No no, emissions need to be cut - for real. There need to be schedules and (tax-based) funding to help make this happen. And - an expropriation of intellectual property so that technologies developed to help this happen aren't controlled by any single company or cartel - or nation.
You make a good point about the intellectual property, though. The system will still work without such precautions, though - eventually if polluting became expensive enough, relevant technology would be licensed.
Are you confusing fee& dividend with cap&trade?
If you accept that we need to lower carbon emissions then that means we will need to stop doing some things. Yes some people will be worse off, others better off. Given that change is coming anyway we might as well be on top of it rather than dragged along screaming and kicking.
Why would I pay more taxes just to have them come back to me? No. Just no!
My second link is a plan to avoid this free-rider problem
And think about it: if I fly across the country on a private jet, or heat my mansion to 80 degrees throughout the new England winter, or build a million cars to sell overseas, I am doing harm to you and your loved ones. I should reimburse you. And that's exactly what this policy is.
The industries where it's easy will take the easy way to avoid the carbon fee.
The industries where it's hard will pay the fee but will see the ratchet coming and will be furiously researching alternatives. Worse come to worse, at some point the fee will be more than sequestration costs so they'll take that option.
I don't have to talk about any specific industry like steel because there is always sequestration as a backstop.
edit: of course my plan only works because there are lots of people like the companies Bill Gates linked to working on the details.
1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_fee_and_dividend 2: https://issues.org/climate-clubs-to-overcome-free-riding/