By postponing change, technofixes may make the transition to an ecologically sustainable society much harder and more unpalatable than if moves in that direction were begun now. There is also the question whether knowledge and its application are themselves free from constraints and costs. In other cases, there might be theoretical solutions but which simply are not logistically or financially viable in practical situations. The history of the Fast Breeder Nuclear Reactor might provide a useful case study. All new technologies bring of course new risks of unforeseen side-effects which may outweigh their successes.
Technologies are also interdependent.
Breakthroughs in one area often produce mismatches elsewhere, for example between bigger tankers, on one hand, and, on the other, existing harbour and canal facilities. Problems of wasteful obsolescence are often multiplied by technological innovation, for instance in the field of computers. New and more powerful technologies can also bring bigger risks from breakdown, accident and error, while the greater use of capital hardware could be at the expense of human job satisfaction and employment. Lack of foresight, time and money can all prevent technology from galloping to the rescue. Apart from the risks, it might be that technofixes are simply irrelevant, since many of our problems are not technical at all, but are social and cultural.