The term “climate change” has become synonymous with “global warming,” and many banks are now talking about climate change in terms of their ability to withstand it.
That’s because banks are being forced to confront the consequences of climate-related risks as global warming accelerates.
It’s a time-consuming, expensive and complicated process.
But it also has potential long-term benefits for consumers and communities.
The short- and long-run costs of climate risk mitigation are enormous, and the long- and short-run benefits are profound.
We are now facing the most consequential challenge to the global economy since the Great Depression, and many of the solutions are available for financial markets.
Banks are not alone in thinking about climate risk.
The U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission announced plans in December for banks to report to regulators on climate risk to help them make better decisions about how to manage and recover from the impacts of climate.
The agency also has a website called Climate Risk Monitor, where people can learn more about climate risks.
Bank of America, Wells Fargo and UBS, which has the largest market share of large U.K. banks, have also announced that they would be looking at climate risks, but they haven’t yet released any specific information about what they plan to do.
That is because they haven`t been required to do so by regulators.
The reason is simple: there are no national standards for climate risk, and regulators don’t want to get into that.
The biggest risk to banks today is the fact that climate change is not a threat to them as they currently operate, but it could be in the future.
Climate change could lead to a severe disruption in supply chains and infrastructure, leading to widespread financial instability.
As a result, the banks that are most vulnerable to climate change are those that hold their business risk exposures in the U.N. and the U