Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Is the world becoming uninsurable?

charleshughsmith.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

731–740 of 1001 posts

Re: Is the world becoming uninsurable?

#731

Post by ryao »

smileysteve wrote: post #681
sandworm101 wrote: post #570

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wildfires are not the problem. They happen all the time without causing billion-dollar insurance claims. Insurance is always assets x risk. The issue is expensive flamable housing (assets) in a wildfire area (risk). We ask for trouble when we create million-dollar wooden houses surrounded by manicured gardens in desert enviroments. And build on a slope facing pervailing winds. The answer is concrete/brick houses with…

A forward looking (part of a) solution for Malibu would be the county acquiring and maintaining beach paths every few houses. Prescribed 10' wide fire breaks. This solves the fire problem AND the limited access to a public resource that is common in Malibu. Ideally a permeable surface without any growth, cleared at least 2x a year.

Legal Eagle claims that embers can travel up to 2 miles:

https://youtu.be/5h1H36rdprs?t=1m51s

That would easily jump a 10' fire break.

Re: Is the world becoming uninsurable?

#732

Post by Alive-in-2025 »

dfxm12 wrote: post #642
pclmulqdq wrote: post #561

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As the governments in the US get increasingly incompetent, insurance prices are going to have to rise. Government services are largely there to protect you during black swan events, so if those services get less and less effective, you're going to need more insurance for those events.

I don't think it is incompetence of the governments. It appears to be a goal of most US politicians to add to the coffers of private business, insurance companies included, at the expense of all but the most rich Americans.

I'd finish your comment with "it's a goal of most US politicians ... to enrich the most wealthy Americans".

Re: Is the world becoming uninsurable?

#733

Post by noqc »

leguminous wrote: post #432
HacklesRaised wrote: post #343

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be fair we are talking about an area of the country that is prone to seismic activity, it does limit the building materials. Perhaps what should be more commonly accepted is that the US is a land of great natural beauty! And large tracts of it should be left to nature. What's the average monthly leccy bill in Phoenix during the summer? $400? Where does LA get most of its water? Local sources? I don't think that's…

> What's the average monthly leccy bill in Phoenix during the summer? $400? The average high temperature in Phoenix in July is 106.5F (41.4C). If you are cooling to 70.0F (21.1C), that's a difference of 36.5F (20.3C). The average January low in Berlin is 28.0F (-2.2C). If you are heating to 65.0F (18.3C), that's a difference of 37.0F (20.5C). I feel like many people living in climates that don't require air condition…

a greenhouse can heat a space by enough to be comfortable for free, but not cool it. Windows and sunlight matter.

Re: Is the world becoming uninsurable?

#734

Post by Alive-in-2025 »

amonon wrote: post #687
doug_durham wrote: post #669

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That doesn't align with the reality of these areas. To get insurance in these areas you have to demonstrate that you have created a defensible space around your house. This is enforced by local fire department inspections. I know this because I live near a fire prone area. Despite these things the area still burned. The problem isn't "lawns" or "wooden houses". In the case of the LA fires you would have had the burne…

>This was a black swan event that will require a thoughtful response. Taleb would have a field day with this one. Broadly, I think a big part of the argument is driven by the assumption that the area will be rebuilt, despite being a known fire risk.

Because of the Santa Ana winds (with this apparently being more than usual), you'll continually have very dry conditions with high winds and the danger of a fire getting out of control. I don't see it as a black swan either. This is a repeatable scenario, every few years they'll probably have conditions like this. The climate is changing, maybe this will spread or move to areas nearby.

I live in an area that had a special warning last summer, we had a very very dry summer and there was a period with low humidity and high winds for a few days, it was considered an unusual scenario with extreme fire risk - but nothing happened this time. Now that I'm writing this I'm wondering what I'll do if it feels like an annual occurrence. Another parallel, the power company warned us they might shut off the power to reduce risk but I guess it didn't get that bad.

Re: Is the world becoming uninsurable?

#735

Post by markus_zhang »

Judging from my experience (house built in non hazard suburb and maintained every few years), Yes.

The thing is that with the additional cost of climate change, a lot of these houses do not have the capacity to go through a once-in-100-years event, as they start to occur more frequently.

We just had a water backflow from the city main pipeline last August. Pretty much everyone was impacted, and insurance cost went up for those that were not impacted anyway.

So to make the house insurable, it requires: 1) massive city infrastructure rebuilding, and 2) everyone pays a lot more to install additional "modules" in their houses. For example I already have a backflow valve but if things get worse and water starts to accumulate close to the bottom of the house I'll need a very expensive French drain, something like 60k CAD. It's not going to break me, but it's 3-4 years of saving.

I can't imagine what happens if we get another once-in-100-years storm this summer. I'll probably leave the basement bare without floor and won't bother to claim it.

Re: Is the world becoming uninsurable?

#736

Post by mtalantikite »

doug_durham wrote: post #675
mtalantikite wrote: post #648

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One thing I haven't seen mentioned in here is the ornamental planting of non-native plants all over LA, like eucalyptus which is highly flammable, as opposed to the native coastal oak, which is not. All those iconic, non-native palm trees are fire hazards.

That's because that wasn't a material effect in this situation. It was hurricane force winds blowing over native shrubs and scrub land. It wasn't forests of eucalyptus that caused this. California has a decades long effort to restore native plants in areas. Eucalyptus groves are being torn out. The problem is that the native shrubs and grass are pretty flammable. They evolved to burn and regrow. They aren't resistant…

For sure, they're not fireproof of course, but they do survive and seem to be more resistant than non-native species [1].

And, like all things, of course there are many interdependent pieces in play, like those hurricane force winds, but oak trees don't burn the same as a palm [2]. I just keep seeing that viral video of a firefighter trying to put out a palm while a guy escaped his house on a bike -- it was shedding embers like crazy. [3]

[1] pdf warning: https://www.fs.usda.gov/psw/publications/documents/psw_gtr21...

[2] https://abcnews.go.com/US/elderly-couple-battles-flames-la-f...

[3] https://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/california-wildfires/pali...

Re: Is the world becoming uninsurable?

#737

Post by s1artibartfast »

epolanski wrote: post #459
spicyusername wrote: post #456

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Building out of wood is cheap and perfectly strong for most areas. Engineering is always a set of trade-offs.

I don't get how can one put his own future in a cheaply built building you're one fire or thougher-than-usual natural event away from losing. It's normal nobody wants to insure such risky assets, especially as nominal value of this wooden crap is stellar due to the skewed demand/offer ratio plaguing good parts of US. In my life I've seen my and my family's real estate being hit by a tree, fire, floodings and I've nev…

Define "cheaply built". These houses are already hugely expensive, to the point that we cant even afford to build more.

Re: Is the world becoming uninsurable?

#738

Post by snakeyjake »

tobyhinloopen wrote: post #283

American, living in area prone to natural disasters: "Is the WHOLE WORLD becoming uninsurable?" The answer is obviously "no" since there are other parts of the world that don't live on a hurricane highway nor build houses made from firewood in an area prone to wildfires.

>don't live on a hurricane highway nor build houses made from firewood in an area prone to wildfires

Fireproof concrete bunkers would be worse for insurance because when the firestorm blows through and shatters the 7-centimeter windows slits your fireproof design calls for and ignites the interior you have to demolish steel reinforced concrete with machinery instead of knocking down wood with a sledgehammer and muscles.

A Caterpillar D9 is more expensive per day than a migrant laborer.

There are so many images of concrete buildings being burned out that if I search "california fires" the 9th image is of a steel-reinforced concrete building has ~10 meter fire jets blowing out one of its windows.

Re: Is the world becoming uninsurable?

#739

Post by riskable »

epolanski wrote: post #437
tobyhinloopen wrote: post #283

American, living in area prone to natural disasters: "Is the WHOLE WORLD becoming uninsurable?" The answer is obviously "no" since there are other parts of the world that don't live on a hurricane highway nor build houses made from firewood in an area prone to wildfires.

I'm always baffled at the fact that Americans don't build houses out of bricks. I read those arguments of the advantages this method has, especially financial ones, but to me it's nonsense considering that it would prevent an endless number of problems that cause the total loss. I still remember when New Orleans was hit with by Katrina, large parts of the suburbs where houses where made by wood and plastic where dest…

If you built a home out of bricks in New Orleans it will sink. Same (and even worse) for Florida. You can mitigate that somewhat but it's extremely expensive and bad for the environment/water table/aquifer.

For reference, to make a non-sinking, heavy building in Florida you have to drill down into the limestone layer which is usually 100+ feet below the surface. Then you have to create very strong concrete caissons to hold the building up, standing on that limestone layer. It's very similar to if you were to build a structure out into the ocean (LOL).

Re: Is the world becoming uninsurable?

#740

Post by s1artibartfast »

Almondsetat wrote: post #330
Panzer04 wrote: post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why bother building a better home when it's cheaper to buy insurance and rebuild later? This is why prices are important - sometimes it's sensible to build cheaper houses without these safeties if the risk isn't there, but if the risk does exist then it needs to be priced right to provide that incentive.

How about the cost of your life ? If the house resists the earthquake and you are inside it, you don't die.

Loss of life from fire and earthquake isnt really high enough to be a concern. This is primarily a cost and inconvenience question.
Post reply on HN