The original premise here was that humanity would "leverag[e] our entire world economy to [a] single goal." You'd need a very significant chunk of humanity to agree in order to change the entire world economy. That's the part I find unlikely, and I think carbon is a decent example of why.

(And since you brought up the topic of sneering and insults, frankly, the only time I've felt insulted at at on this site recently was your "Not with that attitude" comment. Perhaps you're assuming some kind of ill will or political motivation on my part that was not in fact there. Regardless, your comment still reads like a sneer to me, three days later.)