• General

  • Request for Comment - Flow Carbon/Goddess DAO X KLIMA Collaboration

This looks like another solid innovation in the world of carbon bridges that KlimaDAO aims to stimulate. Whitelisting Goddess DAO can ensure KlimaDAO continues to catalyse the integration of the legacy market with DeFi. Doing 'burns' on-chain to achieve off-chain retirements is a nice touch that begins positioning DeFi as the place to manage carbon assets and retirements. Enabling flows on-chain/off-chain will be key in integrating the markets; when legacy participants start to understand the liquidity and efficiency of the Web3 markets, they will stick around.

Executing on this partnership after the recent MCO2 proposal that just passed enables KlimaDAO to quickly diversify and build on the quality of the assets in the treasury. This is in line with KlimaDAO's Vision, per: https://klimadao.medium.com/klimadao-an-introduction-f55571986c

Some carrots in there for KlimaDAO too, marketing budget, pools on Polygon. Particularly interested to see how the Klima Infinity opportunity can be leveraged here.

Question:

  • "Retail and corporate can purchase direct on Flow's site"... But can existing players/intermediaries simply use the bridge (I assume so, but its not clear on the proposal)?
  • Is there already a date for GNTs to go live?

Look forward to the AMA!

    GoddessDAO oh ok - now I understand. So when you lock the GCO2 tokens up in the contract it'll create multiple GNT tokens.

    So when a single VCU is taken out of a bundle, is a GNT burned?

        I like what you guys are bringing to the table and to this space. But I got some questions.

        How are you guys organized?
        It is my understanding that Flow Carbon is an NYC-based LLC. So who are the owners of this LLC? Any other companies, or just the employees/individuals?

        Moving on, you plan to establish the Goddess DAO, and this will govern the protocol. What will then the relationship be between the two? The LLC has a very centralized governance structure, opposed to the whole concept of a DAO. So how will these two entities work together?

        Next, you stated previously that the DAO will be set up as an offshore entity. How will this be done to ensure that it is following the principles of a DAO? Meaning not being registered with some central governance functions.

        Lastly, to the third-party managing the SPV. Who is this "professional third party"? (If you can not disclose it because of legal reasons that's okay) I would just like to check out how will me managing the off-chain credits.

        Overall I like what you are offering. And based on your LinkedIn profiles you look like a very professional, well-educated team, so I look forward to your response to my questions.

          GoddessDAO Another important step forward for the on chain carbon market diversification. We want to make sure this adds value to Klima and is a balanced deal. Starting with the naked bonds first seems the way to go given the recent Klima treasury policy change proposal (KIP8). I can understand though if this proposal is delayed until there is further development and execution from Goddess DAO. (edited)

            0xy_Moron Thanks for your questions!! The bridge is open to all to use. Flow will be providing off-chain services that will be built onto of the open-source protocol governed by GDSS - such as buying carbon offsets with a credit card.
            We are aiming to launch in the next couple weeks as we finalize our agreement with VERRA.

              KlimaMag Thanks so much for your thoughtful questions!

              As I think previously posted, Flow will provide services to customers (corporate and retail) using the open-source protocol governed by GDSS. Flow will also engage in project origination and project finance to develop new carbon credits that will be brought across the GDSS bridge.
              These are activities that anyone, can engage in. We hope that by developing an open-source protocol for carbon trading on-chain, a large number of new entrants can enter the space to provide the off-chain services needed to spread the adoption of offsetting. For example, an individual working out of his home, with a metamask wallet and a laptop, can now become a carbon offset services provider helping local businesses in her town offset their carbon footprint.

              I hope to have more to share shortly on the exact legal framework that will be used to govern the DAO. But we are employing a general framework of a foundation governing a DAO that has been used before by other DAOs.

              Let me get back to you on if we can disclose the manager.

                  ashishpatel This doesn't make any sense. Why would VERRA have a problem with what they do? In constrast to Toucan they don't seem to retire the credit in the off-chain registry when they tokenize it. They just lock it somewhere. So burning the token and at the same time releasing the original contract is how they can get it back off-chain.

                      ashishpatel We have been working with Verra to obtain their approval since before those posts were made.
                      We are trying to build an ecosystem that can harmoniously exist with the existing entities in the carbon space, while building an open, transparent, market with deep liquidity. We think that some of the existing players with VERRA accounts, are going to be very happy to buy tokens on-chain, but will for a variety of reasons want to take them back off (for example they aren't comfortable with holding custody of their asset on-chain for long periods of time). We also think that being able to take things back off will give people comfort when bringing them on-chain, just as most USDC that comes on-chain never goes back off, the knowledge that it can provides comfort, especially to new entrants into the space.

                          GoddessDAO Given that you seem to be targeting a lot of B2B accounts with this statement and that much of your value proposition statement in the proposal is tied to "education" that's correlated with your relationships with your clients, can you provide KlimaDAO with verifiable references of some of these customers, as is standard in the B2B world? After all, it's one thing to frame market validation as "we think this will happen" and another altogether to pull out a list of people who've confirmed that they've gone through the whole funnel.

                            All these Q&A's are great. I support this addition.

                            This proposal is ridiculous. This project has nothing live that is real. This shouldn't even be up for discussion as of now. I am completely against this proposal.

                            Come on, have we just gotten happy for bringing on diversified versions of climate assets? Let's not get out of control and reckless please Klimates!

                            It would be good to get Flow's opinion on the negative media reports for two of the projects on their list:

                            1. Madre Dios Peru: https://redd-monitor.org/2021/05/14/madre-de-dios-amazon-redd-project-easyjets-phantom-carbon-credits-are-generated-by-logging-the-forest/

                            2. Indonesia: https://asia.nikkei.com/Spotlight/Environment/Climate-Change/Indonesian-carbon-credit-project-appears-to-betray-its-purpose

                            Please let us know what DD you did on those prior to purchasing. Thanks much.

                              Hi all,

                              Below you can check the initial version of a partnership evaluation form we've used for Flow Carbon. It's goal is to summarize the proposal's different elements (Pros and Cons), provide initial comments and above all, facilitate a discussion on what is best for Klima. Let us know what you think.

                              This should serve as a supporting doc for tomorrow's AMA with Flow.

                              https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1SA4qoa2vzk4SbXMnWs6O5iRjVwP0nXAA/edit?usp=sharing&ouid=105869954850477532204&rtpof=true&sd=true

                              GoddessDAO

                              I have to admit, I don't really understand what the purpose of Goddess DAO is. As in, it seems like a legal fiction; Flow will ultimately be in control, because it has to be in control, right? What would Flow do if Goddess decided to stop bridging Flow's offsets? An entity created for the express purpose of avoiding securities laws—"Flow's not tokenizing the carbon, a DAO that we control is!"—seems like a flimsy cover. Relatedly, is Verra entering its agreement with Flow or with Goddess? I ask because, if I were Verra, I wouldn't want to enter an agreement with Goddess, just as they haven't entered into an agreement with Klima.

                              In short: why isn't Flow creating an entity like Toucan instead?

                              Look, don't get me wrong, I love the idea of this. But it seems to me that the DAO is being created to circumvent NYS's bitlicense regulations, and further that GoddessDAO will have a hard time transitioning to/demonstrating actual decentralized control.

                              EDIT: After listening to the AMA, I have another question. Because the GNTs expire after five years, what happens if KlimaDAO takes GNT into its treasury, and then the token expires?

                                Looking forward to the 2 way bridge!

                                Interesting proposal, a few concerns:
                                -As many mentioned already, this is a bit too early for Klima to move on. Maybe this would be different a few months after launch when this has proven itself like other products on the market.
                                -Instead of being deterministic, to use these credits you have to rely on actions by Verra and the SPV. This obviously has centralization risks. We are not putting our trust in Circle or Coinbase here, but a project nobody heard off before with no product or cred. Again these risks are reduced later but right now feels a bit too degen for Klima to support this.
                                -Tbh rubbed the wrong way by people in Flow saying deterministic credits are "retired" and somehow have a worse appeal than custodian ones. This is basically spreading FUD, same FUD that bunch of people pointed towards Klima/Moss/Toucan in the past.

                                Two way bridge could be nice if you don't trust on-chain markets are the future, so kudos to creating an escape hatch for corporates that are shy. Ultimately for this reason I am for the project and think it can be positive for ReFi with diversity but got a lot of proving to do before I will endorse such a proposal.

                                My vote:

                                GoddessDAO Against: Do not Introduce GNT, GNT/KLIMA, and GNT/USDC bonds