We commonly hear, it can't be done, it won't be done, and all types of fear uncertainty and doubt, when looking at CDR and 100% REs.
When I was a child there was one way to make pasta. Boil water on a stove, and anything less than al dente was sacrilegious. Today I know that if I use different pasta, (but still calorically the same) angel hair instead of penne, add boiling water from an electric kettle, then microwave it, it's done in less than 5 minutes and al dente. If I'm plugged into an electric grid, it's entirely fossil free. (Yes, induction and radiant work too, but do take some time to boil.) So, it's not the traditional pasta unless you wanted angel hair, but it's less energy intensive, even though it's now has two heat process steps.
This is the kind of thinking we'll be doing to find ways to engineer more ways to reduce the energy demands of our lifestyle and our carbon removal efforts. Couple this with the falling price in Solar PV, and batteries, and we hopefully will meet before reaching 1.5ºC & using up the remaining carbon budget.
And remember, just because the fo**il fu*l industrial complex can pull oil from Alaska and refine it in the lower 48 then ship it to a Walmart or gas pump in Florida, doesn't mean that process needs to continue if EVs take over transportation.
The cost of that entire process I just described was offset by fossil fuel subsidies, shareholders, corporation value, existing supply chains, etc ...
How much ceases to exist or gets replaced by REs and CDR? How much more efficient would it be to just use Solar PV deployed within 50 mi radius of the vehicle that uses electricity instead of oil? How many more new jobs when PV is installed, and the grid transmission upgraded, and the machinists and heavy industry workers are hired to maintain the grid, and new CDR technology? What happens when this is deployed in a city's existing industrial area? But it's totally electric and the new biz owners are fully 3x bottom line so they operate a zero emissions site?