CARBON CREDIT: THE BIG CLIMATE OPPORTUNITY OR A SCAM?

With this post we will try to summarize what remains to be done on the subject of "carbon credit". I read recently on a YouTube video about "carbon credits" a comment from the user @barnabydodd8956 saying: "Sounds like a way for the rich to justify their higher levels of pollution by paying the green industry". Herein lies the first problem with "carbon credits": the conception that many people have is negative. And, in fact, the problem is earlier: the concept or the idea of ​​"carbon credit" has not reached the majority of people. After it has reached them, most of them either don't understand it or have a bad opinion-conception. What remains to be corrected in these "carbon credits"?

Conception. We will mention at least 5 points to consider and try to correct. The first, as we have pointed out, the conception. The view held by many of the public that reports on the issue is that it is a "social patch" for which the rich are allowed to pay to pollute. What solution can we find? Carry out solvent, real and quality projects to, over time, reverse this vision. Even, that in time it will be a positive vision.

Verification. In many "carbon credit" projects developed in recent years, there has not been a system of "tracking", verification and final evaluation of the projects, in order to guarantee that the project has really served to reduce CO2 in the estimated estimates. Solution? It must be ensured that in all "carbon credit" projects there is a verification system: guarantee a report of evidence and indicators to be able to make an evaluation at the end of the project. This commitment that each "carbon credit" project will have its "due diligence" should already be signed in the original contract of each "carbon credit".

Cryptocurrency yes or not? The vast majority, if not all, of the projects worldwide that have pioneered cryptocurrency operations in order to carry out "carbon credit" projects have lost their respective cryptocurrencies created for the occasion by 90% or more than its value since the end of 2021. No naming names, but a company that had invested $16M at the end of 2021 would now have approximately $600,000 to carry out the "carbon credit" project if it hadn't already gone ahead, which it is very possible. Solution? "Blockchain Carbon Credit" projects if they intend to develop and make use of their own cryptocurrency must be a stable cryptocurrency, and better not their own, better make use of one with creditworthiness. For example USDT Tether.

NFT contracts. In recent years, practically no "carbon credit" projects or even "marketplaces" based on NFT technology have emerged. This is the most technologically secure system of guaranteeing the initial ownership of which institution or company makes the investment in a "carbon credit" project and at the same time would include in the NFT contract itself the "due diligence" we were talking about. Solution? We propose to go ahead with CCNFT (Carbon Credit Non Fungible Token) and BCNFT (Blue Carbon Non Fungible Token).

Fast, reliable and booming blockchains. One last aspect, the networks (blockchain) that have been used in recent years (we won't name names) included very high fees and are slow. If we want an NFT market, be it carbon credit, art or the product that wants to be tokenized, we need to work on the basis of practically fee-free networks, which make it easier to verify the ownership of NFT, that are fast and that are developed around a community that works with excitement. Do such networks exist? Yes. We won't say names.