It is interesting that a project like this runs into visceral opposition from two different sides. Those on the left may object that we shouldn't be messing with the natural world in ways that will have consequences we won't understand. Those on the right may object that we shouldn't be attempting large expensive government projects that will intrude on individual liberty.

Both objections have some validity. But neither are cost/benefit analyses, which is a much better way to evaluate whether we should be doing something than asking whether it perfectly aligns with my principles.