Event - Climate Change, Tokenization, and the Carbon Market Panel

Last week, I had the opportunity to attend the first day of BB Digital Week, the largest innovation and technology event in the Midwest, participating in the panel "Climate Change, Tokenization, and the Carbon Market." I spoke as a tokenization and blockchain specialist from BlockC (https://blockc.com.br/).

In the panel, we discussed technologies that promise to make the market more transparent, honest, and, more valuable. The use of AI, machine learning, georeferencing, and tokenization has the potential to fulfill this promise, yet caution and deep reflection are needed to ensure value is actually delivered.

At the end of the panel and throughout the week, several people suggested that I summarize and share these discussions with the community. It seemed like a good excuse to return to writing, this time on my website, Corp Insider, where I hope to maintain an active blog on crypto, technology, and innovation.

So, let’s get to the main points, with some of the highlights I shared during the panel.

How to ensure value creation through tokenization

Digital assets, whether blockchain-native or derived from tokenization (like RWAs and similar), tend to exhibit high liquidity, traceability, automation (via smart contracts), and low operational costs.

During the panel, we discussed how combining AI with georeferencing can generate data used in theses, typically in a PDD (Project Development Document) for carbon credit projects. By using blockchain, we can also achieve added value through traceability, ensuring data origin and integrity.

Different AI models may yield varying results on the same forest area; therefore, documenting the data acquisition and auditing process becomes an intriguing case for tokenization. It’s not merely about recording the process or the origin of data but capturing different versions of responses these models produce, strengthening the methodology behind the asset creation pre-tokenization.

Opportunities we can create through tokenization of environmental assets

What really adds value to tokenizing an environmental asset? There are various possibilities. We should also consider the business model to identify specific ways to leverage the technology. However, we explored a few concrete opportunities during the panel:

• Better distribution of environmental assets, enabling access for different clients and networks (legacy systems and blockchain networks).
• The possibility of replicating bundles of operations, much like a rollup, for official registries, both international and national, such as Verra and Cetip of B3.
• The use of tokens in smart contract automations, enabling the development of derivatives, structured operations, royalty systems for environmental service payments, and the creation of financial products linked to investment and credit.
• Ease of DvP (Delivery versus Payment) operations using the asset.
• Increased trust through the inclusion of data, evidence, and information that characterize environmental assets in their digital form.

The tokenization of environmental assets can open a range of new possibilities. One practical example we discussed was the project by B3 in partnership with ACX (AirCarbon Exchange) Brazil—of which BlockC is a shareholder—that uses blockchain technology to establish a public registry for carbon projects, including the use of the Brazilian PSA Carbonflor methodology, created by ECCON Soluções Ambientais for Votorantim Reserves.

Essential considerations for carbon tokenization projects

In tokenization projects, the purpose must be questioned before any implementation begins. Are we tokenizing to meet internal demands, perhaps for traceability and process control, or are we aiming to create real and tangible value? The answer to this question can determine the type of legacy the project will leave behind and the risk of generating technical debt along the way. For technologies still building their foundational structures —like blockchain and tokenization — every choice, every commitment, constructs a foundation that can either become an advantage for adaptability or a maze of complexity with future limitations.

One must consider whether the effort to make the implementation “future-proof”—integrated with emerging networks and technologies, whether regulated (CBDCs and DREX are on their way) or in DeFi environments — truly generates long-term value. Interoperability and durability are not virtues in themselves; they must serve a concrete, viable purpose. Perhaps, instead of aiming for a definitive solution from the outset, it would be wiser to design a technical plan that allows for updates and adaptations as the landscape transforms.

And here is a crucial point: tokenization itself does not create rights, nor does it establish ownership in the legal sense. Any initiative that seeks to add value through tokens must clearly link to current legal sources, such as laws and formal contracts, which are as ancient and solid as the very concept of property. A smart contract may automate operations, but the legal foundation still lies within the traditional contract, at least on Brazil.