These type of solutions seem like the only reasonable ones to address climate change. Goals of cutting carbon emissions often tend to be misaligned with other activities that would be hard to stop en masse, such as everyone still driving a fossil fuel emitting vehicle, farms using fertilizer to grow their crops or individuals who want to use their AC because they're hot.

Sure it'd be great if we find alternatives to a majority of things that contribute to carbon emissions, but then there's the difficulty of getting everyone to use these alternatives across the board (along with the messy politics of it) and if you succeed at that, you'll still have to deal with other countries who aren't going to change their habits. It's essentially a global game of whack-a-mole. And it needs to happen soon. Some scientists claim we're already beyond the ability to reverse climate change by eliminating these activities.

Given what we're up against, it seems far more reasonable to explore ways of negating our emissions, terraforming the planet or trying to find a way to live on a far less hospital earth. I'm all for continuing our march towards a globally smaller carbon footprint, but it should be done concurrently while we try to address the sobering possibility that it might not be enough.