So he's saying that instead of working on reducing pollution, we should rather enable people to survive it, even if it means making them live underwater, becaus

So he's saying that instead of working on reducing pollution, we should rather enable people to survive it, even if it means making them live underwater, because that'll increase wealth? Considering how incredibly unequal that wealth is bound to be, this just reads like a Big Coal backed piece to try and justify the destruction of the planet in the pursuit of profit.