That would be carbon neutral, but would not be carbon negative, which is the point of the project.
If you have clean energy, using it directly to not burn fossil fuels is strictly more efficient than trying to undo the damage done by burning fossil fuels.
If you can create energy in Iceland, which is already nearly 100% renewable for electricity generation, then using it for carbon capture is carbon-negative.
If you're claiming it isn't carbon negative because someone somewhere in the world is burning carbon, then the word is meaningless, because you may as well claim that every activity on Earth is generating the exact same amount of carbon -- the average of all the activities.