The carbon economy really post-dates the Adam Smith and the Steam Engine, ca 1776-1781, respectively. The article is quite interesting, but the ending is simply a predictable rant against climate change/global warming. Which is not really interesting. The more interesting direction would have been a social critique of hedonic adaptation, social competition, the red-queen effect, and the similar incentive issues both within and adjacent to market economics (which recognizes wealth becomes a proxy for mate selection; and the hierarchical nature of society force-ranks all contestants playing the game).