The dangers of wildfire smoke and particulate pollution are worse than you think
And don't blame Canada!
I usually don’t publish on Tuesdays, but this seems timely.
On Monday, when I was hunkered down in my cabin with the windows closed because of wildfire smoke, I wondered whether I should write yet another post about the dangers of particulate pollution. I have written so many, previously on Treehugger and here on Substack; I wondered if I had anything new to say. I had already decided that it was too dangerous to go rowing or to the gym, but I fired up my Apple Weather app to see what the particulate levels were, and saw this message:
So it suggests that there is no need to modify my usual outdoor activities. Scrolling down, Apple listed the PM10 and PM2.5 at 74ug/m3, and I thought, are they nuts? Do they have no idea what acceptable or safe levels of PM are? Perhaps it is time, once again, to raise the issue of how dangerous particulates are and where they come from.
Blame Canada?
US members of Congress complain that Canadians are not managing their forests or stopping arsonists, noting “our constituents have been limited in their ability to go outside and safely breathe due to the dangerous air quality the wildfire smoke has created.” Had they read the pages on the NASA website that have not yet been pulled down, they would learn that it’s not Canada’s fault;
“Fire weather is becoming more common, and human activities are the main cause. Although some variations in the weather are natural, human-caused climate change has been found to be the main cause for increasing fire weather in the American West. As the planet warms, hotter weather, earlier melting of winter snow, warmer nighttime temperatures, and decreasing summer rainfall are all contributing to increased fire activity.”
Oliver Milman of The Guardian points out that these Republican congressmen voted for the big reconciliation bill, described as…
“the most anti-environment bill of all time” by green groups and will result in a surge in greenhouse gas pollution, according to experts. The legislation, combined with the president’s own executive actions, will cause an extra 7bn tonnes of planet-heating gases to be released in just the next five years, analysis of Princeton University data has found.
The congressmen complain that wildfire smoke interferes with constituents “recreating [is that a word?] enjoying time with family, and creating new memories,” But it is far worse than that- it is killing and maiming them. They are sucking on climate change; particulates may well be responsible for more deaths and illnesses than any other effect of climate change so far.
What is a “safe” level of PM2.5?
The first question, raised by the Apple weather app, is what level of particulates is safe? The table shows the levels described as “safe” by various governments, although Health Canada says there are no safe levels. The 74ug/m3 outside my door is not considered safe anywhere outside of China. I don’t know what Apple is thinking, advising that it is OK to go out and exercise; it is bad for anyone of any age.
How much of the PM2.5 can be attributed to wildfires?
Most PM2.5 comes from burning fossil fuels for electricity and heat, transportation, and home heating. However, windblown dust and wildfires are an increasingly large proportion, contributing over 25% of daily PM2.5 emissions during fire seasons, affecting 70 million USA citizens. Source I couldn’t find a comparable source for Canada. In the Asia Pacific region, “fire-specific PM2.5 concentrations during the fire season average 2–15 μg/m³, with the proportion of fire-derived PM2.5 rising to 30–40% of the total in some years and regions.” Source
How deadly is particulate pollution?
Far deadlier than most people imagine. According to one study, PM2.5-attributable death and disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) are huge.
In 2019, the global ambient PM2.5-related deaths and DALYs were 4,140,970 and 118.2 million, respectively, with 1,702,150 deaths and 47.5 million DALYs for females and 2,438,820 deaths and 70.7 million DALYs for male. In the 13 level-three causes, ischemic heart disease, stroke, chronic obstructive and pulmonary disease (COPD) were the leading three causes of deaths and DALYs attributable to ambient PM2.5.
Seriously, we talk about heart disease, stroke and COPD killing and maiming people, but nobody blames PM2.5 pollution, even though the particles “penetrate deep into the lungs and enter the bloodstream, leading to inflammation, oxidative stress, and exacerbation of chronic diseases, which in turn increases mortality and years lived with disability.” Source. Burning stuff has been killing us forever, we just haven’t been paying attention.
Why don’t people care about particulate pollution?
I love this image of the midcentury modern architect A. Quincy Jones in a shirt and tie, barbecuing juicy porterhouse steaks in the middle of his living room. Ever since we discovered fire, particulates have been an inseparable part of our lives; If you burn stuff, you get particulates. I noted in an earlier post:
Historically, we were all swimming in a miasma of particulates from cars, coal, and cigarettes. It was part of our lives. The natural gas industry is still fighting any regulation of PM2.5 because it would be the end of gas stoves in homes. They are joined by the Petroleum Institute, cement associations, and the wood industry; nobody wants serious regulation of PM2.5 because it would involve regulating fossil fuels, and we can’t have that. And so people keep dying from it; as Paul Billings of the American Lung Association told Inside Climate News, “Why should the public care? Because particulate matter, PM pollution, soot, whatever you want to call it, it kills people. And it kills tens of thousands of people every year.”
I do not doubt that this is a midwestern Republican politician’s idea of recreating, enjoying time with family, and creating new memories. What could possibly be a problem with campfires, hot dogs, and maybe even a few cigarettes? But particulates have been killing us for millennia, and they are killing us now.
We get enough of them without forest fires; the next time a US politician complains about how wildfire smoke is interfering with his constituents’ recreating, point out that it’s climate change we are breathing. Maybe if they weren’t the world’s second-largest emitter of greenhouse gases, we wouldn’t be having this problem.
Special offer!
I do not want to put up a paywall on this site, but it provides a meaningful portion of my income. So here’s a limited-time offer: I will send a signed copy of the print edition of “Living the 1.5 Lifestyle” to anyone in the USA or Canada who signs up for a one-year subscription (C$50, cheap at about US$35- US$37-the dollar is falling ). I am running out of stock, so hurry!
"And don't blame Canada!"
So, you're at your second home complaining about the air particulates - from Canadian wildfires? From your favorite AI, Perplexity (abstracted snippets):
"A significant majority of Canadian wildfires are started by humans, rather than natural causes such as lightning...Human causes include arson, campfires left unattended or improperly extinguished, discarded cigarettes, vehicle sparks, and fires originating in homeless encampments.
As much as 80% of wildfires in Canada—outside the far north—are started by human activity. Alberta, as an example, saw virtually all wildfires in spring 2024 classified as “human-caused,” attributed to recreational activity and careless behavior."
And it mentions other fire causes as well (like deliberate arson).
So yes, Lloyd, Canada can be blamed (even if only partly). That said, there has been a lot of wildfire smoke identifiable as stemming from Canadian lands, so it fits.
And to be even handed, American forests suffer the same issues and those billows of smoke are owned by the US regardless of the cause type.
Here's a post idea for you: California Gov Newsom and LA Mayor Bass has pulled a Magoo after telling the burned out residents in the Palisades et al that they will expedite rebuilding permits. The truth is that they are not and have changed the regulations to make it almost impossible to rebuild (regulation-wise and financially) what residents had. The already stated intention is to support higher density low income multi-family housing in that formerly upper valued housing.
E.g., I think they are targeting your "Goldilocks density" to replace what was the norm.
Which is fair?
Thanks for sharing this! I’m in Colorado, so we either get our own share of wildfires or are adjacent to other western states on fire. I just read this morning about the two fires in the Grand Canyon. I had heard about them before today but my lungs and throat certainly sensed smoke over the last week. I’m sensitive to smoke and get an asthmatic reaction to it, but, of course, my apple weather app wasn’t showing even the “if you’re sensitive, stay inside” notice either.
And as a fellow educator, I continue to be utterly freaking amazed that there are still climate change deniers. It’s called science, people. Just like with that little virus called Covid. Perhaps a little more time getting educated and a little less time kayaking in the smoke is called for 🙄.