I mean I guess carbon capture could be an option but it's probably bottom of the list in terms of effective things to use the subsidies for. Primarily I'd imagine it going to cost offsetting the transition to greener alternatives for things like natural gas energy as I already mentioned. The point in doing it that way is to get a greater reduction in emissions, that it's a less aggressive approach is just a bonus.

> you need to focus on that anyway if you put a tax on their behavior

Definitely don't set the focus to 0 but the bigger focus is reducing overall emissions not whether an individual thing crosses some personal threshold for creating too many emissions.