Fusion reactors may well end up being cheaper to build than fission because they will not require the same safety systems that fission does. Furthermore, the ongoing costs in terms of basic fuel cost and the costly dealing with hazardous waste and decommissioning costs will be very much less.
No doubt ‘richer’ countries will be the first to install them but since the concept of being rich itself is based on energy and the hitherto limited nature of it, the word ‘rich’ will become increasingly meaningless with time.
Carbon is removed from the atmosphere by natural processes.
I have not mentioned a likely other development which may be temporary or quite long lived.
Hybrid reactors. This is where a smallish fusion reactor, possibly even below ignition size, is used to ‘burn’ fissile material in a surrounding blanket.
While this involves using hazardous fuels it is intrinsically much safer because the the material in the fissile blanket is not critical path generating in geometry. It cannot support a chain reaction on its own.
The fissile material’s atoms are split using neutrons supplied by the fusion reactor.
The reason for having those hybrids would be two fold.
First, to burn up the spent fuel waste from legacy fission activity, thus effectively rendering it safe within a sane time frame as opposed to the hundreds of thousands of years otherwise. i.e the mess created by fission could be cleaned up.
Second, fuels other than Uranium could be used thus extending the resource life time for recoverable fissile material.