-Pellet-Voelker-0115_14207434869019.jpg

Business Briefs: People, Products & Partnerships

With this issue of Pellet Mill Magazine, the title moves to a a six-issue per year, theme-based format. Our hope was that adding two issues to the editorial calendar would allow us to dive deeper into specific topic areas with each issue. The decision is already bearing fruit. Katie Fletcher&rsquo;s <a href="http://biomassmagazine.com/articles/11399/deutschlandundefineds-sleeping-giant">feature exploring Germany</a>, Europe&rsquo;s largest producer of wood pellets, likely would not have made the cut in a quarterly format. While incredibly interesting, the story likely would have had to make way for a story more directly connected to the issues that North American producers face daily. The article is a must-read, however, and our North American producer readers will recognize in it many of the same challenges they face here: securing feedstock, seeing demand come in fits and starts, and managing rising production costs. Anna Simet&rsquo;s story, <a href="http://biomassmagazine.com/articles/11400/all-that-glitters">&ldquo;All That Glitters&rdquo;</a> juxtaposes the disparate experiences two North American producers have had folding foreign markets into their operational strategy. One, British Columbia&rsquo;s Pinnacle Renewable Energy Group, made it central to theirs and haven&rsquo;t looked back. Pinnacle CEO Rob McCurdy allows that playing in the export space isn&rsquo;t easy, telling Simet, &ldquo;There are so many pieces to it, and they all have to be done well.&rdquo; In other instances, producers like Trae Fuels discover that domestic markets offer plenty of opportunity, free of the risk and uncertainty some producers experience in their earliest forays into foreign markets. Finally, in my feature <a href="http://biomassmagazine.com/articles/11398/a-dutch-dilemma">&ldquo;A Dutch Dilemma&rdquo;</a>, I dig into the ongoing development of a pellet market in the Netherlands with equal parts promise and pause. The promise is easy enough to articulate. The Dutch, hoping to improve upon their relatively low levels of renewable energy production, have engineered a feed-in tarriff program that most analysts agree would create a 3.5 million-ton-annual pellet demand. The pause and uncertainty stem from an ongoing debate about the sustainability requirements the Dutch NGOs are endeavoring to drive into the regulatory aspects of this new program. North American producers stand by the sustainable nature of their forest management practices, but are leery of forest certification requirements, which add a layer of administrative cost that erodes already thin margins. This issue of Pellet Mill Magazine clearly indicates that all producers, even those who have decided against selling into European markets, are impacted by the market dynamics and public debate unfolding there. We are wise to pay attention.
&nbsp;
Tim Portz VICE PRESIDENT OF CONTENT &amp; EXECUTIVE EDITOR <a href="mailto:tportz@bbiinternational.com" target="_blank">tportz@bbiinternational.com</a>

2015/01/Tim3_2010_1420743745046_largethumb.jpg

2015/01/Tim3_2010_1420743745046_thumb.jpg

2015/01/Tim3_2010_1420743745046.jpg

This issue of Pellet Mill Magazine takes a look at the European pellet industry. Tim Portz says the issue clearly indicates all producers, whether selling to Europe or not, are impacted by market dynamics and the unfolding public debate there.

The European Front

I&rsquo;d like to highlight some of the quality requirements for selling wood pellets into European markets but, more importantly, point out some specific differences between U.S. and European quality, logistical and consumer needs that producers should be aware of when selling into the European markets. For wood pellet producers who sell their entire production into the European markets, it is actually quite simple. You can simply dedicate your entire operation to the needs of your European customers. This may include the use of specific operating equipment such as a 6 mm die instead of the U.S. standard one-fourth inch die or perhaps purchasing testing equipment that conforms to EN methods instead of ASTM methods.&nbsp; You would likely need to adopt the 3.15 mm round hole sieve as your definition of fines instead of the one-eighth inch-square hole sieve used in the U.S., as well as numerous other items that are standard to the European markets. The challenge is that there are numerous pellet producers here in the U.S. who primarily sell their product into domestic markets, but are now seeking opportunities in European markets. Or, perhaps they are servicing one sector of the European market and now want to sell into other sectors, which may have different requirements. In these situations, it is tempting to take the approach that you make what you make and hope your product will be considered acceptable for the&nbsp; markets you are interested in. Several differences, however, if not accounted for, can result in a poorly performing product, limiting your ability to sell into these markets.&nbsp; Here are some examples: Traditionally, European residential heating markets have highly favored, blond pellets, very light in color.&nbsp; U.S. producers have struggled over the years to make pellets blond enough for European buyers. Fortunately, this requirement seems to be loosening up a bit allowing for some hardwood/softwood blended products, but it continues to be challenging for hardwood producers to pass the color test.&nbsp; Additionally, the top pellet quality class in Europe is A1 grade, which has an ash limit of 0.7 percent.&nbsp; U.S. softwood producers can certainly achieve this limit, but it is much more challenging with hardwood and is a parameter that should be closely monitored.&nbsp; It is also relatively common for European distributors to demand a limit of 0.5 percent even though the grade requirement is 0.7 percent. There are a few physical properties that make a difference depending on the specific market within Europe.&nbsp; Many European retailers seem to appreciate a true 6.0 mm pellet. The U.S. standard die is 0.25 inches, which is equivalent to 6.35 mm. After production, pellets typically expand a little yielding a pellet closer to 6.5 mm. This may not seem like a huge difference, but it can give retailers pause. European retailers are also very conscientious of pellet length and length distribution. They prefer an average length of around 1.5 to 2.0 cm with not too many small ones and not too many long ones, and absolutely no pellets greater than 45 mm. Durability is also significant and complicated. For all European markets, the published durability limit is 97.5. For the bagged market, this is fine and it is considered acceptable for bulk industrial markets as well. For bulk residential delivery, the published limit is also 97.5, however distributors for this market typically try to find product that has a durability between 98.5 and 99.0. This is due to the pneumatic conveyance used for this market and a strong desire to reduce fines. To achieve these very high durability numbers and low fines, most European producers who serve this market use additives such as corn starch. In the U.S. additives are not commonly used, so durability tends to be lower. There are also significant transportation and logistical issues to consider.&nbsp; Standard U.S. pallet and packaging, truck sizes and fork lifts are all different in Europe. To complicate this even more, the pallet size and stack height that is needed to optimally fill a shipping container does not match standard U.S. or European packaging systems. One of the largest hurdles to shipping bagged product in containers to European markets is getting the right-sized pallets and packaging for all stages of transport and delivery.&nbsp; I have no helpful hints here as to what works best.&nbsp; It is just something that I highly recommend you research thoroughly if attempting this model. This all boils down to understanding the needs of your customer. If you take the time to understand the needs of the European buyers, you will find that by making some changes to your process to accommodate them, you may find that your product is much more likely to find a buyer. Author: Chris Wiberg Manager, Biomass Energy Laboratory 218-428-3583 <a href="mailto:cwiberg@tpinspection.com" target="_blank">cwiberg@tpinspection.com</a>

2015/01/Testing-Pellet-Wiberg-0913_14207438565481_largethumb.jpg

2015/01/Testing-Pellet-Wiberg-0913_14207438565481_thumb.jpg

2015/01/Testing-Pellet-Wiberg-0913_14207438565481.jpg

There are quality requirements wood pellet producers should consider when selling their production into European markets, or looking for opportunities with those buyers. Chris Wiberg says it all boils down to understanding your customer's needs.

Quality Considerations for European Markets

The industrial wood pellet industry has spent the past several years working closely with policymakers at the European Union level and within its member states on developing sustainability criteria for solid biomass.&nbsp; Transparency in these processes is key to effective policymaking.&nbsp; In fact, the World Trade Organization agrees with that concept, and one of the tenets of its Technical Barriers to Trade Agreement is that the signatory countries to the TBT will undertake any regulatory standards making process, including sustainability criteria, in an open and transparent manner with public consultation and input.&nbsp; In that vein, when the United Kingdom, a signatory to the TBT, developed its sustainability criteria for solid biomass, it did so by involving all stakeholders, keeping the process open to the public. The U.K. government went about its work in a very public manner issuing a number of consultations through the U.K. Department of Energy and Climate Change.&nbsp; The public was provided with drafts of various proposals and was given time to provide comment on those proposals.&nbsp; That process culminated with the most robust set of sustainability criteria on solid biomass ever enacted, and those criteria ensure delivery of a sustainable product, while also being reasonable and workable within North American forest products markets.&nbsp; Let's contrast that process and its result with earlier this year, when the Netherlands began its process of creating sustainability criteria for solid biomass.&nbsp; Unlike the U.K. government, Netherlands, which is also a signatory to the TBT and therefore legally required to have a transparent rulemaking process, decided to establish its sustainability criteria for solid biomass through a closed and secretive process that does not allow for any stakeholder consultation or public engagement or comment.&nbsp; The Dutch government has failed to publish any form of public stakeholder consultation at any point over the past several months, nor has it released an official draft of any proposal, making it impossible for civil society to comment on those drafts.&nbsp; Instead, civil society has been forced to rely upon a secretive expert group on sustainability to try to reach an agreement on criteria. As of this writing, that secretive expert group has failed to reach an agreement and we understand that Minister Henk Kamp, the Dutch Minister for Economic Affairs will have to make some decisions on his own. We now call on Minister Kamp to do what he should have done all along&mdash;abide by the binding obligations of the TBT and open up the process for establishing sustainability criteria for solid biomass.&nbsp; We call upon the Netherlands to open the process to all stakeholders and the public. We stand ready to work closely with the Netherlands on developing sustainability criteria that satisfies both environmental and economic considerations. To move forward with the current closed process only harms the credibility of the Dutch government in the global marketplace and hinders the ability of the Netherlands to meet its EU-mandated renewable energy targets. &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Author: Seth Ginther Executive Director U.S. Industrial Pellet Association 804-771-9540 <a href="mailto:sginther@hf-law.com" target="_blank">sginther@hf-law.com</a>

2015/01/Insight-Pellet-Ginther-0913_14207439352208_largethumb.jpg

2015/01/Insight-Pellet-Ginther-0913_14207439352208_thumb.jpg

2015/01/Insight-Pellet-Ginther-0913_14207439352208.jpg

Seth Ginther says transparency is key to effective policymaking when developing sustainability criteria for solid biomass. The Netherlands began this process behind closed doors, initiating an industry call to open the process to the public.

January/February 2015

Business Briefs

Business Briefs: People, Products & Partnerships

Columns

The European Front

Quality Considerations for European Markets

A Call for Transparency in Dutch Sustainability Rulemaking

Featured

Deutschland's Sleeping Giant

All That Glitters

A Dutch Dilemma

January/February 2015.css-7jxktu{position:absolute;bottom:0px;left:0px;right:0px;height:3px;border-radius:3px;background-color:var(--chakra-colors-brandBlack);}

Business Briefs

Business Briefs: People, Products & Partnerships

Columns

The European Front

Quality Considerations for European Markets

A Call for Transparency in Dutch Sustainability Rulemaking

Featured

Deutschland's Sleeping Giant

All That Glitters

A Dutch Dilemma

January/February 2015