3 thoughts on “NOAA: 2012 second costliest year for weather damages”
They adjusted neither for population nor the increased construction of coastal property. Given the wording of “billion dollar disasters”, it appears that they didn’t even adjust for inflation, but that could be just sloppy writing. This completely undermines any year-to-year comparisons.
Also, the costliest storm was Sandy by far, as it struck America’s largest city, which happens to be totally unprepared to be hit by a tropical storm despite being hit with one approximately once per century. They actually made up a new word “Superstorm” to hide the fact that a sub-hurricane swamped them so badly..
If the weather remained completely static year over year the cost attributable to weather damages will nevertheless increase. This is due to the fact that in a growing economy the underlying assets susceptible to weather damage would tend to increase in proportion to economic prosperity and general population growth.
Did they forget to include the cost of carbon killing efforts and global warming research/promotion/conferences? Looks like we’re headed for media meltdown if we get an “average” hurricane season.
Leave a Reply
Discover more from JunkScience.com
Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.
They adjusted neither for population nor the increased construction of coastal property. Given the wording of “billion dollar disasters”, it appears that they didn’t even adjust for inflation, but that could be just sloppy writing. This completely undermines any year-to-year comparisons.
Also, the costliest storm was Sandy by far, as it struck America’s largest city, which happens to be totally unprepared to be hit by a tropical storm despite being hit with one approximately once per century. They actually made up a new word “Superstorm” to hide the fact that a sub-hurricane swamped them so badly..
If the weather remained completely static year over year the cost attributable to weather damages will nevertheless increase. This is due to the fact that in a growing economy the underlying assets susceptible to weather damage would tend to increase in proportion to economic prosperity and general population growth.
Did they forget to include the cost of carbon killing efforts and global warming research/promotion/conferences? Looks like we’re headed for media meltdown if we get an “average” hurricane season.