[sokoloff]

> if we take that view the only permanent solution [is] to capture the CO2 and stuff it back into the ground

I think that's basically correct on the scale that's needed. I don't even think turning trees into building materials is enough.

Planting a lot of trees and letting forests grow has the advantage that it's obviously possible with current tech, while the forest is expanding in mass that CO2 is being scrubbed, and it's conspicuously visible to people (garnering feelings of goodwill and participation), but I don't believe the relatively small amount of incremental forest that we could reasonably create will make a meaningful change on a 100-year basis.