Decarbonising Without Deindustrialising?

'Pledges' are always rather flexible. The UK Chancellor's announcement that she's pledging £22bn towards carbon-capture technologies looks, however, strikingly 'green'. She claims the move will create 50,000 well-paid jobs in Teeside and Merseyside. It's also claimed that carbon-capture will allow the UK to decarbonise without deindustrialisation. This all sounds very good but is it the optimal use of £22bn? (https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/oct/04/carbon-capture-labour-green-revolution-britain-industry-jobs). The first thing to note is that, at scale, carbon-capture is still a relatively unproved technology. Some folk would argue that it's simply a 'technofix', enabling polluters to carry on polluting. It certainly sounds as if, it might be used as an argument to enable fossil fuels to continue to be used in a variety of industrial roles (to generate electricity, heat homes and as a vehicle fuel). It's certainly possible to make a case that the £22bn might be better spent. It could go to grants to home owners, combined with enskilling a workforce to carry out major changes to the UK's housing stock. Most UK homes, are poorly insulated, generally heated by gas boilers and only occasionally supplied with solar panels. This seems likely to give 'more bang for the buck', in terms of creating well-paid jobs, facilitating decarbonizaton and protecting the finances of the general public. The jobs would be spread over a wider area of the country. There's, perhaps, a danger of carbon-capture becoming a 'unicorn', chased by admiring politicians.