Abstract

Wildfires are becoming more frequent and destructive in a changing climate. Fine particulate matter, PM2.5, in wildfire smoke adversely impacts human health. Recent toxicological studies suggest that wildfire particulate matter may be more toxic than equal doses of ambient PM2.5. Air quality regulations however assume that the toxicity of PM2.5 does not vary across different sources of emission. Assessing whether PM2.5 from wildfires is more or less harmful than PM2.5 from other sources is a pressing public health concern. Here, we isolate the wildfire-specific PM2.5 using a series of statistical approaches and exposure definitions. We found increases in respiratory hospitalizations ranging from 1.3 to up to 10% with a 10 μg m−3 increase in wildfire-specific PM2.5, compared to 0.67 to 1.3% associated with non-wildfire PM2.5. Our conclusions point to the need for air quality policies to consider the variability in PM2.5 impacts on human health according to the sources of emission.

Highlights

  • Wildfires are becoming more frequent and destructive in a changing climate

  • Current air quality standards specific to PM2.5 from the Clean Air Act Amendments do not distinguish the sources of emission or chemical composition, implicitly considering PM2.5 from wildfires and from other sources to be harmful to human health

  • This is true in other regions of the world, as in the WHO Air Quality Guidelines (AQG)[10] for example

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Wildfires are becoming more frequent and destructive in a changing climate. Fine particulate matter, PM2.5, in wildfire smoke adversely impacts human health. Daily-, zip code-specific concentrations of PM2.531 represent fine particulate matter from all sources, including ambient levels and wildfire smoke.

Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call