Very good points about the political and practical difficulty. And you’re right that there would be large incentives to cheat and lean on your auditors. I don’t

Very good points about the political and practical difficulty. And you’re right that there would be large incentives to cheat and lean on your auditors. I don’t have a ready answer for that part of the problem, but I think it’s worth trying to start implementing regardless, because it’s the only proposal I’ve seen that I think has a chance of altering behavior enough to hit our carbon targets - we need to start pricing in these externalities and letting the market adjust toward better solutions. In the beginning, the $/ton would be minor, and would escalate over time, which would give us time to build out the infrastructure and solve other issues before the incentives to cheat got really large. And the foreknowledge of the schedule would allow for investment to anticipate needs. Or perhaps we need to wait a bit longer for the pain to really start being felt broadly, and then we can finally get on with doing what we know we need to do.