• MajorJimmy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Because when ice melts it turns to water. When lots of ice (the arctic) melts, it turns to water (the ocean). The problem is not only does this raise the sea level (effectively causing the coast to recede inward) but it causes more common and powerful natural disasters which, in turn, wreak havoc on specific parts of the country.

      Which states typically face the worst natural disasters? Florida (hurricanes) and California (wildfires). When somebody’s house gets blown or burned away, insurance is supposed to cover the cost. But what happens when the insurance company spends more on paying out claims than it brings in in revenue? It goes out of business.

      To avoid going out of business, these insurance companies are looking at market projections that use data attempting to predict future risks, or future likelyhood that they will have to pay out to their clients. Since climate change is only going to make natural disasters more severe, but ALSO more common, the companies are (intelligently) no longer pursuing business sin these states because it they are going to pay out more than they take in. If they stay, they would lose money.

      Edit: “Wreak” havoc, not “Reek”.

      • Mio
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        They insurance price will need to increase in these new risk zoones.

      • GentlemanLoser@ttrpg.network
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Where’s the part that kills people tho?

        Original OP said the homeowners insurance debacle in FL is going to contribute to the climate change deaths mention in the article.

        I’m trying to understand how lack of property insurance results in excess deaths

        • MajorJimmy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Fair enough. Just speculating at this point, but I would think that, since it’s rather difficult to just up and move to another state, people are going to find that they can’t insure their homes, or if they can, they would be for exorbitant rates.

          Banks require home insurance for a mortgage, so if all the insurance companies start pulling out, you’re going to have large swathes of people who can’t find or can’t afford their insurance. I’m not sure what happens to your mortgage when you lose/can’t find somebody to insure you, though, I imagine it’s nothing good.

          So if they have nobody willing to insure them (not there yet, but if all insurers start pulling out…) You’ll have swathes of people who can’t insure their homes and may go into foreclosure. Homelessness increases, and the homeless are some of the most vulnerable people in the country, so perhaps that’s what they were thinking?

          It’s certainly going to cause significant financial hardships for those states at the very least, though how climate change’s impact on the insurance industry SPECIFICALLY increases deaths, I am not sure.

      • cabb@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Insurance policies are short-term and climate change is going to take longer to really hit. Climate change isn’t why but rather legislative changes. I’ve left a more detailed comment elsewhere in this thread if you’re interested.

      • JustAManOnAToilet@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Put ice in a glass. Add water. Notice where the line is. Wait for it to melt. Check said line again. shocked Pikachu face

    • magnetosphere@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      Insurance companies don’t want to offer homeowners insurance in places where mass destruction is likely. It’s just not profitable.

      Like other companies, an insurance company generally wants as many customers as possible. If an area is considered so potentially dangerous (and therefore unprofitable) that home insurers are willing to turn business away, it may be too potentially dangerous to live in at all.

      • GentlemanLoser@ttrpg.network
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        We’re not underinsured because of climate change per se in FL, it’s because every storm results in a ton of fraudulent claims.

        Again, how does lack of property insurance kill people?