I suppose I should really read the book. But I am suspicious. To me having a carbon tax emphatically does not mean embracing some "capitalism solves all problem

I suppose I should really read the book. But I am suspicious. To me having a carbon tax emphatically does not mean embracing some "capitalism solves all problems" ideology. Direct intervention is still needed, but direct intervention works best in conjunction with carbon taxes. You don't want the market trying to "route around" your direct intervention because there is no incentive to play ball. See https://rooseveltinstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/RI_GND_policy-brief-carbon-CD.pdf https://rooseveltinstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/RI... for more of that. If anything, it's actually this sort of nuclear subsidy that could be too hands off --- if it's like a 1990s throw money at ISPs for fibre with no strings attached tpye thing. I would say Carbon tax and nationalize the nukes.