Yes, I think it is a good idea.
The problem with the environmental impact of our ways of life is that the bill will be served later and will be served to others. For that reason, our traditional free market systems do not work very well in looking after the environment.
There is a well known tragedy for common property in a capitalistic, free market system: there is no one looking after its interest. I feel that’s one of the primary reasons we (should) have governments for. It is their job to guarantee freedom and security to everyone and to look after the interests of those that cannot fend for themselves. For instance those that have no economical power, are not born yet, or are just not part of the system.
Our governments are responsible for the way we treat our environments, since we all are and there is no effective natural stimulus to take care of it. The government can do two things; tax and stimulate. It should do what is most effective. Likely both.
For all those that are skeptical of ‘global heating’ and same, there should also just be the realization that we are running out of resources. Not just oil, but also out of other raw material, such as coltran, lithium, etceteras. On top: even if the chance of the majority of our scholars and scientists being right would be very small, say 3%, we should err on the side of caution, given the enormous potential impact on our future generations.
With reference to China: it is having its own issues. It is polluting itself at an enormous rate, while running out of fresh water and arable soil. It is doing that while producing goods, to a large extent for foreign owned corporations, of which most profits do not end in China, but, for instance, in the US, Hong Kong or Singapore.
It is not about saving the planet, it is about saving our way of life and that of our future children.