Among the more controversial topics that National Underwriter covers is the subject of global warming and its impact upon the insurance industry.

Before writing this week's environmental insurance section in the March 21 print edition of National Underwriter P&C, I wondered what would be most useful to agents and brokers — without getting into the morass of controversy surrounding this issue.

The answer, I decided, was an issue that is top-of-mind for all producers: something to help grow their business.

The topic was “Main Street Producer Can Reap Big Benefits From The Growing Green Sector.” I asked insurers what they offer producers who deal in the small and middle market side of the business.

Some, like Fireman's Fund and The Hartford on the retail side, and ACE from the wholesale end, offer broad programs of interest to agents and brokers. Others interviewed were Chubb and CNA.

This piece, I hope, will give producers ideas about where to look for new business or questions to ask that may lead to unexpected business.

While controversial, I didn't completely steer clear of the question, “What's new on the climate change front?”

On that end, I spoke with Andreas Spiegel, senior climate change advisor at Swiss Re, who pointed to a report from Entergy Corp., on the potential economic loss from climate change, noting how those numbers can be almost mind-numbing.

Keeping that in mind, Spiegel pointed out that here in the United States, we are not realistic in pricing the cost of risk for coastal property owners. This, in turn, is keeping climate change adaptation at bay.

In reality, the soft market is delaying the inevitable. Coastal assets are becoming more and more vulnerable to catastrophic losses. Only re-thinking these exposures will make the risk insurable and affordable in the future.

The responsibility for dealing with these risks, he believes, is not for the property owner alone. The partnership of insurers and local, state, and federal officials is needed to assess vulnerabilities and push for necessary changes in building codes.

Insurers, he noted, do not have the power to do this on their own.

Despite evidence that climate change is having an impact on our environment, and that the primary culprit is man-made pollutants in our atmosphere, naysayers persist in turning a blind eye to science. Or, in most cases, they are turning their back on scientific study.

Some have argued that the real purpose behind climate science is to keep research grants coming. They point to stolen e-mails from researchers the purportedly show researchers fudging numbers and backtracking on their conclusions.

Last month the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration said the Department of Commerce Inspector General concluded that there “was no evidence of impropriety or reason to doubt NOAA's handling of its climate data.”

In July and August of last year, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change said findings from the Dutch government's Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency and the InterAcademy Council found no evidence that the scientific conclusions reached by the panel were suspect.

For his part, Mr. Spiegel says that broadly speaking, the insurance world accepts that climate change is happening. He added that Swiss Re is certain that many large corporations agree it is a scientific fact.

He admitted, however, that for whatever the reason, while Europe is largely accepting of climate change, a higher rate of skepticism remains in the United States.

Whether a producer believes climate change is happening or not, one would hope no producer is foolish enough to turn his or her back on new business. With that, we can keep our fingers crossed that market forces will lead us all to a greener planet.

Special Reports /

Benefiting From A Greener World

Related Stories

Recommended For You