Imagine: it’s the peak of summer in the Southwest, and a heat wave is surging after a spring of heavy rains. To keep cool, you crank up the air conditioning. In the distance, an aging power line sags under the strain of the heat. A spark escapes the line’s faulty insulation, landing in overgrown brush that grew during the rainy season but has died and dried up in the heat, turning to tinder. Flames erupt and before long, a wildfire is beginning to spread. The local utility, hoping to avoid additional ignitions that could spread firefighting resources too thin, shuts off power. The tactic works – firefighters are able to contain the emerging threat before it reaches your neighborhood and home – but at a cost. With people unable to keep their AC running while the power shutoff is in place, temperatures inside homes soar and dozens of people are rushed to the hospital for heat-related illness. 

This scenario is becoming less and less hypothetical as the risks of wildfire and extreme heat compound with an aging electric grid.

We are a nation powered by, well, power; modern American society has evolved around the electric grid. Yet aging U.S. electric infrastructure (the majority of which was built over 30 years ago and has received minimal upgrades since) is increasingly strained by growing cooling demand as heat waves become more frequent and widespread, as well as physically threatened by wildfires and other extreme weather events. And when the power goes out during or after extreme weather, hamstringing essential health, information, and emergency-response systems, the consequences of extreme weather become much worse. In these ways, the electric grid is a backbone of U.S. resilience to extreme weather. The grid is the place where cascading impacts of extreme weather and other effects of climate change converge – but managed appropriately, the grid can also be a robust line of defense.

Zooming in on the intersections between the grid, heat, and wildfire illustrates these broader trends while also yielding immediately actionable insights. The electric grid is a critical asset for keeping people cool during extreme heat. Yet the electric grid is also a wildfire risk because old and outdated equipment can emit sparks that catch fire in nearby vegetation or other flammable materials. Extreme heat increases energy demand on this same outdated equipment, which strains generation, transmission, and distribution systems and heightens wildfire risk. 

Addressing these challenges involves complex questions about who should pay for necessary infrastructure upgrades and who is liable for grid failures that endanger lives and property. Fortunately, there are powerful opportunities to advance co-beneficial technologies and strategies that simultaneously strengthen the grid, build resilience to extreme heat and wildfires, and bring down energy costs for consumers. 

Wildfires, Extreme Heat, and an Aging Grid: A Dangerous Combination

The electric grid poses a substantial wildfire threat for many states. In California, for example, 10% of all wildfires between 2016 and 2020 were caused by electrical power, leading to over 3.3 million acres burned. Since 2015, power lines have caused six out of California’s 20 most destructive wildfires. In 2023, the citizens of Lahaina, Maui experienced the deadliest U.S. wildfire in more than 100 years when a broken power line set nearby vegetation ablaze. The following year, the largest wildfire in Texas history burned more than a million acres; after several months of investigation, the cause was determined to be a decaying utility pole that caught fire.  

Extreme heat brings the chances of wildfire ignition resulting from aging grid infrastructure to a rolling boil. Record-high temperatures drive up air conditioning (AC) use, which increases energy demand and strains the grid. Extreme heat can also cause power lines to sag and expand and transformers to overheat. In 2022, Southern California Edison power lines sagged under extreme heat conditions and came in contact with a communications line, producing sparks that ignited the dry vegetation below. The resulting wildfire near Hemet, California impacted tens of thousands of residents. 

Given the wildfire risk that grids can pose, some utilities have implemented safety mechanisms to protect the public. For example, transmission lines in some service areas shut off automatically when the presence of smoke or fire is detected nearby. Additionally, utilities may proactively shut off power when the risk of wildfire is high in order to reduce the likelihood of equipment-related ignitions that could get out of control. This is a common practice; roughly one in three wildfire-related outages from 2000 to 2024 were public safety power shutoffs (PSPS). 

While these PSPS shutoffs can reduce wildfire risk, they come at a dangerous cost when combined with high temperatures. Power shutoffs meant to prevent fire damage leave people without air conditioning, which most Americans rely on exclusively for cooling. Without AC or alternative cooling strategies, people are more vulnerable to developing heat-related illness. Power outages can also compound the heat-health risk by leaving people without refrigerated medications and electricity-dependent medical devices, and limiting communication options during medical emergencies – emergencies that are more likely to occur during extreme heat events.

Protecting Communities by Investing in a Resilient Grid 

A resilient electric grid helps communities stay safe, comfortable, and healthy in the face of extreme weather. Examples of strategies that can be used to build community resilience through grid resilience include: 

• Grid hardening. Grid hardening refers to techniques that improve the ability of physical grid infrastructure to resist damage from external stressors like extreme temperatures and wildfires. One example is “undergrounding”; i.e., replacing overhead transmission lines with subsurface networks. Undergrounding reduces the risk of wildfire ignition from electrical equipment and protects transmission infrastructure from heat-related sagging, though it can have a high cost per mile to implement. Another example of grid hardening is replacing traditional wood poles with composite materials such as steel or fiberglass that are more resilient to high temperatures and fire.
• Grid-enhancing technologies. Grid-enhancing technologies can be deployed when feasible, which can increase capacity on the current electrical system. The usage of advanced conductors, which can maintain better performance at higher operating temperatures, and demand-response algorithms can reduce grid loads during peak periods, such as the hottest parts of the day.
• Building additional distributed generation while expanding transmission capacity. Decentralized electricity generation (such as solar-plus-storage systems, flexible load programs, and community microgrids) can operate independently during power outages caused by PSPSs or rolling blackouts. Decentralized generation systems provide localized backup during emergencies and relieve pressure on centralized grid infrastructure during heat waves and other periods of very high energy demand. In the long term, getting more renewable energy resources connected to the grid and building high-voltage transmission lines that can transport the energy over longer distances can support a more abundant and flexible power supply.
• Increasing local, regional, and interregional coordination. Coordination is essential because responsibilities for grid operations, emergency response, and utility regulation are often shared across multiple jurisdictions and agencies. For example, utilities maintain infrastructure, while Public Utility Commissions (PUCs) regulate service standards and local governments often manage emergency response and planning. When multiple service areas are affected by a wildfire and extreme heat event, interregional coordination, such as data sharing and real-time weather-impacts monitoring, ensures that potential grid risks and vulnerabilities are shared and response efforts are coordinated. For instance, utilities can coordinate with first responders and emergency response agencies when ordering PSPSs in their service territories.
• Planning for negative externalities from power outages. Utilities can identify and support customers at the highest risk for negative outcomes (e.g., food spoilage, illness, business impacts, emergency services) associated with PSPS, especially those compounded by co-occurring hazards like extreme heat and wildfires. States like Colorado have had to intervene on behalf of customers for negative impacts of PSPS. Thus, it is important for utilities to plan for how they will support their customers. 

Opportunity Areas for Policy Action

Many of the measures identified above require substantial upfront investment as well as coordination across multiple levels of government. This raises an important policy question: who should be responsible for shouldering the costs of grid resilience upgrades in the face of more frequent and costly extreme weather events? 

Certain resilience measures can only be implemented by utilities who own the physical infrastructure that needs upgrading in the face of worsening hazards. Some utilities argue that they need legal protections from liability in order to remain financially viable, to be able to invest in essential infrastructure, and to continue delivering the energy that powers our lives. To this end, some utilities have advocated for liability protection legislation in multiple states that would grant them (the utilities) legal immunity or limit the damages they must pay if their infrastructure sparks a wildfire, on the condition that they follow approved wildfire mitigation plans. In return for taking mitigation actions required under these plans, utilities can seek protection from lawsuits that could expose them to billions in damages. 

However, extreme weather event victims, insurers, and trial lawyers argue that such protections shift the burden onto residents, leaving them with fewer avenues for compensation and creating perverse incentives for utilities to avoid accountability. Additionally, some utility companies are passing the costs of lawsuit payouts, as well as those of system improvements and delayed maintenance, on to ratepayers through higher electricity bills, raising affordability concerns. For example, Southern California Edison raised rates 13% in 2021 to pay for fire mitigation efforts. 

The reality is that no single entity can bear the full cost of making the grid resilient to compounding extreme weather risks, as these are shared risks with shared stakes. Utilities, as noted, have a critical role to play: they own and operate the infrastructure, and they must invest in resilience while keeping energy affordable. But making upgrades and investments at the scale needed to reduce overall risk to the grid and communities in a multi-hazard environment requires a cross-sectoral, multi-pronged approach. The following section identifies the key stakeholders that must partner with electric utilities to build a more resilient grid, outlines their current roles and responsibilities, and suggests opportunity areas for action in this evolving landscape. 

Congress

Roles and Responsibilities. Congress plays a key role in supporting subnational utility work. For example, Congress supports grid resilience through funding programs like the Grid Resilience and Innovation Partnership (GRIP) from the Department of Energy (DOE) and the Wildfire Electric Grid Resilience Program from Sandia National Laboratory. Congress also appropriates funds to executive branch agencies for the development of foundational federal data and tools, as well as the technical assistance needed for better anticipation and response to compounding risks. Agencies such as the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) produce high-resolution extreme weather projections that can help utilities and subnational governments assess risk. 

Opportunity Areas. Understanding where extreme heat and wildfire are likely to co-occur in the future under various scenarios is essential for supporting proper planning. Where possible, Congress can support modeling and research efforts that provide this information more cost-effectively than subnational efforts and develop technical assistance to help communities plan for these compounding hazards. Congress can also authorize and appropriate funding for test beds and prize challenges that support innovation in multi-hazard grid resilience. 

National and International Regulatory Bodies

Roles and Responsibilities. Regulatory bodies such as the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) and the North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC) play vital roles in advancing grid resilience and reliability efforts and standards. NERC develops reliability standards for the electricity sector and FERC enforces them. 

Opportunity Areas. Since both FERC and NERC play a role in ensuring the reliability of the electric grid, they should expand their extreme weather reliability standards to include risks when extreme heat and wildfires occur in the same region. FERC and NERC can work together to build on existing and proposed efforts to develop standards related to extreme heat and wildfires that support utilities and grid operators in prioritizing multi-hazard resilience in their planning. In late 2024, NERC finalized standards aimed at improving transmission system planning for extreme heat and extreme cold events. 

Additionally, NERC can track how utilities are addressing the risks of wildfires and heat waves as part of its grid reliability monitoring efforts and can include these efforts in its seasonal assessments. 

State Legislatures and Public Utility Commissions (PUCs)

Roles and Responsibilities. State legislatures and public utility commissions play an important role in regulating state electricity markets which positions them to incentivize and support resilience. In general, they are responsible for ensuring that their customers receive appropriate services and that rate increases are justified, while ensuring that the utility can recover its costs and reward investors. In most states, the legislature provides the foundation for PUCs to build their underlying statute-informed regulations. 

Opportunity Areas. State legislatures can direct utilities and PUCs to prioritize wildfire and extreme heat mitigation through statute and can authorize funding mechanisms – such as cost-recovery provisions or risk-sharing models – that enable utilities to invest in resilience. Some advocates have called for the creation of a voluntary program that incentivizes utilities to take certain mitigation actions by rewarding them with access to an “insurance-like backstop mechanism.” PUCs, in turn, can evaluate and approve utility proposals aligned with these policy goals, including pilot programs that implement grid measures with co-benefits for wildfire and extreme heat resilience.

Investors and Innovators

Roles and Responsibilities: Investors and innovators can provide other types of funding mechanisms to help the aforementioned stakeholders fund their initiatives or provide research services to improve them, especially at the extreme heat and wildfire nexus.

Opportunity Areas. Given the high upfront costs of many existing risk reduction tools, innovation is key to driving down the overall cost of multi-hazard resilience. Private capital and nonprofits can play a broader role in building a more robust innovation ecosystem. For example, Conservation X Labs’s Fire Grand Challenge is offering more than $1 million in prizes and support for wildfire innovation in collaboration with Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation, The Coca-Cola Foundation, Esri, and Planet. One of the 12 finalists advancing to field testing is Witching Hour, which is testing a robotic system that installs low-cost insulation onto power lines to reduce fire risk. Future programs modeled on this and other prize challenge efforts can reward innovations that support resilience under both extreme heat and high fire risk. 

Looking Ahead: Preparing for Compounding Heat and Wildfire Hazards

A comprehensive approach to upgrading the grid, grid operations, and emergency management protocols driven by the federal government, state governments, utilities, and private sector actors is the most impactful way forward. Lives, economic wellbeing, and property are all costs of inaction.

While grid infrastructure interventions are critical, other measures can also provide important backstops and reduce overall risk that deserve further exploration and integration into an extreme heat and wildfire preparedness and response strategy. For example, alternative cooling strategies that do not rely on air conditioning can reduce grid load – which in turn reduces wildfire risk – and ensure that people are not left sweltering in the heat during public safety power shutoffs. These strategies include passive cooling measures like reflective surfaces, natural ventilation, shading, and insulation. At the same time, prescribed fire and other risk reduction measures in the wildland urban interface can reduce the likelihood that fires that do start are destructive to life or property. 

With strategic investment, cross-sector coordination, and long-term planning, it is possible to reduce risks and protect vulnerable communities. We can build a future where power lines no longer spark disaster and homes stay safe and connected — no matter the weather.

Every day, I work on policy solutions to help end the severe wildfire crisis in North America. But that means I spend most of my time buried in my computer screen, poring over legislation and statistics—not in the field seeing the reality of the wildfire crisis unfold. There is a general disconnect between the DC wildfire policy bubble and those tackling wildfire on the ground in our public lands.

Just as we at the Federation of American Scientists strive to connect science and public policy, the folks at Safewoods strive to bridge the gap between what is being discussed in Washington and the reality of what it takes to implement wildfire resilience projects.

In mid-June, I joined a group of close to two dozen subject matter experts, retired and current wildland firefighters, philanthropic partners, and Congressional staffers representing states and districts from across the country for a stint at Safewoods. We gathered at the Safewoods site just outside of Darby, Montana, for three days to better understand the complexities of on-the-ground forest management – with the goal of incorporating those insights into our day jobs.

Wildfires are a natural feature of the forests around Darby, which historically experienced fire every 5 to 10 years. However, after nearly a century of misguided policies that placed outsized focus on fire suppression, the landscape has become choked with dead wood, shrubs, and other vegetation that can fuel natural fires into catastrophic ones.

Arriving and walking through the Safewoods grounds, I could immediately see the difference between that land and the untreated lands just outside the Safewoods property. The Safewoods team is returning good fire to the ecosystem by thinning or removing fuels that have built up. This creates space for beneficial fire to spread without becoming dangerous. Treated areas are easy to spot: there are trees of differing sizes and species, with plenty of space to grow. Enough light reaches the forest floor to nurture saplings, but not so much that the soil dries out.

Over the course of the three days, my colleagues and I learned from the Safewoods team about what it takes to do this restoration work, and how forest restoration complements other wildfire resilience practices. Mark Adams, Wildland Community Risk Reduction Specialist for the Flagstaff Fire Department, underscored the importance of home-hardening and scaling community risk reduction. Kelly Martin, the retired Chief of Fire & Aviation for Yosemite National Park, discussed how wildfire resilience yields co-benefits like improved water quality and increased fish populations.

A highlight of the trip was a hands-on forest management briefing and fuels management activity. After gearing up in long sleeves, pants, protective gloves and goggles, and our Safewoods-branded hard hats and vests, we set out into the Bitterroot National Forest, where U.S. Forest Service staff briefed us on how to build a small waste-biomass pile made up of the sticks, small logs, pine needles, and other waste material already pre-cut as part of an ongoing selective thinning project. Forest Service crews work to build these piles during the summer, then safely burn them in the fall or winter. Collecting and burning this excess vegetation restores forest health by promoting diverse tree species and density. Thinning and pile burning also lowers fire intensity and gets rid of fuel ladders that channel fire from the fire-resilient forest floor to the fragile canopy – making it safer to return regular fire to the landscape via prescribed or cultural burning. 

Safewoods attendees receive a briefing from U.S. Forest Service staff on carrying out a selective forest-thinning project in Montana’s Bitterroot National Forest.

Our team worked for around two hours. The vegetation we were collecting felt light at first, but not long after getting started, I was sweating more than I do on my standard DC runs. At the end, as I joined others in catching my breath and downing water, we excitedly asked our Forest Service guides how many acres we cleared. They generously pegged us at about a half acre, causing us all to erupt in laughter about how little we’d actually done. But alongside the laughter we also acknowledged the sobering reality that restoring our nation’s forests is hard. Millions of acres of public land face high wildfire risk, but only a small percentage of those acres are receiving the labor- and time-intensive fuel-reduction treatments they need. The ultimate impact of our two hours in Bitterroot was not the half acre that we were able to clear, but rather the deeper appreciation we gained of the magnitude of the wildfire crisis, the hard yet necessary policy conversations we have to have around scalable solutions, and the resources we need to commit to build a fire-resilient nation. 

FAS Wildfire Policy Specialist James Campbell clears hazardous fuels from the forest landscape as part of a hands-on experience at Safewoods.

Safewoods also fosters critical relationships across different groups of people working on wildfire. Smartphones are indispensable in DC, but lack of cell service at Safewoods meant that I was able to engage deeply with my colleagues in ways that are increasingly rare. No one was distracted by work emails or the latest breaking news; rather, we leaned into connecting around a shared sense of purpose. We sat around the fire hearing the crackle of the wood and laughing as each of us got our turn getting smoked out when the breeze shifted. We spent hours getting to know each other over meals and drinks and sharing why we work on fire. Some of us were always called to the outdoors, destined to be a forest manager or wildland firefighter; others (myself included) were too accustomed to city living for such adventure but nonetheless wanted to use their skills to protect our precious forests and the communities in and around them. No matter the reason, we came to learn about each other on a deeper level. We built trust that I know will pay off when it comes to navigating policy negotiations and executing cross-sectoral resilience initiatives down the line.

The communities and landscapes that have been devastated by megafires and the many more in high-risk areas do not have time to wait – they need meaningful solutions now. Confronting this crisis requires decision-makers to understand the lived realities of wildfire risk and resilience, and to work together across party lines. Safewoods helps make both possible.

President Trump’s Executive Order (EO) “Empowering Commonsense Wildfire Prevention and Response” is the latest of several significant federal policy efforts aimed at tackling the wildfire crisis. Other recent efforts include the passage of the Fix Our Forest Act in the House and introduction of a bipartisan negotiated companion in the Senate; an Executive Order on expanding timber production;  and the recently signed Aerial Firefighting Advancement Act of 2025.

The Federation of American Scientists (FAS) focuses on embedding science, data, and technology into government to support communities in preparing for, responding to, and recovering from wildfires. We are encouraged that the Administration and Congress are recognizing the severity of the wildfire crisis and elevating it as a national priority. Yet the devil is in the details when it comes to making real-world progress.

“Wildfires are burning faster and hotter than ever before, destroying communities and ecosystems and producing vast amounts of harmful smoke and debris,” said Dr. Hannah Safford, Associate Director of Climate and Environment at FAS. “As wildfires increasingly impact cities like Los Angeles and states beyond the western U.S., smart federal leadership on this issue is needed.”  

FAS applauds several elements of President Trump’s EO. For instance, the EO correctly recognizes that wildfire technology and prescribed fire are powerful tools for reducing risk and strengthening wildfire resilience. FAS is also glad to see the Administration promote interagency coordination; emphasize the importance of state, local, and Tribal leadership; and recognize the intersection of wildfire resilience and other sectors, such as the grid and our bioeconomy.

“However,” said Jessica Blackband, Senior Manager of Climate and Environment at FAS, “the Executive Order also contains elements that do not seem feasible against a backdrop of enacted and proposed cuts to federal wildfire staff, programs, and funding.”

For example, President Trump’s FY2026 budget proposes significant cuts to federal agencies, including the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) that provide critical data, forecasting tools, and other technical capabilities needed for wildfire preparedness and response (Section 3 of the EO). Workforce shortages in the U.S. Forest Service and partner agencies are raising alarm about readiness for extreme wildfires as well as capacity to carry out risk-reduction projects, including prescribed fires (Sec. 4(a)), safely and successfully. And erosion of federal technical expertise will likely make it difficult for agencies to revise wildfire-related rules (Secs. 4 and 5) in ways that are evidence-based and appropriately balance other health, economic, and environmental priorities.  

FAS also has concerns about timelines and processes established in the EO. For example, section 2 gives agencies just 90 days to “consolidate their wildland fire programs to achieve the most efficient and effective use” of resources. This timeline coincides with wildfire season, when agencies are already stretched thin. Moreover, proposals and consensus recommendations for improving wildfire governance are available, including the final report of the Wildland Fire Mitigation and Management Commission. It is unclear how the EO will build on this substantial work.

Finally, FAS believes that the EO overemphasizes deregulation as a strategy for tackling the wildfire crisis. While there may be regulatory barriers or bureaucratic processes that could be streamlined or improved in the interest of wildfire resilience, other opportunities for progress are more potent. FAS recommends that future directives and policies provide greater support for science that improves our understanding of how wildfires impact people and places; technical assistance to support states and localities in wildfire planning; investments to reduce wildfire risk; development of metrics that make it easier to assess and track wildfire resilience; and approaches for ensuring transparent, responsible spending on wildfire. 

“Tackling the wildfire crisis will require an integrated national approach that is grounded in evidence, carefully executed, and appropriately resourced,” said James Campbell, Wildfire Policy Specialist at FAS. “The Administration should work closely with Congress and the wildfire community in implementing this EO and any complementary policies.”

FAS stands ready to help advance constructive plans and proposals that further wildfire resilience. Our team is working to build a more fire-resilient nation through policy development and analysis, fellowships, and issue education. We look forward to continuing to engage with the Administration, Congress, and state, local, and nongovernmental leaders to this end.

The destruction and ill health caused by wildfires requires scientific and technological expertise as part of a cohesive social and environmental plan

Washington, D.C. – May 7, 2025 – With wildfire risk increasing and the potential for destruction along with it continues to grow nationwide, the Federation of American Scientists (FAS) today joins with other organizations to launch a new coalition, Partners in Wildfire Prevention. The coalition is committed to reducing the adverse effects of wildfires through prevention and preparedness.

“Wildfires are a national crisis – but they’re one we have the capacity to address,” said Dr. Jedidah Isler, Chief Science Officer of the Federation of American Scientists. “There’s a particularly powerful opportunity to harness the power of science and technology for smarter, more effective wildfire management. The Federation of American Scientists is proud to join with first responders, labor organizations, business leaders, wildfire preparedness organizations, and community interest groups through the Wildfire Prevention Coalition to advance actionable, evidence-based policy solutions that will make our communities, and our country, more prepared to handle the growing wildfire threat.”

Wildfire Prevention Coalition Aims

The Wildfire Prevention Coalition has four primary goals: elevating safety and prevention; deploying risk-mitigating technology infrastructure; providing prompt access to claims compensation; and implementing a balanced liability framework. Together, partner organizations in the coalition will work to support one or more of these goals. 

“FAS, and our partners in the Wildfire Prevention Coalition, see this as a pivotal time to take action given the​​ absence of a national, strategic plan to address the wildfire threat. We have been working in wildfire for several years, convening with a range of experts. We have produced an extensive library of policy memos for policymakers to evaluate and champion,” says Dr. Hannah Safford, Associate Director of Climate and Environment at FAS. “All of these memos are actionable ideas rooted in evidence-based solutions.”

Coalition partners include public safety, labor, and business sector groups, along with wildfire preparedness and community interest groups.

“To prepare for and prevent catastrophic wildfires, we must utilize and invest in cutting-edge science and technology. FAS is excited to bring our vital perspective to Partners in Wildfire Prevention, which recognizes the need for investment in advanced modeling, data, and technology focused squarely on prevention. The policy decisions made today should leverage innovation to ensure communities are prepared for wildfires in a changing landscape,” says James Campbell, Wildfire Policy Specialist at FAS.

FAS Wildfire Policy Work

FAS continues to work with scientists and subject matter experts to develop policy recommendations impacting physical landscapes and communities, public health and infrastructure, data and technology, and the workforce. Ongoing wildfire policy work can be found at the FAS website, here: https://fas.org/initiative/wildland-fire/.

ABOUT FAS

The Federation of American Scientists (FAS) works to advance progress on a broad suite of contemporary issues where science, technology, and innovation policy can deliver transformative impact, and seeks to ensure that scientific and technical expertise have a seat at the policymaking table. Established in 1945 by scientists in response to the atomic bomb, FAS continues to bring scientific rigor and analysis to address contemporary challenges. More information about FAS work at fas.org. Wildfire work can be found at: https://fas.org/initiative/wildland-fire/

The Federation of American Scientists supports the Senate version of the Fix Our Forests Act.

Uncontrolled wildfire is an intensifying national crisis. Just this year, wildfires have devastated communities around Los Angeles and affected states in all parts of the country, from Florida to Texas and Oklahoma to the Carolinas. To tackle this crisis, the House of Representatives in January passed H.R. 471, the Fix Our Forests Act, with large bipartisan margins. FAS applauds Senators Curtis, Hickenlooper, Padilla, and Sheehy for coming together to build on H.R. 471, resulting in an even stronger version of this legislation now introduced as a companion bill in the Senate.

“As FAS continues to emphasize, failing to address the root causes of devastating wildfires is a policy choice. And  it’s a choice we can no longer afford,” said Daniel Correa, Chief Executive Officer of the Federation of American Scientists. “Swift passage of the Fix Our Forests Act in the Senate would put us on track to better manage the entire wildfire lifecycle of prevention, suppression, and recovery, including through smart and systematic use of science and technology for decision support.”

FAS championed important provisions of the Fix Our Forests Act, ensuring that both the House and Senate versions of this legislation include essential, evidence-based reforms to improve fuel management and facilitate rapid uptake of innovative approaches to fire management. FAS particularly supports Sec. 102, which would create the Wildfire Intelligence Center – a hub to coordinate wildfire management across federal agencies and embed science, technology, and real-time data into decision making.

Other key provisions include:

• Sec. 117 – Utilizing livestock grazing for wildfire risk reduction, including fuels reduction and post-fire recovery. Livestock grazing is a proven strategy to reduce hazardous fuels and combat invasive species while partnering with local ranchers and farms.
• Sec. 131 – Defining federal prescribed fire activity. Confronting the wildfire crisis must include increased use of prescribed fire; this bill rightly prioritizes the use of prescribed fire in large, cross-boundary projects near wildland-urban interfaces, Tribal lands, high-risk fire zones, or critical habitats.
• Sec. 138 – Facilitating the responsible utilization of prescribed fire. Increased use of prescribed fire also includes ensuring that prescribed fire is monitored and safely extinguished.
• Sec. 201 – Creating the Community Wildfire Risk Reduction Program. Coordinating federal wildfire risk reduction efforts across federal agencies is necessary to enhance resilience in the built environment.
• Sec. 202 – Creating the Community Wildfire Defense Research Program. This section invests in science, research, and innovation related to managing wildfire in the built environment.
• Sec. 204 – Improving the Community Wildfire Defense Grant Program by expanding eligible grant projects to include structure retrofits, defensible space creation, infrastructure hardening, and deployment of wildfire technologies
• Sec. 301 – Establishing a partnership program for biochar demonstration projects. Biochar can enhance forest health, increase carbon sequestration, spur job creation, and build new markets. 50% of biochar feedstocks for demonstration projects carried out under this section are required to come from forest thinning or management on public lands.
• Sec. 302 – Implementing accurate reporting systems to measure hazardous fuels reduction.
• Sec. 303 – Creating a public-private wildfire technology deployment and demonstration partnership. This section will accelerate testing, implementation, and deployment of fire technologies through partnerships between government agencies and private, nonprofit, and academic entities.
• Sec. 401 – Establishing a wildland fire management casualty assistance program.

“The science is clear: tackling the wildfire crisis requires better forest management, increasing the use of prescribed fire, and investing in and deploying the next generation of wildfire technologies. The Fix Our Forests Act will get this urgently needed work done. Now is the time for the Senate to build on the bipartisan leadership demonstrated by the sponsors and pass this bill,” said James Campbell, Wildfire Policy Specialist at the Federation of American Scientists.

The Federation of American Scientists strongly supports the Modernizing Wildfire Safety and Prevention Act of 2025.

The Modernizing Wildfire Safety and Prevention Act would combat firefighter shortages by establishing a new Middle Fire Leaders Academy and grant programs to train and hire more firefighters and retain expert wildland firefighters with increased benefits and better working conditions. The bill would establish the Joint Office of the Fire Environment Center to improve fire response time with updated technology like developing risk maps and establishing. Lastly, it would address the public health crisis caused by wildfire smoke by establishing a nationwide real-time air quality monitoring and alert system.

“As the wildfire crisis continues to grow in size and severity, our solutions must be ambitious to meet the moment. The Wildland Fire Mitigation and Management Commission developed 148 non-partisan policy recommendations to tackle this crisis and the Modernizing Wildfire Safety and Prevention Act is a bold and bipartisan package that incorporates a number of the Commission’s recommendations.” said Daniel Correa, Chief Executive Officer of the Federation of American Scientists. “Rep. Harder, Rep. Franklin and Rep. Neguse have put forth a multi-pronged innovative approach to tackle the wildfire crisis. In particular, the creation of the Fire Environment Center is a game changer for land and fuels management, community risk reduction, fire management and response.”

For more information contact James Campbell, Wildfire Policy Specialist, at jcampbell@fas.org.

The Regional Leadership in Wildland Fire Research Act would establish regional research centers at institutions of higher education across the country to research and improve our understanding of wildland fire, develop, maintain, and operate next-generation fire and vegetation models, and create a career pathway training program.

“Extreme weather has pushed wildfires to grow in size and severity, making our current wildfire models inadequate. The Regional Leadership in Wildland Fire Research Act is a significant investment in understanding how wildland fire risks continue to evolve, and establishes a strong foundation that first responders and forest managers can rely on,” said Daniel Correa, Chief Executive Officer of the Federation of American Scientists. “We commend Senator Luján, Senator Sullivan, Senator Padilla, and Senator Sheehy for their leadership to champion and invest in innovative next-generation fire and vegetation models to protect human health, ecosystems, and our communities.”

For more information contact James Campbell, Wildfire Policy Specialist, at jcampbell@fas.org.

3/5/2025 Update: FAS issues letter of support for the Fix Our Forests Act ahead of Subcommittee Hearing. Read full letter here.

---

The Federation of American Scientists supports H.R. 471, the re-introduction of the Fix Our Forests Act. In the wake of the ongoing and devastating Los Angeles wildfires, we urge the House of Representatives to swiftly pass this bill on strong bipartisan margins much like they did in September 2024. 

“Failing to address the root causes of devastating wildfires is a policy choice. As the crisis in Los Angeles shows, it’s a choice we can no longer afford,” said Daniel Correa, Chief Executive Officer of the Federation of American Scientists. “The Fix Our Forests Act takes important steps to confront these disasters. FAS particularly supports the creation of the Fireshed Center, which would provide first responders with science-backed decision-support tools, and serve as a nerve center to embed and deploy critical technology across the entire wildfire lifecycle of prevention, suppression, and recovery.” 

FAS championed important provisions of the Fix our Forests Act,  such as essential reforms needed to improve fuel management as well as support for cutting edge-innovations in science and technology. These provisions include: 

• Section 117 – Utilizing livestock grazing for wildfire risk reduction, including fuels reduction and postfire recovery.
• Sections 201 and 202 – Creating the Community Wildfire Risk Reduction Program.
• Section 301 – Establishing a partnership program for biochar demonstration projects to support development and commercialization.
• Section 302 – Implementing accurate reporting systems for hazardous fuels reduction progress.
• Section 401 – Establishing a wildland fire management casualty assistance program.

“The science is clear: tackling the wildfire crisis means better forest management, including increased use of beneficial fire and new technologies to scale fuels reduction. The Fix Our Forests Act will get this work done by establishing the Fireshed Center and through other smart provisions. FAS urges Congress to take bipartisan action now and pass this bill.” said James Campbell, Wildfire Policy Specialist at the Federation of American Scientists.

The Federation of American Scientists supports the Wildfire Intelligence Collaboration and Coordination Act of 2025.

This vital bill would create a Wildfire Intelligence Center to provide decision support across the entire wildfire lifecycle of prevention, suppression, and recovery efforts, thereby allowing stakeholders to retain autonomy while holistically addressing the wildfire crisis. Inspired by consensus recommendations from the Wildland Fire Mitigation and Management Commission, this bill further underscores the strong bipartisan momentum in Congress for a new federal center to improve wildfire detection speed and accuracy, enhance recovery efforts, and better prepare for catastrophic wildfires. FAS has previously supported similar legislation to create such a center. We look forward to working with partners to move forward on a single collaborative effort.

“FAS applauds Senators Padilla and Sheehy for introducing this bill, which would take a crucial step forward in protecting our communities from increasingly severe wildfires. The Wildfire Intelligence Center would bring together expertise at all levels of government to give our firefighters and first responders access to cutting-edge tools and the decision support they need to confront this growing crisis,” said James Campbell, Wildfire Policy Specialist at the Federation of American Scientists.

More Extreme Weather Leads to More Public Health Emergencies

Extreme heat and wildfire smoke both pose significant and worsening public health threats in the United States. Extreme heat causes the premature deaths of an estimated 10,000 people in the U.S. each year, while more frequent and widespread wildfire smoke exposure has set back decades of progress on air quality in many states. Importantly, these two hazards are related: extreme heat can worsen and prolong wildfire risk, which can increase smoke exposure. 

Extreme heat and wildfire smoke events are independently becoming more frequent and severe, but what is overlooked is that they are often occurring in the same place at the same time. Emerging research suggests that the combined impact of these hazards may be worse than the sum of their individual impacts. These combined impacts have the potential to put additional pressure on already overburdened healthcare systems, public budgets, and vulnerable communities. Failing to account for these combined impacts could leave communities unprepared for these extreme weather events in 2025 and beyond.

To ensure resilience and improve public health outcomes for all, policymakers should consider the intersection of wildfire smoke and extreme heat at all levels of government. Our understanding of how extreme heat and wildfire smoke compound is still nascent, which limits national and local capacity to plan ahead. Researchers and policymakers should invest in understanding how extreme heat and wildfire smoke compound and use this knowledge to design synergistic solutions that enhance infrastructure resilience and ultimately save lives. 

Intersecting Health Impacts of Extremely Hot, Smoky Days

Wildfire smoke and extreme heat can each be deadly. As mentioned, exposure to extreme heat causes the premature deaths of an estimated 10,000 people in the U.S. a year. Long-term exposure to extreme heat can also worsen chronic conditions like kidney disease, diabetes, hypertension, and asthma. Exposure to the primary component of wildfire smoke, known as fine particulate matter (PM_2.5), contributes to an additional estimated 16,000 American deaths annually. Wildfire smoke exacerbates and causes various respiratory and cardiovascular effects along with other health issues, such as asthma attacks and heart failure, increasing risk of early death. 

New research suggests that the compounding health impacts of heat and smoke co-exposure could be even worse. For example, a recent analysis found that the co-occurrence of extreme heat and wildfire smoke in California leads to more hospitalizations for cardiopulmonary problems than on heat days or smoke days alone. 

Extreme heat also contributes to the formation of ground-level ozone. Like wildfire smoke, ground-level ozone can cause respiratory problems and exacerbate pre-existing conditions. This has already happened at scale: during the 2020 wildfire season, more than 68% of the western U.S. – about 43 million people – were affected in a single day by both ground-level ozone extremes and fine particulate matter from wildfire smoke.

Impacts on Populations Most Vulnerable to Combined Heat and Smoke

While extreme heat and wildfire smoke can pose health risks to everyone, there are some groups that are more vulnerable either because they are more likely to be exposed, they are more likely to suffer more severe health consequences when they are exposed, or both. Below, we highlight groups that are most vulnerable to extreme heat and smoke and therefore may be vulnerable to the compound impacts of these hazards. More research is needed to understand how the compound impacts will affect the health of these populations.

Housing-Vulnerable and Housing-Insecure People

Access to air conditioning at home and work, tree canopy cover, buildings with efficient wildfire smoke filtration and heat insulation and cooling capacities, and access to  smoke centers are all important protective factors against the effects of extreme heat and/or wildfire smoke. People lacking these types of infrastructure are at higher risk for the health effects of these two hazards as a result of increased exposure. In California, for example, communities with lower incomes and higher population density experience a greater likelihood of negative health impacts from hazards like wildfire smoke and extreme heat. 

Outdoor Workers

Representing about 33% of the national workforce, outdoor workers — farmworkers, firefighters, and construction workers — experience much higher rates of exposure to environmental hazards, including wildfire smoke and extreme heat, than other workers. Farmworkers are particularly vulnerable even among outdoor workers; in fact, they face a 35 times greater risk of heat exposure death than other outdoor workers. Additionally, outdoor workers are often lower-income, making it harder to afford protections and seek necessary medical care. Twenty percent of agricultural worker families live below the national poverty line.

Wildfire smoke exposure is estimated to have caused $125 billion in lost wages annually from 2007 to 2019 and extreme heat exposure is estimated to cause $100 billion in wage losses each year. Without any changes to policies and practice, these numbers are only expected to rise. These income losses may exacerbate inequities in poverty rates and economic mobility, which determine overall health outcomes.

Pregnant Mothers and Infants

Extreme heat and wildfire smoke also pose a significant threat to the health of pregnant mothers and their babies. For instance, preterm birth is more likely during periods of higher temperatures and during wildfire smoke events. This correlation is significantly stronger among people who were simultaneously exposed to extreme heat and wildfire smoke PM_2.5.

Preterm birth comes with an array of risks for both the pregnant mothers and baby and is the leading cause of infant mortality. Babies born prematurely are more likely to have a range of serious health complications in addition to long-term developmental challenges. For the parent, having a preterm baby can have significant mental health impacts and financial challenges.

Children

Wildfire smoke and extreme heat both have significant impacts on children’s health, development, and learning. Children are uniquely vulnerable to heat because their bodies do not regulate temperatures as efficiently as adults, making it harder to cool down and putting their bodies under stress. Children are also more vulnerable to air pollution from wildfire smoke as they inhale more air relative to their weight than adults and because their bodies and brains are still developing.  PM_2.5 exposure from wildfires has been attributed to neuropsychological effects, such as ADHD, autism, impaired school performance, and decreased memory. 

When schools remain open during extreme weather events like heat and smoke, student learning is impacted. Research has found that each 1℉ increase in temperature leads to 1% decrease in annual academic achievement. However, when schools close due to wildfire smoke or heat events, children lose crucial learning time and families must secure alternative childcare.

Low-income students are more likely to be in schools without adequate air conditioning because their districts have fewer funds available for school improvement projects. This barrier has only been partially remedied in recent years through federal investments.

Older Adults

Older adults are more likely to have multiple chronic conditions, many of which increase vulnerability to extreme heat, wildfire smoke, and their combined effects. Older adults are also more likely to take regular medication, such as beta blockers for heart conditions, which increase predisposition to heat-related illness.

The most medically vulnerable older adults are in long-term care facilities. There is currently a national standard for operating temperatures for long-term care facilities, requiring them to operate at or below 81℉. There is no correlatory standard for wildfire smoke. Preliminary studies have found that long-term care facilities are unprepared for smoke events; in some facilities the indoor air quality is no better than the outdoor air quality.

Challenges and Opportunities for the Healthcare Sector

The impacts of extreme heat and smoke have profound implications for public health and therefore for healthcare systems and costs. Extreme heat alone is expected to lead to $1 billion in U.S. healthcare costs every summer, while wildfire smoke is estimated to cost the healthcare system $16 billion every year from respiratory hospital visits and PM_2.5 related deaths. 

Despite these high stakes, healthcare providers and systems are not adequately prepared to address wildfire smoke, extreme heat, and their combined effects. Healthcare preparedness and response is limited by a lack of real-time information about morbidity and mortality expected from individual extreme heat and smoke events. For example, wildfire smoke events are often reported on a one-month delay, making it difficult to anticipate smoke impacts in real time. Further, despite the risks posed by heat and smoke independently and when combined, healthcare providers are largely not receiving education about environmental health and climate change. As a result, physicians also do not routinely screen their patients for health risk and existing protective measures, such as the existence of air conditioning and air filtration in the home. 

Potential solutions to improve preparedness in the healthcare sector include developing more reliable real-time information about the potential impacts of smoke, heat, and both combined; training physicians in screening patients for risk of heat and smoke exposure; and training physicians in how to help patients manage extreme weather risks. 

Challenges and Opportunities for Federal, State, and Local Governments 

State and local governments have a role to play in building facilities that are resilient to extreme heat and wildfire smoke as well as educating people about how to protect themselves. However, funding for extreme heat and wildfire smoke is scarce and difficult for local jurisdictions in need to obtain. While some federal funding is available specifically to support smoke preparedness (e.g., EPA’s Wildfire Smoke Preparedness in Community Buildings Grant Program) and heat preparedness (e.g. NOAA NIHHIS’ Centers of Excellence), experts note that the funding landscape for both hazards is “limited and fragmented.” To date, communities have not been able to secure federal disaster funding for smoke or heat events through the Public Health Emergency Declaration or the Stafford Act. FEMA currently excludes the impacts on human health from economic valuations of losses from a disaster. As a result, many of these impacted communities never see investments from post-disaster hazard mitigation, which could potentially build community resilience to future events. Even if a declaration was made, it would likely be for one “event”, e.g. wildfire smoke or extreme heat, with recovery dollars targeted towards mitigating the impacts of that event. Without careful consideration, rebuilding and resilience investments might be maladaptive for addressing the combined impacts.

Next Steps

The Wildland Fire Mitigation and Management Commission report offers a number of recommendations to improve how the federal government can better support communities in preparing for the impacts of wildfire smoke and acknowledges the need for more research on how heat and wildfire smoke compound. FAS has also developed a whole-government strategy towards extreme heat response, resilience, and preparedness that includes nearly 200 recommendations and notes the need for more data inputs on compounding hazards like wildfire smoke. Policymakers at the federal level should support research at the intersection of these topics and explore opportunities for providing technical assistance and funding that builds resilience to both hazards.

Understanding and planning for the compound impacts of extreme heat and wildfire smoke will improve public health preparedness, mitigate public exposure to extreme heat and wildfire smoke, and minimize economic losses. As the overarching research at this intersection is still emerging, there is a need for more data to inform policy actions that effectively allocate resources and reduce harm to the most vulnerable populations. The federal government must prioritize protection from both extreme heat and wildfire smoke, along with their combined effects, to fulfill its obligation to keep the public safe.

The federal government spends billions every year on wildfire suppression and recovery. Despite this, the size and intensity of fires continues to grow, increasing costs to human health, property, and the economy as a whole. 

Billions of dollars newly dedicated to this challenge are an important step forward, but insufficient budget transparency and evaluation frameworks limit our ability to assess whether and to what extent interventions are achieving intended benefits for communities and ecosystems. Additionally, further investments in prevention (including beneficial fire) will be essential for decreasing skyrocketing suppression costs in the long term. 

Coordinated, bipartisan action is needed so that Congress; federal, state, and local agencies; wildland firefighters; nonprofits; and the private sector understand where taxpayer funds are being spent, what interventions are achieving the intended results, and where additional resources are needed to make a downpayment on a more wildfire-resilient future. 

To this end, the Federation of American Scientists is proud to have worked collaboratively with five other organizations to identify four guiding principles federal leaders can follow in order to improve the transparency and accountability of public investments in wildfire management. These principles represent a convergence of research and perspectives from leading organizations in wildfire policy, including The Pew Charitable Trusts, Taxpayers for Common Sense, Federation of American Scientists, Megafire Action, Alliance for Wildfire Resilience, and BuildStrong America. These principles are also aligned with the Wildland Fire Mitigation and Management Commission’s report to Congress, submitted to Congress on September 27, 2023. 

The four guiding principles are: 

1. Wildfire spending should be more comprehensively tracked and reported and federal agency budgets for wildfire should be better coordinated.
2. The federal government should continue to sustain and expand its investments in mitigation in order to reverse the trend of ballooning wildfire suppression costs.
3. The federal government should find ways to help states and local governments better access federal resources and make their own investments to lessen the overall cost of wildfires.
4. Federal agencies should use outcome-based performance metrics to evaluate the success of continued and expanded mitigation investment.

Read more about these principles and how they can be applied here. 

FAS looks forward to working closely with partners inside and outside of government to advance these guiding principles and support their implementation. FAS is a resource for helping to translate these principles into action, including through technical assistance on legislation; identifying relevant research; and serving as a conduit to a broader network of experts on wildland fire.

The Federation of American Scientists (FAS) commends Chairman Manchin, Ranking Member Barrasso, and the entire Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources for clearing a historic 75 pieces of legislation, including multiple crucial bills to confront the wildfire crisis.

FAS urges the Senate to consider and support the following legislation, which is critical to confronting and addressing the wildfire crisis:

• S. 1764, a bill to improve Federal activities relating to wildfires, and for other purposes (Sen. Cortez Masto).
• S. 2132, a bill to require the Secretary of Agriculture to establish a pilot program for the establishment and use of a pre-fire-suppression stand density index, and for other purposes (Sen. Lee).
• S. 2169, a bill to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to carry out watershed pilots, and for other purposes (Sen. Wyden).
• S. 2867, a bill to address the forest health crisis on the National Forest System and public lands, and for other purposes (Ranking Member Barrasso).
• S. 2991, a bill to improve revegetation and carbon sequestration activities in the United States, and for other purposes (Chairman Manchin).
• S. 4424, a bill to direct the Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of Agriculture to encourage and expand the use of prescribed fire on land managed by the Department of the Interior or the Forest Service, with an emphasis on units of the National Forest System in the western United States, to acknowledge and support the long-standing use of cultural burning by Tribes and Indigenous practitioners, and for other purposes (Sen. Wyden).

“FAS is looking forward to working with Members of the Energy and Natural Resources Committee to continue advancing this bipartisan package of bills as it moves through the legislative process,” said James Campbell, a wildfire policy specialist at the Federation of American Scientists. “We appreciate the thorough consideration of this legislation and urge leadership to pass these bipartisan bills before the end of the year.”