This. Anything else requires energy input (and thus carbon emissions in the current situation), whereas plants are carbon-negative from the get-go, require no e

This. Anything else requires energy input (and thus carbon emissions in the current situation), whereas plants are carbon-negative from the get-go, require no effort, and just work right now (no tech to wait for, just a few more years...). Yes, plants eventually decompose and release the carbon, but every new plant buys us 10-100-1000 years until we have to deal with that carbon. The biggest problem now is finding land to reclaim with forest and preventing existing forest from being cut down (as pointed out in other comments, the mature trees store more carbon per area than new trees). In the end, our forests are competing against our agriculture and food supply (and growing population). Just like energy efficiency (home insulation and sealing) is the low hanging fruit of energy conservation, reducing the consumption and production of low-land-efficiency foods like meat is the easiest way to reduce agricultural footprint and make more available to carbon-sequestering trees.