The latest report from the Institute of Actuaries highlights climate sensitivity and geoengineering following a warning that “catastrophic warming levels of above 2°C by 2050 are likely.”
Applying actuarial risk management to planetary systems is brillant - the analogy to the 2008 financial crisis really clarifies how we systematically underestimate risks. The higher climate sensitivity finding basically means our carbon budgets are negative, like discovering your retirement account is alredy overdrawn. The geoengineering discussion is necessary even if uncomfortable, though the moral hazard worries me - it could become another excuse for delaying emissions cuts rather than the emergency brake it should be.
The framing of planetary stability through a solvency lens is genuinly brilliant. Bringing acturial risk managment standards to climate makes the abstract threat feel much more urgent than typical carbon budget discussions. The 2008 financial parallel hits hard too, how we didnt see it coming untill cascading failures made it impossible to ignore. Always thought the moral hazard around SRM was underappreciated, glad to see it called out here.
Do you know where there is more information about the methodology of the following quote? I don't disagree, but was left wanting more information. "Leveraging existing financial services techniques such as reverse stress testing yields far more realistic answers with 80-90% GDP reduction between 3° and 4°C of warming and significant, and hard to manage reductions between 1.5° and 2°C (our current trajectory)."
Applying actuarial risk management to planetary systems is brillant - the analogy to the 2008 financial crisis really clarifies how we systematically underestimate risks. The higher climate sensitivity finding basically means our carbon budgets are negative, like discovering your retirement account is alredy overdrawn. The geoengineering discussion is necessary even if uncomfortable, though the moral hazard worries me - it could become another excuse for delaying emissions cuts rather than the emergency brake it should be.
The framing of planetary stability through a solvency lens is genuinly brilliant. Bringing acturial risk managment standards to climate makes the abstract threat feel much more urgent than typical carbon budget discussions. The 2008 financial parallel hits hard too, how we didnt see it coming untill cascading failures made it impossible to ignore. Always thought the moral hazard around SRM was underappreciated, glad to see it called out here.
Do you know where there is more information about the methodology of the following quote? I don't disagree, but was left wanting more information. "Leveraging existing financial services techniques such as reverse stress testing yields far more realistic answers with 80-90% GDP reduction between 3° and 4°C of warming and significant, and hard to manage reductions between 1.5° and 2°C (our current trajectory)."
Nvm, it looks like it comes from the prior work "The Emperor’s New
Climate Scenarios", which I am re reading now
Parasol/umbrella - block the Sun/shadow maker
"Parasol Lost" is a good title. Good analysis.
Gotta REFLECT more to get a better title.
I love that analogy “moving the furniture to make room for more garbage”. Spot on.