Should states sue Insurance companies that refuse to pay for damages from climate change causes!
A 2019 global survey found that 72 percent of insurance companies believe climate change will affect their business. In 2003 that number rose to 90% but 80 percent of them have not taken significant steps to lessen climate risks.The reason is it's cheaper just to deny people insurance than to spend money making properties secure and safe against the impacts of climate change.
For example, rising sea levels and more frequent wildfires could lead to significantly greater instances of property insurance claims, forcing insurance companies to pay out more than they expected when they created the policies.
Insurers play a critical role in the global fight against climate change: they pay out claims when customers suffer losses caused by extreme weather; they have considerable capacity to make long-term investments in infrastructure to support climate change adaptation and mitigation; and their risk management expertise but first they have to accept that the change is coming and understand some insurers may not be altogether truthful because damage from climate most likely will not be averted.Some insurers are offering climate insurance at a premium for wealthier communities,The insurance is often treated as a type of insurance needed for improving the climate resilience of poor and developing communities. It provides post-disaster liquidity for relief and reconstruction measures while also preparing for future measures in order to reduce climate change vulnerability.
The US is by far the largest historical emitter, responsible for over 20% of all emissions, and the EU is close behind. China falls to third when climate pollution is tallied this way, with about half the US's total contribution. So these nations should be the ones carrying the bulk of the costs but that is not the case at all. The US Budget provides more than $18 billion for climate resilience and adaptation programs across the Federal Government in order to save life on the planet. Each year federal agencies receive funding from Congress, known as budgetary resources . In FY 2023, the Department of Defense (DOD) had $1.90 Trillion distributed among its 6 sub-components. Agencies spend available budgetary resources by making financial promises called obligations how the bombs and jets will fare against Mother Nature is easy to surmise Mother Nature never loses. And most tanks, jets, and missiles don’t float!
The largest source of greenhouse gas emissions from human activities in the United States is from burning fossil fuels for electricity, heat, and transportation. If people would just embrace home wind and solar with battery systems and drive Electric vehicles they would not only save thousands annually they could change the bleak forecasts of the planet. The United States spent $754 billion on national defense during fiscal year (FY) 2021 according to the Office of Management and Budget, which amounted to 11 percent of federal spending; that percentage was lower than the 15 percent of the budget spent on defense in the four years before the pandemic.If the US spent 754 Billion on solar within 3 years they could provide access to free electricity to every person in the country!
According to Tesla founder Elon Musk “If you wanted to power the entire United States with solar panels, it would take a fairly small corner of Desert land in Nevada or Texas or Utah,” “You only need about 100 miles by 100 miles of solar panels to power the entire United States.