Risky Science Podcast · Risk Market News

Climate, Catastrophe Models and the Limits of Prediction with Dr. Roger Pielke Jr.

·42 min·2 clips

Pilkey says La Niña years produce far more U.S. hurricane damage than El Niño years.

1. Risky Science Podcast centers this episode on climate, catastrophe models, and the limits of prediction for near-term insurance decisions. 2. Chris Westfall hosts Dr. Roger Pielke Jr., a researcher with a background in math and policy who studies the use and misuse of science in politically contentious decisions. 3. The episode asks whether climate conditioning adds real value to catastrophe modeling or pushes annual risk pricing beyond what the science can support. 4. Pielke says the catastrophe modeling industry from AIR, RMS, and Karen Clark has been necessary for pricing catastrophic risk and understanding vulnerability and exposure. 5. He argues that a newer “climate risk” ecosystem now promises long-range forecasts such as flooding at a specific house in 2050. 6. He says those promises depart from mainstream climate science and are not something the models can actually deliver. 7. Pielke points to the IPCC and says all climate projections depend on scenarios, especially assumptions about future fossil-fuel use. 8. He says older scenarios used too much coal and therefore too much carbon dioxide, which makes them poor inputs for near-term loss conditioning. 9. He says annual reinsurance and insurance contracts make 2050 and 2070 projections weak guides for today’s pricing decisions. 10. He adds that for hurricanes, floods, tornadoes, and hail, significant human-caused climate signals are generally not expected until later this century. 11. Pielke gives a concrete counterexample from his own research on ENSO and U.S. hurricane damage. 12. He says La Niña years bring much more damage than El Niño years, and that effect is about an order of magnitude larger than projected climate effects on tropical cyclones in 2100. 13. He uses that comparison to argue that short-term climate variability matters more for annual underwriting than distant climate projections. 14. He also discusses Mark Carney’s 2015 “tragedy of the horizon” speech and says it helped fuel a finance-sector climate-risk ecosystem. 15. He says that ecosystem pushed claims that central banks, insurers, and reinsurers faced near-term financial loss or even business failure from climate change. 16. He argues that such claims fit an energy-transition agenda more than the evidence base he sees in the science. 17. The interview style is direct and policy-focused, with Westfall pressing on modeling assumptions, insurance withdrawals, and affordability. 18. Pielke responds with concrete examples, including California’s Proposition 103, Florida’s catastrophe-model vetting, and the idea of stress testing against a trillion-dollar hurricane loss. 19. People working in insurance, reinsurance, catastrophe modeling, or climate-risk finance would likely find the debate useful. 20. Listeners wanting a basic climate primer or a light conversation about weather should probably skip it.

Listen to the show on

Apple Podcasts Spotify

Play clips from this episode More from Risky Science Podcast