The policy goals are better served by being aligned with market forces.
A carbon tax which is fully refunded can be larger without causing economic damage, because it nets to zero for the average customer.
Meanwhile you eliminate the overhead and corruption opportunity on the decarbonization side. If you have a meaningful carbon tax, the incentive to decarbonize exists in proportion to the size of the tax, but people can do it however is most efficient rather than according to the way specified by the companies with the best lobbyists.
I might be if you have lots of exceptions and exemptions to the tax, but you should set it up as a tax of $$/ton of CO2 emitted (with credits for sequestration). You can change the tax rate but you don't have all of these piece meal subsidies and tax credits (wind, solar, electric cars, plug in hybrids, etc.) that can extract donations from various industries to get their specific business subsidized. Pay a small campaign donation for a huge payoff, ie. corruption.
A carbon tax which is fully refunded can be larger without causing economic damage, because it nets to zero for the average customer.
Meanwhile you eliminate the overhead and corruption opportunity on the decarbonization side. If you have a meaningful carbon tax, the incentive to decarbonize exists in proportion to the size of the tax, but people can do it however is most efficient rather than according to the way specified by the companies with the best lobbyists.