The Tough Question For Insurers Withdrawing Coverage From Coal

The industry’s concern over carbon emissions, and their impact on climate change, raises the question of whether nuclear energy is better for the environment.

“One the one hand, nuclear [energy] is a source of carbon-free power generation. On the other hand, we all know there is a certain down side to it,” said Mark Way, director of global coastal risk and resilience at The Nature Conservancy.

During a CatIQ Connect session Wednesday, panelists were asked how insurers feel about coal versus nuclear energy.

“I think that’s a really tough one,” Way said during the session, titled Risks and Opportunities for the Capital Markets. “My strong suspicion is there is not an industry consensus on that.”

It is becoming more common for insurers and financial firms to exclude firms or projects if they are high-carbon emitters, with no clear plan or ability to transition to a low-carbon model, said panelist Alyson Slater, senior director of sustainable finance at the Toronto-based Global Risk Institute.