Excellent discussion. Swiss Re recently noted that property loss costs are growing 5-7% a year. The cited rising construction costs and increased exposure in catastrophe prone areas as the main drivers. In the USA, there has been a net migration toward Florida and Texas, where over 1/2 of all natural catastrophe losses occur …
Exactly. The misleading metric of 'financial losses' is often used as 'evidence' for increased hurricane strength, by a wide variety of players. In reality, financial losses have increased because there is an increased amount of real estate in hurricane-prone regions.
We keep hearing the same message over and over: "don't try to think for yourself, you don't have the skills", "don't listen to fringe experts", "trust The Science (meaning government alphabet soup)". Because the data is so clearly pointing in another direction than the narrative they are pushing, you have to convince people they are stupid and/or blind to ignore it. They're doing it with covid, they're doing it with gender theory, and they're doing it with climate. Follow the money: our home insurance just increased the wind and hail deductible by 300%. Why? Continental US regions has had large hail and wind long before people settled here, nothing has changed.
There is a truth though that it is a good idea to be prepared for weather extremes, but most companies were already doing that prior to the climate accounting standards. The latter somehow force companies to report risks related to changes of properties that show no sign of change.
Having arrived at the end of the 2024 hurricane season, we can now update this post with actual numbers. While the 2024 North Atlantic hurricane season has been very active (85th percentile), we still only have observed 18 named hurricanes. As mentioned, climate 'scientist' and propagandist Michael Mann had forecast 33 named storms and had thus overestimated the true number by 83%. This is emblematic of the fact that forecasts made by models that fail to predict the present, of course also fail to predict the future. It isn't unusual for forecasts on climate related entities to be off by a higher margin, yet some still rely on them as if they were Delphi's oracle.
Excellent discussion. Swiss Re recently noted that property loss costs are growing 5-7% a year. The cited rising construction costs and increased exposure in catastrophe prone areas as the main drivers. In the USA, there has been a net migration toward Florida and Texas, where over 1/2 of all natural catastrophe losses occur …
Exactly. The misleading metric of 'financial losses' is often used as 'evidence' for increased hurricane strength, by a wide variety of players. In reality, financial losses have increased because there is an increased amount of real estate in hurricane-prone regions.
We keep hearing the same message over and over: "don't try to think for yourself, you don't have the skills", "don't listen to fringe experts", "trust The Science (meaning government alphabet soup)". Because the data is so clearly pointing in another direction than the narrative they are pushing, you have to convince people they are stupid and/or blind to ignore it. They're doing it with covid, they're doing it with gender theory, and they're doing it with climate. Follow the money: our home insurance just increased the wind and hail deductible by 300%. Why? Continental US regions has had large hail and wind long before people settled here, nothing has changed.
Most of climate risk accounting is a hoax just like carbon credit accounting, that I reported on a while ago: https://www.wildhorsewisdom.xyz/p/big-banks-net-zero-pledge?r=31a4ti&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web.
There is a truth though that it is a good idea to be prepared for weather extremes, but most companies were already doing that prior to the climate accounting standards. The latter somehow force companies to report risks related to changes of properties that show no sign of change.
Having arrived at the end of the 2024 hurricane season, we can now update this post with actual numbers. While the 2024 North Atlantic hurricane season has been very active (85th percentile), we still only have observed 18 named hurricanes. As mentioned, climate 'scientist' and propagandist Michael Mann had forecast 33 named storms and had thus overestimated the true number by 83%. This is emblematic of the fact that forecasts made by models that fail to predict the present, of course also fail to predict the future. It isn't unusual for forecasts on climate related entities to be off by a higher margin, yet some still rely on them as if they were Delphi's oracle.