Sentences with phrase «costs of a catastrophe»

The insurer told the market at the time significant weather catastrophes including Californian wildfires and December storms in Australia during the fourth quarter, coupled with some adverse development of Hurricane Maria, added around $ US130 million to the net cost of catastrophes.

I wrote about «The Varied Costs of Catastrophe» after Japan's devastating earthquake and tsunami, comparing the human and financial losses to those from the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami.

My 2011 piece on «The Varied Costs of Catastrophe» explains what's up.

This is directly related to the increasing costs of catastrophes across the country.

The cost of catastrophe insurance varies as there are a number of variables that impact premiums, including the types of risks you face, the type of structure you live in and how much coverage you want.

Being underinsured means that your homeowners insurance may only cover about 78 % of the costs of a catastrophe that affects your home.

Not exact matches

About a third of the increase was related to the cost of our aggregate catastrophe program which will help reduce the volatility of our earnings.

Higher costs from the lawsuits this year would be reflected in rates for reinsurance — which is insurance that insurance companies must buy to ensure they can pay claims after a catastrophe — by June 1 of next year, he said.

But, catastrophes do happen and when they are related to health, nursing home expenses can be a significant driver of cost.

Mr Pittaway said there is a «strong likelihood the entire cost of the two events for QBE will be covered by its catastrophe reinsurance programs, leading to a net cost of «just $ 5 million for the events combined».

This means that the cost of home ownership in the immediate affected areas could be higher, as homeowner's insurance premiums may increase because of the catastrophe.

As Harvard's Martin Weitzman has argued in several influential papers, if there is a significant chance of utter catastrophe, that chance — rather than what is most likely to happen — should dominate cost - benefit calculations.

Theresa May said the protection scheme will be a quicker, more reliable and cost - effective way of dealing with catastrophes like floods and droughts.

Employers have been allowed to keep hammering down wages and this is where we find ourselves: a consumer economy in which people can't afford to buy, a private sector subsidised by tax credits to the cost of the national economy and the moral catastrophe of people working and in poverty.

Terrestrial radio transmissions in E-band are suitable as a cost - effective replacement for deployment of optical fiber or as ad - hoc networks in the case of crises and catastrophe, and for connecting base stations in the backhaul of mobile communication systems.

Parke Crescent renters insurance from Effective Coverage will help cover some of the costs to replace damaged property in the event of a fire, theft, natural disaster and any other catastrophe.

This will add additional costs but will be worth the money paid in the event of catastrophe or break - up.

However, too few renters take advantage of a renters insurance policy, making those cost savings disappear in the event of a catastrophe.

Your Laurel Manor renters insurance will cover part of the cost to replace your damaged property due to a fire, flood, natural disaster or any other catastrophe.

That's right around the national average, and far less than the cost of dealing with a catastrophe without coverage!

After a major catastrophe such as a hurricane or tornado, construction costs may rise suddenly because the price of building materials and construction workers increase due to the widespread demand.

- SAS Travel can not take responsibility for additional costs due to unfavorable weather conditions, natural catastrophe, strikes, accidents, illness, injury, loss of personal items, etc..

- SAS TRAVEL DOES NOT TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR ADDITIONAL COSTS DUE TO UNFAVORABLE WEATHER CONDITIONS, NATURAL CATASTROPHE, STRIKES, ACCIDENTS, ILLNESS, INJURY, LOSS OF PERSONAL ITEMS, ETC..

SAS Travel does not take responsibility for additional costs due to unfavorable weather conditions, natural catastrophe, strikes, accidents, illness, injury, loss of personal items, etc..

- SAS Travel does not take responsibility for additional costs due to unfavorable weather conditions, natural catastrophe, strikes, accidents, illness, injury, loss of personal items, etc..

The approach is a simplified catastrophe risk assessment, to calculate the direct costs of storm surges under scenarios of sea level rise, coupled to an economic input — output (IO) model.

Second, the damage cost of a ton of CO2 (at 3 % discount rate) ranges from negative to $ 22 at the 99 percentile [from Richard Tol's paper «The Social Cost of Carbon: Trends, Outliers and Catastrophes»], with a median of about cost of a ton of CO2 (at 3 % discount rate) ranges from negative to $ 22 at the 99 percentile [from Richard Tol's paper «The Social Cost of Carbon: Trends, Outliers and Catastrophes»], with a median of about Cost of Carbon: Trends, Outliers and Catastrophes»], with a median of about $ 4.

It also makes economic sense: All those reservoirs filling up with coal ash day after day are just problems waiting to happen, and if we're just waiting for catastrophes to happen before we do something, the true cost of burning coal isn't being internalized properly; local citizens and people downstream of those rivers end up paying for it with their health and by losing their local environment (what if your family house was buried in potentially toxic sludge?).

I've been following this topic since the 1980s, my initial approach that if there is a potential catastrophe from AGW, we need to understand it and the associated costs and benefits of dealing or not dealing with it.

But globally and chronically, the net effect is negative, especially with respect to the costs of adaptations associated with weather catastrophes, water supplies and rising sea levels.

The economic costs of natural disasters related to global warming are adding up; some of the largest effects of these catastrophes can be felt in the United States, where politics and policies are not keeping pace with the physical realities of climate change.

Other compelling reasons to begin taking action include the potential for catastrophes that defy the assumption that climate change damages will be incremental and linear; the risk of irreversible environmental impacts; the need to learn about the pace at which society can begin a transition to a climate - stable economy; the likelihood of imposing unconscionable burdens and impossible tasks on future generations; the need to create incentives to accelerate technological development the address climate change; and the ready availability of «no regrets» policies that have very low or even no costs to the economy.

If not for the continuous invocation of anthropogenically generated pending catastrophes this whole debate would have occurred between groups of nerds in the faculty lounge lunching on PB&J sandwiches because the grant money coming in wouldn't cover the cost of a Big Mac Extra Value meal.

Remember — a $ 40 a barrel increase in oil costs is just a natural result of the workings of the market, a $ 1 a barrel carbon tax is an unitigated catastrophe which will see us all starving in the gutters.

You can only believe there is a looming catastrophe if a) you believe that man is responsible for 100 % of the CO2 increase (that is in serious doubt), b) an increase of up to 2.0 °C is not beneficial (there is much evidence that it is beneficial), c) over the next 100 years there will not be any major advances in energy production (now we can switch to nuclear within 10 - 20 years), and d) man can realistically do anything to effect global temperatures (the US EPA estimates proposed CO2 restrictions costing tens of trillions of US dollars would reduce global temperature by 0.006 °C).

By «a theory that didn't suit the people who follow this site» you must be referring to the Alarmists» idea that our C02 is causing all manner of global disasters, and will, if not curtailed lead to global catastrophe, meaning we must immediately change our sources of energy to far more expensive ones, costing trillions.

Therefore, since catastrophe is not a real threat, we are left with addressing the question: what are the costs and benefits of warming versus the costs and benefits of mitigation policies?

Whereas in the mid 2000s, Stern et al emphasised the imperative of responding to climate change — or facing catastrophe — they now want to present global political action as entirely inconsequential with respect to cost.

I'm probably too simple, but in my classic view of cost vs. benefit risk analysis, if one possible risk is utter (total) catastrophe the cost approaches infinity so mitigation is demanded even it its probability is zero.

I endorse the findings of Climate Change, Catastrophe, Regulation and the Social Cost of Carbon by Julian Morris as representing my views on the use of the SCC in this matter.

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2014/04/13/3426117/climate-panel-avoiding-catastrophe-cheap/ «Now you might think it would be a no - brainer that humanity would be willing to pay a very high cost to avoid such catastrophes and achieve the low emission «2 °C» (3.6 °F) pathway in the left figure above (RCP2.6 — which is a total greenhouse gas level in 2100 equivalent to roughly 450 parts per million of CO2).

What I deny is the catastrophe — the proposition that man - made global warming ** will cause catastrophic climate changes whose adverse affects will outweigh both the benefits of warming as well as the costs of mitigation.

Weitzman argues — and I agree — that this risk of catastrophe, rather than the details of cost - benefit calculations, makes the most powerful case for strong climate policy.

When other unique areas of dispute — such as appraisal, matching and replacement cost — are considered, sometimes during catastrophe (CAT) operations, the importance of having legal counsel concentrating his or her practice in property litigation can not be underestimated.

But that would be a big mistake, says Moree, who adds renters should think in terms of the total cost they would incur tomorrow should a catastrophe happen today.

Some of the things they may consider include your location, and how prone the area is to catastrophes such as hurricanes, flooding, earthquakes and tornadoes, the repair costs in the area, and the overall construction of your home.

The amount of homeowners insurance coverage you purchase depends on your replacement costs: the amount it would cost to replace your home if catastrophe hits.

However, too few renters take advantage of a renters insurance policy, making those cost savings disappear in the event of a catastrophe.

After a major catastrophe such as a hurricane or tornado, construction costs may rise suddenly because the price of building materials and construction workers increase due to the widespread demand.

A larger house is more expensive simply because it costs more to replace it in the event of a catastrophe.