Oliver, at this point there probably is no solution to the problem of climate change. Nonetheless, it can and will be mitigated. The strategy will undoubtedly include both making carbon more expensive as well as preventing additional carbon from entering the atmosphere.
It's important to differentiate between carbon fuels and fossil fuels. Though fossil fuels are carbon-based, burning them releases carbon which has been stored deep underground, disrupting a biosphere carbon balance which has existed for millions of years. Carbon-based biofuels use carbon that's already here, essential acting as a storage medium for solar energy. Moreover, there is tremendous potential for using nuclear to synthesize gasoline, methane, ammonia, and other carbon fuels from ambient CO2, which would allow us to maintain current modes of transportation without any increase in atmospheric carbon whatsoever.
CCS and geoengineering are superficial bandaids which will provide no real assistance in slowing climate change. False hope derived from them will likely even exacerbate the problem.
I and others see tremendous potential in aggressive deployment of nuclear. It would permit robust increases in trade, productivity, and quality of life with far less environmental impact than fossil fuels. There are indeed serious technological hurdles and expenses to be faced, but none as serious or expensive as the damage which will unquestionably be wrought by climate change.