ClimateCoin 2015 by Dennis Peterson
Please find below the
Finalist Evaluation
Judges'' comments
Thank you for participating in the 2015 Climate CoLab Shifting Attitudes & Behavior contest, and for the time you spent in creating and revising your entry.
The Judges have strongly considered your proposal in this second round of evaluation, and have chosen to not advance it as a Finalist for this contest.
We, the Judges and contest Fellows, are truly grateful for your contribution to the Climate CoLab and for your commitment to address climate change.
We encourage you to keep developing your work. Transfer it to the Proposal Workspace to re-open it, make edits, add collaborators, and even submit it into a future contest. You can do so by logging into your account, opening your proposal, selecting the Admin tab, and clicking “Move proposal”.
We hope you will stay involved in the Climate CoLab community. Please support and comment on proposals that have been named Finalists and vote for which proposal you would like to be nominated as the contest’s Popular Choice Winner.
If you have questions, please contact the Climate CoLab staff at admin@climatecolab.org
Keep up the great work. And thank you again for being a part of this mission to harness the world’s collective efforts to develop and share innovative climate change solutions.
2015 Climate CoLab Judges
Additional comments:
-This proposal is novel, but I have deep reservations about the model on which it is built. The proposal is premised on Bitcoin having solved some fundamental social problem, but the nature of that problem was never specified. [My understanding of the problem that it solved was that it enables all manner of illegal transactions on the global marketplace, but perhaps I missed the positive social impacts.] Moreover, the price of Bitcoins was subject to rapid inflation for a short period of time, and has been subject to a nearly equal degree of deflation since. If ClimateCoin were to behave in the same manner, it might be helpful for a short period of time, but would rapidly become problematic.
-I am concerned about Climatecoin's reliance on the Bitcoin model, not because Bitcoin isn't a great idea, but because Bitcoin is complicated to grasp. If Bitcoin's premise were universally appealing and efficacious -- easy to understand and adopt -- then ClimateCoin would be a clear winner. However, Bitcoin is *not* a simple value proposition, understood by the masses. Further complicating Bitcoin's universal adoption is that unlike other disruptive companies (uber, airBNB), Bitcoin requires people to make a fundamental shift on something they care about enormously -- their money. Still, for all the "mystique and challenges facing Bitcoin and the virtual currency business, [it is] ... a radically new, decentralized system for managing the way societies exchange value. It is, quite simply, one of the most powerful innovations in finance in 500 years." (Wall Street Journal; http://www.wsj.com/articles/the-revolutionary-power-of-digital-currency-1422035061)
Perhaps the Climatecoin entrepreneurs can forge a partnership with Bitcoin, or with a Goldman Sachs team focused on virtual currency. A strategic partnership would maximize chances of success and to address some of the executional factors outlined in the proposal, e.g. marketing and PR.
Bitcoin aside, the Climatecoin proposal is compelling, energetic, well developed, and deserves a good shot for success.
-Interesting idea and, while I'm by no means expert in digital currencies or offset markets, it seems worth a try. Because you are dealing with (at least) two markets - one for offsets, and one for Climatecoin - if Climatecoin is successful (i.e., widely used), it would seem that feedbacks between the two could complicate their use further. I am also unclear about if/how offset purchases would be verified and which ones would be accepted means for obtaining Climatecoins. Are the proposers planning on accepting offsets purchased on any market? It is definitely true that not all offsets have equivalent climate benefits (despite claims of offsetting 1 ton of CO2). I would also imagine that there would be a cost associated with verifying offset purchases, but perhaps there is a way to automate that. In any case, despite some reservations and questions, I think this is an interesting experiment.
Semi-Finalist Evaluation
Judges'' ratings
| • | Novelty: | |
| • | Feasibility: | |
| • | Impact: | |
| • | Presentation: |
Judges'' comments
Your proposal has been selected as a Semi-Finalist!
Congratulations! Your proposal, ClimateCoin 2015 in the Shifting Attitudes & Behavior contest, has been selected to advance to the Semi-Finalists round.
You will be able to revise your proposal and add new collaborators if you wish, from July 1st until July 14, 2015 at 23:59pm Eastern Time.
Judges' feedback are posted under the "Evaluation" tab of your proposal. Please incorporate this feedback in your revisions, or your proposal may not be advanced to the Finalists round. We ask you to also summarize the changes that you made in the comment section of the Evaluation tab.
At the revision deadline listed below, your proposal will be locked and considered in final form. The Judges will undergo another round of evaluation to ensure that Semi-Finalist proposals have addressed the feedback given, and select which proposals will continue to the Finalists round. Finalists are eligible for the contest’s Judges Choice award, as well as for public voting to select the contest’s Popular Choice award.
Thank you for your great work and again, congratulations!
2015 Climate CoLab Judges
Judges' Comments-
Your proposal is thoughtfully written with intriguing elements. The judges have some questions about the details of what can you buy with the coins and how can you use them. We suggest you try to articulate your ideas so that even readers without familiarity with Bitcoin can understand your proposal. Rather than having the discussion of technical requirements riddled throughout your proposal, you can consider having one section that focuses on the technical product description in a way that is easy for people to comprehend. Similarly, if security is a main selling point, you can create a distinct section for that rather than having this attribute scattered throughout the proposal. The judges believe that strategic structuring of your proposal can help with elegantly communicating potential for Climatecoins to disrupt the market. You may wish to explain terms like tones CO2 and collective intelligence so that mainstream investors will know what they are.
The judges also like your proposed partnership with Etherum, but would like more clarity on the currently existing and intended relationships between Climatecoin and Etherum (especially since your development plan includes at least two people who understand internal workings of Etherum, and you mention the benefits of helping to popularize Etherum). We suggest you have someone with a mind for marketing to help go over your proposal, to provide better use-case scenarios. Could you sell this to a top GRI/CDP/Ceres corporation (e.g. Uniliver), and get their employees to become early adopters of Climatecoin before releasing to a general consumer audience? The judges appreciate the attitudinal construct: ''It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.' Perhaps the converse is true as well; if it is possible to profit by offsetting carbon, maybe more people will feel that climate change is an important problem to solve. This section would benefit from further elaboration. On the proposed costs, please be more specific and use dollars.
0comments
Share conversation:
Share via:
No comments have been posted.
