The difference is that thermodynamic analysis of solar panels, even before building them or improving them, tells us that it is a winning bet. We can't say the

The difference is that thermodynamic analysis of solar panels, even before building them or improving them, tells us that it is a winning bet. We can't say the same for carbon capture. It's a thermodynamically losing bet. The humongous amount of entropy we will have to generate to offset any significant part of current emissions via carbon capture (let alone already emitted CO2) basically tells us that carbon capture can only be used in exceptional circumstances where there are no feasible methods of reducing emissions. If there are, then the winning method is to not emit in the first place.