No, my comment was simply a reminder that the average is a statistical artifact -- it doesn't tell us about the range of temperatures we actually experience.
As far as I know, you might think that "advanced, efficient, renewable technology" already has been invented -- I asked for clarification.
Of course it doesn't. We should all know what an 'average' means. However, whatever that mathematically calculated average temperature may be, there will be many locations on the planet where, at certain times of the day, that average temperature is experienced.
What I find disturbing is the presentation as fact, that the idea or hypothesis that such slight increases in average temperatures, possibly due in part to the effects of increases in atmospheric CO2 levels, will lead to more frequent and more severe storms, floods and droughts.
The evidence for this, once again, seems to exist largely in the domain of computer models. The meteorological evidence, as far back as records go, and other records that go back further, do not support it.
As you've probably divined, I'm an AGW skeptic, but not a denier. I think we are barking up the wrong tree if we think we can spend trillions of dollars trying to use CO2 levels as a control knob to make the climate benign. We should instead be spending that money on sensible urban planning that can withstand the sorts of storms and floods that we know from history occur, from time to time, in certain areas.
Unfortunately, we're not good at learning from History. It can take only 2 or 3 generations for people to forget that past events of extreme weather patterns ever occurred. Phrases such as, 'Worst flood in living memory' then have a greater emotional impact. It must be really bad if it's the worst in living memory. What is often not appreciated is that maybe it's not even nearly the worst flood which includes non-living memory. One's great grandfather, or great, great grandfather, probably experienced a worse storm or flood.
If you go back far enough in time you will find reports of floods that appeared to cover the entire known world at the time. I'm thinking of Noah and his ark.
As far as I know, you might think that "advanced, efficient, renewable technology" already has been invented -- I asked for clarification.
In a sense it has, but it's still a work in progress. Hydro-electricity can be produced very cheaply, when the conditions are right. But the construction of large dams often creates environmental and socal problems.
Some facts on the cost of clean hydroelectricity:
"Modern hydro turbines can convert as much as 90% of the available energy into electricity. The best fossil fuel plants are only about 50% efficient. In the US , hydropower is produced for an average of 0.7 cents per kilowatt-hour (kWh). This is about one-third the cost of using fossil fuel or nuclear and one-sixth the cost of using natural gas," as long as the costs for removing the dam and the silt it traps are not included.