Plant a ton of trees and the CO2 problem solves by itself.
The problem stems also from the huge deforestation that has taken place in the last couple of centuries.
This has to do with a study about the measurement of the impact deforestation of tropical forests has on global warming.
> How big is three billion tons?
Three billion tons of anything is a lot, but it’s hard to grasp just how much — particularly when it’s tons of CO2, which we don’t have any everyday experience in weighing.
One way to look at it is that the average U.S. car emits about 5 tons of CO2 a year from the tailpipe, so three billion tons is the equivalent of 600 million cars — about twice as many as there are in the whole United States.
Another way of expressing it is that this is the equivalent of about 13 million railcars full of coal, which would stretch about 125,000 miles (half the distance to the moon).
It's also equal to the total emissions from Western Europe, including Austria, the Czech Republic, Slovenia, all the Scandinavian countries, and Finland.
Plantation forestry grows about 20 cubic meters per hectare-year [0]. Doug Fir weighs ~600 kg-m3 [1]. 3B US tons / (20x600 kg) per hectare-year = 6,796,166 hectares. Plantation lumber is harvested in 7, 14, and 21 year cuts [0], so to ensure you're always sequestering enough carbon you need 21x6.8 million hectares of new forest to defray the current CO2 production... which is about 551,000 square miles, which is approximately [2] Texas + California + New Mexico... or [3] France + Spain + Italy.
The new forest would still be ~20% of the size of the Amazon rain-forest though [4].
Citation? Obviously we're emitting CO2 at some rate E and a ton of trees will sequester that CO2 at another rate S.
But it's not clear that you've measured and compared those two numbers.