I wonder if there is any research going on trying to find a way to steer, break up, or wreaked these storms.
The best way to reduce the impact of these storms is to
reduce amount of excess greenhouse gasses in our atmosphere (primarily Carbon Dioxide and Methane). Sensible climate advocates have been making the economic argument for reducing these emissions since the early 1990s, and we are now seeing the negative costs begin to be borne. Changing infrastructure is expensive, and when your house on a 500 year floodplain is now on a 50 or 10 year floodplain, well, that is just not something that can be fixed, it's just a sunk cost. The real kicker of climate change is that it's not all-or-nothing. We will not go back to the 90s climate in our lifetimes, but if we continue to do nothing, it will get worse and worse.
To weaken a hurricane, you need to cool oceans' surface temperatures, which is effectively impossible. There is a theoretical way to do this, but it's not practical. When I was in college, in our natural disasters earth science class, there was discussion of creating an array of inner-tubes with skirts. These create little cylinders in the ocean.These cylinders would go down to cooler water below the surface, and when the waves splash over the tube, it pushes water in the tube down, which forces the cooler water up. This should theoretically cool the surface, and would dramatically weaken hurricanes. It seems like a reasonable idea until you consider the scale of the problem. We aren't talking about an array of inner-tubes outside of a city, or even the size of a city. We would need two arrays of inner-tubes, one sitting in the Gulf of Mexico and another in the Caribbean sea, and both would need to be about the size of Texas. It's just an absurdity. Beyond that, we have no idea what the ecological effects of stirring the ocean to cool it would have on the massive amounts of wildlife that inhabit these those areas.