CT Rain Posted September 2, 2012 Share Posted September 2, 2012 Yea I read the FEMA stuff a minute ago, sounds expensive. Yeah to be honest a lot of people I spoke with after Irene were very pleased with their flood insurance. Some chose not to rebuild because they just wanted to take the money and didn't want to incur extra debt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ginx snewx Posted September 2, 2012 Share Posted September 2, 2012 Insurance companies have hurt people on the Cape as they designated it an unofficial disaster waiting to happen and don't realize that most of the Cape will not be swept away in surge. My mom, 5 miles inland, behind a terminal moraine at elevation had her ins dropped because of this. We struggled to get her Ins and the price was 25% above what she paid. Even at work way inland,we were recently placed in a 115 MPH sustained zone, as a result we were being asked to make some very expensive alterations. I provided reams of data for the arbitration. Now changed from requirement to recommendation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CT Rain Posted September 2, 2012 Share Posted September 2, 2012 My mom, 5 miles inland, behind a terminal moraine at elevation had her ins dropped because of this. We struggled to get her Ins and the price was 25% above what she paid. Even at work way inland,we were recently placed in a 115 MPH sustained zone, as a result we were being asked to make some very expensive alterations. I provided reams of data for the arbitration. Now changed from requirement to recommendation. Yeah a lot of people had that problem a couple years ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ginx snewx Posted September 2, 2012 Share Posted September 2, 2012 Yeah a lot of people had that problem a couple years ago. I found out that some of that was a direct result of some of the highly published papers we discussed yesterday. No factual evidence rather scientific supposition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CT Rain Posted September 2, 2012 Share Posted September 2, 2012 I found out that some of that was a direct result of some of the highly published papers we discussed yesterday. No factual evidence rather scientific supposition. Obviously you didn't read Kerry Emanuel's paper lol.... rather just the press release about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ginx snewx Posted September 2, 2012 Share Posted September 2, 2012 Obviously you didn't read Kerry Emanuel's paper lol.... rather just the press release about it. Not that one, check this and the references cited. Holy alarmist, Ins companies feast on these and are using them to increase profits, remember despite the brutal Ins losses in 2011, they all made lots of money. http://www.betterfutureproject.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/MassRisingEconRiskFromClimateChange-Full.pdf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CT Rain Posted September 2, 2012 Share Posted September 2, 2012 Not that one, check this and the references cited. Holy alarmist, Ins companies feast on these and are using them to increase profits, remember despite the brutal Ins losses in 2011, they all made lots of money. http://www.betterfut...Change-Full.pdf Just looking at it briefly there's some good things in there and some terrible things in there. It's from an environmental advocacy group so I'm not surprised. There has been a dramatic increase in extreme precipitation events in the last 100 years Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ginx snewx Posted September 2, 2012 Share Posted September 2, 2012 Just looking at it briefly there's some good things in there and some terrible things in there. It's from an environmental advocacy group so I'm not surprised. There has been a dramatic increase in extreme precipitation events in the last 100 years Debatable Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nzucker Posted September 2, 2012 Share Posted September 2, 2012 Not that one, check this and the references cited. Holy alarmist, Ins companies feast on these and are using them to increase profits, remember despite the brutal Ins losses in 2011, they all made lots of money. http://www.betterfut...Change-Full.pdf This report is complete BS. Drought every summer? 6F temperature increase by 2050? Come on! And no one in New England should be mandated to spend tons of money on flood insurance. Flooding events on Cape Cod and the CT shoreline are rare. Money spent on insurance is going to exceed that spent on repairs in the long run. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Damage In Tolland Posted September 2, 2012 Author Share Posted September 2, 2012 Hvy Hvy rain . What a soaker of a weekend Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ginx snewx Posted September 2, 2012 Share Posted September 2, 2012 This report is complete BS. Drought every summer? 6F temperature increase by 2050? Come on! And no one in New England should be mandated to spend tons of money on flood insurance. Flooding events on Cape Cod and the CT shoreline are rare. Money spent on insurance is going to exceed that spent on repairs in the long run. They are in a business to make money and will use what they need to to make the profits.Can not blame them for wanting to do so but.... It's just a question of how hard they squeeze our nuts, because they have us by them at all times. Not losing money yet due to the dire forecasts though http://www.iii.org/articles/2011-year-end-results.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nzucker Posted September 2, 2012 Share Posted September 2, 2012 They are in a business to make money and will use what they need to to make the profits.Can not blame them for wanting to do so but.... It's just a question of how hard they squeeze our nuts, because they have us by them at all times. Not losing money yet due to the dire forecasts though http://www.iii.org/a...nd-results.html My opinion is that if insurance costs an individual money, it shouldn't be mandatory. Individuals should be able to make their own business decisions about how best to protect their property, that is whether it should be insured or uninsured. Mandatory insurance, if it exists, should be a government program; it is against the foundations of our country's economy/free market to force people to consume a private service. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ginx snewx Posted September 2, 2012 Share Posted September 2, 2012 My opinion is that if insurance costs an individual money, it shouldn't be mandatory. Individuals should be able to make their own business decisions about how best to protect their property, that is whether it should be insured or uninsured. Mandatory insurance, if it exists, should be a government program; it is against the foundations of our country's economy/free market to force people to consume a private service. That is a protection for the folks who lend you the money, if you own a home outright no one can force you to have insurance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weathafella Posted September 2, 2012 Share Posted September 2, 2012 That is a protection for the folks who lend you the money, if you own a home outright no one can force you to have insurance. Bingo! You want the mortgage, you get insurance and just to make sure it will be part of our mortgage payment. Sop. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CT Rain Posted September 2, 2012 Share Posted September 2, 2012 My opinion is that if insurance costs an individual money, it shouldn't be mandatory. Individuals should be able to make their own business decisions about how best to protect their property, that is whether it should be insured or uninsured. Mandatory insurance, if it exists, should be a government program; it is against the foundations of our country's economy/free market to force people to consume a private service. Are you serious? If a bank loans you 500k for a house on the water why shouldn't they mandate you to have insurance? I think your argument that people in CT or Cape Cod on the water don't need flood insurance is just dumb. Storm surge from noreasters and hurricanes is a very real threat... we're not talking about Mount Socks here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CT Rain Posted September 2, 2012 Share Posted September 2, 2012 Bingo! You want the mortgage, you get insurance and just to make sure it will be part of our mortgage payment. Sop. Yup Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nzucker Posted September 2, 2012 Share Posted September 2, 2012 Are you serious? If a bank loans you 500k for a house on the water why shouldn't they mandate you to have insurance? I think your argument that people in CT or Cape Cod on the water don't need flood insurance is just dumb. Storm surge from noreasters and hurricanes is a very real threat... we're not talking about Mount Socks here. I didn't realize at first it was only for mortgages...it sounded as if everyone was being made to buy it. I would bet though that money spent on insurance far exceeds the damage caused by storms. I can only remember a couple events recently where CT got into any real trouble with storm surge, namely Irene and April 2007. The climate change "report" about increased natural disasters in New England was a joke. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CT Rain Posted September 2, 2012 Share Posted September 2, 2012 I didn't realize at first it was only for mortgages...it sounded as if everyone was being made to buy it. I would bet though that money spent on insurance far exceeds the damage caused by storms. I can only remember a couple events recently where CT got into any real trouble with storm surge, namely Irene and April 2007. The climate change "report" about increased natural disasters in New England was a joke. Yes... but it's not like it was peer reviewed literature. It was an environmental advocacy group. Who cares what they say? So 2 events in 5 years is rare with surge? I'd argue that, in general, we've been lucky of late. 1992 was quite serious in CT, along with some in 1996. Gloria produced some significant damage in some areas as did the 1978 blizzard. Donna, Carol, 1944, 1938 all produced severe and widespread coastal flooding. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
powderfreak Posted September 2, 2012 Share Posted September 2, 2012 Does this seem excessive to anyone in terms of spatial coverage of big QPF amounts? I could see spot amounts getting into this range but not widespread like that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ginx snewx Posted September 2, 2012 Share Posted September 2, 2012 Yes... but it's not like it was peer reviewed literature. It was an environmental advocacy group. Who cares what they say? So 2 events in 5 years is rare with surge? I'd argue that, in general, we've been lucky of late. 1992 was quite serious in CT, along with some in 1996. Gloria produced some significant damage in some areas as did the 1978 blizzard. Donna, Carol, 1944, 1938 all produced severe and widespread coastal flooding. You miss the references they cited? Can you explain the industries decisions in non flood prone areas to drop long term policy owners or the huge rate increases. The industry uses non peer reviewed literature by the way to back up their reasoning unfortunately. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CT Rain Posted September 2, 2012 Share Posted September 2, 2012 Does this seem excessive to anyone in terms of spatial coverage of big QPF amounts? I could see spot amounts getting into this range but not widespread like that. Yeah it does seem widespread. a 5 day QPF forecast like that is really tough to pin down when you're trying to nail down convection 5 days ahead of time lol. I think we'll get 1"-3" in many areas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CT Rain Posted September 2, 2012 Share Posted September 2, 2012 You miss the references they cited? Can you explain the industries decisions in non flood prone areas to drop long term policy owners or the huge rate increases. The industry uses non peer reviewed literature by the way to back up their reasoning unfortunately. I'm really not that interested in the topic so I didn't look lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ginx snewx Posted September 2, 2012 Share Posted September 2, 2012 For the record folks who build on barrier beaches or in historical flood prone areas should pay for those decisions, punishing folks who are not is ridiculous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Typhoon Tip Posted September 2, 2012 Share Posted September 2, 2012 The music of the atmospheric melody right now doesn't sing so pessimistically heading into early winter. Also, it's early, but the solar activity is no where close to where it was last summer into autumn, and i believe the recession back into a -NAO summer (which it most certainly was) is a bit too coincidental - likewise as it were that we had all that solar storm activity and summarily seemed to loose, albeit perhaps temporarily, the multi-decadal -NAO during the ensuing winter. Looking at the the multi-decadal signal, the tendency for the NAO as suggested by that curve alone is negative. Last year's positive dominance was a clear anomaly - but that is common in nature. Background signals are often trumped by shorter time scale forces that temporarily overwhelm whatever processes are causing said back ground signal. With much less trumping influence it seems reasonable that the background returns. Lest there be some other as yet unknown cosmically engineered reason to not snow on Kevin's house - sure, that's certainly a very real and palpable plausibility, notwithstanding... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CT Rain Posted September 2, 2012 Share Posted September 2, 2012 For the record folks who build on barrier beaches or in historical flood prone areas should pay for those decisions, punishing folks who are not is ridiculous. Yeah I don't think anyone would argue otherwise. I do know that due to wind threat insurance companies jacked up premiums near the water. I haven't heard about areas being forced to get flood coverage for surge recently that weren't already required to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Damage In Tolland Posted September 2, 2012 Author Share Posted September 2, 2012 This reminds me of 38 when we had all kinds if Hvy Hvy rain preceding the cane. Very very interesting Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CT Rain Posted September 2, 2012 Share Posted September 2, 2012 This reminds me of 38 when we had all kinds if Hvy Hvy rain preceding the cane. Very very interesting Yeah... only 1000 miles off. But whats 1000 miles between hurricanes? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Damage In Tolland Posted September 2, 2012 Author Share Posted September 2, 2012 Yeah... only 1000 miles off. But whats 1000 miles between hurricanes? Some very interesting things are going to happen over the next 10 days Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CT Rain Posted September 2, 2012 Share Posted September 2, 2012 Some very interesting things are going to happen over the next 10 days Yeah heavy rain and a cut-off. Welcome to September. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weatherwiz Posted September 2, 2012 Share Posted September 2, 2012 ughhhh having issues with the NWS pages again...this link won't load...says google chrome could not find it http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/data/indices/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.