Thanks for the note, and good question.
The specified tax subsidy repeal (which is directed at the fossil fuel industry) would fully fund the policy for the initial 5-year authorization. Funding mechanism will need to be revisited and expanded for future authorizations, as the procurement schedule scales.
More generally - we fully agree that the fossil fuel industry should bear the cost burden of carbon removal. And we view the policy with a "waste management" frame with EPR (extended producer responsibility) - which cost tends ultimately to get passed on to the consumer - so we chose commercial aviation as the least regressive of the "hard-to-abate" emission sources as defined in NY's CLCPA.
As we look at other states it's pretty clear that - in the absence of a carbon tax or takeback obligation (CTBO
), which would be great but a very significant political lift, beyond the scope of our policy proposal - the funding mechanism for the CDRLA will be tactically determined for each jurisdiction.
Hope this answers your question.