If there's one industry that ought to be concerned about the threat of global warming, it's the insurance industry. OK, the ski industry, too, but I digress.

加利福尼亚保险专员戴夫·琼斯（Dave Jones）最近这样说: "Climate change is an obvious physical threat to us all, but increasingly it also poses a serious financial threat to the insurance industry…" When extreme weather causes damage, insurers pay.

So you'd expect insurance companies to be among the most forceful voices in corporate America calling for the regulation greenhouse gas emissions.

Uh, no. They've been eerily quiet.

而且，至少您希望他们自豪地转向一些大规模投资，以清洁旨在减少温室气体排放的能源或能源效率项目。

又错了。

"It's surprising, in a sense, because they have so much to lose from climate change," saysSharlene Leurig，保险计划高级经理Ceres，一个非营利性的投资者和环境团体联盟。但是，她指出，保险是一项保守的业务。该行业全都与风险有关，但它不想冒着关于气候变化的风险。

这是关于保险业和气候的两个博客文章中的第二个。昨天，我博客federal and state-backed programs that are insure risky propertiesfrom flood and storm damage, creating potential liabilities for all of us. Today, I'll ask why U.S. insurers -- in stark contrast to the big European reinsurance companies -- have been missing in action during the Washington climate wars.

考虑：美国气候行动合作伙伴关系，是大公司和环境集团的联盟，呼吁进行碳排放限额，包括21家公司 - 七家公用事业公司，工业巨头GE和西门子，化学公司Dow和Dupont，Alcoa，Shell，Shell，Rio，Rio，Rio，Rio自AIG离开以来，Tinto，Johnson＆Johnson，百事可乐，而不是一家保险公司（由于气候无关）。

Business for Innovative Climate and Energy Policy，或二头肌（这是CERES的一个项目），这是另一个努力推动政策推动低碳经济的联盟，包括耐克，星巴克，Timberland，eBay，Gap，Gap，Avon，Avon和Aspen/Snowmass等。没有保险公司。

Now…this isn't to suggest that insurers have been entirely absent from the climate debate but mostly they've focused on their parochial interests. Some companies, for example, have asked the federal government to provide wind as well as water coverage in the event of hurricane damage. Others proposed want the federal government to offer reinsurance -- that's insurance for insurance companies -- to protect against a major catastrophe, or "mega-cat" in industry argot. Fireman's Fund, a unit of the German financial services firm Allianz, has been writing "green insurance" policies for building owners. (See my blogpost,Fireman's Fund: an insuror that isn't dull.)

但是，与欧洲再保险公司一再警告气候风险不同，该行业一直是大问题的非因素。早在2007年，瑞士RE America Corp的灾难风险单位负责人安德鲁·卡斯塔尔（Andrew Castaldi），told a Senate committee：“我们明确地相信气候变化给世界经济和社会福利带来了日益增加的风险。”在a 2009 report, Lloyd's of London warned of climate changecontributing to "resource-driven conflicts; economic damage and risk to coastal cities and infrastructure; loss of territory and resultant border disputes; environmentally induced migration; government fragility; political radicalisation; tensions over energy supplies and pressures on international governance". Munich Re, the world's biggest reinsurer,said last year:"It would seem that the growing number of weather-related catastrophes can only be explained by climate change."

当我通过电子邮件发送Property Casualty Insurers Association of AmericaPCI研究和政策分析高级总监David Kodama询问为什么该行业没有更多的声音。

气候变化是保险公司的许多重要战略风险之一。从广义上讲，保险公司评估和监视与气候变化相关的发展，并适合各个保险公司，将相关信息纳入其业务模型和实践中。

但是，气候变化是一个特别复杂的问题，其原因，效果和影响它的相关变量是多方面且不太了解的。

…It is prudent for the many insurers to continue to study the issue.

协会会更加谨慎吗？Ceres Sharlene Leurig说：“在美国，气候变化是一个严重政治化的问题。”“为什么要把脖子放在那里，开始有关许多消费者对某个话题感到困惑的话题的消息，并且在某些情况下，对此充满敌意？”当然，这正是像耐克和星巴克这样的大胆公司与二头肌所做的事情。

但是，可能是保险公司不愿大声疾呼的另一个原因：They write liability coverage for corporations, including oil and coal companies, which are being sued over climate-related liability.

已经对化石燃料公司提出了索赔，该公司提醒一些人对烟草和石棉制造商提起诉讼。在Comer诉Murphy Oil，原告起诉企业被告声称由据称气候变化引起的卡特里娜飓风的影响造成的人身伤害和财产损失。在Village of Kivalina v. ExxonMobil, a native Alaska group sued oil and gas companies and US utilities claiming that coastal erosion caused by global warming would force them to relocate their fishing village.

在a fascinating interview with an Australian newspaperComer案中的首席律师Gerald Maples说，他将追捕那些误导公众气候变化危险的化石燃料公司，就像烟草公司对吸烟的危险宣布怀疑：“这几乎被接受了石棉和烟草的历史现在是气候变化诉讼的榜样。”

_{图像由作者提供。}