The danger involved, for one thing, is the waste of vital capital in pursuit of solutions that aren't real.
If we get Cold Fusion or A Really Good Battery, well and good, problem solved. If not, wind, solar and nukes aren't going to replace oil. I am appalled at academics who propose 'solutions' without the practicality of seeing the whole picture, especially personal economics. Our global economy is hanging by gossamer threads. We will be doing well if we still have jobs in a decade, or food we can afford, or water we can drink. Vast numbers of Americans couldn't come up $1000 cash if an emergency hit. Retirement for most is gone. Automation may soon wipe out the payroll basis of Social Security. Many people in Europe can't afford their prescription medication. Nonlinear effects? You mean such as the fiscal cliff payroll tax increase ( $100 a month for many) that could have people unable to meet current expenses?(drop in consumer confidence just reported) Global warming is a concern but climate PhDs have no special authority in elevating their pet risks above all others. They publish strident warnings while 15% ( currently) of their student's loans go bad ( a threat that rivals the housing/debt collapse). People have a right to judge what threatens them the most.
