See Debatepedia's Global Climate Change Debate Series with the UN Foundation's The People Speak. Press release.

From Debatepedia

This bit in the yes column:

"Subsidizing one or two targeted technologies with a carbon tax would discourage investment in others that may turn out to be more effective. Which technologies should receive these tax dollars? No one has a crystal ball that can determine for sure which will turn out to be most useful. History has shown that the marketplace does a better job of developing new technologies, and a tax takes money out of the marketplace. The solution is cap-and-trade. A cap-and-trade strategy provides the incentive for all segments of the economy to compete to discover the best ways to cut emissions."

Completely misses the point. The subsidy is not the tax. There is no need to spend the tax money on any technology. It is the tax itself, and not where the funds are spent, that creats most of the change. By the same logic, carbon trading would have zero impact because it raises no funds for subsidies.