Anthropogenic Global Warming ... how hot is it ?

"In 2019, children have emerged as arguably the most vociferous and committed advocates for urgent action on climate change." #280
For the most logical of reasons. They have the most skin in the game. Like all previous generations this young generation is working to secure its own future.
What has changed is the risk of catastrophic if not cataclysmic disruptions to our relative hand-to-mouth global culture.
It is undeniably contemptible of currently living adult generations to have made such childhood heroism necessary.

The compounding disgrace here is not whether greedy capitalists will continue to make $money. They have, and will.
The prospective planet killers are contesting which greedy capitalists make the $most, fossil fuelers, or renewablers.

Renewable energy is reportedly the fastest growing segment of the energy sector. Good luck Greta.
 
"Don't forget that Donnie threw a tweet tantrum when Greta was named Time's person of the year in 2019 instead of him" S2 #282
When it's The Apprentice, a mere television series, we can shift accusatory blame to network execs that would authorize it. BUT !
President Trump is a reelected government official. Not for dog catcher, a level of employment more suited to Trump's administrative intellect.
For president of the United States of America.
This is a badge of shame the entire U.S. electorate has brandished.
226257849260d12d94e74cc99e45670d6db2725.gif
e pluribus unicorn

- meanwhile -


New York to fine fossil fuel companies $75 billion under new climate law​

By Jonathan Allen / December 26, 20243:43 PM GMT-5
NEW YORK, Dec 26 (Reuters) - New York state will fine fossil fuel companies a total of $75 billion over the next 25 years to pay for damage caused to the climate under a bill Governor Kathy Hochul signed into law on Thursday.
The law is intended to shift some of the recovery and adaptation costs of climate change from individual taxpayers to oil, gas and coal companies that the law says are liable. The money raised will be spent on mitigating the impacts of climate change, including adapting roads, transit, water and sewage systems, buildings and other infrastructure.
"New York has fired a shot that will be heard round the world: The companies most responsible for the climate crisis will be held accountable," New York Senator Liz Krueger, a Democrat who co-sponsored the bill, said in a statement.




"The companies most responsible for the climate crisis will be held accountable" may be the latest word Senator Krueger. BUT !
It is not the last word.
 

New York to fine fossil fuel companies $75 billion #283

and:

US Chamber of Commerce, oil group sue Vermont over law requiring companies to pay for climate change damage​

Vermont became the first state in the country to enact a law of its kind​

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce and a top oil and gas industry trade group have filed a lawsuit against Vermont over its new law requiring that fossil fuel companies pay for damage the state attributes to climate change.
The federal lawsuit, which was filed Monday, urges a state court to block the state from enforcing the law, which was passed by lawmakers last year, according to The Associated Press. The state said it is working to estimate the cost of climate change dating back to 1995.
Vermont became the first state in the country to enact a law of its kind after it suffered catastrophic summer flooding and damage from other extreme weather, the outlet noted.

The Chamber and the American Petroleum Institute argue in the lawsuit that the U.S. Constitution precludes the act and that the state law is preempted by the federal Clean Air Act, The Associated Press reported. The lawsuit also says that the law violates domestic and foreign commerce clauses by discriminating against the "important interest of other states by targeting large energy companies located outside of Vermont."

"It's another example of mismanagement in corporate America where we're now expected as tax payers to bail them out. They're capitalists when they make money. But they're socialists when they lose money."
Actor Tim Robins, commenting on a California commercial electric power crisis
 

Heavy weather: Last year saw a near record number of tornadoes

Active 2024 was expensive and deadly


The wild weather year that was 2024 finally ended with a parting outbreak of deadly tornadoes, but researchers will be tallying the total costs for months to come.

The year finished as one of the roughest in recent history for weather related disasters. The U.S. was pummeled by five landfalling hurricanes and a stream of atmospheric rivers, heat waves and droughts. That final burst of twisters is expected to make 2024 the second-worst year on record for tornadoes across the nation.

As of Dec. 31, the National Weather Service tallied 1,855 preliminary tornado reports, including 90 in December. That number will drop and the final verified numbers aren’t expected until March 1, said Harold Brooks, a senior scientist at the National Severe Storms Laboratory in Norman, Oklahoma. However, the final total is expected to be more than 1,700 tornadoes.

That would top every other year on record except 2004, when 1,817 tornadoes were confirmed, according to weather service data. The other worst tornado years on record were the 1,692 in 2008 and the 1,691 in 2011.

“We just never really got a break,” said Victor Gensini, an associate professor of meteorology and severe weather at Northern Illinois University. “There was never a significant lull in activity.”

2024 “will be the highest year for insured losses for severe convective storms – including hail, wind and tornadoes – by a large margin,” Gensini said. “We didn’t have the really large outbreaks that produced hundreds of tornadoes on a single day. We had a lot of smaller active days that aggregated day by day.”

At least 50 people died. The annual average number of deaths since 2000 is about 72.

Oklahoma, known for its tornadoes historically, had its worst year on record with 152 confirmed twisters, the weather service said. “In general, if Oklahoma is having a record year, that says something about the country,” Gensini said. At least four other states broke records for tornadoes in a single year.

The 90 preliminary tornado reports across the country in December continue a trend documented over the past 30 or 40 years, he said. “The increasing trend in the South and Southeast is something that’s been increasing, especially in the cool season.”

A particularly active jet stream, the transition from the El Niño weather pattern in the Pacific Ocean to more neutral conditions, and an exceptionally warm Gulf of Mexico have been blamed for much of the rough weather.

“When you look back in history and you’re phasing out of an El Niño and going to neutral, those years are average to above average,” Gensini said.

The Gulf of Mexico played a particular role in the cooler months, he said. “When you have a record-warm Gulf of Mexico, it’s a lot easier to transport the warm humid air that causes these types of storm events.”

Dozens of tornadoes also were a result of hurricanes making landfall.

When Hurricane Beryl made landfall in Matagorda, Texas, and its remnants moved through the northeastern U.S., it produced at least 65 tornadoes, killing at least two people. Weather service offices in Shreveport, Louisiana, and Buffalo, New York, set daily records for tornado warnings. And Hurricane Milton produced a string of more than 41 tornadoes across Florida, killing at least six people.

 

Oregon places new rules on homeowners living in certain high-risk wildfire areas


Oregon homeowners living in certain areas at high risk of wildfire will face stricter building codes and mandates to reduce vegetation on their properties under new “wildfire hazard maps” unveiled Tuesday.

The release of the maps follows a record-breaking wildfire season last year and firestorms in 2020 that killed nine people and destroyed thousands of homes.

The state-developed maps — which will not affect homeowners’ insurance rates, under Oregon law — create new rules for those living in the most fire-prone areas that also border wildlands such as forests or grasslands. The provisions impact 6% of the state's roughly 1.9 million tax lots, a reduction from an earlier version developed in 2022 but retracted after homeowners raised concerns that it would increase insurance premiums.

Wildfire seasons are growing longer and more intense due to climate change, and Oregon isn't the only state grappling with how to manage the risk. Washington state and Colorado have also recently moved to address fire risk in their communities, and a new rule announced in California last week will require insurance companies to provide policies in high-risk wildfire areas in order to continue doing business in the state.

In Oregon, the new building and so-called defensible space codes will affect only ....

 
"Oregon places new rules on homeowners living in certain high-risk wildfire areas
Oregon homeowners living in certain areas at high risk of wildfire will face stricter building codes and mandates to reduce vegetation on their properties under new “wildfire hazard maps” unveiled Tuesday." #286
Finally !

It's not a cure-all. But it's long overdue.

"... and mandates to reduce vegetation on their properties ..." #286
Restrictions on giant sequoia in the back yard might at least seem enforceable.

But guinea grass helped fuel the 2023 Hawaiian wildfires which claimed thousands of buildings, & caused $Billions of $Dollars in damage.

Will Oregon implement lawn mowing patrols to insure grasses are kept below wildfire threat level?

Perhaps obvious building code restrictions such as flame-resistant building materials may be the logical mainstay.
 

Climate disasters drive unusually high losses in 2024 –Munich Re

Climate change fuelled natural disasters that caused $320 billion in losses last year, German reinsurance giant Munich Re said Thursday, warning that "our planet's weather machine is shifting to a higher gear".

The amount of insured losses totalled $140 billion over the past 12 months, making 2024 the third-highest total since 1980, Munich Re said in a report.

The findings echoed similar figures from Swiss Re, the other leader of the reinsurance industry, which calculated overall losses of around $310 billion, of which $135 billion were insured.

Last year is almost certain to go down as the hottest on record and the first to be 1.5 degrees Celsius hotter than before the industrial revolution, the critical threshold laid down in the 2015 Paris accord on fighting climate change.

"Our planet's weather machine is shifting to a higher gear," said Tobias Grimm, chief climate scientist at Munich Re.

"Everyone pays the price for worsening weather extremes" driven by ....

CONTINUED
 

Munich Re #288

Never heard of it.
Munich Re
German reinsurance company
Munich Re Group or Munich Reinsurance Company is a German multinational insurance company based in Munich, Germany. It is the world's largest reinsurer. Wikipedia
Oh. The kind of insurance insurance companies use to protect themselves from insolvency?

Insurers have been adjusting for inflation for centuries.
Not fully clear to me why adjusting for anthropogenic climate change is beyond them. Not a problem of math, but of government oversight?
 
Never heard of it.

Oh. The kind of insurance insurance companies use to protect themselves from insolvency?
Sort of - think of reinsurance as being akin to a bookie laying off his bets.

Insurers have been adjusting for inflation for centuries.
Not fully clear to me why adjusting for anthropogenic climate change is beyond them. Not a problem of math, but of government oversight?

Couple of things here - the models that properly incorporate climate change are new in California (although they have been used for years elsewhere) and various consumer groups (and insurance departments) are up in arms because they will result in some huge increases in premiums (especially in places that are threatened by those changes). Hurricanes, tornadoes, wildfires, you name it. Needless to say the politicians don't like the idea - increased premiums don't sit well with voters.

Scott: In the past, insurance companies in California have not been able to use catastrophe modeling to set rates, the last state to not allow that. Why was that? And how is that changing?

Jones: So under current California law, the way that rates are set is by looking at past experience. But insurers are now arguing that with climate change, and the fact that the natural catastrophic events are becoming nonlinear and increasingly unpredictable, that they ought to be allowed to use probabilistic models or catastrophe models to help set those rates. It is important to note that Florida has allowed probabilistic modeling for many, many years. It’s allowed reinsurance costs to be included in its rates, has rates three to four times the national average, has limited third-party lawsuits, has done a number of things the insurers have asked for for some time. And yet, what we’ve seen is 12 or so insurance companies go insolvent. The Florida insurer of last resort, Florida Citizens, has about 1.3 million policyholders. These are people that can’t get private-admitted insurance. So California is considering allowing catastrophe models to be used and allowing reinsurance costs to be included in rates. And that might help in the short or midterm. But I’m concerned that we’re not going to be able to rate our way out of this problem.

Scott: When you say we’re not going to be able to rate our way out of this problem, what do you mean by that? And what do you see as some solutions?

Jones: So the insurers are arguing that if they’re given more rates, or they’re able to have higher prices and collect more premium, that they’ll write more insurance. And in the short or midterm, giving insurers more premium may help. But in the long term, it’s likely to be overwhelmed by the increased risk and losses driven by climate change. And so you reach a point at which even at a higher price, it’s simply not profitable for the insurance company to write insurance. And that may very well be where we are in Florida, and may very well be where we’re going to get in other parts of the country over time.

And let us not forget the infamous Proposition 103.
 
"- increased premiums don't sit well with voters." #290
Excellent.
They can enjoy real estate ownership in a wasteland of smoldering rubble secure in the knowledge if they ever rebuild, it will be on basis of uninsured loss, & uninsured risk.

Or if we may intrude a glimmer of lucidity into this actuarial debauch:
STOP BUILDING HOMES WITH COMBUSTIBLE BUILDING MATERIALS THERE !

If there is no building capable of catching fire in that insurance district, the fire insurance component of the insurance policy premium should be quite affordable there.
There.

"But insurers are now arguing that with climate change, and the fact that the natural catastrophic events are becoming nonlinear and increasingly unpredictable" Jones

Ya think?!
And you were able to deduce this, simply from the more than century of data you're drowning in?

Scott, Jones, & S2 #290

Bottom line, dysfunctional.
When my computer does this, I shut it down, count to 11, & reboot (it's called "IPL", initial program load).
They can continue to run the marathon, with the concrete blocks chained to their ankles,
or they can fix this.

If government prohibits insurers from providing policies there at the same insurance policy profit ratios as nearby districts, then withdrawing from the market is the correct insurance company move.
And they can politely return, after the politicians sober up.

That may seem callous. But if the politicians conspire with the insurers to abandon these markets, any that filter back in to resume residency would have reinforced motivation to build cheaply enough for the residence to be expendable,
or robust enough to be flame / Earthquake / landslide / flood etc resistant.
 
.... reinforced motivation to build cheaply enough for the residence to be expendable, or robust enough to be flame / Earthquake / landslide / flood etc resistant.
That's easier said than done. But that reminds me of the Galveston Hurricane of 1900 (you can google it but it was the deadliest natural disaster in US history). In any case, someone had built a "hurricane proof" house and was hosting a hurricane party - after all, everyone in attendance would be quite safe. In any case, come dawn and there was no house. Just a level lot covered with debris - a few loose bricks - that sort of thing.

Turns out that the "hurricane proof" house was, in fact, hurricane proof. What it wasn't proof against was flying debris. When the storm tore other buildings apart it created a barrage of flying stuff - not just things like tree branches but individual bricks. The house was not proof against that sort of barrage. And once a hole of any sort was created the house was no longer windproof let alone hurricane proof.

Turning to California and the wildfires - it doesn't matter how robust your construction is if everything else around you is burning your house is going to burn as well.
 
"Turns out that the "hurricane proof" house was, in fact, hurricane proof. What it wasn't proof against was flying debris. When the storm tore other buildings apart it created a barrage of flying stuff - not just things like tree branches but individual bricks. The house was not proof against that sort of barrage. And once a hole of any sort was created the house was no longer windproof let alone hurricane proof." S2 #292

"... tree branches ... bricks", common to such storms.
Declaring an architectural structure "hurricane proof" does not render it so.
Neither does it undermine the principle. "The fact that somebody over-sells an idea doesn't make it a bad idea. It makes them a bad salesman." Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA ret)

The following two pics show designs more typical of those presented as hurricane-resistant.

1736703218947.jpeg 1736703263665.jpeg

California wildfires: At least 10 dead, more than 10,000 buildings destroyed

I suspect if the 10,000 buildings reported destroyed in the above headline met the standards the above two structures do, it might have cut that 10,000 building loss by 80%. BUT !
I'm not a persuasive champion of half-stepping. Why not designs like the following two, also revered for their quiet interior, and energy efficiency (thereby also a benevolent contribution to anthropogenic global warming)?

1736703585048.jpeg 1736703909550.jpeg

There are some simple precautions in such building. The windows should be more like airliner windshields. Trivial? Tell it to Sullenburger.

- meanwhile -
Anthropogenic global warming is surely an issue. BUT !
The U.S. electorate has artificially added a political catalyst: the Trump administration.

MSNBC

Big banks abandon climate-conscious group, bowing to Republican agenda​

Ja'han Jones / Fri, January 10, 2025 at 6:39 PM EST·
Some of the biggest banks and wealthiest investment firms are abandoning earlier commitments to engage in climate-friendly investing as Congress cracks down on socially conscious investing and Donald Trump prepares for his return to office.

The Guardian reported that JP Morgan announced earlier this week that it’s leaving a U.N.-sponsored initiative called the Net Zero Banking Alliance. Basically, the group represented a commitment to prioritize investments that help countries reach “net zero” emissions (the point at which the amount of greenhouse gases being released into the atmosphere is equal to the amount being removed from the atmosphere).
 

Attachments

  • 1736703519457.jpeg
    1736703519457.jpeg
    60.8 KB · Views: 0

Earth Surpasses 1.5 Degrees C in Hottest Year on Record

The year 2024 was the hottest on record and the first to top 1.5 degrees Celsius of warming. All 10 of the hottest years have been in the past decade

1736785864687.png

It’s official: 2024 is the hottest year on record—and the first to exceed 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 degrees Fahrenheit) above preindustrial temperatures. It’s another milestone that underscores how far the present climate has shifted from that of the past because of the continued burning of fossil fuels.

"All of the internationally produced global temperature datasets show that 2024 was the hottest year since records began in 1850,” said Carlo Buontempo, director of the European Union’s Copernicus Climate Change Service (C3S), in a news release.


Last year, which C3S measured at 1.6 degrees C (2.9 degrees F) above preindustrial temperatures, surpassed the record that was just set in 2023. That year had set the record by a wide margin in global temperature terms, registering 0.17 degree C (0.31 degree F) above the previous record holder, 2016, according to C3S. All of the 10 hottest years on record occurred in the past decade, according to C3S data.

Under the Paris climate accord, countries agreed to try to limit warming to under 1.5 degrees C and “well under” two degrees C (3.6 degrees F). That threshold hasn’t yet been breached; the accord considers the average over many years. But “we are now teetering on the edge of passing the 1.5°C level defined in the Paris Agreement and the average of the last two years is already above ....

CONTINUED
 
Berkshire Hathaway is the investment brainchild of the oracle of Omaha, Warren Buffet.
"You should buy stock in a business that's so good that even an idiot can run it, because sooner or later one will." Warren Buffett, CEO Berkshire Hathaway

Special Report

6:08 AM GMT-5
Berkshire coal plants emit more nitrogen oxide gases than any other coal-fired fleet in the country. Despite big investments in renewable energy, the company has resisted efforts by regulators to make coal plants cleaner.
https://www.reuters.com/investigati...st-set-coal-fired-power-plants-us-2025-01-14/

So it seems Buffet's attitude is, if we're all going to die in self-inflicted environmental cataclysm, might as well die $rich.
Right?
 

The Crisis in Homeowners Insurance

In theory, increasing insurance premiums signals rising risk and spurs action that mitigates disasters like California's fires. In practice, climate is changing too fast, and government is being too slow.
Paul Carroll

There is a fundamental tension underlying the wildfire disaster playing out in California, and it's not going away. The tension is between climate change and human nature, as represented both in individual behavior and in the actions of our governments.

The damage from hurricanes, severe convective storms, drought and wildfires has grown even faster than expected over the past several years, and the increases show no signs of slowing. At the same time, we keep building in areas, such as along coasts and in the wildland-urban interface, that are especially vulnerable.

And that's just the start of our behavioral problems. We aren't wired very well for planning for crises like wildfires. You're telling me I have a 2% chance of wildfire in the 10 years I'm going to own this house, and I'm supposed to spend how many tens of thousands of dollars to harden the property? Even if the math makes sense, most people will glide past the issue.

In theory, governments step in and represent all of us on issues like wildfire that we can handle collectively better than we do individually. But governments will slow roll solutions that require hard choices. Job 1 as a politician is getting reelected, so why tick off voters by letting insurance companies raise rates rapidly or not renew policies on properties that have become too risky? Why not stall as long as possible?

So we have a crisis that's accelerating, and our response is moving at the same old, snail-like pace. I'd love to wish the tension away, but I can't. I suspect we'll be wrestling with this tension for many, many years, while wringing our hands about the devastation caused by events such as the wildfires in Southern California.

What I can do is offer a few thoughts on how we in the insurance industry can at least start to accelerate society's response, to mitigate the damage even as climate-related problems continue to proliferate and intensify.

To be clear, I'm not saying homeowners insurance is in crisis everywhere in the U.S. — but we're not just talking California, either. A recent congressional report said Florida, Louisiana and Texas face the same sort of climate-related insurance problems. Colorado officials have said they worry their state could ....

CONTINUED


 

An important question - what happens next?

'This is your Hurricane Katrina': Assessing the long road ahead for L.A.

Kevin Rector

Craig Fugate, who led the Federal Emergency Management Agency in the Obama administration, has seen a lot of natural disasters. He knows the difference between destruction and utter devastation, and puts the nation's truly cataclysmic events — those that erase entire communities in a blink — in a category all their own.

The wildfires that have ravaged Los Angeles in recent days fit into that group, he said.

"This is your Hurricane Katrina," Fugate said in an interview with The Times. "It will forever change the community. It will be a touch point that everybody will remember, before and after. And for Los Angeles, this will become one of the defining moments of the community, the city and the county's history."

Many in L.A. and across California already understand the before: Bone-dry months with no rain. Deadly Santa Ana winds at hurricane strength. Built-out suburbs in one of the most densely populated regions in the nation, bumping up against kindling-dry forest and scrub land.

It is the after that remains unclear — that stirs worry and fear.

There are the immediate questions, like where people who have lost their homes will stay tonight, tomorrow and the rest of this week, and the longer-term ones, such as whether L.A. should rebuild in areas that remain vulnerable to the increasing cruelty of climate change.

Another question that has loomed large: As the region tries to move forward, will politics get in the way?

Scenes of sheer devastation in L.A. — from Altadena to the Palisades to Pacific Coast Highway — have been met with finger-pointing and ....

CONTINUED
 
Back
Top