James Hansen came out with a new study last month entitled, “Global Warming Has Accelerated: Are the United Nations and the Public Well-Informed?” I’m assuming the title is a rhetorical question since it is apparent to anyone with half a brain that we are currently living through a real-life Idiocracy timeline, i.e. look no further than the White House. Central to Hansen’s study is the loss of albedo. His paper explicitly accounts for the 0.5% albedo loss since 2010 and uses it as a core driver of his revised warming projections. Prior IPCC models underestimated or ignored albedo feedbacks. Here’s why Hansen’s findings are groundbreaking:

1. Hansen’s Inclusion of Albedo Loss

The albedo reduction is central to his analysis:

• Quantified Impact: Hansen calculates the 0.5% albedo drop as equivalent to +138 ppm CO₂(raising effective forcing from 419 ppm to 557 ppm in 2024).
• Climate Sensitivity: This forcing supports his revised equilibrium climate sensitivity (4.8°C per CO₂ doubling vs. IPCC’s 3°C).
• Tipping Points: Albedo loss accelerates ice melt, which Hansen links to AMOC collapse by 2040–2050 and earlier sea-level rise.

---

2. Why It Changes Projections

Hansen’s albedo-driven adjustments explain why his warming timelines are far more urgent than the IPCC’s:

Factor	IPCC AR6 (Ignoring Albedo)	Hansen et al. (With Albedo)
Effective CO₂ (2024)	419 ppm	557 ppm (419 + 138 ppm albedo)
2°C Threshold	~2040–2050	2030–2035
Climate Sensitivity	3°C per CO₂ doubling	4.8°C per CO₂ doubling
AMOC Collapse Risk	“Low likelihood” this century	Likely by 2040–2050

• Key Insight: The albedo loss effectively fast-forwards Earth’s climate to a higher-CO₂ state without actual CO₂ increases. This means:
  • Warming observed today (1.5°C) reflects forcing akin to 557 ppm CO₂, not 419 ppm.
  • Feedbacks (ice melt, permafrost thaw) are triggered earlier than IPCC models predict.

---

3. Why Other Models Missed This

• Satellite Data Gap: Prior assessments lacked precise CERES satellite albedo measurements (2000–present), which Hansen’s team used to quantify the 0.5% drop.
• Nonlinearity Ignored: IPCC models treat albedo as a linear feedback, but Hansen shows it’s accelerating (e.g., Arctic sea ice loss begets more ocean heat absorption).
• Aerosol Masking: IPCC underestimated how pollution cuts (e.g., ship fuel regulations) would unmask warming. Hansen’s albedo loss includes this effect.

---

4. Policy Implications

• Net-Zero Isn’t Enough: Even if CO₂ emissions stop today, the +1.7 W/m² albedo forcing (≈138 ppm CO₂) commits Earth to ~0.5°C additional warming by 2050.
• Aerosol Phaseout Dilemma: Reducing fossil fuel aerosols (e.g., coal pollution) could unmask another 0.3–0.5°C by 2040.
• Solar Geoengineering: Hansen argues for urgent research into temporary albedo restoration (e.g., stratospheric aerosols) to buy time for emissions cuts.

Hansen’s albedo analysis doesn’t just “update” projections—it rewrites them. By revealing that Earth’s energy imbalance is far worse than assumed, he shows that:

• 2°C is imminent (2030–2035), not mid-century.
• 3°C by 2050 is plausible under current policies.
• The IPCC’s “safe” CO₂ thresholds (e.g., 350 ppm) are obsolete; we’re already in “dangerous” territory (effective 557 ppm).

Hansen’s findings reveal that Earth’s energy imbalance is far worse than assumed, with albedo loss acting as a hidden turbocharger for warming. Current policies, calibrated to IPCC models, are underestimating near-term risks by decades. To avoid 3°C by 2050, emissions must plummet twice as fast as Paris Agreement targets, paired with unprecedented carbon removal and adaptation efforts. Rapid decarbonization and negative emissions technologies are now non-negotiable to avoid existential risks to civilization.

Without radical action, 2°C by 2030–2035 locks in irreversible damage, including meters of sea-level rise, an ice-free Arctic (darkening oceans and amplifying warming), coral extinction, and ecosystem collapse. At 2°C, 40–60% of the Amazon transitions to savannah due to drought and fires. The Amazon flips from carbon sink to emitter, releasing 90B tons of CO₂. At 2°C, 99% of tropical coral reefs bleach and die, unable to adapt to acidic, hot waters. There will be a 90% decline in North Atlantic cod, tuna, and shellfish by 2050. There will be 1.2B climate refugees by 2050 (Institute for Economics & Peace), overwhelming global governance. In addition to the hundreds of gigatons of CO₂ and methane that will be released, equivalent to 150 years of human emissions, thawing permafrost will also destroy 70% of Arctic roads, pipelines, and cities by 2050.

At 2°C, Earth crosses into a “point of no return”: feedbacks like ice sheet melt and permafrost thaw become self-sustaining, locking in 3–4°C even if emissions stop. Civilization as we know it cannot adapt to this pace of change. 2°C is not a “safe” threshold but a gateway to irreversible collapse. Humanity’s window to act is closing by 2030.

~~~~~~~~~~~

Projections for Insurance Industry Collapse After Factoring in Hansen’s New Analysis

1. Key Changes from Albedo-Driven Warming

• 2°C Threshold: Now likely by 2030–2035 (vs. IPCC’s 2040–2050), escalating weather disasters 10–20 years earlier.
• Extreme Event Costs: Insured losses could rise to **$(upfrom$150B today).
• Compound Risks: Concurrent disasters (e.g., hurricanes + wildfires + floods in the same year) become more frequent, overwhelming reinsurance capacity.

---

2. Revised Timelines for Insurance Market Failure

A. Regional Uninsurability

• Timeline: 2030s–2040s (vs. prior 2040s–2050s).
  • Coastal Zones: Miami, Mumbai, and Shanghai face premiums exceeding 15% of median income by 2035, triggering mass insurer withdrawals.
  • Wildfire Regions: California, Australia, and Mediterranean Europe see 50% of properties uninsurable by 2040.

B. Systemic Liquidity Crisis

• Timeline: 2040s (vs. prior 2050s).
  • Reinsurance Collapse: Global reinsurance capital (~$becomesinsufficient\; to\; cover\; **$1T+ annual losses** by 2040.
  • Credit Downgrades: Major insurers (e.g., Allianz, AIG) face junk ratings as climate liabilities explode.

C. Sovereign Bailouts

• Timeline: 2050s (vs. prior 2060s).
  • NFIP-Style Programs: U.S. National Flood Insurance Program ($20B debt) collapses by 2045, requiring federal bailouts.
  • Emerging Markets: Countries like Indonesia and Nigeria default on climate-linked debt as disaster costs exceed 10% of GDP.

---

3. Climate-Driven Triggers for Insurance Collapse

Risk Factor	Pre-Albedo Timeline	Post-Albedo Timeline	Impact
Coastal Uninsurability	2040s	2030s	Florida’s insurance market collapses by 2035 (vs. 2040).
Wildfire Premiums 2x	2050	2035	California premiums hit $10K/year for average homes.
Global Reinsurance Gap	2060	2045	Reinsurers cover only 30% of losses, vs. 70% today.

---

4. Why Albedo Loss Changes the Game

• Faster Heat Buildup: Darker surfaces (oceans, soot-covered ice) absorb more solar energy, intensifying heatwaves, droughts, and storms.
• Compound Events: Albedo loss amplifies feedbacks (e.g., Arctic warming → jet stream destabilization → prolonged droughts/floods), increasing correlated risks.
• Economic Shock: Insurers face “climate stagflation”—rising premiums reduce coverage demand while claims surge, collapsing profit margins.

---

5. Mitigation vs. Reality

• Adaptation Efforts: Parametric insurance and AI risk models may delay collapse in wealthy nations (e.g., EU, U.S.), but fail in tropics.
• Government Backstops: Nationalization of insurance sectors (e.g., Australia’s cyclone pool) becomes inevitable by 2040, but strains public budgets.
• Equity Crisis: Low-income households face de facto climate redlining, losing access to mortgages and insurance entirely.

---

6. Likelihood of Full Collapse

• Partial Collapse (High Confidence): 30% of global markets uninsurable by 2040 (vs. 2050 previously).
• Full Collapse (Still Low Probability): Requires 3°C+ warming by 2060, but albedo loss makes this trajectory more plausible.

---

Conclusion

Albedo loss advances insurance industry collapse by 10–15 years, with regional uninsurability beginning in the 2030s and systemic failures by the 2040s. The industry’s core business model—spreading risk across time and geography—fails in a world of concurrent, accelerating disasters. While wealthier economies may temporarily subsidize coverage, the global insurance system will fragment by mid-century, shifting climate costs directly to households and governments. Without radical emissions cuts and financial reforms, climate-driven economic collapse becomes unavoidable by 2060.

~~~~~~~~~

I have provided my readers with clear-eyed projections of what is to come in the near future. One of my readers was insisting that we would hit 3C of warming by 2032, but this is physically impossible for the following reasons:

Why 3°C by 2032 Is Impossible

• Thermal inertia: Oceans absorb ~93% of excess heat, delaying atmospheric warming. Even with albedo loss, full equilibrium warming takes decades.
• Feedback timescales: Major tipping points (e.g., Amazon collapse, methane clathrate destabilization) unfold over decades to centuries, not years.
• Emissions reality: Fossil CO₂ emissions are rising (~1% annually), but atmospheric CO₂ growth is ~2.5 ppm/year. To hit 3°C by 2032, CO₂ would need to spike to ~600 ppm (currently 425 ppm)—a physically impossible 17.5 ppm/year rise. Even under RCP8.5 (a high-emissions pathway), warming by 2030 is projected at ~1.7–2.0°C in most studies. Hansen’s analysis aligns with this, emphasizing that 3°C by 2032 would require implausibly rapid forcing (e.g., sudden methane bursts or total collapse of Earth’s carbon sinks).

Nonetheless, the fact that we are facing 2C of warming very soon should be terrifying enough for everyone on the planet.