It’s not even about money anymore, it’s for the sake of “being right”. The real question is why some celebrities and government don’t move some of their property farther from the coastline if the sea-level is rising, or why say, China is setting up naval strongholds on islands in the Pacific that supposedly will go underwater, or why NASA is keeping their Cape Canevral launch site, etc.
Regardless of what anyone thinks of his personality, or politics, he didn't get to be where he by being stupid. If there was even a moderate risk to his properties, don't you think he'd either divest himself of them, or work harder to promote the Paris Treaty? Either way, he'd not take a massive loss intentionally.
To me, this in and of itself, speaks more loudly than 100 city parks full of protesters.