If it's less effective than simply planting more plants, then it would be pointless. It'll take a massive amount of renewable energy to have any impact. That renewable energy might be better used to help burn less fossil fuels.
This is a nice sentiment that I agree with as a sentiment, but it's not realistic.
If it takes the equivalent of 1ton of carbon emissions to capture 1ton of carbon emissions, you are literally going nowhere compared to just replacing fossil fuels.
So this technology needs to be extremely efficient, otherwise the amount of extra energy generation we need - on top of what we already have, renewable or not - becomes astronomical. So far it does not look anywhere close to being sufficiently efficient.
Literally all ideas about carbon capture are quickly revealed to be cynical greenwashing if you think about one simple thing: how much CO2 do we need to store to offset global emissions?
The answer is that we need to store almost 40B tonnes of CO2, or around 10B tonnes of C if we break that down, every year. That's something on the order of 1500 great pyramids of Giza (which weighs 6M tonnes) worth of carbon every year.