This blog post summarizes a new analysis from Climate Central showing that 2025 ranked among the most destructive years on record for U.S. weather and climate disasters.
As an expert with three decades of experience studying extreme events and policy responses, I place the numbers in context, explain the driving forces behind the losses, and examine the policy choices that could either blunt or amplify future risks.
2025 in context: frequency, cost, and human toll
The Climate Central update — built to fill the gap after the federal government stopped maintaining its own billion-dollar disaster tracker — finds 23 separate U.S. events in 2025 that exceeded $1 billion in damages.
That makes 2025 the third-most active year on record for billion-dollar disasters, trailing only 2023 and 2024.
The human and economic consequences are stark: at least 276 deaths and an estimated $115 billion in damages, driven largely by an unprecedented number of damaging severe-storm events.
Key statistics from Climate Central
These concise figures help illustrate the character of last year’s disasters:
Drivers: storms, heat-driven drought, and deadly inland floods
From my vantage point, the pattern is consistent with what climate science predicts: a warming atmosphere increases the energy available for storms, while prolonged heat waves exacerbate drought impacts even when rainfall deficits are moderate.
These combined stresses raise both frequency and intensity of costly disasters.
Severe convective storms dominated the 2025 toll, with near-record reports of damaging high winds and tornadoes during spring and summer.
At the same time, the American West experienced a costly drought episode where scorching temperatures — more than lack of rain — amplified water stress and economic loss.
Record severe storms and the Texas Hill Country flood
One of the most tragic single events was the July flash flood in Texas Hill Country.
It ranks among the deadliest inland floods in U.S. history.
Although the human toll was immense, the economic estimate remained under the $1 billion threshold — a reminder that loss of life and economic cost do not always move in parallel.
Policy implications: federal rollbacks and resilience funding
The Climate Central report arrived amid significant federal policy shifts that have direct implications for preparedness and recovery.
Recent administration actions reduced staffing and budgets at NOAA and FEMA and included an executive order to withdraw the U.S. from several international climate institutions.
Those moves have alarmed experts who worry about weakened early warning systems, reduced scientific capacity, and diminished access to cooperative international research — all at a moment when the country needs more robust climate resilience investments.
Why withdrawal from international bodies matters
Leaving the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, the IPCC, IRENA, the International Solar Alliance and other bodies does more than change diplomatic posture — it can hinder knowledge-sharing and slow technology deployment.
It can also politicize disaster assistance.
The U.S. remains the largest cumulative greenhouse gas emitter and a leading fossil-fuel producer.
How it chooses to act has global ramifications.
Advocates urge Congress to respond by:
Here is the source article for this story: Trump Quits Key Treaties Amid ‘Increasingly Deadly and Expensive’ Weather Disasters