12,000 heat deaths this year

In my opinion, when citing the numbers you should always say whether that’s a model estimate of heat-related excess mortality or specifically attributed deaths. Otherwise you immediately get the usual “you can’t prove that”. But that doesn’t change the fact that especially older people and those with pre-existing conditions are seriously at risk in every heat wave — and the number of hot days is increasing.

And even if people argue forever about big-picture climate protection: shade in cities, drinking fountains, fewer sealed surfaces, heat protection plans for nursing homes and warnings for people living alone really wouldn’t be rocket science. In our town they first cut down trees and then talked about expensive sun sails on the marketplace, which just makes you shake your head.

Tommi89 hits the important point: pitting climate protection against heat protection is nonsense anyway. Even if all emissions were to fall tomorrow, we need protection now for the people who will have to endure the coming summers. Care homes, daycare centers and densely built-up neighborhoods must not wait to react until ambulances and emergency services are constantly running.

At my grandma's apartment block there wasn't even a shady place to sit outside during last year's heatwave, just asphalt in front of the building. A few trees, paved-over courtyards returned to greenery and reliable drinking water stations wouldn't be a luxury, but rather concrete preventative health measures. Do you already have a functioning heat plan locally or just PDFs on the town hall website?

The distinction made by Tommi89 is really important: “12,000 heat deaths” otherwise quickly sounds like a list of death certificates with cause *heat*. But most of the time it’s about statistically calculated excess mortality — deaths that likely wouldn’t have occurred without the heat. That doesn’t make them any less real — rather the opposite, because heat often triggers events in people with heart, lung, or kidney diseases that otherwise get lost in the statistics.

And heat protection has to come before the next wave, not after. Nursing homes could, for example, have fixed drinking schedules, cooler rooms, and clear warning levels; municipalities could provide shade and drinking water in public spaces. These are comparatively mundane measures that don’t require solving global politics first.

I think this exact combination of climate protection **and** very practical heat protection is the key point. You can have a constructive discussion about the precise model calculations, but for someone with heart or lung problems, it ultimately makes very little difference what wording appears on the death certificate. Heat makes people sick and can be the last straw.

Last summer, one of our neighbors simply went around in the morning, ringing the doorbells of the older people in the building and asking whether they had enough water. It costs almost nothing, but it can really help. Perhaps, alongside trees and drinking fountains, we need many more such permanent “heat-support partnerships” in the neighborhood—then people wouldn’t feel quite so alone when the next heat wave arrives.

I would still like to put the specific figures into better context: Are the 12,000 an estimate for the entire year, and is the 9,600 actually only for this one week? Especially with this kind of modeling, it is important to know which comparison years and which statistical method were used. Otherwise, the figure can quickly be either dramatized or completely dismissed by the other side.

In my aunt’s old apartment building, the problem last year was not the temperature alone, but the fact that she hardly aired out the apartment and no one checked on her regularly. A phone call or visit would have helped more than some major campaign. Such heat buddy programs, clear warning lists for primary care physicians, and cooler common rooms would be relatively inexpensive and immediately feasible—while people continue to argue over the major climate protection measures.

The fact that they are estimates does not make the figure worthless—but the reference point does need to be clear. 9,600 deaths in one week and 12,000 over the whole year sounds contradictory at first; perhaps the figures refer to different time periods or models. I would definitely like to see the original source and methodology before deriving political demands from them.

When it comes to heat protection, one could start much more pragmatically, by the way: nursing homes and municipalities with fixed warning levels, hydration plans, and a list of vulnerable people to be called when a heat warning is issued. Technically, this could have been done with automated text messages or simple room-temperature sensors for a long time—the more important thing would be for someone to respond to it.

I wouldn’t simply leave **9,600 in one week** and **12,000 over the entire year** side by side like that either. We need the original source: the period, age group, comparison temperatures, and whether this concerns Germany or Europe. Otherwise, a possibly reputable estimate quickly turns into a number that both sides simply throw around for political purposes.

When it comes to heat protection, measurable measures could at least be established immediately: At warning level 2, care homes report daily fluid intake and room temperatures, municipalities open air-conditioned public spaces, and vulnerable people receive automated calls/text messages. In the long term, shade and depaving as well. That already saves lives while people are still arguing about the next climate protection measure. Does anyone have the study behind the 9,600 at hand?

The RKI link is helpful to start with. What remains important, though, is this: heat mortality is a **statistical estimate of excess mortality**, not a figure where “heat” appears on every death certificate. And 9,600 for one week compared with 12,000 for the year still sounds like different calculations or reference areas—those should be clearly distinguished; otherwise, in the end, everyone is just engaging in a numbers war.

I once experienced with my mother’s attic apartment how quickly a home can heat up to over 30 degrees, even though it cooled down again outside at night. Since then, I’ve considered automatic warning texts plus established phone lists more useful than purely poster campaigns. Does the RKI report actually include a breakdown by federal state or age group? That could make it possible to plan municipal measures much more precisely.