So glad to see another entrant providing diversity for bridging!
I'd love to host a Twitter Spaces with the founding team of Klima DAO, C3 and Toucan Protocol so we can brainstorm how to (3, 3) together.
Anyone else up for this?
So glad to see another entrant providing diversity for bridging!
I'd love to host a Twitter Spaces with the founding team of Klima DAO, C3 and Toucan Protocol so we can brainstorm how to (3, 3) together.
Anyone else up for this?
Simply awesome. Very much in favor.
I would propose that you institute a "selection tax" along the lines that Toucan has proposed for NCT. This is to help clear out old/stale credits.
Specifically, retirements would default to the oldest UBO/NBO credits, and some sort of tax would be levied if the retiring party wanted to choose different/other/specific credits to retire; then, the fees raised through the tax would be used to auto-retire old credits.
odcpw Can anyone explain to me why it's better to have different vintage based tokens rather than align on for example Toucan's methodology? Toucan developed their vintage cut offs based on the market and quality. C3 bases it off existing indices. Is this correct?
We chose to align with the existing indices to lower the barrier for users understanding ReFi. By using CBL Market's GEO and N-GEO contracts, users will have an easier time evaluating the price of the carbon asset.
odcpw Would an alternative be that C3 incentivises bridging to BCT/NCT?
We respect all players in the game, and want to assist everyone in the space. NCT, BCT, GNT, and MCO2 can be voted on via governance to add them to the staking and Klima liquidity gauge (the bridge rewards only pertain to Aither as it is baked into the smart contract) and obtain rewards for their users.
While not confirmed, we are discussing to allow TCO2 can also be utilized for these tokens, and would like to make our tokens TCO2 compliant so that we can also put them into toucan's infrastructure as well.
ollumi 1)Let's say not all 2014 vintages are retired on-chain by the start of 2023, what happens to the remaining 2014 vintage in the pool? Are they just left there as a legacy until they are redeemed?
By default, when a user offsets, the lowest vintage year will be offsetted. For a small fee, they are able to choose which project to offset. This fee is given to veC3 holders.
ollumi 2)Does your collaboration with Aither has specific language as to preference or just intent?
We are partnered with Aither. An announcement from them will come soon.
ollumi 3)This is a question I ask all nature-based pool product proposals since they place a higher value on narrative than a base carbon credit: What's your plan when leakage/project failure forces Verra/GS to pull credits from their buffer pool but your corresponding on-chain offset hasn't been retired? (GS will retroactively adjust the number of credits as well).
We will do our best to minimize this chance by working with Aither to blacklist certain methodologies for C3 approved tokens. When we shift to permissionless carbon pools, it is up to the individual to gauge the risks associated with the approved projects.
As the protocol matures, we plan on posting a governance proposal to divert a portion of revenue to a buffer for edge cases like this.
ollumi Looks like a very promising project and proposal is very well written.
Thank you for your comments!
We are not a competitor, we seek to be an assistive ally to KlimaDAO similar to toucan.
We facilitate the tokenization of carbon credits on-chain, KlimaDAO provides utility to carbon assets by becoming a carbon backed currency.
@Laplace will you be bridging your credits into the TCO2 standard to ensure unified liquidity, transparency and accountability?
OR are you creating a competing standard that will result in fractured liquidity, reduced transparency and accountability?
If C3 were to become a bridge provider that plugged into the TCO2 standard I'd be massively in favor of this. Moss has decided to convert all MCO2 credits into TCO2 as they recognize the absolute importance of one standard for on-chain.
If C3 decides to create a competing standard that results in fragmentation, I would not be in favor of this as we'll be recreating the off-chain market and many of it's mistakes.
We'd love to jump on a Twitter spaces and openly collaborate with you @Laplace, @Dionysus and @Archimedes to figure out how we can 3,3 our way to a unified carbon market on-chain.
Excellent proposal and I'll be voting yes for sure, welcome frens
Yes, I've mentioned it in another comment here.
Laplace While not confirmed, we are discussing to allow TCO2 can also be utilized for these tokens, and would like to make our tokens TCO2 compliant so that we can also put them into toucan's infrastructure as well.
jayE If C3 were to become a bridge provider that plugged into the TCO2 standard I'd be massively in favor of this. Moss has decided to convert all MCO2 credits into TCO2 as they recognize the absolute importance of one standard for on-chain.
C3 would love some clarification here. It looks like while they have respected the TCO2 standard, they are not converting all MCO2 credits into TCO2, nor are they allowing TCO2 to be converted into the MCO2 token (one way conversion). https://twitter.com/robdogeth/status/1491173526900211715
We strive to reduce fragmentation when possible, and there is multiple avenues towards achieving this.
This is super exciting news! C3 is doing something really great -- I guess as time goes on and our products come out of "beta" or "late beta" mode more, gating will be ever more important, but it looks like there is a strategy both with C3 and Toucan to address risks. If we pull this off, though, we will be shaving so many years off the transition to a future with less carbon in the atmosphere every year!
Fantastic news. We need more bridges <3
Thanks for coming C3 guys
love it
Awesome. Bring it!
Permissionless carbon bridge, governance/utility token with gauging to give the market an extra push in the direction we need, and high level of Klima alignment from day 1? Sign me up
LET'S FUQING GO!
jayE OR are you creating a competing standard that will result in fractured liquidity, reduced transparency and accountability?
Blockchain is public and transparent, so accountability and transparency are not an issue.
Create a competing standard is healthy for ReFi because allows organizations that are not aligned with Toucan's actions to introduce themselves on-chain and incentives a competitive environment and continuous improvement. After the controversy raised by Toucan's arbitrage actions, Klimates need decentralization (key concept on blockchain) of carbon bridge solutions. As someone states above
We need more bridges
And lastly, but not less important, one of KLIMA DAO's goal is provide liquidity pools such as KLIMA/BCT, BCT/USDC and KLIMA/MCO2 for ReFi solutions and create a bridge between these solutions and KLIMA. So fractured liquidity is not a a concern for me.
I agree with C3 partnership.