If it were not enough that consumers pay dearly for high-grade fossil fuels said to cause such warming, they must now pay even more dearly to insure their homes, increasingly subject to the vagaries of the weather.

Nobody—certainly not the oil or coal companies—wants to take responsibility.

In the meantime, citizens nationwide suffer not only health problems caused by vast overloads of carbon dioxide being dumped into the atmosphere.

In two months the world's nations will gather in Kyoto, Japan, and will attempt to address climate change and its causes. In a last minute attempt to shoulder the responsibilities of the United States in these matters (the U.S. is, in fact, the worst polluting offender) Bill Clinton will hold an October 6 White House conference to pay homage to scientific assessments of the so-called greenhouse gases.

It is unlikely that the real culprits are due their comeuppance, however, inasmuch as The "folly" committed by President Jimmy Carter at the start of his Chief Executive's career—a "folly" which followed him silently until his career's untimely end—is not likely to be repeated by any president in this century. That "folly" was Carter's bold announcement that it was high time to declare "the moral equivalent of war against oil."

The major industrial nations are reluctant to promise any reductions in gaseous emissions, fearing economic losses should they do so. Just as worrisome are those developing nations striving to improve their economies and equally reluctant to curb emissions for similar reasons.

Some wonder if the Kyoto conference will be nothing more than an exercise in showmanship, an attempt to look busy at solving a problem that isn't likely to go away soon.

Delegates from the European Union have proposed a reduction of 15% from 1990 levels of greenhouse gases by 2010. This, they know, is workable if Eastern European states—formerly Communist—eliminate coal-fired industries and replace them with modernized methodology.

In this way, the European states are said to reason, they can claim compliance with their call for reduction without lifting a finger because the eastern bloc's changeover will account for the required reduction figures.

It is, say observers, a cynical move. Also, while such a call makes the European Union appear willing to capitulate, seemingly moving against the ecological threats involved, the Europeans know that the United States will refuse—to protect its own economic interests—to sign such an agreement.

Heavy losses from storms believed to have been caused from rapid climate changes, finds Americans and others paying double to support national romances with coal and oil. Franklin Nutter, President of the Reinsurance Association of America, said, "The insurance business is first in line to be affected by climate change. …(It) could bankrupt the industry."

Some, working in activist organizations like World Watch Institute, hope that such powerful industries as insurance may put their "considerable weight" into the battle to "cut back human-caused carbon emissions."

The insurance industry bases its rates and coverage policies on the law of averages. "In the case of weather-related coverage," writes Christopher Flavin of World Watch magazine, they assess past trends and assume that the frequency of catastrophes will stay the same. But climate change could render these calculations useless—and, perhaps, already has."

"In response," says Flavin, "many companies are reducing their exposure in coastal and island real estate, wild-fire prone regions, and valleys vulnerable to flooding. Areas of southern Florida and the Caribbean, for example, have become virtually uninsurable. If such trends continue, either governments will have to step in as insurers of last resort or society will lose a vital buffer against disaster."

Fortunately, some 60 insurance companies are indicating they may actively monitor—and, perhaps, lobby on the climate change issue.

If they do so, exults World Watch Institute; they will serve "as a powerful counterweight to the oil and coal industries, whose products are the sources of most human-caused carbon emissions."