Last week's earthquake in Japan could lead to insured losses of nearly $35 billion, risk modelling company AIR World-wide said, making it one of the most expensive catastrophes in history. That figure is nearly as much as the entire world-wide cata strophe loss for the global insurance industry in 2010, and could be the triggering event that forces higher prices in the insurance market after years of declines.
AIR said its loss estimate range was $14.5 billion to $34.6 billion. That was based on a range of 1.2 trillion yen to 2.8 trillion yen, converted at 81.85 yen to the dollar.
The company cautioned that the estimate was preliminary, and its models do not factor in the effects of the tsunami that followed the earthquake, or any potential losses from nuclear damage.
AIR said that in many cases, buildings will have been damaged by the 8.9-magnitude earthquake and then swept away by the flooding thereafter, making precise counting difficult. The firm intends to issue updated estimates in future combining the quake and the floods. At the upper end of the range, this temblor will go down by far as the costliest earthquake in modern history in terms of insured losses, surpassing the roughly $15 billion in losses of the 1994 Northridge earthquake in California.
Of all catastrophes since 1970, adjusted for inflation, it would rank as the second-costliest behind Hurricane Katrina. It may also be enough to stem years of price declines in the global property insurance and reinsurance markets, which are awash in excess capital following an absence of major hurricane disasters in recent times. Going into this year, analysts and brokers said it would take a $50 billion event to stem the price market for just a year. Since January 1, the industry has $10 billion in losses from the earthquake in New Zealand, still-untold losses from floods in Australia and an estimated $8 billion to $10 billion in losses from unrest in the Middle East. Cumulatively, some like Standard & Poor's believe the losses may be enough to trigger the long-awaited "hard market" in which insurers again have pricing power.
There are also lingering questions about the cost of the clean-up and long-term monitoring following explosions and radiation leaks at the Fukushima nuclear reactors. Such reactors generally have insurance that excludes earthquake damage, and many Japanese homeowners have nuclear exclusions in their own policies. That is likely to limit liability to the operator and the government and minimise impacts to the insurance industry itself.
Any liability to the industry would come through participants' shares in liability pools, in which insurers come together to share risk, primarily for privately owned reactors.
"The ones that would probably have insurance would be these more private companies like a TEPCO," said Dale Klein, a vice chancellor of the University of Texas and former chairman of the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission. American Nuclear Insurers, an association of 21 companies that underwrites insurance for US reactors, has a reinsurance relationship with the Japanese industry. Another major US-based player with international operations is Overseas NEIL Ltd.