While overall this seems reasonable there is still the question of how the government proportions the money that it gives back? Does everyone get x/population dollars back? Is it based on how much people paid in taxes for dirty energy (which I think negates all benefits)? Does it get redistributed proportionate to income? Or inversely proportionate to income? In all cases you are going to have people complaining about it being unfair (for some definition of unfair).
The other issue is that unless all countries do the same it will just drive energy consumption from places which charge these tax-like-things to places that don't charge these tax like things. From a global CO2 level perspective it doesn't matter where it comes from, its all equally bad. (Generic pollution isn't as global, but it does have a non-trivial global component.)
Taxes should be about raising revenue. They should NOT be a mechanism for societal engineering because the people writing tax laws are simply not smart enough.
The only solution that I see is to 1) identify the carbon/pollution cost of a product, 2) charge a tax/fee for that amount when the product is sold, 3) uses the revenue to clean up pollution or capture carbon. Were we to start small (i.e. the fee charged represented the cost to clean up a fraction of a percent of the environmental cost) and slowly ramp up from there, we might be able to slowly disincentive pollution instead of just off shoring it.