The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration will no longer track the cost of climate change-fueled weather disasters, including floods, heat waves, wildfires and more. It is the latest example of changes to the agency and the Trump administration limiting federal government resources on climate change.

NOAA falls under the U.S. Department of Commerce and is tasked with daily weather forecasts, severe storm warnings and climate monitoring. It is also parent to the National Weather Service.

The agency said its National Centers for Environmental Information would no longer update its Billion-Dollar Weather and Climate Disasters database beyond 2024, and that its information — going as far back as 1980 — would be archived.

  • dermanus@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    2 hours ago

    OK. I assure you, the insurance industry will continue to track it.

    This is the same logic as “if we stop testing, the disease goes away”

  • Oniononon@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    2 hours ago

    Quite whimsical. Especially hilarious this is done after gutting FEMA. Adding a lol or lmao even since nayural catastrophes are starting very soon.

    If there was no other evidence that current goverment is composed of russian agents then this is. This serves no purpose other than to go out of their way to cause suffering and to cripple another countries emergency services. Two things russia loves beyond everything.

  • NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    edit-2
    10 hours ago

    The year is 2039, Florida has been perpetually under hurricanes for 3 weeks straight as hurricane after hurricane makes landfall. After careful review, it’s been determined that the hurricanes have caused $0.00 in damage. There’s nothing to be concerned about. FEMA has not been dispatched as there is no emergency.

  • Rimu@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    56
    ·
    15 hours ago

    This won’t fool the insurance companies. They’re the ones on the hook for this.

    • brucethemoose@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      15 hours ago

      Depends. Some of their CEOs will shamelessly bow to the party line, though not all. Definitely not Berkshire-Hathaway.

      • gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 hour ago

        Uh, no they won’t?

        The entire business model of insurance is to understand risk and assign a cash-value to it. Ignoring risk means their business model falls apart. They’re not going to ignore risk, in any dimension. And if they’re MADE to “ignore” risk in a particular dimension… they’re still going to analyze it and have actuarial tables around it, and will instead just factor it in by raising prices across the board.

      • halcyoncmdr@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        11 hours ago

        No they’ll just say what the government wants and do what they have to anyway. Hypocrisy is the way they operate already.

        Trump only gives a shit about what people say publicly anyway. It’s the single most important thing for him.

      • Aurenkin@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        13 hours ago

        What do you mean? They have to update their risk models or they’ll go out of business unless I’m misunderstanding.

        • brucethemoose@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          edit-2
          12 hours ago

          They will have to pick between lip service (and hiding the changes by, say, quietly pulling out of places?) and government retribution. Mark my words, at some point they will go after any kind of “climate agenda.”

          And that balance will depend on leadership. I mentioned Berkshire specifically because (at the top level, at least) they’re pretty old school with a low tolerance for nonsense, and big enough to eat the retribution.

        • apfelwoiSchoppen@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 hour ago

          Yes. They can deny for any reason, mostly shareholders. It is primarily a for-profit scam industry who will sign anyone up for premiums that will pay out nothing.

  • MyOpinion@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    16 hours ago

    Out of sight out of mind. Kind of like the wasteland the south is going to become after the next couple of years of storms.

  • yuknowhokat@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    13 hours ago

    Yes, that will really make it all better and stop any further damage from climate related issues. Just like not looking at the power bill means that I don’t have to pay it.