2. Of that $100 billion, $60 billion is from the LA wildfire, so this number is extremely outlier driven
3. There are no inflation adjustments or tests of statistical significance in their claims that damage from extreme weather is rapidly increasing over time
That's just how things are. If we depend on the side that warns us of climate change to never make a mistake or an intentional wrong, we're cooked. Because that side is human as are all sides of all arguments.
Maybe we are cooked. That's how it looks to this clueless person.
Deniers will complain about any name you give it.
Also it’s not getting updated anymore because usgov is currently in ostrich mode when it comes to climate change.
There's an increasing number of locations where extreme weather losses are statistically inevitable, and insurers are no longer offering coverage.
https://earth.org/financial-storm-how-escalating-climate-eve...
1/ totally misleading title
2/ the fires in CA drive the outlier
3/ insurance has already largely pulled out of los angeles. For example there are maybe 2 reliable insurers for 2-4 unit landlords in the fourth largest economy in the world (why discuss landlord insurance? same style of building but a higher duty of care)
A friend's whole PhD as a physicist was to improve modeling cloud formation at a molecular level to be used in a model which was then part of an ensemble, that took him 5-6 years to manage to improve one particular parameter of a model with thousands of parameters.
It's an attempt to simulate all the energy transfers happening from solar activity on Earth's atmosphere, through all chemistry and biological reactions that contribute to results.
Inflation isn’t enough to actually measure what you care about here. A paper should account for individual homes increasing in value faster than inflation and the overall population increase.
Without that it’s far better to just convey the raw numbers and link to an more in depth analysis.
If one ignore the winds, and the californian drought, then sure.
If it gets dry, hot, and windy enough, wildfires become a certainty. That's like saying rain is only a contributing factor for flooding.
Anyway, the thing that made all the numbers in LA wasn't the wildfires. When a city burns, it's not wildfire.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jEwYDl5tl-s&list=PLuECoz9_QT...
There is a good write up in the Chicago Fed about them and how they work
https://www.chicagofed.org/publications/chicago-fed-letter/2...
And the FT did a recent piece on it too: https://www.ft.com/video/b3e44987-107d-49cd-b2b4-397a10bc3af...
I expect that this will become more common in the future.
kasperni•2h ago