This and glacial melt is why we need solar blocking/filtering/reflecting sooner than later, and perhaps extra focused on the poles to protect the necessary temperature differential/stop melting at our largest ice reserves. The sooner we start the less sunlight we need to block, the later we start the more sunlight we need to block. Lower or even zero emissions is not enough, the melting is much faster than predicted so our response has to be. Minimalism and population reduction doesn't actually remove the CO2 and the warming is fast enough that you don't have a good option to just wait it out over 300+ years and absorb the damage.

Stop fight our best tool for controlling heat when the heat is easily the most damaging part!

Humans have added over 2000 gigatons and things are this bad and getting worse fast. The Earth only sequesters about 4-5 gigatons per year. The rest of the CO2 stays up there and keep building up, so the Earth stays hot, ice melts, the Earth heats even faster and the zero net emissions take hundreds of years to get the climate back to normal. AND because you didn't clean the CO2 up your just shifting an atmospheric chemical imbalance into the soil and oceans.

I think just the pure emissions plan may seem like the virtuous solution vs the arrogance of solar blocking, but lower emissions without addressing the actual heat AND acidifying the oceans with all the CO2 is kind of a crap plan!

A plan that uses emissions reduction, solar blocking and artificial CO2 sequestration seems like a much safer bet and of those currently emissions reduction is somewhat practical where it works well like with fossil fuels, Co2 removal is not practical and solar blocking might be fairly easy for a massive increase in control over the heat.. but we can't know much until the public and government gets more serious about emission reduction on their own not be anywhere near enough.