When I look at charts showing energy consumption and population over time like:
I figure that while it'd be nice to have a better model of global climate, there's already a high probability that humans will want to use more energy and keep themselves in a relatively small temperature band (-20 to 40 C).
This implies an increasing ability to manage locally generated waste heat in addition to moderating the local climate for us and whereever we grow our food. So far, the bulk of "discussion" seems more like finger-pointing and attempts to clean our energy production, all of which tries to maintain the status quo.
Which is precisely what we don't want. We need more land and more sea capable of growing more food and housing more humans comfortably. All of this *more* requires developing and trialling new technologies, which some countries are probably doing right now.
Were you a country with significant exposure to climate change, what would you do? Would you put all your eggs in one basket and hope that the global community gets its act together? Cases like the Atlantic tuna where diverse interests have prevented any meaningful regulation seem to indicate that each country should hedge its exposure and start developing tech post-haste.
With that said, will you welcome our climate-controlled future?