I'm always confused why we have expectations of optimality in climate policy when we don't in most other policy domains

Policies can be Pareto improving, and therefore worthy of support, without being Pareto optimal. I would argue this characterized much of the Biden Administration's climate agenda.

No fundamental disagreement, but the primary distinction here is policy cost incidence and instrument efficiency, not supply vs demand.

Seems like a bit of a false dichotomy? If fossil fuel and renewables are substitutes in energy production, carbon taxes will increase supply of green energy. Similarly policies to increase supply of green production without a carbon tax will lower FF prices, increasing demand.

I agree this is poor communication of climate impact estimates, and unfortunately not uncommon. We are almost always estimating climate change effects off of business as usual growth (e.g. GDP, ag yields) but that important nuance is often lost in translation

Great! I passed on your comments. Her first conference talk and definitely a neat paper.