Skip to main content
Studies · CA Air Quality · Investigation 06

Do Wildfire Assumptions Change the Policy?

Wildfire PM2.5 dominates California’s air quality burden. Does uncertainty about future fire severity change which electrification policy is optimal? We tested four scenarios, from mild years to 2020-level extremes. The top-ranked winner (T2+B2) is stable in all four; only one extreme scenario produces a mid-list swap.

4
Wildfire Scenarios
13
Policies Tested
Stable
Top-Rank Winner
Robust
Policy Decision
Robustness Analysis

Four Scenarios, One Ranking

Wildfire contributes between 1.0 and 8.0 µg/m³ of PM2.5 depending on fire severity. We tested the full policy portfolio across four wildfire scenarios spanning this range to determine whether wildfire uncertainty could flip the optimal policy choice.

In every scenario, the top-ranked policy is T2 accelerated + B2 accelerated, followed by T2 accelerated alone. The winner is stable across all four scenarios; only the 6.5 µg/m³ extreme 2021 case produces one mid-list swap between two near-tied policies.

Scenario Wildfire PM2.5 Baseline Deaths Wildfire Excess T2 Deaths Avoided Ranking Changed?
Mild (2019-type) 1.0 µg/m³ 2,653 154 555 No
Normal (5-yr avg) 2.5 µg/m³ 2,924 426 552 No
Extreme 2021 (Dixie) 6.5 µg/m³ 3,763 1,265 542 Mid-list swap*
Extreme 2020 (August) 8.0 µg/m³ 4,031 1,533 536 No

Deaths avoided shown for T2_accelerated (transport only). Rankings evaluated across all 13 single and combined policies. Year 2035 projections. *Extreme 2021 has one mid-list swap between two near-tied policies; top-ranked T2+B2 and T2_accelerated remain stable across all four scenarios.

Why It Doesn't Matter

Wildfire Changes the Magnitude, Not the Ranking

As wildfire PM2.5 increases from 1.0 to 8.0 µg/m³, the absolute number of deaths avoided by each policy decreases slightly. This is because a higher wildfire baseline means the marginal impact of transport and building emissions is diluted — the same ton of NOx removed has a slightly smaller relative effect on total PM2.5.

Mild Scenario
0.997
Marginal value ratio: policies nearly as effective as in zero-wildfire world
Normal Scenario
0.990
Less than 1% reduction in marginal policy effectiveness
Extreme 2020
0.963
Even the worst fire year reduces marginal value by only 3.7%

The marginal value ratio measures how much wildfire dilutes the effectiveness of electrification policies. Even in the extreme 2020 scenario, the ratio is 0.963 — policies retain 96% of their effectiveness. The top-ranked winner (T2+B2) never changes because wildfire affects all policies nearly proportionally.

Wildfire is a health problem, not a policy-ranking problem. An extreme wildfire year adds 1,533 excess deaths to the baseline. That is a massive public health burden. But it does not change which electrification policy you should choose — because wildfire affects the denominator, not the relative ordering of interventions.

Finding
The top-ranked policy (T2 + B2 accelerated) is stable across all four wildfire scenarios; only the 6.5µg/m³ extreme-2021 case produces one mid-list swap between two near-tied policies. T2 accelerated electrification remains optimal in every scenario tested. Wildfire uncertainty — despite dominating the absolute health burden — has zero information value for the electrification decision.

4 wildfire scenarios (1.0–8.0 µg/m³) · 13 policy combinations · 2035 projection year · ISRM source–receptor matrix · Dual CRF (Di + Krewski) · Marginal value ratio = deaths avoided (with wildfire) / deaths avoided (without wildfire)