I can't help but to think that it will solve the problem by putting pressure on its source, aka Humans.
But in the grand scheme of things, we can't rely on such a mechanism, because the consequences are not proportional to the causal actions.
As an example, ask yourself this: what proportion of people would be ready to, say, pay twice as much for electricity if it meant that 1 million people/year less would die in some African country?
But they are the primary source of the net emissions or, in other words, the increase of CO2 levels.
It's a bit like if your neighbor produces just enough grain for a year's worth of food for his family of 10 and you steal just enough for yourself. Technically, you aren't the primary source of the decrease in food, but you are the primary (and only) source of the fact that your neighbor's food supply are lower than needed.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OWXoRSIxyIU
http://whatsyourimpact.org/greenhouse-gases/carbon-dioxide-e...
https://www.skepticalscience.com/human-co2-smaller-than-natu...
https://www.netl.doe.gov/research/coal/carbon-storage/carbon...