late wrote:You don't want to see...
What I want is to have something that makes sense and it is efficient. The more complicated you make things, the less likely you are to have accountable people that are going to genuinely help fix the problem.
We have a global supply chain. You buy a pair of shoes and the materials and manpower for those shoes as well as transportation for those shoes involve a dozen different countries, companies, and thousands of people that source their energy from many different sources. The idea that you can accurately tax the CO2 emissions of those pair of shoes is preposterous. You are going to end up with arbitrary systems that choose winners/losers based on connections and political interest and not necessarily on merit of the technology.
I like to deal with realities rather than wishes. I wish we had nuclear fusion sorted out and we could make tiny little AA battery sized cold fusion reactors that we could power our flying suits like iron man with tiny little fusion batteries. In reality, we need to deal with what we have. There is no way out of fossil that does not involve expanding nuclear substantially. That is the first step. Teslas and Prius are not going to save the planet, for one, the bloody things emit more CO2 into the atmosphere when being made, a lot more, than regular cars. Yes, at some point during their useful life, they will "break-even", but that assume you have a pretty decent bulk of CO2 neutral energy production in the grid... If you producing most of your electricity from petroleum, gas and coal, electric cars are not going to be energy neutral ever.
Did you know if we replace all coal plants in the US for natural gas, we would roughly reduce our emissions by as much as if we had doubled, or perhaps tripled, all our renewable energy? That is easy, feasible, and cheap. Yet that would likely never happen because of "environmentalists" that are not willing to see reason.
Coal emits almost twice as much CO2 than Natural gas, so just dropping the 10% of energy produced by coal and substituting it by natural gas would almost halve the emissions. What is more interesting, we produce a lot of natural gas via fracking that we just flare (we burn without using it), so it is releasing the emissions ANYWAY without us taking advantage of what would essentially be free fuel. And you might ask... why flare it at all? Well it turns out methane is 30times worse than CO2, so at least releasing the CO2 is actually an advantage. So substituting all coal plants for natural gas in the US is a win, win, win. Instead, we are talking about nebulous taxes. If I am the one that doesn't want to see... you are blind.