Bericht$855 Milliarden und kein Anspruch: Das Meer bedroht 267,000 australische HäuserVerfasst 10. September 2026 um 17:04 UTCAnsehenTranskript0:00The sea is coming for 267,000 Australian homes, and the price tag is $8550:05billion.0:06That is not the worst case.0:08It is the middle path.0:09And the policy you're holding probably won't pay a cent.0:12So when the water takes the land, who pays?0:14A new assessment, the first national scale one of its kind, maps the damage across0:181,156 coastal sub-regions from Queensland to the Northern Territory.0:23Published September 9th in Nature Scientific Reports, it's led by University of0:27Melbourne's Tom Compass with Chuang N.0:29Hu Che and ANU's R.0:30Quentin Grafton.0:32The scenario assumes emissions peak around 2040 and warming settles near 2.7 degrees0:36by 2100, a level we're on track to overshoot.0:39Seas have already risen 22 centimeters since 1900.0:43On those assumptions, the bill splits $274 billion in direct property damage, $5810:49billion in lost land use.0:50The exposure is not evenly spread.0:53Queensland carries the largest share of homes at risk, 93,157 properties, and about0:58214.5 billion in losses.1:01The Gold Coast alone is the single most exposed urban area in the country, with1:05projected losses of $84 billion.1:07Western Australia's bill is biggest at the state level, $230.5 billion.1:11Every coastal jurisdiction is exposed.1:13There is no state where the shoreline is safe.1:15Western Australia's state bill leads at $230.5 billion, Queensland close behind at1:21$214.5, and the Gold Coast, a single city, sits at $84 billion more than any other1:26urban area in the country.1:28The sharper turn is what the insurance market will not do.1:31Standard policies exclude actions of the sea, so a block swallowed by a rising tide1:35is not a claim, it's a loss.1:37The report frames this as a widening mismatch.1:40As risk grows, insurability stretches to its limits.1:43In March 2024, the Federal Treasury published this consultation paper inviting1:48submissions on how coastal hazards are defined in policies and what standard cover1:52should require.1:53The ACCC and the Financial Rights Legal Center both filed submissions that April.1:58No standard cover prescription is in force that answers the coastal owner's2:01question.2:02Here's the live test.2:03After ex-tropical cyclone Alfred struck in March 2025, the Gold Coast rebuilt its2:08beaches.2:09About $35 million is attributed to the Council for Sand Replenishment, though the2:13full program runs closer to $37 million, plus about $5 million in emergency2:18response.2:19Compare that to the same city's modeled $84 billion exposure, $35 million to rebuild2:23one beach, $84 billion sitting on the table.2:26That replenishment is a decade-scale stopgap.2:29An example, not a solution.2:31The sea has been rising for more than a century.2:34The Treasury consulted on the insurance gap two years ago.2:37Cyclone Alfred exposed the adaptation limits.2:40The modeling was published on September 9th this year, and the full cost lands by2:432100.2:45The modeling shows the risk concentrating where the population is.2:48A wealthy owner can relocate or self-insure.2:51A family carrying a mortgage on a block the sea is already eating, or a renter in a2:55low-lying suburb has no such margin.2:57The report presses for adaptation, managed retreat, coastal planning, building code3:01upgrades, and for the emissions cuts that change the trajectory.3:04What it does not supply is a mechanism for hundreds of billions to be paid.3:08Neither the insurance market nor the current adaptation spend is sized to this risk.3:13And the projections themselves assume a climate the world has not yet committed to3:16staying under.3:17So who pays for now, the owner?3:19The insurance gap remains open, and the Treasury consultation produced no standard3:23cover fix.3:24That is the unresolved question at the bottom of $580 billion in lost land use, and3:29it is a question this study did not answer.Artikel lesenChronologie der GeschichteHeyDexDas Kurzvideo ↗
