Some horse manure from MIT

If a carbon tax is to be effective, however, it would need to be set much higher than the current rate in many countries, which is based on an implicit price of $30-50 per ton of CO2. And even then, policymakers and climate activists will need to go further. While a tax will encourage firms to seek cleaner energy sources, it is not a sufficiently powerful trigger for the development of alternative low-carbon technologies. As such, carbon taxes should be supplemented with well-designed “green subsidies” to firms and researchers developing wind, solar, and geothermal technologies, and to those working on new ways to limit emissions from existing technologies.

This from  DARON ACEMOGLU.

The error is what government does with the carbon taxes. Mostly the carbon taxes are used to subsidize pensions while efficient users of carbon go to Texas.  The inflation adjustments guarantee the government will always enforce more co2 inefficiency.  And it is the scientists themselves who always want their funding protected in any of these bogus schemes.

Feinstein did all the green transit stuff and inefficient use of CO2 is widespread in underutilized trains. for example.

We are not buying any more horse manure from MIT, we are going to tort court.  We have tried the horse manure from MIT, we tried their bogus 'This time is different', and we already tried their 'build green transit'.  Both were delusional ideas from some politically correct, and incompetent scientists back there. We done with MIT horse manure.

There is a simple proof. If Congress could change the laws as this dim bulb suggest, then their first change would be to support tort cases in CO2 pollution. When I see Congress do that, then their is hope.  Otherwise, scientists all have priors that need carbon subsidies, and that will always come first.