if you think industrialized society should give up oil without alternatives then you should be honest and say that you believe we that the industrial revolution was a mistake and that we should by-and-large go back to an agrarian society where most people subsistence farm.
you can have that belief, that everyone should give up what oil gives us and live in a pre-modern way that most people would, today, consider poverty, because the alternative is (I assume you believe) extinction.
A few years ago an oil selling dictator, used his oil money to attack and occupy my friends country, killed my friend, and forced all the population to flee without ability to take anything with them.
So if you think that i like the situation where everyone supports dictatorships like Azerbaijan by buying their oil, you are very wrong.
But what we want and what is going to happen is often very different. Cutting fossil fuel use will not happen until there are better alternatives. And at that point most likely there will be enough CO2 in atmosphere to trigger melting of permafrost which will produce its own CO2. So "these schemes" will be needed one way or another.
That said my main interest here is seasteading, and increasing ocean biomass. Reducing atmospheric CO2 is merely a curios side effect.
you can have that belief, that everyone should give up what oil gives us and live in a pre-modern way that most people would, today, consider poverty, because the alternative is (I assume you believe) extinction.
But you should be honest about it.