Climate Change, Natural Disasters, and Insurance: Navigating Uninsured Damages for Fair Compensation

August 5, 2023

According to Munich Re, the world's largest reinsurer, the impact of climate change on severe weather events has led to challenges for insurance providers in giving full payouts to policyholders affected by natural disasters. The cost of natural catastrophes covered by insurance reached around $120 billion in 2022, making it one of the costliest years on record for such events.

Insured losses from hurricanes and floods in the United States and Australia contributed significantly to these costs. For instance, Hurricane Ian caused $60 billion in insured damages and $100 billion in total losses when it hit Florida in September. Additionally, floods in Australia resulted in $4.7 billion in insured damages and $8.1 billion overall.

Climate scientists highlight that climate change exacerbates weather extremes, making them more intense and frequent. While no single severe weather event can be directly attributed to climate change, its influence increases the likelihood of such events occurring.

Insurance providers are facing the challenge of accurately pricing policies to account for the growing risks associated with climate change. This balancing act has resulted in some insurers raising premiums, imposing stricter policy terms, or even ceasing coverage in high-risk regions. Consequently, policyholders may face reduced coverage limits, higher deductibles, or exclusions for certain damages related to climate change.

The total losses from natural catastrophes, including those not covered by insurance, amounted to $270 billion in 2022. This figure decreased from around $320 billion in 2021 and aligns with the average of the previous five years.

These facts demonstrate the need for increased collaboration between insurance companies, policymakers, and climate experts to address the challenges posed by climate change. Efforts to enhance risk assessments, develop innovative solutions, and promote climate resilience are essential in providing adequate coverage and protection for individuals and communities affected by natural disasters.

We understand that these events can be devastating for both individual and business owners alike, and we are committed to fighting for fair compensation on their behalf. Our team is well-versed in the legalities associated with insurance policies and claims, giving us a distinct advantage in the negotiation process.


We are committed to fighting on behalf of your assets so they can receive fair compensation for their losses.If you or anyone you know has been affected by unfair treatment of your insurance company, please reach out to Jason J. Joy & Associates at 713-221-6500. Thank you for entrusting us to join your fight.


While this article provides general legal information, it does not constitute legal advice. The best way to get guidance on your specific legal issue is to contact a lawyer.

Contact Us

By submitting this form you agree to receive text messages.

By Rebecca Rivera December 9, 2025
As reported in the Washington Post December 5th, 2025 by Amudalat Ajasa A prominent scientific journal, Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology, has retracted a widely cited 2000 study that previously concluded the active ingredient in Roundup, glyphosate, posed no cancer risk to humans. The retraction was initiated after evidence emerged suggesting the study was heavily influenced by the herbicide's seller, Monsanto (now owned by Bayer), in an apparent effort to disguise potential health risks. Specific concerns cited by the journal include the strong possibility that Monsanto employees contributed to the writing without proper acknowledgment, that the authors may have received undisclosed payments from the company , and that the findings were based solely on unpublished Monsanto studies. This misconduct, discovered through internal company emails during federal litigation, is significant because the faulty research served as a bedrock for regulatory decisions regarding glyphosate for decades. Summary of Alleged Faulty Study and Monsanto's Influence The Study and Its Conclusion: The retracted paper, published in 2000, was a "bedrock study" that concluded: "under present and expected conditions of new use, there is no potential for Roundup herbicide to pose a health risk to humans." The Retraction: The scientific journal retracted the study due to a loss of confidence in its results and conclusions, citing the need to "maintain the integrity of the journal." Evidence of Undisclosed Influence: The co-editor in chief cited evidence suggesting that Monsanto employees "may have contributed to the writing of the article without proper acknowledgment as co authors." Undisclosed Payments: The retraction also noted that the study's authors may have been paid by Monsanto without disclosing it . Basis of Findings: The journal stated that the study's findings about cancer risk were "solely based on unpublished studies from Monsanto." Discovery of Influence: Monsanto's influence over the study was reportedly discovered through internal emails released during federal litigation against the company in 2017. Impact: The study "had a significant impact on regulatory decision-making regarding glyphosate and Roundup for decades," and was one of the most-cited papers on glyphosate safety, underpinning federal regulations for the pesticide. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) even cited it in its 2016 review of glyphosate. Context and Aftermath Bayer's Defense: Bayer (which acquired Monsanto in 2018) defended the chemical's safety and argued that Monsanto's involvement was appropriately cited in the acknowledgments, stating that glyphosate is the most extensively studied herbicide and that the "vast majority of published studies on glyphosate had no Monsanto involvement." Regulatory Stance: The EPA stated the retraction would not affect its current stance —which is that glyphosate is "not likely to be carcinogenic to humans"—because the agency does not directly rely on review articles like this one, but uses them to find other relevant individual studies. Litigation: Bayer has spent approximately $10 billion to settle lawsuits arguing the company did not warn customers about the negative health impacts of using Roundup. Read the full article in the Washington Post
By Rebecca Rivera November 14, 2025
In this series premiere episode, Founder & President of SOSCSA, Child Sexual Abuse Survivor & BSA Bankruptcy Claimant, Curtis Garrison interviews attorney Jason J Joy for an update on the BSA bankruptcy and discussing childhood abuse litigation for which Jason is an outspoken and experienced advocate. Jason's firm is actively litigating cases for many clients his law firm represents. This podcast is recommended for clients already represented, and for those who are still contemplating coming forward to establish a claim. Topics covered in this episode: Recent BSA Bankruptcy Trust report Lajun Claimants (Guam) v. Boy Scouts of America and their recent Petition For A Writ Of Certiorari to the U.S. Supreme Court The 1.5% initial payment, possible second payment time / total percentage Future Claims, BSA Councils, BSA Charters (churches, schools, etc) which there are over 100,000 entities possibly getting free of liability Mixed Claims explained We did not vote for this plan, they promised we would be paid in “Paid in Full” Plans to file an Amicus Brief Statute of Limitations 
By Rebecca Rivera November 6, 2025
The Boy Scouts of America bankruptcy case, involving tens of thousands of survivors of childhood sexual abuse, is among the largest and most contentious mass tort proceedings in U.S. history. In this podcast, Attorney Jason Joy breaks down the latest ruling from the Third Circuit Court, which leaves many survivors of childhood sexual abuse with drastically underfunded compensation.