Hello everyone,
Curve Labs has finished a rudimentary market analysis on the emerging Web3 field of regenerative economics:
We can think of many of these projects as potential collaborators and allies with Celo’s ecosystem 
— related discussion about natural capital assets.
I’m struggling to find a real measure for the benefit of carbon tokenization.
My inspiration this post is firstly the discussions open about the assets held in the CELO reserve and secondly the attached video, which is unrelated in subject directly but relevant in concept at least for me. Essentially quantum mechanics has a problem dealing with real observed data on large objects and hasn’t figured out how to deal with them.
At least in my head the accounting/marketing for the value of carbon tokens seems to have a similar problem attaching itself to the the measurements the world around us uses to define success.
What I’m thinking is missing is:
What I’m getting at here is that while trees and woodlands are carbon sinks and can offset some of my carbon usage, contributing toward a forest is an added economic cost to me. Unless that becomes compulsory, it’s mostly just about me doing it to look cool and fit it without changing my behavior, it’s not really about me solving the underlying problem.
That’s all relevant to the CELO reserve assets in that, that investing in forests in a far off land is discretionary, the security of my finances are not.
On the other hand, reducing my real carbon usage/expenditure has a real and direct economic benefit for me. I own a bit of stock in a company that mines Bitcoin, encouraging these miners to use solar and waste heat and such saves me money.
Don’t get me wrong here, I fully believe in protecting forests and coral reefs and … I just want to understand the economics to make sure that the reserve isn’t saddled with an unproductive asset.
Additionally I’d like to know if there are alternative investments that could do more to actually address the underlying carbon usage problem. Maybe solar/wind farming…
