You can just plant trees to capture carbon. But of course, the ~400ppm carbon in the atmosphere is still far below natural levels that have occurred in history

You can just plant trees to capture carbon. But of course, the ~400ppm carbon in the atmosphere is still far below natural levels that have occurred in history (as high as 7000 ppm). I'm not even convinced that removing carbon using heavy machinery is a good idea, as it would presumably reverse the fertilization effect of CO2: https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2016/carbon-dioxide-fertilization-greening-earth https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2016/carbon-dioxide-fer... Nuclear is promising for other reasons, namely that it's a virtually infinite source of energy with no downsides if we can master a technique for producing it without meltdown risk.