You are here:
Forecast-based Interventions Can Reduce the Health and Economic Burden of Wildfires
Citation:
Rappold, A., N. Fann, J. Crooks, J. Huang, W. Cascio, R. Devlin, AND D. Diaz-Sanchez. Forecast-based Interventions Can Reduce the Health and Economic Burden of Wildfires. ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY. American Chemical Society, Washington, DC, 48(18):1057-9, (2014).
Impact/Purpose:
The results from this study will have a large Public Health impact as recent trends in frequency and intensity of landscape fires across the U.S. are affecting a growing number of communities. Communities affected by wildfire events are in need of decision support tools that can communicate health risks and identify necessary actions in real time. Interventions can be costly and disruptive and can result in loss of public trust if not implemented accurately. Timely and reliable smoke forecasts could be an important tool in informing these decisions but their effectiveness in reducing the health and economic burden has not been evaluated.
Description:
We simulated public health forecast-based interventions during a wildfire smoke episode in rural North Carolina to show the potential for use of modeled smoke forecasts toward reducing the health burden and showed a significant economic benefit of reducing exposures. Daily and county wide intervention advisories were designed to occur when fine particulate matter (PM2.5) from smoke, forecasted 24 or 48 h in advance, was expected to exceed a predetermined threshold. Three different thresholds were considered in simulations, each with three different levels of adherence to the advisories. Interventions were simulated in the adult population susceptible to health exacerbations related to the chronic conditions of asthma and congestive heart failure. Associations between Emergency Department (ED) visits for these conditions and daily PM2.5 concentrations under each intervention were evaluated. Triggering interventions at lower PM2.5 thresholds (≤20 ug/m(3)) with good compliance yielded the greatest risk reduction. At the highest threshold levels (50 ug/m(3)) interventions were ineffective in reducing health risks at any level of compliance. The economic benefit of effective interventions exceeded $1 M in excess ED visits for asthma and heart failure, $2M in loss of-productivity, $100 Kin respiratory conditions in children, and $42 million due to excess mortality