Related Questions

Blockchain Firm Sets Sights on $200 Million Water Tokenization Push Across Asia

A growing intersection between blockchain innovation and real-world infrastructure is taking shape in Southeast Asia, as a blockchain infrastructure company prepares to bring water assets on-chain in a deal that could redefine how essential resources are financed in emerging markets.

Global Settlement Network, a firm specializing in blockchain-based settlement infrastructure, has unveiled plans to tokenize water treatment facilities in Indonesia, with ambitions that extend far beyond a single pilot. The initiative signals a broader shift toward using blockchain technology to unlock capital for large-scale public infrastructure projects that have traditionally struggled to attract investment.

Turning Water Infrastructure Into Digital Assets

The project begins in Jakarta, where multiple government-linked water treatment sites are being prepared for tokenization. By converting physical infrastructure into blockchain-based assets, the initiative aims to make water projects investable at a global scale, opening the door to a new class of investors who may otherwise have limited access to such opportunities.

The initial phase is designed to mobilize tens of millions of dollars to modernize aging facilities, improve treatment efficiency and expand access to clean water across densely populated areas. These digital representations of infrastructure assets will allow capital to move faster and with greater transparency compared to traditional funding routes.

Tokenization, in this context, does not merely represent ownership. It introduces programmable settlement, real-time auditing and enhanced liquidity, features that could dramatically lower barriers to infrastructure investment across developing economies.

Stablecoins and Local Currency Settlement Trials

An important component of the rollout involves testing blockchain-based settlement using local-currency stablecoins. The project partners plan to experiment with controlled payment corridors that allow transactions to settle efficiently while maintaining regulatory oversight.

By integrating rupiah-pegged stablecoins into the settlement layer, the initiative aims to reduce friction in cross-border financing and demonstrate how blockchain rails can coexist with local financial systems. Once validated, the model could expand to additional currency corridors across Southeast Asia.

This approach reflects a growing recognition that blockchain adoption in emerging markets often succeeds when it aligns closely with local monetary frameworks rather than attempting to bypass them.

Scaling Toward a $200 Million Regional Vision

While Jakarta serves as the testing ground, the long-term objective is significantly larger. Following the pilot, the firms involved intend to expand the model across multiple Southeast Asian countries, with a cumulative target of approximately $200 million in tokenized water-related assets.

Infrastructure specialists involved in the project argue that Southeast Asia is uniquely positioned for such innovation due to its rapid urbanization, increasing demand for clean water and openness to digital financial solutions. If successful, the model could be replicated across other forms of infrastructure, including energy, transport and waste management.

Closing the Infrastructure Funding Gap

Across Southeast Asia, water infrastructure faces a mounting financing challenge. Population growth, climate pressures and urban expansion are driving demand far faster than public budgets can accommodate. Industry estimates suggest trillions of dollars in long-term investment will be required over the coming decades to prevent severe water shortages and system failures.

Tokenization offers an alternative pathway by connecting global capital directly with real-world needs. By fractionalizing large infrastructure projects into blockchain-based assets, funding can be sourced from a wider pool of investors while maintaining accountability through on-chain transparency.

Executives involved in the initiative believe this structure could help bridge long-standing funding gaps, particularly in markets where foreign investment has been limited by regulatory complexity or currency risk.

Real-World Assets Poised for a Breakout Year

The water tokenization project arrives at a time when interest in real-world asset tokenization is accelerating across the crypto industry. Market observers expect this sector to expand sharply in 2026, driven by use cases that extend beyond traditional crypto-native audiences.

Tokenized assets tied to tangible value such as infrastructure, commodities and real estate are increasingly viewed as a way to bring stability and utility to blockchain markets. With billions of dollars in real-world assets already represented on-chain, the sector is moving from experimentation toward institutional-scale deployment.

Emerging economies, in particular, are seen as fertile ground for this growth, as they seek innovative ways to attract capital without over-reliance on conventional financing mechanisms.

Southeast Asia’s Crypto Momentum Adds Fuel

Southeast Asia is already one of the most active regions for blockchain adoption, with Indonesia standing out as a major hub for on-chain activity. Rapid growth in digital asset usage, combined with a young, tech-savvy population, has created an environment where blockchain-based infrastructure solutions are gaining traction.

This existing momentum may prove crucial to the success of large-scale tokenization projects. As governments, investors and technology providers become more familiar with blockchain applications, initiatives like tokenized water infrastructure could move from niche experiments to mainstream financial tools.

A Blueprint for Blockchain-Powered Infrastructure

If the Jakarta pilot delivers on its promises, it could serve as a blueprint for how blockchain technology can support essential public services at scale. Beyond financial returns, proponents argue that tokenization can introduce greater transparency, efficiency and accountability into infrastructure development.

As blockchain continues to evolve beyond speculative use cases, projects that address real-world challenges such as water access may define the next phase of adoption. For Southeast Asia, the tokenization of water infrastructure could mark the beginning of a broader transformation in how vital resources are funded and managed in the digital age.

Crypto Market Structure Rules Could Take Years to Materialize, Paradigm Executive Warns

The long-awaited push to regulate the crypto industry in the United States may be closer to becoming law, but its real-world impact could still be years away. According to a senior executive at crypto investment firm Paradigm, even if Congress passes the current market structure bill, the path from legislation to full implementation will be slow, complex, and drawn out.

Justin Slaughter, Paradigm’s vice president of regulatory affairs, says the industry should not expect immediate clarity once the bill is signed. Instead, the rulemaking phase that follows could stretch across multiple presidential administrations, delaying meaningful regulatory certainty well into the future.

From Legislation to Reality: Why Rulemaking Takes So Long

Passing a bill is only the first step in shaping how markets operate. Once lawmakers approve legislation, the responsibility shifts to regulatory agencies, which must translate broad legal language into detailed, enforceable rules. This process, known as rulemaking, often involves drafting proposed regulations, publishing them for public review, collecting feedback from stakeholders, and issuing final versions with legal force.

Slaughter emphasized that the current crypto market structure proposal is unusually complex. He noted that the bill requires dozens of separate rulemakings across multiple agencies, each with its own timelines, priorities, and political pressures. In total, the legislation mandates approximately 45 individual rulemaking processes, a scale that virtually guarantees years of regulatory work.

Even a Signed Bill Won’t Mean Immediate Clarity

The market structure bill has already advanced through important stages in Congress, including movement toward Senate committee markups. Bipartisan negotiations are ongoing, and the legislation is gradually gaining momentum. However, Slaughter cautions that even an ideal scenario—where both chambers of Congress pass the bill and the president signs it—would not lead to fast results.

In his view, the full implementation of the rules could take nearly two presidential terms to complete. That means exchanges, developers, and investors may continue operating in a partially defined regulatory environment for much longer than many in the industry expect.

Lessons From History: The Dodd-Frank Comparison

To illustrate his point, Slaughter pointed to a familiar precedent in U.S. financial regulation. The Dodd-Frank Act, passed in 2010 following the global financial crisis, aimed to overhaul the financial system and reduce systemic risk. While the law itself was enacted swiftly, many of its key rules took years to finalize.

Some Dodd-Frank provisions were not fully implemented until three to eight years after the law passed, and certain elements are still debated today. Slaughter argues that crypto regulation could follow a similar trajectory, especially given the novelty of digital assets and the overlapping jurisdictions of U.S. regulators.

The Bill Still Faces Political Risk

Before any rulemaking can begin, the legislation must first survive the political process. Slaughter acknowledged that even strong bills often stall, collapse, or get rewritten multiple times before finally becoming law. He noted that it is common for major legislation to  die  more than once during negotiations before eventually crossing the finish line.

Upcoming Senate hearings and markups will be critical moments for the bill’s future. Whether bipartisan cooperation holds or breaks down could determine how quickly—or slowly—the legislation progresses.

What This Means for the Crypto Industry

For an industry that has repeatedly called for clear and consistent regulation, the message is sobering. While progress is being made in Washington, regulatory certainty is unlikely to arrive overnight. Crypto companies may need to continue navigating ambiguity, compliance risks, and shifting enforcement priorities for several more years.

Still, Slaughter remains cautiously optimistic. Despite the long timelines and political uncertainty, he believes the process is moving in the right direction. For now, patience may be the most valuable asset the crypto industry can hold as it waits for the regulatory framework to fully take shape.

US Senate Delays Crypto Market Structure Bill as Bipartisan Talks Continue

The push to bring regulatory clarity to the US crypto market has hit another temporary pause. Lawmakers on the US Senate Agriculture Committee have decided to delay the markup of the highly anticipated crypto market structure bill, pushing the process to the final week of January as negotiations continue behind the scenes.

The decision reflects ongoing efforts to secure broader bipartisan backing for legislation that could fundamentally reshape how digital assets are regulated in the United States.

Why the Senate Agriculture Committee Hit Pause

Senate Agriculture Committee Chairman John Boozman confirmed that the committee needs additional time to finalize unresolved details and bring more lawmakers on board. While progress has been made, Boozman emphasized that moving forward without sufficient bipartisan support could weaken the bill’s long-term viability.

According to Boozman, discussions have been constructive, and lawmakers are actively working toward consensus. However, the complexity of crypto regulation, combined with political sensitivities, has made it clear that rushing the markup could be counterproductive.

The committee now plans to mark up the legislation during the last week of January, giving negotiators a narrow window to bridge remaining gaps.

What This Crypto Bill Is Trying to Achieve

At the center of the debate is the question of who regulates what in the crypto industry. The bill aims to clearly define the roles of the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, two agencies that have long overlapped in their oversight of digital assets.

For years, crypto companies and investors have operated in a regulatory gray zone, often facing enforcement actions without clear guidance. This legislation is expected to establish firm boundaries, offering long-awaited certainty for exchanges, developers, and institutional investors alike.

Because the Senate Agriculture Committee oversees the CFTC, its involvement is critical to shaping how commodities-like digital assets are regulated going forward.

Senate vs House: Different Paths to Crypto Regulation

The Senate bill is not the same as the House’s CLARITY Act, which passed in July. Due to procedural rules, the Senate must advance its own version, even though both bills aim to address similar regulatory challenges.

Originally, the Agriculture Committee planned to align its markup with the Senate Banking Committee, which oversees the SEC. While the Banking Committee is still expected to proceed, the Agriculture Committee’s delay introduces uncertainty into the timeline for unified Senate action.

This divergence highlights the difficulty of coordinating crypto legislation across committees with different priorities and regulatory philosophies.

Stablecoin Yields and Ethics Rules Take Center Stage

One of the most contentious areas in ongoing negotiations involves stablecoins and ethics provisions. Lawmakers and lobbyists are pushing for changes that would ban all stablecoin yield payments, extending restrictions beyond issuers to include third-party platforms such as crypto exchanges.

This push follows the GENIUS Act, which already prohibited stablecoin issuers from offering yields. Traditional banking lobbyists argue that allowing exchanges to provide yields creates unfair competition and regulatory loopholes.

At the same time, several Democratic senators are pressing for stronger ethics rules. These proposals include conflict-of-interest provisions designed to prevent public officials from profiting from ties to crypto companies, with some language explicitly covering the president and senior government officials.

Industry Pushback and Developer Protections

Crypto advocacy groups and major industry players are actively lobbying to protect software developers and non-custodial platforms. Their concern is that overly broad definitions could classify developers as financial intermediaries, subjecting them to compliance requirements designed for banks and brokers.

The industry argues that such a move would stifle innovation, push development offshore, and undermine the decentralized nature of blockchain technology. Ensuring that open-source developers are excluded from intermediary classifications remains a key demand from the crypto sector.

Political Risks and the Midterm Election Factor

Despite the momentum surrounding crypto regulation, political reality looms large. Investment bank TD Cowen recently warned that upcoming US midterm elections could significantly reduce the support needed to pass the bill.

If control of Congress shifts or political priorities change, the legislation could be delayed for years. TD Cowen suggested that the bill is more likely to pass in 2027, with full implementation potentially not arriving until 2029.

This timeline underscores why the crypto industry is watching January’s markup so closely. For many stakeholders, it may represent one of the last realistic windows for meaningful reform in the near term.

What Comes Next for US Crypto Regulation

While the delay may disappoint market participants eager for clarity, it also signals that lawmakers are taking the process seriously. A bill passed with strong bipartisan support is far more likely to survive political shifts and legal challenges.

As the final week of January approaches, attention will remain firmly fixed on Capitol Hill. Whether lawmakers can reconcile competing interests and deliver a comprehensive framework may determine the future of crypto innovation in the United States.

In the cryptocurrency market, "volume" is the most cited metric after price. When Bitcoin rallies, analysts immediately ask, "Was there volume behind the move?"

But in crypto, the word "volume" can refer to two completely different things. Unlike the stock market, where all trades settle through a central clearinghouse, crypto activity is split between centralized exchanges and the blockchain itself.

To truly understand market sentiment, you must distinguish between Trading Volume and On-Chain Volume. Confusing the two can lead to a disastrous misreading of the market.

What is Trading Volume? (The Speculative Engine)

Trading volume (or Exchange Volume) refers to the total amount of an asset bought and sold on exchanges like BYDFi.

Crucially, the vast majority of this activity happens off-chain. When you buy Bitcoin on a centralized exchange Spot market, no transaction occurs on the Bitcoin blockchain. Instead, the exchange simply updates its internal database, debiting the seller and crediting the buyer.

• What it measures: Speculation, liquidity, and short-term interest.
• The Pro: It is fast and cheap.
• The Con: It can be manipulated. "Wash trading" (where a trader buys and sells to themselves to inflate numbers) is easier to hide in exchange volume figures than on the blockchain.

What is On-Chain Volume? (The Truth Layer)

On-chain volume refers to transactions that are validated and recorded on the blockchain ledger. This happens when a user withdraws funds from an exchange to a cold wallet, pays for a service, or interacts with a DeFi protocol.

Because every transaction incurs a network fee (gas), on-chain volume is rarely fake. It costs too much money to spam the network with high-value transactions just to create an illusion.

• What it measures: Economic utility, adoption, and "Whale" movements.
• The Signal: If price is dropping, but on-chain volume is spiking, it might indicate that big players are accumulating assets and moving them to cold storage (a bullish signal), rather than selling them.

The NVT Ratio: Valuing the Network

Sophisticated traders combine price and on-chain volume to determine if a coin is overvalued. This is known as the Network Value to Transactions (NVT) Ratio.

Think of it as the P/E (Price to Earnings) ratio of crypto.

• High NVT: The network value (Market Cap) is high, but the on-chain volume is low. This suggests the price is driven purely by speculation (bubble territory).
• Low NVT: The market cap is low relative to the massive amount of value moving through the network. This suggests the asset is undervalued.

Why You Need Both

Relying on just one metric gives you a blind spot.

• If you only look at Trading Volume, you might be fooled by a wash-trading bot on a low-cap altcoin.
• If you only look at On-Chain Volume, you will miss the massive price-moving events that happen on derivatives exchanges, where billions of dollars in volume can liquidate positions without a single satoshi moving on-chain.

Conclusion

To act like a professional analyst, you need to synthesize both data points. Use Trading Volume to gauge short-term price action and liquidity. Use On-Chain Volume to confirm the long-term health and adoption of the network.

When the two align—high speculation matched by high utility—that is when the sustainable bull runs happen.