[ASalazarMX]

My problem with a carbon tax, and carbon credits, it's that they're displacing the problem, and unless they translate to equivalent carbon capture, the net carbon emissions remain nearly the same.

The goal is reducing carbon emissions, not paying for emitting them. Stricter emission limits, and heavy fines/less subsidies for the biggest offenders would do wonders in this regard.

[adrianN]

I always assumed that people who sequester carbon get negative carbon tax, i.e. a payout. If you increase the carbon price to eventually match the cost of sequestration things should work out to net zero emissions.

[ASalazarMX]

So far these people have not made a dent with their carbon capture. It's awesome if these carbon credits are advancing research on carbon capture, but that's not helping with reducing carbon emissions now, these shouldn't cancel actual emissions.

[adrianN]

So far we don't have a carbon price that is anywhere close to the cost of sequestration, so I'm not surprised that neither a lot of sequestration nor a quick reduction in emissions is going on.