Tokenising carbon emissions and creating an efficient and verifiable market

[paxmao]

As many of you know, carbon emissions are nowadays tradeable. This means that he allocation of CO2 emissions given to a country or central institution can be bought or sold by those who emit CO2 and greenhouse gasses so that a market of permissions is created.

This market can be clearly be made efficient by the use o blockchain, yet not completely decentralised I recon. Certification, rights of emission, participants proof of identity and exchanges are all a default in the blockchain world. This could save millions?

[fiulpro]

This is extremely weird. I did know about the carbon trading since it's not new but at the end it's plan of approaching a more CO2 free society failed terribly.
- they should not be tradable in the first place
- one should not buy or sell them
- special incentives might help smaller and greener nations.
It's not just carbon one has to worry about, I get the point of the author but what about the more dangerous gasses??
What is the credibility that the records won't be influenced by the developed nations? Plus they have not even considered per hecta green land available to the industry. They can very well try and make green belt. Rather this can be based on the whole net emission rather how it started!!l

(Google)

Let's try and take the net emission of all gasses and rather calculate the effects that the greenbelt might produce on them then hold them accountable. This is not a business transaction.

[Twentyonepaylots]

Wait, I don't even know you could profit out of carbon emissions lmao. Carbon trading could work really well for the planet's health and economy of the countries who are to partake, but from what I'm seeing, it's not working really well. Perhaps tokenising it could do a better job with the same goal, but without a feasibility study, this will all only be wishful thinking and senseless talk.

[NeuroticFish]

Wait, I don't even know you could profit out of carbon emissions

It profits from others' carbon emissions. The "green" companies receive certificates and they can sell them to those who pollute.
I've read somewhere not long ago that Tesla, for example, earns more from carbon certificates than from making and selling cars.

This market can be clearly be made efficient by the use o blockchain, yet not completely decentralised I recon. Certification, rights of emission, participants proof of identity and exchanges are all a default in the blockchain world. This could save millions?

I'm not sure if blockchain would be of any help, since we don't talk about something that is or can become decentralized.
Also afaik the companies make their own deals with the certificates, with special prices based on the amounts, the previous (similar or not) deals between those companies and so on.
You know, "I sell you certificates cheaper and you sell me this or that components cheaper"; I don't have a full overview on that market, but I have a feeling that's more complicated than Bitcoin markets.
And in the future I expect it to change, as a result of politics deciding to "punish" even more the polluting businesses, maybe not rewarding this good the clean ones.

[Kong Hey Pakboy]

Wait, I don't even know you could profit out of carbon emissions lmao. Carbon trading could work really well for the planet's health and economy of the countries who are to partake, but from what I'm seeing, it's not working really well. Perhaps tokenising it could do a better job with the same goal, but without a feasibility study, this will all only be wishful thinking and senseless talk.

Businesses can profit out of carbon emissions but not in a conventional way, there are some countries that gives tax breaks depending on how much carbon emission your business is prevented from going in the atmosphere. Making tokens looks promising but it is doing the same as what is currently in place, yes a study might work but I predict that it will not be that different as what is the status quo.

[amishmanish]

An IoT sensor that detects emission levels at exhausts and feeds periodic, tamper-proof data onto a blockchain record could well be implemented. These could then be tokenized in different sizes and be made available on an open market where buyers can place their bids to get the best price.
This could work easily in theory. Most of these markets are currently in developed countries though. I am not sure that they cover much of Asia or the developing economies. But definitely a worthy implementation that can avoid the various "adjustments" that can be made to readings like emission content.

[HeRetiK]

As many of you know, carbon emissions are nowadays tradeable. This means that he allocation of CO2 emissions given to a country or central institution can be bought or sold by those who emit CO2 and greenhouse gasses so that a market of permissions is created.

This market can be clearly be made efficient by the use o blockchain, yet not completely decentralised I recon. Certification, rights of emission, participants proof of identity and exchanges are all a default in the blockchain world. This could save millions?

Trading emission certificates is not really accessible to the individual investor speculator, from what I've seen it's pretty much closed off to everyone but mid-sized to large companies. I do assume that is on purpose, so I doubt there's motivation to make the emission certificate markets more accessible, let alone tokenized.

(if I overlooked a way to access the markets via specialized brokers or derivatives let me know, I actually looked for a way a couple of years ago but didn't find anything useful back then)

This is extremely weird. I did know about the carbon trading since it's not new but at the end it's plan of approaching a more CO2 free society failed terribly.
- they should not be tradable in the first place
- one should not buy or sell them
- special incentives might help smaller and greener nations.
It's not just carbon one has to worry about, I get the point of the author but what about the more dangerous gasses??
What is the credibility that the records won't be influenced by the developed nations? Plus they have not even considered per hecta green land available to the industry. They can very well try and make green belt. Rather this can be based on the whole net emission rather how it started!!l

Let's try and take the net emission of all gasses and rather calculate the effects that the greenbelt might produce on them then hold them accountable. This is not a business transaction.

Being able to trade carbon emissions is not mutually exclusive with taking other preventive and proactive measures to tackle climate change.

If anything I believe the carbon certificate market should be available to the general public, as this would allow for speculation to drive the price up, making carbon emissions more expensive as a consequence.