If it is about what people, not mostly corporations, need to do, then it is probably a trap/distraction. Or something that people must do that will destroy a lot of corporations, like full stop all international travel and most city travel. And those fortunes won't accept that peacefully.
I hope that there is a solution, even if is backed by him. But inertia is something hard to stop, both in economics and in climate mechanisms.
The situation by now is that we have a lot of excess of carbon in the atmosphere already, we are adding most of the produced 100 million/day barrels of oil, and a lot of positive feedback processes (like methane being released near polar regions, or gases released for the each time bigger/more frequent forest fires, or losing albedo). Going from that rate of emissions of long lasting greenhouse gases to effectively reaching negative emissions will be hard to plain impossible or just too risky.