If abundance keeps increasing at an increasing rate, we will eventually reach a post-scarcity society. While I personally think there will always be a market for whatever rare luxuries there are, I can understand the idea that banking and currency will struggle to survive in a post-scarcity society.

In order to prevent tornados you would have to be able to regulate air temperature over huge areas. That is much harder than a supercomputer and more advanced than what we have now.

I think the lack of significant investment in geoengineering is simply due to the fact no one with a lot of money wants to "waste it" on a risky investment.

Many governments on earth partake in it to a certain extent "seeding" clouds to fertilize crops more efficiently.

Most first world countries gearing up for a baby bust and possible demographic crisis due to low fertility rates. The U.N predicts the global population will begin reduction by 2086. I doubt we will be hitting 100 billion on earth anytime soon.

Plus, even if your point is right, if something is replaceable that doesn't mean you actively destroy it. If the human population is replaceable that doesn't mean those in power want to destroy it.

The government (and elite in general) don't want to kill poor people. Day laborers are what fuel the economy and keep them wealthy.

My favorite series ever. Gonna reread again this summer once I wrap up the dune series.