Carbon: Greenwash

Carbon markets were meant to channel capital into real climate impact. Instead, they carry a credibility tax. Measurement, Reporting, and Verification (MRV) lives in silos; baselines and leakage are interpreted differently across programs; credits often appear months after the reduction with limited visibility into how that number was derived. Buyers hesitate, discounts creep in, and the accusation sticks: greenwashing.

The mechanics behind the doubt are boring but fatal: late data, uneven methods, and weak linkage from a project’s evidence to the credit a buyer retires. When provenance is reconstructed from PDFs, trust becomes a marketing exercise, not an auditable fact.

EDMA replaces ambiguity with verified lineage. A reduction event enters the chain as canonical evidence (methodology, baseline, sampling plan, sensor/satellite reads), signed at the source by independent roles. A quorum of attestors validates that same evidence hash; if and only if quorum passes, EDMA mints a Carbon Credit NFT (1 NFT = 1 tCO₂) embedding methodology metadata and pointers to the attestations. That credit carries a single, unbroken lineage from evidence → verification → mint. Try to reuse the evidence elsewhere and One-Claim stops it cold.

Retirement is equally clean: when the buyer retires the NFT, EDMA records a final, public state change that links the claim back to the original evidence and verifiers. There’s no “trust us” step—what happened is on-chain, and what didn’t happen can’t be asserted.

Consider a reforestation project that submits monthly satellite biomass updates and audited plots. Under legacy rails, credits might batch six months later with inconsistent leakage assumptions. Under EDMA, each verified ton mints only after the month’s data passes quorum; buyers can sort by method and vintage and retire with confidence that the exact reduction they paid for is the reduction they own.

Last updated