>I think one of the reasons is that it is a market-based solution that allows companies to pollute as long as they are willing to pay for it. Many progressives prefer an approach of behaviour and lifestyle modifications.

I don't see how that hypothesis is compatible with regarding climate change as an existential threat.

I mean, maybe it is potentially the end of the world for practical purposes, and maybe it isn't.

But if it is, then concentrating on behavior modifications that are appealing to impose independently of CO2 levels seems like an expression of either a desire for human extinction or of a disbelief in the problem.