My Climatopolis takes some punches in this review by an urban planner. Apparently, I am not funny. My wife and son disagree. My book offers a free markets perspective on how urbanites and their cities will fare in the face of uncertain climate change. That’s ambitious and it hasn’t been done. Our ability to form expectations over future uncertain scenarios and to make investments to protect ourselves makes me optimist that we can adapt to many of the challenges that climate change will pose. Migration and innovation and how we rebuild our cities will go a long way to determine how we cope with this serious threat. Whether government will be a “friend” or “foe” of adaptation remains an open question. In the book, I offer some nuanced ideas about the intended and unintended consequences of government actions (such as price ceilings on water) in helping us to adapt to this real and evolving threat. As I give keynote addresses about climate change adaptation, I am amazed that people are afraid to talk about this subject and view it to be “dangerous” to even broach the subject matter. Adam Smith would find my book to be “inspirational”. I have hoped that there is a group of intellectual moderates willing to consider unorthodox ideas and to debate me. My critics forget that chapter 1 is called “Too Much Gas”. I want mitigation now but I don’t expect it will happen and I need to know what will happen next. Microeconomics offers several clues!