As of yesterday, State Farm, the US’ largest insurer, will no longer write new homeowner policies in the state of California citing #climatechange fueled wildfire losses and increased construction costs.
“State Farm General Insurance Company made this decision due to historic increases in construction costs outpacing inflation, rapidly growing catastrophe exposure, and a challenging reinsurance market,” the company said in a statement.”
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/may/27/state-farm-home-insurance-california-wildfires
@Smersh: TBH, a lot of us that are or were in the property insurance biz, specifically in underwriting and actuarial, thought it would be closer around 2030. I'm not much surprised it's now since I saw the El Nino projection recently.
@thedisasterautist interesting. I’ve been wondering if there would be a point of no return like with flood insurance. I’m curious if the Feds are also going to reinsure fire coverage like flood since it’s a huge swath of people / wealth impacted.
@Smersh: After a while I believe government will no longer insure flood or fire damages in certain areas simply because it will become a money pit for them, and owners will have to self insure just the same way many coastal residences and business/industry developments have had to for a few decades. And that shit is expensive, to self-insure.
Prior to Hurricane Hugo years ago, a wealthy dude bought an historic house he was told before buying he couldn't get insurance for. Well, Hugo hit, and...
@Smersh: ...the house wound up destroyed. So he complained that nobody would pay for his multimillion dollar loss, the house he'd bought less than six months before, and he got to to F right off. He didn't self-insure because he didn't want to and didn't think he should have to.
It doesn't pay to build or stay where destruction isn't periodic but regular as a matter of Mother Nature.
@thedisasterautist @Smersh
Told my brother more than ten years ago to not buy waterfront property in Florida. Did he listen?
#climate
@GreenCheese @Smersh: MY aunt's home in the late 1960s and into the 1980s was about 300' or about 100m from the Atlantic. As of 1992, it was about 200' or about 61m. Now, where it once was is about 70' or about 21', and there's no room for a house because it's be too close to the road for the coastline residential building code. It's gone, demolished over a decade ago.
@thedisasterautist
Amazing, considering it happened over the course of only about 50 years! That we can see it happening over our lifetimes is unsettling.
@GreenCheese: And that coastline wasn't hyperdeveloped, not until the mid-1990s. Hurricanes routinely additionally erode coastlines. Their area had and still has LOTS of native area grasses, scrub, brush, and trees. The county and state don't allow much destruction in development there and never have. Only what I call jut" coasts and islands really survive, because they're rocky outcroppings and not much sandy.
@GreenCheese: We'll be well gone by then, most likely. That sea level rise will take between 70 and 100 years.
If people are smart, which they won't be, they'll sell before 2030 and start moving well inland or to northern Florida. Wise millionaires and billionaires would do well to buy up inland land tracts.
@thedisasterautist
Also look at all the new wetlands and salt- and brackish-water waterways. What’s this going to do to Florida agriculture? (Though the alligators may love it.)
@GreenCheese: Well, if history is anything to go by, the Florida government will likely do everything they can to get those developed to sell and generate money for the state.
@thedisasterautist
Theoretical Fla map after 10 inches of sea level rise, according to Vox.
#climate #Florida