Unfortunately, the Libertarian Party (capital L) does not fully embrace this line of thinking in their official platform. However, it's a logical interpretation of their base philosophy to which I subscribe, and many of the millennial libertarians I know have more progressive interpretations that address externalities.

From the perspective of a consequential (results-driven) libertarian rather than deontological (morally-driven), it's arguable.

A libertarian generally opposes government involvement because it creates inefficient pricing errors in the economy, such as subsidies. The argument for a carbon tax is that, for those who believe in climate change, it will actually minimize the current pricing error by taking into account the externalities that the carbon will create.

The only question is then what the tax should be priced at, and by whom, in order to accurately reflect the damage.

No true Scotsman fallacy

Libertarian is not the same thing as AnacroCapitalist.

A Randian objectivist is also not the same thing as a Libertarian.