I want to be excited about this, but it's capturing CO2 as CO2 gas, not sequestering CO2 in a form that keeps it out of the atmosphere. If you pay a lot of money in process and power to pull CO2 out of the atmosphere or out of exhaust gases and then use it in chemical processes other than ones which sink the carbon into long lasting solid, liquid, or oceanic absorption form you're just burning money and power to make…
https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2015WR01...
Capturing CO2 from a power plant, biofuel factory, oil refinery, petrochemical plant or other point source and disposing of it underground is a developed technology. Very little of that is happening because the financial incentives aren't there and the financial incentives that do exist go to carbon sequestration schemes which are low-cost, low-quality and generally not measurable (pay us $ and we won't cut down these trees... for now, let's crush some rocks and apply sand to the beach and hope for the best, ...)
With aquifer injection you can measure the gas going in but there are also questions such as: how long does the CO2 stay there? do you have seismic problems?
This scheme is similar to aquifer injection but is more secure at the expense of requiring unusual rock formations and 25 tons of water for every ton of CO2 captured.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbfix
I think it gets way too much press but assuming energy is available you can build a direct air capture in a place where you have reactive rocks and water.