From a reader:

If there were one institution that should stand athwart yelling stop, it damn well should be National Review.

Just because we use twisty light bulbs? I would argue strongly that conservatives should not oppose the use of energy-efficient light bulbs — as long as it is a free choice. Congress had no business telling us what sort of light bulbs to use. But if these light bulbs last longer and save money on utility bills, I’m totally in favor.

Personally, I am an accidental environmentalist simply based on my own use of energy. But as I note in the linked piece, any serious look at carbon outputs demonstrates that the government mandates involved are absurd. We’ll never change personal output unless we ban air travel. Nothing currently proposed would do anything about global warming anyway, even if it is a real threat.

At times — and not just after a few drinks — I’ve thought about what would happen if we scrap the income tax and go to an energy consumption tax. It would look a lot like the Fair Tax, with a pre-bate for basic levels of household energy usage. “The Green Fair Tax.” You’d pay all of your taxes at the pump and on your utility bill.

The benefits? Big energy users like Al Gore would pay tons in taxes, and normal people would pay very little. It would not distort markets as badly as our current tax code (almost nothing could). It would also be superior to a cap n’ trade system designed solely to benefit large corporations. The possibility is tempting because it could bring a lot of support from the Left as well.

Perhaps just a pipe-dream — but no harm in dreaming.