With regards to the above, the 747 isn't really relevant as all the superjumbos are being retired from service anyway. The direction the world is going is a higher number of smaller planes. If we scale back from jets entirely, there are turboprops that seat around 80 passengers and use 5000hp turboprop engines. It's actually not all that difficult to make 5000hp from a geared electric motor.
The issue isn't so much the power, it's the energy storage. In other words, not the thing that turns the propeller, but the fuel. For a turboprop, that fuel is Jet-A, which has an incredible energy density per pound. For electric motors in an airplane it means either batteries or relying on hydrogen storage tanks and H2 fuel cells to convert that H2 into electricity. Batteries have a very low energy density per pound compared to Jet-A. It's the reason why a Ford Fusion can go 300 miles on 60 pounds of gasoline but the Ford Mach-E needs a 1200 pound battery pack to go the same distance. H2 is better on a per-pound basis, but it is very bulky to store and presents its own problems if you go for liquid hydrogen tanks to maximize density.
At any rate, the move to electric cars is happening because cars are so easy by comparison to anything else and already make up about half of the transportation sector's GHG footprint while also being one of the top sources of smog, which is arguably just as important to eliminate as GHG anyway. The transportation sector accounts for about 29% of the USA's total GHG output, so that puts passenger cars at something like 14-15% of the total GHG, which sounds small, but the point is that we're addressing every sector at the same time, and personal automobiles are the easiest part of the transportation sector to address. Airplanes are way low on the list relative to everything that has easier fixes.