It's an excellent and very practical proposal. Unfortunately I think geo-engineering is a hard ask politically.
Left-coded groups demanding action on climate change seem to primarily it as a moral issue, and will tend to reject what they percieve as "easy fixes".
Right-coded groups are more split with some groups wanting various kinds of action while others deny a problem exists at all.
Geo-engineering is perceived as a "techno optimist" position right now, which is a relatively insignificant demographic niche.
But that pales compared to the difficulty of getting international consensus. I feel we'd need a PR / influence campaign the likes of which the world has not yet seen.
Regarding rightists:
It would seem easier to go from "there is no problem" to "the problem can be cheaply contained", particularly without a strict requirement for mass lifestyle, infrastructure, or industrial changes.
Similarly, it's hard to imagine opportunists not using any leftist refusal to take concrete action as ammunition. This will motivate them to at least give token support.
If the problem gets worse, geoengineering will naturally be turned to, not because it's some best solution that would make everyone maximally happy, but because it's the easiest solution and requires the least coordination.
Lastly, note that you mention international consensus, but it's easy to imagine mere regional/factional consensus being enough. Nations already often engage in pollution or depletion of natural resources that crosses borders. Other players not cooperating only means scaling up independent operations to compensate.
The future belongs to techno-optimists. This is a critical coalition to build, because pragmatically, I do not see carbon capture or carbon reduction happening quickly. I think we need the climate scientific community to model an approach and put forward a recommendation.
Left-coded groups demanding action on climate change seem to primarily it as a moral issue, and will tend to reject what they percieve as "easy fixes".
Right-coded groups are more split with some groups wanting various kinds of action while others deny a problem exists at all.
Geo-engineering is perceived as a "techno optimist" position right now, which is a relatively insignificant demographic niche.
But that pales compared to the difficulty of getting international consensus. I feel we'd need a PR / influence campaign the likes of which the world has not yet seen.