Insurance and Climate Change column

The IPCC Climate Change Report and Implications for Insurers

By | October 11, 2018

  • October 12, 2018 at 1:38 pm
    Mike Urbanek says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 2
    Thumb down 4

    Like clockwork, another climate propaganda article on the heels of a hurricane. Remarkable timing.

    • October 12, 2018 at 1:54 pm
      Rosenblatt says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 4
      Thumb down 1

      I don’t know Mike – the article seemed to be heavily weighted to the insurance perspective and wasn’t focusing too much on “if man has contributed to climate change, how much influence has there been?” The numbers and projections cited from the report all followed with points about how it will impact our industry. To wit:

      *”Even if you don’t believe in climate change, enough people, enough policymakers, enough companies are going to be reading this report and saying, ‘We don’t want to be in this world,” Martin said.”

      *”We’ve seen how quickly consumer opinion could shift,” Martin said. “As a responsible risk officer, board member, shareholder, you need to think about that.”

      *“If an insurance company isn’t thinking about its business model in five, 10, 20 year’s time, then I think it’s taking a significant risk,” Martin said.

    • October 12, 2018 at 6:04 pm
      UW says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 4
      Thumb down 1

      Like clockwork, a denier in first with a conspiracy theory.

      • October 15, 2018 at 10:43 am
        PolarBeaRepeal says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 0
        Thumb down 3

        Like a broken clock; tells the truth only twice a day. When can we expect your first post with the truth today? Before or after your posts filed with cliches instead of substance?

      • October 17, 2018 at 2:00 pm
        Bob says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 1
        Thumb down 0

        Conspiracy theory? Like the southern strategy? Like Russian spies everywhere in the republican party?

  • October 12, 2018 at 2:42 pm
    George says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 5
    Thumb down 0

    I think Mike is right to be scared that all the best scientists in the world agree that man’s use of fossil fuels is making our planet uninhabitable. I would love to think it’s a left wing conspiracy too.

    • October 12, 2018 at 2:53 pm
      Rosenblatt says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 2
      Thumb down 1

      Can we take politics out of this conversation and simply talk about how this will impact our industry? I think we can all agree the majority of people believe the climate is changing (irrespective of man’s possible influence of the same, or lack thereof) and that our changing climate is posing risks our industry must acknowledge and plan accordingly to ensure we’re prepared for the future.

      • October 12, 2018 at 4:11 pm
        Agent says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 2
        Thumb down 2

        Hey Rosenblatt, your former POTUS and the former failed VP brought politics into this fray and now you want to give them a pass? There is no way Climate Change is the most serious national security threat this nation faces. Gore said the Polar Cap would be gone entirely by 2014. The sky is falling, right? Politicians from the left along with failed scientists lying about their agenda has driven this issue from the start. That is why people with common sense reject everything they say and call it a big hoax.

        • October 12, 2018 at 4:26 pm
          Rosenblatt says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 3
          Thumb down 1

          Hey Agent, do you think our climate is changing AT ALL? If you do (and I think you do) regardless of what may be causing it — be it people, the sun’s cycles, earth’s natural cycles, mole people burrowing out of the center of the earth, martians adding chemtrails to our atomosphere, whatever — do you think the changing climate poses ANY risks to our industry?

          • October 12, 2018 at 4:30 pm
            Agent says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 2
            Thumb down 4

            Wow, what an unhinged post. Do you know the difference between an island or an estuary yet?

          • October 12, 2018 at 4:38 pm
            Rosenblatt says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 1
            Thumb down 1

            Feel free to post something relevant about this article if you ever decide to take off your troll outfit.

    • October 14, 2018 at 8:06 pm
      Craig Cornell says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 1
      Thumb down 1

      Actually, the world’s “best scientists” do not believe fossil fuels are making the planet “uninhabitable”.

      And it is that kind of Boogey Man thinking and speaking that is dooming the Climate Zealots. Nothing will ever get done unless Green Religion starts telling the truth about the risk.

      Solutions? The IPCC report admits (not reported much by the media) that cutting CO2 emissions won’t work fast enough. Don’t look for CNN to promote that idea, being counter to the “kill the economy with government control” ideas that dominate liberal thinking.

      Real solutions? Well now, the world’s “best scientists” agree that nuclear power is one. Another well-accepted idea is to put small particles into the atmosphere to slightly block sunlight; that one is cheap and would easily work to offset any warming. (But again, doesn’t satisfy the Control Freaks in Climate Church.)

      So go on with your “uninhabitable” babble. Makes you feel good. Makes me ignore you and all the other doom and gloomers.

      • October 15, 2018 at 10:46 am
        PolarBeaRepeal says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 0
        Thumb down 1

        How dare you write a rational post, complete with ideas to solve problems of climate change, instead of attacking the opposing side?!

      • October 17, 2018 at 12:22 pm
        Rosenblatt says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 1
        Thumb down 0

        Did you just SERIOUSLY suggest we utilize solar radiation management as a “real” solution that has been “well-accepted”? That’s an absurd and significantly issue-ridden “solution” that hasn’t been proven outside of small indoor testing and computer simulations. I won’t bother getting into all the issues of that solution, since I’m sure you’re smart enough to research it yourself.

        That said … this “solution” is still in its infancy – I can’t believe you’re trying to pass it off as a “real solution from the world’s best scientists.”

        • October 17, 2018 at 2:13 pm
          craig cornell says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 0
          Thumb down 0

          Not sure why I respond to you sometimes. You just need to read a little closer to save all of us time.

          I said the idea was well-accepted from a scientific standpoint, which is true. The idea would work to lower temperatures and it would be cheap. That is all true. It would work.

          Blocking sunlight to reduce temperature goes back to caveman days.

          Is it the optimal solution? Maybe. Maybe not. But ALL the lefty ideas to solve the problem have to do with economic punishment, meaning higher taxes or energy prices. “Too bad, poor people, when liberals are saving the world, you are just going to have to suffer.”

          The reality is that the IPCC acknolwledged that cutting CO2 emissions in time would be too expensive, a dose or reality for Climate Religion.

          So, what have you got, Rosenblatt? More windmills? Subsidizing rich people to buy Teslas? (fun fact: Only 8% of all CO2 is produce by cars worldwide. Good luck solving the problem with Teslas . . .)

        • October 17, 2018 at 2:57 pm
          Rosenblatt says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 0
          Thumb down 0

          Craig – solar radiation management is not a REAL solution (the first word you wrote in the paragraph preceding your use of the technique.) It is a theorized solution, basically untested in the real world, with no idea what kind of consequences could happen if we tried it.

          On top of that, you can’t claim it would be cheap — nobody really knows how much it will cost and it’s not a one-use fix … you have to continuously release the particles over time to continue its effectiveness (in theory, of course, based on computer modeling and not any actual outdoor real world test).

          I’m all for people being able to get their hands on affordable and clean renewable energy and I’m cool if we want to increase our nuclear power output (with one caveat: we need to do a whole lot better with storing nuclear waste and ensuring it’s not going to be released if there’s an earthquake or attack on a nuclear waste facility.)

          • October 17, 2018 at 3:17 pm
            Craig Cornell says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 0
            Thumb down 1

            Oxymoron alert: “affordable and clean renewable energy”. Maybe it is affordable for you, but it is damn expensive for poor people, especially poor people in developing countries where CO2 production is exploding.

            Get real: renewables are only going to be a small, very EXPENSIVE part of global energy for a LONG time. Honest climate scientists know this.

            And you know I am telling the truth: Climate Religion ruled out nuclear and won’t reconsider. So get real on that one too.

            Live in Feel Good land telling yourself you are on the side of “clean affordable” renewables while the IPCC report tells us all we don’t have time to wait for all that.

            But at least you won’t blame yourself for the problem while contributing nothing to the solution. And isn’t that the only real goal for most lefties? Feeling Good about yourself!

          • October 17, 2018 at 3:38 pm
            Rosenblatt says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 1
            Thumb down 0

            Sorry Craig – when you asked me for my solution, I sincerely believed you wanted to know what I thought … I guess you just wanted me to parrot the “Climate Religion” ideas instead. Sorry for thinking! (end sarcasm)

    • October 17, 2018 at 4:43 pm
      PolarBeaRepeal says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 0
      Thumb down 0

      Give us YOUR definition of ‘best’ as you use it as an adjective preceding ‘scientists’ in your first sentence.
      Next, define ‘scientist’ as you use it in your first sentence.
      Finally, define ‘scared’ as seen in your first sentence.

      • October 17, 2018 at 4:57 pm
        confused says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 0
        Thumb down 0

        i suggest you invest in a dictionary or use one of the free online versions if you need to ask what someone meant when they wrote scientist, scared and best

  • October 12, 2018 at 4:42 pm
    Agent says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 1

    Feel free to pay attention to what your leaders are saying if you ever decide to take off your troll outfit. Ocasio Cortez wants a complete halt to all fossil fuel production or the planet has only 12 years. Totally unhinged as most leftists are.

    • October 12, 2018 at 8:53 pm
      Rosenblatt says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 0
      Thumb down 0

      You left out the part explaining how will that impact the insurance industry.

      • October 15, 2018 at 10:46 am
        PolarBeaRepeal says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 0
        Thumb down 0

        Why not offer YOUR explanations?

        • October 15, 2018 at 1:01 pm
          Rosenblatt says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 0
          Thumb down 0

          (posted again because someone got offended and asked for the post to be removed). Because it’s clear Agent has no real interest in discussing the topic at hand.

  • October 15, 2018 at 8:04 am
    J.S. says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 4
    Thumb down 0

    Is there no end to this nonsense? Story after story after story, the same people come out and give their stupid political opinions despite being utterly clueless on the topic. What idiocy!

    • October 15, 2018 at 8:38 am
      ??? says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 0
      Thumb down 1

      You can say that again!

    • October 16, 2018 at 5:02 pm
      Craig Cornell says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 1
      Thumb down 1

      Those other posts are not at all like your opinion. Your opinion of the other people who post is not stupid, of course. Because? Because it is your opinion.



Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*