> elect someone who stops the progress but then > doesn't require the cooperation of the public, except for funding carbon capture require just as much coop

> elect someone who stops the progress but then > doesn't require the cooperation of the public, except for funding carbon capture require just as much cooperation. Just of a different form. There's no way around it, since the work to do capture does not directly produce a private benefit. You'd have to regulate it to make it work, for example, force a penalty for emitters that cost more than the capture. This means you will already need to elect someone to propose and pass the legislation. In which case, those who would end up having to pay will simply elect the opposition.