November, 10 2019, 11:00pm EDT

Study Predicts Additional Month of 100-Degree Days at US Military Bases by Midcentury
Heat-Related Injuries Already Increasing, New Recruits, Basic Training Hardest Hit
WASHINGTON
Over the next three decades U.S. military bases in the contiguous United States could average an extra month of dangerously hot days each year when the heat index--or "feels like" temperature--exceeds 100 degrees Fahrenheit, according to an analysis released today by the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS).
Building on data from UCS' "Killer Heat" study published in July, this new analysis calculated the increase in dangerously hot days that the 169 major military installations in the contiguous U.S. would experience by midcentury if no action is taken to reduce carbon emissions. Under this scenario, carbon emissions would continue to rise and the global average temperature would increase about 8 degrees Fahrenheit (4.3 degrees Celsius) above pre-industrial levels by century's end. The study defined major military bases as ones that have at least 1,000 servicemembers on site.
"The three hottest bases by midcentury--Marine Corps Air Station in Yuma, Arizona; MacDill Air Force Base in Florida; and Homestead Air Reserve Base in Florida--would each experience the equivalent of nearly four months per year with a heat index over 100 degrees Fahrenheit," said Kristy Dahl, a senior climate scientist at UCS and the lead author of the study. "The growing number of dangerously hot days could pose a challenge to the military's efforts to protect service members' health while also ensuring mission readiness."
Last year alone, nearly 2,800 members of the U.S. Armed Services suffered heat-related illnesses or injuries. The rate of these incidents is rising in every branch of the military and is now roughly 50 percent higher than it was five years ago.
More than 90 percent of heat-related illnesses experienced by U.S. servicemembers occur in the United States, according to Pentagon data. The largest number of incidents from 2014 through 2018 occurred at Fort Benning, an Army basic training facility in Georgia. Fort Benning currently experiences an average of 16 days per year with the heat index above 100 degrees Fahrenheit. The study shows that the number of such extreme-heat days would more than quadruple to 73 per year by midcentury if we do not take rapid action to reduce carbon emissions.
The other bases with the highest numbers of heat-related illnesses--Fort Bragg, an Army base in North Carolina; Marine Corp Base Camp Lejeune in North Carolina; and Fort Campbell, an Army base in Kentucky--now each experience roughly a week and a half per year with a heat index exceeding 100 degrees Fahrenheit; these bases are projected to experience two months per year of such conditions by midcentury. At Fort Polk, an Army base in Louisiana, the U.S. base with the fifth highest number of heat-related illnesses, the number of days with a heat index above 100 degrees Fahrenheit would more than triple--from nearly a month's worth of these lethal conditions each year to approximately three months.
Largest Impact on Basic Training for New Recruits
The rising number of days with extreme heat will likely hit new recruits especially hard. Recruits already experience heat-related illnesses at a rate six times higher than that of other enlisted personnel. According to a recent Armed Forces Health Surveillance Branch paper, "Although numerous effective countermeasures are available, heat-related illness remains a significant threat to the health and operational effectiveness of military members and their units and accounts for considerable morbidity, particularly during recruit training in the U.S. military."
In addition, statistics show that military servicemembers who are young, non-Hispanic Black, or of Asian/Pacific Island descent, also experience above-average incidences of heat-related illnesses.
Looking specifically at basic training facilities across the United States, the number of days per year with a heat index above 100 degrees Fahrenheit is projected to quadruple, resulting in an average of 52 days per year by midcentury if carbon emissions are not reduced, according to the UCS analysis. For example:
- Lackland Air Force Base, Texas, is expected to see 105 days per year with a heat index over 100 degrees Fahrenheit by midcentury (an increase of 69 days);
- Marine Corps Recruit Depot Parris Island, South Carolina, is expected to see 73 days per year with a heat index over 100 degrees Fahrenheit by midcentury (an increase of 61 days);
- Fort Benning, Georgia, which reported the most heat illnesses from 2014 through 2018, would experience 73 days with a heat index over 100 degrees Fahrenheit by midcentury (an increase of 57 days).
- Fort Sill, Oklahoma, also is expected to see 73 days per year with a heat index over 100 degrees Fahrenheit by midcentury (an increase of 53 days).
"We are looking at a steep increase in the number of dangerously hot days at basic training camps where new recruits, who are the most susceptible to heat-related illnesses, go through grueling outdoor training," said Shana Udvardy, climate resilience analyst at UCS and co-author of the study. "Many of these bases are located in hot and humid regions of the United States. Last year, drills had to be rescheduled because of dangerous heat conditions. But how do you reschedule around the entire summer in the decades ahead?"
The analysis also ranked the military bases that are expected to experience the largest increase in the number of days with a heat index over 100 degrees Fahrenheit by midcentury. The top five, listed in order:
- Homestead Air Reserve Base, Florida, (102 more extreme-heat days);
- MacDill Air Force Base, Florida, (96 more extreme-heat days);
- Naval Air Station Pensacola, Corry Station, Florida, (78 more extreme-heat days);
- Naval Air Station Pensacola, Outlying Field Bronson, Florida, (77 more extreme-heat days);
- Naval Air Station Joint Reserve Base New Orleans, Louisiana, (74 more extreme heat days).
"The military has guidelines in place for preventing heat-related illness, but it's still seeing an increase in servicemembers getting sick," said Udvardy. "These guidelines may need to be updated to reflect growing risks and must be diligently enforced especially during extreme heat days. Adjustments may have to be made in the times of day or year when it's safe for soldiers to train outdoors. The best thing we can do to keep our troops--and by extension the country--safe from these worsening conditions is to enact policies that encourage a rapid transition to a clean energy economy. At the same time, we should be working with the rest of the world through the Paris climate agreement to rapidly and dramatically reduce carbon emissions. That would significantly limit the increase in dangerously hot days ahead and protect our most vulnerable communities."
The Union of Concerned Scientists is the leading science-based nonprofit working for a healthy environment and a safer world. UCS combines independent scientific research and citizen action to develop innovative, practical solutions and to secure responsible changes in government policy, corporate practices, and consumer choices.
LATEST NEWS
Trump Social Security Chief Applauds Budget Bill That Will Harm Social Security's Finances
"The Social Security Administration put out a statement celebrating a bill that would lead to faster insolvency of the Social Security Trust Fund."
Jul 04, 2025
U.S. President Donald Trump's handpicked Social Security chief issued a statement Thursday applauding the passage of a Republican reconciliation bill that analysts say would negatively impact the New Deal program's finances.
Social Security Commissioner Frank Bisignano called the Republican legislation, which Trump is expected to sign on Friday, a "historic step forward for America's seniors" and a reaffirmation of the president's "promise to protect Social Security."
But experts warned in the lead-up to the bill's passage that its massive tax cuts would bring forward the date at which Social Security will no longer be able to pay out full benefits in the absence of legislative solutions.
"By raising the standard deduction for all filers, and raising it even higher for some seniors, fewer Social Security beneficiaries will pay taxes on their benefits, and those who do will pay lower rates," said Kathleen Romig and Gbenga Ajilore of the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. "Raising the standard deduction would deliver little to no benefit to lower- and moderate-income families while reducing income into Social Security's trust funds."
The Social Security Administration put out a statement celebrating a bill that would lead to faster insolvency of the Social Security Trust Fund pic.twitter.com/aRhLfcRiIv
— Bobby Kogan (@BBKogan) July 4, 2025
According to the latest Social Security Board of Trustees report—released ahead of the reconciliation bill's passage—the Old-Age and Survivors Insurance (OASI) Trust Fund will be able to pay out 100% of benefits until 2033. Thereafter, if lawmakers don't act, the fund will be able to pay out 77% of total scheduled benefits.
The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget (CRFB), a conservative think tank, estimated in an analysis released last month that the Republican reconciliation package would accelerate the depletion of Social Security and Medicare's trust funds by a year. Compared to current law, the GOP measure would also result in "even deeper" cuts to Social Security benefits after the trust fund depletion date, the analysis projected.
Rep. John Larson (D-Conn.), a leading champion of Social Security Expansion in Congress, highlighted CRFB's findings in a video posted to social media a day before House Republicans secured final passage of the reconciliation bill.
"We have to act now, not just to protect Social Security but to expand the benefits," said Larson. "It needs to be protected, it needs to be enhanced—not cut and diminished."
Keep ReadingShow Less
NYT Runs Hit Piece on Mamdani Based on Tip From Proponent of 'Race Science'
Reports from multiple outlets show the Times is vastly underselling its source's extreme views on race.
Jul 04, 2025
The New York Times on Thursday published a story questioning New York City mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani's past statements about his racial background based on a tip it received from a proponent of "race science."
The Times piece in question focused on Mamdani's college application to Columbia University in which he listed both "Asian" and "Black or African American" as his race.
Although both of Mamdani's parents are of Indian descent, he was born in the African country of Uganda and lived there for the first five years of his life. Mamdani told the Times that he checked the box on the application for "Black or African American" because he considers himself an American who was born in Africa. He emphasized that he does not identify as Black and argued that he found it difficult to express the complexity of his racial background given the options on the application.
However, what is stirring controversy about the Times piece isn't so much its content but the source of its information. The Times acknowledges that the information on Mamdani was culled from a large hack of a Columbia database and that it received a copy of Mamdani's application from "an intermediary who goes by the name Crémieux on Substack and X," whom it describes as "an academic who opposes affirmative action and writes often about I.Q. and race."
A report from The Guardian's Jason Wilson published earlier this year shows that the Times is vastly underselling its source's extreme views on race. As Wilson documented, the "Crémieux" cited by the Times is a man named Jordan Lasker, whose writings regularly defend the work of "race scientists" who use I.Q. test results to argue that Black people are mentally inferior to other races.
"Crémieux runs a Substack also featuring posts on the supposed relationships between race and I.Q.," Wilson explained. "A prominently featured post there seeks to defend the argument that average national IQs vary by up to 40 points, with countries in Europe, North America, and East Asia at the high end and countries in the global south at the low end, and several African countries purportedly having average national IQs at a level that experts associate with mental impairment."
Another report from Talking Points Memo's Hunter Walker found that Lasker has regularly posted about a racial "I.Q. gap" and has even suggested that there are "genetic pathways of crime." On his X account, Lasker has mused about the differences in brain sizes between Black and white Americans and between women and men more generally.
Brandon McEuen, a historian at Wayne State University who specializes in teaching about the history of the eugenics movement, slammed the Times for not only relying on Lasker as its source for the story on Mamdani but also for granting him anonymity.
"The decision to keep Lasker anonymous is ridiculous since his name has already been published in other outlets that don't provide softballs for eugenicists," he wrote on his Bluesky account.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Sanders Says Every Republican Who Backed Trump-GOP Budget 'Must Pay a Price at the Ballot Box'
"They do not deserve to be re-elected and they must be defeated," said Sen. Bernie Sanders.
Jul 04, 2025
As communities across the United States braced for impact after congressional Republicans approved the biggest Medicaid and nutrition assistance cuts in the nation's history, Sen. Bernie Sanders said Thursday that every lawmaker who supported the budget legislation "must pay a price at the ballot box" in the 2026 midterms and beyond.
"This bill includes the largest cut ever to Medicaid in order to pay for the largest tax break for billionaires that we have ever seen," Sanders (I-Vt.), who is working to recruit progressive candidates for office, said after the House passed the legislation, sending it to President Donald Trump's desk.
"Make no mistake about it: This bill is a death sentence for working-class and low-income Americans," said Sanders.
While some GOP lawmakers in the House and Senate voiced concerns about the bill's massive cuts to Medicaid and other programs as the measure moved through Congress, the legislation ultimately garnered near-unanimous support from the Republican caucus when it came time for the final votes. Just three out of 53 Republican senators and two out of 220 GOP representatives voted against the completed bill.
Analysts and advocates expect the legislation to inflict major damage across the country, shuttering rural hospitals, stripping health coverage and food aid from millions, raising costs for Medicare recipients, and devastating local economies.
Some of the pain will be concentrated in swing districts currently represented by Republican supporters of the budget package. For example, 64% of Rep. David Valadao's (R-Calif.) constituents in California's 22nd Congressional District rely on Medicaid.
Valadao is one of 10 Republicans targeted by an ad push that the advocacy group Protect Our Care launched following Thursday's vote in the House. The other targeted lawmakers are Reps. David Schweikert (R-Ariz.), Young Kim (R-Calif.), Ken Calvert (R-Calif.), Nick LaLota (R-N.Y.), Andrew Garbarino (R-N.Y.), Mike Lawler (R-N.Y.), Ryan Mackenzie (R-Pa.), Rob Bresnahan (R-Pa.), and Dan Newhouse (R-Wash.).
Brad Woodhouse, president of Protect Our Care, said in a statement that "these Republicans just voted for the largest healthcare cuts in history in order to fund tax breaks for billionaires and big corporations, and we're going to make sure that every single one of their constituents knows it."
"These Republicans betrayed their constituents and working Americans' healthcare for billionaire tax cuts," Woodhouse added, "and we're ready to go from the grassroots to the airwaves until every last one of them is held accountable."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular