<p>Some people argue that carbon pricing is problematic because it turns nature into a commodity. This can lead to two pro tanto arguments in favour of command-and-control regulation. The first argument is that if nature is turned into a commodity, people will consume it as long as they are willing to pay for it, which risks undermining individual responsibility for climate change. The second argument is that if nature is turned into a commodity, its market price may not reflect its true value. In this article, I defend two claims. Firstly, although the “moral licensing” objection to carbon pricing is valid in theory, it is of little practical relevance as long as the financial incentive of the carbon price remains effective. Secondly, in order to evaluate the “nature valuation” objection to carbon pricing, we must consider the value judgements underpinning the two main approaches to carbon pricing, rather than focusing on the market mechanism involved.</p>