> being defeated) traded away most of the carbon price. And then just
> reinforced that price was the thing to focus on as common sense. I
> feel like I'm wading through quicksand where 90% of the people who
> care about global warming and have spent some time thinking about it
> but are not experts end up focusing on putting a price on carbon
> either by means of a carbon tax or through some sort of permit system
> (cap-and-trade, cap-and-dividend, or other variations). A carbon
> price has become the "common sense" of how to deal with the climate
> crisis. Everything else is sort of secondary, or nice or unimportant.
> Emphasizing a carbon tax, without mentioning public investment and or
> "command and control" (I hate that phrase) regulation reinforces that
> problem.
That's kind of a national ideology problem, isn't it? Anybody defending subsidies for renewables is put in the position of defending them, because subsidies are a bad word, and everybody knows that.
-- Andy