One of the driving forces for increased usage of robots (despite, what one could imagine as being increased resistance by the workers), could turn out to be that they produce less greenhouse gases. If they end up doing a big chunk of our work, maybe we won't need so many factories churning out greenhouse gases?
I watched a programme recently on UK TV about some genius guy who realised that overpopulation would cause children to needlessly die, and so came up with a virus that basically killed people off. I do wonder if the Zika virus is a watered-down version of that. It could conceivably spread more because of the Olympics that we've just had, and the Paralympics that we're about to have.

And climate change? We've got all that to come. We're seeing records go left, right and centre, and this is only the start. I can conceive of monster tornadoes and hurricanes and floods as a norm. This is the problem with economies that are valued through money. We've seen this happening now for 50 years (compare the release of Carbon Dioxide into the atmosphere with global temp increase....it runs virtually parallel), yet we've continued following the dollar/pound/yen/whatever. I suspect that we'll end up paying more through weather/climate change damage than we ever would've done through tackling climate change. And how come people don't see the jobs of the future (if the robots haven't taken them) are in renewable energy? Why aren't we doing something now? Sorry, if I changed the focus slightly here, but in a way, you could argue that it's about virtually the same thing, in the end, survival of the population of the earth