You should tax what you want to prevent in the way that harms the least things you want to continue. So for instance if you can show that car co2 use more dras

You should tax what you want to prevent in the way that harms the least things you want to continue. So for instance if you can show that car co2 use more drastically helps the most vulnerable amongst us while air co2 is largely a subsidy to rockstars then you can compellingly argue taxing air travel more on a per co2 basis is fine. Note: I don’t know enough to have an opinion.