"Cancelling the HS2 high-speed rail project would risk a nationwide economic catastrophe." Source: theindependent.co.uk

[hardyweineberg]

"Cancelling the HS2 high-speed rail project would risk a nationwide economic catastrophe."
Source: theindependent.co.uk

Based on what I have read about "would" in more than six reliable dictionaries, it cannot be used to talk about future possibilities, which have some chance of happening. Only 'will', 'can', 'could', 'may', and 'might' can be used for that.

Yet it's very common for native speakers to use "would" to talk about possibilities.

 

[5jj]

it's very common for native speakers to use "would" to talk about possibilities.

It's commonly used to talk about hypothetical certainties.

 

[Tarheel]

@hardyweineberg Well, one is enough if it's truly reliable.
www.dictionary.com

 

[emsr2d2]

In that sentence, "Cancelling the HS2 high-speed rail project" is the same as saying "If the HS2 high-speed rail project were to be cancelled", so following it with a "would" clause makes sense.