We're on an engineering (among other things) forum, and it's surprising that technological solutions to the global climate problem aren't discussed enough. This statement illustrates another problem - "space" technologists assume that carbon cleaning would take "over a century", while some "carbon-cleaning" technologists assume space-related solutions will take too long. And in this thread there's also an opinion that, since we don't know much about global cooling, we should redouble our efforts elsewhere.
On the other hands, we seem to need all of that. We try political solutions, and they work - too bad so far, even though they do show some progress. We start talking about technological approaches - like, take a billionaire and a tech program, make an analysis (it's a sticky part) and then actually try to do something (aerosols? ocean seeding? pulverized minerals which react with CO2? space shadow? direct carbon capture from atmosphere?). We shouldn't tie our hands to the point of inaction, because inaction is also costly. And yes, we need more traditional approaches too - pressure on politicians, economical means of stick and carrot to get the intended results, green energy approaches - but in addition, not instead, since so far we're badly lagging.