Other points aside, the last point this article makes is a good one: a carbon tax would be a far more effective way to create a more efficient transportation sy

Other points aside, the last point this article makes is a good one: a carbon tax would be a far more effective way to create a more efficient transportation system (and broader economy), than attempting to pick the winner from the start. It's sort of the "I, Pencil" problem - the interactions in the economy are far too complex to manage in a centralized manner. In this case, we have individuals attempting to predict the winner based on very limited information and applying a subsidy, which may or may not be anything more than arbitrary. The alternative is to have all the millions of decision-makers be informed and influenced by price differences emanating from the pollutants themselves, motivating them to seek more efficient solutions. The effects are far more wide-ranging and actors are guaranteed to be rewarded in proportion to their benefit to the environment. The same holds for other subsidies: for solar, for weatherizing homes &c. It's a shame our current advocacy & media landscape leaves little room for someone like me who supports a carbon tax but not cap & trade or direct subsidies. Here's to hoping http://votereports.org/ http://votereports.org/, or something like it, gets us there. Actually, I just emailed http://www.carbontax.org/ http://www.carbontax.org/, hopefully I can get them in the system in time for the election.