The best solution I've seen is a "fee and dividend" system, where a carbon fee is collected and the proceeds are rebated in equal amounts to every legal residen

The best solution I've seen is a "fee and dividend" system, where a carbon fee is collected and the proceeds are rebated in equal amounts to every legal resident of the nation. This means that, when gas prices go up, a lower-class person whose carbon footprint is exactly that of the average citizen will be reimbursed for the extra gas money by exactly the right amount. And the tax ends up being not regressive. Compare the carbon footprint of a well-to-do businessman who flies coast-to-coast on a monthly basis with that of a working-class guy who drives ten miles a day and heats his house with oil. The former is greater then the latter by several times. The working-class guy contributes a relatively small share to global warming, but bears an equal share of the public cost induced by the changing climate. Under the fee-and-dividend system, every man reimburses the public for the cost that he is imposing on them through his CO2 emissions, and is reimbursed by everyone else for the cost they impose on him. Because of this I argue that a carbon fee and dividend is the right policy from a social justice perspective, and should be enacted even if it is not going to be sufficient to push us as a society off of fossil fuels. Google "carbon fee and dividend" or see this (http://www.skepticalscience.com/CCL-pushing-for-US-fee-and-dividend.html http://www.skepticalscience.com/CCL-pushing-for-US-fee-and-d...) for more.