Naturally, no pun intended, Cambridge University has selected Tezos as the foundation for its emerging marketplace designed to trade carbon credits in support of UN Climate Change agendas. The Cambridge Centre For Carbon Credits plans to use a combination of artificial intelligence and satellite sensing to build a decentralized marketplace for verifiable carbon credits, citing the eco friendly and low cost attributes of XTZ along with the governance structure which allows for rational upgrades while avoiding forks.
The goal is to use the trading of carbon credits to promote biodiversity and promote nature based solutions. Carbon credits exist now of course, but there is not necessarily an efficient, transparent, and liquid infrastructure to trade and manage them at scale. Even "mainstream" crypto media actually mentioned the name Tezos in an apparent moment of willingness to face the wrath of the Eth cult when reporting on this development. This follows China and Singapore introducing carbon trading mechanisms and powerful exchange BitMEX purchasing carbon credits in an attempt to offset its own emissions in recent history.
This is merely one initiative and there will certainly be many more attempts to create the go to exchange for handling carbon credits, much like the frenzy we see now with NFTs. Many of these other initiatives will opt for something outside of Tezos such as Ether, but that is not the point. The point here is WHY did they choose Tezos and what impact that could have on the market. This is another example of an institution or entity specifically highlighting the eco-friendly nature of Tezos and the appealing governance structures. This is important because those are two factors that distinctly separate Tezos from Ether.
The ongoing battle here pits Tezos versus Ether and a bunch of Eth copycats that are essentially white labeling Ethereum. Tezos is a distinct Layer 1 protocol completely separate from Eth. We are still not convinced the market truly understands this. A potential bet on Tezos could be viewed as having more potential Alpha and asymmetry. What is more explosive and valuable: another Eth copycat that has some success or a completely separate protocol that sucks away tons of economic value and activity from a competitive Layer 1 protocol?
Speaking of helping and preserving the environment, the huge irony here is that crypto in a general sense could very well end up being very beneficial to the environment. Looking beyond just using volcanoes to mine Bitcoin, there is a huge issue related to excess grid energy and environmentally wasteful scenarios like excess natural gas and energy production. Without getting too far into the weeds - the reality is that organizations can very likely channel excess energy into Bitcoin mining. In other words, they can take environmentally hurtful waste and convert it into cash. Who wouldn't do that when there are options to do so?
So, we have the vast majority of participants trying to out-copycat each other on one hand (Eth chains vis a vis smart contracts, NFTs, DeFi) and the "Bitcoin will boil all the oceans" crowd screaming like Greta on the other hand. In both of these situations there are options that can alleviate the pain and set us down a clear path - but tribalism in most cases gets in the way of progress. What a world we live in now.
Earn Free Bitcoin Playing Games on iPhone