Heat economic impact study

Full Title:
Extreme Heat Economic Study Act of 2025

Summary#

This bill orders the Under Secretary of Commerce for Oceans and Atmosphere (the NOAA leader) to study the economic costs of extreme heat. The study must put dollar values on health losses (including loss of life) and on property and other economic losses tied to extreme heat. The report must be published publicly within four years and the bill authorizes $3.5 million to carry out the work.

  • Main change: Requires a new, government-led economic impact study focused specifically on extreme-heat financial costs.
  • What to measure: Health costs (mortality and illness), property damage, medical costs, insurance and workers’ compensation claims, lost labor productivity, energy and infrastructure impacts, and crop/livestock losses where possible.
  • Coordination and data: NOAA must work with many federal agencies, state and national public health departments, non-federal partners, and may use outside groups (for example, the National Academies).
  • Output and access: Report must be posted on HEAT.gov within four years and allowed to be used publicly, including publication in an open-access peer-reviewed journal.

What it means for you#

  • General public / taxpayers: You may get a public report that estimates how much extreme heat costs the economy and public health. This could be used by policymakers or researchers.
  • Public health departments and researchers: They may be asked to provide data and expertise to help estimate health and mortality costs. The study may create standardized metrics for reporting heat-related deaths.
  • Health care providers and hospitals: The study will try to measure medical costs tied to extreme heat, such as emergency visits and hospitalizations. Providers might be contacted for data or asked to share aggregate information.
  • Workers and employers: The study will look at workers’ compensation claims and lost productivity tied to heat. Employers could see clearer evidence of productivity losses or claims patterns.
  • Insurers and financial firms: The bill directs the study to consider life, health, business interruption, crop, and livestock insurance claims. Insurers may be asked for claim data or analysis.
  • Farmers and the agricultural sector: The study will try to quantify heat impacts on crops and livestock, using insurance claim data where available.
  • Utilities and infrastructure owners: The study will examine energy cost increases for cooling and heat impacts on transportation, energy, and water systems.
  • Federal agencies: Many agencies listed in the bill will be formally solicited for feedback and data, which could increase their workload for this project.
  • Researchers and the public: The findings and methods must be authorized for public use and submitted for open-access peer review, so data and results should be available for follow-up research.

Expenses#

Estimated public cost: The bill authorizes up to $3,500,000 to carry out the study.

  • Direct federal authorization: $3,500,000 is authorized to the Under Secretary for this study. This is an authorization to be appropriated, not a guaranteed appropriation.
  • Other federal costs: The bill requires coordination and feedback from many federal agencies. The bill does not provide separate funding to those agencies for time or data-sharing. This could create additional, unspecified administrative costs for those agencies.
  • Costs to non-federal parties: The bill allows soliciting feedback from non-federal partners and using outside organizations. It does not authorize payments to states or private entities beyond the main appropriation. Any costs to private parties for providing data or analysis are not specified.
  • No detailed fiscal estimate: No full fiscal note or wider budget estimate is included in the bill text beyond the $3.5 million authorization.

Proponents' View#

  • The bill appears intended to produce a clearer, dollar-based picture of how extreme heat harms people and the economy.
  • This could be used to improve tracking of heat-related deaths and health care costs, making public health response and planning more informed.
  • Producing standardized metrics on heat deaths and labor productivity losses may help compare impacts across places and time.
  • Publishing findings openly and in a peer-reviewed venue can make the data available to researchers, policymakers, and communities.
  • Allowing the Under Secretary to use outside organizations could bring in specialized expertise and speed up the work.

Opponents' View#

  • One concern is that $3.5 million may not be enough for a comprehensive national economic valuation covering all the listed elements.
  • The bill does not set penalties or requirements for private firms or local agencies to provide data, so data gaps could limit the study’s completeness.
  • Valuing loss of life and assigning dollar amounts to health outcomes involves judgment calls and standard methods that some may find controversial.
  • The four-year timeline could delay actionable findings for communities facing current heat risks.
  • The bill does not detail how privacy or confidentiality of health, insurance, or employment data will be protected when the study uses sensitive records.
  • It is unclear whether the study will lead to further federal action or funding to address the harms it documents.