Rick (and Jim)
It seems worthwhile to view our response to climate change on a quadrant scale (simple x-y axis).
On the negative-end of the x-axis we have mitigation, which is to drastically reduce carbon emissions so as to halt the addition of more emissions to the atmosphere which by property bake in a certain amount of warming for the following 100 years. On the positive-end of the x-axis we have geoengineering, which is to either directly reduce global temperatures through technology or directly suck CO2 out of the atmosphere. And on the y-axis we have adaptation which is to not focus on reducing emissions but instead built resilience in our social, economic, and infrastructure systems for the warming to come. On the positive-end we have aggressive adaptation and the negative-end we have no adaptation.
Where are we on this scale? 40 years ago, probably in quadrant 4 - mitigation paired with no adaptation. We had time to develop the tech (but we chose not to). 10 years ago probably more in quadrant 1 - mitigation paired with modest adaptation.
Where do you think we are today? (I know, a long winded exercise)
Rick asked about sequestering the carbon already in the atmosphere, so he must think we are somewhere in quadrant 2 - mitigation, but with more geoengineering paired with some level of adaptation. Jim, maybe still in quadrant 1.
In other words, do we need to be worrying about sequestration (which we roughly already know how to do, but don't know how to suck it out of the atmosphere)?