If true, is this good or bad? Do we want more hydrocarbons, or less? How can we take advantage of this find without adding more co2? Might we be better off if oil goes to $200/b, with the resulting recession and reduction in use, plus the faster switch to wind, nukes, and hopefully someday solar?
There is little chance of new carbon taxes, either alone or as a substitute for other taxes, being passed in this era of relatively high prices anywhere on the planet - politicians are still subsidizing oil/ng throughout asia and elsewhere, here they talk of lowering the taxes. It seems the best hope is for very high prices in the near term, which will only come with a change in the current supply/demand balance.
TOD readers worry separately about the coming hydrocarbon shortage and global warming, kind of like a brain partition. One is a partial solution for the other, so the sooner we have the economic incentive to switch from hydrocarbons to other solutions, any and all other solutions, the better. Every increase in price should be celebrated.
I think our positions match on 100% here. From purely technical perspective PO is solvable - we have vast amounts of nuclear, wind, solar, hydro energy... But climate change is presenting unprecedented risks for the future, and we don't really have anything to tackle it with.