Toxic Burn Pits at U.S. Marine Base in Afghanistan Threaten Health

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

This article was published in Scientific American’s former blog network and reflects the views of the author, not necessarily those of Scientific American


Open-air pits in which toxic materials are burned are still being used at bases in Afghanistan, new data suggests.

A report from the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction warns that at one 13,500-person Marine base in Helmand province in Afghanistan U.S. military and civilian personnel are being exposed to smoke emissions from open-air burn pits that create serious health concerns.

“Toxic smoke from burning solid waste each day increase the long-term health risks for camp personnel,” inspector general John Sopko wrote to commanders of U.S. Central Command and U.S. Forces-Afghanistan. The emissions create elevated risks for, “reduced lung function and exacerbated chronic illnesses, ranging from asthma to chronic obstructive pulmonary disease,” he said.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Military guidelines explicitly say that burn pits can only be used to dispose of refuse in emergency situations until approved incinerators can be obtained. Camp Leatherneck already spent $11.5 million to purchase and install two 12-ton and two 24-ton capacity incinerators, yet his inspectors found that the 12-ton incinerators were being underutilized and the larger incinerators were not being used at all. Moreover, the five-year-old camp was moving forward with a $1.1 million contract to haul solid waste to a local landfill that Sopko says is not necessary. The marines, sailors and government contractors on the base generate about 54 tons of solid waste each day. All that waste could be processed if the incinerators were operated 18 hours a day according to Sopko’s department.

The news comes after a similar inspection led to the revelation in April that another base in Afghanistan, Forward Operating Base Salerno, was continuing to use open-air burn pits despite spending $5 million for incinerators.

The burn pits have been in congressional crosshairs for several years. Last month, Reps. Tim Bishop (D-NY) and Diana DeGette (D-Colo.), introduced new legislation that would establish three Centers of Excellence focused on the prevention, diagnosis, mitigation, treatment, and rehabilitation of health conditions related to burn pits and associated environmental exposures.

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe