Skip Navigation Links.
Collapse IRMI OnlineIRMI Online
Expand How To Use IRMI OnlineHow To Use IRMI Online
My Paid Publications
Expand What's NewWhat's New
Expand DashboardsDashboards
Collapse Commercial Liability InformationCommercial Liability Information
Collapse Free Commercial Liability CommentaryFree Commercial Liability Commentary
Expand Additional Insured IssuesAdditional Insured Issues
Collapse EnvironmentalEnvironmental
Professional Liability Insurance for Construction Projects (April 2012)
Homeowners Insurance Excludes Chinese Drywall Damage (February 2012)
Asbestos Damages Excluded under Property Policy (January 2012)
Insuring Completed Operations Pollution Risks (January 2012)
Emergency Response Costs in Pollution Liability Policies (August 2011)
Judgment Day Comes in Global Warming Litigation (February 2011)
Green Building Projects and Environmental Risk (January 2010)
No CGL Coverage for Chimney Repairs Due to Carbon Monoxide Leakage (January 2011)
CGL Pollution Exclusion Applies to Dust and Diesel Fumes (December 2010)
In a Year of Skepticism, Global Warming Is Still a Timely Topic (November 2010)
Mold from a Covered Concurrent Cause Still Excluded (November 2010)
Pollution Exclusion Found Inapplicable (May 2010)
An Update on Chinese Drywall Claims (April 2010)
CGL Policy Held To Cover Oil Spill Cleanup Costs (April 2010)
Mold Damage to Contractor's Nondefective Work Caused by Subcontractor May Be Covered under Prime Contractor's Umbrella Policy (January 2010)
CGL Pollution Exclusion Bars Coverage for Injury from Carbon Monoxide Released from Heater (December 2009)
Insurer and Environmental Consultant Have No Duty To Warn of Mold (July 2009)
No Coverage in Homeowner's Policy for Mold Damage from Water Pipe Leak (May 2009)
Construction Debris Is Excluded Pollutant (February 2009)
Pollution Legal Liability Market Update (July 2008)
"Damages" under a 1973 CGL Insurance Policy (April 2008)
"Suits" under a 1973 CGL Insurance Policy (February 2008)
Common Law Exceptions to the 1973 "Owned Property" Exclusion (January 2008)
Epoxy Fumes Excluded by CGL Insurance (November 2007)
Contractors Pollution Liability Update (October 2007)
Allocating Losses under a 1973 CGL (September 2007)
Pollution Exclusion Bars Coverage for Damage Caused by Dirt and Rocks (March 2007)
Pollution Exclusions in CGL Policy Bars Coverage for Carbon Monoxide Poisoning (February 2007)
Naturally Occurring Hazards: They Can Be "Hazardous" to Your Contractors Pollution Liability Coverage (January 2007)
Mold Is Not Covered as an Ensuing Loss of Leaking Water (January 2007)
Promoting Insurance-Based Solutions to Brownfield Redevelopment Challenges (November 2006)
Financing Environmental Loss with Environmental Insurance (October 2006)
Premium Instead of Prayer Needed for Mold Coverage (July 2006)
Mold Litigation: Expert Testimony Required to Prove Causation (April 2006)
Subrogation and Intervention in Construction Defect Case Involving Water and Mold (February 2006)
Environmental Insurance Helps Create Sustainable Development Out of "Brownfields" (December 2005)
Absolute Pollution Exclusion in Contractors Policy Does Not Bar Coverage for Toxic Fume Injuries (November 2005)
Manganism? (October 2005)
Environmental Insurance as a FASB Fix (August 2005)
Silica Claim Barred by Total Pollution Exclusion in CGL Policy (August 2005)
Broad Pollution Exclusion Is Ambiguous: Lead Covered by Policy (May 2005)
Silica—The Next Environmental Issue (April 2005)
Whether Mold Cleanup Costs Are Covered Depends on Causation (April 2005)
Homeowners Policy Unambiguously Excluded Coverage for Mold (October 2004)
Environmental Liability Buyouts: A Developing Option (August 2004)
Development of Environmental Risk Profiles for Construction Firms (July 2004)
Managing the Environmental Risk from Subcontractors (May 2004)
Seven Tips on Mold Management Programs (November 2003)
Environmental Due Diligence: The Information Is Everywhere! (May 2003)
The New Reality of Risk: Environmental Toxic Torts (May 2003)
Insured Fixed-Price Contracts and Environmental Cleanup (April 2003)
Managing Environmental Liabilities through Contracts (January 2003)
Environmental Insurance Changes the Game for Commercial Lenders (December 2002)
Environmental Risk in Retail: Exposures and Solutions (October 2002)
The Environmental Risks of Residential Construction (October 2002)
A Mold Prevention Program (July 2002)
Navigating the U.S. Environmental Liability Market (Part 2) (March 2002)
Navigating the U.S. Environmental Liability Market (Part 1) (March 2002)
The Pitfalls of Accepting Contaminated Fill (March 2002)
Mold: The Newest Environmental Hazard (September 2001)
Conducting Proper Environment Risk Assessments (July 2001)
Introduction to ISO 14001 (April 2001)
Brownfield Redevelopment: A Risk versus Reward Proposition (December 2000)
Colleges and Universities: Changing Your "School of Thought" When It Comes to Environmental Liability (October 2000)
Lenders and Environmental Liability (September 2000)
There's a Fungus Among Us (June 2000)
The U.S. Environmental Liability Insurance Market (May 2000)
Hidden Environmental Exposures of the Construction Industry (March 2000)
Expand Liability InsuranceLiability Insurance
Expand Commercial Property InformationCommercial Property Information
Expand Commercial Auto InformationCommercial Auto Information
Expand D&O, PL, E&O, EPLI InformationD&O, PL, E&O, EPLI Information
Expand Workers Compensation InformationWorkers Compensation Information
Classifications and Cross-References
Expand Risk Mgt. and Multiline InformationRisk Mgt. and Multiline Information
Expand Risk Finance InformationRisk Finance Information
Expand Construction InformationConstruction Information
Expand Personal Lines InformationPersonal Lines Information
Expand Claims, Caselaw, LegalClaims, Caselaw, Legal
Expand Insurance IndustryInsurance Industry
Expand Glossary of Insurance & Risk Management TermsGlossary of Insurance & Risk Management Terms
Expand SearchSearch
Terms of Use
Privacy Statement
System Requirements
Support

In a Year of Skepticism, Global Warming Is Still a Timely Topic

November 2010

The U.S. Weather Service recently reported that the first half of 2010 was the warmest 6-month period since recordkeeping began in 1880, and it predicted that the full year's temperatures will also set a record. In contrast to these warm temperatures, last winter's record snows and extreme cold temperatures set records across large areas of the United States.

by Rodney J. Taylor
Aon Environmental Services Group

These extreme weather events have many people confused about climate change and global warming, especially risk managers trying to prepare for the future and mitigate the financial consequences of weather-related losses. If steps are not taken to address these risks, the costs of losses and of insuring against them will continue to rise.

Recent Weather Fluctuations

The extraordinary weather variations being seen in the United States and around the world are symptoms of climate change that continues to threaten human health and property. For example, areas of the Southeastern United States that were experiencing record drought conditions 2 years ago have since had abundant rain that has replenished water supplies in reservoirs and underground aquifers. California had fewer forest fires this year due to cooler temperatures in the mountains and higher than average rainfall during the summer months.

Outside the United States, Russia has experienced the worst drought in its recorded history. China has had severe flooding along its major rivers, and large portions of Western Europe have had temperatures several degrees above normal seasonal highs. Pakistan has experienced record flooding that has left more than 20 million people homeless and destroyed more than a million acres of crops.

Assessing the Risks from Climate Change

In a thought-provoking article, "How Should We Think About Extreme Weather Events?", Jay Gulledge, director of the Science and Impacts Program at the Pew Center on Global Climate Change, concludes that the question of whether climate change has caused a specific weather-related event is essentially unanswerable.1 He suggests that risk managers would be better served by asking whether global warming changes the odds of certain types of events occurring rather than focusing on the cause of a particular windstorm, flood, or wildfire. If it is determined that the odds of a weather-related event have increased, the organization should then analyze the risks of loss associated with individual operations and facilities to evaluate its vulnerability if that event occurs. By anticipating events and vulnerabilities, the risk manager can focus on how to address the associated risks.

New prediction models based on more recent data also incorporate global warming projections into their calculations to provide more reliable estimates of future damage and allow better risk management decision making. More accurate projections of weather-related events allow risk managers to develop more realistic estimates of future damage from these events. This facilitates the development of risk protection programs that can prevent much of the damage that will otherwise occur.

For first-party losses involving property damage due to floods, storm surges, tropical storms, tornados and lightning, accurate projections of future events may indicate that higher insurance limits are needed to cover more severe direct damage and to pay for longer periods of business interruption following extreme weather-related events. For third-party claims that allege a corporation's emissions of greenhouse gases have caused or contributed to global warming, risk managers need to press their managers to implement reductions in emissions. They should also review their casualty insurance programs to make certain they provide the maximum coverage available for climate change claims.

Human needs also must be considered in light of recent flood, fire, lightning, and windstorm losses. With better information, risk managers can develop plans to evacuate personnel from impacted areas and to respond to emergency situations with the resources necessary to provide safety as well as temporary accommodations and supplies.

Lack of Consensus: General Public versus Scientists

A recent Yale University survey indicated that a relatively large segment of the American public is personally convinced that global warming is happening (71 percent). When survey participants were asked if scientists are in agreement on whether climate change is happening and what is causing it, a majority indicated they do not believe there is a consensus among the scientific community regarding the reality and the causes of climate change.2 According to the survey results, most Americans (69 percent) believe human activity is a primary cause or has made a substantial contribution to global warming. Many of the respondents did not perceive that climate change poses a serious threat to them, their families, or their communities, but do believe they threaten serious harm to others in places far away. They also do not believe that serious impacts of global warming will be observed in their lifetimes.

Contrary to the opinions expressed in the survey results from the Yale study, there is a high degree of consensus among scientists on the basic facts of climate change. Disagreement among them involves only the details. The vast majority of scientists agree that global temperatures are rising and that human activity is a significant factor in the warming that has taken place since the beginning of the mid-20th century. There is less agreement on the timing of future events and on the consequences of not taking measures to prevent greater accumulations of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. This uncertainty is due, in part, to concerns that climate conditions may reach a "Tipping Point" where the rate of change accelerates and damage becomes irreversible. Some scientists believe this could occur in the next few decades if permafrost in the upper half of the Northern Hemisphere begins to melt, releasing massive quantities of CO2 into the atmosphere as it thaws.

Risk managers must avoid buying onto the arguments of climate change extremists on either side of the issues. There is no laboratory where experiments can prove the validity of assumptions regarding global warming, so we must rely on simulations to predict future climate conditions. However, even though our understanding of how climate processes work is far from complete, and our ability to observe what is happening is limited, we must recognize that the models we use for climate change projections are not completely accurate.

Proactive Risk Management

Risk management measures that can be taken to mitigate the financial consequences of first-party climate change losses include accurate analysis of loss potential and the purchase of insurance with adequate limits to respond to more frequent and more severe weather-related events. With the exceptions of flood losses, weather-related events are not excluded from standard physical damage insurance policies. For homeowners, flood insurance is customarily purchased through the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP).

In some areas, windstorm losses are also insured outside of the commercial marketplace. State programs have absorbed these risks where rates are not allowed to rise to levels that will attract commercial insurers. First-party property damage policies should also be examined to evaluate the protection provided for unusual risks associated with weather-related events, such as sewer backup, sinkhole damage, and pollution from hazardous materials released by windstorms, floods, lightning, and wildfires.

Third-party claims that allege bodily injury or property damage due to global warming caused by or made worse by emissions of greenhouse gases may not be covered by general and excess liability policies in some jurisdictions. The pollution exclusions in these policies may apply to releases of CO2 and other harmful substances in the normal course of business (steady-state discharges) or as a result of sudden and accidental catastrophic events. Environmental insurance policies may be used to supplement the protection provided by general liability policies, but even with this additional coverage, there may be uninsured risks. Gaps in coverage should be analyzed and alternative risk management measures should be taken where these gaps cannot be closed by insurance.

Liability claims may also be filed against directors and officers of corporations as a result of climate change events. These may involve allegations that the strategic decisions of corporate executives failed to take global warming into account. For example, companies that generate large volumes of greenhouse gases should be looking at measures to reduce emissions in anticipation of regulations that will make continued emissions much more expensive. Claims may also allege that the executives failed to make decisions that could have led to new business opportunities based on climate change, and that these decisions affected the value of the corporation or its revenue.

Awareness of climate change factors may also provide important insights for contractors as they address a changing landscape of risks in carrying out their work. In such activities, risk managers cannot assume that the past will be an accurate predictor of future events. They should calculate the odds of more weather-related delays than in previous years and expect that these delays will be more disruptive than would be expected from a review of past events. If a builder's contract specifies a certain number of rain and snow days as "normal," the risk manager may want to consult more contemporary models as these contract conditions are negotiated. Additional protection at the job site against wind, rain, lightning and flooding may also be necessary to avoid damage to stored materials, equipment, and structures under construction. Measures may also have to be taken to assure proper management of materials and construction activities to assure that mold does not develop from wet materials or the incursion of rain or flood water into buildings under construction. Storm water barriers should also be designed to contain larger volumes of water and more frequent rainstorms.

The variation in weather-related events is likely to be more extreme for contractors that work in areas outside the United States than for those that work only on domestic projects. Monsoons, tsunamis, earthquakes, and volcanic eruption must be added to wind, rain, lightning, flood and wildfire risks as causes of potential job site losses. Transportation of materials and equipment may also be at higher risk of damage due to storms at sea and conditions that disrupt land-based transportation.

Conclusion

Climate change is a timely topic in spite of some peoples' perceptions that global warming is a hoax or that the results are remote in terms of where and when damage will occur. Risk managers need to focus their efforts on the use of up-to-date models and comprehensive risk analysis to anticipate more severe weather-related events and to address their corporations' vulnerabilities to first-party, third-party, and executive liability claims. Where the internal resources to evaluate and address risks are inadequate, risk managers should seek assistance from climate specialists, insurance brokers, and consultants that can assist in the understanding and management of global warming risks.

While some view climate change risks as the next generation's problem, serious financial impacts of weather-related events are already being seen in many regions of the world. Prudent risk management measures supported by strong corporate policies can mitigate the consequences of many events that will be devastating if no action is taken. Risk managers should put aside their skepticism, study the facts, and take appropriate actions while there is time to prepare for a warmer future.


1Jay Gullege, "How Should We Think About Extreme Weather Events?," Pew Center on Global Climate Change (blog), September 7, 2010.

2Yale School of Forestry & Environmental Studies, American Opinions on Global Warming Summary.


Opinions expressed in Expert Commentary articles are those of the author and are not necessarily held by the author's employer or IRMI. Expert Commentary articles and other IRMI Online content do not purport to provide legal, accounting, or other professional advice or opinion. If such advice is needed, consult with your attorney, accountant, or other qualified adviser.

Advertisements
    
 
© 2000-2012 International Risk Management Institute, Inc. (IRMI). All rights reserved.