My question is not rhetorical. I really do want to know what the Youngkin adminstration is thinking.

Climate change is a real phenomenon, a process driven by the release of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. Eunice Foote, pioneering American amateur scientists, discovered this in an experiment in the 1850s. So... the three options for addressing the carbon emission problem are: regulations, incentives, and market solutions. Regulations and incentives are anathema to conservatives. So which of the three options does the Youngkin administration, supposedly conservative, choose to destroy? Market solutions, in the form of Virginia participation in RGGI.

Again, I want to know what you are thinking. If you reject the only approach to carbon emissions that SHOULD be acceptable to conservatives, what does that leave? What are you cooking up to replace RGGI in motivating Virginians to reduce carbon emissions? I have a concern that the answer is probably "nothing."