The problem is that the cost of environment degradation is only an economic externality to the fossil fuel producers and distributors. That means the poor are

The problem is that the cost of environment degradation is only an economic externality to the fossil fuel producers and distributors. That means the poor are already paying for remediation. Moving the tax burden on to the producers is a zero-sum game: the cost of environmental remediation is still bourne by the consumer, but shifting the payments towards the source of the degradation is a governance policy that can shift the equilibrium of the system towards a more sustainable model. It's a reasonable position and one of the options before those we have chosen to lead us. Then again, the argument "but muh munny" is a strong counterargument among those who own them.