Health Impacts of Future Prescribed Fire Smoke: Considerations From an Exposure Scenario in California

• Published in: Earth's future Vol. 12; no. 2
• Main Authors: Rosenberg, Andrew, Hoshiko, Sumi, Buckman, Joseph R., Yeomans, Kirstin R., Hayashi, Thomas, Kramer, Samantha J., Huang, ShihMing, French, Nancy H. F., Rappold, Ana G.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Bognor Regis John Wiley & Sons, Inc 01-02-2024; Wiley
• Subjects: air quality; Arson; Dispersion models; Emergency medical care; Emergency medical services; Emissions; Environmental risk; Exposure; Forest & brush fires; Forest management; Morbidity; Outdoor air quality; Particulate emissions; Particulate matter; Particulate matter emissions; Particulate matter sources; PM2.5; Population number; Prescribed fire; Public health; Smoke; smoke pollution; Task forces; Vegetation; wildfire smoke; Wildfires; wildland fire; United States > US; California
• ISSN: 2328-4277; 2328-4277
• DOI: 10.1029/2023EF003778

In response to increasing wildfire risks, California plans to expand the use of prescribed fire. We characterized the anticipated change in health impacts from exposure to smoke under a future fire‐management scenario relative to a historical period (2008–2016). Using dispersion models, we estimated daily fine particulate matter (PM2.5) emissions from hypothetical future prescribed fires on 500,000‐acres classified as high priority. To evaluate health impacts, we calculated excess daily cardiorespiratory emergency department visit rates attributed to all‐source PM2.5, distinguishing the portion of the burden attributed to prescribed fire. The total burden was differentiated by fire type and by smoke strata‐specific days to calculate strata‐specific burden rates, which were then applied to estimate the burden in the future scenario. This analysis suggests that the exposure to prescribed fire smoke, measured as the number of persons exposed per year, would be 15 times greater in the future. However, these exposures were associated with lower concentrations compared to the historical period. The increased number of exposure days led to an overall increase in the future health burden. Specifically, the northern, central, and southern regions experienced the largest burden increase. This study introduces an approach that integrates spatiotemporal exposure differences, baseline morbidity, and population size to assess the impacts of prescribed fire under a future scenario. The findings highlight the need to consider both the level and frequency of exposure to guide strategies to safeguard public health as well as aid forest management agencies in making informed decisions to protect communities while mitigating wildfire risks.
Plain Language Summary
Prescribed fire is a forest management strategy for reducing the risks of wildfires. While some fires are ecologically beneficial, smoke from fires is a major source of airborne particle pollution, which is harmful to human health. This study examined the change in health impacts resulting from an expected increase in the use of prescribed fire within California's high‐priority wildfire risk areas. We used daily counts of cardiorespiratory emergency department visits attributed to air quality combined with model‐generated measures of smoke pollution to estimate health impacts. We compared exposures and the associated health burden on days impacted by wildfire or prescribed fire smoke in the past to the impacts in the hypothetical future scenario with increased prescribed fire. Projections of future prescribed burning in high priority areas suggest that more people would experience smoke more often, although exposures would occur at lower concentrations. With more frequent lower‐level exposure days near populated areas, the health burden would increase relative to past prescribed fire. Understanding the potential impact of prescribed fire may simultaneously help protect public health and increase safety from wildfires.
Key Points
A California‐based model of future prescribed burning in high‐priority wildfire risk areas suggested more people will experience smoke
An increased number of exposure days in the future scenario led to an overall increase in the future health burden
The excess future health burden was due to the cumulative impact of lower exposure days and high population density in high‐priority areas