[Rubinsalamander]

Rises the question which temperature is the "right" one. Assuming we can control climate change at some point in the future

Like having a clima-council which votes to lower or rise the temperature. Would definetly cause conflicts between very hot and cold nations

[api_or_ipa]

The economic consequences would be absolutely huge. Take my native Canada for an example. There's breathtaking amounts of land that's currently of little economic value because of a shortened growing season and permafrost. A small increase in temperature would have a huge impact on the usability of that land. Conversely, other places in the world would suffer desertification and suffer greatly.

As an amusing side-note I've pondered whether colder countries could/should/will intentionally spew C02 into the atmosphere to improve their own living situation. There's not a whole lot other countries could do about it except try and capture the C02 which is much more expensive than burning it. Obviously this doesn't take in effect other averse consequences from global warming but it was still an amusing train of thought.

[baxtr]

BTW: it is CO2 not C02... (sorry)

[bryanlarsen]

There's a very large band for the "right" temperature. The problem is the rate of change. Given enough time, the ecosystem will adapt.

[Rubinsalamander]

That large band exists only for mediterran regions. Some regions are already living on the hot/cold edge

[fifnir]

Imagine the entire planet fighting for the thermostat

[dalbasal]

This is not impossible.

There are a bunch bunch of ideas for how to build a "thermostat." Some of them might be affordable for even a mid sized economy. We could find ourselves in a world where 26 different countries have competing climate control agendas and toolkits. Presumably Vanuatu has a different take that Latvia.

Perhaps this will be the 22nd century's alternative to resource wars.